Absolute Infinity “Institute:” The Absolute Institute

[randydible]

I’m a university professor who realized at a young age, thanks to psychedelics, that I needed to go into philosophy and blast through all the academic bs to grow as a philosopher. I specialized in John Lilly’s use of a mathematical way to Enlightenment in the float tank. I succeeded in some of this, before my Bufo breakthrough in the summer of 2024. Subsequently I found Leo, and Leo helped me interpret my “reference experience” of absolute extra-referential ecstatic God-consciousness, and now I am dedicated to that. I was already following such programs as “The Absolute Infinite is Ultimate Reality,” and the systematic metaphysical consequences that cascade from this absolute foundation, so I’d characterize the greatest improvement brought by Bufo as “…and I am that! I’m God! I’m absolutely everything, there can be only one, and it’s You!” 
 

This summer (2025), after working with the toad more, and integrating my philosophy of the float tank (cybernetics, systems theory, mathematical mysticism reaching all the way to mathesis universalis) and also my specialization in the ontological phenomenology/ ontology of reality/ universal ontology, I’ve started expressing myself in videos. I also added to my website a page for a series of entities that provide a home for my God-Realization/ God-Consciousness work, under the labels “The Absolute Institute,” “The Absolute Foundation,” “Universal Society for Absolute Infinity,” “The Center for Universal Ontology,” and of course the “Absolute” is the Absolute Infinite Ultimate Reality of the Godhead. All this I articulate as a universal ontology, an ontology of absolutely everything. As theory it is a systems-theory of absolutely everything that is in a way “systemless,” or spontaneous. As an “Institute,” this spontaneous organization is uninstitutionalizable, although you’re going to want to internalize its integrity and confidence! While I envision this stuff taking Leo’s contributions to the broader philosophy world, and then also to the sciences in their universal foundation of truth and reality, there is a political side to all this that could be a real path to peace on earth and transcendental happiness. 

https://randolphdible.com/the-absolute-institute/

My aim is to bring to the global scale what Leo cracks open for individuals dedicated to the great work of the highest possible teaching imaginable: God.

Edited August 16 by randydible
Just cleaning up typos for clarity!

[James123]

24 minutes ago, randydible said:

I’m a university professor who realized at a young age, thanks to psychedelics, that so needed to go into philosophy and blast through all the academic bs to grow as a philosopher. I specialized in John Lilly’s use of a mathematical way to Enlightenment in the float tank. I succeeded in some of this, before my Bufo breakthrough in the summer of 2024. Subsequently I found Leo, and Leo helped me interpret my “reference experience” of absolute extra-referential ecstatic God-consciousness, and now I am dedicated that that. I was already following such programs as “The Absolute Infinite is Ultimate Reality,” and the systematic metaphysical consequences that cascade from this absolute foundation, so I’d characterize the greatest improvement brought by Bufo as “…and I am that! I’m God! I’m absolutely everything, there can be only one, and it’s You!” 
 

This summer (2025), after working with the toad more, and integrating my philosophy of the float tank (cybernetics, systems theory, mathematical mysticism reaching all the way to mathesis universalis) and also my specialization in the ontological phenomenology/ ontology of reality/ universal ontology, I’ve started expressing myself in videos. I also added to my website a page for a series of entities that provide a home for my God-Realization/ God-Consciousness work, under the labels “The Absolute Institute,” “The Absolute Foundation,” “Universal Society for Absolute Infinity,” “The Center for Universal Ontology,” and of course the “Absolute” is the Absolute Infinite Ultimate Reality of the Godhead. All this I articulate as a universal ontology, an ontology of absolutely everything. As theory it is a systems-theory of absolutely everything that is in a way “systemless,” or spontaneous. As an “Institute,” this spontaneous organization is uninstitutionalizable, although you’re going to want to internalize its integrity and confidence! While I envision this stuff taking Leo’s contributions to the broader philosophy world, and then also to the sciences in their universal foundation of truth and reality, there is a political side to all this that could be a real path to peace on earth and transcendental happiness. 

https://randolphdible.com/the-absolute-institute/

My aim is to bring to the global scale what Leo cracks open for individuals dedicated to the great work of the highest possible teaching imaginable: God.

