Three Types of Imagination

[jelmar35]

Hi all, I was wondering if someone could clarify some things about God's imagination.

I have been practicing mindfulness for quite some time now and have been able to distinguish two types of imagination that are both a product of the ego:

1. Superficial everyday imagination, like picturing a dragon.

2. The drawing and connecting of concepts. For example, presently I see the qualia that correspond to a smartphone. The ego then calls that a smartphone (by assigning a lable) and connects it to other concepts through an elaborate worldview.

I can see how one would get a type of non-duality by coming very aware of (2), where this drawing stops. My problem is this, however: the qualia precede (2)! The qualia (that my ego would call fingers) still move as fingers would. If I would transcend (2), even though I might not make distinctions conceptually anymore, the quale of red is still different than the quale of blue.

Hence, if God (me) creates everything through imagination, this imagination must be of a different type than (2). It must be a type of imagination that causes there to be red and blue, before the ego can grab on to these experiences and intepret them. God's imagination must be deeper, this I will call (3), which should ultimately decide which quale should go where.

However, here is my problem. By transcending (2), you have already killed distinctions between objects. But through (3), these objects should still move and change as they do. This requires objects to be distinct on the level of (3) as well. So, by transcending (2), are we actually fooling ourselves, because God actually also imagines distinctions, which we are then denying?

Funamentally, my question is: Does God imagine the cup's qualia only (a) or the cup as an object with properties that result in the qualia (b)? If (b), is the ego right in calling the cup a cup? And if (a), how can we account for the predictable change in qualia?

In Leo's videos, I am always confused when he says "you imagine." I know I (the ego) imagines my parents through (1) and (2), but do I (God) also imagine my parents?

Thanks a lot for any help.

[Sempiternity]

Everything within consciousness if God's imagination. If it's not being imagined within consciousness, it does not exist, as it's not being imagined. Look right now at what is and is not within consciousness.

[jelmar35]

@Sempiternity I have heard this so many times. Of course (2) falls under (3) and everything is God's imagination. This does not address the subtlety I put forward.

Edited January 31, 2023 by jelmar35

[Sempiternity]

There is no you. You are imaginary. You (the imaginary character) are within consciousness, which is God's imagination. The confusion is the definition of 'You". There is only One, and You (God) are it. 

[jelmar35]

@Sempiternity My question already assumes what you are saying.

[Sempiternity]

54 minutes ago, jelmar35 said:

do I (God) also imagine my parents?

Yes

 

55 minutes ago, jelmar35 said:

Does God imagine the cup's qualia only (a) or the cup as an object with properties that result in the qualia (b)? If (b), is the ego right in calling the cup a cup?

It's all Mind. It has no substance, only the appearance of it. Something and Nothing are the same thing. Call it whatever you want, it's just one thing, your imagination. 

 

58 minutes ago, jelmar35 said:

how can we account for the predictable change in qualia?

All there is is Now. It's predictable, because you imagine it to be so. You imagine the future, as a thought Now, based on a Past you are also imagining Now. 

 

[caspex]

When you are talking about (3) you're still applying ideas that only apply at (2). Distinctions don't exist at (3).

What I mean is,
You mentioned how qualia precedes (2). I agree with that. But then you mention how even when you transcend (2), the quale of red is still different than blue.
You haven't transcended (2). This is why they seem different, in your direct experience. Because your direct experience still contains the difference between them. They are not different AT ALL. There is no difference. Notice the difference between the two and try to put a finger on it. What you'll notice after a while is that you are imagining the difference. At (2). That difference is conceptual.

 

Quote

However, here is my problem. By transcending (2), you have already killed distinctions between objects. But through (3), these objects should still move and change as they do. This requires objects to be distinct on the level of (3) as well.

How they should move or how they move is an idea at (2). The difference between two movements is also a (2) imagination. There is no difference between how a ball moves when rolling vs. a drop of rain falling down and splashing on the ground. This applies to shape, sound, objects, ideas, everything.
The fact that the change in qualia at (3) is predictable means you didn't transcend (2). Because the prediction is happening at (2). By making a distinction between the present and the future, and between memories and qualia. Collapse that distinction and you wouldn't be able to think let alone predict.
Movement itself would seem completely still because there would be no difference between an object being at one location in space time vs. another. At the same time, stillness would seem absolutely dynamic because there would no difference between stillness and dynamism.
(3) with a total lack of (2) and (1) is completely homogeneous as you would imagine(at (1)). It's so homogeneous infact that it is no different from the heterogeneity at (2).

