Cassiopaea Forum Reading Workshops - Public

(CRW Am-EU) What temporary schedule is best for you?

  • Sunday 17:00-19:00 UTC (18:00-20:00 French time)

    Votes: 33 66.0%
  • Saturdays 17:00-19:00 UTC (18:00-20:00 French time)

    Votes: 17 34.0%

  • Total voters
    50
Thank you all once again for a great discussion! We covered the Preface and Chapters 1 and 2



Short summary:
In the Preface and Chapters 1 and 2, Chang revives a millennia-old Taoist system where sex integrates sensuality, health, spirituality, and cosmic balance—prioritizing female pleasure, male ejaculation control, mutual essence nourishment, guilt-free naturalness, and ecstatic freedom. Aligned with modern science, it counters repression and frustration, promising longevity, peace, joy, and healing on an individual and societal level.

If we look at the depravity in f.i. The Epstein files that our world’s elites engage in, but throughout history really, meaning that we are ruled by psychopaths who cannot understand these concepts let alone practice them, and given that we are STS beings in an STS world, this offers one path, in combination with The Work, to get out so to say. Also, what the C’s said in the session of 6th december 2025, that love gives all, love is the driver, sex without love and a deep psychic connection drains energy to 4D STS. We explored the concepts of love and deep psychic connection, using casswiki on love. We also discussed the importance of communication between love partners, explored the forum thread on polar beings, including what Mouravieff had to say about it, and concluded that in relationships where one partner is not involved in The Work, open and honest communication, mutual respect and giving the other support to achieving whatever his/her highest potential or innate direction may be, may be one way of still doing The Work in a constructive way, learning different things about self and the beloved. We regularly were reminded of related themes in the romance novels.

Further, we discussed that men, but also women, have been brainwashed by equating ejaculation with orgasm, manhood and healthy sex. If one doesn’t ejaculate, one is failing somehow, and should be ashamed, especially vis a vis a partner. That love is more than just ejaculating into a vagina is something that is not taught in our Western culture.

We discussed that the knowledge of the importance of touch and loving, also for adults, has only in the last three decades been more fully researched in the West. All humans, so also the male, need touch and love, Chang says that the problem is that the overwhelming majority of men never had the opportunity to learn adequately how to cope with the situation.

Chang says that in the past, Western manners and Western preconceptions have hindered a proper understanding of the Tao of Loving, the concepts seemed too strange to be comprehended. We think religion, catholicism/protestantism may have played a big role here. Lastly we discussed, as per John Carter's article, that modern heterosexual relationships are diagnosed as crippled by a new psychological pathology: the simp-rapist complex. This is a contradictory double-bind imposed on men by post-sexual revolution norms, where women demand both protective, providing "nice guys" (simps) and dominant, aggressive alphas—but society ruthlessly punishes any display of the latter traits as "rape culture." So all in all, discovering the knowledge of the Tao of Love and Sex would for many come in very timely indeed.

For next week's workshop, we will cover Chapters 3 and 4. Have a good week :flowers:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi everyone,

Here are the links for the recent Aus-Asia-Am group discussions on Laura's Substack article:
The Breath of the All-Merciful: How Analytic Idealism, Ibn ʿArabī, and the Deep Esoteric Tradition Converge on One Living Cosmos


Here's the video of the last meeting
The audio
And the folder


We will read this Substack article by Laura for our next workshop at 7pm Sydney ADEST time (GMT+11).

See you all then!

___________________________________________________________________________________________
Below are the links for the workshop discussion points:

Kastrup's Analytic Idealism explained.
Analytic Idealism is a modern metaphysical theory primarily developed by Bernardo Kastrup, which posits that phenomenal consciousness is the fundamental substrate of reality. It suggests that the "physical" world is not a separate, non-mental entity, but rather the way transpersonal mental processes appear when observed from across a dissociative boundary.

