Spiritual Practice School

● Elements of the spirit. To maintain adequacy between experience and space, the True Ego formed the causal body – an external causal object identical to itself – and merged with, identified itself with, this external object. The True Ego began to think: “This is not an external object – this is I myself”. With repeated occurrence of this experience, the True Ego became bound by this obscuration. This moment can be regarded as the emergence of the spirit. The spirit can also be understood as the totality of the True Ego, anti-mystical force, accumulated experience, motivation, and causal body. The spirit, as a causal body, appears as a concentrated cluster of light.

● Elements of the soul. In order to understand more deeply, see more clearly, distinguish more precisely, and firmly retain what was seen and understood, the spirit formed the astral body (in some sources: the “subtle body”, “etheric body”, or a particular variant of “form” or “external appearance”) – an external astral object identical to the spirit – and merged with, identified itself with, this external object. The True Ego began to think: “This is not an external object – this is I myself”. With repeated occurrence of this experience, the True Ego became bound by this obscuration. This moment can be regarded as the emergence of the soul. The soul, as an astral body, appears as a blurred reflection in a mirror – without a physical form.

● Elements of sensations. To perceive all other external objects, the soul formed primary, elementary sense organs: the capacity to see, hear, touch, smell, taste, and sense motion.

● Consciousness. To better understand what the sense organs perceive, and to synthesize various sensations into a unified whole, the soul acquired the ability to form images and to think in terms of these images.

● Touch. Contact. The meeting of sense organs with external objects. These external objects were created by the same soul, as well as by other souls. The three gunas serve as the building material for forming external objects.

● Sensation. As a result of contact between sense organs and external objects, the soul receives sensations. Sensations may vary in intensity (strong or weak) and valence (pleasant or unpleasant).

● Perception. The integration of individual sensations into a unified image.

● Feeling. The evaluation of the image formed through perception. The criterion for evaluation is what was established at the stage of motivation. Thus, when details of past and new experience coincide, an illusion arises of approaching the original absolute state of the True Ego – and the new experience, new sensations, and new images are also evaluated as pleasant.

● Thirst. Craving. Pleasant experience inevitably leads to a strong desire to repeat it – to passion.

● Attachment. "Clinging". Strong attachment both to objects of pleasant feelings and to one’s own internal factors associated with them. For example, clinging to memories of a beloved person.

● Appropriation. Possession. Holding onto objects of craving, objects of pleasant feelings and thoughts, close to oneself.

● Formation of existence. Becoming. The creation of a physical body.

● Internalization. An external object (object of attachment) crosses the boundary between outer and inner, becoming part of the physical body and forming internal metabolism – thus becoming part of metabolism. This creates an inner need for the external, the similar. For example, internal alcohol present in the blood creates a need for more external alcohol.

● Birth. If internalization is not interrupted, the further development of the process leads the soul to form increasingly coarser, more inert bodies. Eventually, the soul finds itself in a human body within this phenomenal world. At the moment of birth, the True Ego forgets what occurred before – and due to this, a mistaken view arises: “This body is I”. Repeated cycles of birth reinforce this obscuration. Understanding this stage as a single event is erroneous. It must be understood as the soul’s descent into a state of continuous birth and death, continuous rebirth – an experience of infinite previous births.

● Suffering. If a person is born, death is inevitable. If the soul, through will and correct thinking, interrupts any element of this chain, the process of conditionally forming existence ceases.

The Buddhist teaching on the Twelve Stages (links, conditions) of the arising of samsara (the Twelve Nidana Chain, or the Twelvefold Formula of Existence) and the above described procedure of the soul's arising are one and the same. The assertion that the process of forming the conditions of arising exists permanently and immanently is correct. The claim that the last link in the process of forming the conditions of arising leads back to the first link is a misconception, an error, a confusion. In reality, the last link of arising leads to the first link of liberation: to faith.

The commonly held belief among Buddhologists that Buddhism denies the existence of the soul is mistaken. Buddhism does not deny the existence of the soul itself, but only the Christian approach to understanding its properties and meanings. Buddhism teaches that one should abandon any sense of I. However, this does not mean at all that the sense of I supposedly does not exist, or that the I itself supposedly does not exist. Yes, the Buddha says in one place: If, Ananda, when asked by the wanderer Vacchagotta, Does the I exist?, I were to answer The I exists, would such an answer be consistent with my knowledge that all phenomena are impersonal? Yes, this text indicates that the Buddha has a spiritual level at which all internal phenomena are detached from his personality. However, on the other hand, it is not possible to interpret this text as meaning that the Buddha, inwardly, tacitly, and specifically for his disciple Ananda, gives an outright negative answer about the existence of the I. This was not stated in the text. It is unacceptable to stretch the meaning of this text to such an interpretation by syntagma, one hundred percent.

