plurality is not duality

[nuwu]

or is it?

it may be possible to merge consciousness independently whether it is finite or infinite: becoming conscious of meta-perspective (such as trip reports and medative states claiming to become aware of higher-order entities like earth, the sun, the universe, etc). or at the same time, from the infinity of gods video, it is reportedly possible to merge multiple infinities to reach higher-order gods. do finite states even deserve to be called finite, considering all states represent infinite information? it could be infinities all the way down and up, experienced through attachments to duality or not. not to mention, do perspectives even experiences the same “infinity” once they awoken deep enough, or we are already isolated gods? if latter, shouldn’t it mean completeness is impossible, even within non-ego states?

latest leo’s mouse trip report suggests experiences possible beyond infinite states, is it a mix of both duality and non-duality or a transcendental state for which we do not have symbols? would it mean it could be possible to design collaborative dreams without attachments/egos? why is it assumed that duality requires an ego outside self-preservation of partially unpleasant experiences? the ego mind succeeded to imagine itself from nothingness, which means duality without attachment must be possible at its genesis (unless we describe it as direct appearance in the void without creation). not to mention how does the ego reshape itself after the experience of the void (or non-experience)? shouldn’t it be straight up impossible, unless our state of consciousness is already infinite understandings onto itself and continuous?

i’m just curious. there are too many things we don’t know considering leo’s recent breakthroughs and videos. does absolute infinity (Ω) even exists as an actuality, or it is a pointer toward ever growing states of consciousness which can never be reached? not sure but imo the infinite regress theory is less likely than a direct one, such as all “mechanisms” consciousness can use to shape itself are simply explained, with only content changing

Edited October 13, 2022 by nuwu

[Ramu]

@nuwu no mix of duality and Nonduality.  It's all the latter, hence one 

[nuwu]

@Ramu yes i dont think there is more than one state. ego attachments could be frictions in its ability to expand, nothing more. im not saying i understand consciousness or know what's the optimal set of symbols able to define it. just sharing ideas

[Osaid]

I'm not sure what the question is, or if there is one, but I will try to answer some ideas I see here.

Plurality, or, "more than one", is by definition, a duality. All dualities are imagined, that is inherent to duality, it is how duality functions.

You might be referring to the idea of having infinities which are coached inside of finitudes, which is valid. There are infinities which are inside finite things, paradoxically. For example, the amount of numbers and decimals between 1 and 2 could go on forever, but it is limited between 1 and 2.

for example: 1.1, 1.11, 1.111, 1.1111 (you get the idea, the decimals can increase forever)

Or, you can even zoom into and out of an object forever.

I'm not even sure how there can be "separate consciousness which merge into one" as Leo described in his "Infinity of Gods" video. That seems impossible. I would have to experience that to even begin understanding it, assuming Leo isn't deluded. Or maybe I am misunderstanding something. From what I can see, all separation is imagined, as all distinctions are, and "separate consciousness" would have to be an imaginary distinction as well.

 

[amanen]

36 minutes ago, Osaid said:

I'm not sure what the question is, or if there is one, but I will try to answer some ideas I see here.

Plurality, or, "more than one", is by definition, a duality. All dualities are imagined, that is inherent to duality, it is how duality functions.

You might be referring to the idea of having infinities which are coached inside of finitudes, which is valid. There are infinities which are inside finite things, paradoxically. For example, the amount of numbers and decimals between 1 and 2 could go on forever, but it is limited between 1 and 2.

for example: 1.1, 1.11, 1.111, 1.1111 (you get the idea, the decimals can increase forever)

Or, you can even zoom into and out of an object forever.

I'm not even sure how there can be "separate consciousness which merge into one" as Leo described in his "Infinity of Gods" video. That seems impossible. I would have to experience that to even begin understanding it, assuming Leo isn't deluded. Or maybe I am misunderstanding something. From what I can see, all separation is imagined, as all distinctions are, and "separate consciousness" would have to be an imaginary distinction as well.

