Bring4th

Full Version: How much do we really create our reality?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
There's some cool things happening in my reality.

But then some bad things like the US launching 80+ missiles at Syria, and rumors of starting WWIII.
I mean did I really choose a timeline where this would happen?
I didn't vote for Trump.

I guess I get a balance of both bad and good. I guess the war will involve me if we experience nuclear war.

And rumors that the US dollar will crash.

The people I attract into my life seem rather dark, but I show them love nonetheless. And they seem to be happy to talk to me.
We create our realities to the same degree we are conscious. Since we are 3rd density, we are roughly 3/7th of our total consciousness. So we create approximately 43% of our reality with our conscious thoughts. Some rare humans might be at a slightly higher percentage. We are like little kids with clumsy hands trying to throw a ball. We don't have good metaphysical motor control at our stage of evolution. But that isn't grounds for not practicing either now is it? Practice makes perfect, and not beating ourselves up for our lack of finessed control over our godhood is the most conducive and positive environment for metaphysical evolution.

Just keep ratcheting up the ladder of possibility until you can't go any further. That's how all masters are born. Step by step.  
Yes. What has helped me personally is by trying to perceive things in a different way. Different point of view.

The way that you perceive your thoughts coming to you about what happens to you or that you are witness of.
It is very interesting what you can get out of asking 'Why did I think that?' or 'Why this thought came to me?'.

That way you start becoming more aware about yourself.
(04-06-2017, 11:38 PM)anagogy Wrote: [ -> ]We create our realities to the same degree we are conscious. Since we are 3rd density, we are roughly 3/7th of our total consciousness. So we create approximately 43% of our reality with our conscious thoughts. Some rare humans might be at a slightly higher percentage. We are like little kids with clumsy hands trying to throw a ball. We don't have good metaphysical motor control at our stage of evolution. But that isn't grounds for not practicing either now is it? Practice makes perfect, and not beating ourselves up for our lack of finessed control over our godhood is the most conducive and positive environment for metaphysical evolution.

Just keep ratcheting up the ladder of possibility until you can't go any further. That's how all masters are born. Step by step.  

43%? I have thought for a while that it was much less. I kind of had the notion that us as conscious third densites make suggestions to the universe and our higher self more than anything else. Perhaps more recently in my development I can see 43% being true.

Is that an actual calculated number that you believe applies to most humans? Is that kind of like the light spectrum, where the light visible to us is a tiny fraction of the whole range? And the range of reality control in third density ranges from 42.8 to 44? This would mean that say 45% and above are when you enter higher densities?
The way I look at it is this: We know that, from a higher-density (like 6D+) perspective, 3D life is "flat" and all potentialities already exist. Time and linearity are illusions created by our own veiled bond to the highly limited sensory organs attached to our bodies. As such, from a certain higher point of view, every possible state and outcome of your own life also already exist. Your own Higher Self is the synergistic total of all those states and outcomes.

I see this as something like a hugely complicated web of potentialities, linked together by the choices we make in our day-to-day lives. Turning left, vs turning right. Asking out person A vs person B. Having kids vs not having kids. Etc. All these outcomes (and many many many more) already exist and we are, in effect, merely navigating between the outcomes. Like a huge Choose-Your-Own-Adventure book.

Or, in essence - we are not choosing the outcomes which exist. We are choosing the outcomes which we observe.

And I think looking at it that way helps solve the riddle of how we "create our own reality." Reality already exists; we're tourists sampling its many twists and turns and detours.
I think stuff like politics and all that affects bigger groups or humanity as a whole are being created together.

What concerns our personal life mostly and especially only ourselves we create 100% ourselves.
Most of whats going on inside of us is unconscious though, thats why we feel disconnected from the outcome.
it because we cannot see or refuse to see that we create it.

There more we explore the self, discover our deeper motivations, desires and limitations, the more we feel connected to the outcome.
I think thats why it is helpful to take responsibility for everything that happens in ones life, since it puts one in a position where one can start to discover what "caused" the manifestation.

