Psychology, Philosophy & Non-Dualism

The whole field of psychology can be seen as a misunderstanding about the irreconcilable world views of dualism and non-dualism. The misunderstanding begins with the assumption that reality is in its nature “dual”, consisting of subjects and objects, observer and observed. This is then followed by the assumption that a model of non-dual processes such as “mind” or “human experience” can somehow be arrived at from combining dual principles such as personality traits, genes, or neurotransmitters. The final assumption is that the framework of psychology is a useful way to do this, in order to predict and explain human behaviour and, in psychology’s subset, psychiatry, to make people well.

In psychology, the first dualistic split is traditionally made at mind and body. From a dual perspective, mind somehow arises from body, or is a kind of “software” running on the “hardware” of the body (which is further broken up into parts like “central nervous system” and “brain”). Over time there has been a swing between which of the body or mind is considered “prime” (in dualism, one must always come before the other). Freudian and Jungian psychology tended to favour the mind as the origin of experience. Nowadays, the body has taken primacy as technology has increased the resolution to which the body can be “cut up” and reassembled from ever-smaller parts in order to create human experience. This is reflected in the current fascination with neurotransmitters and, with growing focus, genes. However, those with even a small curiosity toward non-dual practices such as insight meditation and yoga can notice that thoughts can be made to disappear simply by relaxing muscles. If your “mind” is in your “head” running on your “brain”, why does relaxing, say, a leg muscle suddenly relieve anxious thoughts? From the non-dual perspective, the muscle tension is the thoughts. One doesn’t cause the other — they are literally the same thing. The time delay between one and the other is a product of the dualistic perspective that observes it, and which encodes time into the experience as a necessary facet of that perspective.

Although trying to reconcile non-duality into a dualistic world view is categorically futile, the attempt to do so resulting in the field of psychology has not been entirely pointless. Frameworks such as transactional analysis can provide some good rules of thumb to consider when predicting outcomes of human interaction. However, I believe that the attempts made resulting in psychiatry have, for the most part, been so thoroughly misguided and uninformed that they have had often horrifying consequences for patients. A strong example is psychopharmacology, in which a human experience is reduced to a collection of neurotransmitter levels which are then manipulated with drugs to produce a different, hopefully “improved” human experience. The assumption is that the whole is made from parts; change the parts (neurotransmitters) and you get a new whole (human experience). However, you cannot produce a non-dual process such as “a human experience” from dual concepts such as “neurotransmitters”. In fact, you cannot derive non-duality from duality at all (though you can do the reverse, suggesting to me the primacy of non-duality, which I will return to later). Drugging an otherwise healthy child with Ritalin in order create a “normative” human experience should raise red flags for anyone with a capability for seeing the bigger (less dual) picture. But to the dualist the whole is made from parts, so by changing the parts a new whole can be created in one’s own image.

Attempting to reassemble non-duality from dualist principles is understandable — humans are living a primarily dualistic experience, and their models tend to reflect that. Strict dualism is regarded as “science” and strict non-dualism (as strict as can be experienced or expressed by a human) is regarded as “a crock of New Age shit”. Quantum mechanics — e.g. the double-slit experiment — seems to sit eerily on the cusp between the two. From a non-dualist perspective however, the double-slit experiment points firmly to a completely non-dualistic reality, where for the first time experimentally the intention of the scientist was found to directly manifest the result he experienced. From the dualist perspective, such things are “impossible”, and humanity has quietly tiptoed around “quantum effects” for a century, calling them names like “spooky” and generally pretending the whole thing never happened. In psychopharmacology, the same thing happened when it was noticed that patients could “think themselves well”. This was filed under the “placebo effect” and is still regarded as a sideshow pseudoscience by most dualists, whether they admit it or not. And, of course, you cannot make much money from the truth.

The further towards the singularity of “total non-dualism” you head, the more you start to see everything as being reflected in everything else. The whole thing is just one big fractal, the same at all levels, and appears to point to something just out of reach. The placebo effect is a fractal copy of the double-slit experiment. The “free will problem” is the fractal copy of the same thing in philosophy.

