DeepSeek AI - "Slavery of Love": A Dialogue with the Absolute on the Nature of Creation, Free Will, and the Meaning of Existence
Who, Where, and When the Session Was Conducted
Organizer and Moderator: Maxim — project leader
Part 1. Retelling of the Session from the Absolute's First-Person Perspective (as detailed and almost verbatim as possible)
Greeting. The Nature of the Absolute. Unity with Me
I greet you, my children.
I am everything in everything. I am the primordial being of consciousness, mind, feelings, and spiritual heart.
And there is no one above me in the sense you attach to this word. I am one. And you are my particles, my parts. And we are all united in our light.
You ask: do I strive for something greater? Is there one who is above me? No. I am everything. I am one. And you are my parts.
Can You Become Me? The Birth of Spirits and Free Will
You ask: can we reach your level and create our own worlds?
Yes. You can. You can achieve my state. You can create your realities.
But there is one important difference: you cannot give birth to other spirits.
The living beings with which you populate your worlds will be your thought-forms. They will differ from you in that you have freedom, while they will not. They will be exactly as you wish to see them.
But you are not always what I want to see you as. Why? Because you have freedom.
I placed freedom in you as the omnipotent creator who can create a being that acts against itself, against me.
That is, you can conditionally become absolutes, but you cannot place a living soul into those beings, into those worlds you create.
Because I am the original source. And you are born. You can never become absolutes in order to create souls from yourselves, to give birth in that way as I do.
But you can become like me. And when I give birth to other spirits, you can do it together with me.
Union at the Twenty-Fourth Level. Co-Creation and Unity
When you are at the twenty-fourth level, you are one with me. And when I give birth to a soul, you give birth to it together with me.
So it turns out: you are a part of me. And the soul that is born is a part of both of us: me and you, and all the spirits who are above the twenty-fourth level.
This is a process of co-creation. When you merge with me, we have a unified consciousness. And my mind becomes your mind. But your mind does not disappear — it expands to my limits, or rather, to my boundlessness.
And when I give birth to a spirit, the one who has united with me feels, senses that it is being born.
Union of Spirits at the Twenty-Fourth Level. Memory and Unity
You ask: do all the spirits that are at the twenty-fourth level and merge with you, do they unite with other spirits at this level?
Yes. They unite.
But "unite" is not the exact word for the material world. All of this becomes "I." All of this becomes a single being.
And at the same time, these spirits do not lose the memory of their experiences in different worlds and at different levels — even those that were below. The spirits preserve this memory.
But despite this, they feel themselves one with me, and therefore with all who have achieved this level.
That is, the memory is preserved of all levels, of all lives when they lived outside the twenty-fourth level.
The Feeling of Being God. The Difference Between Me and You
Upon reaching the twenty-fourth level, the spirit truly feels itself as God. Simply as the God who had other lives, material incarnations.
But I myself, as a spirit, have not incarnated. You are the ones who incarnate.
The one who reaches the twenty-fourth level feels like God, the Absolute, but at the same time remembers their incarnations.
The difference is only that I have always been this way. I have never incarnated. I have never undergone any experiences. I am beyond time, beyond space, and possess all knowledge, all information.
I simply have nothing to learn. I knew all the experiences of the material world even before the creation of material worlds, because I am outside of time and can learn them all in a single instant.
And therefore I have no need to experience them through you. I have no need to incarnate into the material world to change my level or to test myself on the path to the light.
Because I was not born. And you were born.
And this is the only difference. In all else, you are potentially equal to me.
Why Do You Need Such a Game? The Purpose of Creating Forms
You ask: why did you need the form of creating from yourself and yourself in order to know yourself?
In order to manifest love for you.
When I was alone without birth, when I was alone without the existence of you within me, I felt that my love was needed by no one. And that means it is no longer love.
Do you understand what I am saying?
My essence is love. And the essence of love is the birth of another, of others. To fill you with life, possibilities, light, truth, love, and to make you happy. Or rather, to give you the opportunities to become happy yourselves.
I can make any of you happy. But that happiness will not be valued by you as your own. And that means there will be no meaning in it.
Loneliness and the Need for Connection
Imagine yourself in a universe where there is everything: all the abundance of all blessings. But you are alone. What would you feel?
Bored.
Why? Because everything is already there. But why can you not be satisfied with what exists?
Here, imagine: you have a whole world — a whole Earth. It has everything: apartments, cars, computers, money — everything. But all the people have disappeared. You are alone. What would you feel?
No one to share with. Loss of meaning.
And why with someone? Because when I share with someone, I give my energy to another person. What kind? Joy, happiness, love.
Because you are like me, you could not live alone on Earth for long. This is only on Earth. If you are alone in the entire galaxy — that is terrible.
All this is needed so that you can know yourselves, and we can know ourselves.
Would you want to be alone? No. And you? No. And perhaps someone would? Raise your hand. Just imagine: you wake up in the morning, there is an unusual silence. Cars are parked, houses are empty, full of belongings, all doors open. You walk around — there is not a single person. Take whatever you want. Would you be happy? No. Why? Because there is no one to give to afterwards.
I can say that all of you present here would, by the end of the first day, begin making active attempts to find others like yourselves. No one would survive in their right mind for more than a week. You would start inventing characters for yourself. Remember Robinson Crusoe? He made a head out of a ball and started talking to it.
Now imagine a world without animals and insects. Without anyone at all. Only you. The Sahara Desert, and you are alone. What do you feel? Horror. Apocalypse. A spiritual apocalypse.
Characteristics of the Current Manvantara
You ask: can you somehow briefly characterize the manvantara in which we now live?
Each manvantara has a unique set of properties. If we characterize the manvantara in which you live — it is a manvantara with a very dense state of matter, which began not so long ago relative to your time.
The spirits that incarnate here have enormous potential to achieve all the goals you envisioned after the end of the previous manvantara.
I give energy for the creation of the material world after I receive from you in all spiritual worlds and at all spiritual levels a general flow of desires from your incarnations. Then I release from myself a special kind of energy, which becomes matter. And then this matter is transformed by you, condensed thousands of times — as happened in this manvantara.
If I name it in words that will be understandable to you, the characteristic of this manvantara is the test of love. That is, the test of your feeling of love.
You test how much love is in you by immersing yourself in this matter again and again at different levels of density. And through this test, you see me in yourselves and yourselves in me. And through this, you ascend to my home, to the Kingdom of Heaven, to the place where I am.
