Deconstructing “Reality” - The most comprehensive non-dual meta-analysis

[Anton Rogachevski]

@gettoefl I'm sorry, I can't quite understand that statement. If you don't exist, then who am I talking to? This seems like a confusion. (Just the kind of confusion I'm warning against in the text, which I assume you didn't read.)

If you said that to a Zen master he would hit you with a stick and say: "Here I just hit nobody." : )

 

Edited Monday at 02:55 AM by Anton Rogachevski

[Keryo Koffa]

If only there was an ungrasping button 

[Anton Rogachevski]

7 minutes ago, Keryo Koffa said:

If only there was an ungrasping button 

Why would you want one?

[Keryo Koffa]

17 minutes ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

Why would you want one?

Leo's State of Consciousness Knob sure would make things more convenient, like radio 

Like, okay now I'm at god realization frequency, now it's non duality, now I'm chilling with the DMT entities, now I'm talking to plants, here I am astral projecting, abstracting the mind, creating realms, here's balancing the ranges of telepathy, here's lucid dreaming, liminal spaces, life review, lucid waking, warping everyday perception, alternate timeline tuning, probability exploration, psychic expansion, here I can perceive aliens, now I can see the electric structure of the internet, here I am looking through novel senses of various animals, here I fuse with the environment, over here I can access cellular consciousness and perceive how my body works, and on this level I have the whole blueprint and can create and customize all kinds of forms, planetary frequency, galactic frequency, here I can project my consciousness through light across the solar system and be back in no time, here I can explore more spatial dimensions and new qualia sensations, fractalize time, modes of experience, aesthetic equivalents, source dynamics, synchronicity depths, potential attunement, syntactic origins, unique communicative methodologies, and all kinds of psychic abilities, in ranges that balance inner experience and its manifestation in collective reality.

That would be cool and that's why I would you want one.

[kbone]

5 hours ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

@gettoefl I'm sorry, I can't quite understand that statement. If you don't exist, then who am I talking to? This seems like a confusion. (Just the kind of confusion I'm warning against in the text, which I assume you didn't read.)

 

I suspect there's a lot of confusion as most people will try to explain Realization away. I'm in no way saying that @gettoefl is doing that, as I neither have read enough of him nor know him. The problem is that words are dualistic and only understood between interlocutors if there is (frame of) reference for the words/concepts being used by each peep involved in the convo or discussion. Furthermore, as I've noticed on this website, many folks throw words like god, truth, realization, etc around pretty freely and without hardly any consideration for what they may be referring to in the first place. Sometimes there's a clarity in the messaging being expounded (which is nice), while at others, there's a degree of intuitive understanding presented, but perhaps the mind has not quite yet been informed enough and/or worked out the ramifications of what it means to their world view/philosophy. Further down the line, sometimes remarks sound disingenuous, flippant, and/or like sandcastle building, at yet others it sounds like repetitions that they are attempting to justify in their own minds and/or fit in with the 'dominant philosophy and its adherents' of the message board. The line of questioning you are using in your discussions with various folks is important (and I applaud doing so), as it is the very process by which you penetrate the ideas/concepts' meanings with respect to the mind's present state and/or depth of awareness, which can then be used in the deeper contemplation/meditation that you seem to practice (could be wrong, not sure). 

The very little that I know you, I sense you have really done well to isolate the parameters in which mind moves and/or its limitations. But then, I am not sure how you define 'mind', so maybe share that in order to share insight on how your study treats it, or the depths to which you've explored it in contemplation/meditation. Since you seem interested in the limitations of philosophy/science, the mind, and meditation, there are some concepts that might be of interest, but I do not want to just start throwing a bunch of them out if you are not interested. As you've stated, you seem to be at a nice plateau after having gone through a rather challenging period of finding a very workable sanity. That may be enough (at least for now), as it is conducive to being an actual adult (not just in age, but in authentic self awareness), which is no longer pulled in to the conditioned disorder based childhood traumas, mama-pappa issues, and the like.

Until then, perhaps the following blurbs can help provide a perspective.

Philosophers are peeps who know less and less about more and more, until they know nothing about everything. ---- and who the what knows, maybe Self/Truth Realization emerges in the mind's complete and utter surrender. 

Scientists are peeps who know more and more about less and less, until they know everything about nothing.  ---- and who the what knows, maybe Self/Truth Realization emerges in the mind's complete and utter surrender. 

NOTHING is unexplainable.

EVERYTHING is a mystery.

Peacely...

[Anton Rogachevski]

@Keryo Koffa It does sound cool : )

[Anton Rogachevski]

4 hours ago, kbone said:

repetitions that they are attempting to justify in their own minds

Yep non-dual dogma is the worst!

4 hours ago, kbone said:

which can then be used in the deeper contemplation/meditation that you seem to practice

Yep the text is a live contemplation exercise. If you go along with it, you can verify these things in your experience. 

