Bring4th

intelligent infinity, aka god :

http://lawofone.info/results.php?session...=1&ss=1#22

Quote:92.22 Questioner: I am assuming that she sits between the different colored columns, with the dark one on her left, to indicate at this position an equal opportunity for the potentiation of the mind to be of the negative or positive nature. Would Ra comment on this?

Ra: I am Ra. Although this is correct it is not as perceptive as the notice that the Priestess, as this figure has been called, sits within a structure in which polarity, symbolized as you correctly noted by the light and dark pillars, is an integral and necessary part. The unfed mind has no polarity just as intelligent infinity has none. The nature of the sub-sub-sub-Logos which offers the third-density experience is one of polarity, not by choice but by careful design.

We perceive an unclear statement. The polarity of Potentiator is there not for the Matrix to choose. It is there for the Matrix to accept as given.

it has no polarity - which means, it doesnt have a service to other polarity, or even a service to self polarity, when self is seen as everything, it has no polarity, it just is.

this is a significant piece of information.

Then what is 'Intelligent Infinity'? Does it feel anything? What is it learning or becoming through us? Important questions to consider given the fact that this illusion is largely by 'careful design' for a greater purpose. Can anyone throw more light on the concepts of 'the Matrix' and 'the potentiator'? I am not sure I understand. Thank you for the observation anyway unity100. Though as you say, god may be 'just is'; but it appears to revel in the play of hide and seek with us with the impishness of a little child.

i think matrix, potentiator etc are better discussed in the ever-straggling-foot-dragging thread that is going to be attended to, in the book iv discussion thread i believe.

(07-13-2010, 12:39 AM)unity100 Wrote: [ -> ]i think matrix, potentiator etc are better discussed in the ever-straggling-foot-dragging thread that is going to be attended to, in the book iv discussion thread i believe.

Thank you for pointing to the direction Unity100, in terms of the thread that can throw some light on the concepts that I queried upon. Your posts are quite thought provoking in general.

Yes indeed, All That Is is just that, all that exists. One could say it would be impossible for II to be polarized, as that would suggest preference, which would be impossible when all is equal, all is one.

(07-12-2010, 11:52 PM)Confused Wrote: [ -> ]Then what is 'Intelligent Infinity'? Does it feel anything? What is it learning or becoming through us? Important questions to consider given the fact that this illusion is largely by 'careful design' for a greater purpose. Can anyone throw more light on the concepts of 'the Matrix' and 'the potentiator'? I am not sure I understand. Thank you for the observation anyway unity100. Though as you say, god may be 'just is'; but it appears to revel in the play of hide and seek with us with the impishness of a little child.

Confused, you ask solid questions. The "What is intelligent infinity learning through us?" question I can not venture a sufficient reply.

As to "What is intelligent infinity?", I would look to the experience of the mystics. In different languages and using different symbology, they describe reality in terms that are remarkably uniform, all of them attesting to the ineffable nature of the experience.

In my little brain, intelligent infinity is empty, infinitely empty with no boundaries, no beginning, no end, no shape, no form, no space, no time, and no content whatsoever. In fact, if a description is requested, it could probably be described better in negative terms, the "neti, neti" practice.

In that emptiness, the manifested universe arises in the moment. But that arising universe is not other than intelligent infinity. There is no two-ness, there is no many and one. In intelligent infinity, there is only one infinity, an intelligent infinity.

Here is a cherished quote I keep with me from Ken Wilber, my favorite philosopher:

"So the call of the Nondual tradition is this: Abide as Emptiness, embrace all Form. The liberation is in the Emptiness, never in the Form, but Emptiness embraces all forms as a mirror all its objects."

The idea of embracing something as a mirror does with the objects reflected on its surface is a thought which opens me to deep contemplation.

And welcome to the forums! We embrace you as the mirror does its image. : )

Gary, great quote. I've thought very similar thoughts.

Intelligent Infinity, is Love, it is the potential.

It does have feeling and that feeling is love.


The great original thought is Intelligent Infinity/love.

Quote:There is unity. This unity is all that there is. This unity has a potential
and kinetic. The potential is intelligent infinity. Tapping this potential
will yield work. This work has been called by us, intelligent energy.

Infinity and Intelligent Infinity are paradoxically the and yet indifferent as one has come after the other due to the 'original thought' of the Creator. This is linear from my point of you I believe, but I maybe it is not linear and always has been and will be; thus, Intelligent Infinity is the same as Infinity and love will always be feeling/being-ness of the One Infinite Creator.

This is my perception.

Love and light.

@Bring4th_GLB - Thank you deeply for the warm welcome. You and your team are doing a wonderful job in service to this planet by hosting this website. Though your modesty may force you to demur, I personally believe that those of you at bring4th.org are actually at the forefront or vanguard in terms of co-creating the impending 4th density on this planet. In subtle and mysterious ways, bring4th.org is helping in the formation of a positive social memory complex, which may come into its fullness of exemplary manifestation as the 4th density vibrations assume complete sway over this planet.

