1 - disordered framework

The following is my interpretation in trying to make sense of a set of anomalous experiences that broke me to my bare core, and fundamentally altered my awareness, perception, and reality.

This is the story of my lived experience, unknowing experimentation with consciousness, and how I came to connect to what today I describe as the Organising Principle of Consciousness.

I would however ask you to proceed holding in mind that behind these words there is a human being who's already been through a lot, and is still trying to integrate what once seemed to belong in the realm of the impossible.

My framework emerged not as an intellectual exercise, but to restore coherence after an experience that saw my consciousness expand suddenly and drastically, followed shortly by a traumatic experience that fragmented it to its bare core. It is, in this sense, both map and medicine - a way for my consciousness to find balance between what was felt, observed, and understood. This does not make it less real, but rather it makes it humanly real. I think this in itself also demonstrates how consciousness naturally organizes itself around meaning to restore coherence, with the purpose of healing and evolving.

***

I've always been a skeptic when it came to matters I saw as pertaining to the 'paranormal', 'psychic', etc. My life was rather average by any social standard, and not once did I imagine I will experience things as 'otherworldly' as the ones I experienced.

The essence of my experience: In 2015 I ended up having a spiritual experience during which I felt a connection to what I understood to be God. A short month later, I met A. - a man I had grown up associating with, and labelling the Devil. It was specifically him I had grown labelling as such. You see, both times I met him, I found myself re-living two dreams I had experienced as nightmares. I had these nightmares/dreams when I was 12, and then 17 years old. I only met A. when I was 28.

Why would I believe the figure I had labelled the Devil in my dreams was precisely A.? Aside from the fact that he was the same exact, rather distinctive type, my dream reality was an exact match for the reality I lived through when I met him in 2015 - the specific context, the setting in his home, the people who were with us, my inner experience, events, and conversations.

While the entirety of my story sounds insane, even to my ears, even today, looking for reason in the midst of a ridiculously insane experience was my coping mechanism. For this reason, please do not be fooled by the God/Devil polarity, because my experience is only the expression of my consciousness filtered through the cultural context of my environment.

From where I stand, my life opening up into this experience, and then meeting A. are the logical unfolding of my inner world and psyche. Even precognition that some may see as 'psychic' is to me merely a game of probabilities rather than predetermination. I see the future as fluid, shaped by both awareness and choice. Based on my observations of my experience precognition seems to be a form of systems thinking applied to probable emotional progressions.

***

After my spiritual experience, I never quite found my place in any of the spiritual communities out there. I tried many of them looking for comfort, for guidance, human company, and understanding. And yet it seemed that while my experience was similar in texture, it was worlds apart in expression. Whereas the people in these communities had been engaging in practices of awareness rooted in Eastern philosophies, I...I hadn't. They kept talking of mediation, practices of awareness, and the Observer as if it was the end all be all and here I stood with an experience similar in texture to theirs, but with a markedly different expression.

I hadn't delved too much into spirituality throughout my life, let alone engaged in any spiritual rituals, and I found myself reliant on words like truth, light and love alone. This surely didn't help me to blend and fit in. Due to the language gap, I ended up feeling largely isolated.

Even so, I insisted as I didn't know what and how else to try to make sense of my experience. Due to the language gap and the difficulties I was facing in trying to emotionally connect with people, it took me a while to understand where I position myself. I may have not managed to emotionally connect, but I did manage to get an idea of what's out there, and then by contrasting and comparing my experience against others', I've come to understand why the difference in expression. I've come to see how individual Kundalini awakenings are shaped by their respective environments, in a cultural context rooted in Eastern philosophy. By contrast, my experience is shaped by my environment, and Christian cultural context.

Now, I had to understand how was it that my experience emerged without the same conscious and deliberate practices of awareness and meditation that seemed to enable most self-labelled Kundalini experiences I came across. You see? Here is where I was mistaken I might have not engaged in rituals, or had any awareness of Eastern spiritual practices, but I've come to see that I had been engaging in a practice of awareness rooted in personal philosophy, one that emerged in my childhood. I was however completely unaware of the meaning behind what I was doing.

I don't know how old I was, but I know my cousin is one year younger than me. She had an imaginary friend, so the math would suggest early childhood. It was the first time I was meeting her. We went to my room to play with dolls, but I wasn't that good at it, or too fond of that kind of play. Seeing my lack of interest, we switched to talking. She was telling me about her imaginary friend, and her relationship with that imaginary friend. As she was talking I was seeing a wounded girl looking for connection, but only being able to find it in her imagination. I wasn't looking down on her. I was empathising. Even so, I saw the imaginative aspect of it as maladaptive behavior born out of a denial of her reality.