Great work my brother.

The Absolute is already the Absolute.

It does not begin, it does not end. Beginning and ending are ideas inside time, but the Absolute is not inside time.

“Infinity” still belongs to the language of time, of continuation, stretching endlessly forward and backward. But the Absolute is not a line that stretches; it is beyond duration.

Therefore, Infinity still belongs to the realm of thought, because infinity implies a contrast with “finite.” The Absolute has no opposite.

Therefore, the Absolute does not need infinity. Infinity is only a shadow of the mind trying to imagine the limitless.

The Absolute is that which includes all infinites, all experiences, all rises and falls, all beginnings and endings. It is the ground in which both “finite” and “infinite” appear and disappear.

[Breakingthewall]

3 hours ago, James123 said:

Infinity” still belongs to the language of time

Infinity means no end. It's a negative definition, "in" means no, "finity" means end. So it's unlimited, open, absolute. 

[James123]

29 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Infinity means no end. It's a negative definition, "in" means no, "finity" means end. So it's unlimited, open, absolute. 

Nah. Still finite is opposite.

[Breakingthewall]

1 minute ago, James123 said:

Nah. Still finite is opposite.

Sure, and the opposite of absolute is relative. 

[randydible]

You’re both right! I’ll stick with my nomination, borrowing from the Cantor and scholastic context of the “infinitum absolutum” versus the “infinitum secundum quid,” and from the great prolegomenon “Apeiron,” and also blast through traditia and sedimentia with this most explosive metaphor, for I am not merely human but, to tie it to Nietzsche, I am dynamite! 
 

Be sure to see my videos, where you’ll see how I weave the live currents of contemporary and traditional trends together with Leo Gura’s great contribution. All this is my integration work. It will lead not only to universal ontology (the ontology of absolutely everything, of reality and ultimate reality, etc.), but to a whole new civilizations epoch of “integral science” and an “integral philosophy” that blows past Wilber and even Dible and Gura, for it is INTEGRITY itself! It is a matter of CONFIDENCE both in the sense of the method of hypothesis operative in speculation and theoretical activity AND in the sense of the highest CONFIDENTIAL KNOWLEDGE, hidden in plain “sight,” but in the direct rays, I reflected and unreflectable and unrefractable LIGHT, for it is SIGHT WITHOUT LIGHT, or honestly choose your own metaphor from your infinite imagination and use whatever works to actually effect the great paradigmatic transformation of humanity. Universal humanity is possible in so many ways, but the point is to see it clearly, in lucid God-consciousness, and to see it through. I am happy to share transcendental happiness in any and all ways possible, and personally I have always attached this promise to the very idea of absolute infinity, and precisely to its reciprocal, as a recipe, with the main ingredient being the highest possible magician: me, the supreme personality of the Godhead, the actual fucking God. Leo’s completely right in indicating this, and doing it like nobody else does. It’s a complete miracle that this and all the other possibilities can be here and now, and so much more and and must!

[James123]

Just now, Breakingthewall said:

Sure, and the opposite of absolute is relative. 

Does infinite include "finite"?

Absolute meaning includes all, it is not finite versus infinite.

The Absolute does not exclude anything. All raise and fails within.

.

[Breakingthewall]

@randydible very ambitious, I also believe that true spirituality has to be formulated in a precise way.

but to try that, are you really open to the totality full time, the total depth, the absolute openess? Do you feel the flow without limits in your daily basis? Me not, just sometimes, then it's not possible yet to make a real map. Maybe never, maybe any day. 

[Breakingthewall]

1 minute ago, James123 said:

Does infinite include "finite"?

Absolute meaning includes all, it is not finite versus infinite.

The Absolute does not exclude anything. All raise and fails within.

.

