The Paradox of Solipsism

[godwide_void]

I don't believe I need to rehash to anybody here that all things exist within the Creator, and the Creator exists within all things. Everything exists.

There is also the notion that an individual's reality is a direct reflection of their psyche, this being sustained by the Law of Attraction which entails that the frequency at which a being/their thoughts vibrates will attract to itself those people, place and circumstances which vibrates similarly. Every interaction and experience which occurs does so in accordance with the Universe's personal course for you to learn, so every scenario one finds themselves in and the people met face to face all occur for the purpose of allowing you to learn. The aspects of the Creator/other-selves you meet are apparently reflections of yourself and represent some aspect of yourself which you must face, address, etc. The reason and what they represent varies, but the Ra material states that all are reflections of the self (though perhaps I am reading a bit too into it and they simply meant that by reflections they meant it is Creator facing Creator).

The formula for the Law of Attraction is as such:

(Belief + Vision)Passion = Manifestation

These are the elements of your vibrational frequency.

(Belief * Passion) + (Vision * Passion) = Manifestation

Your vibrational frequency is determined by the first part of the formula, your beliefs multiplied by your passion. Then, the vision multiplied by your passion sets the exact thought manifestation. The two are synchronized by your passion. When all is in harmony, your thought manifestation becomes particle in the world of space/time.

The basic gist of solipsism is that reality is nothing more than a creation of the mind and falling in line with the theory of the Holographic Universe, would be true, as our thoughts do play a key role in the reality we find ourselves in. This, however, is also not true as the people one meets and the places/scenarios one finds themselves in are not only figments of the imagination since the Creator isn't a creation of the individual's mind, but the other way around. I am also of the opinion that in some cases, perhaps solipsism is part of what drives the STS adept?

So our individuated personal Universes both overlap with the Universes of others, thus we co-Create the larger Universe together, but at the same time we are creating these Universes we are in with our minds through the various mental distortions/beliefs we hold and the thoughts we dwell upon, however the reality we find ourselves in may not always be what we expect as there exists the possibility that certain thoughts lingering in our minds conflict with what we may hope to manifest and lead either to the non-manifestation of our desires or a completely odd outcome fraught with circumstances we did not hope to find ourselves in, though those circumstances exist in the first place because of the mental biases held and in some cases (if these biases are counter-productive to your chosen path) these situations occur so that one may rid themselves of the unnecessary distortions one might have developed.

We first create our reality, which is embedded into the larger reality, fitting somewhere in the cosmic jigsaw puzzle, then the realities of others joins together to form the entire piece.

Sorry for the long-winded rant

[Plenum]

I confess, I couldn't follow the fine turnings in your argument.

I believe you are asking about the nature of Co-Creation?

and what hand we have in that?

I think the Will is paramount here.

[drifting pages]

I find that right now answering is not productive. Logic can only get you so far.

I am used with the unknown now and any attempt to intellectualize consciousness seems futile.

Living the moment,focusing on what i prefer in a state of surrender and a certain detachment is the most effective stance i know.

I love my 3D mind very much but overburdening it with pros and cons and this and that and more and more details is torture.

Blessings

[godwide_void]

I agree drifting pages, I felt like I was somewhat going in circles in my mind trying to capture and convey this sort of understanding with a language that, as deeply comprehensive as it is, falls short in fully and accurately describing such processes. As powerful as words are, they can also be very unnecessary, and even Ra at times were unable to precisely convey a concept seeing as how it was either beyond words, or there just wasn't sufficient enough capabilities in our language to string it all together (yet they still managed to blow minds word by word!). It's intriguing though how there are so many possible ways that one concept can be interpreted, deconstructed, described, analyzed, explained. I guess in 4D it'll be the norm to look into the eyes of another and just be on the same page, where that indescribable sense of inner knowing comes out and is instantly recognized and understood.

[charlie2012]

Thank you very much godwide_void, you described one if the key processes of this place very well. I am going through a process of learning, forgetting and relearning the small "rules" that make up our experience. Your words made the process clarified my own understanding greatly. I'd like to add a little view: take creator A and B that are sitting in a room. A: s energy is flowing through only through his heart chakra, while B has a complex variation of distortions which makes his enrgy flow through all of the lower chakras. The light meets between the two creators and reflects from and passes through to each otherself at different rates depending on the intensity/vibration. A: s light shines easier through to B than the other way around and etc. What are your thoughts?

