New Video: 8 Unique & Original Proofs Of God

[Daniel Balan]

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Whatever horror you want to imagine.

I said, you would not believe me that reality is Love.

I didn't say that.

Not necessarily. Human existence is horrific enough if you bother to really look into it.

Do you understand the horror of torture prisons in the Middle East?

You know of such things intellectually, but I'm talking about the horror of living it. If you lived through it, you would not be so open to reality being Love.

But why @Leo Gura, please tell me, I've never understood this! Why is murder and torture love? Why are those allowed? And for example the universe allows you to torture and kill me right now, how has the universe decided who is the torturer and who is the torturee? And why not the other way around? On which bases the universe allows one to suffer at the hands of another and not the other way around? How does the universe decide who has to endure torture and who has to enjoy his domination over the victim? It feels so wrong!

[Rigel]

Those conjoined twins are sooo cute I couldn’t hold back my tears. People take just being a normal functioning human for granted it’s crazy.

[Terell Kirby]

seems the issue primarily lies in human love corrupting God’s Love. There are aspects of reality that are antithetical to our survival-so our minds have a hard time processing how God could Love such things. That’s because we make the mistake in assuming God’s Love is subordinate to human love and survival agenda. It’s not the really hard to grasp if one investigates deeply.

Good exercise is imagining the worst possible thing that could happen to you as a human, or the people you love-and asking “how is it possible that God can love that, and I can’t?”

When I do this I ask “did I get impaled of burned at that stake? Or am I imagining that I did? How is it that can imagine these possibilities in the first place? Who is imagining and who is experiencing it?- these kinds of questions open up Pandora’s box

Edited May 18 by Terell Kirby

[Rafael Thundercat]

6 hours ago, Daniel Balan said:

But why @Leo Gura, please tell me, I've never understood this! Why is murder and torture love? Why are those allowed? And for example the universe allows you to torture and kill me right now, how has the universe decided who is the torturer and who is the torturee? And why not the other way around? On which bases the universe allows one to suffer at the hands of another and not the other way around? How does the universe decide who has to endure torture and who has to enjoy his domination over the victim? It feels so wrong!

Selflessness. Your questions come from selfishness.

[Rafael Thundercat]

16 hours ago, Thought Art said:

@Xonas Pitfall I want to say that sometimes I avoid reading your comments because of your signature and writing style. It's really overwhelming. You also put a lot of detail in your comments so I would like to read them but I sometimes don't because there is just so much going on.

Is like trying to talk with a person using a hyper psycadelic t-shirt. The Visual distracts from the topic hehe

[Thought Art]

@Rafael Thundercat It's even worse. But, everyone get's their own preferences. 

[Inliytened1]

19 hours ago, Thought Art said:

@Xonas Pitfall Solipsism makes all this a moot point though. If there is only one conscious all this talk of other being is a joke. 

So, all this logic seem useless. Except, to create a reality in which it appear to be such and such a way for some reason I can't recall.  

If you think about it.  All there really needs to be is One Consciousness.   This Consciousness can then imagine or create absolutely everything.   It can imagine separation.  It can imagine self, and other.  The difference between other being real or not also is a duality that collapses.  If God imagines other exists then really where is the line that would say it doesn't?  But also when all separation collapses into One then you have Infinite Consciousness.   Love! 

Edited May 18 by Inliytened1

[Thought Art]

@Inliytened1 Yeah, that's where the question of why this particular configuration of "physical Laws" and human existence comes in. Life or existence could have been literally anything and yet here we are with this lot.

[Xonas Pitfall]

14 hours ago, Thought Art said:

@Xonas Pitfall To me solipsism suggest there is only one consciousness. Other beings are fabrications in that one consciousness. When you dream you don't think those other's exist right?

Yes! You're on the right track, but again, consciousness is infinity (since it is all one).

Now, one "weird" or "unique" thing about infinity is that it has different properties than most - or any - objects you see. It contains its own contradictions.

• If you say "apple," it is apple - it's not "not apple".
• If you say "bird," that bird is the bird - and it's not anything other than that exact bird.
• If you say "fish," it is not "not a fish".