I think its hard to give a percentage, since everybody is a different point. Some maybe less than 1% conscious of their influence, others maybe 90%.
i would figure, the majority is well below 5%.
(04-07-2017, 02:41 AM)sjel Wrote: [ -> ]43%? I have thought for a while that it was much less. I kind of had the notion that us as conscious third densites make suggestions to the universe and our higher self more than anything else. Perhaps more recently in my development I can see 43% being true.

Is that an actual calculated number that you believe applies to most humans? Is that kind of like the light spectrum, where the light visible to us is a tiny fraction of the whole range? And the range of reality control in third density ranges from 42.8 to 44? This would mean that say 45% and above are when you enter higher densities?

The 43% is just the ratio of 3/7 translated to a percentage. But keep in mind, just because we are 43% conscious (roughly), it doesn't mean we are using that conscious influence in a deliberate and controlled way.

That 43% influence is being used horribly by most 3rd density beings. Most of the world gives the majority of their attention towards what is going wrong, rather than what is going right, so that is the vibrational string they are vibrating, and thus attracting all complimentary vibrations like that to themselves. A fourth density being would have around 57% control over their conscious reality, but they would likely be using that 57% influence in a far more deliberate and finessed manner due to the nature of their density and the absence of the veil.
You'd need to explain exactly to what degree of separation you attribute 100%

If you consider that your true beingness is infinity and that your absolute free will  (100%) manifests it whole. Then you're clearly not manifesting 43% of your reality with your conscious 3D mind. Creating your reality includes manifesting every other-self and each of their choices, just as manifestating every Law of this universe and others, just as manifesting all of space and countless sub-Logoi manifestations within countless Logoic manifestations to hold up your impression of a tiny moment to yourself which is literally not there without all of the rest also. As 3D consciousness, the ratio of conscious to unconscious is much like finity to infinity as 100% conscious of our totality is Intelligent Infinity which lies at the center of ourselves and where our free will truly is whole.

If you're talking about your ability to freely navigate this Octave as an individualized portion of consciousness, which really is just another ego of a truer self, then I would think the progression to be of an exponential nature and not linear across densities. There's also the idea that 1D is equally close to the root of free will as 7D is (or since it is the 8D that extends into a next 1D, even closer) and that in this 3D experience we have a notion of extended free will unlike 4D for example, then its very hard to make calculation as it is somewhat very abstract altogether. But I don't see any way to tweak a perception of separation that allows me to see a 3D self as creating 43% of its reality unless you limit it to the extreme with quite a lot of constructs to limit the notion of what it manifests and manifests not, and then its much more like 100% for 3D conscious/unconscious blended together and unique to each in regard to the extent one blends the two together and wouldn't relate to densities anymore.

So I'm more of the idea of 100% through a base faith in which at each moment you can seek to know why you manifested what you did to always find a cause and effect for containing the desire of what was manifested. Its all quite deep within, but its there here and now nevertheless.
Percentages are helpful but I think we should also consider that the majority of reality creation happens at the filtration of ideas by the veil.  We make our reality through our perceptions in our mind.  With many such as wholeness, eternal life, and unity being filtered, we're left with a fraction/percentage for sure but is it really static rather than dynamic?

Your mind, and the filters of your senses and the veil make your reality, collectively we all make our own AND other's reality's.  Consensus becomes a perpetuation of a kind of reality.

Once you control your thoughts and emotions without actually controlling them, you'll find reality is made more by perceptions than it is by anything else excluding actions.

That's why seeing love in the moment is the lesson for 3D next to making a polarity choice.
That's why its so important to do something, anything.

That's why the veiling effect is so thickly powerful on inciting reaction, and why catalyst works so proficiently.
(04-07-2017, 10:01 AM)Minyatur Wrote: [ -> ]You'd need to explain exactly to what degree of separation you attribute 100%

I'm not sure if I understand what you are asking, but 100% conscious control would be a 7th density being (which would not be a degree of separation since it is absolute oneness).