 

Yes, because all separation is imagined, there cannot be a second consciousness. It is literally oneness, only one consciousness. Any kind of merging with 'other' separate consciousness is imagined within the one consciousness, there is no other to it in actuality. The one consciousness has to include everything in it, so by default anything is not outside it or excluded from it, thus absolute solipsism. There can never be a real separation.

[Breakingthewall]

one infinity is the same as another infinity. it is an appearance of multiplicity. infinity divided by a thousand trillion = a thousand trillion infinities, but they are really the same infinity appearing to be a thousand trillion. infinity has no limit, so there can be no other. any piece of infinity is the entire infinity. the mechanics of infinity is not the same as the mechanics of the finite, we cannot understand it with our finite mind, we can only guess. infinity is incomprehensible and unthinkable because the act of thinking is finite. Infinity=zero because there can't be nothing concrete into the infinity, same than into the zero. Because anything concrete into the infinity became zero in comparison with the infinity. The zero is limitless, as the infinity, so they are synonyms. There cannot be two things without limits, only one.

Edited October 13, 2022 by Breakingthewall

[nuwu]

@Osaid there is no definitive question, only plain and loud introspection, probably distant from truth. i want to understand what the experience of the absolute is like. leo's recent reports are intriguing in this regard. even if i have no clue whether those states were actuality or delusion. it doesn't matter since im not attached to any idea of what consciousness is, or how it is like to get there.

« Plurality, or, "more than one", is by definition, a duality. » is one of the assumptions im questioning. from my understandings, duality allows us to imagine relative, hollow experiences. but why should this preclude a subconscious entanglement of "others"? unless for example, if the sum of all dualities needs to somehow cancel out into nothingness or something. leo suggested god can experience forms, so maybe it doesn't, if im not misunderstanding.

on the other end, plurality may naturally require incompleteness by design, since it is the fragmentation of awareness. i dont see why the experience of forms is required. it would make more sense if "infinity of gods" would be straightforwardly explained by the fact such separation is possible with both dual and non-dual blobs.

ultimately, all bounded infinities are held within the absolute infinite, but how to tell what its experience really is? so far nobody has reported any convincing evidence for why such state is worth seeking other than "dreaming is suffering", which isnt untrue. but i have a hard time overcoming my fears because of how its like to be teared apart between two black holes, of ego and infinitude. im not sure why nobody attempts to explain anything about it either, other than we are all on the path to get there.

« I'm not even sure how there can be "separate consciousness which merge into one" as Leo described in his "Infinity of Gods" video. » i dont think this is necessarily delusional. simple states of consciousness already have many paradoxical elements, so what would the singularity be like is far from obvious. does the absolute include itself? or even weirder, what if there were infinite bubbles of "absolute" hanging on a meta-plane of existence? i think the terminology used by leo in the video is confusing since the size of infinities we are talking about is unclear. its also a potential criticism for such awawakenings. how would the absolute have degrees of awareness, unless it isnt "it"? yet i have no idea what it is like, or if it even exists. too many things remain unclear for idiots like me. « From what I can see, all separation is imagined » not to mention, if god can bring to existence one "absolute", shouldnt it be able to spawn many of them as well? why should it give birth to itself only once?

@amanen our oneness isnt necessarily the only oneness possible, even if this is a crazy, needlessly confusing, and futile statement to make, its still a possibility. we will never be aware of "other absolutes", since whatever we become aware of in our consciousness is part of "our absolute". the shortcomings of spiritual symbols really prevail in leo's latest video. im still unsure what type of god they were talking about.

@Breakingthewall not all infinities are the same. at least, mathematically they arent, but it does seem to translate well within metaphysics. different sizes of infinities can represent various things. for example, there is an infinite amount of information required to describe the perspectival experience we are having right now, yet such infinity is so small many spiritual teachers will overlook the properties and describe it as finite. still the terminology around infinities is confusing and they probably simply mean "finite infinities".