You get the point.

However, one unique thing about an "object" that is infinite - or everything - or God - or All - is that since it is All, it must contain that which is not. Otherwise, it wouldn’t be truly All. Do you see the paradox? This is the kind of thinking you need to start understanding.

So if God is All-One consciousness - Infinite -

1. Then it "asks" itself: What am I not?
2. Finite? But how can I not be finite? I am everything, no?
3. So - it becomes finite.

If I am All-loving, then what am I not? Not-loving? But I am All-loving, no?
So - I must also love the not-loving, aka evil.
So it creates evil, so it can love evil too.

Now I must note: when I say this, it might look like there's some timeline progression or some kind of needing or realization going on in "God's mind." But God just is. It's basically like an infinite object.

That's really all you need to understand.

Think of an infinite object. What properties does that object have?
Does it lack anything? Or does it not?
If it lacks something, what does it lack?
Can it lack anything?

Just question that.
That’s really all you need to understand - or to begin understanding - God and "Its" nature. Hope this helps! Also gave my signature a little upgrade, hehe 😅

[Xonas Pitfall]

@Thought Art Let me try to explain! 

You're approaching this question from a really limited perspective, which is totally normal. It’s not a natural shift at all; it usually takes some deep meditation or a heavy psychedelic kick to really break through, hehe. Take a look at some of those deep-space or infinity documentaries - there are countless planets out there. Even here on Earth, or deep under the ocean, you could have been born into a completely different form of consciousness. Each one would offer a radically different experience of life compared to your current human self, or any other creature. And every planet comes with its constants, its own gravitational rules, environments, and elements. This planet just happens to have the right mix to support the specific form of life we're used to.

Now, a better way to understand this might be through a video game analogy.

Think about Mario.

Mario spends his life navigating his world, learning its mechanics:

• "If I go down this pipe at this angle, that Piranha Plant eats me - okay, avoid that."
• "Hit this block, I get a mushroom."
• "My goal is to save the princess."

• "When I descend into this pipe at a 45-degree angle and velocity > 2 m/s, I get eaten by a carnivorous plant-like entity. Conclusion: avoid entry at that vector."

• "Striking this suspended block with an upward force of 10 N triggers a transformation sequence resulting in an object that enhances my size and abilities - a ‘mushroom’ power-up."

• "Objective remains consistent: traverse obstacles, maintain life state, reach destination to initiate rescue protocol for the princess character."

So within his world, he develops a clear sense of cause and effect - his version of physics. "Mario Laws & Physics." But if Mario ever asked why his world works the way it does, he'd be trying to find meaning in rules that were coded into his reality. Those laws make sense to him, but only in his specific world. He doesn’t know his entire universe is just one tiny sandbox among infinite others.

Now apply that to us.

If you ever went to Mars, you'd have to let go of Earth-based assumptions. Your body would feel different. Your movements would change. Time might stretch or compress. Watch the movie Old (2021) if you want a wild example of this.
(Spoiler: on an isolated beach, people age so rapidly that a full lifetime happens in a single day. Their biology, relationships, fears - all get redefined. The entire framework of what matters changes.)

That’s the point: once you tweak just a few variables, the entire structure of life, meaning, and consciousness transforms. And that tells you something huge - none of this is fixed. It's all context.

34 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

@Inliytened1 Yeah, that's where the question of why this particular configuration of "physical Laws" and human existence comes in. Life or existence could have been literally anything and yet here we are with this lot.

When you ask that, it really depends on what you mean or expect with the question. If you’re trying to connect Earth’s specific laws to some divine plan or ultimate reason, the question kind of collapses in on itself. It only really holds weight in a relative context.

It’s like Mario asking, “How do the Laws of Mario Physics connect to the Human World? What about the Ultimate Universal Laws?” It makes sense within his game, sure - but outside of that, it doesn’t apply. His world is just one coded system, and there could be infinite others with totally different rules.

Same with us.

