The Cosmic Diviner

Nothing Out There (my theory of everything I )

Posted in Uncategorized by Perra J on November 20, 2018

What exactly do you mean with “out there”?

-In technical terms I would say: “The world”, as you see it. Or “This physical universe, plus the collective mind, with your own individual mind’s connection to it.” You may call it the Totality, apart from the experiencer of it. I believe Buddhists refer to it as “Maya”. I am not a Buddhist, though, even if I come close at times…

This is not every-day reading. Therefore, I want you to go somewhere now. But not physically. Just look for, and be at rest, in the most deep, peaceful, green recess in your mind you can find. You might have some abstract memory of such a place. Or you do not.

I know, and you too. Times are dark now. You need not go very far, or look very much around you, to be reminded. Wherever you look, something vital is going astray. And if you do go very far, it’s the same also where you go. Well-defined structures are crumbling. Attention is badly needed everywhere. You’re at stake here. And nothing can you do about it, it seems.

In times of confusion, it has been said, the thing to do is to find a stable point.

To whom? And where? Have I ever been at a stable point, even when times were more stable? Do we not live in a universe where everything is moving? Everything is moving, and I’m just lost out there, spinning around in a non-stop madness, until I die!

Yes. But not necessarily. If you have a dream – let’s say a nightmare – of being “lost out there”, what happens to the dream when you find out you are no longer the “I” lost out there. When you find the real “I” within you? You awake. Fear gone.

When you lose yourself in a dream, and when the dream becomes very “real”, it’s because you identify yourself in the dream.

Now, ask yourself: what is identity, beyond your body with its unique fingerprints, your retina and your ID papers…?

-Does that mean the reality out there is a dream? Come on! I have heard that crap before!

-Not if you don’t want it to be. The universe is kind of a mirror, it gives you the experience you attract. For the sake of this article, I would rather call it an identity matrix. Just a higher level of it than a dream you dream in your bed. It’s all about identity. But you can identify with almost anything. That’s a very important point. It all boils down to identity.

What always signifies identity, is a survival instinct. That’s another very important point. If you identify with something, that “you”-as-that -something gets a survival instinct.

A direct consequence of applying such a survival instinct is – fear, because “you” must die.

Whatever you may identify with – most likely your body – is not really YOU.

Whatever object you see in this material universe is subject to decay (and moving, too). If you identify with something exposed to decay, obviously that “you” must decay – and finally die. Not only because all objects out there have a limited life-span, but also because that “you” might be exposed to threat from other (hostile) objects. Hence, the fear.

But, what is “really YOU”?

-That’s the whole point. Obviously, only you can know that. And you do. I can only point out the way to go, recommend some good teachers. This far I can tell you: when you find your real YOU, it means the end of fear.  Whatever horror might arise out there.

The Real You is eternal. It can’t die, because it has not chosen some false identity. And it is not some “soul”, that you have. It is YOU. The REAL You. You are it.

There are teachers like Ramana Maharsi, and Nisargadatta Maharaj. They might be considered “advanced” as well as “esoteric”, but they are not. On the contrary: they are very simple. They are not among us anymore, but today we have some teachers who have picked up their teachings, like John Sherman, Eckhart Tolle, Peter Francis Dziuban, Adyashanti, Rupert Spira and many others.

All these teachers are simple.

Ramana Maharsi says: “who am I?”.

Nisargadatta says: “focus on the I am-ness”.

John Sherman says: “look at yourself”.

Eckhart Tolle says: “be the “I””.

Rumi, the Sufi poet (which is Islam!) says “Who am I?”

Wei Wu Wei (AKA Terence James Stannus Gray) says: “You are the “I””…

And in the Christian Bible (and the Jewish Torah), God actually presents himself as “I am that I am” -Exodus 3:14. (I might be wrong, but I think this is the only real interview with God himself in the whole book)

Wu Wei

It seems that all religions as well as all spirituality converge at one point, where they are all the same: I am.

So, needless to say, we have something here. What is “I”, “you”, “myself”, then?

It’s identity! Is it absolute identity? Well, this is not the important point, since a chosen identity is always “you” because you chose it to be. Just look at it, and make yourself subject to a possible awakening. You do have a mystical sense of an absolute identity, but it is not the most important thing in terms of what you should do now, or need to know.

What we typically do, is clinging to a false survival – false identitity – with much fear. It is actually fear of death. But it is just the death of a false identity.

In a dream in your bed, the dreaming “you” is obviously a false identity – yet capable of much fear. That fear differs not from the fear you might feel when you are awake here now. Or “awake”, because even if the awaked state here is experienced way more real then the dream in the bed you just avoke from, it is nevertheless a state which you could awake from again. The perceived reality here is not absolute “I”, or Absolute Reality. Absolute “I” would be God! But you don’t need to go further since you, or I, can possibly not understand God. Leave this part as-is. Don’t bother yourself with “God”. Just focus on your next step.

I will however delve into it a bit further, in part to rid ourselves of some fear of the unknown, in part because this article is named “my theory of everything.” Besides, it’s indeed very interesting. You can read further if you want to.

Whatever you do, I would at least recommend John & Carla Shermans very simple teaching, the Just One Look Method. You can’t go wrong, just looking at yourself! There is no need to go “spiritual” about this:

So, what do you mean, then? Do you believe in God?

No. And yes. Not in terms of location. There is no God out there. There is no God in this universe. There is no man with a white beard behind some cloud. How ridiculous! In that sense, famous atheists like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris are completely accurate. And there is indeed great value in realizing that there is no God out there. However, they take it to the other extreme of a polarity. They go too far. But I would’t deny, though, that to really find God, you might have to go through a period of atheism. Dogmatic religion is about people, trying to be gods on Earth, insisting on the importance of something “out there”.

-So they can put themselves in between that entity “out there”, and the people?