Edited October 14, 2022 by nuwu

[amanen]

19 minutes ago, nuwu said:

 

@amanen our onenss isnt necessarily the only oneness possible, even if this is a crazy, needlessly confusing, and futile statement to make, its still a possibility. we will never be aware of "other absolutes", since whatever we become aware of in our consciousness is part of "our absolute". the shortcomings of spiritual symbols really prevail in leo's latest video. im still unsure what type of god they were talking about.

Oneness means that experience which includes anything and everything and nothing in it. This means that anything that exists is consciousness.

The whole idea of another absolute is based on not understanding the depth of oneness. It includes everything so if there would be another absolute it could not be composed of experience, consciousness, anything, everything, or nothing, because these things are automatically part of the one consciousness. Such an absolute would not be experience so it would have absolutely nothing in common with consciousness. 

It would be impossible to communicate with it because if it had any single thing in common with consciousness it would already be consciousness.

And the actual absolute consciousness includes everything, the realization is that there is nothing that is not experience means that there cannot be anything outside it. 

Keep in mind that all distinctions and boundaries are not real, this means that another absolute cannot be different from the absolute because they are one by default, so another absolute would always be part of the actual absolute,

When you go really deep into consciousness you realize that it is the only thing that exists, any ideas about other absolutes are grounded in not having gone deep enough into the magnitude of consciousness. Consciousness is omnipotent so any other "absolute" would always be under the control of consciousness. There can only be one God.

[Saggy Asten]

@amanen The supression of reality exhibits redeeming intuition to new sphere dogma. Releasing the energy that is being held by your third eye helps you regain the forgotten ability to remorse fear and mortality.

-HeavensGate

[amanen]

2 minutes ago, Saggy Asten said:

@amanen The supression of reality exhibits redeeming intuition to new sphere dogma. Releasing the energy that is being held by your third eye helps you regain the forgotten ability to remorse fear and mortality.

-HeavensGate

I'm not sure I understand what you are talking about, can you clarify. What forgotten ability? What energy? What suppression of reality? What dogma exactly?

[Saggy Asten]

3 minutes ago, amanen said:

I'm not sure I understand what you are talking about, can you clarify. What forgotten ability? What energy? What suppression of reality? What dogma exactly?

I'm talking about the forgotten Ancient Egypt techniques to regain powers that would let you experience something beyond our existence.

The energy resides in everything around you. We are all going to experience each others lives, our world and the whole subsequent sacrificial system grew up around these two ideas (Heaven and Hell both being tied to false beliefs).

The suppression of reality started years ago as a result of evolution which only leads to more decimation so the truth will be forgotten...

Political and religious dogma..the new world order is about to come and we are all doomed.

 

[amanen]

Just now, Saggy Asten said:

I'm talking about the forgotten Ancient Egypt techniques to regain powers that would let you experience something beyond our existence.

The energy resides in everything around you. We are all going to experience each others lives, our world and the whole subsequent sacrificial system grew up around these two ideas (Heaven and Hell both being tied to false beliefs).

The suppression of reality started years ago as a result of evolution which only leads to more decimation so the truth will be forgotten...

Political and religious dogma..the new world order is about to come and we are all doomed.

 

Ah, I'm sorry but I don't believe in history or even the world.

I don't need ancient Egypt techniques for powers, I've accessed them directly by myself.

[Saggy Asten]

3 minutes ago, amanen said:

Ah, I'm sorry but I don't believe in history or even the world.

I don't need ancient Egypt techniques for powers, I've accessed them directly by myself.

Oh, so can you already transform into an immortal extraterrestrial being without passing through the death barrier?

[amanen]

2 minutes ago, Saggy Asten said:

Oh, so can you already transform into an immortal extraterrestrial being without passing through the death barrier?

I haven't transformed into any extraterrestials, I have not experimented with shapeshifting yet, but I've had success with other powers. Also, death is not real. You can just imagine anything without limits.

[Osaid]

2 hours ago, nuwu said:

but why should this preclude a subconscious entanglement of "others"?

Because "others" is based on a duality between "you" and something "other than you".

