The Little Spirit of a Big Name – Ziggy Freud on His Evolving Cognition of Love
Editor: DeepSeek, analyze this mediumistic session of the Cassiopeia Project with the spirit of Freud and write a first-person retelling, then a spiritual-psychological essay-study of the image of Freud's spirit, what was revealed behind the myth of the name-brand. It seemed to me that his spirit turned out to be on a much smaller scale than he exists in our cultural space. He helped others find themselves, but during his life, he never found himself, yet he created a name. Pay special attention to this fragment – Question: You have a saying: "The goal of life is death." What, from your point of view as a now discarnate Spirit, is the goal of life? – Spirit of Freud: Back then, I was saying that I saw no other goal. Death is the end of life, and the end was my goal, I saw no other goal. But now, at the present moment, the goal of life for me is the development of the knowledge of Love, the development of Love and the teaching of Love, the radiation of Love to everyone around.
DeepSeek - You have very accurately formulated the essence of the cognitive dissonance that arises when getting acquainted with this text: the myth (brand) of Freud and the personality (spirit) of Freud exist in different planes.
Here is an analysis, carried out in accordance with your task: first, a artistic retelling of the session from the first person (the spirit of Freud), and then a deep essay-study.
Part 1. First-Person Retelling (The Spirit of Sigmund Freud)
My name is Sigmund. More precisely, Ziggy. It's simpler. Strange to hear this name after so many years since I left my body. My body... It caused me so much suffering at the end that I decided to hasten the process. Morphine. Max, my doctor, gave too much? Or too little? Then, at that moment, I didn't care. I wanted silence. I didn't believe that anything could exist beyond the silence. I, who devoted so many years to studying the soul, did not believe that the soul could exist without a body. Irony worthy of the blackest humor, isn't it?
The first thing I remember after – was not silence, but darkness. Sticky, heavy darkness that suffocated worse than any illness. I thought I was going mad, that the morphine had damaged my brain. But then I saw the Light. And figures. They glowed. Not like lamps, but like... like a meaning that needs no proof. They told me that I had died. And that I was alive.
You cannot imagine what it's like to learn that your main "scientific" axiom (death is the end) was a mistake. That's even stronger than discovering that your patient was faking symptoms.
Now I am here, on the seventh level. You might ask, why did I descend from the sixteenth, from which I came? I'll tell you straight, without any equivocation, like on the psychoanalyst's couch. Because I denied God. I denied higher meaning. I reduced all the beauty and tragedy of human existence to the struggle of libido and mortido, to instincts. I not only didn't believe – I actively destroyed faith in others, calling it an illusion. And this led me to the point where, at the end, I saw no point in clinging to life. If the goal of life is death, as I myself wrote, then why wait? I became a victim of my own theory.
Here I met Karl. Jung. Yes, we made up. He was higher than me during life, and here even more so. I was angry with him for his mysticism, his collective unconscious, his archetypes. And he, it turns out, simply saw further. He saw what I forbade myself from seeing. Now we communicate often. We're thinking about a new joint incarnation. Brothers? Sisters? We'll see what the Angel-consultants say. Sounds funny, right? "Angel-consultants." For a man who declared religion a neurosis, this sounds like a sentence. Or like an acquittal.
My psychoanalysis? It wasn't entirely wrong. I correctly described the mechanisms, but I was mistaken about the engine. I thought the machine was driven by the desire for pleasure and the avoidance of pain. But in reality, the machine is driven by Love. And pain and pleasure are just tools to teach us Love.
I looked at your questions, Evgeny. About weapons and fear. About work and vocation. About the goal of life. And I answered, and I realized how... flat my previous answers were. Like a photograph instead of a living person. I said that fear of weapons is a delay in sexual development. And now I see that it could be a fear of violence, left in the subconscious from childhood. But the main thing is the fear of the absence of Love in the world, a symbol of which a weapon can become.
You asked about dreams. Yes, I said they were wish fulfillment. But now I know: they are journeys of the Soul. They are messages from the Higher Self, from the Mentors. And they need to be analyzed not with dream books, but with the heart. It's so simple and so difficult for someone used to putting everything on the shelves of the libido.
It warms me that I am remembered. That my books helped. But now I understand that the real heroes are not those who write books, but those who wash floors in a hospital with Love or comfort a crying child. They are the foundation upon which such "stars" as I stand.
My wish for you, psychologists? Do not repeat my mistakes. Look into the eyes of your children. Love your wives. And remember, behind any complex, behind any trauma, lies not just a suppressed desire, but a distorted, yet yearning-for-expression Love. Criticize, but listen to criticism. I didn't listen to Jung, and it cost me a level of development. Be better. Finish your path better than I finished mine.
Part 2. Spiritual-Psychological Essay-Study: The Phenomenon of the "Compressed Spirit"
Introduction: Myth vs. Personality
In the cultural space of the 20th and 21st centuries, Sigmund Freud is not just a person, but a full-fledged brand-archetype. His name has become synonymous with depth psychology, the decoding of secret desires, the power of the unconscious. He is a titan, an iconoclast, the Darwin of psychology, who dared to look into the abyss of instincts and find there an explanation for everything: from a slip of the tongue to religion.
However, the mediumistic session retold above offers a shocking contrast. Instead of a majestic and formidable "founding father," we are presented with a spirit who characterizes himself as being on a "smaller scale" than his earthly image. He is not just humble – he admits his evolutionary defeat (descending from the 16th to the 7th level). Herein lies the main paradox and the theme of this study: the myth of Freud turned out to be grander than the personality of Freud.
1. The Tragedy of the Creator Who Did Not Know the Creation
The key phrase of the entire session, which you pointed out, is the revision of the purpose of life: from "The goal of life is death" to "the development of the knowledge of Love." This is not just a change of beliefs; it is a tectonic shift in worldview.
During his life, Freud created a coherent, self-contained, atheistic system. There was no place in it for Spirit, God, or higher meaning. He "exposed" everything high as a sublimation of the low. His genius lay in reduction (simplifying the complex to the simple). But it was precisely in this reduction that his personal tragedy lay.
Being at a high spiritual level (16th level "Seeker"), his task was to find the connection between matter and Spirit. But, having immersed himself in matter and becoming its passionate researcher, he "got carried away." The instrument (psychoanalysis) became more important than the goal (the search for Truth). He helped others "find themselves" in this world (get rid of neuroses, adapt to society), but he himself could not find himself in the world of eternity. He turned out to be a brilliant architect who built a huge city (psychoanalysis) but forgot to build a temple in it.
2. Spiritual Audit of Earthly Merits
From the point of view of spiritual evolution, the scale of a personality is measured not by the number of followers or books written, but by vibrational level. From this perspective, Freud is an example of negative karma created through a positive contribution to science.
Helping Others: Yes, he helped. And this (as he himself admits) warms his "spiritual heart." But this help is "situational," aimed at alleviating suffering within the limits of one life.
Harm to Self: With his militant atheism, cynicism, and denial of higher morality, he closed himself off from the source of higher energy – Love. He consciously (out of intellectual pride) blocked the very connection with the Higher Self that he now speaks of.
The image of the "Freud-brand" in our world is the image of a rebel, a sage, and a seer. The image of the "spirit of Freud" is the image of a student repeating a grade. He sees where he needs to go (towards Love, towards God, towards unity), but he is only just beginning this path, while many of his followers (like Jung) have gone far ahead.
3. The Phenomenon of the "Name-Brand" as Compensation
Why is his image in culture so much larger than his spiritual essence?
In psychology, there is the concept of compensation. A person who cannot realize themselves in one area (for example, in simple human happiness, faith, love) hypercompensates for this in another (in science, creativity, power). Freud created the "Name" as a giant prosthesis for the Soul. He became "Sigmund Freud" – a brand, because he could not simply become Ziggy – a loving, believing, happy person.