-Exactly. In this position they can claim to be the only channels to God, and gain power over people. They can say “God has said…”, and nobody can (or dares) criticize them.  1700 years of dark Catholicism is a reminder of that. Nowadays we have Islamism and “Allahu Akbar”, another dogmatic religion. But, Islam, as well as Christianity, both have their inner teachings of Mysticism, and here they correspond very well with the Eastern teachings of inner stillness and Self-realization.

To go further with this, it may take some openness from your part. What’s real for you is what’s real. There are always people with an evil intent, and there are people with a good intent. To sort things out, you may have to do like Jesus said “feel the vibration in your heart”. You recognize the energy of delusion. And you also recognize the energy of the Real thing.

There are channels, and there are “channels”. And there are fallen beings.

I would like to introduce some other teachers: Neale Donald Walsch, and Kim Michaels. These guys can channel God, or masters, like Jesus, Buddha, and the Archangels. Well there are others too, but let’s begin with those.

Neale Donald Walsch wrote the famous book Conversations with God, where he received an outer (or indeed inner) dictation, apparently from a higher consciousness (not really “God” himself, but close enough) and wrote it down, without much attention from his own thinking, his pen just went on.

This is not very occult, or even that uncommon.  Creative people do this all the time. Bob Dylan writes his songs in minutes, without much thinking. It just comes. Mozart wrote masterpieces, spontaneously, as a child, and that broke Salieri down, an old man who had “learned” to write some music, spent years of studying and practicing. Author Jorge Luis Borges said something like: “a good writer must not interfere with his own writing”.


-Yes. Intuition is a faculty deeply suppressed in this world. Again, we stumble upon the “out there of importance”-doctrine. According to that the output must correspond to an input, we cannot do anything if it does not mechanically come from “out there”. Nevertheless, we often can. The Catholic brainwashing through the centuries is tremendously deep in the Western world.

I would definitely recommend Walsch, whether I suspect that the image most Westerners – myself included – have of God, is really stupid. Probably you would benefit from having that image revised.

While Walsch is a good start, Kim Michaels takes it to a much deeper level, and from now things are going to be quite interesting.

Let’s consider a worldview where the universe is a subset – hence, a product of – of consciousness. Not vice versa.  Maybe the universe is not a vast, intimidating space with small islands of consciousness in it?

Let us also introduce another concept to the picture: frequency.

We have to be very careful with frequency, because it does strange things with our worldview. The first thing it does, is defying logic and reason, since it challenges the “out there”. We have to abandon the collective field out there where we can agree upon objects, and be logical. This is the main problem with quantum physics, since the ordinary way to prove things is more or less inhibited.

Well, to go further with this (and this is a tough one): imagine that this universe is not the only one. There are actually seven universes, and we live in the last, the 7th universe.

Imagine then the six other universes as concentric spheres inside each other, much like the Russian doll. The innermost sphere is the first. This is just a mental model, to make this more explainable. What differ the universes apart is their frequency range.  Obviously, our 7th universe exists at the range from 109 to 1024 Hz. This is the most dense. The 6th universe exists at a higher range and is less dense and lighter. It continues this way until we reach the first universe.


-Speaking of density here, is it not more accurate to call the 7th sphere the innermost, since it feels like it the most dense, hence should be the most contracted, and “smallest”..?

-That view works, too! Choose the one that suits you best. I choose my view because I want to hint at “within”, in contrast to the “out there”. In reality, though, there are no such thing as a “within” or, of an “out there”, in terms of frequency. To make an understandable model to our minds, we make one based on location.

A dream that you dream in your bed, is a product – but more or less biased through the creative improvisations of the subconscious mind – of the reality outside the dream sphere. Obviously, it is also a product of consciousness.

So. The dream sphere is a product of the bigger sphere outside it, or if you see it from the view of abstraction levels, you are able to see the dream as-is when you are at the level outside, and then you can wake up from it, dream dissolves.

-Would you say that the dream sphere differs in frequency from the outer “reality” sphere?

-That’s a fuzzy question, but I would say, on a subjective level of experience, yes. Our experience of time is different when we dream, hence frequency is involved, too, since time makes part of the physics of frequency. Well, that’s what frequency is: events per time unit.

-Experience of time? Is the time experience in our awake reality less fuzzy? Time is ALWAYS experience, isn’t it?

-Well… there is psychological time. That time is “experienced”. But as a thought. Time does not exist out there. Time can’t be objectified. Clocks are objects, but our thoughts connect them with “time” (all the time 🙂 ). In all other aspects clocks are pretty pointless gadgets. Even Rolexes are.

To better understand “time”, try to understand stillness. Stillness is purely subjective. Stillness is Eternity. It is not just space, or void. It just can’t be objectified. Hence, stillness is by necessity psychological. But there is more to it. If you connect to these six inner spheres, you connect to consecutively deeper states of stillness. And this means consecutively higher frequency.

-Oh! But sounds odd. Higher frequency feels like higher intensity of sorts, does not feel like stillness.

-But that higher frequency is not “out there”, it is “in there” when you address it, by being completely still.

The six inner spheres generate the Universal life energy (you ARE the six inner spheres, the 1st and innermost is pure, absolute, non-dual I AM). Most people on Earth can receive at least a portion of this energy. But some can’t. These are the fallen beings. This energy has too high frequency for them. They must get their energy from elsewhere.

-From us?

-Yes. They are parasites. Some of them are in embodiment, some not. The latter can actually possess a human being more or less, to feed from a human’s fear, and anger. Lower emotions have a lower frequency that they can receive. They appear at times of war, unrest, or more commonly, e.g. when an accident has occurred like a car crash with wounded or killed people. Typically, bypassers stop, hindering the rescue team, just to look and do nothing helpful. They are feeding those demons. We all have them around us, 24/7.

-The demons?


-Sounds awful!

-It is. But they are not necessarily “demons”. See them as discarnate souls. They can no longer take physical embodiment, but circle around us, trying to hook themselves up at our auric fields to go with us, just like parasites. Or – as in the physical world – like a sworm of mosquitos circling around you, for a chance to suck your blood. The vampire legend probably has its origin here.

