Hyperion

The following is my attempt to formulate a "theory of everything" that is as short and concise as possible and doesn't contain any kind of unnecessary fluff. I hope you have fun with it... and please keep in mind that this is only a conceptual model which, just like any model, is nothing but a necessarily incomplete and ultimately inadequate abstraction. Enjoy. --- The Absolute is the totality of Being. It has no specific quality, as it is the origin, the sum, and the essence - or field - of all possible qualities. Therefore, the Absolute cannot be directly experienced; an experience is always the experience of something definable, i.e. of something that possesses a concrete quality. In other words: Reality is only ever partially perceivable, experienceable and cognizable, but never as a complete whole. Consciousness or experience of reality is therefore only possible where the Absolute seemingly splits up into several parts and establishes contrasting relations between them; it is the contrast between these different parts (or states) that gives them their specific qualities and thus makes them experienceable. Relativity is thus a necessary condition of existence: No relations -> no contrast -> no qualities -> no experience / cognition of reality. In order to perceive itself, the consciousness of the whole, which can only ever be experientially aware of specific parts or aspects of itself, must constantly alternate between contrasting qualitative states; therefore, no state can ever be permanent. However, a state can appear more or less permanent if the speed or vibrational frequency with which consciousness shifts between contrasting states is accordingly low (-> one-sided fixation, relative stagnation, seeming incompleteness / fragmentation, suffering). But the higher the frequency, the more consciousness approaches a holistic experience of total reality where contrasting qualitative states seem to be experienced simultaneously (-> unification and integration of all opposites, 'spiritual awakening", "enlightenment"). This is the essence of all spirituality. --- Due to popular request, here is a more easy-to-understand analogy (which I originally posted below) that illustrates what I am talking about in the text above: This is the famous Yin Yang symbol, which I am sure you are familiar with. Now, here's a question for you: Is this symbol white, or is it black? It's obviously both, right? So the symbol possesses / represents not only one specific quality, but two: Whiteness and blackness. Now imagine a thing which has not only two qualities but literally every single quality that there could possibly be, including the quality of not having any quality whatsoever. This "thing" - which is no-thing as well as everything - is the Absolute aka. All of Reality. This no-thing / everything cannot be experienced directly, since it is impossible to experience every possible quality that there is all at once. So what does it do in order to be able to experience itself? It splits itself up into infinite parts, each of which represents and embodies a specific quality (just as Yin represents blackness and Yang represents whiteness), and then it lines them all up in space and time so that it can experience them one by one. Now, when it moves its awareness very slowly from part to part (so to speak), then each quality that is being experienced in the moment is being experienced for a pretty long time; and the longer it takes for a certain quality (or part of reality) to be experienced, the more dense, solid, sticky and permanent it seems... even though no experience can ever be permanent (since an experience can only exist in contrast to another experience, just as Yin can only exist in contrast to Yang.) Now, go back and take another look at the Yin Yang symbol. Imagine that you could never see (experience) the whole symbol all at once, but only one part at a time. Imagine that there is a switch in front of you that you can flip either to the left or to the right; and depending on which side you flip the switch, you see either the Yin part (black) or the Yang part (white) appearing on the screen. (Remember: You can never see them both at the same time.) - So, the only way for you to get an idea of what it would be like to see the full symbol all at once is to flip the switch back and forth as fast as possible; and the faster you flip it back and forth, the more it will seem like you are looking at the whole symbol (while at the same time the two contrasting parts will seem less and less dense and solid.) This is basically what spirituality is about. It's about learning to flip the switch as fast as possible (by whatever means necessary) in order to "perceive the Absolute" - which you never fully do, but you can get closer and closer and closer and closer to it... unto infinity. Because that's literally what the Absolute is: Infinity aka. All there is. Hope that helps.

I love you too, cupcake. 😘

Sure, that's relatively (un)true.

We certainly can. That's relatively (un)true. See, you have been conditioned by religion and/or spirituality to believe that there is something that is "real"/unchanging which creates and exists independently from something which is "unreal"/changing, seemingly not realizing that this is nothing but a conceptual model of reality, not reality itself. Don't mistake the finger that points the moon for the moon itself, my friend.