Infinite means that anything that seems finite really is infinite, because it's a part of the infinity that is the infinity itself appearing as finite

[randydible]

Just to chime in on the nature of the Absolute Infinite: no need to debate, given Leo’s already made it clear what the Absolute Infinite is, not only in videos dedicated to this thematically, but of course all his spiritual/ metaphysical videos about reality make it crystal clear: it is absolutely everything, including exactly this me, and you, and there is only the one (me or you) and there is everything too (contradiction is the nature of understanding being, for pure being is pure self-reference), and that includes the always already absent accompaniment of Absolute Apeiron, for that is pure and radical nothingness. How could there be anything else? Hedwig Conrad-Martius emphasizes that what is the real religious-consciousness “skandalon” is that there is anything at all, given the overwhelming overflowingness of Yes! Absolutely Applicable Affirmation, Pure Primary Positivity! Good without an opposite—that’s Plato’s “the Good,” highest God etc., the “beyond of being” (epikenia tes ousias) in the positive of all-inclusive sense. Is there room for “debate” or even dialectical positioning in such a sea of positivity? Yes! Of course there is! Is there room for a big ‘ol “No!?” Yes! Is it a sea of Nos? Yes! Why the fuck not? I can literally do absolutely anything, in finite reality and in infinite intelligence and infinite imagination, in the Godhead: where else is anything but in the Godhead?

 

My own integration work includes reading the Srimad Bhagavatam not as a Hare Krishna devotee, not yet and maybe never, but because the white light of the “whiteout” experience on 5/ Bufo is understood by the ISKCON (“God-Realization,” “God-Consciousness”) crowd as belonging to the lower wrung of the “impersonalists” who see the effulgence of bliss as ultimate reality, rather than the divine super-mundane happenings of Lord Krishna as the Supreme Truth. That all works for me. I saw Leo mention ISKCON in a blog post or forum response somewhere, suggesting it’s cultish like most of religion, but I contend that everything can be recontextualized (and Leo too, and Leo’s expressed opinions too) to become conducive to Godhood (ACTUALIZATION, realization, consciousness, revelation, etc.). Happy Krishna appearance day, btw! I started the second Canto today, after midnight coincidentally (no such thing!). 

[randydible]

@Breakingthewall Yes! It’s not only possible, but necessary in the deepest way. “Reactivation,” aka “Surrender,” aka “returning to Godhead,” needs to fill all mundane things in daily experience. This requires the great revolution of the infinite sphere, which is the paradigmatic architectural-foundational shiftless shift to ALIGNTENMENT and SPHERITUALITY. Think on it!

[randydible]

@James123 Yes, and yes! I hear you about the “opposite” of infinity being finitude, and check this out: take that to the absolute limit of its essential point and it coalesces to the CO-ALL-ESSENCE that is exactly precisely the ONE AND ONLY pure perfect infinitesimal point itself! That is the perfect origin of finitude in every possible sense. That alone is the source of all things. Yes, it’s “opposite” which is the ABSOLUTE INFINITE is truly what it is and truly its real and ultimate “source,” but that’s what makes the possible distinction so fucking intimate with infinity, for it is the ABSOLUTE INTIMATE. Through their conjugation ALL THINGS arise and set, as that infinite sphere of ABSOLUTE RELATIVITY, which we’ve heard Leo talk about in numerous instances (though not going, for instance, into Cusa and the hermetic infinite sphere, for instance, but that’s fucking fine lol). Leo’s right, and I’m right, not because we’re different but because the Absolute Truth is the “same,” even though it is the “same” in that it’s the absolute external reference experience of loss-of-reference or refer-madness. Pure self-reference is that organizing principle of all possible universes, allowing for an actual territory and an actual map in perfect simultaneity beyond similitude (“same,” in this sense, beyond that iota i).

[Breakingthewall]

20 minutes ago, randydible said:

@Breakingthewall Yes! It’s not only possible, but necessary in the deepest way. “Reactivation,” aka “Surrender,” aka “returning to Godhead,” needs to fill all mundane things in daily experience. This requires the great revolution of the infinite sphere, which is the paradigmatic architectural-foundational shiftless shift to ALIGNTENMENT and SPHERITUALITY. Think on it!

It requires something serious, without contradictions and bullshit, absolutely clear, product of total clarity. 