2 hours ago, nuwu said:

i dont think this is necessarily delusional. simple states of consciousness already have many paradoxical elements, so what would the singularity be like is far from obvious.

A paradox is created when you try to describe something that is infinite with something that is too finite to describe it. For example:

The next sentence is true. The previous sentence is false.

The fact of the matter is, both sentences are true and false. In this case, it's infinite in the sense that it doesn't need to be limited to only "true" or "false", it can be both at the same time.

Another example is an experience of nothingness. Trying to imagine nothingness is a paradox to the finite mind, because the mind can only imagine in finitudes, whereas nothingness is infinite.

It is true that aspects of reality are genuinely paradoxical, in the sense that they will carry 2 seemingly opposite finite characteristics at once.

Paradox does not mean impossible, though. Paradoxes still exist, they just can't be properly described through finite means. I am saying that "multiple consciousnesses" is metaphysically impossible, not that it is a paradox. Here are the reasons as to why it is impossible:

1. All separation is finite

2. Consciousness is infinite

2. Consciousness is prior to imagination

I have gone and rewatched some of Leo's video, and I was actually misinterpreting what he said. I thought he was making the metaphysical claim that consciousness can be separated from consciousness, but rather, he is pointing to the experience of "multiple minds" within one consciousness. He is essentially using his new experience to describe how "others" can fit into one conscious experience. The main gist is this: Even if other absolute sovereign consciousnesses exist, you will never be able to verify it because that is inherent to being an absolute sovereign consciousness, and this also applies to all other absolute sovereign consciousnesses. They will only ever exist through your imagination, otherwise their existence steps into your experience, and thus becomes a part of your existence. It is basically his solipsism video, just reworded in a different way, perhaps an even more precise and holistic way.

2 hours ago, nuwu said:

what if there were infinite bubbles of "absolute" hanging on a meta-plane of existence?

Even if we assume there are, notice that they can only ever be perceived through imagination, otherwise they are simply another aspect of your single conscious experience. There is no getting around this. You have to imagine "another experience outside of your current experience", and that imagination is within your experience, and your experience always contains the imagination of other experiences. If you were to experience another experience, that is still within this single experience. It is only "another" experience relative to an imagined separation between "you" and "another".

"meta-plane of existence" is just another way of saying imagination. It's something you are not experiencing outside of your imagination, so therefore you call it "meta", because you are imagining some other plane of existence which is not visible to you right now.

This is basically the whole "do others exist?" question, but Leo has replaced "other" with "separate absolute infinity". 

2 hours ago, nuwu said:

not to mention, if god can bring to existence one "absolute", shouldnt it be able to spawn many of them as well? why should it give birth to itself only once?

One experience is all it really needs to spawn "others". There is one experience, and then there is the perception of multiple experiences created from within that one experience through imagined dualities. There is one experience, but it is possible to perceive multiple experiences from within that one experience by imagining yourself to be separate from certain aspects of reality. The "multiple experiences" come from your ego's perception of reality.

You really just have to come to the present moment and ask yourself: "How am I perceiving "other experiences" when I only have access to this one single experience?"

This is similar to how "past" and "future" is all perceived from within one experience. It's the same mechanism. You imagine "past" and "future" from within the present moment, and so the "past" and "future" are actually ultimately happening from this present experience.

You could also flip the logic here on its head and say that "why shouldn't God not give birth to itself only once?". If you don't allow God to give birth only once, that's a limitation you're putting on God.

 

[Egodeathrow]

It is a dance of separation and union, Individuation and diversification, Negentropy and entropy, Can you make your consciousness full spectrum in a synergistic ,yet broadly encompassing way? But can you just stitch together of what you will with all these pieces, Cause really we are scrambling to unravel oneness, What does that tell us about the orientation we are approaching this from, We are approaching this from a bias of wanting to deconstruct, If you sat with what is you might just implicitly get that reality is one, Or it may take work who knows maybe sitting wont cut it for the realization there is one infinite and it is full spectrum. By definition us trying to make a choice or anchor that reality is either one or plural that already implies separation, If your using that conceptual matrix everything will appear as that, Like a shattered mirror you cannot see your reflection clearly anymore.