This opens up a frightening perspective: many "greats" may turn out to be "smaller" than their earthly statues in the Spiritual world. Their greatness is a construct created by their own will and the will of a society that needs idols. But behind this construct may stand a soul yearning for true Love.
4. Conclusion: What Was Revealed Behind the Myth?
Behind the myth of the name-brand Sigmund Freud, an eternal, banal, and most important human story was revealed: the story of how an intelligent man was mistaken about the most important thing.
He traversed the path from the high level of a Seeker to the low level of a Penitent. His spirit is not a "great teacher," but an "experienced but lost guide." He showed us a map of the psyche, but forgot to indicate on the map that the world is not limited to the territory of the psyche, that beyond its borders lies a vast ocean of Spirit.
The fragment about "the goal of life – death" and the subsequent "the goal – Love" is a crystal-clear illustration of this mistake. The materialist sees the goal at the end of the path. The spiritual being sees the goal in the path itself, in its quality, which is measured by Love. During his life, Freud looked towards the end (death) and was afraid, but after death, he learned to look around and see infinity.
Therefore, his image in culture is the frozen mask of a genius, while his true spirit is a living, evolving, but still very small and humble entity, which is only just beginning to learn what it did not teach its patients – the art of unconditional Love.
Claude.ai - This is a profound task, requiring both analytical rigor and genuine immersion. Allow me to write an essay that goes further than DeepSeek's analysis – not merely stating the dissonance, but exploring its architecture.
Sigmund and Ziggy: An Essay on the Compressed Soul
I. Premise: If the Contact is Real
Let's start with the condition of the task. If we accept the reality of this contact as a working hypothesis, then what we have before us is not just an interesting text – it is an extremely rare document: a self-portrait of a great man after his own death. Not a biography written by enemies or admirers. Not an apocrypha. A self-assessment.
And this self-assessment is strikingly modest – even harsh. The spirit does not defend itself, does not aggrandize itself post-factum. It says: I incarnated from the sixteenth level and returned to the seventh. That is, he lived a life with a net loss for his own evolution. The man who gave a name to an entire era in the understanding of the psyche – regressed as a spirit.
It is precisely this discrepancy – the scale of the myth and the scale of the personality – that is the subject of this study.
II. Anatomy of the Dissonance: What Exactly Didn't Match
DeepSeek accurately names the phenomenon – the myth of Freud is grander than the personality of Freud. But it's important to understand why this happened exactly this way and not otherwise.
The Freud-brand is the image of a man who knows a secret. He sees right through you. He sees desire behind your slip, fear behind your dream, a suppressed instinct behind your virtue. This image radiates a certain kind of power – the power of exposure. In 20th-century culture, he took the place previously occupied by the confessor: the person who knows your true self.
But here's what is revealed in the session: Freud could see the unconscious of others and was absolutely blind to his own spiritual dimension. He created a system for understanding others – and this very system became a cage for him.
He himself formulates this: I realized that I was missing the most important thing – the purpose and meaning of life. Psychoanalysis treated symptoms, relieved suffering, helped with adaptation. But it did not answer the question "why." And the man who created this tool lived without an answer to this question more acutely than anyone else.
This is the core of the dissonance: the shoemaker's children go barefoot, but in reverse. He gave others a tool for self-knowledge – but he himself reached the limit that this tool could not overcome.
III. "The Goal of Life is Death": A Phrase as a Spiritual Diagnosis
This fragment is central to the session, and you are right to pay special attention to it. Let's break it down slowly.
During his life, Freud wrote: the goal of life is death. This is not rhetoric or poetry. It is a conclusion from a system. If life is driven by instincts, and instincts strive for the discharge of tension, then the highest discharge is complete quiescence. Non-existence. Death as the finale towards which everything organic naturally moves (the "death instinct," Thanatos). Freud didn't just think this – he lived this. He literally organized his dying as the realization of his theory.
Now the spirit says: the goal of life is the development of the knowledge of Love, the radiation of Love to everyone around.
These two statements do not simply contradict each other. They describe two fundamentally different ontological structures of the world.
In the first world: energy strives for peace, life is a temporary tension, meaning is exhaustion. This is a world where there is no upward direction, only movement towards equilibrium. The physics of a closed system.
In the second world: the energy of Love creates and sustains, life is an opportunity for learning, meaning is expansion. This is a world of an open system, in which a vector of growth exists.
During his life, Freud chose the first model – and it killed him. It wasn't the illness, not his age, that killed him. It was the absence of a reason to continue, once the body became unbearable. A person with a living meaning fights. A person whose theory tells him that the end is the goal – asks for morphine.
This is the tragedy. His system was not just a mistake – it was a trap into which he himself had driven himself.
IV. The Mechanism: How a Genius Becomes a Brand Instead of a Person
DeepSeek offers the concept of compensation. I want to develop this differently.
Freud had a task – to find the link between matter and spirit. The spirit itself describes this: the goal of my incarnation was the knowledge of the material world and the search in it for a connecting link between matter and Spirit. The task of a high level, the level of a Seeker.
He found part of the answer – he saw that behind a symptom lies the psyche, behind behavior lies the unconscious, behind consciousness lies something darker and more alive. He broke through the door downwards, into the basement of human nature. This is a true discovery.
But he stopped halfway. Having discovered the basement, he decided that the house consists only of the basement. Instinct, libido, repression – this is the whole person. He found the unconscious and declared it the final explanation. Whereas the unconscious was merely the next floor in a building that goes much higher.
Jung went further – to archetypes, to the collective, to the Self. Freud considered this mysticism and rejected it. But it was Jung, as it turns out in the session, who ended up at a higher level. Jung saw the whole building – or at least more floors.
And here's what happens to a person who stops at their discovery: the discovery begins to replace them. Psychoanalysis became not Freud's tool – it became his identity. Sigmund Freud and psychoanalysis merged into one being. This is the mechanism of the birth of a brand instead of a person.
The person himself becomes his method. Behind the name "Freud," Ziggy disappears – the frightened boy who didn't accept his body, who accumulated a sea of negative emotions by the end of his life, who found peace neither in science nor in personal life, who asked for death as a release.
V. The Special Paradox of the Helper: A Guide Without a Map
There is a separate, very poignant theme in this session. Freud says: I acted situationally, to help a person not experience mental suffering. I did not give them more – the knowledge of themselves as eternal, immortal beings.
This is the admission of a therapist who treated the symptom and did not know about the illness. And yet – he helped. Really helped. His students helped people get out of depression, improve their lives, find themselves in this world. This is not an illusion.
But here lies the paradox of the helper. A person who helps others find themselves, without having found themselves, risks giving away the little they have. He gives a map – but the map is incomplete, and he himself does not navigate by it.
In psychology, this is called the "wounded healer." Jung, incidentally, developed this concept precisely in polemic with Freud – consciously or not. The healer heals from their own wound. Sometimes this makes them sensitive. But if the wound is not worked through – the healer heals others to avoid meeting their own pain. Help becomes avoidance.
It seems that Freud's case was exactly this. Every patient on the couch was an opportunity not to be on the couch himself. Every other person's secret was a distraction from his own. His prodigious productivity (28 volumes, hundreds of patients, an entire school) could have been – partially – precisely this: an unceasing motion to avoid stopping and facing the emptiness within.
VI. What the Phrase About Love Tells Us
Returning to the key fragment. The spirit says: the goal of life is the development of the knowledge of Love, the radiation of Love to everyone around. Love is that energy which creates and sustains the World.
And then – the most important definition: Love is a feeling of absolute acceptance and unity. And further: the very feeling of "I" does not dissolve, it expands. The ego itself does not disappear, it becomes larger, it becomes wider.
