October 2025 TAT Forum

It’s not an affront to Truth, or to an orientation towards Truth, I wouldn’t at all be happy in a life that was just self-focused, mundane focused; it would feel empty, hollow, ungrounded to anything deeper and/or beyond myself. At the same time, these days I seem to care more about being of service to the finding of Truth, regardless of who finds it, and often it feels most honest to say I’d rather my friends find it first. It’s hard for me to tell how much of this is related to a comfortable life and how much of it is coming from a genuine orientation that’s less self-concerned than it used to be. I feel whittled away, hollowed out, not all the time, but increasingly so. I wouldn’t ask for things to be different than they are, which seems different than self-pity.

There’s also this growing doubt or disassociation from all the doing/seeking-language that I’ve so often found myself saying and accepting on the search; it all seems like it keeps Truth at arms-length sometimes, in a way that’s hard to put into words. Is it not absurd to think that finding myself in this state of delusion is somehow my doing? Is it not absurd to think that I can “do” anything? What do I even mean by “I” if not simply my preconditioned personality, which (so far as I can see) is just a reaction pattern, not an autonomous agent? Who am I to shake my fist at God for throwing me overboard? Clearly God wanted to experience the waves, through me, because here we are. That’s why I say in the poem that it’s not the questions or the longing that feels so tiresome, it’s the seeming un-truth that there’s anything to “fix” at all. God will wake up through this character if He wants to, won’t he? He created the “wound” years ago, the hole of longing, I didn’t ask for that. He creates periods of hair on fire (sometimes curiosity fueled, sometimes suffering fueled) and periods of less hair on fire; all of that just seems to happen.

These insights, or convictions perhaps, create a tiredness not towards “what is” in any given moment, but towards a tone of seeking Truth for my own sake and from my own imagined doing. Observing (perhaps a better word than seeking) and opening to Truth for Truth’s sake feels much quieter, curious, and devotional to me, closer to doing-less than doing-more. It’s fueled by a curiosity towards what’s arising at any given moment, ignorance and confusion included, buttressed by the conviction that anything else is insanity, a dog creating its tail by chasing it.

I’m trying to drum up interest in material for the TAT Forum that reflects seekers’ investigation into the question of whether Spinoza had discovered the truth of what he was at the core of his being.

Would you be interested in doing that for the October Forum by September 25th?

Typical of responses I sent for clarification were:

What I’m asking for is your opinion, the strength of your conviction, evidence you’ve come across that supports it, evidence you’ve come across that challenges it.

and:

Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677) was a Dutch philosopher of Portuguese-Jewish origin and a key figure of the early Enlightenment. His rationalist and monist philosophy was profoundly controversial in his time, leading to his excommunication from his Jewish community. His work, much of it published posthumously, profoundly influenced thinkers for centuries. (per Google AI Overview)

https://www.curiosityu.com/videos/who-was-spinoza-and-why-should-we-care/ might be a starting point for an investigation.

I was trying to encourage seekers to do a little investigation into Spinoza … looking for an item or two that might support that he was successful in self-realization and an item or two that might challenge it, forming an opinion, and communicating the result citing evidence pro and con. If several people did that, the comparison might reveal new data to most of them that may alter their opinions. In other words, a microcosm of seekers working together to improve their seeing and questioning their certainties. The same kind of investigation and comparing notes could be productively used in evaluating the beliefs about other authorities and teachings.

Also, the fact that he was excommunicated from his synagogue for making this pronouncement. 

Finally, because he believed in a philosophy of tolerance and benevolence. And all this back in the 1600’s when these kind of ideas were not readily and easily accessible. 

I looked into him a little more today and found this:  Spinoza claims that part of the human mind is eternal, not in the sense of personal immortality, but because the mind, in its adequate knowledge, is identical with God’s eternal intellect. Thus, when we know things adequately, we already “participate in eternity.” ~ Theresa M.

I think for me to form an opinion on whether he was awakened or not would just say more about what my beliefs are in relation to awakening and whether his words or actions reinforced them or not. I guess that unless I had awakened myself and could maybe recognise something in his words I could never know for sure, so I don’t know if Spinoza found the truth of reality. I hope he did. I admire his bravery and his desire for it. ~ Peter Doherty

If discovering the truth of what I am at the core of my being provides Ultimate satisfaction, I can’t imagine a greater personal discovery. But what if something else does, too? Is that also Enlightenment? Taking Art’s question at face value, I read about Spinoza on Wikipedia and ChatGPT. Spinoza’s ancestors were “Crypto-Jews” (nothing to do with electronic currency, haha), meaning they practiced Judaism during the Inquisition and endured “torture and public displays of humiliation.” I wonder how that shaped Spinoza.