Nowhere in the Buddhist sutras is it said that the atman does not exist. Yes, in one of the sutras the Buddha gives this admonition: that the affirmation The atman exists eternally is not recommended for monks to practise. But a discussion about affirmation cannot be interpreted as a discussion about ontology.

The Buddha set a vector: Everything that is changeable is not I; liberation lies through the erasing of egocentrism. Based on this, some followers who call themselves supposedly true Buddhists, or supposedly true Theravada Buddhists, have simply logically and practically extended this vector to the absolute: since the atman is nowhere to be found in experience, it is most effective for practice to assume that it does not exist at all.

Buddhism does not recognise the Absolute as a Creator God (Ishvara or Brahman). But Buddhism has its own Absolute – it is Nirvana (the unconditioned state of freedom) and Vajrakaya (the Absolute Body of Truth). This is not a super soul , but the very nature of reality, purified of illusions. The Buddha seed (Tathagatagarbha / Buddha nature) is a crucial concept in Mahayana Buddhism. It is important to understand: this is NOT an individual soul dwelling in the body. Buddha nature is the fundamental potential of every living being to become enlightened. It is not an eternal spark that belongs to you personally. It is a metaphor for the purity of mind. Like gold hidden in mud, or the sun behind the clouds – the clouds (ego, thoughts, passions) are temporary, while the clear sky (Buddha nature) is always present. In later Mahayana texts (for example, in the Mahaparinirvana Sutra), Buddhist masters took an even bolder step. To explain to ordinary people what Buddha nature is, they used the word atman , but in a completely new sense: Buddha nature is the True Atman (Mahatman), because it is unchanging. But this Atman has nothing to do with the selfish I of a person. At the most fundamental level, the I and Buddha nature are one and the same. There is nothing other inside us. There is no separate dirty ego that must be physically destroyed, and no separate holy Buddha that must be brought in from outside. The very living spark that is right now reading this text and recognising itself as I – this is the starting point. The entire fabric of reality is woven from this one thread – pure awareness. Apart from this living presence, there is nothing else for all beings. The difference is not in substance, but in state. Mahayana Buddhism explains this through the metaphor of a golden statue covered in mud: the ordinary I is gold that has become completely entangled in its own mud. It has identified itself with thoughts, fears, name, social status, and body. It has narrowed itself to the size of a small, frightened ego that is forced to defend itself from the outside world. Buddha nature is the same gold, but purified and having realised its true, boundless nature. When the ordinary I says I am Buddha nature! , a dangerous mental substitution often occurs. A person begins to think that their habitual whims, their selfish desires, and their limited personality are the Absolute. But the point is that Buddha nature is not our personality, but our pure, unconditioned Consciousness, which exists BEFORE any thoughts about personality.

Nowhere in the Buddhist sutras is it said that at the moment of physical death the I, or personality, or soul is discarded or disappears. Phrases such as The logic of the sutras is this: for some essence (soul or I) to disappear or be discarded at the moment of death, it must first exist during life are precisely a classic commentarial argument (in the style of Abhidharma or Nagarjuna) that attempts to retroactively provide a logical justification for what the Buddha himself remained silent about in the sutras. In the early sutras themselves (the Pali Canon), there is no text that says: The soul cannot disappear at death because it did not exist during life. If we return to the strict letter of the sutras and remove all later philosophical superstructures, we will discover an astonishing thing: the Buddha fundamentally refused to answer the question of what happens to the I or personality at the moment of death. When you look into your most ordinary I as deeply as possible. If you concentrate on your I and try to see it, then you will indeed, in accordance with the Buddhas thought, discover the following: your I appears as a point in the inner plane that has no dimensionality and no modality. And at the same time, this point is the centre of both the inner and outer universe. And at the same time, it is indeed possible to attach the body to this point, or not to attach it. You can attach consciousness, or not. You can attach emotions, or not. You can attach thoughts, or not. And yet, clearly, liberating this point from any or all possible attachments does not lead to the point supposedly disappearing. And the most important modality of this point is that it catastrophically fears to cease its existence. It fears to die, and does everything to avoid dying. It is ready to go to absolutely any lengths just to not die. For this very reason, the reasoning of Buddhologists that from the absence of modality follows absence is erroneous. From the absence of geometric dimensionality of a point does not follow, as a consequence, its absence.

In fact, the most ordinary I and the Buddha seed are one and the same. Nothing else exists apart from the I that every soul has absolutely, and which is absolutely the same in all souls.