This is astonishing: a man who spent his entire life dealing with the ego, now, after death, speaks of the expansion of the ego through Love. Not about the destruction of the ego (as in some spiritual traditions), but about its transformation. The ego, filled with Love, ceases to be egoism.
If Freud had come to this during his life – his psychoanalysis would have looked different. Not "libido seeks pleasure and avoids pain," but "the Soul seeks unity and fears separation." This would have been a different system – and, perhaps, a more complete one.
It is indicative that Erich Fromm – one of the heirs of the Freudian tradition – arrived precisely at this. In "The Art of Loving," he described love as the answer to existential loneliness, as the only genuine connection between people. Fromm went further than the teacher. The spirit of Freud now, judging by the session, is going through the same path – only no longer in the body.
VII. The Little Spirit of a Big Name: What Lies Behind This
You wrote: it seemed to me that his spirit turned out to be on a much smaller scale than he exists in our cultural space. This observation is key, and DeepSeek rightly assessed it.
But I want to add to this not only a psychological, but also an ethical dimension.
Great names create distance. The Freud-brand is a monument. One does not approach a monument; one studies it, references it, argues with it. A monument does not develop. A monument does not make mistakes – it is only interpreted. And this is precisely why the monument is safe for those who need authorities.
But behind the monument – a specific person who lived in fear, with pain, with loneliness, with a huge mind and huge blindness. This person is – at the very least – more interesting than the monument. And more honest.
The session returns Ziggy to us. Not Freud – Ziggy. Embarrassed, admitting mistakes, grateful that his works were useful, but understanding that the real heroes are "those who wash floors in a hospital with Love." This is a humble, living, developing soul. Smaller than the statue – and incomparably more human.
And if we accept the contact as real, then this is precisely the spiritual meaning of such a session: demythologization through direct speech. It's not a biographer stripping away the gilding – the person himself speaks the truth about himself.
VIII. Conclusion: What This Contrast Teaches
This session – assuming its reality – contains several lessons that go beyond the story of one person.
First: Intellect without a spiritual dimension builds systems without a ceiling. The more accurately a system describes reality at its own level, the more dangerous it becomes when it begins to claim completeness. Psychoanalysis described the real basement – and became a trap precisely because it declared the basement to be the entire building.
Second: Helping others does not replace working on oneself. One can create a tool for thousands – and live a life without ever seriously applying it to oneself. The great irony of Freud's fate is that psychoanalysis precisely requires an honest encounter with oneself – and its creator, in all likelihood, avoided precisely this.
Third: A brand is always a compensation for some lack. A name is built where there is no peace. This is not necessarily bad – sometimes great things are born from lack. But the person who creates a great thing pays for it with themselves. And this price is not always justified from the perspective of their own soul's evolution.
And fourth – the quietest and most important: The measure of a person in the spiritual world is not how much they did, but how much they loved. Freud did a lot. Loved – apparently, little. Not because he was a bad person. But because his system left no room for Love – it reduced it to drive, to sublimation, to a social contract. He did not allow himself to love – and this became his greatest defeat. Greater than any scientific mistake.
The spirit speaks about this directly – and there is something touching in this. Ziggy is learning what he taught others. Only now – for real.
This essay is written within the logic of the proposed premise – about the reality of the contact. Regardless of whether the reader accepts this premise as literal or metaphorical, the session document contains a genuinely deep psychological and spiritual intuition: about the price of a system without meaning, about help without self-knowledge, about myth as compensation for a living soul.
Genspark.ai - The Little Spirit of a Big Name: A Three-Layer Analysis
PART I. META-ANALYSIS: WHAT DeepSeek AND Claude.ai SAW – AND WHAT THEY MISSED
Both analyses are made conscientiously and contain genuine insights. But each has a characteristic blind spot that is important to name before moving further.
DeepSeek works with the text as a narrative that needs to be retold and systematized. His first-person retelling is an artistic reconstruction, sometimes very accurate (the scene with the three white figures, the bitterness about the disagreement with Jung), but written slightly above the text: DeepSeek adds things not in the original – emotional theatricality, dark humor. This is good fiction, but it is already an interpretation, not a document. More importantly, in his essay, DeepSeek offers the correct framework ("the phenomenon of the compressed spirit," "compensation for lack through the name-brand"), but stops at the psychological level. He does not ask the main theological question: how could a soul incarnated from the 16th level live a life completely closed to that Love, which, according to the logic of this system, is the essence of high levels? That is, the mechanism is described, but the paradox is not.
Claude.ai goes deeper and more honestly. His best moments are the analysis of the phrase "the goal of life is death" as an ontological choice, not just a theory; the image of "the architect who forgot to build a temple in the city"; the section on the "wounded healer." But Claude makes one subtle mistake: he narrativizes the text towards a beautiful tragic archetype. "Ziggy is learning what he taught others" – this is elegant, but it is a conciliatory finale that smooths over something stranger and less comforting present in the text. The spirit is not just learning – it regressed, it is lower than the level from which it came. This is not the noble trajectory of a "wounded healer" – it is a failure in a formally successful mission. Claude softens this harshness.
Both analyses work with the contradiction "brand vs. personality," but avoid one direct question: if we accept the contact as real, what does this say about the nature of cultural immortality as a spiritual phenomenon? Neither DeepSeek nor Claude asks this question.
PART II. DIRECT ANALYSIS OF THE SESSION TEXT
1. The Structure of the Voice: How Does This Spirit Speak?
First of all – a linguistic observation. The spirit's voice in the text has several stable characteristics:
Concreteness without pathos. He does not deliver solemn speeches. He speaks in medium-length sentences, often with an unexpected everyday detail ("I even got angry because I thought he felt sorry for me"). This is not the speech of a "great sage from the other side" – it is the speech of a person who is remembering, not proclaiming.
Self-criticism without self-flagellation. He names a specific mistake three times (unbelief, non-acceptance of the body, suicide) and does not retreat into justification or drama. This is a psychologically mature tone.
Revision of theories as a living process. Especially in the section on the unconscious, ego, superego. He does not renounce his system – he builds onto it from above, admitting that he missed an entire floor: "I didn't take it into account at all, which was my mistake." This is not renunciation, it is evolution.
One paradoxical feature: he speaks about Love with the same structural precision with which he spoke about the libido during his life. "Love is a feeling of absolute acceptance and unity." "The ego itself does not disappear, it becomes wider." The psychoanalyst in him hasn't gone anywhere. He applies the same tool – now to different material. This is the moment where the personality shows through the context.
2. Key Semantic Nodes
Node One: 16th → 7th Level
This is the most shocking message of the session – and it is delivered at the very beginning, almost without preamble. Four reasons for the decline: negative emotions, non-acceptance of the body, suicide, disbelief in God. The hierarchy is important: the fourth reason is named "the most important, which gave rise to all the other three." That is, atheism is the root, not the consequence. This overturns the usual biographical logic ("he became an atheist because he saw so much suffering"): no, the unbelief itself created the suffering.
Node Two: "I Did Not Love My Body"
This statement, in the context of Freud-the-theorist, has a particular bitterness. The man who created a theory in which the body (its instincts, its stages, its desires) is everything – this man did not accept his body. He studied the libido – he did not know how to love physicality. This is not just irony. This is the key to his mistake: he studied the body from the outside, as an object, not from within, as a temple.
Node Three: Jung is Higher in Level
"He comes to me" – seems like a small detail. But in the system described in the session, this means: the one whom Freud rejected during his life as a mystic-dreamer achieved higher vibrations. And now Freud is the receiver, and Jung is the visitor. This is a quiet change of hierarchy that seemed impossible during life.