I remember reading about Richard Rose’s parents, specifically his mother, who supposedly camped-out on the governor’s steps as part of a protest while she was pregnant with Richard. I read that Richard thought this had some part in shaping his character. Spinoza was also formally expelled from his Jewish community for heresy, which I assume means he had some familiarity with saying what he truly believed, even if it was unpopular and no matter what the social cost. ChatGPT tells me that Spinoza lived “a quiet life,” turning away from wealth and prestige and instead devoting himself to “thought” (self-inquiry?).

Spiritually, Wikipedia tells me that Spinoza believed that God and Nature are synonymous, and that both are an indivisible, “absolutely infinite, self-caused, and eternal” substance. This reminds me of what I’ve heard people at the TAT Foundation refer to as “the Absolute,” which is something akin to an un-separate-able “solid ground of being” that is the essence of all, fundamentally and essentially. At the end of the day, my sense is that Spinoza discovered something special, rare, and profound. To know if it satisfied his soul or not, we’d have to ask him. ~ Brett S.

I can appreciate Jim’s sentiments on scholastic philosophers. They make observations of the nature of reality, existentialism. It is externally directed. I listened to some YouTubes on Spinoza and there wasn’t one example of him looking within. He made no distinctions between self and Self. All his theories were based on mind-derived observations of what he considered the nature of reality or God.

He went against the religious establishments of his time, the theme there was that organised religion equates to political power. But after hearing about his views I was left with the impression that he was into this modern craze of “attracting abundance”, that if you gain power and wealth that means whatever you are doing is right. I believe that to be a sin, in that the “ends justify the means”. Rose talked about some spiritual practices teaching people to acquire wealth without having a conscience about it.

So actually in fact, religion, properly practised according to the original teachings, would be much more beneficial to a seeker than to focus on Spinoza. Spinoza could lead folks astray in my opinion. Who cares about all his observations of the nature of reality when it doesn’t touch anything in me. At best it could create some good subjects to contemplate to open the mind a bit but will not generate true insight, which I believe has to be more psychologically based. ~ Patrick K.

1. Substance monism or “necessitarianism” is the view that each and every fact about the world is necessary and affects each other to the extent that the world could only be the way it is and no other way. “Everything exists because everything else exists.” Similar to Rose and Gurdjieff’s thinking that man is at a huge disadvantage under tremendous influences, Spinoza may have had a heightened insight to recognize this, though I could not find if he indicates whether there is an option for a “free” will.

2. “God is one, that is only one substance can be granted in the universe….” (Prop XIV Corollary 1). God is the natural world, God is everything, and therefore that everything that exists is a “mode” of God, every human, rock, and tree. Is God. Each of those in turn have any of an infinite number of attributes, most unknown to humans, two of which are mind and sensory experience. This view preceded that of Advaita by a few centuries. Nor was this view apparently shared with any other published Western philosophy at the time, so some ‘esoteric’ experience may have prompted it.

3. There are three kinds of knowledge:
– First is the sensory-body experience; he also attributes imagination to this level.
– Second is reason, and this includes that everything without exception has an explanation.
– Third is intuitive, whereas he proposes that one intuits the essence of things. He did not elaborate, as I could find, as to what extent that intuition could know beyond body and mind, however:

4. He saw the mind and body as one. This was also a unique observation, which implied that something perceived the mind and body, that there is something separate that sees. Or maybe similar to Advaita, this was only his way of saying observer and observed are one.

5. In the very beginning of his Ethics, he lists seven Axioms through which he maintains that a thing is a thing in itself, not relative to anything else, but completely standing alone. This is a curious observation, in that something in a relative universe might not be relative at all. He seems to have implied relativeness exists only in the mind of man and that all things remain singular and unique. If this were an observation and not mere theory, then it may have required some insight gained from outside or above the relative nature of human consciousness.

In conclusion, as I am not enlightened, awakened or know anything about the “core of my being.” I cannot judge the sprawling extent of his philosophy in Ethics as to whether it points to that core of being based on what he perceived or experienced, but it does seem that some Cosmic-like experience was necessary for him to propose a philosophy to subtly suggest that he found some perspective from above, or at least from the extreme limits of mind. However, as a “seeker,” I do not find Spinoza’s philosophy simple enough to follow as to be inspirational or compelling enough for me to further study. ~ Jerry S.

Despite Spinoza’s very challenging history, Nadler suggests that he would like to believe Spinoza embodied his own “free person” ideal to some degree—transcending his passions, unafraid of death, and clear about the unity of all things through reason. Spinoza’s insistence that this is not just a concept but a genuine path to freedom, happiness, and wellbeing makes me feel like he was speaking from some lived experience, though I can’t tell if he was a seeker far down the road or a finder looking back at his journey.