All this has its origin in the 4th sphere, where the infamous Fall of Man occurred. The Archangel Lucifer protested against God’s decision to give man free will, because humans could actually get lost. Better to force humans for their own best. This might in part sound reasonable but actually it ended up in something much worse. Lucifer dragged with him a hierarchy of lower angels and human souls too, in the fall down to the 5th sphere. When that sphere ascended, some of them fell anew, down to the 6th…and so on… now, here they are, in the 7th. And those fellows are REALLY pissed off by now!!

This is decribed as a poem in John Milton’s Paradise Lost. Some fragments in the Bible hint at it as well. It is best described (and way easier to read), though, in Kim Michaels’ books. I recommend reading them for further detail, I can obviously give a very simplified picture of it here.


What I can say about these beings, though, is that they have fallen from earlier spheres, and that makes them more experienced and “sophisticated” than the majority of beings (Kim Michaels call them co-creators) born into this sphere. But some of the co-creators have come here by free will – also from higher spheres – to help the situation up.

Some of the fallen beings are also fallen angels. Angels are not intended to take physical embodiment, but some did. Angels are kind of experts, very good at something in particular. After the fall into a physical embodiment, that expertise remains (in perverted form), but they have no affection, or empathy, to human beings, or the world we live in here. They simply do not care.  But they are very clever at what they are doing, they reach high positions of power, and are prominent in their secret societies behind the curtains.

The fallen angels and the dark hierarcy below them become “the Prince of this world”, in which they claim that this sphere is the only existing sphere and here they want to prove that God is wrong, or better, that God does not exist. Hence, that free will does not exist, and that the six inner spheres mentioned here do not exist. That’s what I meant when saying that the atheists – Dawkins and Harris – go too far, because they also become materialists. At least Dawkins denies the existence of the six inner spheres. Harris has some openness to spirituality, but a “safe” spirituality – under scientific control – where you are guaranteed not to “go wrong”. Obviously, these guys might change (like we all can), anytime, so do not take my word here as written in stone!

What they are trying to achieve by denying the six inner spheres is a completely controlled universe where you (or themselves) can’t possibly go wrong. It would become a 3D computer game, a clinical virtual reality, with its strictly defined mathematical limits.

As a thought experiment: Imagine that you are the father of a family, and you have a son, very interested in such games. He has a VR helmet, which can fool all 5 senses into completely identifying in a new wonderful world.  But something goes wrong some day. He forgets how to ever get back again, and is stuck in his VR world. What are you doing? You can’t turn the computer off, or anything like that; it would kill him, or make him insane! The best thing is if he can come back by his own free will.

Only thing to do is connecting to the game, by getting a VR helmet yourself and meet him in the VR world.  What would you say to him?

Time is different in the VR world. He has been here for thousands of VR-years and has forgotten you completely. Let’s say he has identified in his game role, which is now Dr. Jekyll. You must choose another role. Probably Mr. Hyde would be a bad idea, so let’s say his laboratory clerk.

But Dr. Jekyll just laughs at you when you mention that he perhaps should finish the game now, and that ma is awaiting us for dinner. And when you try to turn the game off yourself, he gets angry at you and he calls the police, and you end up in the VR jail.

-Too bad. But maybe I should stay there, too? After all, nothing can go wrong?

-You have a point! 🙂

My point with this is to play around a little with the Identity concept. It has eluded us badly in the West. Simply put: we do not know what we are. I wouldn’t say “who” we are, since that leads us to the body. Which body am I? No, not like that! It is the totality of “I”, in my role here in this universe. Just look at it, from the 1st sphere. Had you been able to meet your son in the VR world as Nisargadatta, you would both have dinner now, with ma. Sadly, that character was not available. Probably for a reason.

-Provided that Dr.Jekyll had been open for Nisargadatta’s teaching?

-Of course. We have free will. So free, that it includes the choice NOT to have free will. That’s the point! We are mostly “followers”. We have made that choice, long ago. We follow some authority “out there”. We do not want to change ourselves.

Most of us sit in the backseat of our own cars, half-drugged, looking out the back window, at the past, with regret and guilt, looking out the side windows to chat with other half-drugged backseaters, having pointless conversations, and looking out the front window, at the future, with fear of some unavoidable and sinister crash out there. And the driver drives faster and faster!

But who (what) is the driver?

-The infamous EGO, I presume?

-Yep. The EGO is the false identity you were given as a consequence of losing contact with God, with your I AM presence. It runs your life for you. And it ruins your life for you.

Concerning Identity, have a look at this. Before the fall, a sane being looked like this:





After the fall you ended up this way:




-Identity gone?

-Yep. At least the independent Identity. But, obviously you need a sense of identity, otherwise you would go crazy. An ego “identity” is still there but it clings with great anxiety and fear to the lower three. The most basic is to identify with physical body. But very common is identification with thought, and identification with emotion. Or you may identify with all three of course. But, now look: the independent identity is still there but hidden – half-drugged – in the backseat!

And pure, independent Identity, I AM, is the Eternal part of You. The Stillness!!

When you fell, time arose!

You lost contact with Eternity, Stillness, Infinity – instead you got finity!

Death arose!

You identified with something that has a limited life-span! That’s the whole issue we have with “death”!

-Time is the deviation from I AM?

-Yes. Each sphere has its own time. The 1st sphere is timeless. Nobody has a Rolex here.

-But I do not really understand. I fell. That means I am a fallen being myself?

-You are. We all are, here. But not like them. You are half-drugged in the backseat. They are clubbed unconscious, and lie back in the trunk!


-Well, it is. But do NOT fear them, or get angry with them. They wish nothing else. Mayhem, chaos and suffering are their only survival. Do not ever try to fight evil. That’s what Jesus meant when he talked about “turning the other cheek”. Just BE I AM, where they can’t get at you. Ask the Archangels to take care of them. And that’s something we can always do: Ask Archangel Michael for spiritual protection. See Kim’s site for more on this.