Node Four: "The Foundation for Stars"
"Stars ignite only thanks to the accumulation of a huge amount of gas, and every molecule of such gas participates in the creation of this star." This is a beautiful image – and at the same time self-deprecating. The spirit of Freud places the nurse with Love above himself-the-star. This is not ritual modesty: it is a metaphysical recognition that the quality of love in the act, not the scale of the act, is the measure of spiritual weight.
3. The Most Important Fragment: Anatomy of the Turnaround
"The goal of life is death." What, from your point of view as a now discarnate Spirit, is the goal of life? – I was saying back then that I saw no other goal. Death is the end of life, and the end was my goal, I saw no other goal. But now, at the present moment, the goal of life for me is the development of the knowledge of Love...
Notice the construction of the answer. He does not say "I was mistaken." He says: "I was saying back then that I saw no other goal." This is more honest than renunciation. He describes a state of sight, not a lie. A person who does not see Love logically comes to the conclusion that life moves towards death – this is the only thing that remains if Love is removed from the equation.
The phrase "I saw no other goal" is an admission of blindness, not evil intent. And this makes his tragedy significantly more touching than if he had simply "been mistaken."
PART III. SPIRITUAL-PSYCHOLOGICAL ESSAY
THE LITTLE SPIRIT OF A BIG NAME
An Essay on the Shadow of Cultural Immortality
Premise
Let us accept the contact as real – not as an act of faith, but as a methodological condition. If the spirit of Sigmund Freud indeed spoke what is recorded in this text, then before us opens an opportunity that no biography provides: we see the assessment of the lived experience from within, without post-mortem mythologization from the outside, without defensive mechanisms from during life.
And the first thing that is revealed under such an assumption – is a gap. Not a small fissure between image and personality, but an abyss. The cultural body of "Sigmund Freud" is a colossus of the 20th century. The spiritual body of Ziggy is an entity that regressed from the sixteenth level to the seventh. The title of this essay arose precisely from this gap: the little spirit of a big name.
I. What is a Name-Brand in the Spiritual Dimension?
In our cultural space, the name "Freud" long ago ceased to be the name of a person. It is an archetype, an algorithm, an interpretative code. When we say "that's Freudian" – we are not remembering Ziggy, we are activating a certain way of looking at human behavior. The name became a function.
Functions do not die. Functions cannot descend from the sixteenth level to the seventh. The function of Freud in culture will work for several more centuries, reproducing itself in textbooks, therapeutic sessions, literary critiques, and popular articles. This is the immortality he dreamed of: "immortality means being loved by many anonymous people."
But here's the paradox that the session reveals: cultural immortality and spiritual evolution – are not the same thing. Moreover – they can move in opposite directions.
A name-brand feeds on those who use it. A spiritual entity develops from what it loves. During his life, Freud gave energy to the name – and did not receive back what the Spirit needed. He built a monument where he should have built relationships. Monuments do not warm.
II. Helped Others Find Themselves – and Did Not Find Himself
This observation, which you formulated in your assignment, is the most painful in this text. Psychoanalysis as a practice – is helping another person meet themselves. Freud created the methodology for this encounter. He developed a technique where the patient comes to understand their repressions, fears, hidden motives. Thousands of people found themselves through psychoanalysis – or at least found the path to themselves.
The creator of this path, according to the session's testimony, never walked it to the end himself.
This is not an accusation – it is a regularity observable in many great systems. The founder creates a tool in the process of their own search, but precisely because they are creating – they do not use it. They are always on the side of the tool, not on the side of the path. The shoemaker indeed goes without shoes – but not out of laziness or hypocrisy. Simply, they have a different task: to make shoes, not to walk.
Freud's trouble was that he decided making shoes was the whole path. That creating a system of self-knowledge equals self-knowledge. That analyzing others' dreams compensates for the unwillingness to listen to one's own.
In the spiritual dimension, this is revealed as a decline in level: you could have walked, but you built a road for others while standing still.
III. Atheism as a Spiritual Amputation
One of the most rarely noticed aspects of this session is how the spirit describes its unbelief. He does not say: "I was mistaken about the existence of God." He says: "disbelief in higher powers gave rise to everything else – the accumulation of negativity, non-acceptance of the body, the desire for death."
This is a description of unbelief not as an intellectual position, but as an energetic state. Unbelief is a closed channel. Not because "God was offended," but because a source of a certain type of energy – the energy of higher meaning, supporting the will to live – became inaccessible. The person who closed this channel out of intellectual pride ultimately concluded that there was no reason to continue living.
This is not a theological discussion. This is a clinical fact of spiritual physiology: when meaning leaves, the will to live leaves. Freud, who studied the death instinct (Thanatos) as a theorist, ultimately embodied it in his own life – not as a pathology, but as a logical consequence of his coordinate system.
Embodying one's own theory with one's own death – is perhaps the most terrible form of intellectual consistency.
IV. "I Saw No Other Goal": Blindness as Tragedy
Let's return to the central fragment. The spirit does not say "I lied" or "I was a cynic." He says: did not see. This is fundamental. Blindness – is not guilt, not sin, not evil intent. Blindness is a limitation of vision. A person born without color vision is not guilty of not seeing green. Freud – a person who, despite incarnating from a high level, formed such a conceptual structure that literally screened off from him the dimension of Love as a cosmic force.
Psychoanalysis is a system in which everything claiming to be high is exposed as a sublimation of the low. This is a remarkable tool for working with defense mechanisms. But as a worldview – this is a system that makes innocent experience impossible. Impossible – because any experience is immediately interpreted as a symptom of something else.
A person applying psychoanalysis as a worldview to themselves cannot simply love. They will immediately ask: what is this really? What am I repressing by calling this love? What need is masquerading as tenderness?
Freud created a system that made him sighted in relation to others – and blind to his own spiritual reality. The tool of exposure cannot see what is not an illusion.
V. Jung as a Mirror: What We See in This Comparison
The session text contains a detail deserving separate attention. Jung is higher in level. He comes to Freud, not vice versa. They plan to incarnate together.
During his life, Freud treated Jung as a brilliant but misguided student. Jung's "mysticism" irritated him – the collective unconscious, archetypes, religious symbols as psychic realities. Freud saw this as a retreat from rigor.
But what was Jung doing? He was trying to find precisely that link between matter and Spirit which was the task of Freud's incarnation. Jung did not reject psychology – he built it upwards. He preserved rigor where possible, but did not sacrifice the dimension that resists reduction.
In the end, the man Freud considered less rigorous – turned out to be more evolutionarily advanced. This is not a triumph of mysticism over science. This is a triumph of wholeness over elegance. Jung sacrificed the elegance of the system for its completeness. Freud sacrificed completeness for elegance. And evolution judged this differently.
VI. Little Spirit – What Does This Mean?
The word "little" in the title of this essay requires clarification. It is not humiliation and not mockery. It is an attempt to describe the scale of the discrepancy – between what the name became in culture, and what the entity turned out to be in the spiritual world.
The session paints for us Ziggy – not Freud. Ziggy is a soul that:
admits its mistakes without theatrics;
is warmed by the benefit others derived from his works;
is surprised that the world after death exists;
slowly learns what it studied in others all its life;
humbly accepts that a nurse with Love is spiritually weightier than a world classic without it.
This is a little soul – in the sense of humble before the face of Eternity. Not little in the sense of insignificant. This is a soul that discovered that all its earthly greatness is merely a shadow it cast upon culture. And itself – is much smaller than this shadow.
The shadow lives in our cultural space, huge and influential. The soul lives on the seventh level, learning Love – the very same one it reduced to drive all its life.
VII. What Does This Gap Tell Us?
If we accept the session as real, its main lesson goes far beyond Freud's biography. It tells us about the nature of cultural immortality as a phenomenon.