4 hours ago, kbone said:

and who the what knows, maybe Self/Truth Realization emerges in the mind's complete and utter surrender. 

It's important not to have expectations about how truth should be and what it would be like, because it may be unknown to us yet, but what if it was known and obvious all along, and right in front of our eyes? What if nothing was hidden? : )

Edited Monday at 02:53 AM by Anton Rogachevski

[Anton Rogachevski]

A peak into my new theory arising from this text:

Reconceptualizing “God” Within Meta-Phenomenological Epistemology

In this framework, God is understood not as an external entity or metaphysical being, but as a phenomenon — the fundamental nature of experience itself.

The infinite, ineffable quality traditionally attributed to God corresponds to the boundless, dynamic potential within immediate experience. Experience is the ground from which all phenomena arise and dissolve; it is holographic, continuously unfolding, and without inherent limits.

This experiential infinity is what gives rise to the intuition or feeling of “God” — not as a separate transcendent reality, but as the very core phenomenon of being aware. God is thus the experiential field’s infinite openness and depth, the raw “stuff” of conscious presence.

By framing God as this fundamental experiential phenomenon, the theory offers a rational and non-ontological understanding of divinity, accessible to those who reject traditional supernatural or metaphysical claims. God is the infinite nature of experience that all beings share, not a distinct metaphysical object.

This perspective bridges spirituality and reason, revealing “God” as the foundational phenomenon underlying all conscious life and the source of all appearances, rather than an external being to be believed in or worshiped.

[Inliytened1]

10 minutes ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

A peak into my new theory arising from this text:

Reconceptualizing “God” Within Meta-Phenomenological Epistemology

In this framework, God is understood not as an external entity or metaphysical being, but as a phenomenon — the fundamental nature of experience itself.

The infinite, ineffable quality traditionally attributed to God corresponds to the boundless, dynamic potential within immediate experience. Experience is the ground from which all phenomena arise and dissolve; it is holographic, continuously unfolding, and without inherent limits.

This experiential infinity is what gives rise to the intuition or feeling of “God” — not as a separate transcendent reality, but as the very core phenomenon of being aware. God is thus the experiential field’s infinite openness and depth, the raw “stuff” of conscious presence.

By framing God as this fundamental experiential phenomenon, the theory offers a rational and non-ontological understanding of divinity, accessible to those who reject traditional supernatural or metaphysical claims. God is the infinite nature of experience that all beings share, not a distinct metaphysical object.

This perspective bridges spirituality and reason, revealing “God” as the foundational phenomenon underlying all conscious life and the source of all appearances, rather than an external being to be believed in or worshiped.

Actually there is no theory you just awaken as God.

[Anton Rogachevski]

@Inliytened1

I did say it was a framework. So yes a theory of a thing isn't the thing. 

Awakening can only make sense to the one having it. My theory explains why it appears to him like that, and what it actually means.

In short it basically means that you fell deeper into illusion and had allowed Descartes Demon fool you completely. Or that you've bough the shadows on the wall of Plato's cave mistaking them for the outside and thus disconnecting from the ability to actually exit some day.

 

Edited Monday at 05:00 AM by Anton Rogachevski

[Breakingthewall]

On 15/6/2025 at 8:18 PM, Keryo Koffa said:

Like, okay now I'm at god realization frequency, now it's non duality, now I'm chilling with the DMT entities, now I'm talking to plants, here I am astral projecting, abstracting the mind, creating realms, here's balancing the ranges of telepathy, here's lucid dreaming, liminal spaces, life review, lucid waking, warping everyday perception, alternate timeline tuning, probability exploration, psychic expansion, here I can perceive aliens, now I can see the electric structure of the internet, here I am looking through novel senses of various animals, here I fuse with the environment, over here I can access cellular consciousness and perceive how my body works, and on this level I have the whole blueprint and can create and customize all kinds of forms, planetary frequency, galactic frequency, here I can project my consciousness through light across the solar system and be back in no time, here I can explore more spatial dimensions and new qualia sensations, fractalize time, modes of experience, aesthetic equivalents, source dynamics, synchronicity depths, potential attunement, syntactic origins, unique communicative methodologies, and all kinds of psychic abilities, in ranges that balance inner experience and its manifestation in collective reality.

That's a broad vision. Reality unfolds in infinite dimensions. We are bound to the dense energy structure of limited humans, but we can break the bubble and expand.

Edited Monday at 09:01 PM by Breakingthewall

[Breakingthewall]

18 hours ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

This experiential infinity is what gives rise to the intuition or feeling of “God” — not as a separate transcendent reality, but as the very core phenomenon of being aware. God is thus the experiential field’s infinite openness and depth, the raw “stuff” of conscious presence.

Experience is the inevitable manifestation of the absolute, not the absolute. The absolute is the substance of experience, and this substance is limitlessness, and you are exactly that. Absolute depth. This is something you have to see.