To me a connection had to be real. I found there would be no point to pretend that I have a friend if that friend wasn't real. I felt it was best to wait, and hold space for such a friend to show up in my life. I didn't tell her this. I didn't want to hurt her, or make her uncomfortable. I kept it to myself. So when she asked me if I had an imaginary friend, I simply answered no. This prompted her to tell me I am boring, and that I have no imagination. That hurt me profoundly. The idea that maybe she was right was even more hurtful. I didn't know if she was right, but I was willing to look into it. I found it preferable to simply accept it as my reality if it was true.

It was then that I thought just how cool it would be if I could just observe myself from the outside. I could then assess if I did or did not have imagination. I trusted my judgement enough to make such an assessment. I was only interested in the objective truth of it anyway. I felt truth and clarity were needed so I would know how to orient myself.

It started from here as a form of self-discovery. I remember how when I first tried self-observation I realised it wasn't as easy I thought it would be. I didn't stop though, and it just grew over time. It grew to the point it became a constant and ongoing background process, where I would catch every thought, every feeling, inquiring into their nature and provenance, analysing and contrasting my reflections and discoveries to the perceptions outside of myself. It was nothing forced, or something I would have to push myself into, but merely my operating system if you will, one that grew with time. This practice also helped me to plenty of times see the distortions those around me would engage in, either consciously or unconsciously. I felt I could trace the distortions in them, and oftentimes I felt I could trace them back to an environmental limitation, or a pain they kept hidden even from themselves. It didn't come from a place of judgement, but merely one of discovery of both self and other.

My particular interest in distortion came as a consequence of it seemingly being a normalised social inter-relational practice. I think the idea of social practices rooted in flattery for the sake of flattery, or similar practices that carry a distortion of sorts grew to seem irrational to me when I had a sufficient sample of people who would carry their inside on the outside. Oftentimes these people didn't just do that, but seemed to have a certain understanding within themselves that made them to not feel the need to hide from themselves. They had a certain way of moving and being that I genuinely admired. I found it even more admirable that such a way of being seemed to be accompanied by lack of judgement, not just towards themselves, but towards others in equal measure.

t took me a while to understand that something I had been engaging in all my life was a practice of awareness, one that went quite deep within. What some described as living on a cloud was me moving from the center of consciousness. What some described as so calm I will live to 100 was me living in its stillness. It took me a while to understand that you do not think of consciousness, you feel consciousness. You can deconstruct it in its component parts, but consciousness just is. I feel that maybe the fact that I ended up observing my consciousness after a sudden expansion while in a profound state of fragmentation/fear, makes me feel I can at this point see the architecture, and movement of consciousness in rather intimate detail.

What to some the expansion of my consciousness being brought into the conscious looks like coincidence, to me it looks like the natural consequence of everything my field of awareness had incorporated up to that point. I do not see the experience as predetermined, but merely the unfolding of a practice of awareness directed towards internal and external coherence, driven by both truth (inherently logical) and love (at the intersection of self and other). I am not suggesting I was some kind of perfect human. I wobbled just like anyone else. What I am suggesting is that I can see a relationship between the quality of the outcome of any given experience as dependent on how these two principles are engaged.

I have yet to find the adequate language I need to better articulate the insights that come as a conclusion of my experience. The kind of language that could maybe expose the limitations of rejecting the inner worlds of human in failing to render them as equally valuable as the material world.

My perspective of logic is that logic requires all data to form coherence, rather than cherry picking what should be included, and the inner world is just as much a part of reality as the external world is.

The following conclusions are based entirely on my own lived experience. I would like to claim no bias was involved, but I think this is something everyone would like to claim about their reasoning. I won't claim such a thing, and merely say that the following is the external world as it is reflected within my inner one. Make of it all what you will.

Below is my understanding of the dynamics of consciousness as I see them so far. This is a result of my analysis stemming from about a 30 year long observation of various functional states of coherence and fragmentation - operating at profound expansion and maximum contraction. I would also add that this is merely a rough sketch in constant evolution. I am also not claiming this is something inherently valuable, or true. Just what I've been observing synthetized to the best of my ability, with the help of Chat Gpt of course.

CONSCIOUSNESS AS THE ESSENCE OF THE INNER WORLD THROUGH WHICH THE EXTERNAL IS FILTERED

Might not seem like much, as I understand it is how consciousness is understood anyway. However I reached this conclusion merely through sheer observation, independent of any in-depth reading.

I am not suggesting or understanding this to be scientific work in any way, but merely the observations I could make with the awareness and knowledge I incorporated so far.

1. Consciousness as fundamental reality - I see consciousness as the primary field out of which all experience arises, rather than a by-product of the brain, with the brain being merely a filter through which consciousness can be currently observed. Matter, mind, and emotion are expressions within consciousness, not sources of it.