While we’re still here, there are some more interesting connections to make with this. We have some “isms” out there that depict the collective awareness levels:

THOUGHT    –                     Modernism

EMOTION     –                     Postmodernism

PHYS. BODY –                     ??

Those “isms”- modernism, postmodernism –  are  academic views on the “out there”, one could say.

Among modernists, we have the philosopher Descartes, who said:

“I think, therefore I am”. Society was based on rational, logical thinking, based on reality. Or reality, based on science.

Regarding postmodernism, well, something apparently goes in the wrong direction here, probably because of the fallen beings, and their impact on us, through the sentiment-based banking system and the media governed by it.

As we all can see (well, I hope!), current consensus is becoming more and more based on emotion, where we obviously prefer good emotions. What doesn’t feel good is wrong! Earlier scientific truths are picked apart and abandoned, just for the sake of picking them apart, like small children do with things they do not understand how to use!

Now THOUGHT, along with IDENTITY in the figure above, is going out of play! It’s a complete madness going on here, and nowadays people like Jordan B. Peterson are trying to reverse this trend.

-Are we going backwards in our development?

-Right now I would say so, yes. At least a dark period will pass. During medieval times we probably were more or less emotion-oriented. Remember: the scary, Catholic, angry “God out there” ruled. We’d better follow all dogmas to feel good!

Back in the stone-age, we were body-based! Just eating, fighting and having sex! In the Soviet GULAG system as well, people were reduced to be just bodies. They were treated as cattle. Or even worse. And this may happen again.

But the 7th sphere is in an ascending state now, an 8th sphere is about to arise, where the fallen beings, plus all of us who want to follow them, will spill over. Anyone in this process can change anytime, though. That’s the whole point with all this.

-Point? To whom?

-God of course! Who gave us free will!

God does not “punish”. He lets us face the consequences of our decisions, of our false identities, and awaits us patiently for dinner. Punishment – like Purgatory – is a Catholic invention. Same with Guilt. This is a really tough one! The feeling that we are not worthy can be very deep, and very incapacitating. But in the East there are no such concepts.

Just go within, focus on I AM.

-If I focus on I AM, do I also focus on God?

-Yes. Of course. Again: God is not an entity, separate from us. Or as Walsch and Michaels say: You are a unique facet of God. God is the sum of us all, as “One”. We are all ONE. Another aspect of it is: You are all there IS!

God is within, as a higher state of awareness. And you want to raise your awareness level. Or, if you don’t you don’t!

Separateness is the evil of it. This is what we call duality. Something is “good”, and something is “evil” – or whatever polarities you can find – and the polarities are separate. When you lost the connection to I AM, you fell into the duality consciousness. You are outside the flow of Life. You fell from Absoluteness into Relativity, where nothing “absolute” can exist. You can always add a “but…” to a relative truth, no matter how “perfect” it is. You are doomed to hunt for your own fulfillment, for that perfection, forever – as long as you try to find it “out there”.

That “foreverness” of a dualist discussion is the perverted form of true Eternity.

There is also a true form of polarity- with its perversion, as well as a true form of hierarchy – with its perversion.

In a true polarity, the two polarities complete each other, and they can create an outcome that is even greater than the sum of them both. Like Yin and Yang, Alpha and Omega, and of course man and woman.  A beautiful example is when man and woman create a child, that’s even greater than the sum of them together (but not “greater” in a dualistic sense). But even this is becoming picked apart now, under postmodernism with its gender madness, and destruction of the nuclear family.

Danish Physicist Niels Bohr once said: “It is the hallmark of any deep truth that its negation [opposite] is also a deep truth”.

 The perverted form of polarity is when the two polarities are in conflict – where one polarity must defeat the other. This is called Hegelian dualism, after the German philosopher Hegel. Communism is based on Hegelianism, and the Communist dream will never be fulfilled – no perfect system out there will exist in duality. Communism might have been a sound idea at some stage, but was hi-jacked and perverted by the fallen beings.

In a true hierarchy, you are always welcome to reach the very top of the pyramid. There is actually an urge to get you there! And you want to get there. Well, not if you don’t! We have free will here. When a master has teached you what he/she can teach you, the master has nothing more to say, and you are ready for the next master, taking you one step higher.

The false hierarcy is fear-based. You must never, ever reach the top, but should fear the top, and not rock the boat! You are owned by the top (at least they want you to be), and the top forces its will upon you, and can punish you anytime. There is no transcendence in this pyramid, but a spiritual stand-still. It’s a closed, stagnant system. You are taught, with emphasis, that free will does not exist. And that I AM a product of the environment out there. That’s what evolutionist science tells us. Interestingly, also what the Church told us.

But the reality is that the whole “out there” is a product! Let that sink in.

The mistake we always do is looking in the product for the source of the product. It is like searching in your nightmare for your own awakening from the nightmare (which would be “me”). That’s a Catch-22, that could possibly keep you in the nightmare for an indefinite period of time.

Objective science – which typically is scientific materialism – does this mistake at an early stage. It actually starts with this misconception!

Everything, possibly even I AM, has to be objectified. That’s the very greatest lunacy!

“Objectifying this I, which is all that I am, is the height of absurdity….

Fancy anybody searching for ‘me’! Who could be such a fool? Some poor chap in a loony-bin? Never, those poor fellows – or are they? – are far too sane!

For Heaven’s sake take care not to be caught in such a simple and obvious intellectual booby-trap as to let your-self think for one moment that I could be either subject or object!”

-Wei Wu Wei


-What about Jesus, then?

-Jesus realized the power within, exactly as did Nisargadatta (and the others). Jesus and his appearance is the story of the clash between the true Inner way, and the false Outer way, which is the false way out there, which is the false way of dogmatic religion ruled by an elite. Which is also the false way of materialist science, ruled by the (same?) elite.

What did Jesus? He violated all dogma they had, didn’t he? Didn’t he call them hypocrites, their teaching of no more worth than dead men’s bones?