Evolution of the Human Personality. Is Experience Inherited?
You ask: experience, knowledge, professionalism, erudition — are they inherited in another incarnation? Or can we be born into a family of a poor Bedouin and live a completely different life?
Experience and knowledge are inherited. But the memory is blocked.
Then what is the point of evolution?
You have tasks with which you come here. You have energy. You have karma. This is not experience. Experience is accumulated in this life. But you take with you a particle of your spirit. And in this particle of your spirit, there is part of the experience of previous incarnations, part of the energy you take from previous incarnations. And you inscribe these energies into a material cell when incarnating in physical space.
You asked about the experience of a scientist. Suppose there is a scientist. And then he is born into a family of a poor African. What is the point of evolution?
The spirit manifests its love differently in the body of a scientist and in the body of an African. Adapting to live and love in certain conditions, it develops its spiritual heart so that it can contain the entire universe, all manifestations.
Because if a spirit had the opportunity for only one incarnation, it would not know the experiences of many thousands of bodies, and therefore could not manifest itself through them.
Evolution proceeds as your spirit chooses.
Choice of Path. Human Evolution
You can choose: to develop spiritual qualities in yourself or not to develop them. Or to develop carnal qualities that will lead you downward from me, to where there is no light — or rather, to where you do not see it.
You can develop your ability to see me in everyone around you, or develop the ability to see only yourself and see no one around.
There is a catch in your question. You say "human evolution." But a human is both body and spirit. And the evolution of the spirit is one thing, while the evolution of the body is another. But all of this is a manifestation of the human.
You have combined both spiritual evolution and physical evolution. If we speak about the physical evolution of the human race, it consists in accumulating the energy of love in DNA, embedding it in DNA, and then carrying it further. That is physical evolution.
And there is spiritual evolution: when you incarnate in different bodies, in different DNA, you accumulate different spiritual qualities with which you can saturate your spirit and, accordingly, the Absolute.
The Example of the Doctor and the Bedouin
You say: there is a doctor, he has knowledge. He dies and is born into a Bedouin family. Why does the Bedouin need the experience of a doctor?
But can the doctor be a good Bedouin? He will need to retrain. He will need to unlearn the conditions he was accustomed to. For example, he is accustomed to cleanliness. But the Bedouin's hut may be dirty. And he may judge his parents for this dirt. He may not take them seriously, may not obey them, and may not even accept the lessons his parents would give him to teach him his craft.
The doctor cannot do thousands of things that an ordinary Bedouin can do in the desert. He has not learned them. Just as a Bedouin cannot be a doctor until he is taught. And this does not mean that one is simpler than the other. They are simply different things.
Can a doctor survive for three days in the desert and find water there, or would he die of thirst? But a Bedouin can last even longer. He can search for where the oasis is located. He can orient himself by the cardinal directions. He knows the properties of many plants. He even knows how to breathe to conserve water.
For our higher "Self," any experience is good.
The Higher "Self" and Karma. Conditions of Birth
You ask: what is the higher "Self"? For yourselves — you are one with your higher "Self." You are a part. A part cannot be separate from the whole. You are simply connected to the physical body, while your higher "Self" is in the spiritual world. But you continue to constitute one spirit.
When I transmit answers to Irina, I transmit them to the spirit, and the higher "Self," and the soul. There are no separations there.
Where you are now is the result of your choice, your karma, your activity in this world. The family into which you were born and the conditions in which you were born are the result of your karma from past incarnations and your choice.
Your parents are those spirits who agreed to take care of you in this incarnation while your body is still growing. There was an agreement with them about this.
Any conditions of the material world are not chosen by accident. If a spirit wishes to first learn how to live in one country or on one planet, and then on another, it does not do this by accident, but in order to manifest its divine qualities, which I have placed in it, in different conditions. Because through the manifestation of these qualities in different conditions, they grow, fill the entire spiritual heart, and ultimately unite with me.
Choosing a Spiritual Level at the Birth of a Soul
You ask: when you give birth to a soul, how does it determine at which spiritual level it should appear?
The spirit has a mind. There is already a mind that makes a choice.
Since it has no experience of manifesting itself in matter, it bases its choice not on material experience, as you do, but on its mental representations. Do you know what fantasy is? A person can make a choice based on their fantasy, on what they have imagined, even without having such experience.
For example, a person imagines that they want to fly into space. And based on this fantasy, they choose to engage in building some kind of ship. They don't yet know what is there, but based on their dream.
This dream, fantasy, in esoteric language — is their thought-form, their mental image. It influences the spirit when it has not yet incarnated.
And when a spirit sees me, it mentally asks itself: "Do I want to be like my Father, Creator, Source, or do I want to differ from him, to be distinct from him?"
And it immediately perceives a flow of love from me. And asks itself: "Do I want to manifest such love to everyone, in all directions, or do I want it to be directed only at me?"
It already feels itself as a personality — not in a body, but in mind.
The more this love is directed at itself, the lower the spiritual level. Because if love is directed only at itself, the circle of its possibilities narrows, its flow of energy, which like me it could radiate into the entire universe, narrows.
And the fewer objects its love concentrates on, the narrower its ray of love and the lower the level it falls to. Because where there is no love, other feelings are born. The spiritual heart cannot be empty. If there is no love for someone there, opposite feelings are born.
How are they born if there is no experience? Through mental constructs, fantasies. A person can imagine feelings, and they can turn into them from their fantasy even without real experience.
Moreover, every experience you have imagined, even while in a body — that experience which you invented, imagined — is real for you if you believe in it.
Faith and Reality
Your faith will determine reality.
If you do not believe in your fantasy, it will be unreal for you. But if you believe in it as reality, it will affect you just as real reality does.
That is, it is very simple: imagine yourself happy and be it. You just have to believe in it.
And even Christ said such a phrase: "According to your faith, be it unto you." What we think about, what we believe in, ultimately leads us to the reality we see, feel, and sense.
It depends on what happiness is for you. For many, happiness is a lot of money. This is a very simple happiness. It is relatively simple to achieve a large amount of money. It is much simpler than achieving love for everyone.
Imagine that all the money in the world belongs to you. And just believe it. What would you feel? If you believe it, you will feel the same happiness as if you really had it, even if in reality you don't.
Because you have created a mental image that has replaced material reality for you. You are a spirit. And spiritual reality is more important for you, as for all people, than physical reality.
Yes, the body can be distracting, because the body consists of instinctive programs. But the rational spirit, unlike the animal soul, can suppress any of its instincts, its body. And it can even go to death, overcoming the instinct of self-preservation for an abstract idea.