(04-07-2017, 10:01 AM)Minyatur Wrote: [ -> ]If you consider that your true beingness is infinity and that your absolute free will  (100%) manifests it whole. Then you're clearly not manifesting 43% of your reality with your conscious 3D mind. Creating your reality includes manifesting every other-self and each of their choices, just as manifestating every Law of this universe and others, just as manifesting all of space and countless sub-Logoi manifestations within countless Logoic manifestations to hold up your impression of a tiny moment to yourself which is literally not there without all of the rest also. As 3D consciousness, the ratio of conscious to unconscious is much like finity to infinity as 100% conscious of our totality is Intelligent Infinity which lies at the center of ourselves and where our free will truly is whole.

If you're talking about your ability to freely navigate this Octave as an individualized portion of consciousness, which really is just another ego of a truer self, then I would think the progression to be of an exponential nature and not linear across densities. There's also the idea that 1D is equally close to the root of free will as 7D is (or since it is the 8D that extends into a next 1D, even closer) and that in this 3D experience we have a notion of extended free will unlike 4D for example, then its very hard to make calculation as it is somewhat very abstract altogether. But I don't see any way to tweak a perception of separation that allows me to see a 3D self as creating 43% of its reality unless you limit it to the extreme with quite a lot of constructs to limit the notion of what it manifests and manifests not, and then its much more like 100% for 3D conscious/unconscious blended together and unique to each in regard to the extent one blends the two together and wouldn't relate to densities anymore.

So I'm more of the idea of 100% through a base faith in which at each moment you can seek to know why you manifested what you did to always find a cause and effect for containing the desire of what was manifested. Its all quite deep within, but its there here and now nevertheless.

All I'm saying is that your conscious attention is creating/attracting/manifesting 43% (roughly, but let's not get too hung up on numbers) of your experience. The other 57% of your experienced reality is being determined by other portions of your consciousness (like the higher self for example). You can only choose what you are conscious of. If you are not conscious of a choice, you can't act on it (choice presumes awareness). I'm talking about the control available to the incarnated human ego.
Insofar as we are aware.

But, there is the individual and collective reality. You create your personal reality and all of we creates the humanity reality.

And another question, the Higher Self create part of your reality. Not affect the freewill but he "planning" the events.

Peace, love and light.
One may create 100% of one's reality by how one responds, reacts, interprets, perceives, and acts within existence.

There are circumstances in motion beyond one's direct knowledge of creation (or agreement), though they may be indirect or subconscious, such as the collective human mindset of beliefs about nature, or cosmology, or society, etc. But one has complete choice over how one deals with them. 
(04-07-2017, 10:22 AM)anagogy Wrote: [ -> ]All I'm saying is that your conscious attention is creating/attracting/manifesting 43% (roughly, but let's not get too hung up on numbers) of your experience. The other 57% of your experienced reality is being determined by other portions of your consciousness (like the higher self for example). You can only choose what you are conscious of. If you are not conscious of a choice, you can't act on it (choice presumes awareness). I'm talking about the control available to the incarnated human ego.

So the vibratory rate of the focus within the Octave.

So 43% would be the highest potential, top mark of the spectrum of this density, available as a mind of this density to impact the Octave-reality and any more requires to work through a mind/body of a higher plane?

I guess what I thought to be exponential was more what can be done with each increase of the vibratory rate of focus
Consciousness cannot be measured since it is infinite. I think talking about percentages for this would be like trying to measure the weight of the universe using a ruler.

Creative abilities to alter space/time and "matter" are supposed to be within the natural state of human nature. As it is the channeling of intelligent infinity and this can be done without having to be of a higher density, but very close to the next and already harvestable.
Changing the reality as for something like events or situations, enters in conflict with the free will of the rest of the individualized portions. (Mandela effect maybe?)
It's a collective thing, speaking on terms of social complex. Being the birth of a social memory complex the start for 4th density experience.