(07-13-2010, 11:14 PM)LsavedSmeD Wrote: [ -> ]Intelligent Infinity, is Love, it is the potential.

It does have feeling and that feeling is love.


The great original thought is Intelligent Infinity/love.

intelligent infinity isnt love. it is infinity becoming consciousness.

Heh, last exchanges clearly demonstrate the ungraspable nature of intelligent infinity.

How can it not be love if it is infinite and the source for all, including love! How can it become consciousness when time exists only within it.

Is there anyone here who can make a valid case for it's existence? How do we know it exists at all? Don't get me wrong, I believe. I just feel it's one of those things that's impossible to catch in words without mutilating the concept in horrible ways.

if it is infinity, it ALSO contains love, and it also is love. however, that doesnt make it love. it doesnt define it. just like how each and every one of the people reading this thread are ALSO part of intelligent infinity and indispensable, but how they being as such does not make intelligent infinity's totality, definition those persons themselves.

http://lawofone.info/results.php?session_id=15&ss=1#21

we call it logos or love, for the lack of a better word in english. however, it is still not the same with what 'god is love' in religious or new age literature :

http://lawofone.info/results.php?session_id=27&ss=1#12

intelligent infinity exists before love even comes into being.

(07-14-2010, 09:34 AM)unity100 Wrote: [ -> ]if it is infinity, it ALSO contains love, and it also is love. however, that doesnt make it love. it doesnt define it. just like how each and every one of the people reading this thread are ALSO part of intelligent infinity and indispensable, but how they being as such does not make intelligent infinity's totality, definition those persons themselves.

http://lawofone.info/results.php?session_id=15&ss=1#21

we call it logos or love, for the lack of a better word in english. however, it is still not the same with what 'god is love' in religious or new age literature :

http://lawofone.info/results.php?session_id=27&ss=1#12

intelligent infinity exists before love even comes into being.

It is much like an un-carved block of the Taoist traditions "waiting to become".

Quote:There are two terms here, intelligent infinity and intelligent energy. We have identified them as the Creator’s love and light; the creative idea and the light, literally, used to manifest the idea. Here is another definition:

So "In the beginning" was not "The Word", but Thought. The Word, is thought expressed and made manifest as Creator.

Intelligent Infinity can be likened to the central 'Heartbeat' of Life, and Infinite Energy as the Spiritual 'Life-blood' (or potential) which 'pumps out' for the Creator to form the Creation.

Intelligent Infinity was the Infinite One, and its first expression of itself being the "word" which literally means Love/Logos; this would mean that the only way to express itself at first is love, because, it is not another essence but love.

So you can say that Intelligent Infinity is not love, but logically that would mean that it's first expression would be pure nothingness - if that is what your trying to say; however, this not the case.

Due One Infinite Creators great Original Thought (of love/the logos) the Creator will always be love because there is no time so in a confusing-paradoxic way, there is no beginning or end to the One Infinite Creator being love and or the great heart beat of the One Infinite Creator - each beat saying "love", "love", "love". So, this argument holds no reasoning as there is no end to the One Infinite Creators, infinite essence, of love.

(07-14-2010, 09:34 AM)unity100 Wrote: [ -> ]if it is infinity, it ALSO contains love, and it also is love. however, that doesnt make it love. it doesnt define it. just like how each and every one of the people reading this thread are ALSO part of intelligent infinity and indispensable, but how they being as such does not make intelligent infinity's totality, definition those persons themselves.

I understand what you're saying and you're right, generally speaking this is true, but according to the notion that all is one, or the holographic nature of the cosmos. We can assume that every individual present here IS in fact the whole universe. It is a matter of where you put your identification I think.

Quote:we call it logos or love, for the lack of a better word in english. however, it is still not the same with what 'god is love' in religious or new age literature :

Opinions differ in the new age literature that is true. However I've seen many uses of the words that do imply the same underlying insight. You are surely referring to a certain instance salient to you.

Quote:intelligent infinity exists before love even comes into being.

Do you think intelligent infinity is bound to time?

(07-14-2010, 10:05 AM)LsavedSmeD Wrote: [ -> ]Intelligent Infinity was the Infinite One, and its first expression of itself being the "word" which literally means Love/Logos; this would mean that the only way to express itself at first is love, because, it is not another essence but love.

that is erroneous in regard to what Ra says. ra says the first thing there was infinity, second was infinity becoming consciousness. this conscious infinity is intelligent infinity.

http://lawofone.info/results.php?session_id=13&ss=1#7

there is no 'word' or 'love' here. there is awareness.

http://lawofone.info/results.php?session_id=15&ss=1#21

Quote:15.21 Questioner: In yesterday’s material you mentioned that the first distortion was the distortion of free will. Is there a sequence, a first, second, and third distortion of the Law of One?