From a relative, physics-based view, you can answer why we're here the way we are - because of this particular set of constants - gravity, electromagnetism, time, matter - everything lined up just right. If they hadn’t, we simply wouldn’t exist. There are infinite versions of planets that never stabilized, stars that never formed, and universes that collapsed into dust long before anything conscious could even appear.

But if you're trying to tie that to “God-level” reasoning - like why this version of existence was chosen - then it becomes meaningless, because God already includes all those failed versions. Every possible configuration is already part of the infinite. There was no final “decision.”

Look at atoms, unstable isotopes like Carbon-14 exist only for thousands of years before decaying, while stable isotopes like Carbon-12 last indefinitely. Or think about planets - some like Mars have stable orbits that have lasted billions of years, while others, like small asteroids, can get pulled apart or crash within a short time. The same goes for genetics. Genes that can’t find a stable, functional configuration disappear over generations, while those that do survive and keep competing. Evolution 101.

TL;DR: God, or the ultimate reality, contains all the “failed” infinite forms and structures that never lasted long enough to become physical, as well as those that did - including our Earth and human life. We often underestimate the immense timescale of billions of years of evolution and the constant clash of dust, particles, and energy that made life possible.

But on a relative level, we can study which combinations and configurations - like stable gravitational setups - persist long enough to support life, helping us understand why life emerged here, why it took this form, and why we exist.

[Thought Art]

God is looove

[Thought Art]

@Xonas Pitfall That’s an interesting response. But, I am not left with the divine logic of why this particular life or configuration. I’ve been outside of human existence with my consciousness. I’m just grappling with this mystery. I know these things about Infinity logically. 
 

It likely requires a “grokking”. I feel like I’ve seen through higher states and understood this love. But, it seems to fade. 
 

Regardless, I have a divine gift to create a beautiful life to the best of my ability and to share that with others. I will keep pursuing that. There is nothing better for a human. 

Edited May 18 by Thought Art

[Xonas Pitfall]

@Thought Art I 100% agree with that! Mysteriously beautiful! 

[Oppositionless]

1 hour ago, Inliytened1 said:

If you think about it.  All there really needs to be is One Consciousness.   This Consciousness can then imagine or create absolutely everything.   It can imagine separation.  It can imagine self, and other.  The difference between other being real or not also is a duality that collapses.  If God imagines other exists then really where is the line that would say it doesn't?  But also when all separation collapses into One then you have Infinite Consciousness.   Love! 

Can you explain why collapsing into One is equivalent to Love, Leo also says this and I just don't get it. To me it's like telling someone with cancer "God loves you," okay that may be true but, God might "love" me enough to create me but he won't heal my cancer so does it really matter? Why call it love ?

Edited May 18 by Oppositionless

[Xonas Pitfall]

@Oppositionless To be "One" is to unite everything, to connect everything. And to truly connect is to love.

To hold something in your consciousness with the full intent to experience and understand it is, in essence, to love it. The deeper your desire to understand something, to take it in as part of yourself, the less judgmental you become. You grow more accepting, more compassionate, more loving.

Think about the people closest to you. Why are they called “close”? Because they probably see and understand you more than others, because you have more experience with them than with others, because they probably care for and love you more than others. The more "connected" you are, the closer you are. The closer you are, the closer to One you are - merging together. We usually call this process "love."

Oneness requires ultimate connection and a lack of separation.
The process God uses to fully "merge" or bring parts "closer to each other" until they unite is Oneness, Love, Union, or even Sex.
Even the physical act of sex is a symbol of this: getting as close as possible - literally under someone’s skin, inside their body - to create pleasure. To Love them properly and fully.

Think about what we mean when we say someone is “close-minded” or refuses to empathize. We often say, “He can’t see the other person’s point of view,” or “He can’t put himself in their shoes.” In other words, he can’t imagine being close to that person, can’t imagine being them, can’t merge his perspective with theirs. He’s stuck in his own experience, focused on his Self, not the Other. He’s failed to connect the two into one shared understanding. And because of that, he is less empathetic, less compassionate, less loving. He lacks the Love to merge, to connect, to understand. However, God has an infinite supply of that! Hence the label "All-Loving" or "God is Love."