[drifting pages]

Godwide_Void

I have dealt with the problem of solipsism many many times, so my answer above is the one i found that gave me balance and direction of focus.

That said

Regardless of solipsism being true or not, which is something i can't verify right now and don't know how can be verifiable.

How do i want to live in the NOW, what types of experience do i prefer, this is how i see it, regardless of the nature of existence\awareness in relation to a self or identity.

Love or fear. Joy or depression\anger\hate.... and so forth..

[Ali Quadir]

Is it possible to define the paradox of solipsism in a simple sentence or paragraph? I've read this thread with keen interest over and over again, but I don't actually see what the problem is...

[godwide_void]

Thank you very much godwide_void, you described one if the key processes of this place very well. I am going through a process of learning, forgetting and relearning the small "rules" that make up our experience. Your words made the process clarified my own understanding greatly. I'd like to add a little view: take creator A and B that are sitting in a room. A: s energy is flowing through only through his heart chakra, while B has a complex variation of distortions which makes his enrgy flow through all of the lower chakras. The light meets between the two creators and reflects from and passes through to each otherself at different rates depending on the intensity/vibration. A: s light shines easier through to B than the other way around and etc. What are your thoughts?

Given that Creator A's being is dictated by his Heart chakra, we may assume that he/she is an open, loving, accepting, non-judgmental, and understanding person who tries to highlight the inherent good in people when he/she perceives another. I would think then, that the distortions/imbalances of Creator B, manifesting in any number of ways (communication issues, anxiety, comparison of him/herself and Creator A, sporadic outbursts, emotional issues, etc. which may all accumulate into a general feeling of low-self worth/hopelessness) during their conversation/time together, would be accepted by Creator A who has balanced love/compassion in him/herself.

Creator B's psyche is, for lack of a better term, jumbled up, and Creator A perhaps acts a reflection of the innermost aspect of B's mind which knows that none of these distortions equates to the end of the world or B's being a bad person, and to accept these distorted parts of the self as aspects of onesself, but not the defining factor. So Creator A represents Creator's B deepest desire to strive towards happiness and purification and exists as a teacher to B to help him recognize and overcome these distortions, which may happen when Creator B begins to see how much of a kind, loving and open person they are, and starts to confide in Creator A the inner turmoil he/she undergoes, and the expected result is Creator A counseling B, listening, understanding, offering insight, etc.

So how is Creator B a reflection of Creator A's psyche? Simply put, if Creator A desires to love all beings unconditionally, then he/she should be able to accept someone who is as 'flawed' as Creator B, so out of Creator A's desire to love others, regardless of their path, Creator B enters A's life and allows such an opportunity to occur. That's my take on your scenario anyways.

---

Godwide_Void

I have dealt with the problem of solipsism many many times, so my answer above is the one i found that gave me balance and direction of focus.

That said

Regardless of solipsism being true or not, which is something i can't verify right now and don't know how can be verifiable.

How do i want to live in the NOW, what types of experience do i prefer, this is how i see it, regardless of the nature of existence\awareness in relation to a self or identity.

Love or fear. Joy or depression\anger\hate.... and so forth..

I am glad my perspectives granted you some solace. And I agree with your sentiments that it's how one approaches the moment that really matters as opposed to what vast body of knowledge one draws from or what technical analysis one makes; everybody creates their own reality moment by moment, and whether one undergoes times of peace or chaos rests solely on you.

A classroom is a good example. Objectively, it's just a room with chairs. Add several people there, the students and teacher, and it has become a place where many vastly different realities are taking place. To one, school might be an intense bore, another may be daydreaming, another might be keenly interested in whats being discussed, and yet another may be struggling with some social anxiety and is dreading the entirety of the time there. So we have a prime example of a set, underlying reality existing independently of everyone there, and at the same time when many are gathered there (or even just one) different realities are created by the various minds which enter that sphere of consciousness. Reality exists apart from the mind, and the mind also creates its own reality within the reality it finds itself in.

Ali Quadir, I believe this analogy may better put what I was trying to get across in better perspective for you as well I hope. It's not so much a "problem" as it is an observation.