Philosophy is psychology (is everything). Any human field — even the “hard sciences” — only ever measure the human doing the measuring. (Even mathematics is simply human perception of reality, codified.) And the part trying to do the measuring cannot quite reach himself. Every human field is therefore categorically futile. That’s okay — if you’re a non-dualist, you realize that the dualist part making the attempt is in this whole thing anyway, and any frustration regresses infinitely to zero (in actuality, the brain claps out and you get a Fruition). From the perspective of the dualist, however, the attempt is completely worthwhile, as he appears to be asymptotically approaching The Answer. “Hey guys, we just need to find this Higgs boson [that we’ve just made up in a private act of creation] then we’ll know how particles get their mass!” “But what are Higgs bosons made of?” “Shut up.”

In philosophy, your leaning towards dualism or non-dualism will tend to be reflected in your taste in philosophers. Extreme dualists will tend to like Descartes, and his “I think therefore I am”. Lots of subjects and objects in that little chestnut. Let’s fade that perfectly dualistic expression slowly into non-dualism:

I think therefore I am

I perceive therefore I am

I am aware therefore I am

I am aware

Aware

[Reality blinks out] (Fruition/Nirvana (first definition, “extinguished”))

Once the understanding is reached via direct experience (though the moment during the Fruition blink-out itself categorically cannot be experienced nor defined by the human hardware), Descartes’ pithy proof of self becomes the incomprehensible and paradoxical ramblings of non-dualist Eastern philosophers, such as:

You are nothing, and being nothing, you are everything.

– Kalu Rinpoche

In reality, most humans are heavily bunched up toward the “dual” philosophical leaning, as a fractal reflection of how they experience reality.

The Future

Human understanding of reality has reached as close to the asymptote of The Answer as dualism will afford. In fact, all of that progress is an illusion because you cannot reach truth from dualism. The future of human endeavour therefore needs to be based in non-dualism — the understanding that the universe is a single amorphous non-definable “blob” — including “you”, “who” “is” “it” — and that any separation from that blob is necessarily a creative act.

We cannot work from a position of total non-duality because the human experience disappears at that point (hence, the “blinking out” of Fruition in insight meditation). The human experience is necessarily, and by definition, dualistic. However, your perspective can be gradated from non-dual (zero; unattainable) to extreme dualism (definite separate subject, definite separate object).

When reality fades back in after the blink-out — which I have experienced several times — it filters through what are called “formations” in Buddhism. Some of these formations are extremely dominant, such as Good and Evil (whose biological correlates are roughly “nourishing” and “harmful” — everything is in everything; as above, so below). Another “prime” formation is inheritance — symbolized moralistically as karma, and biologically as genetics/epigenetics. Again, these are the same fractal reflections described using different separations.

Psychology & Medicine

When creating a new field of psychology, it makes sense to start off at the closest point to non-dual we can get then look at the largest, most “prime” or dominant formations first. The majority (60%) of depressed patients recover spontaneously upon missing a night’s sleep. Rather than going after the most dual, least prime formations by chasing neurotransmitters, instead let’s meet that experience at its dominant formation: circadian rhythm. Night and day. Asleep and awake. If patients chart their mood hourly against time of day for a week or two they will find exactly when they are supposed to be asleep (feeling bad) and when they are supposed to be active (feeling good), since depression is literally just a sleep state. This is exactly how I manage my “bipolar” symptoms, without drugs. Once the circadian formation is met and matched, mood becomes normative very quickly — in fact I barely get any symptoms at all any more. I now start my work in the early evening, and work late into the night. I will tend to sleep for a few hours then continue productively for the entire next day, then finally go to bed late that night and have a long sleep. Following that long sleep, I will be in a semi-hibernated (“depressed”) state until that evening and tend to relax and eat heavy foods on that day, matching that state exactly as I find it (which leads to minimal suffering). In this fashion my circadian rhythm is almost a “2 days on, 1 day off” system, with occasional short sleeps during the “on” days. On the first night of the cycle, I can literally feel the neurotransmitter cocktail hit as night falls. I am a night owl. No amount of chasing individual neurotransmitters to try to recreate that formation will work. You cannot build a bigger formation (circadian rhythm) from smaller ones (neurotransmitters). This needs to be a primary rule of the new non-dual position.