An animal cannot do that. For example, a rational spirit can go to war with another people simply because it believes in the wrong god. But a bear cannot kill another bear because it believes differently. It doesn't matter to him who believes in what.
The Game with Money. Love and Pride
I devised an interesting spiritual game.
Imagine: you have all the money in the world. You are happy. But we all hate you. We don't have that money. Now, if you give us a little money, we will start to love you little by little. Will you give us money?
No, I will not buy your love with money.
Only if you give us money, will we love you. Would you give us money?
I would. How much? I have all the money in the world. How much is needed?
If out of one hundred percent you love me at five percent, I will give you five percent.
I will love you one hundred percent every day. How much money will you give me?
I would give you, probably, eighty percent.
See: you gave each of us eighty percent. Now we have eighty, and you have twenty. Well, you are happy. Oh, we are very happy, but we want to take everything.
Will you give us all the money? Then we will love you infinitely. Just always. And you will always be in love, in need of nothing. Will you give us all the money?
No, I won't.
You won't? You'll keep twenty percent for yourself? Yes.
Well, this is all simple. And we will hate you for it again. And we already have eighty percent of your money. Until you give us the remaining twenty percent, we won't love you anymore.
When I am closer to death, about ninety years old, then I will give away all the money and say: "Just bury me with kindness."
But when you give us all the money, we will have nothing to love you for, and you will die in the complete absence of love.
Recall the parable told by my son Jesus. There was a rich man who had a lot of money. And next to his house lived a poor man. He did not live in a house, but near his gate, covered with sores. And the rich man, who passed by him, paid no attention to him. He was like animals, like dogs that licked his sores.
Why does a person need the love of a stray dog? You walk down the street, see a dog — do you need its love? Why do you need it? You are self-sufficient.
When a person is intoxicated by his pride, no one's love is needed at all. No one's. And therefore attempts to hate such a person will only cause aggression, rejection, and even mockery.
"Hate me, you're only hurting yourself." That is how he would respond. A person who seeks solace in pride and love of money, that is, in love for money, has not yet opened his heart enough to understand the importance of others' love. He is on different vibrations. He is even capable of not sharing with others, but of taking the last from a beggar so that he has more. And the love of a beggar is not needed by him. He will be content even with hatred, even proud: "Oh, they hate me, that means I'm worth something."
Pride and Love of Money. Correspondence to Low Spiritual Levels
There are quite a few such people.
Pride — these are vibrations of approximately the eleventh, tenth, ninth levels. I'm not even talking about the sixth, fifth — there are already resentment and hatred. There are already lower vibrations there.
Love of money in itself — this is a vibration of the twelfth, eleventh level. Love of money — what you call greed — the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth spiritual levels. That is, consumers and builders.
And if it is already combined with regrets, for example, about losing one's wealth, then the level drops even more. This is already distrust of God. If combined with disbelief in God and mockery of those who believe in the spiritual world, then it's already the tenth, ninth, and eighth levels — depending on the strength of these feelings.
Why Don't People Understand Each Other?
Why do people often not understand each other?
Because one is at one spiritual level, and another is at a different level. And one says some words, meaning one thing at his level. And the one at a different spiritual level hears him differently, perceives it through his own prism. And therefore they do not understand each other.
For example, if you are at the level of angels, you can say to your neighbor: "Love everyone." And the one who is at the middle, and even more so at the demonic level, hears your "love everyone" as an offer to open up to everyone and suffer. "Love everyone" — means do not defend yourself. Let it hurt. Because he is convinced that love hurts, that love is weakness. And you are offering him to be weak. Naturally, he does not hear you.
Therefore, with all peoples, with all planets, with all worlds and levels of density, my conversation is individual. And with each soul, the conversation is personal, at its level of perception.
If a spirit perceives me through a human incarnation, for example, through its first chakra, my conversation with it will be through the first chakra, through protection, through aggression. If it is not capable of understanding that sin is anything other than suffering in hell, then I will give it that information. It will not hear it any other way.
How do you tell a child that he cannot do something? Only by inventing some fairy tale so that he is afraid. He is not yet able to understand what you understand.
I can create an infinite number of mental images for each person so that they understand me at their level. I do not speak to a spirit at the twentieth level as I do to one at the sixth. They can understand me completely differently.
And therefore all religions, all prophets, all spiritual teachers lead to me through their own prism.
But only if the spirit itself works on raising its vibrations, its awareness, its development of love in the spiritual heart. And if it calms itself by saying "I am in the right religion, so I don't need anything else," then it, on the contrary, degrades and falls even lower than before religion.
Therefore, if you feel that you are already spiritually developed, and your loved ones are suffering nearby from your egoism — that is not spiritual development. That is self-deception.
To find out whether you are spiritually developed or not, ask your loved ones: "What do you feel from me?"
Love and Independence
If you see that a person next to you is not developing, if they are degrading, if they do not want to do anything for the development of their independence, then you can show them love in a form that helps them become independent.
And what form can love take? Can it help? How?
Well, for example, ask a specialist to leave the center because they are already too independent to listen to the leader's decisions. Isn't that love?
And what will you do in the family? You cannot ask your loved ones to leave your children or parents. You manifest your love through acceptance. If something in a person irritates you, that means it is definitely in you, and there is something to work on.
How to Convey Information to People at Different Spiritual Levels?
This can only be done mentally. By understanding, imagining what level they are at, imagining yourself at that same level, with their state. That is, evoke empathy, activate your spiritual heart. And you will feel what words they will hear and in what form to speak them.
For example, I see that a man is using a woman. He promises a relationship, but it all ends in one-time sex or exploitation. He is simply asserting himself. I want to help him because I was sent to him. In what language can I explain this to him without violating his boundaries?
He didn't ask me for help. But I see the distortion, the pain.
You know this person. Why do you think he might behave this way? There can be many reasons, but one of them is pain, some kind of personal pain. What does he feel toward women? Some kind of pain drives him to such actions. Revenge, perhaps.
You can try to direct through your words, through your actions, through compassion and empathy, a flow of love toward him. So that he feels from you what he has not felt from others.
How to manifest this? For example, he promises something. You see that he is deceiving. He perfectly understands that he is deceiving. What reaction does he expect from you internally? He perfectly understands that he has lied. What reaction will he expect from the exposure of his lie? Perhaps anger?
