Spiritual Warfare

@Breakingthewall How can the absolute contain the relative if the absolute is, by definition, unchanging? Since the absolute is unchanging, how can it then encompass changing and cyclical aspects? How can we understand causes and effects within the relative world if the absolute is not a conscious entity that acts? Is it possible for there to be causality in the relative that does not result from an active will?

@Leo GuraIf time is an aspect of our consciousness and not a measurable construct, why do we experience it so consistently across different people and events? Wouldn't time feel more subjective if it were purely tied to consciousness?

👍 The movie is terrible, it completely misses the mark. I’d rather watch paint dry; at least that has some suspense!

Absolutely! Women are way more than that. They’re also the ones rolling their eyes at bad jokes and reminding us to get our lives together!

You always prioritize the pursuit of pussy, and then, maybe then, think about spirituality.

That's just speculation, we don't really know if we ever truly awaken to our real nature. For all we know, what we consider "awakening" could just be another layer of the illusion. It’s possible that we may never fully grasp the absolute truth, and what we experience as "enlightenment" could still be filtered through the limitations of human perception.

Life sucks

If the absolute is everything, why would it need to experience itself through duality? Can something that is complete and whole truly lack self-awareness without separation? Why would the absolute need to forget itself to understand what it’s like to be something? If it is everything, wouldn’t it already encompass all possible experiences without needing to fragment? If the absolute forgets itself to experience duality, how does it eventually remember? What triggers the realization of its true nature if it has willingly forgotten its identity? And I don’t buy the idea that God needs to forget it’s divine nature to have experiences! God could still maintain it’s memory of It’s true nature while experiencing life as a human.

If an eternal God has already experienced infinite adventures, wouldn’t that imply that time itself is real for God? How can an eternal being, which exists outside of time, experience anything sequentially, including infinite adventures? Why would infinite experiences lead to cosmic horror? Could it not be possible that an eternal God, being beyond human emotions, transcends concepts like boredom, horror, or desire? You mention that reality is absolute, and that there are infinite manifestations of that infinite absolute. How can these manifestations exist without implying some form of change or time, which contradicts the nature of an unchanging absolute? Assuming that God would eventually fall into cosmic horror after experiencing infinite human lives projects human limitations onto an infinite being. God, as the absolute, would not be bound by emotions like boredom or despair. The concepts of "fun" or "horror" may not apply to such a being at all.

If living forever means existing in a perfect state, why would there ever be a desire for something different, like "sweet dreams"? What would make such dreams appealing to a being that already has everything? If the "tiny, mad idea" is instantly rejected and everything returns to what it was, doesn't that imply there was some imperfection or curiosity in the eternal state to begin with? Why would such an idea arise in the first place? How can something that never really existed leave behind such vivid experiences? If the universe is both an illusion and something to be "summarily rejected," that creates a paradox. How can something exist long enough to be dismissed and still claim it never existed at all? Even fleeting experiences leave a mark.

If there is no creation, only being, what is the origin of what we perceive as the world around us? How do we explain change and development if everything is just presence? If typing these words is simply "presence" and "happening for no one," why do we experience it as a personal action? Why does it feel as though we are conscious subjects? How can something be alive and present without being "for someone"? Doesn’t life and awareness require an experiencing entity in order to exist? If everything is "presence" and "unknowable," how can we talk about it or develop theories about its nature? Isn’t reflection itself a form of knowing?

Exactly. This is why the concept of creation makes no sense when applied to an unchanging, eternal God. Creation implies change, a before and after, but an eternal being exists beyond time and does not experience progression or transformation. How could something unchanging initiate anything new?

I find your perspective intriguing, and I agree with many of your points. However, let’s consider the possibility of a God who exists without a beginning or an end. If such a being is truly timeless, how could this God engage in the act of creation? This raises a compelling dilemma: if God exists outside the confines of time, how could time itself emerge from this timeless existence? While I understand that time may not be real in an absolute sense, let's assume it is for the sake of this argument. My focus here is on the religious view of God, which often seems contradictory to me. I would like your help in examining these contradictions and exposing the inconsistencies within this perspective. How can a timeless God create within a framework that requires a temporal process? This question challenges the very foundation of traditional religious beliefs about divine creation.

While it may be tempting to equate infinity with non-duality, could it be argued that infinity, in its mathematical sense, exists independently of our perceptions and distinctions? Perhaps infinity is a concept that transcends our understanding of unity and duality, suggesting that our efforts to comprehend it through a non-dual lens may limit our grasp of its true nature.

I believe that while consciousness may have the potential for infinite exploration, not all aspects of it provide meaningful insights. Some experiences can be trivial or repetitive, which suggests that the depth of exploration is not infinite in terms of quality. The complexities of consciousness mean that even if we explore it endlessly, we might not always find new or significant understandings. This complexity could make our exploration of consciousness feel more cyclical rather than genuinely infinite. In other words, we may revisit similar ideas or experiences without uncovering deeper truths each time.

Thank you for the insightful response!

Can we genuinely equate the two, or do they embody different principles? Infinity suggests an unbounded quantity, while eternity might imply a qualitative state that transcends the mere accumulation of moments.

You are absolutely right; I wasn't thinking clearly. Thanks for the reminder, and those are excellent points, by the way

@OBEler @Breakingthewall If something is truly infinite, it must have the capacity to expand infinitely. Otherwise, it would contradict the very definition of being infinite. Consider the universe: if it is infinite, it can continue to expand without end. Similarly, when we think of infinity in mathematics, such as infinite series or sets, these too must be able to grow without bounds to truly be considered infinite.

Is infinity conscious? Does it exist merely as a natural force, lacking awareness, or could it possess some form of intelligence or intention? If infinity is genuinely infinite, it cannot advance in any direction.

If the infinite is the only true existence, what then is the purpose of our experience of the relative and ever-changing? Does it hold any inherent meaning, or is it merely a means to attain greater insight? Could it be that the transient nature of our experiences serves as a catalyst for growth and understanding, allowing us to explore the infinite through the lens of the finite?

If we assume that instantaneous time is the correct interpretation, how do we explain our experience of memories and continuity? Are memories an illusion or a function of consciousness adapting to a constantly changing reality?

If everything is just an illusion or a "magic trick," and nothing is really happening, then why do we experience growth, change, and consequences? If there’s no real movement, how do we account for the tangible ways our actions impact others, or the meaning we derive from relationships, creativity, and experiences? Could it be that what we perceive as "illusion" is actually just a different layer of reality, one that holds value even if it's part of a grander, cosmic play?

I tried the same thing, but when I asked for an omelette in the future, they told me I’d have to wait.

How can that be possible if time itself doesn’t exist?