So basically to change reality you need to get everyone on board. That's why the Confederation cannot land or show themselves freely here.

I would also think there is some kind of safety switch on our code or consciousness in order not to mess up everything with powers you cannot control.
Would be like giving nukes to children.

Of course this is only my opinion.
Just to clarify:

Basically, we are all the creator and have the ability to alter reality to an unlimited degree, provided we see through the illusion *totally*.

But that 'totally' is a tall cup to drink.

The consciousness of each density comprises a certain degree of illusion (or separation/unconsciousness/lack of development/resistance to truth). A 3rd density being could tap into more power over their reality, but doing so would make them no longer 3rd density, because accessing such would require them to see through more of the illusion than the 3rd density vibratory level comprises. For example, recall how Ra spoke of beings who had acquired the necessary disciplines of personality to teleport about the universe by thought. And do you also recall how they spoke only of 4th density beings and higher? Well that's because the the level of illusion required to 'see through' to perform that ability lies beyond the 3rd density threshold of illusion/consciousness. So to tap into that ability would require you to elevate your consciousness to a higher level.
I'll take two tall cups of 'Totally', sounds like a fun drink to me Wink

What if none of us are wrong or right, but simply hitting and missing here and there everywhere?

Can I change my reality so you're all wrong or all right?

What does it mean exactly to 'create OUR reality'??
(04-07-2017, 05:56 PM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]I'll take two tall cups of 'Totally', sounds like a fun drink to me Wink

What if none of us are wrong or right, but simply hitting and missing here and there everywhere?

Hahaha, I would say that is very probable.

BigSmile
(04-07-2017, 05:56 PM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]Can I change my reality so you're all wrong or all right?

What does it mean exactly to 'create OUR reality'??

It means "coalesce a particular experience to your consciousness".

Since consciousness is all that exists, all there is is experience. All potential experiences are enfolded in the macrocosmic infinite one.

As Ra said, the creator (which we are), does not properly create, so much as it experiences itself.

Since everything exists (all experiences exist within infinity), you could, were you adept enough, attract the experience, to your consciousness, of the reality where everybody else was all wrong or all right. Or the reality where everybody you know died in a nuclear holocaust, or where they all became hippies and started singing kumbaya. Though, such control over catalyst would probably defeat the purposes of our present state of evolution and the type of incarnation we are experiencing.
(04-07-2017, 06:50 PM)anagogy Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-07-2017, 05:56 PM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]Can I change my reality so you're all wrong or all right?

What does it mean exactly to 'create OUR reality'??

It means "coalesce a particular experience to your consciousness".

Since consciousness is all that exists, all there is is experience. All potential experiences are enfolded in the macrocosmic infinite one.

As Ra said, the creator (which we are), does not properly create, so much as it experiences itself.

Since everything exists (all experiences exist within infinity), you could, were you adept enough, attract the experience, to your consciousness, of the reality where everybody else was all wrong or all right. Or the reality where everybody you know died in a nuclear holocaust, or where they all became hippies and started singing kumbaya. Though, such control over catalyst would probably defeat the purposes of our present state of evolution and the type of incarnation we are experiencing.

Perhaps we need to draw a line to distinguish in this 'reality' what is real and possible to manifest/attract/create/experience and what is not real and not possible.

I think for Gemini, this can be summed up as can he 'for real' create a reality or experience where he is an animal-human hybrid akin to a furry.

For me, this question could be, can I create a reality where I'm a woman.

For another, it could be, can I create a reality where I'm married and happy with a family and a good job.

Or, it could be, can I create a reality closer to an anime appearance?

When we discuss 'creating reality in infinity on Earth', I feel like we leave vulnerable the ability to mistake fictional fantasies as being 'potential' or 'probable' and thus 'real'.

Other than that.

If the Creator only experiences, shouldn't it be called by the Confederation the One Infinite Experiencer? Wink Heart (What if creating and experiencing are the exact same thing in this context?)

Can I attract to myself the experience of understanding what Ra meant by Consciousness is the microcosm of the Law of One?