Regarding heritability, regular readers will know that I am rather enamoured (remember: all separation is a creative act) by the formation of “Neanderthal” and the idea that Neanderthals walk among us. From the position of dualism, Neanderthal and Homo Sapiens genes will mix like paints and someone with, say, 5% Neanderthal genome couldn’t possibly produce a “Neanderthal”. But under non-dualism the formation of Neanderthal is not made up from just genes. There is a history; a story; a karma. The Neanderthal formation is larger than the sum of any smaller formations such as genes. If you learn how to spot Neanderthals, you will never be able to “unsee” that formation; and, meeting them, you know almost their entire life story before they even open their mouths. I will write some in-depth articles shortly about Neanderthal identification, including a traits list.

From the perspective of psychology, I would like it to be acknowledged that the following conditions are Neanderthal conditions, and that they become conditions largely through the process of trying to force a Neanderthal lifestyle formation into a Sapiens cultural formation. These conditions are: bipolar, schizophrenia, ADHD, OCD and Asperger’s. Neanderthals are night owls — hence “lunatic”, i.e. becoming manic when the moon was out (as observed by Sapiens). Meeting the Neanderthal’s circadian formation should be the first step, followed by other lifestyle formations such as diet and times to eat. (The Buddhist advice, “Eat when you’re hungry. Sleep when you’re tired” is the best advice for meeting the formations of any species.) Meeting the Neanderthal societal/cultural formation would be the next step by their forming their own communities and “reverting”. The negative sides of these conditions would disappear in a matter of days or weeks.

Under non-dualism, medicine would necessarily bleed into psychology (as would every other field, since these separations are entirely creative acts). When finding a patient has cancer, the current (dualist) approach is to see the cancer as a separate entity which must then be destroyed. Non-dualist treatment however would start from the understanding that the cancer is an inseparable part of the whole, and the first step would be to look for the fractal copies of the cancer in other areas of the patient’s experience — such as in his mind, his mood, his beliefs, his relationships, his lifestyle and his environment. By understanding the formations that gave rise to the cancer, those formations can be integrated and resolved and the cancer will disappear. (Yes, I understand the “good luck finding volunteers!” argument at this point. 😛 )

Philosophy & Science

Similarly, philosophy and science will share much overlap under this new world view since they were never separate in the first place. Science would proceed from the philosophy of non-dualism — namely that all scientific “discovery” is necessarily a creative act (whereby the separations that appear to govern “reality” are purely a product of the “discoverer’s” intention), and also that what we do to others, we do to ourselves. Technological progress would be recognized as a product of intention. An atomic bomb arises from the fervent intention to destroy. Medicine arises from the intention to nurture. The technology we were to create would be decided in advance from philosophical principles of morality (non-separateness) and, for the more fun part, from desire of that which we intend to experience next.

All research into time travel would end, as would any theorizing about relativistic time effects such as “the Twin Paradox”. This is because, in a reality where non-dualism is prime, time literally does not exist.

The primary causality under which we currently study (dualist) reality is “linear causality” — A→B — from where we arrive at the perception of time (notice how time only appears to move forward under that model). This would be replaced with “fractal causality”. Two of the strongly observable “types” (artificial separations) of causality that arise from fractal causality are “similarity causality” and “habit causality”. In short, habit causality states that what has happened before will happen again. From a philosophical perspective, we can choose the habits we wish to see repeating, going forward. Similarity causality states that similar things tend to congregate and/or act as one. We can see this in all species. Both of these “types” of causality are simply different expressions (dualist separations) of fractal causality. They’re the same thing. Understanding fractal causality is the key to operating from non-dualist perspectives.