[drifting pages]

Solipsism ( /ˈsɒlɨpsɪzəm/) is the philosophical idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist. The term comes from Latin solus (alone) and ipse (self). Solipsism as an epistemological position holds that knowledge of anything outside one's own mind is unsure. The external world and other minds cannot be known, and might not exist outside the mind. As a metaphysical position, solipsism goes further to the conclusion that the world and other minds do not exist. As such it is the only epistemological position that, by its own postulate, is both irrefutable and yet indefensible in the same manner. Although the number of individuals sincerely espousing solipsism has been small, it is not uncommon for one philosopher to accuse another's arguments of entailing solipsism as an unwanted consequence, in a kind of reductio ad absurdum. In the history of philosophy, solipsism has served as a skeptical hypothesis.

Metaphysical solipsism

Metaphysical solipsism is the "strongest" variety of solipsism. Based on a philosophy of subjective idealism, metaphysical solipsists maintain that the self is the only existing reality and that all other reality, including the external world and other persons, are representations of that self, and have no independent existence.

Epistemological solipsism

Epistemological solipsism is the variety of idealism according to which only the directly accessible mental contents of the solipsistic philosopher can be known. The existence of an external world is regarded as an unresolvable question, or an unnecessary hypothesis rather than actually false.
Epistemological solipsists claim that realism begs the question: assuming there is a universe that is independent of the agent's mind, the agent can only ever know of this universe through its senses.
How is the existence of the independent universe to be scientifically studied? If a person sets up a camera to photograph the moon when they are not looking at it, then at best they determine that there is an image of the moon in the camera when they eventually look at it. Logically, this does not assure that the moon itself (or even the camera) existed at the time the photograph is supposed to have been taken. To establish that it is an image of an independent moon requires many other assumptions that amount to begging the question.

More at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism

---

Also check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie because it relates to the other topic.

[godwide_void]

I'm reading through the philosophical zombie article right now, but could you elaborate on how you feel it relates to it?

[Unbound]

Sounds to me like a simple expression of the nature of Illusion.

---

Of course, the Law of One messes with this concept.

To use the previous example of the camera and the Moon. The Moon is consciousness, the Camera is consciousness.

[isis]

i can't get solipsism out of my mind...pun intended...& i'd love to know every1's opinion on it that has one.

here's mine: i believe everything is within my mind & i think my mind is the one infinite creator's mind.

so how can i think i'm (technically) in another's mind if i can clearly see they're actually the one in my mind & that i'm actually the one on some sort of (unfathomable) "outside"...how can there be more than one mind?

i feel like a shell that not only contains existence but is existence. i feel i can only know for certain that my mind is here & that everything's in it & that if all is one then i'm alone.

this current understanding of things makes me feel lonely. it makes me savor every moment i'm feeling separate...& these moments never last long. i'm always going to back to the mindset that there can only be me (aka the one infinite creator) here.

this makes me not want to share the Law of One teachings bc i don't want to cause another to feel this loneliness that i feel when i think about infinite unity.

so what i'm really hoping for here is that some1 can communicate something to me that makes me want to remove "solus ipse" from under my user name.

[Unbound]

What am I thinking?

[isis]

What am I thinking?

all that matters is that u're thinking it inside of my mind.

[Unbound]

What am I thinking?

all that matters is that u're thinking it inside of my mind.

Are you sure it isn't you thinking it inside my head? Or really, who says thought happens in the head at all? Maybe we are thinking together.

The fact is though, you are not conscious of my thinking, therefore your consciousness is not equivalent to the One Infinite, which is conscious of my thinking. It is also conscious of your thinking, and the thinking of everyone and all things. The consciousness of the One Infinite is absolute.

The reason you feel alone is because you are only identifying with half of yourself. You see only your side, and do not let my side be. You see yourself as the One Infinite but do not see yourself as One that is part of Many that is part of One. You are getting the One, but not fully acknowledging the Infinite, it seems.

You are being the Creator but not embracing the Creation.

I may totally be wrong, but this is what the guides say right now, in context of this.

[GentleReckoning]

Google Voice time experience with this where someone is in a wheelchair and she had to have been in an accident that made her life very difficult she was living in a nursing home and I asked her what her dreams are like and it sounded like she was dreaming of everything that she would have been doing in a different time line if she hadn't made whatever decision it was that brought her down to the point where she was living in a nursing home so that makes me think that everybody else is simply reflecting um other peoples reality and might actually not be fully conscious so to speak in the reality that you're experiencing or actually fully conscious in every different decision making or Never different time line on but just experiencing I am one individual choice or one individual experience

[Spaced]

Sure the entirety of creation is created by you and everyone you come across is some aspect of yourself reflected back, but so too are you created by and a reflection of everyone you meet. It's a network of consciousness, unified and whole, that is creating and expressing itself thru individualized nodes.

