GodisOne

"is structured around the distinction between the observed system and the observer. " Actually it's structured around the Interaction between the observed system and the observer. That is what those theories you mentioned (e.g measurement problem) emphasize. And this interaction only goes o show that they are not separate--one affects the other. "The fact that you think that there is a real distinction between "You" and "I" tells me that you are viewing the ego as a real thing that divides reality rather than a construction in your infinite mind." On the contrary, I see it as an illusory agent that creates the sense of separation. I even told you "You can say we are configurations or parts of the Infinite Mind, but surely we are not the Infinite Mind, by definition." So I do see the ego/the separate observor as "a construction in your infinite mind"; it's just I wouldn't say "your" Infinite Mind, because Infinite Mind belongs to no one. "Your experience is absolute." This is once again saying that only my experience is fundamental (solipsism). This goes into direct contradiction with me saying "no, I am not the only mind that exists; there are other minds." So who is right? You can't falsify my claim and I can't falsify yours. After all, what is your problem with multiple minds all being configurations of the Infinite? Why do you assert that there is only your mind that exists? And by asserting that, you negate the fact that only my mind exists. If so, then it's internally inconsistent. But so far you've only been saying my mind exists, so that is why I am not noting any inconsistency. But the moment you will assert it is only your mind that exists, or if you go to someone else and tell them only your mind exists, then you are being inconsistent and self-contradicting.

Yeah you are presenting solipsism, but the problem is there is no one mind having one experience. There are many minds, each with its separate experience. You and I cannot be the Infinite Mind because we are not "located nowhere and everywhere" and also we are separate. Each one of us has a different experience. You can say we are configurations or parts of the Infinite Mind, but surely we are not the Infinite Mind, by definition. And in quantum mechanics, there is a consistent theory that describes how many minds emerged from One Mind or Infinite Mind. Since you said "Science has not and cannot ever prove there are multiple minds". There is the Hugh Everett's Many Minds interpretation, that states when a quantum event happens, minds branch off to experience their possible outcome. One mind becomes many minds, each unaware of the others, each experiencing a different outcome — but all equally real. (And there was a missing piece: why doesn't the observer see a superposition of all these outcomes simultaneously when the branching happens? Decoherence theory answers this by showing that when a quantum system interacts with its environment — air molecules, photons, your brain — the superposition effectively stops being coherent. The different possibilities stop interfering with each other and behave like separate, independent classical outcomes.) Anyways, I just brought this up as a valid theory in quantum mechanics that states multiple minds exist. So these minds exist and they all emerged from One Mind (which you can call God--the first Mind, Originator of all other minds). If you were to relate this to nonduality, you would say that the Self is the wavefunction which is whole and undivided. There's also another interpretation (Bohm's implicate order) that states many observers are locally unfolded expressions of the same undivided consciousness, appearing at different space and timepoints. So here you have multiple minds again.

I've tried 5-meo several times, and honestly I don't care what Leo says, It's a drug, and it can be dangerous. If it's causing you tinnitus, you may want to avoid it, as tinnitus is the brain's compensatory mechanism to damage to inner hair cells/synapses. And at least for me, it just messes up your brain circuits and neurotransmitter balance.

Not "loose" terminology, but terminology that defines that which is "loose". So for example, the "Unknown" attempts to describe that which is not in the real of the known. And honestly there is no need for extensive discussion on the definition, because it should be clear to the seeker. With all due respect, you are making no sense. Your game is to not think about God? If you first think about God, you lose? What's the point? We get that when you're told to not think about something, you think about it, but what does that have to do with this?

@Dodo You nailed it when you said "Saying that something is true, just your consciousness level is not high enough to realise it is a great way to assert your view." Many people here claiming to be God, and if you disagree with them, then your consciousness is just not high enough lol. The biggest problem we have in this forum is people are not able to agree on one definition of God. Is it the traditional monotheistic God? The Self? The Truth? Once we agree on the definition, then we can make some progress. Otherwise, we are just loosely throwing terms here and there. If we are referring to God outside the Abrahamic religions, it is better to leave God alone and use the appropriate terms such as the Infinite or the Self or the Absolute. @Lazarus93 "It may seem in your current dream that there are billions of conscious sentient beings, but ultimately they are all You. They are figments in your mind." What you are describing is solipsism. That You are the only mind that exists and all else is a figment of your imagination. Doesn't that contradict my solipsistic take on reality, that I, not You, am the only mind that exists?