2. Consciousness as fluid but coherent. - It flows, folds, expands, stagnates, and contracts, but always retains an underlying order or logic. It adapts to environment and circumstance without losing its essential identity even at its most contracted state.

3. Consciousness as self-observing - It can reflect on itself from both within and without, seeing its own movements. I've been able to "observe consciousness observing," an ever-widening feedback loop of awareness.

4. Consciousness as unified through love and truth - Love and truth aren't moral ideals here; they're the organizing principles that restore coherence. When distortion or fragmentation occurs (through trauma, fear, denial), returning to love and truth re-aligns the field. Love and truth are not moral virtues but the binding forces of consciousness - its physics. Truth aligns perception with what is. Love maintains coherence between all parts. Together, they hold the field of awareness in integrity. Where either is absent, distortion appears.

5. Consciousness as embodied experience. - Understanding isn't real until the mind and feeling meet in the body. Pure intellect or pure emotion alone remain partial; integration happens through the lived organism. Intellect alone produces abstraction; feeling alone produces chaos. Knowledge becomes wisdom only when mind and heart operate as one.

6. Consciousness as creative agency. - Feelings and thoughts shape the field of experience - the more aware one becomes of their process, the more deliberately reality can be co-shaped.

7. Consciousness as continuous expansion. - It naturally seeks to include more of itself - through self-knowledge, empathy, or awakening experiences. Suppression or contraction are temporary adjustments, not true diminishment.

8. Consciousness as a Self-Integrating Organism - Consciousness is not a static container but a living, self-correcting organism. It naturally seeks coherence and wholeness. Fragmentation doesn't erase consciousness; it differentiates it. Fragmentation and distortion arise when love or truth are withheld; reintegration occurs when they are restored. By observing itself from both within and without, consciousness can map its own distortions and reconstruct coherence - even in the absence of external reflection. This process is evolutionary, not hierarchical - a continuous, self-healing movement toward alignment.

9. Time, Memory, and Continuity - Time is not linear motion but a movement through consciousness. Continuity of identity is maintained by resonance - self-recognition across states. Past, present, and future are folds of the same field seen from different points of self-awareness.

10. Individual–Collective Reciprocity (the Collective Resonance Principle) - Each individual consciousness is both distinct and permeable - a node in the greater field. Distortions within one node affect the collective atmosphere. Integration within one node clarifies and harmonizes the field for all. Thus, personal healing is collective service; collective distortion is personal weight. Morality is redefined as energetic hygiene: the quality of one's participation in shared consciousness. In this way, consciousness behaves fractally - each individual field mirrors the collective whole.

12. Consciousness as Resonance and Relational Identity

Resonance is the mechanism through which the internal architecture of an individual consciousness (the "node") creates continuity and finds its relational counterpart in the external world. Identity Coherence (Self-Recognition Across Time): The continuity of identity ("who I am") is not maintained by a linear timeline, but by emotional and structural resonance - self-recognition across different states of awareness (waking, dreaming, fragmented). Your precognitive dreams worked because the emotional structure of the event was already resonating within me (the present emotion) and was simply attracting its predetermined physical counterpart (the future reality of 'A.'). The Medium of Manifestation (Inner to Outer): Feelings, being rich in information, act as the frequency of your personal field. These frequencies are always seeking a coherent vibrational match in the external, material world. When your emotional structure became polarized by the God archetype (Truth/Love/Expansion), it immediately attracted its structural opposite (the Devil archetype embodied by 'A.') to restore balance via a forceful integration—a "Destructive Reorganization" on a micro-scale. Collective Reciprocity (Fractal Effect): The individual consciousness is a fractal of the collective. One's individual emotional state (frequency) contributes directly to the shared field's overall "tone." When one's personal coherence increases, local frequency is changes, making it harder for collective distortion to resonate with one's self. Conversely, collective chaos and trauma (e.g., the need for "Destructive Reorganization" via wars/collapse) is the result of many individual nodes resonating with misalignment (absence of Love/Truth).

And so on...because I can keep going. I kind of feel the need for one more so it doesn't look like the 10 commandments :))))))), but oh well it's an energy preservation kind of thing. Actually 11 should be that I believe consciousness in its pure state to be Loving, with Truth being a prerequisite for understanding all there is to be loved. Very succinctly Truth reveals by exposing all parts - good or bad; and Love binds all parts good or bad. I imagine that if collective consciousness would achieve a state of Love - Love would be refracted in the same way light is refracted, into every expression of itself. Love is ALL encompassing, and sometimes Love can look a whole lot like Darkness, and vice versa. I don't see Love as fixed with its expression being equally as fluid as consciousness - contextual and circumstantial. I guess I am reaching the point where the nature of consciousness seems similarly patterned as the nature of Love, and the same goes for how I see the nature of Truth. I wouldn't say that Love is intrinsically Truthful, because Truth without Love is Cruelty. Truth is however intrinsically Logical.