[Poet]

i can't get solipsism out of my mind...pun intended...& i'd love to know every1's opinion on it that has one. (...)

My opinion on this issue is that human beings are not capable of understanding the creation by reason. I believe it is something which has to be experienced/felt...

I can give you some passages from the book "The Art of Loving" by Erich Fromm where he expressed this very beautifully:

There is one way, a desperate one, to know the secret [Fromm means the secret of live, we could also say: The nature of creation]: it is that of complete power over another person; the power which makes him do what we want, feel what we want, think what we want; which transforms him into a thing, our thing, our possession.
(...) The other path to knowing "the secret" is love. Love is active penetration of the other person, in which my desire to know is stilled by union. In the act of fusion I know you, I know myself, I know everybody—and I "know" nothing. I know the only way knowledge of that which is alive is possible for man—by experience of union—not by any knowledge our thought can give. (...) Love is the only way of knowledge, which in the act of union answers my quest. In the act of loving, of giving myself, in the act of penetrating the other person, I find myself, I discover myself, I discover us both, I discover man.
The longing to know ourselves and to know our fellow man has been expressed in the Delphic motto "Know thyself." It is the mainspring of all psychology. But inasmuch as the desire is to know all of man, his innermost secret, the desire can never be fulfilled in knowledge of the ordinary kind, in knowledge only by thought. Even if we knew a thousand times more of ourselves, we would never reach bottom. We would still remain an enigma to ourselves, as our fellow man would remain an enigma to us. The only way of full knowledge lies in the act of love: this act transcends thought, it transcends words. It is the daring plunge into the experience of union.
(...) The experience of union, with man, or religiously speaking, with God, is by no means irrational. On the contrary, it is as Albert Schweitzer has pointed out, the consequence of rationalism, its most daring and radical consequence. It is based on our knowledge of the fundamental, and not accidental, limitations of our knowledge. It is the knowledge that we shall never "grasp" the secret of man and of the universe, but that we can know, nevertheless, in the act of love.

I strongly experienced this feeling of union with another person just one time I can remember. It's a feeling of melting together, of completely knowing the other person in this exact moment. It doesn't matter about what you talk. It can also experienced when you engage in art, science, being in the nature or else. You relate yourself to something, melt with it, become one - and become the creator. Like it was said above, staying in the moment is very important in this respect and according to Fromm, it is the possibility to know. I believe one important step in achieving this is letting go of fear...

Fromm later goes into more detail about knowledge gained by thought (=reason). He discusses Aristotelian and paradoxical logic. I cannot post all here. If you want to read it, look on p. 72 and start reading there (send me a pm if you want the book). He concludes:

I have discussed the difference between Aristotelian and paradoxical logic in order to prepare the ground for an important difference in the concept of the love of God. The teachers of paradoxical logic say that man can perceive reality only in contradictions, and can never perceive in thought the ultimate reality-unity, the One itself. This led to the consequence that one did not seek as the ultimate aim to find the answer in thought. Thought can only lead us to the knowledge that it cannot give us the ultimate answer. The world of thought remains caught in the paradox. The only way in which the world can be grasped ultimately lies, not in thought, but in the act, in the experience of oneness. Thus paradoxical logic leads to the conclusion that the love of God is neither the knowledge of God in thought, nor the thought of one's love of God, but the act of experiencing the oneness with God.
(...) The emphasis on thought has also another and historically a very important consequence. The idea that one could find the truth in thought led not only to dogma, but also to science. In scientific thought, the correct thought is all that matters, both from the aspect of intellectual honesty, as well as from the aspect of the application of scientific thought to practice—that is, to technique.
In short, paradoxical thought led to tolerance and an effort toward self-transformation. The Aristotelian standpoint led to dogma and science, to the Catholic Church, and to the discovery of atomic energy.