It seems to me you haven't properly experienced a lack (2). Maybe you collapsed the distinction of the idea of "objects" but that doesn't automatically include other ideas like shape, odour, color, movement, time, space, self etc. All of that needs to be individually worked on. The first time I realized that my keyboard was physically(not even metaphysically) the same as my hands, I physically recoiled because I thought the keyboard and my hand would merge, as if the keyboard was gonna attack me. Sounds ridiculous but it triggered a reflex. It can get real creepy if you don't collapse the distinction of self and everything else beforehand.
You need to address all the factors when removing (2) and they are really easy to miss. At the end you have to collapse the distinction between all these factors and between (1), (2) and (3) themselves. I mean, just (3) is pure beingness. That's what you necessarily end up with if you get rid of all the distinctions, which are at (2) in your model.


Or so I assumed, after re-reading your post, it seems (2) only contains the connecting of dots and concepts. That assumes a distinctions between concepts. So yeah, I see how you would logically arrive at distinctions being at (3). In that case, God's imagination/Qualia would start at (4) which precedes all distinctions of (3). But ultimately contains (1), (2) and (3) as well.

[jelmar35]

@Sempiternity @Swarnim Awesome guys, thanks for taking the time.

@Swarnim Yes, with transcending (2), I basically meant the state you would have if you had zero thoughts at all (as in "zero voices/images in the head"). So, if I understand it correctly, the distinctions between colors do result from imagination that precedes (2). So to transcend distinctions between colors, I would have to do more than just transcend thoughts. Or is it the case that when all interpretation ceases, the truth of a lack of distinctions just becomes apparent.

I indeed have not really had any huge mystical experiences. I have had glimpses of no-self and have become quite adept at noticing my own thinking.

You have said that at the level of God's imagination, all distinction disappears, but is it not this imagination that creates (the appearance of) distinction?

I would be fully content btw with an answer like "meditate more, do psychedelics" etc. Nevertheless, it feels like making this more concrete would make it easier for me to know what to look out for. Thanks

[Michal__]

You can build up your imagination so much that you can create a realistic alligator in your room than you can completely see, travel to realms that are completely realistic with their own rules without sleeping or draw stuff in the air that other people who do a similiar practice in similiar doses can see and tell you information that you didnt tell them and they have no way of knowing it,

Also you can make yourself have hyperreal dreams about things you want to happen and they will then happen in this reality.

Do a multiweek kasina retreat where you spend all day doing it. Learn basic magick. Have fun.

[caspex]

@jelmar35 I think you're only looking at surface level thoughts and activity when you talk about (2). This is what I mean:
You can stop all voices, sounds, images in the head and still function properly in your immediate environment. This is possible because none of that is necessary for action and decision making in the moment. Your mind functions normally, making assumptions, interpreting, projecting, reacting, just without gross thoughts. These subtle thoughts usually give rise to the gross thoughts. The most major subtle act of the mind is the Self. You're not actively thinking "Me, Me, Me" in a gross form right? But the self is still always there in the background. This is what assumptions, interpretations, worldviews, etc. are like.
To transcend thought completely, I'd argue one needs to transcend these subtle activities of the mind as well, which necessarily includes transcending the self(It's a distinction). It's among the subtlest of the subtle thoughts and acts by the mind, that creates distinctions between things for the purposes of survival. It's so subtle of an act that it seems as if it is a fact. Creating a distinction between Red and Blue would be one of those things.
The ability to notice subtle acts of the mind is called Mindfulness. Just doing practices to notice the illusion of self will increase your mindfulness in noticing other subtle distinctions. You really need to be on the lookout for these things.
 

Quote

You have said that at the level of God's imagination, all distinction disappears, but is it not this imagination that creates (the appearance of) distinction?

God's imagining all the distinctions(because it imagines (2)) but if you want to experience what it would be like without the distinctions, then you'd call that the experience of Oneness.

[jelmar35]

@Swarnim Thank you, man. My awareness has indeed been getting subtler and subtler and I notice there is still a lot that I am missing.

I will continue my journey.

[Kamo]

The mind wont graps this easily without the use of changing your state of consciousness. You must take a psychedelic then observe all 3 changing. Then you will be able to understand your question.@jelmar35