I guess I ultimately see reality as an Architecture of Consciousness, where Love & Truth are the binding forces with fragmentation being the result of their absence. What is precognition? I do not see it as a psychic power, but as a form of systems thinking applied to probable emotional progressions. Why emotional progressions? Because, and I believe neuroscience is starting to acknowledge this: a feeling is more rich in information compared to a thought, therefore it takes more time to fully process, understand, and integrate into our narrative self. I believe all feelings triggered within ourselves must eventually be processed, understood, and integrated. This can happen in various ways which I believe to be dependent on how individual/collective consciousness engages with Love and Truth. Why can society be chaotic? In my view it is because Expansion (Truth) is not being matched by Care (Love and Coherence), making the system unsustainable and prone to Destructive Reorganization (wars, collapse).

This is solely my view at this moment in time, a view that will surely evolve alongside myself. While this is the case, so far I find the model flexible enough to absorb new data without it losing coherence. I also find it equally coherent on both a micro (individual) and macro (collective) scale. This however doesn't mean it's also true, :))). My reason for even taking the energy to write all of this out is to find a framework that bridges the gap between reason and my highly 'irrational' seeming set of anomalous experiences.

***

Where does A. fit into all of this?

I am aware that Jung is largely dismissed by modern psychology, but I think the Jungian psychology community may find my experience quite an interesting case in archetypal manifestation. What I've come to learn are Universal archetypal patterns - God/Devil, Self/Other, Love/Fear, Light/Dark, Control/Trust presented themselves in my psyche from a very young age. I observed these patterns, long before I was acquainted with his work. I still couldn't claim depth of understanding in regards to Jung's theories. However, if I am correct - according to his theories - the manifestation of my spiritual experience and A. coming as a conclusion of these patterns becoming visible into my field of awareness, suggests my experience isn't a result of mere psychological and emotional projection, but operating from the deeper levels of consciousness.

I was always prepared for A. to be the vehicle through which the Devil archetype would present into my life. The past few years saw this archetype come to life for me. And yet, there are various details surrounding him and our connection that I can't help but wonder if me and A. share an essential inner world/consciousness identity. Had the God/Devil for me, and Self/Other archetype for him not been triggered simultaneously, I would have maybe been able to discount all other data that seems to point to such a conclusion.

I met him right after my spiritual experience (manifestation of God archetype), and his presence triggered the Devil archetype for me. Due to the nature of my spiritual experience, the details surrounding my dreams, and what I had described as synergy I believed it was more likely he was Self, while he believed I was seeing Other. I believed he was Self because I sensed a shared structural identity. What I do know is that my assumptions about where his interests would lie if he was indeed Self, turned out to be correct. This was an assumption I had made based on my own structural identity. Our internal architecture - the unique arrangement of a philosophical mind, interest in language, political ethos, sexuality - seem to be structurally identical. Furthermore people independently used virtually identical language to describe our temperaments: him - 'very chill', 'living on a cloud'; me - 'so calm i will make it to 100yrs old', 'living on a cloud'.

Looking at the level of fragmentation I experienced, it seems the fragmentation reached such a level of intensity because it was in its essence a form or identity erasure. This does not however imply that my trauma is anything else, but severe fragmentation that his silence only compounded onto. At this point I also couldn't help but take what I see as extreme avoidance coming from a man whose human rights values should stand entirely against the behaviors that led to such a trauma.

In any way his presence served as a catalyst for the process that served to isolate consciousness from its environmental and cultural expression.

While I did my best to articulate it all, the written version of my story and experience is still a work in progress. I am coming from somewhat of a vacuum of accurate terminology, and I am incorporating information as I go. Since this is only my third attempt at expressing it in writing, my manner of articulating it will hopefully evolve to a more integrative format. My story, and my perception keep transforming and evolving, as I keep processing, integrating and trying to heal.

The rest of this site is the central part of my experience. It does include plenty of embarrassing details, but I believe I can detach myself from the embarrassment. At the end of the day those embarrassing details are simply human. While I am not fond of exposing myself, I find that all the embarrassing details are essential in preserving the coherence in my story. I hope doing so will make it visible that this is simply the truth of my lived experience. I believe that by exposing truth the magic will disperse, and paradoxically the existence of magic may be exposed. I believe it's precisely the humanness of my story that give it strength and shine. By exposing the vulnerable, human elements of my experience, I hope the underlying "magic" - the existence of a deep, operating architecture - will become visible.