Then you wrote:

this current understanding of things makes me feel lonely. it makes me savor every moment i'm feeling separate...& these moments never last long. i'm always going to back to the mindset that there can only be me (aka the one infinite creator) here.

this makes me not want to share the Law of One teachings bc i don't want to cause another to feel this loneliness that i feel when i think about infinite unity.

so what i'm really hoping for here is that some1 can communicate something to me that makes me want to remove "solus ipse" from under my user name.

So based on what I wrote, I think you shouldn't buy into this Aristotelian logic. You cannot explain the Law of One with it, creation will always remain mysterious and contradictory seen through these glasses. It also emphasises separateness. But as you know, we are all one. So relate yourself to something: Start again to tell others about the Law of One or do other things which you enjoy...

[isis]

i changed the thingy under my user name from "solus ipse" just bc i found 1 i liked a little better. i still think if all is one then that means there's only 1 of us here...only one infinite creator....no real co-creators...no real duality...only identity (it says in the LOO "there's only identity" & that doesn't seem like a good thing to me.) & for me explains why we're here all seemingly separate so much of the time. i've shared the LOO with 1 person so far bc i've only found 1 person that i thought could handle it. the LOO tells you that you are the one infinite creator & that's not something a lot of people can take.

all is one, and that one is, the Infinite Creator. unity/identity/the infinite creator is all that there is. this means you are all there is. each of us is somehow all there is. the self alone. solus ipse!

[Unbound]

Aloneness is defined by a contrast to togetherness which is aspect of duality. The One is not alone, but neither is it together, yet it is both, infinity accomodates all possibilities. Claiming the One Infinite Creator is only one thing but is not infinite will ever be a distortion of the truth. In infinity lies togetherness, in unity lies the one, both arise and work together, imo.

[βαθμιαίος]

the self alone

Which self?

[Adonai One]

the self alone

Which self?

Manyness is as illusory as death and unconciousness. There is only one that creates facades. The illusion does not define reality. Reality defines illusion.

"And said, Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither: the Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away..."

---

1.7 Questioner: [The question was lost because the questioner was sitting too far from the tape recorder to be recorded.]

Ra: I am Ra. Consider, if you will, that the universe is infinite. This has yet to be proven or disproven, but we can assure you that there is no end to your selves, your understanding, what you would call your journey of seeking, or your perceptions of the creation.

That which is infinite cannot be many, for many-ness is a finite concept. To have infinity you must identify or define that infinity as unity; otherwise, the term does not have any referent or meaning. In an Infinite Creator there is only unity. You have seen simple examples of unity. You have seen the prism which shows all colors stemming from the sunlight. This is a simplistic example of unity.

In truth there is no right or wrong. There is no polarity for all will be, as you would say, reconciled at some point in your dance through the mind/body/spirit complex which you amuse yourself by distorting in various ways at this time. This distortion is not in any case necessary. It is chosen by each of you as an alternative to understanding the complete unity of thought which binds all things. You are not speaking of similar or somewhat like entities or things. You are every thing, every being, every emotion, every event, every situation. You are unity. You are infinity. You are love/light, light/love. You are. This is the Law of One.

May we enunciate this law in more detail?

[Poet]

1.7 Questioner: [The question was lost because the questioner was sitting too far from the tape recorder to be recorded.]

Ra: I am Ra. Consider, if you will, that the universe is infinite. This has yet to be proven or disproven, but we can assure you that there is no end to your selves, your understanding, what you would call your journey of seeking, or your perceptions of the creation.

That which is infinite cannot be many, for many-ness is a finite concept. To have infinity you must identify or define that infinity as unity; otherwise, the term does not have any referent or meaning. In an Infinite Creator there is only unity. You have seen simple examples of unity. You have seen the prism which shows all colors stemming from the sunlight. This is a simplistic example of unity.

In truth there is no right or wrong. There is no polarity for all will be, as you would say, reconciled at some point in your dance through the mind/body/spirit complex which you amuse yourself by distorting in various ways at this time. This distortion is not in any case necessary. It is chosen by each of you as an alternative to understanding the complete unity of thought which binds all things. You are not speaking of similar or somewhat like entities or things. You are every thing, every being, every emotion, every event, every situation. You are unity. You are infinity. You are love/light, light/love. You are. This is the Law of One.

May we enunciate this law in more detail?