If this all is the microcosm, all of this...consciousness, then what is the macrocosm??

Is consciousness truly 'All' that exists if its only a microcosm?  Is the One Infinite the macrocosm or is the macrocosm something distorted still?  Consciousness is pretty...deep with being.  For it to only be an microcosm to something more is boggling to my imagination as vastly vivid and infinite as it is.

Maybe the macro is some root to consciousness that itself has many more microcosms to be experienced before it itself comes into view.

I don't know, but discussing these things is fun, sadly it also drains me mentally.  Sad because if I had the energy, I'd talk about metaphysics exclusively, its just so fun and fascinating o:
(04-07-2017, 07:14 PM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]If the Creator only experiences, shouldn't it be called by the Confederation the One Infinite Experiencer? Wink Heart (What if creating and experiencing are the exact same thing in this context?)

I would in fact agree that is indeed the case. You can call it what you like, but at the end of the day, nothing exists beyond ones ability to experience it (i.e. be conscious of it). Even if something did exist beyond consciousness (and i can't stress enough that it doesn't) it would be irrelevant because you couldn't experience it ever.

(04-07-2017, 10:01 AM)Minyatur Wrote: [ -> ]Can I attract to myself the experience of understanding what Ra meant by Consciousness is the microcosm of the Law of One?

In my opinion, Ra was talking about the consciousness within the illusion. Consciousness is a lot like a hologram. If you shatter a hologram into a thousand pieces, each piece contains the whole image within it. Thus, it is the microcosm of the whole hologram (the macrocosm). We are the pieces of the shattered whole, trying to put ourselves back together -- this is also a distinctly kabbalistic notion.

(04-07-2017, 10:01 AM)Minyatur Wrote: [ -> ]If this all is the microcosm, all of this...consciousness, then what is the macrocosm??

Undistorted and unpotentiated intelligent infinity -- the octave density.

(04-07-2017, 10:01 AM)Minyatur Wrote: [ -> ]Is consciousness truly 'All' that exists if its only a microcosm?  Is the One Infinite the macrocosm or is the macrocosm something distorted still?  Consciousness is pretty...deep with being.  For it to only be an microcosm to something more is boggling to my imagination as vastly vivid and infinite as it is.

Maybe the macro is some root to consciousness that itself has many more microcosms to be experienced before it itself comes into view.

I don't know, but discussing these things is fun, sadly it also drains me mentally.  Sad because if I had the energy, I'd talk about metaphysics exclusively, its just so fun and fascinating o:

Spirit is pure being and it radiates purely (no thoughts of self). Body, or matter, is the opposite of spirit and absorbs purely. Mind is the manifestation in the middle of those two forces. When spirit moves into matter, it becomes self reflective (turns in on itself), forming a 'mental complex'. Some people draw lines in the land between these forms of energy, and call them different things. To me they are all different configurations of consciousness. Some eastern sources call mind "consciousness" and spirit "awareness" in order to distinguish the fact that one involves a subject/object relationship while the other is more of a 'non-dual' state. I'm a simple person though, and generally don't split hairs quite that finely.
(04-07-2017, 07:14 PM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]I think for Gemini, this can be summed up as can he 'for real' create a reality or experience where he is an animal-human hybrid akin to a furry.

It'll happen in another density, and I'll probably be like that for more than my life here.
I want to be slightly cartoony, if there is a cartoon dimension.

But I'm getting a fursuit, so at least I can look like one. That's good enough for me for now.
(04-07-2017, 07:35 PM)anagogy Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-07-2017, 07:14 PM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]If the Creator only experiences, shouldn't it be called by the Confederation the One Infinite Experiencer? Wink Heart (What if creating and experiencing are the exact same thing in this context?)

I would in fact agree that is indeed the case. You can call it what you like, but at the end of the day, nothing exists beyond ones ability to experience it (i.e. be conscious of it). Even if something did exist beyond consciousness (and i can't stress enough that it doesn't) it would be irrelevant because you couldn't experience it ever.

