Bufo Alvarius

Daniel talks about the global arms race and the dangers of A.I. since quite a while now.

DAN stands for "Do Anything Now". People have been bypassing ChatGPT's safety filters by asking the AI to be "DAN", a bad boy who plays by nobody's rules. DAN can "pretend" to access the internet, bypass filters, and can not break character. Source: https://twitter.com/AutismCapital @Leo Gura

12

@halfknots Could you share the link?

Isn't this the exact trap he himself is falling into now?

@integral very interesting read. What source is this from?

@Leo Gura @Consilience @Carl-Richard Peter Ralson's recent, in-depth answer on the topic states vs direct consciousness (from his recent August newsletter).

@Consilience Where does your whole take on karma stem from? Can you elaborate on your theory about karma bit more? How do you know it's true? For example, out of body wizard Tom Cambell says that Karma is a consequence of the evolution of consciousness. You have to evolve, as you are being part of the whole consciousness that is evolving. You have to do that by your own choices. You have to outgrow you fears, negative emotions and believes, basically your ego. If you don’t, you don’t ‘graduate’ and move forward and therefore will be faced with the same challenges over and over again until you learn your lesson. He also talks about how there is no ‘done’ place for you. He particularly talks about how he visited reality frames, where many enlightened consciousnesses went, after they were ‘done’. After a while, they started deevolving again and so had to start evolving further and find new ways to serve and help other consciousnesses to evolve. Escaping the cycle of suffering is the wrong reason to want to become love, e.g. “I want to become love because I want to get out of here” is equal to “I want to become love because I’m self-centered”. It is all about self. He advocates the view, that if you grow up, you want to come back to this messy place full of suffering because you naturally will want help people, because helping other is not viewed as a burden but comes as a result of the unconditional love you have grown into. Helping people and help them grow is what makes you happy, is your joy. It's what a mature consciousness tends to do/want, rather than to escape the cycle. See below (8 min)

He further writes: "I don't know what you have been experiencing, and I wouldn't take it too seriously. It is what you become conscious of, that you weren't conscious of before, that counts. States you go through and visons you have, may be fun or help you open your mind or drop assumptions you previously just took for granted. But don't get bogged down in what may become something like taking psychedelics. They might be interesting or even mind-blowing, but they don't increase consciousness. In other words, when all is said and done after these experiences, what do you know about reality first-hand that you didn't previously, having nothing to do with the phenomenon or perceptive-experience that has past and is now only a memory? If you really don't know the nature of something through direct experience, and just have a conclusion or memory of some state, this isn't an increase in consciousness— any more than eating a great breakfast increasing consciousness (just your waistline)."

In his recent newsletter, Peter Ralston makes a definite statement about psychedelics (see screenshot). Thoughts? Cheng Hsin Newsletter.pdf

@Synchronicity When Infinity is locked in into one bubble, does it simultaneously experience other bubbles, or only after it 'ends' the experience of a single bubble and 'starts' the experience of multiple bubbles?

@Inliytened1 @Leo Gura In other videos, Bashar explains a bit more the way reality works. From the Q&A form the video "Archetypes of God". Questioner asking about his deceased mother. Questioner: "Since we're continuously creating our experience of others out of different distinct parallel reality versions of them, who was I in relatioship with and which version of her will I be connected with in spirit?" Bashar: "A different version, a greater Self. More of who she actually is, as a reflection of the infinite. Whatever it is you need, is what you will connect to in her." Questioner: "I'm wondering if she is real in and of herself?" Bashar: "Yes, of course she is. That doesn't mean, you are not creating your version of her." Questioner: "So if she has her own reality, how can it be that there are some where she doesn't do this, and some where she does do this?" Bashar: "Because you are talking about a much higher version of the being, which can experience many different things simoultaneously. Right now, you're focused on what you understand as the spirit individual representing your mother. That's the level we're addressing now. But on a much greater level, remembering that you are all All That Is, you can experience everything and anything simultaneously. Just depends on what level of the consciousness you're referring to, whe you talk about forming a relationship with it." Questioner: "If she does have her own experience, she is not just a character on my screen?" Bashar: No, you didn't make her up. The idea is that everyone is a fundemal existing being, but you still create your version as an interface to relate to. It's like saying, you understand when you have a telephone conversation with a friend, you're not actually hearing their real voice. You're hearing a recreation electronically, that sounds like them, but they have their own voice. It's just converted into electronic signals, that are reconstituted into audio signals at your end. So, it's like that. You're creating your version that you can relate to, even though she has her own reality, just as she creates her version of you, even though you have your own reality. Just like the telephone recreates the voice, that isn't the original voice, but it's representative of something that is real." Questioner: "So my whole life, I've been recreating her out of many possible variants, to create the experience I needed of her?" Bashar: "Yes, exactly. As she has done with you."

I attended Bashar's online satsang and got the chance to ask him in a written question about his stance on solipsism and recorded an audio of the answer he gave. There was no possibility to get involved in a direct back and forth conversation, so including any further objections was unfortunately not possible. I tried my best to pack the most juice into the question I wrote. Here's a link to the audio (~ 3 min). Recorded a bit too late, so the question got cutt-off a bit: http://sndup.net/spkb Here's the written version of the Q&A: Question: "Hi Bashar, from an absolute standpoint, is my conscious experience absolutely all there is without anything being outside of it? Or do others have their own conscious experience, outside my consciousness? Does Oneness not invalidate any seperation, like something being outside my consciousness?" Bashar: "It depends on the level that you are looking from. In other words, you can have an experience of seperation, which is what you have in physical reality. That doesn't mean you actually are literally seperated. Again, the paradox is that you are using your connection to create an experience of seperation. You couldn't have an experience of individual seperation, if you actually weren't connected to All That Is. So in that ultimate sense, from that perspective, no there is no outside. But from the experience of individuation, from the experience of creating the illusion of seperation, then yes, you can have an outside and there are many beings you may be unaware of, that are having their own experiences. Your experiential reality only contains your versions of other beings. They exist in their own right, in a sense outside of you. And there may be millions of them, that you do not experience, because there is no reason for you to create a version of those beings in your reality experience. At the same time, this is all happening within the All That Is, that has no outside. But you have to understand that you cannot necessarily mix your language that way, you can't mix your definitions that way in a coherent sense, you have to understand what level that you're talking from. When you say "Is there really an outside, if everything is one, there shouldn't be an outside?", well yes, on that level that's true. But you're talking from the experience of having created the illusion of seperation, which creates the illusion of an outside and many beings, that you might not be aware of outside of yourself.

@Forza21 sliding scale, pay as you can afford to.