Yesterday night, I had my first channeling experience. Here are a few key takeaways:
Personal Takeaways
Live in the present, and whenever you can’t (for example you’re distracted, stressed, angered, etc) take a moment to realize the thoughts, and start writing on them until you can be back in the present moment
As your goal is to make people happy (including yourself), don’t forget to do acts of happiness during your day, no matter how packed it is with “tasks” or “work”
Structural Takeaways
My friend explaining us about the oversoul structure (clockwork) and how we as humans have to tune into the big picture work of the universe
He put himself in a trance state and let Burgiel speak through him, sharing his Galactic Intelligence / Wisdom and educating us (“enlightenment = learning about reality”)
There was no new information that could prove me that anything special was occuring
Information Takeaways
Two main paradigms we can live in (old = current, new = future) - most of us still live in the first one, and only few are transitioning
8 states of clearance (excluding state 0), similar to Wilber’s states of consciousness
State 0 = total darkness, state 1 = physical, state 2 = material, state 3 = emotional; ultimate state is one of pure trust and synchronicity with the universe
Burgiel was between Earth and Moon, in a spaceship that has 3% opacity and that is not physical (the shape depends on his own imagination, as it’s in another dimension)
Dear friend,
I want to thank you for yesterday’s experience. It was the first of such a kind to me, and I’m grateful that I could experience it with you, in a safe place surrounded by love and laughter.
I had a few hours to integrate what happened, did a few pages of reflection on it and I’m still integrating. Although, and I am honest to you, I am still coming from a place of doubt, it doesn’t mean that I do not trust your validity claims about your own reality. The question is whether my reality is going to get closer to yours or continue its trajectory on a parallel wavelength.
Let’s first start with key takeaways that I could apply towards myself. Those two were:
-
Live in the present, and whenever you can’t (for example you’re distracted, stressed, angered, etc), take a moment to realize the thoughts, and start writing about them until you can be back in the present moment (in other words: feel them, integrate them, and let them be)
-
As your goal is to make people happy (including yourself), don’t forget to do acts of happiness during your day, no matter how packed it is with “tasks” or “work”: what counts is your ultimate purpose, and you should tackle every thoughts and action through it
Second, I’d like to draw some parallels between Burgiel’s philosophy and Ken Wilber’s states of enlightenment. I don’t think that those might make total sense to you as you are only familiar with one part of his philosophy (spiral dynamics), while those go far beyond. I invite you to read through my summary on those stages. Moreover, I highly suggest you to read “Ken Wilber - History of Everything”, which applies those different stages on four different realms: the intentional one (development of human consciousness), the cultural one (historical cultural development), the behavioral one (history of development in physical complexity) and the social one.
In any case, here are similarities drawn between the two concepts, knowing Ken Wilber’s concept already is a summary of the world’s concepts out there:
-
Both are based on a raise of consciousness and understanding (enlightenment), going from physical to mental to meta-mental to all-inclusive
-
Both are based on the concept that humans were focussed on increasing horizontal knowledge (such as skills), while enlightenment is based on vertical (mental) development
-
Reaching a higher state of understanding of reality means going through a journey starting from a confused Present, going through an enlarged perspective of the Past and Future, in order to go back to a non-evaluative attention to the Present (total surrendering and trust)
-
Both invoke higher phenomena at work: “the Oversoul / Universe” vs. “Spirit”, which have their own forces of creation and development
-
Both talk about 9 stages of understanding of reality (stages of “clearance” for Burgiel, which includes state 0 of non-knowledge, and stages of “consciousness” for Wilber)
-
The ultimate stage is one of transcendence, of living in the now, which includes living in all dimensions, of living in total surrender and trust to a higher organism of consciousness
-
Enlightenment is not a goal: it is fine to live in lower stages, and higher stages shouldn’t judge you (although intermediate stages still haven’t gone above their ego and there is a high possibility that, due to their apparent superiority, they will judge lower ones, until they realize that judgment itself is a quality they need to abandon)
-
I’d love to hear more about Burgiel’s specific definition of stages (as they still aren’t very clear for me), but Wilber’s creates a clear differentiation on each stage concerning someone’s doing, being, and feeling.
Concludingly, to me it seems that I can grasp Burgiel’s concept intellectually. The metaphorical components and symbolism behind his language (“Universe”, “Alien”, “Paradigm”, etc) are exchangeable with those of other concepts and unite in their meaning.
From all other specific details, such as his spaceship, whether he consumes food, etc. - I could not come to any logical conclusion, especially because 1) there was lack of information (for example “I eat food, but can’t tell you more”) and 2) there were discrepancies in the type of information provided (“I am at a physical distance between Earth and Moon, but my spaceship is non-physical”).
I can therefore, for now at least, only conclude the following:
- Burgiel’s world (and therefore, yours) have a lot of depth in knowledge and wisdom, which I can grasp intellectually
- While the intellectual part is satisfied, I cannot find enough differentiation components to claim that reality as the “Truth”
- When it comes to more detail-oriented explanation, the information provided yesterday were not enough for me to make rational or emotional sense out of it
- I therefore can only adhere to the intentional part of your philosophy, yet not take the symbolism literally
My question therefore is: can you help me get closer to your reality? If yes, how?
I’m open to anything, yet couldn’t find the entrance door. I’m looking forward to your answer, but reading it alone already would satisfy my thirst for sharing.
With love,
Gui