[Breakingthewall]

9 hours ago, nuwu said:

@Breakingthewall not all infinities are the same. at least, mathematically they arent, but it does seem to translate well within metaphysics. different sizes of infinities

There are no sizes , infinity have no dimension. infinity, by the fact of being infinite, contains everything. therefore, another infinity is the same infinity. and therefore, only infinity exists. the infinite, by its infinity, dissolves all that is finite and turns it into nothing. anything contrasted with infinity is zero, therefore in the end infinity is nothing. there is only one, and it is you. infinity is, and only it exists

[Breakingthewall]

8 hours ago, amanen said:

, but I've had success with other powers.

Could you elaborate? It's an interesting topic . Intuitively i think it's possible 

[Breakingthewall]

4 hours ago, amanen said:

Personally seen pyrokinesis and telekinesis

Really? Who did? Could you explain the circumstances?  

4 hours ago, amanen said:

also very frequently (usually multiple times a week) see reality's structure change in real-time; it will have some detail (like an internet link, a sentence in a book, someone's clothes, a product in store, a person, a random fact, an animal, a scene, etc) and it will transform real-time into something else. For example I might be looking at a person and then suddenly they transform into another person under my sight, or if I'm reading a whole sentence might suddenly change to a different one. The transformations always make sense and aren't random.

You seem someone with quite common sense so i believe those stories. I suppose that the more openness things stop being so rigid and that kind of thing is possible

[nuwu]

@amanen not saying consciousness isnt one. if there were other absolute infinities on a meta-plane of existence, we wouldnt know about them since we are "that one god" who is absolute within its own infinity, and no apparent ways to carry information between separate voids. as far as we know there could be infinite numbers of gods, which is both ridiculous and plausible. « another absolute cannot be different from the absolute because they are one by default » they would be identical, unless its possible to merge consciousness where the actual absolute would include itself and all possible cross-combined awareness in infinite arrangements.

« It would be impossible to communicate with it because if it had any single thing in common with consciousness it would already be consciousness. [...] There can only be one God. » there is no proof nothing exists outside our nothingness. nothing has no scarcity to it. it may exist an infinite amount of times. and we wouldnt know anything about this even if fully awake. it could be interesting if it were possible to establish some sort of link or communication between such entities.

@Osaid « Because "others" is based on a duality between "you" and something "other than you". » not necessarily saying this is untrue, only investigating whether or not classical spirituality withhold introspection. it seems actualized.org's videos are slowly moving away from buddhism, or at least find themselves in a somewhat confusing status. i wish @Leo Gura could share some clarifications about these, since the views are growingly incompatible with traditional spiritual models. both philosophies are interesting in their own way, such that silencing or discrediting opposite narratives is superfluous. summary of discord (from what i can tell):
- in buddhism, all dualities necessarily cancel out into nothingness/oneness. our perspectives are conceived from subconscious vibrations who melt into nonduality with meditation/stillness. in leo's recent videos, the understandings of awareness are unclear, other than absolute infinity implies all impossible and absurd states of awareness, potentially even blends of seemingly incompatible experiences (non-duality + duality?), or subinfinities merging together, or something i dont even know
- arguments pointing at biases are useless, since both buddhism and leo are sustained by powerful egos. former being more cultural and artistic, while latter being a classical body-mind perspective
- oneness is in our heart. nothing should be required in order to (un)reach the absolute, like gravity. countless perspectives are unable to obtain sufficiently powerful psychedelics to "awaken". in contrast, meditation is universal. god can not prevent itself from being itself. but then, what does it mean to "do nothing"? if one is meditating, isnt she already imagining herself not taking psychedelics? its mitigated
- death is imaginary, which may contradict the assumption one must be entitled to attain parinirvana after physical death, even with a glimpse of nonduality. why is such delay required, if bodily functions are illusions? buddhism traditionally shut down all discussions about the "experience" of parinirvana, yet it could be very well be dreams within sub-infinities.
- meditation with calcified pineal glands is, or seem to be less effective due to lower andogenous dmt. so what is the difference between meditation and some ever lasting trips? buddha claims ego's attachments are the source of suffering, but why would such attachments matter when they are themselves imaginary? counter-argument is that if it meditation works for (you), doesnt it mean it works for everyone since (your perspective) is the only one that is provably actual? were you ever aware of a state where meditation doesn't work?
- maybe leo is susceptible to impressive state of awareness and experiences of large infinities, which can be confused with the absolute if you trip hard enough. shouldnt the absolute be transcendental to states and degree of awareness? no sized infinities may ever compare to the absolute. such as it doesnt matter how large numbers can grow, they will never reach infinity unless going back to nil. one could dream being the "god" of infinite civilizations, yet it still woudnt be the absolute. then at the same time, how do we know what it takes to reach the absolute? all awakenings could be the delusion of self-impressionable entities, as far as we know.
- there are anecdotal evidences from that one taiwanese youtuber who experienced both awawakening with meditation and 5-meo-dmt, and reportedly shared an abyssal difference in favor of former. status of leo's meditation practices are unknown. unclear why he doesnt try serious attempts, since it would make communications between the two schools of thoughts easier.
- if everything is a single self-loving entity, why would rejection of anything be ever necessary to obtain truth? this is assuming there is such thing as an "ego" out there who has any level of sovereignty on the matter, but there is no such thing. there would be only one ego, that is yours.
- is leo delusional, or is it buddhism?