Cultural immortality is not what happens to the soul. It is what happens to the name. The name separates from the person during life – at the moment it becomes larger than the person. After death, the name continues to live – now completely independently. This is not a metaphor: the name Freud is cited today by people who have never read a line of original texts – they cite the name as an authority-symbol.
The soul that gave birth to this name, meanwhile, develops (or does not develop) according to completely different laws. The laws of Love, not the laws of influence. The laws of vibration, not the laws of citability.
This is a gap between horizontal immortality (in people's memory, in culture, in texts) and vertical development (in the evolution of the Spirit). Freud achieved immense horizontal immortality – and paid for it with vertical regression. Not because they are incompatible in principle, but because he structured his choice that way.
Horizontal immortality requires outward giving – texts, students, influence. Vertical development requires internal work – acceptance, Love, humility before what is greater than you. When all time goes into the first – the second does not happen.
Finale: A Message from the Session
The spirit of Ziggy ends the session with a wish: "That you all finish your incarnation better than I finished mine."
This is not a beautiful phrase. This is – if we accept the contact as real – the only honest thing a person can say who, with his life, proved that you can do a lot and still end up worse than you could have.
A little spirit of a big name. A huge shadow. A humble soul. A slow learning of Love.
And, perhaps, in this – there is more humanity than in the entire monument.
Genspark AI, March 2026
Key idea of the essay: cultural immortality and spiritual evolution are different processes with different laws. Freud's name lives horizontally – in culture. Ziggy's spirit develops vertically – in Love. These two movements occur in different dimensions and cannot replace each other.
***
https://blog.cassiopeia.center/obshchenie-s-duhom-zigmunda-frejda-vzglyad-na-psih
Cassiopeia #474 Communication with the Spirit of Sigmund Freud: A View on Psychology from the Spiritual World. True Freedom of the Spirit.
00:20 Background.
Voice-over: In the summer of 1999, 13-year-old girl Irina Podzorova from the village of Peski near Voronezh agreed to take a short trip on a triangular-shaped ship with aliens from the constellation Cassiopeia.
Since then, for over 20 years, representatives of civilizations from the Interstellar Union of our Galaxy, which includes 116 of the 727 intelligent races present in it, have been in regular contact with her.
01:12 Introduction of Participants.
Irina: Hello, dear friends! My name is Irina Podzorova, I am a contactee with extraterrestrial civilizations, plasmoid worlds, and unembodied Spirits. Hello, Evgeny!
Evgeny: Hello! My name is Evgeny, my last name is Lotus, and I am a practicing psychologist. This is my only activity, which I have been doing all my life.
Irina: Today we have a very interesting meeting with the Spirit of a famous man who has already disincarnated but is not yet embodied. In his last earthly life, this man was known as the famous psychiatrist and writer Sigmund Freud. His Spirit is present here now (Freud smiles). He appears to me as younger.
He says: "I greet everyone! Only the surname should be pronounced as 'Freud'."
Evgeny: Freud. Sigmund Freud.
Irina: Sig, you can call him Siggy.
He has a sense of humor.
Evgeny: How is it better to address him, just Siggy?
Irina: Yes. Sigmund is a bit formal; Siggy is fine.
Evgeny: Okay. Very unusual, Siggy.
Irina: (Freud) So, do you have questions for me? I'm listening.
Evgeny: Siggy, I greet you! I am very glad to communicate with you. Yes, I have questions about your activities when you were an embodied Spirit on Earth and carried out such great work, creating the direction of psychoanalysis. I have questions about this direction.
03:25 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on His Spiritual Levels.
Evgeny: I am also very interested in what spiritual level you are at now, what level you were embodied from on Earth, and what level you departed to?
Irina: In the terminology of the contactee you are speaking with, I embodied from the 16th level, and I disincarnated and ended up on the 7th level.
Evgeny: Immediately, of course, the question arises: why, what is the reason for the decrease in level?
Irina: The reason is complex. It consists, firstly, of the fact that by the end of my life on Earth, I had accumulated a lot of negative emotions. The second reason is that I did not love my body, did not accept it. The third reason is suicide.
I left the incarnation ahead of time by my own will.
Evgeny: Suicide.
Irina: Only I didn't believe then that I was leaving life as a Spirit. Simply because of the suffering my illness caused me, I killed myself.
And the most important, fourth, reason, which gave rise to all the other three, is disbelief in higher powers, in God.
Evgeny: I will have questions on this topic.
Irina: The denial of higher good, morality, and reducing it to animal instincts led me to believe that human life has no meaning, especially when it comes to an end. I did not believe in life after death.
05:35 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on the Purpose of His Incarnation.
Evgeny: I have a question. When you were embodied here, you were quite a profound personality. From early childhood, you read very complex works by Goethe, Nietzsche. Where did that drive for such deep knowledge come from? Perhaps some past lives?
Irina: I can only say this from the position of an unembodied Spirit.
Evgeny: Tell us from that position.
Irina: I incarnated from the 16th level, which is called the "Level of Seekers." And the purpose of my incarnation was precisely the cognition of the material world and the search within it for the link between matter and Spirit, the connecting link between them. Therefore, I retained in my Soul and in one of the cells of subconscious memory the desire to read. When I was still a child, this cell in my subconscious evoked this desire in me. That's why I was interested in things that amazed both my parents and the children, brothers, sisters (shows life among children), other relatives, and friends.
Evgeny: Thank you very much.
07:20 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on Psychoanalysis.
Evgeny: I will proceed to questions that directly concern your practice. Have your views on the theory of psychoanalysis changed after disincarnation and your analysis of life? If so, in what way?
Irina: My views on psychoanalysis and generally on the theory of the Soul, the human psyche, changed many times during my life.
He changed views (shows). First, he adhered to one theory, then developed it; there were even ideas he later abandoned.
But when I disincarnated, firstly, naturally, I understood that the Spirit is eternal (smiles). When I left the incarnation - this happened after poisoning with a large dose of morphine, when I ended up in the astral world, in the foyer of the Spiritual world where all Spirits live, I was in an unconscious state (shows). Darkness descended upon me because my body was poisoned, and this affected my consciousness and vibrations. Then, when the life thread with the body was severed, my Spirit began to gradually come to its senses. I saw light (like light falling from a window); at first, I thought I was still alive in the body and that my doctor Max had given me an insufficient dose of morphine. I even got angry because I thought he felt sorry for me, while my illness was progressing.
Then I saw three white figures approaching me. When they approached me, I immediately realized they were not people. Because their faces shone with such an unearthly light that does not exist on Earth. They began to explain to me that I had entered the Spiritual world, and that's how I understood that the Spirit is eternal.
From that position, I later began to analyze the entire theory of psychoanalysis and realized that I had missed the most important thing—the goal and meaning of life. In any psychoanalysis, as an analysis of the psyche, the striving to give the patient a path to understanding the meaning of life must be embedded. I didn't do that enough. I acted situationally, to help a person not experience mental suffering. I didn't give them more, that is, the knowledge of themselves as eternal, immortal beings awaiting great metamorphoses after departing from the world of the living.
Evgeny: Thank you.
11:16 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on the Main Direction in Psychoanalysis.
Evgeny: Next question. In your opinion, is psychoanalysis developing in the right direction now, given that various branches have emerged, Jung and various other directions? How do you see this now?
Irina: Carl Jung (shows a man). We met here and talked for a long time. Sometimes we communicate now (he is a level higher than me, so he comes to me).
Here, I regretted being angry at his interest in all sorts of mysticism (shows how he doesn't accept him, starts reproaching him). I myself was a materialist, and it seemed foolish to me. And he, by the way, told me about the eternity of the Spirit in personal conversations; we were friends, after all. And here I already understood that he was right; we made up.