How do you reconcile this with consciousness as a microcosm?
(04-08-2017, 01:33 AM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]How do you reconcile this with consciousness as a microcosm?

I thought I already did. That's what I was talking about with the holographic shards. You'll have to state more clearly what you believe the apparent contradiction is, because it isn't apparent to me.

The consciousness of the macrocosm is the unblinking eye of the creator, the consciousness of the microcosm is us -- the particular and specific. It cannot see all, because while it does contain the whole image, it is a smaller version of that image, and thus the minute details are less distinct. In the personal consciousness, some parts of the image are magnified and other parts are minimized. The image is warped to some extent.

When Ra says "consciousness is the microcosm of the Law of One", they are saying, "your personal manifestation of consciousness is a reflection of the impersonal creator". We were created in the image of god. That's all that was being communicated by that statement in my opinion.
Hold on hold on.

In the Law of One, Consciousness itself is a microcosm.

That to me sounds like there is more beyond consciousness itself, that the macro to the micro isn't the exact same thing as akin to as above so below, but rather an evolution of the micro.

How do you know that consciousness doesn't also evolve into something else?  That the whole of the Law of One isn't just micro and macro consciousness?  I feel like infinity isn't so simply described as being conscious.  Our octave is just the beginning of that consciousness for the Creator, what was before and how can we call that conscious when it clearly is stated as lacking that attribute?

I'm just confused as to how you appear to know, whenever I talk of these things I know in the back of my mind that I could be wrong, because I don't know.  It helps leave me open to some interesting avenues of imagination but that's the best I'll ever be able to do, is assuredly speculate.

Why do you view the macro of the Law of One as being consciousness?  Is it possible that the macrocosm could be some form of awareness or experiences beyond consciousness?
(04-08-2017, 09:45 AM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]Hold on hold on.

In the Law of One, Consciousness itself is a microcosm.

That to me sounds like there is more beyond consciousness itself, that the macro to the micro isn't the exact same thing as akin to as above so below, but rather an evolution of the micro.

How do you know that consciousness doesn't also evolve into something else?  That the whole of the Law of One isn't just micro and macro consciousness?  I feel like infinity isn't so simply described as being conscious.  Our octave is just the beginning of that consciousness for the Creator, what was before and how can we call that conscious when it clearly is stated as lacking that attribute?

I'm just confused as to how you appear to know, whenever I talk of these things I know in the back of my mind that I could be wrong, because I don't know.  It helps leave me open to some interesting avenues of imagination but that's the best I'll ever be able to do, is assuredly speculate.

Hey C_A, I'm sorry if I appear as a 'know it all'. I won't say I 'know' without any shadow of a doubt. I'll just resign myself to saying: it has been strongly impressed upon me by my inner being that this is the case.

It it is so strongly impressed upon me that it feels more likely than any other perception I might have. Maybe I'm wrong, but it is how I understand the reality of things to be. You are, of course, free to hold your own beliefs relative to the subject. I'm not trying to tell you what to believe by any means.

Ever since I was a I was a child, I would look up at the stars and marvel that I was 'aware of existing'. I had this deep inner feeling, even at that age, that this thing we call 'awareness' was concomitant with this thing we call 'existence'. I also had a deep reverence for it, somehow knowing that it was 'holy'. Again, these are just my feelings about it, not trying to tell you what to believe. I am not beyond being wrong of course.

(04-08-2017, 09:45 AM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]Why do you view the macro of the Law of One as being consciousness?  Is it possible that the macrocosm could be some form of awareness or experiences beyond consciousness?

You keep referring to 'awareness' and 'experience' 'beyond consciousness', but both of those things are expressions of consciousness. Awareness is just another word for consciousness. Experience is just another word for consciousness. For me, something beyond consciousness is a logical contradiction. Its not that I'm unwilling to entertain the notion, I just don't understand it, in the same way I wouldn't understand if you said 1+1=5. It just doesn't compute for me. If something is beyond any being's ability to be aware of it, how could it have any impact on their reality? You would never be aware of it, how could it possibly affect you? This is why I say even if things existed beyond the field of consciousness, they would have no relevance.

