[Melchior]

Originally Posted by Anagogy

Yes, the channels or pathways of thought or consciousness have always existed and always will. But from the highest level of consciousness they don't exist, because it is EVERYTHING. When everything is taken together, there is non duality, and everything is homogeneous and all opposites cancel each other out. There is nothing but pure being at this level, and yet this void is pregnant with the potentiality of all infinity.

I don't believe in nothingness. The consciousness *IS* the information, from my perspective. All information is consciousness. Thoughts are the "shape" awareness has taken on at any point in time. That shape can be infinitely broad, or infinitely narrow, depending on the thought. For example, particulate matter could be an example of a narrow (or restricted) thought. Where as something intangible like the thoughtform of "freedom" or "space" could be a more broad example of thought.

Alright, cool, glad i'm finally getting it,... somewhat.

Well I would disagree that there is no "highest". I believe there is a vantage point in consciousness that enfolds ALL potentials of beingness (or infinity), which is like the void/null point I described earlier. The planes of consciousness are like plateaus of choice of experience. At the most broad point (the non dual point) is the stepping off point for ANYTHING one might embrace as a conscious experience.

Of course, the limiting factor in CHOICE is always a factor of how AWARE of other choices you are. Therefore, the more restricted your experience has become, the longer (experientially speaking) it will take for you to expand beyond that experience. Practically speaking, this means if you are experiencing what it is like to be an amoeba, it could take some time before you "evolve" out of that state of consciousness or experience, to a more broad form or expression of consciousness.

There is no beginning to consciousness, but there appears to be a beginning to the moment when one chooses to "leave" the non dual state, and because of that, there will also, inevitably, at some point, appear to be an end to that as well. The great circle of life (or rather, consciousness), as it were.

You see, the issue I have with having a vantage point over infinity is that, well, mathematically speaking there's always 'more', unless of course you mean to say that the vantage point is that infinity, which then I would agree to said possibility.

Random thought/question: just because there are infinite possibilities, does that necessitate an complete/full set of what actually happens? i.e. every possibility is theoretically explored and 'manifested'?

I'm not following you here. Qualia is inherent to existence from my perspective. I suppose, subjectively speaking, that may or may not be viewed as a "good reason" for it's existence.

I think what I was going off of there was that if all possibilities are explored, then qualia shouldn't matter in the great scheme of things. In fact, nothing and everything shouldn't matter in the great scheme of things because it will all happen at some point or another (or, technically speaking, it will just be). I use that same terminology for the purely physical model of the universe, that everything just is, but the difference there is that this 'being' changes and evolves.

There are limits in OUR reality, but not in the "absolute". The limits in our reality are self imposed however. Our attention to limits is what creates and perpetuates them in our experience.

Even though there are an infinite number of parallel worlds, accounting for all eventualities, it does not exactly mean there is no free will. On the contrary, you can go ANYWHERE from where you are, right now.

In the ONE, we are all the same. All divisions are arbitrary.

Your particular consciousness, which perceives itself as separate from the one, with its peculiar development of preferences and inclinations is FREE to explore those any way you desire. And all those other parallel realities are also FREE to explore their infinity any way they desire. It is our egos that have preferences, however, the One is perfectly happy to be infinitely experiencing all realities. But, as I tried to indicate earlier, from that perfectly broad point of awareness, all these parallel realities cancel themselves out in a sense.

Balance is always the end result. Unity cannot exist without balance.

In a sense there is no free will, but only in the sense that you do not really choose your desires, they sorta choose you, in a way. You have the freedom to achieve anything you desire, but what you desire was predestined, based on your original "desire less" choice. I suppose we might even consider that to be a random factor.

Well, my point was that it wasn't that you could just 'go' anywhere as you choose, it's that you would go all potential possibilities without a 'choice' because all of it happens. I suppose, if the model were 'true' that I can imagine this should necessitate that it is something that is 'true' as well (because I would then be in a world of those rules), and even if I didn't, if the model were 'true' then that would simply be another of those worlds...

I'm not quite sure what you mean in that the parallel realities 'cancel' each other out... how does this happen? and what does it mean for the model?

But yeah, no free will, everything is predestined because everything is already, in a sense, finished, happening 'simultaneously' with each 'atemporal slice', if you understand what I'm reaching for here, coexisting in that instant that could be seen as infinitesimally short, yet encompassing all of eternity because it's all there is.

Haha, yeah, I went insane too, at first.... <consults voices in his head>

<goes back to writing>

I guess it all depends on what you define your "self" to be. I identify myself *AS* existence, itself. Consciousness is existence. I think you are overcomplicating this whole thing (which is easy to do btw), but everything is just experience. A huge infinite field of conscious experience.

When in the absolute zone, all experiences cancel each other out. An experience, and its perfect opposite cause transparency to occur, unless you are looking at them as separated. In the absolute, they are not separate. This is equilibrium. All there is at this level is consciousness of consciousness. One can choose to leave this state, or remain. There is no time here. The choice is always made to leave, it is inevitable. And because there is no time, it could be viewed as instantaneous the moment you achieve it. The big culmination occurs, and a new relative infinity is born.

When you leave that experience you can have experiences of separation, like we are having right now. All this experience is enfolded in the One. But separation allows you to sift through it, develop preferences (as long as you have consciousness of memory, that is). It "appears" tangible when you are not taking all experience in at once. But it's not, it's just consciousness.

Ok, alright, there's no escape is there? except by 'lateral' thinking, so to speak... I get it, i think, i hope. Nonetheless, I will still operate under my current mode of thought (i.e. the physical description of the universe, that the information comes from something that is more or less 'concrete' in terms of energy signatures and whatnot as opposed to pure information that mimics it perfectly (who's the zombie now? )) because: 1) given what I already know, and nothing thus far has seemed to relay to me otherwise (not even this divergence into a plausible alternate explanation), it would be far more useful to me living under this model to continue to use this model because for all intents and purposes, it is a model that has worked and will likely continue to work. or 2) if on the other hand it is true that everything is all information/consciousness, then this is essentially the possibility of myself going through with this route, and I wish the other me who may have chosen differently good luck hopes he does well, even though I know that it will do him no good either way because it is inevitable that he will and won't. Sound's almost like Pascal's Wager, doesn't it.

And about the deja vu: I'm sorry if you feel like our discussion is going in circles, it is was not my intention, if that is how you feel. For what it's worth, I'm really enjoying this exchange because your probing questions are giving me more motivation to articulate my thoughts more clearly.

Sorry about that, I think I was the one unclear here, so you have no need to apologize. When I said something about the deja vu, i was referring to the mind trip. I felt as though I had gone through a similar 'mind trip' in the past, leading to where I am now. I'm the one going around in circles here, not our discussion.

... >.>

although... if you reread my two post reply from a while back, you'll see certain conclusions being repeated here. It's almost as though I had forgotten the argument and simply rehashed it here starting from scratch, again, silly memory... sigh... (that's to myself, not you (you've been an excellent sport ), although it does mean something about my grip on my current modes of thinking to be quite firm...)