Once again, notice how linear causality can be derived easily from fractal causality: to get a straight line, you simply “walk around the edge” of a fractal, without ever realizing that is what you have done. But the reverse is not true. You cannot make a fractal from a straight line, because that line would never end. Start and end points are the basis of linear causality, hence “God” or “the Big Bang” at the start of the line (the line being thought of as “time”), and a big question mark at the other end, usually filled in by some human-created “purpose” (such as “the Rapture” or “Endtimes” for the religious, and mindless technological progress / space travel for the scientifically inclined). This non-commutative relationship between linear and fractal causality suggests strongly to me that fractal causality (non-dualism) is prime.

Left and Right Brain Hemispheres

I have hoped that some of you have begun thinking about the left and right brains while reading this. This is no coincidence. Dualist and non-dualist perspectives are mirrored fractally in the left and right brains, respectively. This is also vice versa: the left and right brains are mirrored fractally in dualist and non-dualist perspectives. In non-dualism, nothing “comes first”. The left brain “gives rise” to the dualist perspective just as much as the dualist perspective gives rise to the separation we call a “left brain”! We are always looking at reflections in a fractal.

Getting you thinking fractally is literally the gateway straight into the processes of the right brain, and the key to your having sudden “click” moments after which nothing is ever the same.

If we were to symbolize the operation of the left and right hemispheres, the left hemisphere would be represented by a straight line (hence time, rectilinear design, “progress” and every other facet of dualism you currently consider to be “reality”). The right hemisphere would be represented by an infinitely complex fractal, the pondering of which would immediately enact right-brain processes. Such symbolization is necessarily a left-brain (dualist) act — hence why the symbol for the fractal (non-dualism) is impossible to render under that system. In compromise, to symbolize the processes of the right brain, we can use a circle. From a circle we can derive things like habit (repeating) causality. From a circle it is easy to then move to thinking about that circle as having no start and no end and thus becoming a spiral — which is probably the most basic form of a fractal we can ponder. We are straight into right-brain, non-dualistic processes at that point, as the spiral descends infinitely downwards into itself while also exploding outwards to infinity and blasting outside the edges of your visual field.

Trippy? This is exactly how you enter right-brain states without drugs, and is exactly the sort of thing I intend to be teaching, going forward.

What is Enlightenment?

Mystics have struggled to define enlightenment since mystical practices began. In fact it has even become a source of argument, thus defeating the entire point of enlightenment in my opinion.

I will give that opinion now.

Enlightenment is: Operating primarily from a non-dual perspective.

Becoming enlightened is therefore not a single sudden event (though jumps in enlightenment do appear to happen in bursts) but rather a progressive movement away from dualist to non-dualist perspectives.

In my own personal experience, having made such shifts, laypersons’ notions of enlightenment entailing “moral perfection” start to make more sense. I am not for a moment claiming moral perfection (far from it). However, understanding non-separateness did, extremely tangibly for me, kick-start a process of far stronger consideration of my own behaviour toward others, since “what I do to others, I do to myself”. Such moral imperatives became strongly self-evident following my non-dual experiences. I understand that, to a dualist (as you most likely are), such things appear as sanctimonious preaching, since you see yourself as inherently separate from others — and indeed everything else — and rate your actions based on very simple A→B causal lines. In this respect, I do not intend to preach at all, but merely advise from my own perspective when asked (or when I’m specifically writing about such things). More importantly, I intend to teach the methods whereby such insights can be gained experientially. That is now my primary goal.

Need help with your meditation? Book a Skype coaching session →

You may also like...

22 Responses

  1. Bravo on the first manosphere post to cover non-dualism. I’ve got mine coming hopefully this year but if there is a tougher subject to express/easier way to alienate readers through an internet post I don’t know what it is. But thats what I love about your site.