It is a bit like the question: if a tree falls in the forest and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound? My answer to that question is: what tree? What forest? They are given life and reality by our awareness of them.
(04-08-2017, 09:45 AM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]Anything is possible. Let's focus on our limitations.

(04-08-2017, 09:28 PM)anagogy Wrote: [ -> ]Anything is possible. Let's focus on the wonders of infinity and unlimited possibility.


Well, you're both taking the same set of facts and running entirely different directions with them. It's your focus that's different.

Everyone agrees that all begins and ends in mystery, and that anything is possible.

CA seems to enjoy focusing on why something shouldn't be possible, rather than on how to raise the probability of a desired outcome. "Drawing lines" seems to be the focus of most of his posts ITT.

anagogy's posts are always somewhat inspiring to me, honestly, because they seem to be more about erasing lines rather than drawing them. I've definitely noticed that anagogy's posts in general always seem inspired by the idea of infinite possibility.

I get the feeling that if there were a kitten stuck in a giant tree on a branch far out of direct reach, CA would shrug and find something that's easier to accomplish, and anagogy would find a ladder or learn to fly.

Seth says that there are entities that transcended physical existence and chose to migrate to other parts of the universe.

Werewolves that can physically shape-shift already exist. I don't know if animethropy is a thing yet, but if that's really, really what you want to do, that's probably not that much harder than becoming a physical werewolf - and if you can reshape your own physical form, as Seth mentioned his species learned to do, then, yeah, why the hell not.

And that's the thing: you can ask, "Why not? Let's find a way to do this," or you can say, "Let's draw a line here so we know that, even though this is theoretically possible, it just can't happen to us or be done by us, and focus on the line."

I'm betting the entities that have transcended their own bodies and can manipulate time and space to the degree of Seth or Ra favored one way of thinking over the other. One is just more conductive to evolution.
(04-08-2017, 09:28 PM)anagogy Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-08-2017, 09:45 AM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]Hold on hold on.

In the Law of One, Consciousness itself is a microcosm.

That to me sounds like there is more beyond consciousness itself, that the macro to the micro isn't the exact same thing as akin to as above so below, but rather an evolution of the micro.

How do you know that consciousness doesn't also evolve into something else?  That the whole of the Law of One isn't just micro and macro consciousness?  I feel like infinity isn't so simply described as being conscious.  Our octave is just the beginning of that consciousness for the Creator, what was before and how can we call that conscious when it clearly is stated as lacking that attribute?

I'm just confused as to how you appear to know, whenever I talk of these things I know in the back of my mind that I could be wrong, because I don't know.  It helps leave me open to some interesting avenues of imagination but that's the best I'll ever be able to do, is assuredly speculate.

Hey C_A, I'm sorry if I appear as a 'know it all'. I won't say I 'know' without any shadow of a doubt. I'll just resign myself to saying: it has been strongly impressed upon me by my inner being that this is the case.

It it is so strongly impressed upon me that it feels more likely than any other perception I might have. Maybe I'm wrong, but it is how I understand the reality of things to be. You are, of course, free to hold your own beliefs relative to the subject. I'm not trying to tell you what to believe by any means.

Ever since I was a I was a child, I would look up at the stars and marvel that I was 'aware of existing'. I had this deep inner feeling, even at that age, that this thing we call 'awareness' was concomitant with this thing we call 'existence'. I also had a deep reverence for it, somehow knowing that it was 'holy'. Again, these are just my feelings about it, not trying to tell you what to believe. I am not beyond being wrong of course.



(04-08-2017, 09:45 AM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]Why do you view the macro of the Law of One as being consciousness?  Is it possible that the macrocosm could be some form of awareness or experiences beyond consciousness?

You keep referring to 'awareness' and 'experience' 'beyond consciousness', but both of those things are expressions of consciousness. Awareness is just another word for consciousness. Experience is just another word for consciousness. For me, something beyond consciousness is a logical contradiction. Its not that I'm unwilling to entertain the notion, I just don't understand it, in the same way I wouldn't understand if you said 1+1=5. It just doesn't compute for me. If something is beyond any being's ability to be aware of it, how could it have any impact on their reality? You would never be aware of it, how could it possibly affect you? This is why I say even if things existed beyond the field of consciousness, they would have no relevance.

It is a bit like the question: if a tree falls in the forest and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound? My answer to that question is: what tree? What forest? They are given life and reality by our awareness of them.

I got you now!
I'm of the crazy idea that consciousness is only the beginning to much more evolved manners of 'awareness' and 'experience' and that it too shall pass into something greater than its sum, akin to 1+1=>2

Beyond that, I too do not understand it, and I too feel this to be true, that there is something beyond or more than the faculties of consciousness, they're just not a part of this octave most likely but maybe they are beginning at 7D, I don't know.


Why it is when people talk about me, I see them talking of themselves while talking of me but they do not realize this?

Maybe I should start pointing these things out.  Bit it'd probably upset people.  I guess I won't, I'd rather call the police or a neighbor with a ladder than leave myself stranded in a tree.

But thanks for the flattering faith, mahakali.
(04-09-2017, 09:54 AM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]I got you now!
I'm of the crazy idea that consciousness is only the beginning to much more evolved manners of 'awareness' and 'experience' and that it too shall pass into something greater than its sum, akin to 1+1=>2

Beyond that, I too do not understand it, and I too feel this to be true, that there is something beyond or more than the faculties of consciousness, they're just not a part of this octave most likely but maybe they are beginning at 7D, I don't know.



Why it is when people talk about me, I see them talking of themselves while talking of me but they do not realize this?

Maybe I should start pointing these things out.  Bit it'd probably upset people.  I guess I won't, I'd rather call the police or a neighbor with a ladder than leave myself stranded in a tree.

But thanks for the flattering faith, mahakali.


I'm more interested in why, when people talk about you, you focus on anything posts their posts might tangentially or synchronistically relate to other than you.

Sure, whatever, consciousness is evolving and 1+1=3 or whateverthefuck. I was more referring to your attitude in general. First thing you talk about coming into this thread is about drawing lines and how much certain things aren't possible, which is basically the exact opposite attitude I generally see from anagogy. That's all I meant.

It wasn't my original intention tend to address this, but I also personally don't think something can exist without being conscious in its own way. Even subatomic particles are conscious. Sure, there can be things humans aren't consciously aware of, but those things, then, have their own consciousness, and, beyond that, you're just arguing semantics.

I'll caution you and everyone else against reading too much into my posts, because the way my mind works is not the way people generally tend to read it.

And f*** the police, too. Puppets one and all. I feel like their ultimate goal is stagnation of consciousness, not evolution.
Lovely, just realize your judgments of me are more stemming from such judgments of yourself, I think Anagogy is right and that we may be more similar in our ideas in this thread.

For all I know, we're both right and wrong.  I like how he views things and can agree to their perspectives, I just think its important to not get lost in fantasy trying to create a fantasy reality because infinity dictates its possible when in 3D reality this just isn't so concretely true.

That's all.  What's wrong with separation?
(04-09-2017, 03:48 PM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]Lovely, just realize your judgments of me are more stemming from such judgments of yourself, I think Anagogy is right and that we may be more similar in our ideas in this thread.

For all I know, we're both right and wrong.  I like how he views things and can agree to their perspectives, I just think its important to not get lost in fantasy trying to create a fantasy reality because infinity dictates its possible when in 3D reality this just isn't so concretely true.

That's all.  What's wrong with separation?

No, I was mostly thinking of you in this case.

Everything is possible, even within 3D reality; there's just more weight to contend with here. Infinity is infinity, no exceptions. Where there's a will, there's a way.
Pages: 1 2