Either way, the interviewer quoted Spinoza’s closing paragraph in Ethics, which resonated deeply with me. I quote it here from Steven Nadler’s Spinoza’s Ethics: An Introduction (2006)—pdf:

“If the way I have shown to lead to these things now seems very hard, still, it can be found. And of course, what is found so rarely must be hard. For if salvation were at hand, and could be found without great effort, how could nearly everyone neglect it? But all things excellent are as difficult as they are rare [omnia praeclara tam difficilia quam rara sunt].”

From what little I’ve gathered about Spinoza so far, his philosophy feels less like abstract theory and more like a gentle nudge to keep going—to trust that even if the path is steep, the very difficulty might be proof that it leads somewhere real. ~ Mahesh.I

I love that saying, it came either from Gurdjieff or one of his students, that if you don’t know what you want, you will not know right from wrong, virtue from evil, up from down etc. I want to wake up, at least bit by bit even if I can’t ever make the final leap. Therefore any waste of energy or misused mental energy in the realm of sex is a sin against myself/my life’s work. Also I believe that it is a sin against others too since we are all connected, that energy could have been used to help others, were I not so selfish and wasteful with it. If you are having sex to have children that is fine, but I believe sex beyond that is a sin. I am not saying this in alignment with any religious affiliation, it is my very own derived empirical conviction.

Being celibate to me means turning the inner head/attention away from any sexual thoughts or reactions to sex associations/stimuli that enter the mind. If you find that difficult, I recommend folks to develop their very own “ways and means” committee, as Richard Rose recommended, to plan how to purify your mind from sex bit by bit until you gain mastery. Even if you never gain complete mastery, the struggle will be beneficial, God loves a trier. Keep earnest in your efforts towards complete control of your mind regarding celibacy and I believe that you will be rewarded handsomely.

So what are the pros? The pros can mainly be judged by the lack of cons. The salvaged energy goes toward your higher purpose. Rose talked about “neural energy”, one of the most subtle forms of energy that gets used up in sex. This energy needs to be channeled up the spinal cord to the brain, not the other way around. You want your sensitivity to develop in your brain, in the neurological connections in your brain. You don’t want sensitivity to develop more in your gonads. It is easy to see that the vast majority of the world are not celibate, because people can’t think for themselves. Everyone lazily thinks along “herd” lines, a term Rose used. Why is that? Is it because nobody actually has the energy to really think for themselves?

cons:
decreases momentum of my Vector.
increase of egos & increase of “egoic-thought”, which closes “me” to intuitive mind.
proportional decrease in “spiritual energy”.
due to the overall change (decreased level) of Being/Sleep, life perks up… i gain “vampire” friends… i gain happiness.
less clarity… which combined with decreased intuition, increases my “Penny”.
i do not choose sex… sex chooses me… child support probable. 
waking up with an unknown entity. /p>

(there are no cons to being celibate correctly … other than possibility of physical and partner issues)
pros – celibacy correctly (celibate in all 3 centers)
cons – celibacy incorrectly (celibate in body only)

In this system, we recognize that some degree of psychological discomfort is the driving force that has led us to the path of Seeker of Enlightenment, and we recognize that we make effort to discover Truth as the antidote to our disquiet. In any system that purports to lead one to Self-realization and/or the realization of a greater Truth than the drama of the temporal world and our participation in it, the system will have a set of exercises and behaviors associated with it – prayer, meditation, congregational rituals, physical exercises and disciplines, reading and study of sanctioned manuscripts, etc. And one of these practices seen in many systems is the employment of celibacy: “We come now to one of the great secrets of occult work. As Eliphas Levi advises, the thaumaturgist observes celibacy . . . at least for certain periods of time prior to most rituals or invocations.” The Albigen Papers p82 par 2

Because we recognize we are swimming against the tide, pushing through the surge of the throng, we also recognize that we must cultivate the energy needed to make our way in opposition to the sway of behavioral conformity and the urges to life-force dissipation. Celibacy is about both building energy and poking our psychologies, as we seek to extract ourselves from the sea of drama.

Celibacy is a red-hot poker that we must learn to handle with skill and care, lest we injure ourselves or ignite mayhem. Celibacy properly handled will raise the electro-motive force of the protoplasmic entity, making the entity both more sensitive to and more influential upon the psychic field of temporal manifestation, and in so doing push the reflective component of awareness to more astute scrutiny of the activity and cacophony of the cerebrum. And celibacy may also intensify the psychological discomfort that put us on the path in the first place, pushing us harder in our quest for Realization.