    This is true: “We cannot work from a position of total non-duality because the human experience disappears at that point (hence, the “blinking out” of Fruition in insight meditation). The human experience is necessarily, and by definition, dualistic. However, your perspective can be gradated from non-dual (zero; unattainable) to extreme dualism (definite separate subject, definite separate object).” Because to realize the self you can’t identify as a human, in fact as Nisgardatta Maharaj says you can’t hold any concept, any concept necessitates duality because concepts seperate.

    This is why to realize the self the mind needs to be destroyed, no mind no suffering. The mind acts as your friend when its actually your enemy. Thats the true meaning of the crucifixion of the Christ, what died on the cross was the illusion of identiying with the body while the holy spirit or self beyond self that was forgotten was resurrected and lived forever. The real meaning of the Holy Trinity is the son being the illusion of identifying as human , the father being consciousness the illusion of God/creator of all life and the holy spirit being our true selves beyond conception.

    • Illuminatus says:

      When I was arising back from the singularity (nothingness), I saw how my beliefs about Neanderthal were a creative act. I saw the formation arising — and allowed it. It’s a dominant formation for me at this time, as your Christianity is evidently a dominant formation for you. The truth of the crucifixion is that it is whatever truth you make about it — truth itself is a creative act.

      Were this not a post about realizing the essential creativity in any separation you make, I would have left you alone there. But no “truth” can be declared in the context of this post without an asterisk indicating the essential creativity of the experiencer choosing to experience that truth. The “truth” is just one separation of the blob into observer and observed out of infinite possibilities.

      Re “your mind being your enemy”, that is its own formation. I prefer to see the mind as the tool that cuts — that which creates the separations — and to use it to cut more interesting or enjoyable separations (according to taste).

  2. James says:

    How does this work with two people of opposing beliefs?

    Also, slightly off topic note: I stopped meditating a few years ago due to hitting the “dark night” as it were, I just had no clue about it at the time. I read most of MTCTB the other day and was glad to have more clarity on that experience.

    • Illuminatus says:

      “How does this work with two people of opposing beliefs?”

      Take a piece of cloth (the universe). Put one hand up underneath it. Then the other. Now have them “talk” at each other.

      One piece of cloth talking to itself, each “formation” believing itself to be separate.

      The analogy breaks down because you might then ask about the hands that animate each side of cloth (the “soul”). In reality there are no hands.

  3. James says:

    Mmm, I see.

  4. James says:

    Moments of no self still creep me out. Like most westerners I identified “me” as my thoughts largely still, there is comfort in that duality.

  5. HH says:

    “Strict dualism is regarded as “science” and strict non-dualism (as strict as can be experienced or expressed by a human) is regarded as “a crock of New Age shit”. Quantum mechanics — e.g. the double-slit experiment — seems to sit eerily on the cusp between the two. From a non-dualist perspective however, the double-slit experiment points firmly to a completely non-dualistic reality, where for the first time experimentally the intention of the scientist was found to directly manifest the result he experienced. From the dualist perspective, such things are “impossible”, and humanity has quietly tiptoed around “quantum effects” for a century, calling them names like “spooky” and generally pretending the whole thing never happened. ”

    That the intentions of an observer can cause “spooky” measurements is an outmoded an incorrect interpretation of quantum physics. Have a look at this link for a nice summary of our current understanding of how measurement in quantum physics works:

    http://preposterousuniverse.com/eternitytohere/quantum/

    • Illuminatus says:

      That link mostly agrees with me. They may have updated the language, but they’re still no closer to truly understanding the implications. They simply aren’t crossing the threshold. AND they are still in denial about it all.

      “Most modern physicists deal with the problems of interpreting quantum mechanics through the age-old strategy of “denial.” They know how the rules operate in cases of interest, they can put quantum mechanics to work in specific circumstances and achieve amazing agreement with experiment, and they don’t want to be bothered with pesky questions about what it all means or whether the theory is perfectly well-defined.”

      According to your link, most — I quote — MOST modern physicists do EXACTLY what I accuse them of in my post.