Interesting quote. Ra also states that "in truth, there is no right or wrong" which fits very well with the paradoxical logic described by Fromm. But the sentence must in my understanding be: "We are all one but at the same time we are all not one." I think this seperateness is in some way real, at least it becomes real through the experience of this illusion. In my current opinion, it is just a way of simplifying things when we say that "we all are one."

all is one, and that one is, the Infinite Creator. unity/identity/the infinite creator is all that there is. this means you are all there is. each of us is somehow all there is. the self alone. solus ipse!

This is the passage where you buy into Aristotelian logic (correct me if I'm wrong). You think because "all are one", it cannot be true that "all are not one", right? But this is Aristotelian logic, namely the law of contradiction (="A is B" and "A is not B" cannot be true at the same time). Fromm writes that you cannot understand creation with this logic, it is only possible with experience. And it can only be expressed with paradoxical logic (="A is B" and "A is not B" can be true at the same time).

[Unbound]

There is a name for that type of logic that allows such paradoxes isn't there? I hit this same wall of paradox and realized that the flaw was in idealistic forms of logic which were based on purely classical assumptions. I went searching and found that there are systems of logic which, as you say Poet, accomodate such paradoxes. The thought system one uses to interpret one's own body of conceptualizations will shape the form of one's entire worldview.

[Adonai One]

14.20 Questioner: And you ready yourselves for harvest through [the] best service you can provide. Is this correct?

Ra: This is correct. We offer the Law of One, the solving of paradoxes, the balancing of love/light and light/love.

http://www.lawofone.info/results.php?q=paradox

[isis]

right if 'true simultaneity' is real then 'solus ipse' is...real?

[Unbound]

Edit: It is real if that is what you choose to focus on within the One Infinite.

Yes, you are the One Infinite, and so are you all, and as am I, however do we all fully know ourselves? How can we, the One Infinite, know ourselves completely if we do not also know all others, who are the One Infinite? Yes, it is a paradox, we are all our own, complete, individual One Infinite Creator, we are all the One Infinite Creator, but we are all absolutely unique. You can think of the One Infinite as the archetypical blueprint of Creation and though it casts the fundamental mold of all things, all of those things then go on to change and create themselves as sovereign Creators, equal to the One Infinite.

My girlfriend has an interesting way of viewing it, with the One Infinite basically being a battery to power the continuous consciousness process of reality (my words aha).

[Adonai One]

The original state is a state of all-knowing. All else is illusion. Knowledge is an illusion.

[Unbound]

It is perhaps one of the most difficult thing to explain that even though we are unified, that doesn't mean we don't each have our own complete, individual existence. We are each a complete infinity, so we must all absolutely exist in and of ourselves, even if it may seem like unity causes there to be a lack of personal nature I have never been able to believe that because it doesn't make sense how something which is and manifests as all identity and personality lacks any sort of experience. Granted, there are a lot of weird things in existence which don't make sense to me, and perhaps they do to someone.

I guess this is just a very personal topic for me and not just because I have always been a lonely person, but in actuality the more I explore the nature of my mind the more I realize that everything is real or not real based on my decisions. Now, I also understand that the idea of "real" and "not real" are just descriptions I have applied to my experience as an expression of my emotional and intellectual relationship with them, as well as spiritual if I am in tune aha

Usually the things we don't want to be real are the things that frighten us or make us uncomfortable, whereas the things we do like we want to be real so we can experience them. However, we must remember these are just parts of a system in our minds. The things we want do not manifest based solely on wanting them, but also through the reconciliation with those things that frighten us as this fear ties up energy vital to the positive manifestation.

Negative energy is locked up potential energy. Those who use this with intentional lock up large amounts so it can be unleashed with fury or vast subtlety. Positive energy is kinetic energy, moving and flowing like an infinite, constant river. Negative energy is like rocks in lava or chunks of ice breaking off a glacier and flowing to warmer rivers on the currents. The two co-exist as aspects of the same thing.

We co-exist, my friend, TrueSimultaneity, although I do not know how to prove this to you besides the sheer tenacity of my existence as the One Infinite, aha! Much love.

---

The original state is a state of all-knowing. All else is illusion. Knowledge is an illusion.

Only if knowing is what is important to you, the One Infinite! Each experience of the moment is a refinement of the One Thought. A conscious creator can refine the One Thought in to anything and such is the skill of the master alchemist.

---

Of course, all in my opinion! Aha

[AnthroHeart]

So Tanner, the One Original Thought is evolving? Or is that a goal we should be seeking in its purity?