For more, I recommend Richard Rose’s book, Energy Transmutation, Between-ness and Transmission, a treatise on energy and celibacy that I believe is of value to anyone practicing the maximum reversal system.

Do you love your Higher Ideal more than you desire sex?
Your sexual partner is not part of that equation.
The sexual partner is an excuse for the hypnosis of sex.
Celibacy is easy.
It is a question of whether one surrenders to love or the hypnosis of sex.

1. Inhibition of sexual activity, especially for young people has great and lasting value. It sets the foundation for these life-long benefits:

a. Clearer seeing and thinking.
b. Greater capacity to focus one’s mental and physical energy with consistency in pursuit of one’s goals.
c. Increased odds of avoiding entanglements that are not in one’s long-term best interests.

2. Complete sexual abstinence by those who’s number one priority is to discover the Absolute Truth regarding who and what they are is a catalyst and potential shortcut to that discovery because:

a. It is crucial in developing the necessary intuition to discern what is a lie from what is true – especially in one’s own thinking and perceiving.
b. It increases needed sensitivity to one’s deepest feelings and a capacity to discern between feelings that emanate form the body versus feelings that emanate from one’s Essence.
c. It is the most readily available and powerful form of self-confrontation for exposing the mechanisms of self-delusion that prevents one from seeing clearly, let alone seeing the Truth, and for exposing how rationalization of desire moves one to act in service to those desires versus in service to one’s declared goals and commitments.
d. Celibacy requires commitment and determination, and its practice begins in the mind by providing alternatives for the focus of one’s attention when the focus is drifting towards sexual reverie.

3. I see no significant con or down-side to a period of purposeful celibacy, or any long-term efforts at some degree of sexual restraint. It is true that the practice can lead to a certain prideful narcissism, but that will eventually resolve itself, most likely in a manner beneficial to one’s spiritual aspirations.

Or, for example, if you are someone who is guided primarily by emotion, driven by sentimentality and feelings rather than instinct, celibacy may provide an opportunity to experience more sincere human connection with others…provided that you don’t feel like you’re being unnecessarily cruel to yourself and others.

In my experience, 30-45 days of celibacy in the pursuit of self-knowledge provides many advantages and few disadvantages for someone who is attempting to observe the mind, emotions, and body through intentional inner work.

Here some of the advantages that I experienced:

• Freedom from the cognitive load of the cue-craving-response-reward cycle; transcending the ‘habit loop’ – provided a boost to working memory and intellectual capacity
• Moderate increases in physical energy due to the absence of the energy expenditure in sexual activity and orgasm (applies to both male and female physiology according to The Foundation for the Scientific Study of Sexuality)
• A new point of observation of the self; increased self-awareness
• Indifference to previous appetites translated into increased power of intuition
• Better comprehension and insights gleaned from reading material and in meditation
• Greater sense of self-control, self-confidence, and emotional stability

Here are some of the disadvantages that I recall:

• Relationship/partner misunderstandings
• Confusion/ridicule of friends who were generally dominated by pleasure-seeking behavior
• Temporary spiritual pride or ego

Overall, I found celibacy to be a net positive and genuinely pleasurable experience, with many more pros than cons.

Whenever you are travelling in what I call the desert without any railroad tracks—you have no trail to go by—you have to have some beacon light, something to guide you. Logic will not do it; your faith alone will not do it; but intuition will. It will take you through the abstract realms.

Any system that pretends to take you into becoming has to have some mechanism for facilitating your skill in becoming—the necessary skill—and that skill involves intuition. You can’t argue it out logically, this is the whole thing.

So once you hear it—it amounts to the business of closing doors. The human mind is like this room, and if they’re pounding on a piano next door, or the sirens are singing outside that window, you’re going to be distracted, and your computer’s not going to work—because all this stuff is continually going to be injecting itself into your problem. So the secret of course is closing doors. ~ From Laws, Yardsticks, Exaltations

During my first solitary retreat (1980), a light bulb over my head appeared “out of the blue” in my imagination. I thought that only occurred in comic books. The words that accompanied it were that my only chance for mental clarity was an extended period of celibacy. I was amazed and excited … and looked forward to the end of the week’s retreat so that I could share the good news with my wife. That didn’t work out the way I had hoped.

I was completely celibate for almost 5 years, then struggled to remain celibate for more than several months at a time for about 6 more years, and was mostly celibate for the final 15 years before my breakthrough into self-realization. I have no way of knowing whether intentional celibacy was crucial or even helpful, but I have the conviction that it was important for me. I remember Richard Rose defining celibacy one time as decreasing intentional sex-action and also recommending it for males before the age of 40. He also suggested experimenting by reading a difficult book, being celibate for 30 days, then reading the book again … to see if it improved mental clarity or intuition for you.