Vibroverse

Yes, we know what we know and we don't know what we don't know. We, I think, have a hard time with accepting where we are, and our ability to think gives us the power to make anything abstract. We know of things, but another question that interests me is what does knowing something means at all. What do we mean when we say we know something. Do we know something that is external to us, or do we know something that is not. Now, of course there is a certain mode of being, if we try to deny that, we run the risk of fooling ourselves. The reality has a certain mode of being, and trying to deny that actually is trying to deny yourself. However, the question is what is the limits of knowledge and why knowledge is a thing that is making itself a being. What is, for instance, the experience of moving from this moment to the next moment. The mind has a certain mode of being, it has a certain pattern, and when it learns something new, for instance, when it molds itself into a form that it was not before, is it happening as a natural unfolding of being. That's one of my questions in regards to the duality that we call knowledge. What is the mechanism that underlies the process of moving from one moment to the next moment, for instance. And that leads me to the paradoxes of Zeno, where we are thinking of the idea of moving from one moment to the next moment to be an illusion, and it makes sense in a certain sense that experience might be unfolding within itself, but it creates a new form of continuity, and therefore I say continuity probably is an illusion from which we cannot run, in a sense. And that's where I feel like anything that we can objectively refer to, or suggest the existence of in through some objective form, like through language, is not the point to start, or even end, this experience of the process of understanding the experience, for it meets itself in this point in all its journeys that are "away" from its own form, or mode, of being. That might, in a sense, be the process of the creation of worlds, that existence already is the ability of forming and creating itself, and knowing it might, in that sense, necessitates not just knowing it, but being it, and understanding that it is the experience, or the experiencelessness, of being it.

Let alone what the question is referring to, you can even ask whether that question itself is real or not, and luckily we can never get there, at least for now, haha.

I love your questions, your mind seems to be similar to my mind, in a sense. I'm thinking about the nature of learning, and whether it is happening as a result of the same process of achieving, creating, manifesting, receiving other things, other more tangible things, and I think the answer might be yes. And if so, then we need to find the intrinsic essence of that which is to be learned, and as you said, I think it can be a fun and exciting experience really, for it is, then, the same process of being, and then it is just that it is being adjusted to a different modality of being. That's, in my opinion, the point where the idea of surrendering to yourself can be helpful, for otherwise it will be an experience of some form of pain, and it will not be a satisfying journey for you. I think that's where being makes itself evolved to another modality of being, but it has its own intrinsic dynamics. That's, I guess, we, in a sense, come to the question of "how can the one appear as many", and that I guess is the mystery that discovers itself as the process, and that itself, in a sense, might be what a process even is. It is like the inexplicable is being itself, but it cannot explain how it even is able to be itself. Well, that might be something, by its nature that can never be understood, but the question, perhaps, is not about understanding it, but getting closer and closer to the concept of being about understanding it, and that might be the very definition of science itself. I think the most important thing that we forget in the process is that there is a certain order, a certain, as the ancient Greeks called it, Logos, a pattern of being that calls itself towards itself, and that is the dynamic of being that is being understood by realizing that it cannot ever be understood, for it is the very idea of being the missing link itself. And being is knowing itself through itself, perhaps, without even knowing that it is knowing itself through itself, and that very thing, in a sense, might be the very cause of duality, the öne becoming the many.

And even more than that, imagine that you are that professor himself in the dream where you have, in your dream history and memory, learned about those subjects before, and now you are a master of those subjects. I think we, at the ultimate level, the infinite consciousness that contains all possible information and worlds, however, here we are at the relative level where we experience the mode of a process in time and space. Of course, the ultimate knowledge of being itself is a mystery, in a sense, by its nature in all the possible worlds, for existence is its own cause, so it cannot be "known", in that sense, for it is the very knowing itself, it is the very beingness of existence. But, for some reason, on the relative level of knowledge and beingness, there is a certain form of a pattern in the unfolding of reality, and maybe it is a good and intentional thing from the ultimate level consciousness.

Imagine you're having a dream, and in the dream you are in another universe, and you are in a class where a professor is teaching you about some astronomical facts about that universe, or maybe a language that is spoken in one world in that universe. And when you learn some information in that world, about that world, do you really learn something which you did not know before, or is it more like you realizing something that already has been a part of your consciousness which you were not aware of before? Sometimes I think that, in a sense, this might be what evolution of consciousness is like. You the infinite consciousness are like the totality of all possible information in and of existence, but you're experiencing a spacetime reality. So, in that perspective, you're actually like an architect who is discovering yourself when you learn something new, in a sense like what Socrates thought mathematics to be, where he was just being a midwife for the awareness of knowledges that already were within.

