Vibroverse

I agree with you, in a sense, but, I think, it also is impossible to be a pure empiricist, for we have the nature of conceptualizing our experience.

But they do it for they are looking for the ground of being, to unite the experience in a ground, so their effort also is understandable.

"How"s all the way down.

Yeah, Hegel's criticism to him also is pretty simple. He says that "if you say that we cannot know anything about the thing in itself, then how do you even know there is such a thing as the thing in itself, for that would be something that you would know about the thing in itself that it exists?". But, at the same time, I still think that there can be something to what Kant says about the existence of the thing in itself, even if we cannot even know whether it exists or not, or it is just my interpretation of him, like his, in a sense, influence on me, I don't know. That's another topic for now.

I think both the phenomena and noumena are of the same nature, there is no real distinction between them, in my opinion. And, to be honest, I don't really understand what Kant means by noumena, the thing in itself. Does he simply mean that our senses might be fooling us, is it really that simple? However, there is a problem in this when he says that there might be something else that is at the noumena level, because even with the reference to it as being "something", it becomes the part of the phenomena. I think Hegel also was aware of this problem, so he also said that there is no difference between noumena and phenomena. He says that what we should study is the direct experience of the phenomenal level of being, and, I think, he would perhaps say that, if we could talk with him today, that if we will talk about a "noumena" at all, then it would be consciousness.

You might be already there right now.

Yeah, my human personality is an illusion, and if I become conscious of myself as the fullness of being, then I can even turn myself into a cat, and all sorts of shit like that, you know. And, I don't know how at all, but there might even be a "dimension" where triangular squares also exist, and all sorts of shit like that. And now I'm also thinking that, money also is an illusion. There is no such thing as money as there is no such thing as the world. You can say "isn't it obvious?", and yeah, on the ontological level it is, but on the psychological level it isn't, haha.

Yes, they seem to differ in form and the level of density of the form that I perceive to be.

I think it's possible to create a different history where you were born from a different family in a different world. I think you actually are creating your "real" history and individual self in the now anyways. Think of the world as vapor that you densify in your awareness. Then you can relax, get into a sleep like state, and start dreaming a new form of your awareness. First you need to understand that reality, and your timeline, and all that you know to be you, is awareness.

A cat that I imagine and a cat that I see are both imaginary, and one is not more real than the other. This world that I see is not more real than any other possible world that I can imagine. All worlds are my consciousness. All things are my consciousness. I can delete whatever, and whoever, I want to delete, and I can create whatever, and whoever, I want to create. And I already am doing that deleting and creating thing in every moment.

Dude, I wanna say, with all my love, that you have no fuckin idea about what you're saying.

I think every historical text must be interpreted in its own context of temporal and spatial evolution. Every text and person is a byproduct of its cultural and evolutionary environment.

What I say now may be a little controversial, but I'm thinking of spirituality also as a science that is evolving, like, say, medicine. You don't want the medicine of the last millenium to treat you today, but it was an evolved technology in its time back then. The view of love is evolving.

Yes, I'm aware of that. What I mean is consciousness is evolving, and the Quran was a part of that process of evolution.

I think in dialectical terms about this, that the Quran had to be written as a part of the evolution of the Spirit. Of course the Quran has all those biases and things that we deem to be negative today, if you have evolved. And the negativity in the Quran, by its nature, carries the opposite idea in itself also, and evolution is about the process of coming to a positive balance of those ideas.

I agree. A new synthesis of reason and intuition, of logic and love. A new modality of being.

And the weird thing that I'm thinking about is this: It is obvious, to me, that reality is a mirror, reflecting what's going on inside of me, but the question is, what is that which is inside of me is a mirror to, is a representation of, if you know what I mean? And I feel like it is turtles all the way down, like, it is representations and mirrors all the way down where, at the bottom of it, they don't refer to anything, and I feel like it is because Source has created reality out of nothing, because "something" is nothing. So, to me it feels like reality, in a sense, is like a web of mirrors that has no center to it, or, you may say, every point is the center to it. But again, I think that's the point where we need to understand that intuition is the ground of logic, the ground of modeling, and it's best to think in alignment with the intuivite faculty of yours.

Yes, nothing happens by chance. As you said, if you increase your awareness, you will realize that even the timing of the dogs starting to bark in the street is a reflection of your state of consciousness, your, shall we say, frequency. Everything is happening by law of attraction, and some people may, for some reason, not like the concept of the law of attraction, and that's fine, but what that concept, in its essence, is referring to is a fact of existence.

Law of attraction is real, but I don't truly understand how and why it actually works, and I don't know if it is understandable at all, or a mystery in itself. But the law of attraction is, yes, real, in a sense, your thoughts, somehow, influence your reality. However, as Abraham Hicks explains, I believe in the concept of the Inner Being and the Vortex, the Stream, and that we are, like, something like vibrational frequencies of consciousness. And the Inner Being already is, or has become, the reality, the path, that we prefer. And therefore it, again, comes to the importance of your state of being. It is, in my opinion, of paramount importance that you release your resistance, so that you can become, more and more, receptive to the Inner Being. And, for me, from where I am, the best way of accomplishing that alignment, more and more, with the Inner Being is through the quietness of the mind, so that you can be more receptive to the, you may say, Cosmic Mind, the Mind of the Inner Being, in, like, a way that is "relevant" for you in your experience, in your world.

Yes, but in order for you to be closer to your true nature, you still have to be there to be closer to your true nature. Existence, in that sense, cannot become that which does not exist. I mean "being" itself cannot not exist. But, the trouble we are experiencing about that might be this, that we still are trying to look for the limits, the limitlessness, of being through thought and language. We are creating a model of limitlessness in our minds and claim that it is what limitlessness really is. But, to me, it feels like the true limitlessness, the true nature of being, cannot be found in our depictions and models of what we think to be that which is limitlessness. We think that the models that we create in our mind about limitlessness can themselves be limitless. And, I think, the true limitlessness, maybe, or obviously, is not about the models of it that we imagine it to be, but it, in a sense, is the imagining itself that is what it is, really.

It is impossible for God, for Consciousness, to not exist, for instance, if we don't try to say it is possible by just creating word games.

I think laws of logic are much deeper in its foundation than laws of physics. It is imaginable to bend laws of physics, but it is not even imaginable to bend laws of logic.

Imagine a person who lives the most fucked up life ever, I mean, the most fucked up life in all the probable worlds where it just cannot get any worse than that. That person has the greatest fears and regrets and confusions ever, etc, and everything is against him, that even the pain, etc, of Christ is nothing compared to that. Think of it as that which as bad as it gets ever.

There you don't know what to do, you don't know what to think, you are, like, trapped within a trap within a trap, eternally, ad infinitum.

That there is nothing good, none at all, in the past, in the world, in the now, etc, of that person, of that being, and it is like the epitome of pure fuckedupness and negativity.