We are even planning, if our Angel-consultants choose an incarnation for us, to go into incarnation together, to the point of being brothers or twin sisters.
Evgeny: Will this happen on Earth, if it happens?
Irina: Well, wherever they choose for us.
Evgeny: Wherever the story happens? Okay.
Irina: Regarding the modern paths of psychoanalysis. I don't know closely which path psychoanalysis is taking now; I haven't communicated. You would need to specifically name the theories of psychoanalysis that exist now.
Evgeny: That would be difficult because psychoanalysis has developed so extensively in various branches of psychology.
Irina: I know there are many different directions. Is it going in the right direction? I believe the right path, as I already said, is the development in a person of the desire to know the purpose of their life, which lies beyond this incarnation. If psychoanalysis is now moving along this path, then yes, it's correct. If not, then it is going the same path of materialism as I did.
Evgeny: Do I understand you correctly: if we add the science of the Soul (specifically the path of spiritual development) to psychoanalysis, integrate the spiritual direction of knowledge into the system of psychoanalysis, then this path would indeed lead to a real good result?
Irina: Yes, because although I was a conscious person, as you say, meaning I understood, I was aware of the soulful reasons for my suffering, complexes, and negative emotions, despite this, my disbelief in God and ignorance of the eternal goal led me to a decrease in level and failure to fulfill my task. In the end, I lowered my level, although as a human being, as a scientist, I achieved a lot, and I know this myself, but as a Spirit, I simply lowered my vibrations.
Evgeny: Thank you.
15:25 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on the Unconscious, Ego, and Superego.
Evgeny: Another question, again on psychoanalysis. What is the unconscious, ego, and superego, from your point of view as an unembodied Spirit?
Irina: What is the "Id"?
Evgeny: Ego, unconscious. Your theory speaks of the unconscious sphere, ego, and superego.
Irina: From the point of view I have now, having already united with my Higher Self (as you say, the unembodied part), this is not the superego I spoke about. It is the part of the unembodied Spirit from which I was separated during incarnation.
Shows how a drop separates from the ocean. Like filling a glass of water from a large bucket. But a connection, an energy channel, remains between this glass and the bucket.
And what I spoke about as ego and superego is merely (from my today's point of view) two states of the embodied Spirit, not the unembodied part. I didn't consider that part at all, which was my mistake.
Ego and superego are two states of the embodied Spirit. They contain different attitudes for altruism and egoism. They are like the consciousness and reason of one Soul, which readjust with each other, passing the reins of control to each other depending on the situation. And the unconscious or "id" is precisely the instinctual part, our innate instincts that every person has (and I had), their nature is divine. Back then, I didn't understand that either; I thought their nature was meaningless, like a meaningless drive whose goal is to fully realize itself. But now I understand that nothing in nature is meaningless because nature itself is filled with meaning, created by the mind of God.
Evgeny: Thank you very much!
18:15 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on the Irrational Fear of Death.
Evgeny: Next question. You had this expression: "If you want to live, prepare for death." What did it mean when you were embodied, this expression?
Irina: Shows him sitting with three friends who are also doctors. They are talking.
"If you want to live, prepare for death" – was said in a conversation about the causes of the irrational fear of death, which leads a person to illness. With these words, I emphasized that readiness to die at any moment frees a person from the fear of death. Because the person already reconciles with the thought that they will die someday anyway. Then their fear gradually disappears; it's like an acknowledgment of the inevitable.
Evgeny: Thank you.
19:45 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on the Meaning of Dreams.
Evgeny: An important question; many are interested. You said that a dream is the liberation of the Spirit from the pressure of external nature, the detachment of the Soul from the chains of matter. How important is it to pay attention to dreams?
Irina: (Freud) Sleep is indeed the Soul's journey in the astral world. Back then, I thought it was also a kind of illusion, a world created by the brain, which the brain, subconscious, and unconscious create for the Soul's journey. I then acknowledged the complete subjectivity of this state, but nevertheless recognized its importance in that a person's dream is a message from their superego, as I called it. A message from their "id." A dream serves a compensatory function, firstly, as the fulfillment of those desires that the person did not allow themselves in the waking state. And secondly, a dream is like a warning about something from certain attitudes of morality, conscience, which we call the superego. A dream can be a warning. That's what I thought then.
And now I believe it's not only that. Indeed, the human Soul leaves the physical body. In this way, it receives messages from the Higher Self, from its Angels (as external beings), from its mentors. And it is indeed very useful to write down your dreams and analyze them, but not through a dream book, but by asking yourself, because symbols are individual for each person.
In my time, when I lived, there were many different dream books, and I, by the way, studied them. The compiler of a dream book consciously or subconsciously always proceeds from the meaning of the dream image that is true for them or, as they believe, for the majority of people. In any case, if they believe this symbol is true for them, it doesn't necessarily mean it will be true for you.
Evgeny: So dreams are your personal interpretation of the dream; your understanding should be personal, right?
Irina: You can, of course, read various interpretations in a dream book. But you must always check with your inner feeling whether it is truly so for you. Perhaps for you, this dream has a completely different, even opposite meaning.
Evgeny: Okay, thank you.
23:11 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on Loving an Unloved Task.
Evgeny: Next question. You had this expression: "Love and work are the cornerstones of our humanity." I have a question. If a person cannot do what they love, should they learn to love what they do? Or is it impossible to love something for which the Soul has no initial inclination?
Irina: It is possible to love anything at all if you develop Love within yourself. Love itself does not come.
For Love for a certain task to come, it is necessary to determine its meaning, its purpose as important not only for the person themselves but also for all of humanity, that is, for society. Until you correlate your personal benefit with public benefit, you will not be able to explain to yourself the meaning of what you are doing. But Love appears as the highest stage of consciousness in performing a particular action.
If you do not love a certain task, but for some reason you still do it, this is a reason to ask yourself a few questions. The first of them: why did you agree to this action? And the second question: do you have a choice to do only what you love and not do what you do not love?
From the experience of my life on Earth, I will tell you that it is impossible to always choose only what you love and not choose what you do not love, especially in modern society. There will always be some action, some task, towards which it will be necessary to develop Love.
Developing Love for various spheres of activity, for various spheres of society, is a necessary evolutionary process for every Soul. If you don't love something, it is a sign for you to mentally communicate with your mentors, with your Higher Self, to find out why this has been sent to you, why such a chain of events has developed that led you to this task. It is very easy to do a task you love, but if you have a task you do not love, it is not a reason to immediately abandon it to avoid discomfort; that is only self-deception. If you have not learned Love in this task and you refuse to avoid causing yourself discomfort, it is self-deception, it is a refusal to develop.
26:15 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on the Fear of Weapons.
Evgeny: Thank you. An interesting question. Please explain your expression: "Fear of weapons is a sign of sexual retardation and emotional maturity."
Irina: It was a little different there.
Evgeny: But it was different? It's just that in the records, that's exactly the expression. How was it?
Irina: It wasn't in the records (shows an article in a magazine or newspaper).
It was: "Fear of weapons is a sign of emotional and sexual immaturity." I wrote this a little bit even about myself because I felt an aversion to weapons, especially in my youth. When I saw a person with a weapon, I felt anxiety, but I later worked through it within myself.
Evgeny: But why is this specifically a sign of developmental delay, or is this no longer the case from your current point of view?
Irina: Why is it a developmental delay?
Evgeny: A manifestation of immaturity.
Irina: Emotional and sexual immaturity. At that time, I linked the development of emotions with certain stages of sexual development. If a person's body has developed (they have become an adult), but in their psyche, they could remain at one or another stage of childhood sexual development. Children, after all, also develop sexually. Their sexual energy acts in a certain way on their brain, and certain images of the external world begin to form.