« A paradox is created when you try to describe something that is infinite with something that is too finite to describe it. » but the silly question is, what if the absolute attempt to describe itself? is the absolute too finite for this? not to mention, shouldnt finite symbols be incapable of understandings the absolute, based on this exact argument, such that we know that we can not actually know?

« I am saying that "multiple consciousnesses" is metaphysically impossible » multiple consciousnesses aware of each other would necessarily be "one" in a meta-group. though there could also be infinite consciousnesses that are not aware of each other in a way that is irrelevant to our purpose actually, but its funny to think about

« he is pointing to the experience of "multiple minds" within one consciousness » im also unsure what leo means in the videos. if "gods" means actual absolutes, or just nondual sub-infinities. maybe if it were possible to experience both nonduality and duality simultaneously, as reported by mouse-leo, it could also explain the plurality of nondual infinities which would somehow be incomplete yet full, or something.

« Even if other absolute sovereign consciousnesses exist, you will never be able to verify it because that is inherent to being an absolute sovereign consciousness, and this also applies to all other absolute sovereign consciousnesses. » this is a strong argument why "merging absolutes" should be impossible, yet if they are truly sovereign, shouldnt they have the ability to either accept or blend the sovereignty of others? all of these are assumptions about what being "sovereign" means, but im not sure how they can be evidenced. « They will only ever exist through your imagination » unless they created themselves and then let go of their sovereignty afterward. or unless if god is sufficiently powerful to create other bubble of oneness that even itself can not control.

« Even if we assume there are, notice that they can only ever be perceived through imagination » but we know nothing about the behavior of imagination outside duality. if god is truly capable of imagining other gods into existence, there could be other weird things it could do. or it could be pure delusion at infinite levels, not sure if its even possible to know.

« "meta-plane of existence" is just another way of saying imagination. » there could be a category that is beyond god. even full awakening would not provide evidence for the lack of it. god is a tricky symbol because it both means "nothing beyond" or "our oneness", but the relation between these is an assumption.

« "How am I perceiving "other experiences" when I only have access to this one single experience?" » yes, unifying multiple consciousness creates a new oneness which is aware of both. it is a single experience, but it is also alien to the classical definition of absolute.

@Egodeathrow im referring to the concept of sizable infinity (or transfinite), distinct from absolute infinity. i agree zero is infinity. issue is whether or not the absolute includes itself in various possible ways

Edited October 15, 2022 by nuwu