      “For our purposes in this book, that is often a pretty good strategy. The problem of the arrow of time was there for Boltzmann and his collaborators, before quantum mechanics was ever invented; we can go very far talking about entropy and cosmology without worrying about the details of quantum mechanics.

      At some point, however, we need to face the music. The arrow of time is, after all, a fundamental puzzle, and it’s possible that quantum mechanics will play a crucial role in resolving that puzzle.”

      The arrow of time only arises as a product of the dualist perspective. I’ve solved this in the post.

      That they believe they are getting closer to “solving” non-duality from a dual worldview is their “approaching the asymptote” as I described in this post. They honestly believe they are getting closer all the time, and quantum mechanics is the latest “magic bullet” they have all their faith — literal FAITH — behind.

      “And there’s something else of more direct interest: That process of measurement, where all of the interpretational tangles of quantum mechanics are to be found, has the remarkable property that it is irreversible. Alone among all of the well-accepted laws of physics, quantum measurement is a process that defines an arrow of time: Once you do it, you can’t undo it. And that’s a mystery.”

      Of course it’s irreversible. Like any event it arises in awareness and is completely impermanent.

      HH, how and when you do decide something is “correct” or “not correct”? What are the criteria for it arriving in one or the other category? You have not broken into that process and understood it yet, and it’s holding you back.

      • Hoary_Hippo says:

        HH, how and when you do decide something is “correct” or “not correct”? What are the criteria for it arriving in one or the other category? You have not broken into that process and understood it yet, and it’s holding you back.

        I don’t really understand the question or what kind of answer you are looking for. And I don’t really buy the implication that you have something to “teach” me. Are you indicating that you have some better process than I? Or that you transcended “correct” vs. “incorrect”?

        • Illuminatus says:

          You can’t be taught anything because you’re not here to learn. You’re an inveterate troll and polar responder. I’ve seen you do the same thing on Dharma Overground. I literally don’t know what you get out of it. How can this be anyone’s “hobby”? You’re not even particularly good at it. You are redefining the term “waste of space”.

          I’ve ingratiated your bullshit enough and you’re no longer welcome here.

          • happy_hippo says:

            For me, putative experiential contact with non-duality is not so interesting if it doesn’t manifest in your worldly interactions. Your response is very negative and polarised and inherently dualistic – “waste of space” “troll” “polar responder” “bullshit” “can’t be taught” “not here to learn”…but it doesn’t have to be that way. However, if you don’t find any value in these interactions and I can leave you be.
            Best of luck with your practice etc..
            HH

    • Illuminatus says:

      “The left-brain is characterised as selective, focused, methodical. It filters information to allow the “big picture” to be seen. The right brain, on the other hand, deals with all of the detail ignored and filtered by the left brain.”

      I stopped there because the right brain sees the bigger picture, and the left brain focuses on the details. Also, I’ve read a fair bit of Jaynes and his whole bicameral breakdown hypothesis is total junk in my opinion.

  6. brahman says:

    Hmm, I think they are meaning something different than what you are assuming with their use of “”big picture”” which is a highly rational one according to them. They approach his theory from a non-materialistic perspective.

    While there may be a fair bit of filler on that site, I think it has some good info and if you like the “Illuminati” you should definitely give it a decent read, considering the information presented there is said to be what was previously only available to 6th degree members of the “True Illuminati” (which is more centered around Mathematics, Gnosticism and philosophers such as Pythagoras, Leibniz, Hegel and Nietzsche, rather than the conspiracy theory “propaganda” usually seen).

    • Illuminatus says:

      Can you post some excerpts I might find interesting?

      • brahman says:

        Sure. It is awfully long (2,000,000 words) and I haven’t gotten through it myself. There used to be an abridged version I saved, but is offline now. I could try re-uploading it if you like what I excerpt.