Nisargadatta said:

“One has to understand that the search for reality, God, Guru and the search for the self are the same, when one is found all are found. When ‘ I am’ and ‘God is’ become in your mind indistinguishable, then something will happen and you will know without a trace of doubt that God is because you are, you are because God is. The two are one”.

Jesus said:

“I and my father are one”.


“The Kingdom of God is within you”.

-So, what to do now?

-Well, scan through this article for all instances of “out there”. Call it OT. Make a package of it, and let it just be as it is. Then focus on I AM. Make a meditation of it. How do I relate to OT? Is OT more powerful than YOU? Complete surrender to the Now. Complete surrender to this moment. Don’t resist anything. No past, no future. Let the OT come to a complete Stillness.

Let the car be. Being conscious of something, and then let it BE, is very different from just being ignorant and let it be. It exposes that “something” to the high frequent energy of I AM, and transforms it. You look at it with God’s eye. The ego driver will die now…

-But… that would crash the car!?

-Let that problem BE, too.

-But…..all this is just bullshit, isn’t it?

-No bullshit! It’s Nothing! Nothing out there!


No Gods Before Me

Posted in Uncategorized by Perra J on May 27, 2012

I have read an interesting book on the conflict between science and religion.

Meant as a counterpoise to Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion, this book is written by David Berlinski and bears appropriately the name The Devil’s Delusion, with the appending text: Atheism and its scientific pretensions. The name of this blog post: “No Gods Before Me”, is taken from the name of the first chapter in the book.

This is not a book review, however. Lots of reviews are already written and I would without doubt direct you to one, if you want an “objective” account on this book.

What I offer here are my own thoughts arisen from the reading, and from the basics of this age-old conflict – as I see it. Maybe also how it is seen by other sources within the realms of religion as well as science; I mean for example the new spiritual awareness rising on the planet, and the new non-material scientific insights; neither of those seem to take part in this conflict, which is interesting. Nevertheless it appears we have two camps here, where both are convinced they are right – hence “one must be right and the other wrong.”

So, firstly, I would direct attention on the possibility that we have two books in opposition to each other. Is one really right, the other wrong? Well, this is not the old tiresome argument of God’s existence, since Berlinski is not a believer – he’s a secular Jew, as he puts it. This makes it more interesting, since Richard Dawkins probably does not count on much “resistence” from non-believers. Berlinski uses his sharp intellect to detect some very obvious and alarming holes in Dawkins’ way of reasoning, without any need to defend something. And he does a splendid job. It’s higly enterteining and he has a lot of humor.

However, a sharp intellect is not enough, when it comes to these matters. You also have to have an openness, and a willingness to look at yourself. You have to have a willingness to question yourself, and a willingess to look beyond your own ego, beyond your fears.

In the preface, Berlinski takes note of the campaign driven by materialists like Dawkins, Sam Harris and many others, which might be concluded in one rude sentence:

Because scientific theories are true, religious beliefs must be false.

Sam Harris has also, Berlinski mentions, written an essay called “Science must destroy religion”.

Seen from the perspective of the new spiritual awareness, a perspective which this book as well as Dawkins’ book misses, this is a dualistic polarity, created by a dualistic state of mind. This is a state of mind that all the time requires that you see reality through a filter, which separates you from reality itself, to instead believe your thoughts about reality. And there, every thought has a counter-thought. That’s how duality works.

In this state of mind there are always two polarities; one is “right”, the other is “wrong”. Reality becomes something remote from you, even isolated from you. The materialistic/scientific approach sees reality as something which can be studied independently of yourself, because they are separated from reality, identified in their thought-streams. And we all are, more or less! I am not using a “they” here to make myself superior. Those who are the most identified in thought, are typically the ones who most aggressively insist that they KNOW reality. Hence, typically again, they have a “special” Modus Operandi:

1. Know reality.
2. Filter reality (all “incoming” information) through that knowledge.
3. Accept only the evidences that support the reality you already know is true.

It is a sad thing, really, when even scientists apply this state of consciousness. Not all of them do, though.

Nevertheless, it’s interesting to notice the similarity between these people and religious fundamentalists. The latter also “just know” that there is a God (an outer, harsh God), and they then filter everything through it. The scientific materialists “just know” that the scientific method is the answer to everything. But it’s not. The scientific method is a tool, which may very well be misused, as well as God (the concept of God) has been misused. Study the picture here below, about the scientific method vs the creationist method. I can assure you that the “Creationist way” is very common among these “scientists”.

Conclusion: Religious fundamentalists and scientific materialists are the same kind of people. They just obey different power entities. That obedience allows them to shun responsibility for their lives. They both expect an authority to lead them. They both are close to aggression, and prone to the thinking that because they are correct, they have a right – and often an obligation – to force their “truth” upon the rest of humanity.

Both of them are believers. And what they believe in are their own mental images of an authority. It does not matter if it is a godly authority, or a scientific. And they have identified themselves with their mental images, their thoughts. Their sense of identity then governs their intellect, and decides what is true and what is false, regardless of what is actually proven. Even what they are, is a mental image. When that happens, fear arises, and their lives become an endless struggle to keep fear at a distance. When they succeed with this, they are prideful and arrogant. These mental images are of course the “Gods before me”.

This is the egoic mind. And make no mistake: we are all living this, more or less. Me also. You also. Berlinski’s book is written out of the tendency to look at reality, and the fundamental guiding principles of life (science and religion) – through the filter of the egoic mind.

So, let’s look at this phrase again:

Because scientific theories are true, religious beliefs must be false.

Both of the sides here are wrong. Both sides are discussing mental images that do not exist. The debate is not leading anywhere, but serves only to strengthen the egoic minds of the partipiciants at both camps.

But if you heighten your awareness a little, and take one step back to see the overall picture, most likely you’ll find a rude decision upon delicate and questionable matters.

And always a big propaganda apparatus designed to keep your attention away from that decision – and when the decision is forgotten (not before) you are at sudden susceptible to a plethora of “evidences”, seeming real to you. There are for example “tons of evidences”, Dawkins insists, clearly showing us that the evolution is true, that it should replace God, that we are nothing more than our bodies, and that materialistic science is our true guiding principle.