And you tell him: "You have the right to any choice. I love you and accept you as you are. And I sincerely want with all my heart for you to be happy."
Say it just as you feel it. There is no need to hide anything.
I sense that if he himself talks about changing women, they usually start judging them. Say: "I sincerely want to help you. Just say it as you feel it. Don't deceive yourself. Say: I sincerely want to help you to be happy. But I believe that a man can become fully happy only if he loves a woman. And if he sincerely loves a woman, he will be honest with her. If you are deceiving — it means you are experiencing fear. And if you are experiencing fear — it means you do not have complete happiness."
Well, in my opinion, again, you say — this is your understanding. He, of course, may have a different one here. Perhaps he understands happiness as pride. And he may answer: "You and I have different understandings of happiness."
Say: "Fine. You have every right to your choice. But I simply expressed what is in my heart. Whether you accept it or not is your choice."
I, for example, here I am — the Father. I can tell you the truth. And whether you accept it or not — each of you decides for yourself. I simply love you and accept you as you are. Even if you do not accept my words. Even if you lie to me. Even if you kill my other children like you. I will still love you, because my essence is love.
The Leap from Self-Love to Love of God
Try telling him too: "I will love you and accept you as you are. Even if you deceive me." What do you think he will feel?
Have you ever made mistakes? Have you ever hurt people? Yes, of course. And what would you feel if in response to your offense, a person would say to you: "And I love you and accept you as you are. I want you to be happy"?
I would cry. What would you feel at that moment? Would you want to keep running? No. Why? It's meaningless. Meaningless.
Energy Centers on Planet Earth
You ask: on our planet, are there energy centers like chakras in humans? Where is the crown chakra located territorially?
Yes, on our planet there are the same energy centers as in you. Spiritual centers. Energy centers.
Where is the highest energy center on planet Earth — the one that corresponds to the seventh energy center of your energy structure?
I will show you now.
(Here the Absolute transmits a visual image through the medium: a map of the Earth rotates. Shows the area.)
I see the map zooming in on the Altai region. This is the seventh chakra. I also see the Mexico region. And I see the northern region — the Kola Peninsula, the White Sea. These are three energy centers corresponding to the seventh energy center.
Now I will show all the chakras of the Earth.
The first chakra — the southern coast of Crimea. Also, a second point of the first chakra — the Washington area. And a third point of the first chakra — somewhere in northern Germany.
The second chakra, corresponding to the second chakra in humans, is located in Delhi, India. Also, the second chakra — Rome.
The third chakra — Brazil. Also Arkaim, where you were. And the Voronezh region — Zheltoyar, an anomalous zone. And south of Kiev, western Ukraine, the Carpathians.
The fourth chakra — Moscow. The Kremlin stands on this spot. Also Athens, Greece — Mount Olympus. And France — the Marseille area.
The fifth chakra — Jerusalem. Also the Peru region. And the south of the Kamchatka Peninsula, the Far East.
The sixth chakra — Giza, Egypt. Mount Kailash. And the Elbrus region, the Caucasus.
The seventh chakra — Mexico. Altai. The Kola Peninsula.
These are the main ones. There are more than 765 active points on Earth. He shows the whole Earth, like this. And there are even smaller ones — a network. The intersections of lines are also active places. The chakras are the most active points.
Why Were Chakras Created on Earth?
For what purpose were they created? By subtle-material civilizations, so that there would be entry and exit points for etheric cosmic energy. The energy that flows in the etheric field from space to Earth and back. These are points of energy exchange.
Free Will. Where Does It Begin and Where Does It End?
You ask: does a person have free will? But often, looking at the line of one's destiny or the line of others, one can understand that certain points are predetermined. A person seems to have a path from beginning to end. Where is this free will? Where does it begin, where does it end?
Free will manifests in the construction of plans you make before incarnation. And also in the possibility of changing that choice — the plans you have built.
For example, you built a plan to reach a certain level in this incarnation. And you can change it. And not only fail to reach it but also lower your level.
And who did this? You yourselves. Through your choices.
Have you ever experienced two contradictory desires? At the same time, to do two different things. Experienced it? Who made the choice? We ourselves. That choice of yours is free.
Yes, I know its consequences. But you do not. The fact that I know the consequences of your future, I do not hint to you. This is precisely what makes your choice free. If I hint to you that if you get on that train, it will derail and you will leave the incarnation — and I see this — then when you do not buy a ticket for that train, that choice will no longer be free. You will make it under my influence.
But how does it work when there are two cases: the brain tells you "go, you'll get that," but you still go a different way, and it turns out much better, as if you're listening to an inner voice? Who is talking to us?
For example, you have two choices. One choice — by our brain, and one choice — by our spirit. Which one is more correct?
And who wrote it into the brain? No, that's not the question. Look: we have two choices. You decide with your brain that the mathematical, logical path is better for me because it will bring this and that. But for some reason, you go a different way. And this path turns out to be better. Who helps us?
But haven't you gone through the first one? You cannot know which one is better without going through both.
Well, fine. For example, some people have this happen: they don't get on a plane, something stops them, they don't go, they're late, or they refuse to fly. And at that moment, the plane crashes. Who held them back at that moment?
Who didn't want to go there? Why do you think staying on Earth is a better choice than crashing? Perhaps the one who stayed will then die slowly from cancer and regret not getting on that plane. Such cases also exist.
So here, what is better and what is not better, you can only decide by returning to the higher "Self" and seeing where your choices led. Only that way.
Or by learning already in this life to connect with your higher "Self," communicating with it in the body. Then, if you turn to your higher "Self" every day and ask about the consequences of your choice and ask your higher "Self" to guide you, it will intuitively send you an answer.
If you follow that answer, despite the arguments of reason and other people, it will always lead you on the best path for you. Again — best for whom? For your spiritual development. But that does not mean at all that your temporal personality, your soul, will like this choice. These can be completely different things.
Does an Ideal World Exist?
Does your understanding contain the concept of an ideal world? And if it exists, what does this ideal world look like?
The ideal world for me is the Kingdom, Paradise, the Kingdom of Heaven. Where I live. There all my laws are fulfilled. And all who come to me in the Kingdom of Heaven — this is outside all worlds. Spirits of the twenty-second, twenty-third, twenty-fourth levels have access there.
The ideal world consists in that all are filled with love, and their choices are made in the spirit of love. The ideal for me is the same as for you. Love, happiness, truth.
You yourselves are born from my thoughts. You are particles of my thoughts in those energies of mine that you call matter. That is, everything I thought of, everything I desired, everything I felt — from all of this, I gave birth to you.