God cares about Itself, and by caring about Itself, It cares about humans, who are not separate from Itself. Assigning anthropomorphic traits (trauma, validation, etc..) to God is not appropriate. God ofcourse doesn't care about how It's perceived as It cannot be perceived but is instead the Perceiver. "No vision can encompass Him, but He encompasses all vision. For He is the Most Subtle, All-Aware." (Quran 6:103).

@Breakingthewall You say: "the only absolute truth appears when there is no grade, when relativity doesn't exist, when everything is equalized and there is no definition, differentiation, or comparison." "when relativity doesn't exist": Truth has to be relative, because without relativity, how will you define Truth? Truth is defined relative to their being no relativity. Therefore, the Truth you speak of is not absolute, but relative, as you say it's "when relativity doesn't exist". "when everything is equalized": Being relative, Truth does NOT contain everything, and so cannot be "when everything is equalized". Everything contains falsehood, so Truth cannot contain everything. "no definition, differentiation, or comparison": Truth, being relative, is defined, different, and comparable "Absolute" (by itself) on the other is beyond all distinctions and as you described "when everything is equalized and there is no definition, differentiation, or comparison". Therefore, no such thing as the absolute truth. Whatever is absolute, is neither truth nor un-truth, because "absolute" is beyond all distinctions. So, you mixed up the definition of two things here: truth and the absolute. But there is no such thing as absolute truth, because it is self-contradictory, as one implies distinction, the other doesn't.

OP is not denying the existence of karma and its propagation to the next life. He is wondering how it works exactly. This is where we have to look to the most famous spiritual scientist of our time, Albert Einstein, for insight. who said “Everything is determined, the beginning as well as the end, by forces over which we have no control. It is determined for the insect, as well as for the star. Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper.” He admits that the forces governing karma care outside our control, implying a predetermined universe.

@Bacher You say: "You seem like you have not realized that life on earth is not the end of this infinite imagination that will go on forever. This imagination is also creation. You will not understand God by sitting like buddists and contemplate emptiness or the light. Why do you think this life on earth and other life forms exists? That is because the LIGHT or GOD needs that to understand itself, what it is capable of and how long it can go and create and at the same time experience all the emotions and reactions. It cannot do that by simply being the light." In Reality, in Truth, there is no time. Separate selves debate about whether the imagination goes on infinitely or temporarily, but the truth is that it never started so nothing has ever happened. How can anything happen if there is no such thing as time. Reality tries to concede to the separate selves by saying well, the imagination is only real to you because you are experiencing separation. But the hard truth is that you are not even separate selves. And never have been. The separate self comes back and says "oh but I'm experiencing this; you can't say nothing is happening." Reality responds, until you see that you are not real---i.e that you are not separate, you will experience Reality as events. @Breakingthewall You say: "Realizations pull you away from the core, keeping you circling like a moth to a light, looking at it from different angles, when the idea is to break the separation between you and the light and be the total essence of what it is, which isn't a realization, it's the source of realizations and everything else. There's nothing you can say about this light , since anything you say will be an aspect, a facet, a realization among infinite facets, an absolute zero." Piercing through the separation, like you say, is what frees the individual from the illusion that there are realizations to be made about Reality. Like you say, "the idea is to break the separation between you and the light". Who can make a realization about Reality? One would have to be separate from Reality and stand separate from it to be able to understand it, but if one himself is Reality, how can he understand Reality or have true insights about it. All there is is Reality.

"because there is nothing just pure eternity forever." Who said you were a human since the beginning of the universe for you to be bored, waiting for Homo sapiens to emerge before you decided it was fun to join. Even then, the passage of time (13.8 billion years in our case) is unlikely to be experienced at the same rate as it does on Earth with our human brains.