Which of the following is the case for the nature of Reality...

[blueplasma]

Is Reality one giant dream and God is experiencing it through infinite POV's corresponding to the infinite beings(which are themselves imaginary) OR

Is God imagining infinite dreams simultaneously and experiencing them separately and each persons life is one such dream ?

[BipolarGrowth]

Present Moment Experience. 
 

The end. 
 

But to be more detailed and fulfill your request for a conceptual answer, I think that it is impossible to know this for certain. My best guess is that God is living my POV completely alone, and this applies to you as well if you are having an experience. There is nothing else which is not contained within this moment. Your conscious experience, if it is there, does not occur at the same “time” as mine per say. Beyond even that, I am not conscious any more than you are because I am not conscious. Consciousness is what envelops all beings. That is what I am. I am not conscious — consciousness is me. 
 

“Before Abraham was, I am.” -Jesus Christ 

Edited May 28, 2021 by BipolarGrowth

[blueplasma]

20 minutes ago, BipolarGrowth said:

Present Moment Experience. 
 

The end. 
 

But to be more detailed and fulfill your request for a conceptual answer, I think that it is impossible to know this for certain. My best guess is that God is living my POV completely alone, and this applies to you as well if you are having an experience. There is nothing else which is not contained within this moment. Your conscious experience, if it is there, does not occur at the same “time” as mine per say. Beyond even that, I am not conscious any more than you are because I am not conscious. Consciousness is what envelops all beings. That is what I am. I am not conscious — consciousness is me. 
 

“Before Abraham was, I am.” -Jesus Christ 

Ya but is this consciousness creating multiple dreams simultaneously or one at time. If not then how do explain the different life experience that each one of use is living.

[BipolarGrowth]

Just now, blueplasma said:

Ya but is this consciousness creating multiple dreams simultaneously or one at time. If not then how do explain the different life experience that each one of use is living.

There is no way to know. I explain different life experiences by asking you to explain why dream characters in your night’s sleep get to act like intelligent humans and you consider them to have no consciousness of their own. 

[Gnosis]

1 hour ago, blueplasma said:

Is Reality one giant dream and God is experiencing it through infinite POV's corresponding to the infinite beings(which are themselves imaginary) OR

Is God imagining infinite dreams simultaneously and experiencing them separately and each persons life is one such dream ?

None of these are the case.

"Liberation" means "Reality" is unlimited, end of story.

[Gnosis]

Even "the present moment experience", per se, has nothing to do with the nature of "Reality".

It's simply the only "thing" occurring.

[vladorion]

God is not imagining anything. The one imagining is part of the imagination.

God also doesn't fall asleep, as Leo claims. It is consciousness that fools itself (which begins by consciousness believing it is God), but in truth even consciousness doesn't exist.

[Gnosis]

1 hour ago, BipolarGrowth said:

Beyond even that, I am not conscious any more than you are because I am not conscious.

This is a great statement. There's "objectively" no difference between your body and a corpse.

There are no "other beings" in consciousness, and consciousness is not experienced by "a being".

Neither is "true".

Consciousness is occurring, end of story.

 

But even this is too conceptual and assumes too much about the nature of "Reality".

"Reality" is a notion even larger and more inclusive than "Consciousness".

To "know" "Reality" is already to be "Liberated".

"Consciousness" is "objective"; "Reality" is not "objective".

In "Reality", there is no "Enlightenment", "God", or such "things", including "Consciousness", and "Reality".

[BipolarGrowth]

5 minutes ago, Gnosis said:

This is a great statement. There's "objectively" no difference between your body and a corpse.

There are no "other beings" in consciousness, and consciousness is not experienced by "a being".

Neither is "true".

Consciousness is occurring, end of story.

 

But even this is too conceptual and assumes too much about the nature of "Reality".

"Reality" is a notion even larger and more inclusive than "Consciousness".

To "know" "Reality" is already to be "Liberated".

"Consciousness" is "objective"; "Reality" is not "objective".

In "Reality", there is no "Enlightenment", "God", or such "things", including "Consciousness", and "Reality".

Define Reality for us. Not being a dick — this is important for us to get your message. You’re using the word Reality in a unique way, so a more specified connotation would be helpful. 

[Gnosis]

2 minutes ago, BipolarGrowth said:

Define Reality for us. Not being a dick — this is important for us to get your message. You’re using the word Reality in a unique way, so a more specified connotation would be helpful. 

"Reality" is un-delimit-able and un-reference-able.

As such, "Reality" cannot even be called "itself".

To say there is such a "thing" as "Reality", is already a fundamental error.

[Gnosis]

"Reality" is not relative or Absolute.

"Reality" does not "exist" or "not exist".

"Reality" has all degrees of freedom.

When "Reality" is unlimited, it is undelimitable and unreferenceable; every "thing" becomes "Reality", including "Enlightenment", "God", "things", and "Consciousness", and as such, all these "become" unlimited, undelimitable, and unreferenceable also.