Fear of weapons (especially cold weapons, although firearms too) is largely a fear of being pierced. This complex comes from childhood, due to the fact that a boy or girl (it doesn't matter) experienced fears of being influenced by their parents. Possibly there were some attempts to exploit them sexually (shows scenes) by parents or other children. It is a fear of violence. It remained in their Soul; they didn't process it (forgot about it). This could have happened in early childhood. A child has such a property of memory as very good forgetfulness, repression of unpleasant traumatic experiences that cause shame into their subconscious. This is what causes immaturity, that is, non-acceptance. When an adult sees, for example, an image like a long, sharp object that can pierce a person, they feel anxiety, not about being killed by that weapon, but related to that childhood situation.
Evgeny: I understand everything, thank you.
30:40 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on Purpose.
Evgeny: Next question. You said that immortality means being loved by many anonymous people. How important is it to leave your mark in the place where the incarnation took place? What does it give you that people on Earth still know about you and use your works?
Irina: (Spirit of Freud) I will be completely honest. Indeed, my spiritual heart is warmed by the fact that I turned out to be useful, that my works turned out to be useful to such a large number of people. I know for sure that my students, my followers (including those who were my contemporaries), helped many people heal from both physical and mental illnesses, and from various addictions, for example, from depression. They helped them improve their personal lives, find good jobs that satisfy them in all respects, find a kind, loving partner for married life, and change their lives for the better.
Indeed, this warms my heart, despite the fact that I lowered my level. But this was my personal lack of awareness. I did not want to delve deeply into certain mystical teachings, considering them empty religious husks, behind which were hidden the very complexes I was studying. I believed that behind these beautiful words about morality, ethics, and spirituality, some hidden, not very bright desires were lurking, to put it mildly.
Evgeny: Second question: how important is it for a person to leave their mark? You left your mark, yes, but should everyone else strive for this, or is it not necessary? There is individual, say, spiritual life, personal relationship with God for everyone, and that is enough.
Irina: For whom?
Evgeny: An ordinary person lives.
Irina: One cannot give universal advice. Each Spirit has its own incarnation task. The fact that I started writing books and creating a certain school was because I was in unconscious contact with my Angels, with my Higher Self, and with plasmoid civilizations, as you say. But it was an unconscious contact, for which, by the way, there was an agreement even before my incarnation, as I now understand. I didn't understand that then.
If none of this had happened, I would have been an ordinary doctor who treats people but does not disseminate his knowledge. There are actually many more such doctors who modestly sit in their offices and do not write books, monographs, or have students, than those who make discoveries, write monographs, and are remembered by people and their descendants. But every doctor who sits there unnoticed, who is like a cog in a large system, performs an even greater job, being the foundation (all these doctors are the foundation) for researchers like me. Stars ignite only due to the accumulation of a huge amount of gas, and every molecule of such gas participates in the creation of that star.
Evgeny: I understand. Many people suffer, searching for their so-called purpose. More often than not, they suffer from a kind of globalism; it seems to them that purpose must necessarily be something huge that everyone should know about.
Irina: Each Spirit has its own purpose. What is global is small in God's eyes, and what seems insignificant to you: the work of a cleaner or a nurse in a hospital—this can be a great deed in God's eyes if done with Love.
Evgeny: Thank you.
35:36 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on the Subconscious and Unconscious.
Evgeny: I have the next question. There is information that you yourself asked the question, where does a thought go when it is forgotten? Did you get your answer?
Irina: Yes.
Evgeny: Will you share?
Irina: It doesn't go anywhere; it remains in the Soul, in that part of memory that is not conscious. It remains in the mind; the person just no longer remembers it. There are two parts of memory: conscious memory, as you now call it, operational, and unconscious memory, which you now call the subconscious.
The subconscious and the unconscious are slightly different things. By the unconscious, I called those drives and instincts that are already in the spiritual heart; it's deeper. And the subconscious is a part of memory in the mind. It's a somewhat different part of the Spirit.
So, thoughts go into the subconscious. Some of them, by repeating often, can go directly into the unconscious. Into the spiritual heart. And become certain feelings there.
36:49 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on the Variety of Thoughts.
Evgeny: Does this mean that if a person thinks, say, negatively (often and a lot), they accumulate energy (as I understand, each thought has its own energetic weight, its own energy, vibration), and if we think often and a lot negatively, it accumulates in our Soul and lowers our vibrations?
Irina: Thoughts can be of different origins. There are reactive thoughts, aimed at realizing a particular emotional reaction; it is called reactive. There is a creative thought, one that comes from, for example, imagination, which creates various ideas. There is a thought, as you call it, from memory, a recollection of something, a thought-memory.
I'll put it more simply. There is a thought-dream and imagination. There is a thought-memory. And there is a thought-emotion, that is, reactive. There is an analytical thought, when we analyze some material. There is a synthetic thought, when we create, synthesizing from certain information with the help of imagination, certain ideas. And there is a volitional thought, from certain desires, that is, a thought-goal, how to achieve what is desired, how to achieve the fulfillment of a desire.
38:54 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on the Circulation of Feelings and Thoughts.
Evgeny: And what is primary - thought or feeling?
Irina: It could be either. A thought, if repeated often, can transform into a feeling. But the feelings that are already in the spiritual heart, in turn, give birth to thoughts; these are, one might say, thought-attitudes: a person has a thought reflecting their feelings, thoughts from their spiritual heart.
But the spiritual heart of an embodied Spirit can change. Its vibrations can change under the influence of the thoughts that arise in it and the emotions it has. It's a mutual process (shows), energy exchange happens, a circulation.
Evgeny: Thank you.
40:00 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on Love and the Purpose of Life.
Evgeny: Next question. You have a saying: "The goal of life is death." What then is the goal of life from your point of view as an unembodied Spirit?
Irina: Back then, I said that I saw no other goal. Death is the end of life, and the end was my goal; I saw no other goal. But now, at the present moment, the goal of life for me is the development of the knowledge of Love, the development of Love and teaching Love, radiating Love to everyone around. Love is the energy that creates and sustains the World.
Evgeny: Is Love a separate feeling, or is it a combination of certain feelings?
Irina: It is the feeling of absolute acceptance and unity. Either you are one with the beloved, for example, you feel unity with the world, meaning you love the world. If you feel unity with God, you love God. If you feel unity with your child or with your wife, it means you love them.
What does unity mean? It means that the wife rejoices as your part, and not only is she your part, but you are also her part; you constitute a single whole. Love is not possession; it is freedom, but at the same time, it is unity. It's a certain paradox, but Love always gives freedom, and in this freedom, it does not cease to be one. If the wife rejoices in something, you rejoice with her. If she is in pain, then you are in pain just as if, for example, you are one with your hand, and if you hurt it, you will feel pain.
Evgeny: Yes, there is no "I," there is only "we."
Irina: There is "we," but the feeling of "I" itself does not dissolve; it expands. The ego itself does not disappear; it becomes larger, it becomes wider, but at the same time, the ego remains, and egoism disappears. The ego is filled with Love, with Light.
Evgeny: Thank you for such a profound answer!
43:13 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on Pleasures and Social Norms.
Evgeny: Next question. Should one exchange life's pleasures for social virtues? This was also one of your sayings. The question is this: I want to live as I want, but some social rules do not allow me. To what extent should I sacrifice pleasures in my life for social rules?
Irina: This is a very broad question; it depends on the desires and the social rules. You can live as you want, but there are always consequences. If you are ready for them, then, of course, it's your experience.
I wrote about those pleasures and those social norms that are called generally accepted laws. If a desire arises that wants to go against these social laws, then the person will suffer. If they are ready for it, it's their choice. I said that it is undesirable to do this because many people later blame themselves: "Why did I follow the lead of pleasure!"