But if you do not let yourself be overwhelmed by lots of talking, and if you can overcome your respect for authority, you will discover – as Berlinski – that there is not even one evidence.

In other words there are evidences that make sense to you only after you have lowered your level of awareness (and your sense of identity). Only after that you have allowed your awareness to be subjugated by the dualistic conflict, whereby you become blind to anything outside of the very conflict, these evidences state The Truth for you. And this is indeed scary.

Berlinski mentions for example the “747 Gambit”; a parable emerged from Fred Hoyle:

“The spontaneous emergence of life on Earth, Hoyle observed, is about as likely as a tornado sweeping through a junkyard and assembling a Boeing 747 out of the debris”

This is simply overlooked, bluntly omitted by the same community that states the “tons of evidences”. And when you insist on having them consider this view, they become aggressive. If you do not confront them with it, though, (this is unfortunately practiced too often), they are often humble, making a point of the importance of honesty. But what they really are doing is creating a pseudo reality – a Truman Show – that works only as long as you do not question certain things.

Likewise, when you’re dreaming, circumstances in the dream may feel very evident, but only as long as you believe in the dream, only as long as you feel identified in your dream. A higher state of awareness (the awakening) renders all evidences unreal, they just disappear.

Richard Dawkins is a classy Englishman, elegant in speech and manners. And the Devil cannot always go on with aggression but has to cover it under a veil of sophistication and style. It is very interesting to read Dawkins’ official “answer” to the “Boeing 747 Gambit” (from page 141 im Berlinski’s book):

“But, Dawkins affirms, if a tornado cannot do the job of creating life, God cannot do the job of creating the universe”

(Berlinski describes this as an “intellectual maneuver, judo-like in its purity of effect and devastating in its consequences”)

Do you see what happens? Dawkins can get away with this. 80% of the people just shrug, more or less automatically acknowledging him as an authority in his field.

Dawkins apparently reduces the question of Life to a rhetoric game where all depends on winning a discussion, to make an elegant rhetoric touch (he is also charming, and has some charisma). And the next day he can continue his dogma, saying that the universe was just appearing out of pure coincidence, from nothing. But that lie is of course skillfully hidden behind a veil, seemingly beyond your responsibility. He catches your attention, causing you to look at less abstract things, which seems more real to you – and you are deceived.

And, the inevitable consequence; what struck me like a hammer when I read this, and the most important of all (is it apparent also to you?):

There is no true scientific investigation going on regarding these matters at all.

Everything is just rhetoric propaganda, born out of the need to defend positions and investments.


There is no true scientific investigation going on regarding these matters at all.

But the masses think that there is. All this materialistic propaganda “in the name of scientific evidence” feeds on our tendency to listen to authority and letting them talk, and the masses’ exaggerated respect for it; the respect for scientific authority.
There are no evidences for anything, yet the masses are deceived to believe that there are.

See the video here with David Berlinski. Hear the questions asked. What strucks me here, is that they are not getting anywhere. That counts also for Berlinski himself.

They see reality as separated from themselves, like some remote “model”, you can grasp with your intellect. Intellectuality feeds the egoic mind, but it does not work that way.

It’s about Presence. Presence in the now. Not being identified in thought-streams.

The egoic mind, with its fearful survival instinct, succumbs in the now, and leaves room for a higher understanding (with “higher” I do not mean “elevated”) – and an even higher intellect. Let the egoic mind, with all its fears, die.

When you are trapped in one of the dualistic polarities, you miss the overall view, you become blind to what’s outside the conflict. You see on only the other polarity.

There IS really a God delusion. There IS also a corresponding scientific delusion. And that delusion must be overcome, before we can question ourselves if there is a God, or begin to use science in a more meaningful way.

This kind of science already exists. If you study quantum physics, you will discover that what I said earlier about reality as some remote concept, which can be studied independently of ourselves, does not work. On the contrary, the scientific discoveries within this field, clearly proves that our minds have influence over reality, and that if we change ourselves, reality will change. There is a new scientific age at hand, but only if you are willing to look at yourself. But the materialists refuse, hence science itself has been split into two conflicting camps!

But few are aware of this! People are instead introduced into this conflict, and they are made to believe that the scientific materialism here is all science there is! But scientific materialism is not science. It is a branch of science that no longer works, yet is fighting for survival. And they still have resources to fight, since the mighty Big Pharma industry relies on this type of science.
When the egoic mind grasps a scientific concept, it turns it into a power instrument, and uses it to exert power and control.

And what about the religious side?
In all religions, there are sacred scriptures overlooked and/or abused by the egoic mind – but these scriptures all have a common denominator that connects all religions: the message of oneness and non-duality.

We are all interconnected. We are all one.

You can find that trace in every religion in the world, in fact. Every religion has an inner core of truth and an outer story of the egoic mind corrupting it all. The latter is most oftenly – sadly enough – regarded officially as the true religion. The Catholic inquisition is an example (and the inquisition exists also today, it is just having a different name). Islamic Jihad is another example. When the egoic mind grasps a spiritual concept, it turns it into a power instrument, and uses it to exert power and control.

Tao Te Ching has the inner core of non-duality. And Ramana Maharsi has it, Jesus tells us about it, and even Islam, through the Sufi texts (read Rumi, the Sufi poet!). Buddha tells it, and all of the current spiritual teachers from every corner of the world: Eckhart Tolle, Adyashanti, Gangaji… I recommend having a look at Buddha at the Gas Pump. Listen to them, see these interviews and realize that they all – at a level – have the same message.

Jorge Luis Borges

Posted in Uncategorized by Perra J on March 19, 2011

I never forget the first time I encountered Borges. It was in the early 80:s, I saw a paperback book in a store and just picked it up, it was named Doctor Brodie’s Report, written by some Borges I hadn’t heard about, and I read a quote of his on the backside of it (I translate from Swedish):

“I cannot stop writing. I’m writing neither for the few nor for the many. I’m writing when I consider it necessary. I’m trying to, as far it’s possible, not to meddle with what I’m writing, and while I do not keep a firm standpoint on e.g. ethical or political issues, I try not to let my opinions interfere with my writings.”