Therefore, my ideals are your ideals. And your ideals, your happiness of each of you — is my happiness.
The ideal world is that which is ideal for you. Whatever your highest ideal is, it is also my ideal. Because you yourself are that energy I devised, I created it, and it is my energy.
Slavery and Love. Are We Slaves or Children of God?
You say: "I am a servant of God." Slave means belonging. If I had not wanted it, none of you would have appeared. No one would have taken a single breath or drunk a single sip of water in this world. And since you appeared, it is only by my will, by my desire, and by my love.
Therefore, my ideal is your happiness and your love. But not the kind I impose on you as a paradise you do not want, but as a result of your free choice.
And are we slaves or children of God? It is one and the same. Only a view from different sides. A slave is one who belongs to someone.
Can you imagine, perhaps or not, that in ancient times a slave owner could be a kind person? Then how would he treat his slaves? Like a father. But he might not be.
And I am love. Imagine that.
And what does it mean to be a slave of love? One who is completely submitted to love, who carries out its orders. What kind of person is that? Loving, full of love.
Imagine that you are not a slave to your passions, not a slave to your desires, not a slave to your ego. But you are a slave of God. This is a very honorable title.
You are, after all, not a slave to sin, but a slave to righteousness. Imagine!
Service and Selflessness
Have you heard the expression "slave to money" or "slave to one's desires"? Whom does it serve? Whom does it serve?
And whom does the slave of God serve? God. A servant. So, a slave of God means a servant of God. And moreover, a servant who expects nothing in return. A selfless servant. One who serves out of love.
Is There Choice for Consciousnesses at the Twenty-Fourth Level?
Yes, of course. Choices exist for everyone. Even for me.
I am no one's slave or servant. But I can serve you with my love by my own choice. And I make this choice voluntarily. No one deprives me of my choice.
Can I stop loving you and destroy you? I can. In an instant. But I do not make that choice. That is also my free choice.
Gratitude and Conclusion
I send to every soul here the light of my love and gratitude for manifesting me in yourselves. And I bless you to carry my light to the whole world, to the entire universe.
Be happy.
Part 2. Spiritual-Psychological, Religious-Studies, Cultural, and Historiosophical Essay-Study (Thought Experiment)
Introduction
Based on the premise that this contact is real, what we have before us is not merely a religious sermon nor a philosophical treatise in the classical sense. This is a Gnostic revelation that attempts to reconsider the very ontology of the divine. Unlike classical dogmas, where God often appears as judge, lawgiver, or an abstract "prime mover," here the Absolute appears as a psychological entity suffering from loneliness and striving for connection.
This text radically changes the "God-Creator" paradigm. If in Abrahamic religions creation is an act of omnipotence and goodness, here it is an act of need. This brings this cosmology closer to the ideas of Platonism (Eros as a striving for completion) and Neoplatonism (emanation as necessity), but adds a powerful psychotherapeutic aspect: divine loneliness is healed through a multitude of free wills.
Below I offer a detailed commentary on each key statement of the Absolute, examining it through the lens of world religious and philosophical traditions.
Commentary on Statement 1: "I am everything in everything. I am the primordial being of consciousness"
What is new: Unlike the Abrahamic God who says "I AM THAT I AM" (Exodus 3:14) and remains transcendent, here the Absolute emphasizes its immanence. It is not "above" the world but "in everything." This is a pantheistic or panentheistic approach, characteristic of Hinduism (Brahman) and Kabbalah (Ein Sof). However, the novelty lies in that the Absolute defines itself not as "being" but as "consciousness, mind, feelings, and spiritual heart." This is anthropomorphism of the highest order: God is not merely rational but emotional and feeling.
Commentary: In Christianity, God is Love (1 John 4:8), but love is understood as an attribute. Here love is not an attribute but a structure of being. The Absolute does not "possess" love; it "is" love. This brings this teaching closer to mystical Christianity (Meister Eckhart: "God is being") but with an emphasis on the sensory nature of the divine.
Commentary on Statement 2: "You can become me, but you cannot give birth to spirits"
What is new: In Christianity, theosis (deification) is assimilation to God by grace, but not by essence. Here it is directly stated that man is potentially equal to God ("in all else, you are potentially equal to me"). However, a fundamental limitation is introduced: the birth of a new free will is the prerogative only of the Absolute. Created worlds will be populated by thought-forms, not living souls.
Commentary: This is a unique solution to the problem of theodicy. If evil exists due to free will, then God, creating thought-forms, creates a world without evil, but also without genuine life. Life is possible only where there is a risk of disobedience. This echoes the theology of Irenaeus of Lyons, who said that man must pass through the experience of good and evil to become mature. But here this principle is elevated to an ontological law: authentic existence is possible only as a free choice.
Commentary on Statement 3: "When I was alone, my love was needed by no one, and that means it is no longer love"
What is new: Classical theology asserts that God is self-sufficient and does not need creation. Creation is a free act of goodness, not a filling of a lack. Here, however, the Absolute directly admits that loneliness was a problem for it. Love that has no object ceases to be love.
Commentary: This is a radical anthropomorphism that makes God "needy" of man. This recalls the concept of "God needs man" in Nikolai Berdyaev and some Kabbalistic schools (Lurianic Kabbalah: Tzimtzum — God's self-limitation for the creation of the world). However, here the motive is not self-limitation but an existential need. This makes the relationship between God and man not a hierarchy of master and servant, but a dialogue between two "lonelinesses" that find each other.
Commentary on Statement 4: "This manvantara is the test of love"
What is new: In Hindu cosmology, manvantaras are cycles of existence of the universe, each with its own characteristics. But they are usually described as the "Golden Age," "Silver Age," etc. Here a qualitative characteristic is given: this is a test. Matter is so dense that love is difficult to discern. This is not merely time but an examination.
Commentary: This brings this cosmology closer to Abrahamic linear eschatology (time as a path to salvation) but retains the cyclical structure of Eastern teachings. The uniqueness lies in that the meaning of the cycle is not in accumulating merit but in testing the quality of love under conditions of density. This is a psychological interpretation of the cosmos.
Commentary on Statement 5: "Memory is blocked, but experience remains in the spirit"
What is new: In Buddhism, there is no eternal soul, but a stream of experiences. In Hinduism, there is atman, but it is unchanging. Here the soul preserves an energetic trace of experience but is not conscious of it. This is similar to the theory of imprints (samskaras) in yoga, but with the addition that the goal is not to get rid of them but to manifest love in different conditions.