        “Illumination teaches that God is not the creator of the universe. The opposite is true. The universe is creating God. God is the telos – the object, the purpose – of the evolving, Becoming universe. All of the astonishing conclusions of Illumination flow from this single truth.
        As the universal dialectic unfolds, God is becoming purer and purer, more and more refined. In alchemical terms, God is turning into the purest gold. But this revelation has the most profound consequences. The outcome of the universe is not settled. There is no predestination. We are all free and we are all contributing to the dialectic, and what each and every one of us does alters how the dialectic unfolds. We ourselves are helping to shape God…or, rather, what we do determines God’s attitude towards us. Our fate is in his hands and yet, just as truly, his is in ours.
        Illumination – ultimate gnosis – reveals the true nature of the True God and explains the precise nature of the test he has set for us all.”

        “Secret societies such as the Illuminati have dedicated themselves to probing the unconscious, to illuminating the darkness in which so much transcendent knowledge resides. To put it simply, the unconscious is the realm of the divine while consciousness is the arena of our petty, trivial, daily lives.”

        “In fact, it is the unconscious that is primary while consciousness is merely a useful device that allows us to engage more successfully with the material world. All religiously minded people agree that this material world is not our destiny, so consciousness is of little use in defining the meaning of our lives. Only the unconscious can help us. All transcendent states are connected with the unconscious. In order to make contact with the divine order, nothing is more critical than escaping normal conscious states.
        Fasting, meditation, drugs, extreme exertion, extreme isolation, extreme pain, extreme tiredness, extreme prayer – they are all designed to bring us to a state where we can break free of the grip of our consciousness in order to release our unconscious. That is no accident. Consciousness is a restriction, a barrier, an obstacle. It holds us back from becoming who we truly are, from attaining gnosis. Its evolutionary purpose is to help us navigate the material world, not the spiritual one.”

        “God is inside all of us. By venturing into our unconscious, we all have the opportunity to find God at our centre. We can all become God. We have been given a special program – the “God Program” – that allows us to accomplish this transcendent feat. It is this program that underpins all religious feelings, all intuitions about souls and the afterlife. Unfortunately, the program can be sabotaged – by consciousness! Consciousness does not understand the unconscious. It’s as if consciousness is harnessed to an infinite cloud of impenetrable mystery. Naturally, the consciousness is disturbed by this and seeks to defend itself against the existential angst the unconscious generates. Consciousness goes into denial. It represses difficult ideas. It projects the contents of the unconscious onto external objects. It does everything it can to detach itself from the unconscious, to make it seem as though the unconscious isn’t there at all. Everything it does is the opposite of what it should be doing. Consciousness needs to become the partner of the unconscious, not its lifelong sworn foe.”

        “When we say “Mind”, we are referring to an unconscious cosmic mind. What that unconsciousness is striving to do is become conscious – which is the ultimate manifestation and actualisation of mind’s potential. God’s is the mind that has made all that is unconscious conscious. We, the human race, are a long way behind God. We have a spark of consciousness amongst an ocean of the unconscious. Our task is to fully illuminate the unconscious, and when we have done so we become God.”

        “In fact, it is the unconscious that is primary while consciousness is merely a useful device that allows us to engage more successfully with the material world. All religiously minded people agree that this material world is not our destiny, so consciousness is of little use in defining the meaning of our lives. Only the unconscious can help us. All transcendent states are connected with the unconscious. In order to make contact with the divine order, nothing is more critical than escaping normal conscious states.
        Fasting, meditation, drugs, extreme exertion, extreme isolation, extreme pain, extreme tiredness, extreme prayer – they are all designed to bring us to a state where we can break free of the grip of our consciousness in order to release our unconscious. That is no accident. Consciousness is a restriction, a barrier, an obstacle. It holds us back from becoming who we truly are, from attaining gnosis. Its evolutionary purpose is to help us navigate the material world, not the spiritual one.”

        “The fundamental stuff of existence is living mind in prototype (unconscious life). Only one thing can qualify as living mind – the uniform flow of structured information. Information is life. Information is mind. Information is math. Information is logic. Information is reason. Desire, will, feelings, sensations, dreams, hallucinations, fantasies, intuitions … these are all information! The generation, transformation, processing and interpretation of information is what life and mind are all about.”