Ra: I am Ra. Only up to a very short point. After this point, the many-ness of distortions are equal one to another. The first distortion, free will, finds focus. This is the second distortion known to you as Logos, the Creative Principle or Love. This intelligent energy thus creates a distortion known as Light. From these three distortions come many, many hierarchies of distortions, each having its own paradoxes to be synthesized, no one being more important than another.

that means intelligent infinity is there, it realizes the first distortion that is free will, then this, finding a focus, leads to second distortion, creative principle, or love. this is what Ra says. the intelligent energy becomes at this point. then, this creates another distortion, the third, light.

if you go to first expressions or how it can express itself or similar, the first way, first distortion that intelligent infinity expresses itself becomes free will. if you push it so far as to try to define infinity with its first expression, it therefore becomes, free will. love, is what comes into being after that point, and as a result of this.

Quote:So you can say that Intelligent Infinity is not love, but logically that would mean that it's first expression would be pure nothingness - if that is what your trying to say; however, this not the case.

its first expression is free will.

pure nothingness, is infinity. it is 3 principles above love, 2 principles above free will, 1 principle above intelligent infinity.

Quote:Due One Infinite Creators great Original Thought (of love/the logos) the Creator will always be love because there is no time so in a confusing-paradoxic way, there is no beginning or end to the One Infinite Creator being love and or the great heart beat of the One Infinite Creator - each beat saying "love", "love", "love". So, this argument holds no reasoning as there is no end to the One Infinite Creators, infinite essence, of love.

according to what Ra says, the 'original thought' is free will, as in the above.

---

(07-14-2010, 10:41 AM)Ali Quadir Wrote: [ -> ]I understand what you're saying and you're right, generally speaking this is true, but according to the notion that all is one, or the holographic nature of the cosmos. We can assume that every individual present here IS in fact the whole universe. It is a matter of where you put your identification I think.

a microcosm being infinite in itself, inside, does not mean it can encompass entirety of infinity outside.

if, it was possible, negative path wouldnt have to turn at the early stages of 6d to positive, because they would be able to transplant themselves, a microcosm, as the entire infinity inside and outside themselves.

but, because they can not, they have to merge with entire infinity themselves.

Quote:

Quote:intelligent infinity exists before love even comes into being.

Do you think intelligent infinity is bound to time?

before/after in this context are not relevant to time. take them as priority if you will, take them as cause-effect if you will, take them as being higher principles if you will.

(07-14-2010, 10:41 AM)unity100 Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-14-2010, 10:41 AM)Ali Quadir Wrote: [ -> ]I understand what you're saying and you're right, generally speaking this is true, but according to the notion that all is one, or the holographic nature of the cosmos. We can assume that every individual present here IS in fact the whole universe. It is a matter of where you put your identification I think.

a microcosm being infinite in itself, inside, does not mean it can encompass entirety of infinity outside.

Inside and outside, the terms you use here are a bit tricky. Because in holography we can't really say one thing is separated from the other. If you have a holographic image of both an apple and a tree. Then the apple inside the hologram is not outside of the tree. You cannot change the apple without changing the tree. If you are to cut the holographic image in half you get two the same images.

A microcosm in this sense is infinite in itself and is completely linked with anything outside of it. The all is one principle doesn't just mean that there is a unity in which all things exist... It means that unity exists in all things.

All is one.. Not one is all..

Quote:if, it was possible, negative path wouldnt have to turn at the early stages of 6d to positive, because they would be able to transplant themselves, a microcosm, as the entire infinity inside and outside themselves.

Sorry, I don't see why that would be...Why would they be able to transplant themselves? The seed of having to return to the positive is embedded in themselves. No matter where they transplant to they would take this seed with them. It is inherent in their path. There is no outside forcing them to do anything, the whole reason they eventually turn back to positive lies within.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:intelligent infinity exists before love even comes into being.

Do you think intelligent infinity is bound to time?

before/after in this context are not relevant to time. take them as priority if you will, take them as cause-effect if you will, take them as being higher principles if you will.

Cause and effect do not exist outside of locality or the time frame. At that point is a higher order effect we usually call synchronicity.

Are you saying that the higher order effect of love is infinity?

If you are saying that then we agree.

(07-14-2010, 11:10 AM)Ali Quadir Wrote: [ -> ]Inside and outside, the terms you use here are a bit tricky. Because in holography we can't really say one thing is separated from the other. If you have a holographic image of both an apple and a tree. Then the apple inside the hologram is not outside of the tree. You cannot change the apple without changing the tree. If you are to cut the holographic image in half you get two the same images.

A microcosm in this sense is infinite in itself and is completely linked with anything outside of it. The all is one principle doesn't just mean that there is a unity in which all things exist... It means that unity exists in all things.

All is one.. Not one is all..

this is not related to linkage, causality or changing.

even in your example, however it would be impossible to analyze infinity with holographic projections and thoughts, still the apple inside that tree cannot encompass and summarize the entire apple+tree. it may be a microcosm in itself and go infinitely towards into own self, but still it cannot encompass the tree and itself at the same time.

the fact that infinity minus any finite entity not being the same infinity anymore, doesnt make infinity any of its subsets. it only makes those subsets as important as infinity.

Quote:Sorry, I don't see why that would be...Why would they be able to transplant themselves? The seed of having to return to the positive is embedded in themselves. No matter where they transplant to they would take this seed with them. It is inherent in their path. There is no outside forcing them to do anything, the whole reason they eventually turn back to positive lies within.

this is not relevant to any kind of seed, and there is no seed either.

they are trying to revert the flow of existence. flow of energy. the principle of existence.

inwards instead of outwards.

all the existence, manifestation is flowing outwards (also has parallels with dewey's physics that was examined in Ra material).

these entities are trying to stop it first (by clogging their centers) and then turn it inwards.

to do that, they need to clog all centers and then suck all the energy from outside.

they are doing that until early 6d. at which point, they start to experience problems in the mechanic, because, their finite existence cannot encompass infinity, as the 6d entity starts to become more and more cocreator with the creation.

their own selves cannot suck up the infinite energy of existence, so, in that sense, they are unable to express infinity in their own self only.

they have to again merge with infinity, with everything else.

had they been able to say 'everything is me', they would be able to do it. but saying is one thing, believing is one thing, manifesting it is another. for that manifestation, they would be able to suck in all infinity. they cant, so they return to positive format.

Quote:Cause and effect do not exist outside of locality or the time frame. At that point is a higher order effect we usually call synchronicity.

Are you saying that the higher order effect of love is infinity?

If you are saying that then we agree.

it doesnt matter what kind of approach you use in analyzing this. take it as hierarchy if you will. if you dont want to translate to casuality.

for intelligent infinity to exist, there has to be infinity. for for free will to exist there has to be intelligent infinity. for love to exist, there has to be free will. for light to exist, there has to be love. and so on.

actually these all has to be higher order's subsets. intelligent infinity, is not infinity anymore. it is different than it, and very very probably, a subset missing some particular aspect. when combined with that aspect, it will probably again return to stillness, and there would again be infinity in which nothing happens and everything happens. but that is a different and long topic.

by the way, cause-effect are not tied to time. just, all causes and all effects combine into a null point in infinity, nullifying each other. for anything under infinity, cause-effect should exists.

(07-14-2010, 12:55 AM)Confused Wrote: [ -> ]@Bring4th_GLB - Thank you deeply for the warm welcome. You and your team are doing a wonderful job in service to this planet by hosting this website. Though your modesty may force you to demur, I personally believe that those of you at bring4th.org are actually at the forefront or vanguard in terms of co-creating the impending 4th density on this planet. In subtle and mysterious ways, bring4th.org is helping in the formation of a positive social memory complex, which may come into its fullness of exemplary manifestation as the 4th density vibrations assume complete sway over this planet.

Dear Confused, if your supposition is right, that is if those of Bring4th.org are at the vanguard of that which is co-creating the coming density, then I thank you for being a part of this Bring4th experience and exponentially adding to the collective power of the co-creators. We are all in this boat together and your service is needed and appreciated.

Love and Light to you fellow seeker of truth,
GLB

(07-14-2010, 09:03 AM)Ali Quadir Wrote: [ -> ]How can it become consciousness when time exists only within it.

Great thought Ali. Anything that happens in time - anything which has a beginning and end - is not the real, is not intelligent infinity in its unmanifest, undistorted, pure form.

Actually, what I just wrote is a way of conceiving that which cannot be conceived. I can see how the concept of "infinity" would contradict even what I just wrote... and any thought I can possibly attempt to throw at infinity.

How about this? Infinity (intelligent or otherwise) is trans-conceptual. Meaning that it goes beyond all intellectual conception - all POSSIBLE conception - even beyond the definitions of those of us who may be hell-bent on defining it in absolute, conceptual terms. (I won't mention any names... because Unity100 knows who he is.)

Still, I much enjoy your thought, Ali Quadir!

Love/Light,
GLB

(07-15-2010, 01:10 AM)Bring4th_GLB Wrote: [ -> ]How about this? Infinity (intelligent or otherwise) is trans-conceptual. Meaning that it goes beyond all intellectual conception - all POSSIBLE conception - even beyond the definitions of those of us who may be hell-bent on defining it in absolute, conceptual terms.

Makes sense and sounds pretty cool but I think I'll stick with good old infinity...

Quote:13.12 Questioner: Can you tell me how intelligent [Transconceptual] became [...] individualized from itself?

Ra: I am Ra. This is an appropriate question.

The intelligent [Transconceptual] discerned a concept. This concept...

(07-14-2010, 11:26 AM)unity100 Wrote: [ -> ]even in your example, however it would be impossible to analyze infinity with holographic projections and thoughts, still the apple inside that tree cannot encompass and summarize the entire apple+tree. it may be a microcosm in itself and go infinitely towards into own self, but still it cannot encompass the tree and itself at the same time.

It does. In a holographic image most definitely all the objects in the image are part of the same wave function. We can discuss the relevance to intelligent infinity. But stating that in a holographic image the apple inside the tree cannot encompass the entire apple+tree is going against common scientific knowledge.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holography

Quote:the fact that infinity minus any finite entity not being the same infinity anymore, doesnt make infinity any of its subsets. it only makes those subsets as important as infinity.

Maybe the mistake is that an apple is a finite entity. It's not, not in a holographic sense, not in a quantum mechanical sense, not in a spiritual sense. It is only finite in the classical mechanical sense.

In fact finiteness doesn't actually exist in reality. Finiteness exists wherever there exists information. An actual object is infinite in too many ways. It is for example spread out across the totality of space. It has for example infinite microcosms inside of it. It is interacting with other objects in the universe in infinite even if subtle ways.

Information is as far as I know the only finite thing that exists. Our minds work with information. We therefore tend to impose finiteness on impressions we call objects. Both finiteness and objects are illusory. Even mental or emotional objects.

Quote:

Quote:Sorry, I don't see why that would be...Why would they be able to transplant themselves? The seed of having to return to the positive is embedded in themselves. No matter where they transplant to they would take this seed with them. It is inherent in their path. There is no outside forcing them to do anything, the whole reason they eventually turn back to positive lies within.

this is not relevant to any kind of seed, and there is no seed either.
they are trying to revert the flow of existence. flow of energy. the principle of existence.

inwards instead of outwards.

Isn't the flow of existence a rhythmic breathing? In many many systems there is always the duality of two flows in different directions. Their polarity is what causes reality.

Quote:they are doing that until early 6d. at which point, they start to experience problems in the mechanic, because, their finite existence cannot encompass infinity, as the 6d entity starts to become more and more cocreator with the creation.

This is what I meant with the seed. It is inherent in them to have to move towards the positive at some point. Just like it is inherent in a parasite not to kill the host. They have to or they stop existing.

Quote:had they been able to say 'everything is me', they would be able to do it. but saying is one thing, believing is one thing, manifesting it is another. for that manifestation, they would be able to suck in all infinity. they cant, so they return to positive format.

Suck in infinity? This links back to the holographic model we discussed above. You seem to feel that to become one with all we have to somehow suck it all in? The truth is we already are one with all. It's not a matter of sucking anything in or becoming one with anything. Spirituality is the slow progressive realization that we are one with everything.

Quote:

Quote:Cause and effect do not exist outside of locality or the time frame. At that point is a higher order effect we usually call synchronicity.

Are you saying that the higher order effect of love is infinity?

If you are saying that then we agree.

it doesnt matter what kind of approach you use in analyzing this. take it as hierarchy if you will. if you dont want to translate to casuality.

for intelligent infinity to exist, there has to be infinity. for for free will to exist there has to be intelligent infinity. for love to exist, there has to be free will. for light to exist, there has to be love. and so on.

These are all suppositions. They sound logical enough but I don't see why
they should be true. I might as well say.

For free will to exist there must be intelligence. For intelligence to exist there must be love. For love to exist there must be light.

It's all arbitrary.. The hierarchy you speak of is one you impose on the reality. The reality itself is a mishmash of patterns and information. It does not require the hierarchy you speak of. It's much more organic than systematic.

What does happen is that there are higher order interactions for example between infinity and intelligence. And between intelligence and love. These things are like you say linked together.

We could call this higher order intelligence. Concepts like intelligent infinity like Ra uses refer to these higher order patterns. Intelligent infinity does not mean there is an actual infinity somewhere which is intelligent. It means something that can in our minds best be represented by that image.

Quote:by the way, cause-effect are not tied to time. just, all causes and all effects combine into a null point in infinity, nullifying each other. for anything under infinity, cause-effect should exists.

This is just semantics. But cause and effect do imply an order which is usually temporal. They imply that the cause leads to the effect. But the truth in the matter is that causes and effects exist together. You cannot remove an effect from it's cause. You can only change the flow of events. But every cause will have an effect. Every effect will have a cause. If you remove temporality from the equation all you'll lose all hierarchy.

An event like 2012 for example. Is this the effect of the changes leading up to it? Or is it the cause for those changes to occur? Many times the cause lies after the effect in time. But if that's true, then really they are two sides of a coin. Not separate events in space time connected by causality.

(07-14-2010, 09:03 AM)Ali Quadir Wrote: [ -> ]Heh, last exchanges clearly demonstrate the ungraspable nature of intelligent infinity.

How can it not be love if it is infinite and the source for all, including love! How can it become consciousness when time exists only within it.

Is there anyone here who can make a valid case for it's existence? How do we know it exists at all? Don't get me wrong, I believe. I just feel it's one of those things that's impossible to catch in words without mutilating the concept in horrible ways.

I will enjoy trying to reach for an answer. Modern Science cannot explain where our conciseness comes from, but somehow we are all here together on this plane, looking at each other wondering what we are.
Here we are, all of us, thinking to ourselves, or are we? Could the thoughts we have separately but simultaneously actually be from one thought divided? Where is the proof? The only thing that I can think of that goes towards proof is that we have emotions that we can all agree on. We have given words to identify these emotions. We can all agree what each feels like. Fear is a good one. We have all felt fear at some time in our lives, and regardless of the catalyst for the fear, fear feels like fear to me the same it feels to you. It feels like Fear. How is it possible that all of us, each one of us, have this same emotion? Some emotions may be stronger in other people, but the essence of the emotion is unchanged. We are separate, yet the same. Where do the emotions come from? I propose that our emotional states come from one conscious thought shared amongst us. The thought manifest itself in us as emotions, giving evidence that there is only one of us, which leads to intelligent infinity.

Hey Seejay I think you hit the nail on the head. Proof is something that isn't compatible with reality... Empirical science by definition never delivers proof. However, if you want to see the evidence for the idea that all is one you could look into the field theories. Ervin László for example is quite informed and has written about this in great detail.

If you really want to get to the bottom of this a study of systems theory will get you far.

(07-15-2010, 05:18 AM)seejay21 Wrote: [ -> ]Here we are, all of us, thinking to ourselves, or are we? Could the thoughts we have separately but simultaneously actually be from one thought divided? Where is the proof? The only thing that I can think of that goes towards proof is that we have emotions that we can all agree on. We have given words to identify these emotions.

It is exactly that, one thought, but not divided (this implies separation), more so a subset, the 'hierarchy' of the Logos of thought/consciousness, one stemming from the other.

seejay21 Wrote:Where do the emotions come from? I propose that our emotional states come from one conscious thought shared amongst us. The thought manifest itself in us as emotions, giving evidence that there is only one of us, which leads to intelligent infinity.

From my understanding, emotions are different vibrational levels, just as the colours of the rainbow. Depending on our state of mind, we operate (within different life contexts of course) at particular levels of vibration (from fear to love). The level we vibrate at not only attracts us more of the same, but it is the point of generation of our thoughts, which are then put through filters and patterns we have constructed through our years of experience. Hence, when in a state of fear, thoughts and decisions are created that reflect that level. The same goes for love, and everything in between.

We all tap into the same 'pot' of emotion, just as the colours you see all stem from the same spectral vibration. The same with taste, sound, touch, everything. All various levels of energy, vibrating at different frequencies'.

Edit: this is why I consider the jump to 4D to be so incredible; the entire nature/laws of the density are changing.

Imagine a graph, with time along the bottom (x), and emotional level on the side (y). As one moves through life, their emotions fluctuate, so they will flow along the time axis, making wave patterns. We all do this concurrently, on the same graph. We share the levels. This also explains when you are with someone you 'click' with, you may think the same kind of thoughts. You are on very similar vibrational levels.

Ali Quadir Wrote:Maybe the mistake is that an apple is a finite entity. It's not, not in a holographic sense, not in a quantum mechanical sense, not in a spiritual sense. It is only finite in the classical mechanical sense.

In fact finiteness doesn't actually exist in reality. Finiteness exists wherever there exists information. An actual object is infinite in too many ways. It is for example spread out across the totality of space. It has for example infinite microcosms inside of it. It is interacting with other objects in the universe in infinite even if subtle ways.

Agreed. The rational mind likes to consider all things finite as they are easier to understand, measure and quantify. This approach is very useful in the Newtonian mindset, i.e. planning the slingshot approach of a satellite around a planet, but fails to grasp metaphysical/philosophical principles with regard to consciousness and existence.

It is a shame that, back in the days of our leaps in scientific understanding, science and spirituality were indefinitely separated and considered mutually exclusive of each other (it was actually against the law to do so). This hindered the evolution of consciousness on our planet for centuries, and still is a major factor in the way this world generates conflict and disharmony within itself.

Science and spirituality are two sides fo the same coin, and from a balanced perspective, understanding both gives one much ability to understand the whole experience of life.

unity100 Wrote:even in your example, however it would be impossible to analyze infinity with holographic projections and thoughts, still the apple inside that tree cannot encompass and summarize the entire apple+tree.

One should avoid stating what is impossible, as that is a personal mindset limited to subjective (and current) understanding. Many great discoveries and inventions emerge from considering the 'impossible'.

unity100 Wrote:it may be a microcosm in itself and go infinitely towards into own self, but still it cannot encompass the tree and itself at the same time

That is the exact nature of a fractal, and it is becoming widely accepted that is entire universe is that of a fractal hologram. The book, The Holographic Universe (Michael Talbot), is of incredible value. Highly recommended.

Many other channeled entities discuss the nature of the universe, Bashar in particular. Also invaluable.

GLB Wrote:How about this? Infinity (intelligent or otherwise) is trans-conceptual. Meaning that it goes beyond all intellectual conception - all POSSIBLE conception - even beyond the definitions of those of us who may be hell-bent on defining it in absolute, conceptual terms. (I won't mention any names... because Unity100 knows who he is.)

I think brother, the word is ineffable (which I seem to recall you using in another thread recently)...

Quote:Ineffable: Incapable of being expressed; indescribable or unutterable

One could consider trying to describe intelligent infinity from the perspective of a third density mindset, ineffable (although very intellectually stimulating) :¬)

Peace brothers.

i dont want to continue this discussion, because we discussed it many times, and it will become just a repetition of those discussions. however, i will state a few important points and leave this train of thought. there are many sub points in people's posts, and if i get into each, each of those have the potential of going towards full fledged topics itself, as far as i can see.

infinity has to be infinite in every aspect. this needing to be infinite is not limited to physical or dimensional characteristics. i am never discussing infinity with ascribing it only such characteristics, when i say infinite, i mean infinite in every way. this also means that, there is only one infinity that is possible, and anything that is a differentiation out of it, has to be different from it. because, if anything different from it would retain the same properties, it would be the same infinity, and nothing else. therefore, this makes infinite intelligence, and the chain starting from it, different from infinity. when they again complete to infinity - and this includes infinite intelligence, aka god - they again all together become just infinity, and there will only be infinity again.

conclusively, nothing different from infinity itself, can express, contain (in every sense) or manifest or become in any way analogous with infinity. to be infinite, things need to be infinite, and when they are infinite, there is only one infinity, and it is, well, the infinity we name. all the conclusions that follow behind come as a result of this, like how a negative cant go on after 6th density. it cannot force infinity to merge into itself, it has to merge into infinite.

on holograms, fractals, fractal universes - universes are just the physical manifestation nodules, units we know. they are by no means the entirety of infinity, or, its subset, infinite intelligence. it is highly possible that an infinite array of manifestation methods, possibilities and physicalities exist. i am taking these into account while pondering infinity. therefore, i am just analyzing it in logic terms; infinity or its subsets. one should not err in that point by thinking 'logic cannot etc', because the very conclusion of Law of One, is created with the same kind of logic -> there is one, therefore everything that exists is one. (as subsets of a greater whole). actually even more possibly, anything that we observe and know in this universe as anything, is probably contained within the set of universal rules this universe's central logos set for this universe. this includes physical as well as the rules and concepts that exist for time/space and all relevant manifestations. (physical or astral or so on).

as for the 'hierarchy/priority/whatever' of infinity, infinite intelligence and as such, well, whatever you name or take it as, such a thing exists. else, ra wouldnt have described the manifestation of the creation as such. ra would just say 'there is infinity. everything exists' and cut it. but they didnt. instead, it is described that first thing existing is infinity, second conscious infinity, aka infinite intelligence, and all the others start to come into being through distortions after this. it doesnt matter whether this may be related to time, priority, etc. what matters is, as Ra tells us, such a thing, exists. infinite intelligence cannot replace for infinity, intelligent energy cannot replace for infinite intelligence and so on.

at this point, i very much think, intelligent infinity having no polarization should be the thing we are concentrating at. it is quite important. when you add that Ra also says they are seeking without polarization, it becomes important as to understand the real nature of existence.

(07-15-2010, 07:02 AM)Namaste Wrote: [ -> ]I think brother, the word is ineffable (which I seem to recall you using in another thread recently)...

Quote:Ineffable: Incapable of being expressed; indescribable or unutterable

One could consider trying to describe intelligent infinity from the perspective of a third density mindset, ineffable (although very intellectually stimulating) :¬)

That's it, Namaste! "Ineffable". Much better ring to it. Also, Poffo, I agree, substituting "transconceptual" for the word "infinity" makes it a rather clunky affair. : ) And Unity100, great post #25!

I just wanted to clarify to anyone participating in this thread that I meant not to negate any of your excellent thoughts. Nor to suggest that this is not a topic worthy of exploration and discussion.

In my previous post, I just hoped to lighten and soften the effort to understand through the process of rational thought that which, in the end, will forever elude thought. This is just my opinion but is also one shared by every human who has become the drop in the ocean, that is, every entity who has dissolved the boundaries of the separate self in the ocean of intelligent infinity.

If we approach the infinite that way, then maybe we can release the intense need to cling to "is" and "is not" and nail it down to an absolutely pristine definition.

Which is not to say that it's not worthy to "define" intelligent infinity as clearly as possible - much productive conversation and thought can ensue from the attempt - it is only to suggest that we can shift our focus ever so slightly to the art of relating to other people with flexibility, warmth, and humor, realizing that our most important function here is to relate to, understand, and respect others.

Lots of love to all,
GLB

(07-15-2010, 09:14 AM)unity100 Wrote: [ -> ]i dont want to continue this discussion, because we discussed it many times, and it will become just a repetition of those discussions. however, i will state a few important points and leave this train of thought. there are many sub points in people's posts, and if i get into each, each of those have the potential of going towards full fledged topics itself, as far as i can see.

I would invite you to stick around, but in the end you must do what you must do. You solicited my answers with your suggestions... I will respond to your message, and any that you or anyone else cares to add.

Quote:infinity has to be infinite in every aspect. this needing to be infinite is not limited to physical or dimensional characteristics. i am never discussing infinity with ascribing it only such characteristics, when i say infinite, i mean infinite in every way. this also means that, there is only one infinity that is possible, and anything that is a differentiation out of it, has to be different from it.

Not precisely. There are an infinite forms of infinity.
Take for example a grid. If I tell you the grid is two dimensional and infinite in size. Then the grid is infinite, thats clear according to your logic right? But it's not.. An infinitely large grid could still be restricted on it's x axis, or on it's y axis, we do know for sure it's not restricted on both axes. This is the common usage of the word infinity. Used in science math and philosophy and it's usable in these philosophical and esoteric discussions.

The same goes with the philosophical concept of infinity. You can take a universe which is truly infinite. Take from it everything that relates to some object. (Assuming this is possible without removing all content) and your resulting universe is then still infinite in size... Repeat this trick an infinite amount of times, and your universe will STILL be infinite in size.

However, if you take all that is, which you may be talking about instead of infinity, and remove from it a single atom. Then you're no longer holding all that is. Infinity clearly is not equivalent to all that is. But from your objections I gather that you might be using 'totality' as a concept while you call it 'infinity'.

Quote:conclusively, nothing different from infinity itself, can express, contain (in every sense) or manifest or become in any way analogous with infinity. to be infinite, things need to be infinite, and when they are infinite, there is only one infinity, and it is, well, the infinity we name. all the conclusions that follow behind come as a result of this, like how a negative cant go on after 6th density. it cannot force infinity to merge into itself, it has to merge into infinite.

This is correct But different from how you expect it I believe. I said earlier that there is infinity in every object. Not just in the large. I also said that the seed of positive is inside of negative. (Remember "Yin yang"? Remember the occult saying "As above so below"?)

So for the negative to merge back with the positive, it indeed needs to merge with the infinite. However, the seed itself is infinite. Finiteness as I explained is an artifact of our conceptual mind. Infinity is much more common in this universe.

There is only one.

Quote:on holograms, fractals, fractal universes - universes are just the physical manifestation nodules, units we know. they are by no means the entirety of infinity

That is correct.. But they do by necessity contain the entirety of infinity as I explained above. Blake's poem comes to mind.

To see a world in a grain of sand
And a heaven in a wild flower
Hold infinity in the palm of your hand
And eternity in an hour.

Quote:at this point, i very much think, intelligent infinity having no polarization should be the thing we are concentrating at. it is quite important. when you add that Ra also says they are seeking without polarization, it becomes important as to understand the real nature of existence.

I agree. And Ra obviously didn't mean there are multiple variations of intelligent infinity. He refers to just one. I think we can conclude that we cannot deduce terribly much from Ra's choice of words. Clearly if we attempt to do that rigidly we come to conclusions that are invalid.

(07-15-2010, 10:31 AM)Ali Quadir Wrote: [ -> ]I would invite you to stick around, but in the end you must do what you must do. You solicited my answers with your suggestions... I will respond to your message, and any that you or anyone else cares to add.

as i said i wont talk on this any further, however i will comment on a major fault in your approach :

Quote:Not precisely. There are an infinite forms of infinity.
Take for example a grid. If I tell you the grid is two dimensional and infinite in size. Then the grid is infinite, thats clear according to your logic right? But it's not.. An infinitely large grid could still be restricted on it's x axis, or on it's y axis, we do know for sure it's not restricted on both axes. This is the common usage of the word infinity. Used in science math and philosophy and it's usable in these philosophical and esoteric discussions.

according to my logic, grid, or a line, couldnt be infinite. you have brought that comment yourself. i have said that, to be infinite, something needs to be infinite in every way and aspect, known and unknown, else, it cant be infinite. this includes intelligent infinity, aka, god, creator. it is not infinity, because it is different than infinity. if it wasnt, then it would just be infinity.

you have a tendency to evaluate infinity in physical, dimensioned terms. a universe cannot be infinite. because, it is something that exists as an identifiable aspect with certain properties.

(07-15-2010, 05:18 AM)seejay21 Wrote: [ -> ]The only thing that I can think of that goes towards proof is that we have emotions that we can all agree on. We have given words to identify these emotions. We can all agree what each feels like. Fear is a good one. We have all felt fear at some time in our lives, and regardless of the catalyst for the fear, fear feels like fear to me the same it feels to you. It feels like Fear. How is it possible that all of us, each one of us, have this same emotion? Some emotions may be stronger in other people, but the essence of the emotion is unchanged.

Actually, I would disagree with this. Though it may seem obvious to most of us, emotions may be experienced differently by those of different polarities.

STO's generally agree that fear and pain aren't pleasant. But STS entities might find those emotions pleasant. The emotion or sensation itself might be the same, but the perception of it might be totally different.

I do agree with your larger point, however, in that the emotions are shared.

(07-15-2010, 12:25 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: [ -> ]Actually, I would disagree with this. Though it may seem obvious to most of us, emotions may be experienced differently by those of different polarities.

STO's generally agree that fear and pain aren't pleasant. But STS entities might find those emotions pleasant. The emotion or sensation itself might be the same, but the perception of it might be totally different.

I do agree with your larger point, however, in that the emotions are shared.

Yes indeed, some will have different filters and patterns in which the emotion is processed. This will, in turn, generate an individuated outcome/response to the said emotion.

Some people for example, confuse anxiety with excitement, and visa-vera. The perception is entirely subjective.