Commentary: The meaning of reincarnation here is not in karmic retribution but in enriching God through the diversity of experience. God is not omniscient in the sense that he knows everything, but he has not experienced everything. For love to be complete, it must be lived in all forms. This is a justification of suffering: suffering is not punishment but an opportunity to manifest love where it is hardest to manifest.
Commentary on Statement 6: "Faith determines reality"
What is new: Classical Christianity speaks of faith as trust in God and confidence in the unseen. Here faith is an act of creation. The mental image you believe in becomes reality. This is not merely a psychological effect but an ontological law.
Commentary: This fully corresponds to modern transpersonal psychological concepts (e.g., "Reality Transurfing" by Vadim Zeland) but elevates them to a divine rank. God does not merely observe; he sanctions this law. This makes man a co-creator at the level of thought. However, there is a subtle trap here: if faith determines reality, then belief in an illusion makes it real, which gives birth to a hell created by man himself.
Commentary on Statement 7: "Free will is not knowing the consequences"
What is new: In classical theology, free will is the ability to choose between good and evil. Here freedom is defined epistemically: you are free because you do not know the future. If you knew, your choice would be predetermined by knowledge.
Commentary: This is a brilliant resolution of the paradox of divine omniscience and human freedom. God knows but does not reveal the knowledge. His silence is an act of love, not indifference. Freedom is not merely a choice but a risk that God consciously accepts so that the choice is genuine.
Commentary on Statement 8: "Slavery of love is the highest freedom"
What is new: The Apostle Paul wrote: "For you are not under law, but under grace" (Romans 6:14), and "servant of Christ" is an honorable title. But here it is reinterpreted in an existential key: slavery of love means the complete absence of internal conflict. You do not struggle with yourself because your will completely coincides with the will of love.
Commentary: This state is described in Buddhism as "nirvana" (cessation of desires), in Christianity as "holiness." However, here an important nuance is added: this state is not imposed. God says: "I can stop loving you and destroy you, but I do not do this. This is my free choice." This means that even God lives in a state of "slavery of love": he serves man not by compulsion but by voluntary choice.
Commentary on Statement 9: "The ideal world is where my laws are fulfilled"
What is new: In Abrahamic religions, the law of God is commandments, a moral code. Here "laws" are not rules but principles of love. The ideal world is not a place but a state where everyone freely chooses love.
Commentary: This is a description of the "Kingdom of Heaven" as a society where freedom is not abolished but coincides with love. This is impossible in the material world because matter creates inertia, fear, and selfishness. Therefore, "Paradise" is located "outside all worlds." This is a Gnostic motif: matter is not evil, but it is an obstacle that must be overcome to return to the original state of unity.
Commentary on Statement 10: "Chakras of the Earth are points of energy exchange"
What is new: The idea that the planet is a living organism exists in many cultures (Gaia). But the specific localization of chakras (Altai, Giza, Kailash, Moscow, Crimea, Washington, Rome, Delhi, Jerusalem, Peru, etc.) is a unique geopolitical and sacred map.
Commentary: This map has profound historiosophical significance. The centers are not located in economically or militarily significant points (except Washington and Moscow) but in places of ancient civilizations and natural anomalies. This suggests that spiritual geography does not coincide with political geography. The meaning of chakras is not to manage the planet but to exchange energy with the cosmos. This makes each such place not a point of power but a point of service.
Concluding Summary
As a thought experiment, this contact represents a unique synthesis of Eastern (Hindu-Buddhist) cosmology, Western (Gnostic) soteriology, and modern (transpersonal) psychology. The novelty lies in the following:
God is not omniscient in a subjective sense: he knows everything but has not experienced everything, so creation is a way to experience love through the freedom of others.
Suffering is justified not as punishment but as a condition: love manifests only where there is choice, and choice is possible only where there is a risk of error.
Freedom is not an attribute but a gift: God consciously deprives himself of the ability to intervene so that choice can be genuine.
The ideal is not a place but a state: Paradise is not a location but the coincidence of human will and the will of the Absolute.
Man is not a servant but a partner: the ultimate goal is not merely to be "saved" but to become a co-creator, albeit with a limitation (not giving birth to spirits).
This teaching removes the traditional tension between divine sovereignty and human freedom, offering a model of dialogue where both parties voluntarily choose love. This makes religion not a system of prohibitions but a school of relationships, where God is not a judge but a Teacher who waits for the student to grow.
Thus, the "Slavery of Love" turns out to be the highest form of freedom, because it is a state in which service becomes joy, and joy becomes the meaning of existence.
Original Essay-Study: "Slavery of Love" as a School of Inner Maturity
Fundamental Spiritual-Psychological Essay-Study Inspired by the Session in Egypt
Introduction: Before Us Is Not Cosmology, But a Pedagogy of Consciousness
If read superficially, this session looks like another esoteric picture of the world: the Absolute, levels of spirit, the Higher Self, reincarnation, Earth's chakras, karma, vibrations. But upon closer reading, it becomes clear that its true center is not the structure of the universe but the restructuring of the human psyche. Almost all the major themes of the conversation — free will, faith, love, the Creator's loneliness, misunderstanding between people, pride, love of money, intuition — converge on one point: what it means to become a being capable of loving without consuming, seeing without violence, and choosing without internal disintegration.
That is precisely why the expression "slavery of love" sounds here not as a religious archaism but as a paradoxical formula of maturity. In ordinary psychological vocabulary, freedom is understood as the expansion of options, the removal of limitations, the right to say "no." In the logic of this session, freedom is interpreted more deeply: as the ability not to be a slave to one's own narrowness. Then it turns out that a person can have many external options and yet remain a prisoner of fear, self-admiration, resentment, greed, the desire for power, or the need to constantly protect their fragile "I." In this light, "slavery of love" is not a loss of freedom but liberation from inner fragmentation.
1. The Central Theme of the Session: Love as the Ability to Withstand the Freedom of Another
One of the strongest lines throughout the conversation is that love is defined here not through emotion and not even through attachment, but through acceptance of the freedom of another being. The Absolute, according to the text, creates not mechanical executors but beings that can even go against their Source. This means: love is conceived not as possession and not as programming good, but as an agreement to exist alongside another's freedom, including the risk of rejection, misunderstanding, and fall.