[Mason Riggle]

 An infinite fractal strange loop. 

[BipolarGrowth]

47 minutes ago, Gnosis said:

"Reality" is un-delimit-able and un-reference-able.

As such, "Reality" cannot even be called "itself".

To say there is such a "thing" as "Reality", is already a fundamental error.

 

28 minutes ago, Gnosis said:

"Reality" is not relative or Absolute.

"Reality" does not "exist" or "not exist".

"Reality" has all degrees of freedom.

When "Reality" is unlimited, it is undelimitable and unreferenceable; every "thing" becomes "Reality", including "Enlightenment", "God", "things", and "Consciousness", and as such, all these "become" unlimited, undelimitable, and unreferenceable also.

As true as this may be, you have to appreciate how different this is from what many point to when using the word. Thanks for taking the time to clarify. 
 

I think you’ve used the pointer well. 

[Kambido]

Why not both? If god is infinite, how can we put a restriction on how it experiences. I tend to believe this "god" concept is more like a platform, an infinite consciousness type platform. The experiences within it, would be similar to if all experiences in your mind where experiencing, then multiply that by infinity... well, it becomes something else entirely. Grasping and empathizing with that is a step i guess. But as to the individuals experiencing within god, i believe these are gods too. I believe it's a full circle, everything is one and many, dreams within dreams, consciousness within consciousness, infinity within infinity. Therefore, my friend, i would say both to your question. If you can imagine it, it's been imagined, and if imagined, then it could be reality in some possible world, some platform. An infinite consciousness is hard to grasp if it has no restrictions. All we know is restrictions. I can imagine a scenario at a time, some maybe more, but not infinitely. To be everything is quite intense.  

[Gnosis]

6 minutes ago, BipolarGrowth said:

As true as this may be, you have to appreciate how different this is from what many point to when using the word. Thanks for taking the time to clarify. 
 

I think you’ve used the pointer well. 

My apologies, the language I use is indeed somewhat unique.

This is just the word that resonated the most for me.

It's fairly hard to find verbal descriptions of the sum product of cognitive development, awakening, and deconstruction.

Even if there are qualified speakers or writers, it will not come out of their mouth and the pen will never touch the paper.

Thank you for asking for the clarification, as if you had not asked, I would never have spoken.

 

You awaken, and deconstruct awakening.

Otherwise, you delude yourself further.

Even clarity, is still the subtlest ignorance.

The toughest Diamond is thrown away.

 

Even at the pursuit of nations, Bodhidharma won't return.

[The0Self]

Infinity. That's all. It can appear as anything, including the imagination of what it would be like to be conscious of some "thing" if it were possible for the infinite to know the finite (which is of course impossible).

Edited May 28, 2021 by The0Self

[BipolarGrowth]

1 hour ago, Gnosis said:

My apologies, the language I use is indeed somewhat unique.

This is just the word that resonated the most for me.

It's fairly hard to find verbal descriptions of the sum product of cognitive development, awakening, and deconstruction.

Even if there are qualified speakers or writers, it will not come out of their mouth and the pen will never touch the paper.

Thank you for asking for the clarification, as if you had not asked, I would never have spoken.

 

You awaken, and deconstruct awakening.

Otherwise, you delude yourself further.

Even clarity, is still the subtlest ignorance.

The toughest Diamond is thrown away.

 

Even at the pursuit of nations, Bodhidharma won't return.

I often use words differently as well. Most of the maps of meaning I work with are far outside the scope of the average non dual spiritual seeker here. It’s always a challenge to present things as they may best be heard by people who have different understanding of things. 

[blueplasma]

@BipolarGrowth Does that mean that there is no way to be certain that you other people are conscious and that only I am conscious?

[BipolarGrowth]

6 hours ago, blueplasma said:

@BipolarGrowth Does that mean that there is no way to be certain that you other people are conscious and that only I am conscious?

You cannot be certain if there is another conscious present moment experience bubble of sensations like your own. Anything you experience with that consciousness is experienced within your own awareness. Even if you experienced another person as being conscious, this is not proof for someone else’s consciousness. This is proof that your consciousness can produce an experience which makes it seem like there is more than just you. I am not saying that only you are conscious. I’m saying that you can never know if that is a true statement. It is a Shrödinger’s cat situation in which you have no way to ever open the box. 

[blueplasma]

1 hour ago, BipolarGrowth said:

You cannot be certain if there is another conscious present moment experience bubble of sensations like your own. Anything you experience with that consciousness is experienced within your own awareness. Even if you experienced another person as being conscious, this is not proof for someone else’s consciousness. This is proof that your consciousness can produce an experience which makes it seem like there is more than just you. I am not saying that only you are conscious. I’m saying that you can never know if that is a true statement. It is a Shrödinger’s cat situation in which you have no way to ever open the box. 

I know that it can't be explicitly proved that other people are conscious..but isn't it obvious by corollary... that just like I am conscious you are also conscious.