[Oppositionless]

@Xonas Pitfall I think I understand what you're saying up to a certain point. I guess where I diverge is this:

I agree that love is an emotional response to oneness, but haven't had the *realization* that the two are actually the same. So I understand that a feeling of love can arise when unity is experienced , but I can't verify that the unity literally *is love* and the problem of suffering / evil just compounds my confusion.

Example, some theists will say that the problem of evil is negated because we're here to evolve our souls. But I don't understand why God couldn't have just made us evolved . 
 

I would love (lol) to be proven wrong , infinite love sounds great . I just haven't experienced it.

Edited May 18 by Oppositionless

[Xonas Pitfall]

15 hours ago, gengar said:

the ego's projection is absolute, the projection is what creates the thing and it's horribleness, and in the end there is no projection at all, since the ego is God, God is looking at it as a horrible thing and creating it as horrible experience by being the ego and being with the horrible. So you cannot use logic to escape the fact that it is in essence horrible, since the argument of "it's only a projection by the ego" doesn't exist in absolute logic, since all appearance and creation are one, the experience of a human being raped by an iron pick to death is not a projection, but absolute, and absolutely horrifying, since the experience of the pain, the ego's agony, and the "objective", "non-projected" experience of the pick, are one.

We've basically arrived at the problem of evil again, which Leo refuses to tackle, in my suspicion because of his arrogance (laughing at his forum members for not accepting infinite horror as being part of infinite love, instead of guiding them towards accepting it - again, this is God's hardest task, since it is the loving of the things most unlovable - it's easy to love sex and cake but hard to love pain and rape - Yet Leo laughs at his audience for struggling with it)

I'll try my best to explain it, but it's tricky since it's very paradoxical.

I'm sure most people, by now, get the paradoxical nature of infinity, oneness, and consciousness.
Since it's an "infinite object," it has properties that contradict themselves.
Unlike a cat, which is a finite object - it is a cat and not what is not a cat.
Infinity includes both the infinite and the finite.

If I'm infinite, then I must include all that I am - and all that I am not.
The same logic applies to love, or to God as "all-loving."
If you are "all-loving," then you must also love that which is all-unloving - aka pure evil.

The "form of projection of the ego" is the only way evil can exist.
It cannot exist without finite forms, because if all finite forms collapsed, there would be no limited perspective for evil to be done onto.

It has to be real suffering from the POV of the ego, because if it weren't real, then there would be no way for it to exist.

Imagine you weren’t attached to your arm, and I pulled out a chainsaw and split it in half - you wouldn’t care, because you aren’t attached to it.
And if everyone in the world were like that, then "fear of having your arm cut off" or "the evil of having your arm cut off" would never exist.

But since God has to actualize all possibilities, somehow it has to create an attachment to an arm.

So yeah, from your human POV, God is both benevolent and psychopathic - both very loving and very evil.
Your human self actually helps God become both all-loving and all-evil, because you are the final "ingredient" It needs to complete its infinity. Since it is "One" - and love requires another, and evil requires another to be done onto - It creates limited forms: planets, atoms, humans, bugs, ants, etc.

15 hours ago, gengar said:

And where does it end? Does God ever conquer horror, or does he move in an experiential sine-wave from horror, to nothingness, to pleasure, and repeats this cycle forever? Is there any use in controlling our karma? If life is full of horror, why not kill yourself? Is there no honor in staying alive till natural death happens, no karmic reward for going through the suffering and not being a coward and killing yourself to avoid suffering?

There is no “horror” to conquer, because that horror is a part of It. It is that horror. It has to be - otherwise It wouldn’t be truly all-loving, infinite, or all-encompassing.

The real point is simply to experience life.
But the way we've structured society causes us to constantly search for purpose and meaning. That’s mostly our ego - it clings to meaning, because the more meaningful we feel, the more valuable we believe we are. If we’re valuable, then maybe our identity can survive beyond our lifetime, or we can secure a sense of survival now.