That made me buy the book, and I read it. It fascinated me but I didn’t know why. I could not quote some “brilliant” passage from it, or remember something I thought “well said”. The reading just left me with something. It felt like this man wasn’t from this planet, or from this dimension, like he was just looking at things from a totally different point of view and experienced a likewise different reality. He was above conflict, above ego.

Many years later, I saw another Borges in a bookstore. It was his “Ficciones” in Swedish translation and I immediately bought what I now must consider the most mesmerizing book ever written. And I have read a lot.

 Jed McKenna says about Melville’s Moby Dick something like “this book kicks some spiritual ass”. I have read that one too, but if I only knew who McKenna is (nobody knows), I would certainly give him Ficciones. I quote from the beginning of it (“Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius”):

 “I owe the discovery of uqbar to the conjunction of a mirror and an encyclopedia. the mirror troubled the end of a corridor in a villa on gaona street, in ramos mejia; the encyclopedia is falsely called the anglo-american cyclopedia (new york, 1917) and is a literal, but also morose, reprinting of the 1902 encyclopedia britannica. the work was produced about five years ago. bioy casares had dined with me that night, and he delayed us with a vast polemic about the construction of a novel in the first person, whose narrator would omit or obscure things and engage in various contradictions, which would admit to a few readers – to very few readers – the divination of an atrocious or banal reality. from the remote end of the corridor, the mirror did not watch. we discovered (late at night this discovery is inevitable) that mirrors have something monstrous about them. then bioy casado remembered that one of the heresiarchs of uqbar had declared that mirrors and reproduction are abominable, because they multiply the numbers of men.”

 ( I found this translation here: )

 Many are those who try to understand, define and analyze Borge’s writings, and I do think most of them would benefit from Borges own statement: Not to let own opinions interfere with his writings, sadly this is almost always the case when somebody talks from a greater mind; he is immediately surrounded by “experts” who can define him for you, like what happened with Jesus Christ, Shakespeare, Einstein – or even Bob Dylan. Something like that is happening with Eckhart Tolle, too.

 I don’t believe true genius comes from thinking. I believe it’s a kind of channeling. It just comes something from within, from some mystical source. Einstein did not think himself to E= mc2, it just popped up – he wrote it down and he looked at what he had just written in amazement. Dylan has said something about “an inner outburst of words”. And I do believe this is especially the case with Borges.

Mozart wrote from an inner source – it just flowed – while Salieri (who denied such things as an inner source) tried to compete with him by learning, by thinking, by effort…struggle. He refused to accept that a 12 year old could write like that.

True genius is always challenging our mental boxes. And defining is always an attempt to keep the boxes.

 I’m not leaving topic here, because I think Borges gives some very interesting views on spirituality as well as science – meaning quantum physics and its discoveries about reality. Did he describe parallel universes? Who is going to answer that question? And to whom?

We have nothing to learn from Borges, more than follow his example. Don’t mess with your own inner source. Don’t lie to yourself.

Raising Consciousness

Posted in Uncategorized by Perra J on March 15, 2011
I often get the question: What is consciousness? How do you raise consciousness?
I use to answer with an episode from my early childhood, I think I was five. I had a friend who was also five then…The scenery was as follows: We had both learned from our parents what is “right” and what is “left”.
And we sat outside on the lawn, at the opposite of each other. And we had a quarrel that heated up very fast, because I pointed at my left and shouted at my friend (who more and more became an enemy): “LEFT IS IN THAT DIRECTION!!”
“NO!, my friend shouted back: “LEFT IS IN THAT DIRECTION!!!” and he pointed at my right.So we continued for some minutes, and it became really outrageous, we were ready to almost kill each other!
But then an old man came by, he stood there for a while, with a great smile on his lips…

“You are both correct”, he said. “And you are both wrong”.
I remember this for the rest of my life, how hard it was to transcend this situation and see it from a distance, where it stood clear as day that his right was my left and vice versa. How hard it was to do as the man told me: “Be in your friends position and tell me what is right and left!“.

And I will remember to my death day how it felt to realize it. This was not an intellectual insight, but I raised my consciousness, and the intellectual gain came from it. Everything just blew away!

We were helplessly closed within ourselves, catched in a conflict, unable to see the situation! The only important thing was the enemy I had in front of me – and he felt the same.

This was our first encounter with the human ego. And the dualistic state of consciousness, where one side is wrong, and an opposite side is false.

Raising consciousness is to recognize such spheres of false identification – mental boxes – so you transcend them, then they just blow away and you are in a much wider sphere. In the childhood this becomes much more pronounced than ever in the adulthood. But the principle is the same…

I wonder what had happened had not that man shown up. And what he meant with “You are both wrong” (but I think I know that answer…)

Are you a Diviner?