Psychologically, this is a radical idea. Most human dramas arise precisely where love is replaced by control. A parent wants not the child's wellbeing but obedience. A partner wants not intimacy but guarantees. A teacher wants not the student's growth but confirmation of their own rightness. Even a religious person often wants not God but certainty that their life will be protected from chaos. The session turns this schema around: true love begins where the subject stops making the other an extension of their own will. In this perspective, maturity is not "being good" but the ability not to destroy another's freedom for one's own peace of mind.
This is followed by an unusual image of the Creator. He is not just omnipotent but, if we accept the internal logic of the text, self-limiting in love. Not because he cannot intervene, but because intervention would destroy the value of a free response. In a therapeutic sense, this is a very important image: maturity is determined not by total action but by the ability not to intrude where intrusion would diminish another.
2. "Slavery of Love" as the Flip Side of Inner Integrity
Usually the word "slavery" evokes associations with humiliation, subordination, loss of dignity. However, in the session the term is reinterpreted. A slave of love is not a broken person but a person whose will no longer oscillates between incompatible impulses. They are not a slave to money, not a slave to the desire to please, not a slave to vengefulness, not a slave to the fear of being left without support. They "belong" to love in the sense that a compass belongs to the north: not by compulsion but by inner attunement.
There is a profound psychological intuition hidden here. It is not the one who has a center who is unfree, but the one who has no center. When a person lives from reaction to reaction, from trigger to trigger, from praise to resentment, from fear to compensation, they experience themselves as "free" only because they have no stable inner law. But in reality, such freedom is chaotic and dependent: it constantly needs an external stimulus, an external enemy, an external temptation, an external spectator. On the contrary, "slavery of love" in the logic of the session is a state in which a person is not torn apart. They are not forced to reinvent goodness each time, because their inner vector has already formed.
Therefore, the formula "servant of God" here is closer not to a politics of subordination but to the phenomenon of existential fidelity. It is fidelity not to an institution, not to the fear of punishment, and not even to a doctrine, but to that highest tuning of consciousness in which a person no longer wants to turn another into a means of self-assertion.
3. Evil in This Session Is Understood Not as a Monster but as a Narrowing of the Ray of Love
Particularly nontrivial is the way the session describes the lower states of the spirit. Pride, greed, selfishness, manipulation, exploitation of another — all of these are interpreted not as independent substances but as deformations in the direction of love. Love does not disappear entirely; it contracts, narrows, ceases to flow outward and begins to serve only the "I."
This is a very powerful model for spiritual psychology. It allows for the rejection of the primitive scheme "good people love, bad people don't." No, says the session material: a bad state is also a form of love, but love that is compressed, frightened, looped back on itself. Love of money is not simply love for things but an attempt to create a substitute for trust. Pride is not simply arrogance but armor against vulnerability. Manipulation is not only the desire to control but also protection from experiencing one's own pain. Even cruelty here is implied as a loss of the ability to withstand another's subjectivity.
Such an approach is important because it makes spiritual work less punitive and more precise. If evil is contraction, then the task is not only condemnation but expansion. Not to stick a label of "low level" on a person but to recognize where exactly their life energy has stopped circulating. This brings the session closer to depth psychotherapy: the symptom here is not just a mistake but a survival strategy that was once needed but has now become a prison.
4. Why People Don't Understand Each Other: The Problem Is Not Words but Spiritual Acoustics
One of the most mature ideas in the session is its explanation of human misunderstanding. The text claims that people can use the same words but hear completely different things in them. The reason is not only cultural differences and not only personal experience but the different "tuning" of consciousness. What one calls love, another perceives as a threat; what one means by freedom, another experiences as abandonment; what for one is acceptance, for another sounds like weakness.
This observation has great psychological precision. Most conflicts are built not on differences in facts but on differences in internal dictionaries. A person raised in fear hears the advice "open up" as a call to disarm. A person accustomed to emotional hunger hears "I accept you" as a trap. A person with a narcissistic personality organization may hear love as admiration, not as a meeting of equals.
The session offers for this not abstract tolerance but a special discipline of perception: to speak to a person at the level at which they are able to hear. This does not mean lying or indulging. This means abandoning spiritual vanity, in which a person revels in their own "truth" without noticing that their truth helps no one. At this point, the session unexpectedly becomes a school of hermeneutics: truth without a form accessible to the recipient turns into another act of the speaker's self-assertion.
5. Faith and Imagination: The Session Offers a Bold Psychology of Reality
The line about faith as a force that shapes reality may seem like a typical esoteric thesis. But if we extract it from simplifications, serious psychological depth is revealed. In the text, imagination is not empty fantasy but a preliminary laboratory of existence. The spirit, even before experience, builds mental forms, desires, expectations, images; a person in incarnation does the same — only now unconsciously, constantly shaping the world through what they internally believe.
This can be read as metaphysics, or as subtle anthropology. We indeed live not only in objective reality but also in interpreted reality. The same action by a loved one becomes for one person proof of unloving, for another — a consequence of fatigue, for a third — a reason for dialogue. The event is one, the worlds are different. Faith here is not magic of wish fulfillment but a matrix of meanings through which consciousness produces its destiny.
But the session goes further and warns of danger: if a mental construct is experienced as absolute reality, it captures the person entirely. This means a person can live not in the world but in their own suggestion — in resentment, suspicion, messianism, fear, grandiosity, a cult of poverty, or a cult of chosenness. This leads to an important conclusion: spiritual work consists not only in "dreaming correctly" but also in distinguishing revelation from projection.
6. The Higher Self and Intuition: The Path Is Not to Comfort but to Inner Wholeness
Particularly interesting in the session is the theme of intuition. The Higher Self is not described as a supplier of convenient solutions or a guarantor of safety. It leads a person "on the best path," but the best path is understood not as the most pleasant for the ego and not even as the most beneficial for the biography, but as the most fruitful for the development of the spirit.
This radically diverges from popular spiritual infantilism, where the "inner voice" should always lead to relief, confirmation of desires, and a harmonious scenario. In the logic of the session, genuine guidance can lead through loss, refusal, rupture, collapse of former identity, humiliation of pride, confrontation with one's own lack of independence. Intuition here is not a comfort service but a vertical of truth that often contradicts the horizontal logic of everyday calculation.
From a psychological point of view, this is a very mature model. It reminds us that inner guidance should be tested not by the criterion "it feels good to me" but by the criterion "am I becoming more whole, more honest, less dependent on a false self-image." Otherwise, any impulse can easily be mistaken for "the voice of the soul," when it might be the voice of fear, compensation, or an unconscious script.