There is no such thing as a screen that "renains" after the movie is "done". Screen and movie are two sides of the same coin; one cannot exist without the other. The Absolute is the world of relative change, and it is also the world of relative changelessness.

Key and Peele are the 🐐 🐐.

The screen changes its appearance depending on what movie it shows, doesn't it? Nothingness is a relative aspect of reality that can only be experienced in relation and contrast to the experience of somethingness. When "something" is being experienced, "nothing" is no longer being experienced and therefore no longer exists. Therefore, (the experience of) something affects (the experience of) nothing, relatively speaking. And also, it doesn't.

Any part of reality is affected by the other parts, and also it isn't. It means that anything that can be expressed with words is relatively (un)true.

...which is why the perpetual chase for satisfaction is a fools errand, as a certain Indian guy (among many other people) pointed out some 2500 years ago. ☸️

It is also nothing. It is also not the movie. It is also affected by the movie. It also isn't. It also is. Everything could also not vanish, and the Absolute still isn't the Absolute. Satisfied?

Sure, that's relatively (un)true. 🙃

I am saying that the Asolute is change, and it is also the absence of change. It's also somethingness happening... which makes it even more magical.

Yup, that's what verbal communication is all about.

There is no such thing as an absolute perspective. All perspectives are by definition relative. You can describe nonduality/formlessness/timelessness and call that description the "absolute perspective", but that so-called absolute perspective is still going to be relative. And it is no more logical or illogical than the opposite perspective (which focusses on duality/form/time).

Yup, all of this is relatively (un)true. Waking, dreaming, real, unreal, changing, unchanging, permanent, impermanent, nothing, something... all of these are mental labels aka. relative distinctions/perspectives. The Absolute (= that which has no opposite) includes and transcends them all. ☯️

Again, this is a relatively (in)valid statement... meaning that it is valid in one sense and invalid in another. It is valid in the sense that when you wake up and find that your town is still standing, you can say "oh I see, it only got wiped out as part of a dream". And it is invalid in the sense that in the dream, the town actually was wiped out. Sure, you can tell yourself that it was "just" a dream; but that dream you had was an actual occurrence/experience that undeniably took place in and as part of reality, or else you would not remember it. (Even if you say that it is just a memory that is popping up in the here and now, the simple fact of the matter is that this memory is popping up in the here and now, making it a real and undeniable occurrence.) Notice that when you classify your waking existence as "more real" than dream existence, you are making a relative distinction that is solely based on conceptual thought. So "ABC is true" and "XYZ is untrue" is in the end nothing but a mental story. See what I mean?

@Mellowmarsh I'll be happy to once more repeat my actual question: Why not say "happenings never stay the same forever as fixed unchanging events" instead of "nothing has ever happened”? The first statement implies that something did happen (but didn't last) while the second statement says that nothing ever happened. So why insist that they state the same when they obviously contradict each other?

Sure, that would be a relatively (un)true statement.

@Mellowmarsh Well if you scroll back, you will find that my actual question was: And the reason I was asking is because I just don't see how these two statements are related.

My man, you'd be surprised what people believe once they blow enough magic powder up their butthole.

I sure have, but what exactly does that have to do with my question?

Then why not say "happenings never stay the same forever as fixed unchanging events" instead of "nothing has ever happened”? I could say "reality", but for any statement that you make about reality therevis an opposite statement which is equally relatively (un)true. [Insert gif of turtle on rotating vinyl record]

Of course. And together with this experience, there is the knowledge / realization that I can only experience "dreamlike" because I can also experience "not dreamlike". So if you ask me if in this very moment my experience of reality is dreamlike or not dreamlike, my answer is: YES. ...which is why I said: "That depends on what you mean by real." Umm, are we posting on the same forum?

The key word(s) here being "as if". See, many people (seem to) think that they have somehow stumbled upon the "true nature of reality" when they switch from the experience of time to the experience of timelessness and then run around saying things like "nothing has actually ever happened", as if it were absolutely true. But as I always like to point out, the experience of timelessness can only exist in relation and contrast to the experience of time, making "nothing has ever happened" a relatively (un)true statement. In fact, anything that can be expressed with words can only ever be relatively true, not absolutely true.