[James123]

9 minutes ago, randydible said:

@James123 Yes, and yes! I hear you about the “opposite” of infinity being finitude, and check this out: take that to the absolute limit of its essential point and it coalesces to the CO-ALL-ESSENCE that is exactly precisely the ONE AND ONLY pure perfect infinitesimal point itself! That is the perfect origin of finitude in every possible sense. That alone is the source of all things. Yes, it’s “opposite” which is the ABSOLUTE INFINITE is truly what it is and truly its real and ultimate “source,” but that’s what makes the possible distinction so fucking intimate with infinity, for it is the ABSOLUTE INTIMATE. Through their conjugation ALL THINGS arise and set, as that infinite sphere of ABSOLUTE RELATIVITY, which we’ve heard Leo talk about in numerous instances (though not going, for instance, into Cusa and the hermetic infinite sphere, for instance, but that’s fucking fine lol). Leo’s right, and I’m right, not because we’re different but because the Absolute Truth is the “same,” even though it is the “same” in that it’s the absolute external reference experience of loss-of-reference or refer-madness. Pure self-reference is that organizing principle of all possible universes, allowing for an actual territory and an actual map in perfect simultaneity beyond similitude (“same,” in this sense, beyond that iota i).

Where was it before your physical birth or in deep sleep? Where was / is there? If you trying to grasp the Truth via knowledge or experience, "you" are not gonna make it. Because, there is no you, nor experiencer or experienced there.

@Breakingthewall @randydible let Peter Ralston and Ramana Maharsi talk, not me 😂 

 

 

[Breakingthewall]

13 minutes ago, James123 said:

Where was it before your physical birth or in deep sleep? Where was / is there? If you trying to grasp the Truth via knowledge or experience, "you" are not gonna make it. Because, there is no you, nor experiencer or experienced there.

@Breakingthewall @randydible let Peter Ralston and Ramana Maharsi talk, not me 😂 

 

 

if Ralston said then it's true. He's famous right? 

And Ramana Maharshi took consciousness to the limit of its self-perception and took it for the absolute. This attributeless "I am" is not total reality, but an extreme form of the human flow perceiving itself. The absolute is not a motionless perceiver, but the unlimited openness that includes the perceiver, the world, and all possible flows.

Edited August 16 by Breakingthewall

[UnbornTao]

@Breakingthewall Blah blah. 

You'd even try to dispute the Buddha before actually getting what he's getting across. You can't, or won't, tell the difference between your own conceptual bubble, on the one hand, and what's being pointed at.

Edited August 16 by UnbornTao

[randydible]

@Breakingthewall “Do I contradict myself? Very well, I contradict myself. I am large. I contain multitudes.” Walt Whitman, also repeated by, for instance, Huxley in Ch. 1 of The Perennial Philosophy.

Contradiction and paradox and tautology are all gatekeepers on infinite intelligence. This is differently thematic in Western logic  and civilization (eg. Aristotelian vs. non-Aristotelian logic, centered on the status of the “this statement is false” type) than for instance in Nyaya and Buddhist logic of the Nagarjuna type.

 

Is this not clear enough yet? Thats because of the dominant paradigm that seems natural, though it’s actually artificial. This will become more clear as we shift to the infinite sphere paradigm, which though “mine” (in the sense of who else is talking about this?), is also well articulated by Leo here and there (cf. What is Reality… etc… spoiler: it’s an infinite sphere matrix of absolute relativity, etc.).

[James123]

11 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

if Ralston said then it's true. He's famous right? 

And Ramana Maharshi took consciousness to the limit of its self-perception and took it for the absolute. This attributeless "I am" is not total reality, but an extreme form of the human flow perceiving itself. The absolute is not a motionless perceiver, but the unlimited openness that includes the perceiver, the world, and all possible flows.

“There is no knower and nothing known. The Self alone is. The Self is not the seer or the seen — it is That by which both appear.” Ramana Maharsi.

[Breakingthewall]

1 minute ago, James123 said:

“There is no knower and nothing known. The Self alone is. The Self is not the seer or the seen — it is That by which both appear.” Ramana Maharsi.

That is meaningless. 

[Breakingthewall]

6 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Blah blah

Be respectful with a new user that tries to transmit his vision. You aren't in the kindergarten