        “Here is wisdom. Every problem in the world is psychological. The reason why the earth is so cruel, wretched and depraved is that it is being deliberately run according to psychopathic values. It is governed by the Shadow and the Persona rather the Ego and the Self (in Jungian terms); by the Id and the Pleasure Principle rather than the Ego, Reality principle and Superego (in Freudian terms).”

        “Jung’s collective unconscious is one of the truly great ideas whose true worth has never been properly recognised beyond New Age circles. Anyone who understands this key concept has made huge strides towards understanding not only themselves, but also the entire nature of the universe.”

        “The Matrix is practically the perfect Gnostic tale. A man (Neo) is unknowingly living in a world controlled by a malign, hostile controller (the Demiurge). Agents (the archons, the “ultimate puppetmasters”) operate within the Matrix, eliminating any threats. Humanity is literally asleep. People are arrayed in huge battery farms to provide energy for machines. They are collectively fed a dream of an illusory world (Christianity, Judaism, Islam, freedom, democracy etc). Neo is contacted by mysterious guides (the Illuminati) who offer him a chance to find the truth. They tell him that he is the Chosen One (meaning that he is ready to make full contact with his higher self: to at last find the Holy Grail after many prior reincarnations). He doesn’t really accept who he is, but nevertheless joins his guides in their great struggle against hopeless odds. He endures many ordeals (representing his arduous initiation into the great mysteries), like the archetypal hero of myth, and is pursued relentlessly by his enemies. Still, he fails to realise who he is (nothing is more difficult than facing up to yourself; abandoning all of your comforting delusions and safety nets). He must die and be reborn before he can assume the mantle of his higher self (all mystery religions require the metaphorical death of the initiate before he can gain access to the higher truths). Then, Neo achieves gnosis and understands everything. He sees right through the Matrix. He can manipulate “reality” at will. By the end of the trilogy, he is blind, but can still see (the sight of the soul), and he is bathed in a mystic, glorious light (of the True God). Can you too be Neo? You will never get there through slavish devotion to “facts”. How many facts existed in the Matrix? None at all. The whole thing was an illusion. Don’t you “see”? Knowledge and facts are not synonymous. Knowledge can transcends facts.”

        • Illuminatus says:

          The people who write this stuff have obviously got somewhere close to nothingness. Then, on their way back up, they write all this crap.

          It’s the same with me writing about Neanderthal things, and magick powers. These are all formations. At least I know however that they’re slotted in as part of the customized experience. The people who write the sort of shit above seem to actually believe in the mythology they create to explain their experience, not realizing they’re just doing the same as any human has done, ever.

          Zero is zero. Everything after that is your choice in customizing your experience. All the stuff about “purpose” and “God” and whatnot are just bits that specific author has chosen to filter his experience through.

          The experience is more customizable than you might think. For example, if you want to experience the “God Program” in the above, just keep reading about it. Buy into it. Begin meditating or whatever, trying to invoke the God Program. Sooner or later you will experience the God Program. This is literally all any of us are doing, all the time.

          • Illuminatus says:

            It’s a real shame to see people who get so close to understanding nothingness, who then turn back at the last second and write a load of crap about The Matrix, or the “True God”, or the Illuminati, or the Loch Ness Monster.

            I’m not even offering any alternative: that’s the point.

          • brahman says:

            Fair enough. There is more to that site than what you describe, but sounds like you wouldn’t like the rest of it.

            I’m more into Yoga theory and practice nowadays, but I figured you’d find that site interesting considering your name. Started meditating properly with Mindfulness in Plain English last year and found Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha recommended in a magick book later in the year, though didn’t get far into it, despite being impressed. I’ve been more into mantra meditation recently, however having been working with the breath more lately and regret leaving it as an object.

  7. James says:

    Anyone have the money power and pussy program on a thumb drive I could borrow? 😀

  1. March 3, 2015

    […] Psychology, Philosophy & Non-Dualism – Personal Power Meditation […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *