Biased view of STS...and INFINITY

[Ali Quadir]

Look at it this way. As soon as you have a closed infinite whole as you suggest where nothing can come in and nothing can leave. Then any subset that becomes manifest must immediately manifest it's conjunct...

therein lies a problem. you cant 'close' infinity. infinity is infinite. whatever that can be or has been or will be is already existing in the infinity. 'nothing can come in and nothing can leave' are invalid, in infinity, there are states exist where everything can leave, and everything can come. 'being able to come' and 'leaving' are also concepts that exist in infinite varieties within infinity.

No, you don't understand. I never said you can close infinity. I just suggested it is closed in the way that nothing can go in or go out. It is an isolated system in the sense that there is no possible system outside of it. This is your definition of infinity I just rephrased it.

Not only do you exist... Your existence defines the universe as you experience it.... See the two halves? The ancients described this: "As above so below" Now nothing in you or your conjunct can be changed without changing the other.

my existence, along with all the entities existing in this universe, and along with all the entities existing outside this universe but affecting it, and the entities which are wherever they are but affecting those entities that are affecting the entities affecting this universe, are all creating and defining this universe.

its not only 'me'.

Again, you missed the point... I said your existence defines the universe AS YOU EXPERIENCE IT... If you don't exist there is no experience for you. If your existence changes then the other entities that are affecting the universe affect your experience in a different way.

Therefore YOU define the rest of the universe. All other possibilities and existences. Whether Schrödinger's cat is dead or alive depends on your perspective. Which alternative timeline did you follow? Where are you in time space and probability?

This is relatively simple temporal physics lol.. Never watched doctor who?

The bird entity exists within your perspective therefore it exists... The bird has it's own perspective and existence. But this is not the same as yours. The monitor has it's own perspective and existence. But again it's not the same as yours. Some parts of what you'd call internal to the bird would be internal to you, others would be external. Parts of what you'd call external to the bird would be internal to you and other parts external... At any rate, the way you perceive the bird depends completely on what you are and your perspective. You could even say that the perceived "birdness" is implicit to you, and much less to the bird.

the bird, regardless of my or its perspective, still exists, even in the manner you speak about.

Existence is relative, something exists relative to you. Does Schrödinger's cat still exist? Or is he dead? I don't know... Where are you?

the understanding of that existence being different from our mutual perspectives, doesnt make the existence of the bird go away. it makes, perception of that existence and its effects in regard to internal spiritual world, different. yet, the effect exists, therefore, an entity doing that effect exists.

I hope I've showed you now that this is true only from a very limited 3d perspective, not from a multidimensional perspective.

I don't deny that they are concepts within infinity.. In a way you're denying that.. You're claiming that the infinite cannot create thus creation is not part of the infinite. I claim it can. I claim that the process of creating as seen in our 3d experience is a distortion of the process of creating as it would be seen in 7d or 8d..

im not claiming, im saying that, infinity cannot create.

You're saying :
Infinity cannot create...
Everything that exists exists inside infinity. Nothing is apart from infinity.
Ergo, nothing can create.

Yet humans can create as evidenced by the existence of that word and your argument is therefore wrong.

the supposed activity of creation, creating that the infinity is supposed to take, has to already exist within infinity BEFORE any act is taken, for infinity to be infinity before that. therefore, because, already that state, action, not only as in the state of existing entities that were to be a result of that creation, but even the concepts of creating, and creation, and entity also exist within the infinity itself.

You're right here... That which is created must exist within infinity... Therefore, from the perspective of infinity... As I already explained. The principle of creation an infinite perspective is vastly different from what we think it to be....

You deny the relevance of perspective. You ignore the potential that different perspectives which seem to be contradictory can still exist.

anything that can engage in ANY kind of activity, cannot be infinite.

Not true... Obviously not true... If a single human can jump over a fence. Then humanity has the ability to perform the "jump over a fence" act... If elements inside infinity can create.. Then infinity can create.

Because it looks different from two perspectives doesn't mean the act is different.... For example, if you're learning from Ra, or you and Ra are learn/teaching.. There is no difference in the act or interaction. Just a different perspective.

I used Xeno's paradox as related to motion to clarify things. When the infinite creates.. It is not like in 3d where something appears to suddenly begin existence... It is that "within the infinite the conditions are such that" finite creatures with a particular perspective can perceive this sudden start of existence. And this is creation from the perspective of the infinite... Cool isn't it?

In a way it's similar to the peekaboo game babies play... Their simpler perspective means you do not exist when you're not visible. To them you're really appearing and disappearing. Creating and destroying yourself.

this is where our planes of discussion fall apart and cant meet. you are still applying concepts within infinity to infinite, and actually trying to measure or arrange it and compare it.

No I'm not... I'm comparing two perspectives. That's why I use the word... Perspective.

paradox is a concept that exists within infinity. also, its counterpart also exists within infinity. because, infinity needs to be infinite.

This is what I said earlier... That you define your counterpart by who you are... Since infinity needs to be infinite everything that defines you immediately defines your counterpart.

it would be easier if you have dropped this motion, time, movement, space understanding filled approach to infinity, and just reduce all of them to concepts, and everything to concepts and then analyze on these.

You can't understand infinity without these concepts. It's like studying humans by ignoring those pesky emotions.

This is your understanding. I believe it to be wrong. Every single part IS the whole.. Look up Indra's pearls....

if every single part was the whole, there would be no creation or anything else, because everything would be the same.

Again... unless you take perspective into account... All the different things are the same things in different TIME SPACE POSSIBILITY vectors... This is why they are different things to you!

definition of infinity makes infinity impossible to manifest in any form but infinity. this includes the so called 'illusory' finities.

Exactly.... So explain why I exist... I am part of the infinite am I not? Because if I was not, the infinite would not be infinite it would be infinite minus me. Yet you claim the infinite cannot manifest. And yet it does because I am very clearly manifest.

yet we stare at our monitors now. things, exist, in the manner we know so far from the concept 'existence'. therefore, everything is not the whole.

Can you not see it has to be? Those illusory finities you mention ARE the infinite.. There is nothing else that can be.... Ergo you are infinity. I am infinity, everyone here is infinity.

The Law of One... Not the law of many things that complicatedly work together... ONE...

Do understand that I didn't claim ape mind cannot PERCEIVE anything above 3d... I claimed it cannot perceive anything above 3d in an undistorted fashion. Similar to the dimensions in math. You can very much perceive a 4 dimensional cube... But to you it'd be a curious 3 dimensional shape.

then that would also apply to your understanding of every finite thing being the infinite whole themselves.

True.. Ape mind has no chance to understand.. Unless it is guided by something else, other than ape mind... Something many people use with reliable repeatable results. Like I said, it's been explained before, you've always rejected the reality of that thing.

Either way, the differences between looking at something from 3d and looking at something from 6d the way I understand them are enormous.

infinity doesnt change its nature from where you look at it. it still is infinite, before you look at it, and after you look at it. even the concept of looking at something, contemplating, thinking about it or perception are things that are in infinity.

Here again you ignore the existence of perspective... Perspective and relativity...

You may think that the infinite is unchangeable.. And this is correct. But your understanding of it is not.. You may think that the infinite can only exist in one way. But your perspective on it changes as you evolve through the densities.


I'm perfectly fine with your not subscribing to the idea. I'm not putting this down to convince you... I'm guessing there are various opinions on how this works... Yours is not the only one, and yours is not the only correct one, as far as I am concerned.

It's that perspective thing... You have a certain point of view, I have another... My point of view is guided by my experiences. Peregrinus describes his by stating "I have seen The One Creator in the darkness, alone and by Itself, having The Original Thought, and beginning to create that which we know as Creation" He didn't say he deduced this with logic... Experience you makes it clear that this is not intellectual masturbation he has experienced this. They saw it. I agree with them... I've seen this same principle too. The logic you see above is adapted to convert that experience into third density concepts, it is not a substitute for the experience.

Monkey mind has little chance of figuring out the eternal variables... Fortunately monkey mind is not all we have. You seem to think it is all we have... You are wrong there.