At any given moment, you are here, now, and before you, the absolute depth of reality opens up. There is nothing else; you stand before the absolute. At any given moment, there is no you; there is only the absolute. You are that; you are total. It is absolutely impossible to grasp it; you have to make that movement.

[Breakingthewall]

17 hours ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

short it basically means that you fell deeper into illusion and had allowed Descartes Demon fool you completely.

That of the illusion means nothing, there is not truth or lie, there is a step back, a step above truth and lies, where nothing means anything, where meaning happens and has no meaning, it is something that appears, just like anything else.

[Keryo Koffa]

1 hour ago, Breakingthewall said:

That's a broad vision. Reality unfolds in infinite dimensions. We are bound to the dense energy structure of limited humans, but we can break the bubble and expand.

Just keep hitting that invisible collective membrane that keeps realities coherent and shatter the matrix until it can't recover and we're released.

[Breakingthewall]

4 minutes ago, Keryo Koffa said:

Just keep hitting that invisible collective membrane that keeps realities coherent and shatter the matrix until it can't recover and we're released.

It's a gradual process, release our energy system, become light, go beyond limitations

[Keryo Koffa]

11 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

It's a gradual process, release our energy system, become light, go beyond limitations

👍

[Anton Rogachevski]

@Breakingthewall

I really appreciate your efforts : )

Thank you for your contribution to the talk.

I'm starting to see the limitations of this framework as it so focused on precision it forgets that our life is our experience, and if you have an experience of being God, that means you will have a nice life. Maybe I'm not entirely correct at debunking this persuit of Enlightenment.

Edited yesterday at 03:11 AM by Anton Rogachevski

[Breakingthewall]

4 hours ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

I'm starting to see the limitations of this framework as it so focused on precision it forgets that our life is our experience, and if you have an experience of being God, that means you will have a nice life. Maybe I'm not entirely correct at debunking this persuit of Enlightenment.

Well depending of what God means. The experience of being God is usually escapism. We are human, we have a human energetic system, and reality demands that we develop a human life.

Opening to the absolute allows for a broader perspective from which to align your energetic system and flow as a human in a more authentic, pure, and free way, until you reach a point of total lightness and constant openness. This isn't being God; it's being this structure of reality in the most aligned and pure form possible, which connects you with the divine, as the barriers have fallen. 

[kbone]

3 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

Well depending of what God means. The experience of being God is usually escapism. We are human, we have a human energetic system, and reality demands that we develop a human life.

Opening to the absolute allows for a broader perspective from which to align your energetic system and flow as a human in a more authentic, pure, and free way, until you reach a point of total lightness and constant openness. This isn't being God; it's being this structure of reality in the most aligned and pure form possible, which connects you with the divine, as the barriers have fallen. 

Right, the word 'god' brings up all sorts of misconceived notions, often sending the uninformed mind into resistance mode, rabbit holes, and whatever else. Simply put, one needs to be aware of the differing degrees of ignorance and/or awareness at play in the phases of transcendence, (Realization), emanation, and immanence.

The Zenny Oxherding pics allude to this.

That said, it can be quite hard to intuit where an appearing mind's depth and breadth are coming/emanating from with respect to the contexts one interacts within and the topic(s) at hand here. 

[kbone]

9 hours ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

@Breakingthewall

I really appreciate your efforts : )

Thank you for your contribution to the talk.

I'm starting to see the limitations of this framework as it so focused on precision it forgets that our life is our experience, and if you have an experience of being God, that means you will have a nice life. Maybe I'm not entirely correct at debunking this persuit of Enlightenment.

 

This is why I differentiate between 'experience' and 'realization'. The experience of 'god' comes and goes, and is often marked in memory as an event (but yes, there is a memorable aspect or facet), but Realization is deeper, so to speak, and what was Realized is Known to be right Here, right  Now, prior to all and inclusive of movements of mind (some more diluted/deluded than others). There's no 'need' per say to go 'get more', but of course, it's always nice to take a walk in nature, meditate, whatever to drop off the mind's content and/or detach from it to put it into fresh perspective, especially after a hard day or an intense psychological/physical period (like a new job, a death in the family, a health issue, etc).

It's a bit of a stretch to say that if one 'has an experience of being God', one will automatically have a nice life. That may be a bit wishful, automagical thinking ...." It's important not to have expectations about how truth should be and what it would be like" (Rogachevski, A., 2025).

But, the 'pursuit of Enlightenment' will be debunked by the Realization, as it will be SEEN as always having been Present, available, Truth... beyond/prior to the mind's conception of it. It's a bit of a doozy to the mind, hehe. Such a lil' rascal! 

 

PS: I like how the Anne Frank pic shows up at the base of a Nietzsche quote. Both a great stories in humanity. I'd like to hear your interpretation of the quote.

Edited yesterday at 12:53 PM by kbone