Refuting the Social Theory of the Origin of the Self

In modern academic science–psychology, sociology, and linguistics–there is a deeply entrenched dogma that the human "Self" is exclusively a product of socialization. Positivist scientists have naively equated the moment a child masters the personal pronoun "I" with the birth of that Self. From a materialistic standpoint, until society provides a human being with language, culture, and the mirror of social relations, no "Self" exists within them.

This is a fundamental misconception. Science commits a gross methodological error by confusing the tool used to perceive an object with the objective existence of the object itself.

The sun does not come into being the moment humanity invents the concept of "the sun." The sun exists as an objective reality prior to any sign or name. In the exact same way, the deep human "Self"–the True Subject, the Witness, the Center of Presence–is inherently predetermined in a human being from the very beginning. It is ontologically primary.

The Substitution of Concepts: The Real "Self" vs. Social Biography

To maintain its materialistic worldview, mainstream science resorts to a trick. It divides the psyche into a "biological proto-Self" (proprioception, body schema, animal instincts) and a "real, higher Self" (the social, narrative self). It then claims that what is given by nature is merely physiology, and that only society makes you a person and a human being.

This is where the ultimate spiritual deception lies. Science applies the word "Self" to the Autobiographical Self (Narrative Self)–that is, a social mask, a story about oneself, a conglomerate of habits, roles, titles, and externally imposed values. But none of this is the "Self." This is the Personality.

The Personality is indeed constructed by society (including the society of a past life). It is fluid, multiple, and conditioned. But the Personality is merely the clothing worn by the True Subject, or the cargo carried by the Ship. Equating the Observer with what it observes–with one's social roles–is a sign of spiritual blindness.

Three Arguments Against the Theories of the Dictate of Socialization

For a spiritual practitioner, it is vital to clearly see the invalidity of scientific dogmas. Our True "Self" does not owe its existence to society for three reasons:

1. Essence Precedes the Sign. Even materialistic science itself acknowledges the presence of a pre-verbal "Self" in infants (the sense of agency, body boundaries). The fact that a hypothetical feral child–a Mowgli raised outside of society–cannot talk about themselves in human language does not mean there is no center of perception inside them. Their "Self" is present as a pure fact of being, a point where sensory signals converge. Society does not create this center out of nothing; it merely provides it with a mirror and a language.

2. Language Is an Instrument of Fixation, Not a Creator of Reality. When a child begins to say "I" instead of "Niko wants to play," what occurs is not the birth of the Subject, but its formatting. Language allows the "Self" to conceptualize itself for the convenience of social interaction. However, the source of consciousness existed in the body long before the first spoken word. A telescope does not create a planet; it merely makes it visible.

3. The Continuity of Consciousness. Social roles (personalities) can collapse, change, or be completely erased by amnesia. A person can forget their name, status, and their entire biography received from society. Yet, through all of this, the deep sense of presence–the pure "I AM"–remains unchanged. This proves that the Subject is autonomous and does not depend on social constructs.

Conclusion for the Practitioner:

Materialistic science attempts to convince a human being that they are merely a consequence of external causes, a product of a factory called "society." This deprives an individual of true grounding. By understanding that your fundamental "Self" precedes any socialization, any word, and any opinion about you, you reclaim your status as the True Subject. Society did not create your "Self"–it merely gave it a name. But He Who bears this name has always remained, and remains, free.

Absolute

The Absolute is known by many names across traditions, but only when understood in their most profound sense: Adi-Buddha (the Primordial Buddha), Brahman-Absolute, The Lord (only in the most accurate, non-anthropomorphic understanding), Allah (only when correctly understood – since “Allah” literally means “the Highest God”).

Atman is translated from Sanskrit as selfhood, or simply I. The word Atman is usually used in other languages to denote the Wise True Ego, which returns to the state of the Absolute, as an alternative to the ignorant True Ego, which, on the contrary, falls out of the state of the Absolute. Atman is an analogue of one of the understandings of the Holy Spirit.

The Absolute is the primordial state of all True Egos. It is absolute freedom, absolute joy, and absolute bliss.

The Absolute exists eternally. Matter exists eternally, just as the Absolute does. Samsara, however, is not eternal. Samsara arises when a large number of True Egos begin to fall out of the Absolute. The building material of samsara is matter – the three gunas.

The Absolute is in a state of absolute potentiality. Before samsara arises, and after it dissolves, matter remains in this state of absolute potentiality.

Samsara means the cycle of existence. Existence and samsara are one and the same.