Satisfaction and feeling good are your nature, God is Love, God is Peace, God is the experience of feeling good. And what is actually weird is you thinking that wanting to feel good is something weird, because noone told you that feeling good is good, noone told you about that which is obvious. And they told you that the purpose of life is anything but feeling good and satisfied ?

I think it is not just what language is about creating distinctions, but language is a distinction itself, it's a "thing" itself.

To me, language seems to be an object like the other objects of the world, and linguistic structure seems to be a structure like the physical structure. That's, in a sense, like when Hegel says "real is rational, and rational is real", meaning the objects of the inner world are in zero distance from the objects of the outer world. So, to me, both mental and physical structures seem to be at zero distance from each other, and that language is another form of being experiencing being, meaning, as the reality is a self forming system, language also is a self forming system, or maybe we can even say that it is the same system appearing to itself as dualities and subtleties.

Yeah man, I think God can even create a fuckin square circle, like it might even be the creator of fuckin logic in some way that our human minds cannot just grasp, I have no idea, then yeah, you might be right, really ?

You can change your history, you can change your memories, you can change the date on which you were born, you can change the country in which you were born, you can change your body and become someone else, you can change your self, you can change your timeline, you can change existence, you can change everything, you are that which is limitless. This is all a fuckin imagination and noone, noone, can tell you what you can create and what you cannot for everything they say will, again, be your own fuckin imagination, so you yourself are the fuckin authority of what is "real" and what is not, you are the fuckin God.

Yeah, I'm really not interested in such big changes, they would probably be very uncomfortable, but I'm exploring the possibilities of Consciousness, as you said.

Sure, but I'm talking about how it feels to me, not what "it" actually is.

Science is an illusion, it is an imagination, even though it can be pretty helpful on the practical level. It is nothing but the patterns of consciousness, but of course, by studying the manifestation of consciousness, you can come to understandings about consciousness, yeah.

A few weeks ago I listened to a philosopher and his 10 yo daughter talk about nothing, and the girl was referring to nothing as pure white and it sounded interesting to me, because I also think of it, when I try to think of it, as pure black.

Fuck Einstein, he has no fuckin clue about how deep this shit called existence is. By the way, you may like this. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CaLDtvUJI_A&t=4494s

Yeah, I don't think there is such a thing as "the" path also, and this not only is different from person to person, but it can also change within the same person as well. You sometimes may feel like following one path and other times another path.

Okay.

I think quieting your mind actually might be what makes your intellect sharp.

Yeah, that's, pretty much, what I was talking about. And you can still get involved in mental processes, but you do it in a way that is intuition based, grounded on the grand scheme, in a sense, of intuition and meditation.

Thinking too much and trying to solve problems don't frickin work, at least that's how it is for me, so I'm in the process of turning back to my studies of Taoism, studying the idea of Wu Wei, because I feel like that's the only real option that can ever work, but when I'm trying to explain what I mean it is hard for me to explain, because this is a very intuitive thing that I'm experiencing about that idea.

You don't understand what I'm saying.

Once I heard Rupert Spira say "the best thinkers in the world are those who do not think", and it, kinda, made great sense to me, when I look at the mechanism of thinking.

Haha, yeah, you may be right in some sense, but what I'm saying is if God is Love, then we must be base our now moment on Love, or at least we need to move towards Love by stopping not being Love, if who we actually are is God, and therefore Love. You know, it is like the idea of moving closer and closer to the mind of God, to the mind of Love, and let God's mind think through us, like being a vessel that is more and more open to the receptivity from the mind of Love. And in that way, we may allow the mind of Love to philosophize and think and be through us, in a sense, by not philosophizing and thinking and trying to understand through the human mind. It might sound so obvious when I say it in this way, like "of course it is the best state of being, or state of moving towards Being, in a sense, that it would be the best and most efficient and wisest way of knowing". But then I ask myself "do I really do that, do I really care about being in a meditative state first, and then experience the process of being in that way?", then my answer, to myself, is "not really". Now it may look like it has got nothing to do with your thread, and like I'm trolling your thread, and yeah, maybe I'm doing that, in a sense, to some degree, but I felt like saying this to everyone that is listening in the universe, in a sense ? Sorry for trolling, dude, if it feels like that to you, and if it feels like I'm not frickin saying anything, and in a sense, yeah, I'm not saying anything, but I'm really thinking about what it even means to say something, so I wrote this here ? Anyways, just pardon my rambling, please ?