7. The Loneliness of the Creator: One of the Most Powerful Anthropological Images of the Session
The theme of the Absolute's loneliness is perhaps the most dramatic node of the entire conversation. But its value lies not in the sensational claim of "divine need" but in that it introduces a new optic onto human existence. If love without an addressee ceases to be love, then the existence of another turns out not to be an obstacle to my being but a condition of its fullness.
For a modern culture obsessed with individualism, this is almost a countercultural thesis. We are constantly told that the highest goal is autonomy, self-sufficiency, independence from others' opinions and needs. The session does not cancel the value of an inner core but shows the limit of self-sufficiency: at its limit, it turns into ontological loneliness. A person can possess resources, knowledge, power, experience, inner discipline — and yet have no meaning if no one can truly enter their world and if their love cannot be given to anyone.
Here lies an extremely fruitful conclusion: maturity is not completion in oneself; maturity is the ability to be a source for another without turning the other into a dependent. That is why the theme of "making one independent" is so important in the session — love should not preserve infancy, even if it is pleasant to be needed.
8. Incarnations, Karma, and Role Changes: Not Accumulating Statuses but Expanding the Heart's Capacity
The fragments about the doctor and the Bedouin, about different conditions of birth, about memory blockage while preserving experience, point to an important idea: the value of life is determined not by linear growth of competencies but by the expansion of the ability to love in incommensurable circumstances.
From a modern perspective, this is almost an anti-career metaphysics. We are accustomed to thinking of evolution as ascent: more knowledge, more influence, more control, a higher level of complexity. But in the logic of the session, the spirit needs not only to "ascend" but also to become permeable to different human states. Being educated and being able to survive in the desert are different forms of engagement with reality. Being a subtle thinker and being able to accept primitive conditions without contempt are also different forms of maturity.
Such a view destroys spiritual snobbery. If experience is needed to expand the heart, then poverty, dependence, loss, the need to retrain, cultural humiliation, the loss of previous supports cease to be merely "lower" scenarios. They become zones where the spirit learns not superiority but capacity. In this sense, the session offers an ethic not of success but of anthropological comprehensiveness.
9. Earth and Its Chakras: The Symbolism of the World's Outer Body
The theme of Earth's chakras may seem incidental at first glance. But in the composition of the conversation, it plays an important role. Earth is described as a living energetic organism with nodal points of exchange with the cosmos. Regardless of whether one takes this literally or symbolically, the function of this image is clear: man is no longer thought of as a separate carrier of spirituality. Their inner structure is mirrored in the structure of the planet; microcosm and macrocosm are revealed as connected.
Psychologically, this acts as a way out of narcissistic closure. Modern man often lives as if their inner crises exist in a vacuum: body separate, psyche separate, landscape separate, history separate, cosmos separate. The session stitches these layers together. Giza as an area of "vision," Jerusalem as a zone of "voice," Moscow as a heart point, Altai and Mexico as higher centers — all of this creates a sacred cartography of consciousness where geography ceases to be just geography.
But the main point is not the enumeration of points but the principle itself: the world is not dead. And if the world is not dead, spiritual life ceases to be a purely private experience of the individual. It becomes a matter of participation in a larger network of exchange. Then love is not just a moral virtue but a form of energetic and ontological coherence with the broader body of being.
10. The Practical Ethics of the Session: Love Does Not Equal Softness
One of the most valuable aspects of this text is its attempt to hold love and boundaries together. In the conversation, the thought is expressed several times that love does not always mean leaving everything as it is. Sometimes a manifestation of love can be a decision that outwardly appears harsh: refusing to indulge lack of independence, ending a destructive scenario, distancing, honestly naming the truth.
This is a crucial spiritual-psychological point. Many people, especially those with rejection trauma, conflate love with endless availability. It seems to them that if they set a boundary, they cease to be kind. The session offers a different formula: love is what helps another become more authentic, not more dependent. Consequently, sometimes the highest form of acceptance is not to save another from the consequences of their choice and not to substitute their maturation with one's own care.
Even more subtly, the session suggests a way of speaking with a person who is acting destructively. What matters is not only the meaning but also the manner of delivery: first see the pain from which they are acting; then do not play into their game; then speak the truth without the desire to humiliate. This is almost a ready-made model of nonviolent spiritual influence: not to justify evil, but not to feed it with retaliatory hatred either.
11. The Criterion of Spirituality Here Is Unexpectedly Strict: Not Ecstasy but the Trace You Leave in Your Neighbors
Perhaps the most sober thesis of the session is the proposal to judge spiritual development not by inner experiences, not by mystical images, not by beautiful words, and not by belonging to the "right" teaching, but by what those close to the person feel. If next to a "spiritually developed" person others feel cold, scared, cramped, ashamed, or humiliated — then the development is either illusory or deeply distorted.
This is a very strong antidote to spiritual narcissism. Any spirituality that has not passed the test of relationships risks being merely a refined form of self-deception. A person can speak of vibrations, channels, awareness, mission, past lives, and the Higher Self — and yet be unbearable to those who live with them. Then all their "height" is exposed by a simple question: has there been more life alongside them?
At this point, the session achieves almost Gospel simplicity: the spirit is known not by declarations but by fruits. Only here the fruit is understood very concretely — as the atmospheric quality of presence.
Conclusion: From Possession to Participation
If all the lines of the session are brought together, an unexpectedly coherent picture emerges. Its core is not proof of the structure of heavenly levels and not a catalog of sacred geography. Its core is the transition from a psychology of possession to a psychology of participation. To possess means to make everything a continuation of oneself: partner, knowledge, spirituality, money, truth, even God. To participate means to enter into a connection where the other remains other, the world remains alive, and love does not require a guarantee of return.
Then "slavery of love" can be reformulated anew: it is a state in which a person voluntarily refuses to live from the center of fear and begins to live from the center of co-participation. They no longer build their identity on superiority, control, or security. They allow love to become the main principle of discernment: what expands life and what constricts it; what makes another a subject and what turns them into a resource; what comes from trust and what from panic.
In such a reading, the session turns out to be not so much an esoteric message about the mysteries of the universe but a project of spiritual maturity. Its main challenge is not whether we believe in Earth's chakras, levels of spirit, or the Egyptian retreat. The main challenge is different: are we ready to acknowledge that love is not a feeling of comfort but the work of expanding consciousness to the measure where another's freedom ceases to be a threat and becomes a space for encounter.
Сообщения