The Misconception of “First Cause”. In philosophy, when referring to the highest spiritual or divine principle, the term “first cause” is often used – implying the cause of existence. This is an error. And so is the belief held by most religions. Nearly all religions claim that the Highest of the High God created existence. But this is not true. On the contrary, certain schools of Buddhism are correct in asserting that the Highest Principle – the Absolute – created nothing. The emergence of existence and the entire universe was not by design, but by mistake, by misunderstanding – the misunderstanding of fragments of the Absolute. The Absolute itself did not create existence and is absolutely indifferent to it. This world and the Absolute exist in parallel and do not intersect. To be precise. The Absolute is not the absence of existence, but rather exists where existence is absent. The Absolute has no forms, no modifications, and no states – meaning, it has only one unchanging state.

Nirvana and the Absolute are the same. The state of nirvana is the state of the Absolute. It is more accurate to understand nirvana not as a place in space, but simply as a state – the state of liberation, the state of absolute peace. In the sutras, nirvana is described as: the destruction of worldly desires, the eradication of knowledge and experience (as binding). As a result of destroying worldly desires, liberation arises – freedom from suffering.

The True Ego. The True Ego is the very “Buddha-nature” present in every living being – the one spoken of in Buddhism. Originally, the human True Ego is a part of the Absolute. This is why scriptures say: “Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven”. Here, the “Holy Spirit” refers precisely to the Absolute. And it is easy to understand why: since the True Ego is the fundamental component of the soul’s structure, blasphemy against the Absolute – and thus against the True Ego – means a person severs themselves from their own True Self, effectively destroying the most essential and highest part within. They turn their own soul away from liberation, directing it against salvation.

The Absolute is indifferent to samsara. Since the Absolute resides in nirvana, and since reaching the state of the Absolute (and nirvana) occurs through: – pratyahara (withdrawal from the senses), – meditation that denies all samsaric worlds, and since nirvana is defined as “not samsara”, and since “not samsara” and “creator of samsara” are mutually exclusive, and since complete indifference to samsara is what allows the disciple to progress, while the belief that the Absolute created samsara blocks all progress – therefore, it can be firmly stated: the Absolute is indifferent to samsara. The claim made by many schools of Hinduism (and Abrahamic religions) that Brahman-Absolute created samsara is false.

This widespread misconception can be explained by samsara’s nature: It actively tries to keep souls trapped within itself, weaving cunning nets – the “bonds of samsara” – from which souls struggle to free themselves. This mistaken view of the Absolute is one such bond. Though, of course, we must never forget: these “bonds of samsara” are ultimately woven by ourselves.

The Bhagavan (in the strictest Hindu sense) does not exist.

The Ishvara (in all variations of this meaning) does not exist.

That is, it is not possible for any being to be both God and the Absolute at the same time.

God – this term we use to denote a conscious being dwelling in the heavens.

The Absolute and God are entirely different. God is an ordinary astral living being. God has only one True Ego. The Absolute is a conglomerate of infinite True Egos.

Shiva, Vishnu, and Brahma are not aspects of the Absolute. They are simply gods. Like all of us, they fell from the Absolute state. Each has only one True Ego.

God is not omnipotent – even if written with a capital letter, even if believed to be one, singular, and unique, even if called the Father or the Creator. But the Absolute is omnipotent. It could create anything – but chooses not to. The Absolute does not create the universe. The universe is created by fragments of the Absolute that have fallen from it.

“God created man in His image and likeness” – this is not true. There is a resemblance – but not because man was created by God. Rather, because God and man are essentially the same kind of being. The Bible lied about cause and effect. Humans, gods, and deities – all created themselves. God is simply another living being, like us: possessing a True Ego, possessing a soul, having fallen from the Absolute state. Some stronger gods do not have physical bodies – only astral (soul) bodies.

To whom should one pray and worship? Since God and the Absolute are different – one should pray and worship the Absolute. Because: the Absolute is our true essence, the Absolute is our highest goal, the Absolute responds to our calls and prayers more powerfully than any god, our Self (“I”) and the Absolute are, in essence, one and the same.

The Absolute is indifferent to samsara – but not to us (as individual selves), because all our "I"s are parts of the Absolute.

We all fell from the Absolute. The Absolute is our original state. In the Absolute, we were merged with all other "I"s. There, we were absolutely happy. Therefore, any connection with another “I” feels pleasant – it is a memory of the original state. Coming closer to another person, to another soul – this is a reflection of the Absolute, where all "I"s were united.

How to visualize the Absolute? As a transparent emptiness – where nothing exists. Its yantra (symbol) can be: a diamond, a vajra, a vajra-bell, or a transparent glass sphere.

Typical Classification of Realms

Realms of existence and niches of habitation come in different levels. If we list these levels in descending order from top to bottom, it would look approximately like this (in parentheses, we will indicate the approximate number of days after death, according to authoritative sources, when a person is reborn into a given realm).