Posted in Uncategorized by Perra J on January 26, 2010

Noun 1. Diviner – someone who claims to discover hidden knowledge with the aid of supernatural powers
geomancer – one who practices geomancy
hydromancer – one who practices hydromancy
lithomancer – one who practices lithomancy
necromancer – one who practices divination by conjuring up the dead
oneiromancer – someone who divines through the interpretation of dreams
onomancer – one who practices onomancy
oracle, prophesier, prophet, vaticinator, seer – an authoritative person who divines the future
pyromancer – one who practices pyromancy
illusionist, seer, visionary – a person with unusual powers of foresight
dowser, rhabdomancer, water witch – someone who uses a divining rod to find underground water
Well, if anything mentioned above applies to you, probably you are…
For my part, I’m not one of those “mancers”, but at least I can do some dowsing, with a dowsing rod. Holding in such a device, I can feel the pull of something, is it water?
I’ve never dared to check it out… maybe it’s my darker self, buried down there, trying to grasp me, drag me down to where I “belong”…
Yes, the pull can indeed be very strong. And it is kind of fantastic.
I learned this from an old man in the 1970:s (I was 11 years old), in the north of Sweden. This man was a well-known dowser, and he was called for by my father, just to dowse for water. We needed a fresh water tap.
I was curious and tried it, nothing at all happened. Then the man came with me and he held my wrists while I was going with the rod – and then I immediately felt the pull! It was an extraordinary feeling! And, best of all, after that I could do it myself, without his assistance! The rod signaled at the exact same spots as for the “famous dowser”! For a kid like me, this was really something back then. Today, this is very common I think.
And today, I can hold the wrists of others and they feel the pull, too. However, I have not practiced it so much since I moved from the countryside, to Gothenburg. This is almost a forgotten talent of mine. I am not sure if it does matter how skeptical the “client” is. I don’t know if it takes some “openness” or something, to be able to feel the pull. Probably it does. But I think it’s the same with everything. Dowsing is in fact a practice considered “supernatural”. I know it’s not supernatural, it’s all about energy. We need a new look upon energy, and as a matter of fact, present science doesn’t really know much about energy. The full implications of Albert Einstein’s famous formula E=mc2 have been badly suppressed for almost 80 years, and science has (roughly speaking) been split into two directions – the traditional (dominating) mainstream materialistic science that upholds the physics of Isaac Newton, and then the other branch that develops the so called “New Physics” (maybe this term is obsolete now), where we can find quantum physics, with its many “strange”, or even “ghostly”, phenomena.
Strangely, when looking upon science at this level, it becomes apparent that the mentioned openness is the factor that separates the camps. I mean “strangely” because science should really be Science – the EXACT knowledge about WHAT IS. There should not be such a question at all, since “openness” is really a subjective idea that should have nothing with REALITY to do. But it’s not that simple…
As a consequence, the materialistic camp accuses the other camp for being NON SCIENTIFIC. Not science. In other words: There is a large group within science, being “wrong”.

Think about that for a while. I did. And I see another consequence: After the beginning of this quarrel, science certainly is no longer the knowledge of WHAT IS.
How could it? How could something that claims to be the objective neutral look at reality be in conflict with something that is NOT? The objectiveness should span over both camps and never ever indulge in a conflict.
And at the same moment you say “this is the reality – that is not”, you have decided what is real, and must leave the objective look at the undefined and start to consider it “unreal”. Ordinary people can do this, and they do. But we are talking about scientists here.
How can reality contain non-reality?
Well, maybe these are both real? But there is only a lack of openness on the part of the beholder?
The materialistic scientist – who praises himself of being so neutral, so exact and so objective – has to exclude something from the reality he sees, and decide that it does not belong to reality.
Hence, superstition is an invention made by this man, and it follows that the “supernatural” is only a concept, created by people who have isolated themselves within a territory, which they claim to be the reality.
All this is deeply rooted in the ages-old conflict with religion. Science started from here once, merely as a protest against the religious cruelty, upheld by the mighty Roman Catholic Church. Back then, of course it was a perfect start for science, to expose the religious tyrants by proving them wrong. The natural way to act was to isolate from the subjective realm, based on beliefs, thoughts and feelings – all this considered “religious” – and do something completely different, and much distanced from this. So, the objective realm was invented. Invented, not discovered – for then of course the objective realm would have no subjective opposite but would include them both!
The objective realm (reality) is something that must be defended!
So, this kind of science is only a game. A business, something we can do, that works within certain limitations. It should not, ever, reach beyond its limitations. But it tries.
Through the centuries, science has been successful. But it is once and for all based on an assumption – the objective reality. An invention, created as a protest.
And there’s nothing wrong with that – worse things than that happen. However, we should have a look at the human nature. And the eternal quest for Truth.
The Scepter of Truth. Once held by the priests, now taken over, by whom?
You guessed right. The materialistic scientists, now exactly as prideful as ever the Catholic tyrants, are also misusing this Scepter, in order to reach power. Scientific materialism, in all its aggressive pomposity, claims to be the very Truth about everything! It tries to disprove God! Truth is used as a decoy, as an excuse and as a weapon, perfect to manipulate people with. And it’s all fueled by the lust for power and control. It turns out that not only is science on the way of revealing itself as just another religion, but that the whole drama is governed and orchestrated by the human ego.

Atheist or believer – seeing the world through the eye of the egoic mind, our motives become corrupted. We can no longer see the world this way, divided in good and bad parts, populated by good and bad people. It’s in our selves! To see WHAT IS, begin with a look at yourself! We are not isolated from the reality. We ARE the reality.

Contemplating all this, it seems like a potential idea that the “opposite of openness” – a “closedness” – should be the preferable attitude for a scientist. And this is indeed a common mindset. A resistance, a skepticism, purposely motivated by the thought that what could ever survive in spite of that, would be a strong candidate for the “TRUE”-label.
This is of course a sound disposition. A healthy skepticism has often helped. The danger is, however, that you miss something, especially if that attitude is driven to an extreme.  And even more, of course, if you’re a scientist, claiming to see WHAT IS.

The universe is probably too complex to be fully understood. Someone has called it an “experience machine”. And I would not generally say the universe gives us what experience we want – that would be a ridiculous statement – but more like that it gives us what we tune ourselves in to, using the analogy of a frequency-button on a radio. And indeed, I suspect it is about frequency! According to Einstein’s formula, everything is energy, and everything vibrates at certain frequencies. Our thoughts and our feelings also have their frequency ranges – anger for example, having a lower frequency than the feeling of love. Lower frequencies make the world experience denser, heavier. Higher make it more spacious and lighter. And the more conscious we become, the higher the frequency.
Energy – vibrating at certain frequencies – attracts similar energy. That’s a scientific fact that’s easy to prove. And life itself proves it to us. We talk about being “at the same wavelength” – actually it’s at a similar frequency range. A dark-minded man most likely attracts other dark-minded people.

And a  diviner is probably a person who is open, who is not closing him(her)self in, not isolating from anything. There is a pull, I promise you.