But the actual point is just to fully live it - to experience everything, and to enjoy whatever beauty you find. That is the reward. That is the present.

And if we do want a "purpose", one of the most meaningful is to help enhance that exact experience - to increase our capacity for beauty, understanding, and connection. Whether that’s improving health, advancing science, creating art, writing poetry, loving someone, loving many, inspiring others, or simply speaking in a way that makes life feel more alive and magical - that’s where the deepest purpose can be found. Whether that impact is small, just on yourself, your pets, your closest people, or something that reaches the whole world, is entirely up to you.

The universe is structured in such a way that no matter what you do, you’re always fulfilling your purpose. Because the only true purpose is to fully experience and appreciate the present moment - the life you have, right now.

[Xonas Pitfall]

33 minutes ago, Oppositionless said:

@Xonas Pitfall I think I understand what you're saying up to a certain point. I guess where I diverge is this:

I agree that love is an emotional response to oneness, but haven't had the *realization* that the two are actually the same. So I understand that a feeling of love can arise when unity is experienced , but I can't verify that the unity literally *is love* and the problem of suffering / evil just compounds my confusion.

Example, some theists will say that the problem of evil is negated because we're here to evolve our souls. But I don't understand why God couldn't have just made us evolved . 
 

I would love (lol) to be proven wrong , infinite love sounds great . I just haven't experienced it.

Yeah, no worries at all, haha!  I'm still struggling to fully understand it myself, or I guess, embody it. I can grasp it logically, but of course, my ego doesn’t like it too much, teehee.  I guess it's only natural!

The most practical advice I can give is to explore this through direct experience. A decent dose of a psychedelic, paired with deep contemplation, can help. Read blog posts (even this one!), watch Leo’s episodes on love, self-bias, infinity, and just let your mind wander. Let the questions stay open for a while, and eventually something will click. I know that before I had those experiences, none of this made any real sense to me either. I just didn’t have the consciousness to see it.

But to try putting it into words here, it all comes back to infinity. If God only created you in a "fully evolved" state, then it wouldn’t have created you as you are now. If it only created love and not evil, then it wouldn’t be all-loving, because true, infinite love must include even what we call "unlovable."

So when people say “collapsing into One is Love,” it means that in total Oneness, in absolute infinity, everything is included. Nothing is left out, not even suffering or evil. That kind of unconditional inclusion is Love. But the ego doesn’t like that, because it wants to protect itself. It wants to separate what’s "good" from what’s "bad." So when it hears that God doesn’t share that judgment, it resists. That’s the tension.

The issue really comes down to comprehending and accepting infinity - all of it. All experience, all being, all contrast. Love, in this context, isn’t sentimental or nice. It’s total inclusion, complete connection. It's the willingness to be everything, even the parts we fear or hate. And that’s something hard for the ego to accept, because the ego runs on division - on protecting a self from the rest.

A good metaphor here is the saying, "a face only a mother could love."

It means that even if someone is seen as ugly or flawed by the whole world, their mother still loves them deeply simply because they are hers. She brought them into existence, watched them grow through every stage, witnessed their struggles and triumphs, and knows every small habit, fear, and strength deeply and intimately.

You can imagine God like that. Everything is its creation - there’s nothing to reject, nothing to be ashamed of, nothing to judge. It understands why someone did what they did. It saw the entire path, the whole chain of cause and effect. It was there, as all of it. It knows how limited that consciousness was. It is that consciousness.

So, from God’s perspective, even the darkest evil is still understood. Still part of the whole. Still held in love. Some forms of evil are truly a “face only a mother could love” 😅 - and we, in our limited human forms, are not that mother. Not yet. But God is!

[Natasha Tori Maru]

Hmm so is the predominant issue here reconciling relative love and absolute Love? 

The connection between the two and why the same word would be utilised? 

[Oppositionless]

1 hour ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Hmm so is the predominant issue here reconciling relative love and absolute Love? 

The connection between the two and why the same word would be utilised? 

Yes in a sense. Like I understand deeply shoppenhauer calling God the Will. It's blind, amoral, and primal. Its desire , its creative .