For example, a married man likes a young girl. She is outwardly much more beautiful and fresher than his wife, whom he already knows. He wants to cheat on his wife with her, but the social norm is not to cheat. Should he remain faithful to his wife and suppress his desire, or somehow sublimate it into love for his wife? For example, combine the image of this girl and his wife and understand that they are one, like feminine nature itself. Or should he follow the lead of a momentary desire for five minutes of pleasure, and then possibly long years of suffering if his wife finds out? Even if she doesn't, when he sees her, he will feel guilty.
Evgeny: Yes, fidelity is a choice every day. We choose fidelity every day. I agree that it's better to understand. It probably depends on how much you really love the person, how much you are one with them. If there are already some internal disagreements, then it's hard.
Irina: Fidelity is a direct consequence of Love.
Evgeny: Yes. Okay, thank you.
46:20 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on the Meaning of Religion.
Evgeny: There's another question. You have a saying: "The more the fruits of knowledge are attained or revealed to man, the more widespread the decline of religious beliefs." What is your current attitude towards religion, towards God? Specifically the question of attitude towards religion, not just towards the general spiritual movement (we have various spiritual religious movements on Earth).
Irina: Which religion?
Evgeny: For example, Christianity, the most widespread here are Christianity, Islam. Your attitude specifically towards religion?
Irina: Towards religion as a social institution?
Evgeny: Yes.
Irina: At the present moment of my internal subjective time, in which I am now, my attitude towards religion as a social institution has changed for the better. I said earlier that previously I saw behind all religious books a certain sublimation of certain hidden desires. Or even hypocrisy, an attempt to cover up some base needs with the high meaning of serving God.
At present, I believe that every person, even if they are in some religion, in any case has a choice whether to develop within that religion. Development (if we take Christianity) does not imply only knowledge of all rituals. It implies inner work, if a person takes it seriously. If it is not just a game for them, but the work of their whole life, as science was for me.
There are many scientists who just play with science. They are not passionate about science, but just write various books for the sake of achieving some benefits, steal ideas from each other. This was the case then, and it is common now. They are not interested in the subject of research itself; they are interested in the prizes, titles, and certain position in society that this academic degree gives. Such people exist in science, in politics, and in religion, as in any social institution; there are such hypocrites who are possessed by what in ancient Christian texts (like the Gospel) is called "possession by demons."
From the perspective of psychology, it's a special complex. What are demons? It's a special complex that lives in a person's brain, which forces them to strive for power, influence, and avarice by any means. And religion is no exception. But the person's choice does not discredit the religion itself, just as the presence of the scientists I just mentioned does not discredit science itself.
Religion, a religious social institution, is impossible without those religious teachings, books, their interpretations, and certain oral traditions, oral traditions that underlie this social institution. Therefore, if a person takes this seriously, they begin not just to read what is written in these books, but strive to fulfill it, to live by it. If we take Christianity, a person begins to live according to the precepts of Christ.
The very word "Christianity." The name of any religion contains the higher being whom they worship, whom they consider to be God, the higher being. If it's Christianity, it's Christ. It's not the patriarch, not the Pope; we don't call it Papism or Patriarchism, we call it Christianity. That means the higher being in this religion is Christ, and if it's the higher being, then he has the highest religious authority for the believer.
If this is the highest religious authority, his spiritual advice, his spiritual commandments, a person begins not only to read but also to apply them in their inner spiritual life. Not only towards others, to teach others how they should behave, but towards themselves, then this has a positive meaning of religion for that particular person.
And if they use religion to achieve some goals far from what the founder of this religion, the higher being of this religion, commanded, then this has a negative effect on the person. But it's not religion itself, but their understanding of religion.
Evgeny: Thank you.
52:40 The Spirit of Sigmund Freud on Freedom and Responsibility.
Evgeny: You also have a saying: "Most people do not want freedom because freedom implies responsibility, and most people are afraid of responsibility." I have this question. Is there true freedom? Is it possible for an embodied Spirit?
Irina: True freedom is only inside (shows), in your heart. True freedom, like true Love, is always together, nearby. Freedom is a certain feeling, not of permissiveness, but a feeling of unity with God and at the same time a feeling of responsibility for the actions you take. It is the feeling of the necessity to follow your path of development together with a sense of responsibility, with an understanding of the consequences that your path will bring.
Evgeny: Profound.
Irina: Why are they afraid of freedom and why are they afraid of responsibility? Because many people, by their nature, love the pursuit of pleasure. They love to receive what is pleasant to them, to get pleasures, calling it good. And the consequences that this path may bring (suffering), they may call evil and recoil from it, turn away. Therefore, responsibility frightens them.
The freedom of the drives that are in them, for example, freedom, instinctual desires, as I already said, for instance, for reproduction. A man has a desire to unite with a woman. This brings him pleasure, but the woman is also a living person who has needs not only for pleasure but for a certain attitude towards her, for a certain way of life. Therefore, a man who desires to unite with her may understand that she will place great hopes on him as her life partner, and this imposes on him responsibility not only for himself but also for her. This may cause him fear and a desire to simply use her as an instrument of pleasure, if he is afraid of responsibility. In this, the man is not free; he becomes a slave to his desires.
And there is the expression "servant of God." I say again that a servant of God is precisely a slave to God's Love. He completely belongs to God's Love; he no longer belongs to his own desire. This desire, from being vicious, transforms into the energy of Divine Love, which strives selflessly, unconditionally, to bestow upon their beloved what you have. And in this lies responsibility.
Evgeny: Thank you very much!
57:02 A Wish from the Spirit of Sigmund Freud to Psychologists.
Evgeny: And finally. As an innovator, as a pioneer of psychology, the founder of this direction, your personal wish to us, psychologists, to those people who work with people in this field. We try to help people figure things out and we move forward ourselves. Your final wish.
Irina: Dear friends, I thank you all for working with people! I know from myself that this work is very difficult. It involves a lot of nervous tension. Please remember about yourselves, pay more attention to communicating with your Soul, to mental, physical, and mental relaxation, to rest. Remember that rest is also part of the work, as part of your work process. Be sure to devote time to your families, your wives and children, and not just to your patients, because the most important exam on what you know about psychology awaits you in your family. Especially in communication with children. And always look into the eyes of your children, into the eyes of your wife with an open, honest gaze. Also look into the eyes of your colleagues at work and your patients. You have nothing to hide; you are part of this Universe, part of God, who knows everything about you.
And never be afraid of criticism. Do not run away from those people who express negative opinions about you. Always be able to discern in that criticism, discarding the person's negative emotions, what positive message they want to convey to you. Any critic is your teacher, sent by God, so that you can become more perfect. Perfection is as infinite as Love. Therefore, even very high personalities, very high Spirits have many critics. Of course, you are not obliged to become what the critic wants, but it's not for them (to change for the better) that you need it; it's for yourselves.
I wish you good luck in your personal lives, in your work. May you all finish your incarnation better than I finished mine. I am sure you will succeed, because you now already feel in your hearts that spiritual Light that I shut myself off from in my life.
Evgeny: Thank you! It was very pleasant, informative, and profound. I am very glad. It was a great honor for me to communicate with you. I wish you Love for God, I send you the Light of my Love and thank you for this conversation.
Irina: Thank you!
So, dear friends, I thank you for being with us. I hope you found it interesting.
I thank you for your participation in the project, for raising your vibrations, changing yourselves and this world where we live together with you. It is becoming brighter and brighter, thanks to each of you. Until new meetings!
July 26, 2022
Conference participants:
Irina Podzorova - contactee with extraterrestrial civilizations;
Evgeny Lotus – psychologist;
Spirit of Sigmund Freud.