Core Principles
  • Monism: Reality is made of only one substance: consciousness. This differs from dualism (mind and matter) and physicalism (only matter).
  • Mind at Large: Individual minds are considered "dissociated alters" of a universal consciousness, often referred to as "Mind at Large" (MAL).
  • Dissociation as a Mechanism: Using the clinical analogy of Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID), the theory argues that our individual egos are segments of universal consciousness that have become psychologically isolated.
  • Dashboard Representation: What we perceive as the "physical world"—matter, energy, space, and time—is a simplified "dashboard" representation of complex underlying mental excitations, similar to how a pilot uses dials to understand the external environment.
    Essentia Foundation +6

Key Objectives & Context
  • Solving the Hard Problem: By making consciousness fundamental, it bypasses the "Hard Problem of Consciousness"—the difficulty of explaining how subjective experience could ever emerge from inert matter.
  • Naturalistic & Rationalist: Despite its seemingly "mystical" conclusions, the theory prides itself on being a rationalist and naturalist view that aligns with empirical data from physics and neuroscience.
  • Modern Interpretations: Kastrup describes it as a "modern dressing" of ancient non-dualistic traditions like Advaita Vedanta.
    Essentia Foundation
    Essentia Foundation +4

Criticisms
  • Incoherence: Critics argue that it is explanatorily incoherent because it struggles to explain why different "alters" see the same world if there is no objective physical ground.
  • Subjectivity vs. Unity: Some philosophers point out a potential contradiction: if consciousness is unitary, a single subject should not be able to experience multiple unique perspectives simultaneously.
  • Pragmatism: Detractors sometimes claim the theory is "pragmatically useless," offering no new scientific predictions or ethical guidance compared to traditional materialism.

Ibn al-Arabi and the story of Hizir:

Cs Session 27 May 2000, on how soul memories are stored in neutrinos:
(L) Moving along to the next question: we have been discussing memories and how memories of, say, past lives are stored, and that leads to the question of what is the structure and composition of the soul? How does the soul remember? How does it carry its memories from lifetime to lifetime, from body to body, whether simultaneous or sequential? How does the soul "store" them?

A: Has to do with atomic principles. These with gravity present the borderland for the material and the nonmaterial. Which theoretical atomic particulates would you think form the basis here?

Q: (L) How about tachyons?

A: Maybe neutrons?

Q: (A) Neutrons? Or neutrinos?

A: Neutrinos.

Q: (A) Well, first they say neutrons, then neutrinos. Or "maybe neutrons." I say "neutrinos" and they say "yes." So a "maybe" is only a pointer. Neutrinos are funny particles because they are massless. But, some people don't believe that neutrinos exist. My guess would be neutrinos. Do they exist?

A: Okay, we are going to throw caution to the "winds," and say yes. [Laughter.]

Q: (L) In terms of these neutrinos and soul composition, how are memories formed or held or patterned with these neutrinos?

A: Contained within for release when and if suitable.

Q: (L) Memories are contained within the neutrinos?

A: Sort of.

Q: (L) Are they contained within patterns formed by the neutrinos?

A: Closer.

Q: (L) So, that means that if one "consciousness unit," or soul, has more memories or experiences than another consciousness unit, it would have more neutrinos?

A: No.

Q: (B) Different patterns?

A: No.

Q: (L) What's the difference?

A: More data per unit, sort of.

Q: (L) Does that mean that an individual neutrino can be, in and of itself, more "dense" in data, so to speak?

A: So to speak.

Q: (L) Does this increased density of data change the nature or function of the individual neutrino?

A: Maybe it changes the function of the awareness, thus the environs.

Q: (L) Is there a specific number of neutrinos that constitutes a consciousness unit, or soul?

A: Number is not quite the right concept. Orientation is closer.

Q: (L) What are the orientational options?

A: Vibrational frequencies.

Q: (L) Do the vibrational frequencies increase or decrease with density of data?

A: Change; better not to quantify.

Q: (A) We are talking about soul. Soul is what density, in concept?

A: Ark, are neutrinos related to the concept of a bridge into pure energy in some way?

Q: (A) Yes. I was going in that direction. I was wondering why you speak about neutrinos and not photons, because photons are also a bridge to pure energy, I would say. The difference between photons and neutrinos is that photons are bosons and neutrinos are fermions. Neutrinos have to dance so that they don't touch each other. Bosons are like pairs of neutrinos and photons, as bosons, are free to move in space any way they want.

A: We would mention photons in terms of this discussion, but for the tendency of some reading the WebPages to misinterpret in terms of the "love and light" fantastic.

Q: (L) Well, the "light fantastic" was a dance around the turn of the century, so that refers back to the remark about "dancing." (A) Are neutrinos the fundamental building blocks of everything? The most fundamental particle, so to speak?

A: More like a midpoint with spherical outward expansive quality. Tetrahedron, pentagon, hexagon.
 
Back
Top Bottom