I think of “viewpoint” as “a point from which something is viewed”. That could apply to the eyes, as a location in space. Or it could be applied to an “issue” (political, moral, philosophical, etc.), as a premise. Or it could be applied to a “Human being”, as the aggregate desires/needs/wants/purposes/whatever. But in any and every case, it must always be relative to something else. That is, there must be something to view in order for there to be a viewpoint.

And that is what, to me, is the main difference between a viewpoint and a spirit. The spirit is, by definition, not dependent on anything. The viewpoint is dependent on there being something external to the viewpoint. Without an external thing to view, there cannot be a viewpoint.

So by assuming a viewpoint, the spirit assumes a position relative to some external thing.

Now that could be interpreted to mean that a spirit cannot assume a viewpoint if there is nothing external to view. But that’s not really the case. It can’t be the case because that would make the spirit’s assumption of a viewpoint dependent upon something external to itself, which contradicts the very definition of spirit.

So now we have to look at “creation”.

Where would the external thing come from? (Let’s call that external thing “an object”. Not necessarily in the physical sense, but in the linguistic or epistemological sense, as “the object of a sentence” or “a known thing”.)

We already know that the spirit is capable of creation, so the obvious conclusion is that the spirit creates the object and assumes a point from which to view that object.

Which begs the question, “Which one happened first?”

Well if we look closely at the mechanism of that process of creation, we see that the spirit is viewing the object at the instant it is created. (Analogy: You look at a painting while painting it. You can’t very well paint it without looking at it. Otherwise you would have no way of knowing what you are painting.)

So really, the creation of the object and the assumption of the viewpoint actually occur simultaneously.

Now it really does not matter which happened first – the creation of the object or the assumption of the viewpoint. What matters is that, in the case of “creation”, the two are inextricably linked.

And since the “assumption of the viewpoint” is an action and the object is a thing, we can actually say that the action of assuming the viewpoint is what creates the object.

That may sound strange at first, but when you consider that the two happen simultaneously, it becomes obvious.

Look at it this way: In order for something to be created, there must be some process or action involving time. That is, there is a point in time when the object did not exist, and there is another point in time when the object does exist. So what was the action or process that caused the object to come into being? There is nothing that happened other than the spirit’s assumption of the viewpoint.

And that is the fundamental mechanism behind “free will” and “creating one’s own reality” and really anything associated with “creation”. The spirit simply decides to view an object and “poof” – both the viewpoint and the object magically come into existence.

And this, to me also explains the concept of “nothing but the present”.

If the assumption of a viewpoint is the process of creation, then it stands to reason that the abandoning of a viewpoint would be the process of destruction. (True destruction, as in “poofing out of existence”, not simply “rearranging components” as in smashing something.) That is, by constantly maintaining a viewpoint, we are constantly creating that which is being viewed.

But that would seem to mean that when we are not viewing an object, that object does not exist. Now that is actually exactly what happens, but let’s look more closely at that whole phenomenon.

How do we know that an object we are not viewing exists?

Our only means of knowing that is through memory. We’re not viewing the object itself, but we do have a “mental picture” of the object.

And that leads directly to “the mind”. Now without going into a whole treatise on the mind, let’s just say that the mind operates a little differently. It is a “special place” where things (thoughts, mental image pictures, ideas, etc.) can continue to exist without being viewed.

So with that in mind (no pun intended), and going back to the existence/creation issue, we can say that when something is not being viewed, it exists only in the mind. But when we decide to view it again, we assume that viewpoint and it poofs back into existence exactly as we “remember” it.

And all that is pretty much the foundation for my whole philosophy. It addresses reality and the mind and the spirit and creation and free will and viewpoints and all sorts of other stuff.

Anyway, that’s how I see it.

In consideration of the question, "What is real?" I once decided that the only thing that was real was other people. (Other observers.)

Everything else is just mind stuff or programs.

Imagine that you are in a holo-deck such as the one on Star Treck. It has in it what you could call programs that appear to be people, but they are not real people, they are just part of the program.

Then if you go into a holo-deck program with a few 'real' friends, you have to learn to distinguish the artificial programed people from the "real" people.

What is the difference between the two inside of the program? I would have to say that the 'real' people would seem to have more depth, or might be more creative, or have more feelings. I think there would be tests that would reveal if they were 'real' or not. You might be able to tell just by talking to them. They would have 'imagination.' They would be doing and saying more than what could be programed into them.

That's how I view life. Only the people are real. Everything else is just mind stuff and programs.

I agree. And I think you hit on the fundamental difference between the real and the hologrphic in the holodeck analogy - "creativity". The real people are the only one's truly capable of creativity.

Good analogy.

I’d like to pause and examine your philosophy JB. Below are your quotes which I have formulated into points to frame your philosophy.

1.first cause, the prime source, is eternal in its own right

2.it (prime source) grows via dividing itself

3.individuals are 'manifested' from first cause, and are part of it.

4.INDIVIDUALS are identical to 'first cause' in that they have their own individual point of view, and their own Will…

5.Then they (individuals) manifest any way they choose.

6.the universe expands. ... because individuals are completely FREE TO manifest anything they choose.

7. A. ‘universe’ & ‘matrix’ are synonymous

B - ‘higher self’ and JB are not synonymous therefore JB is a manifestation of the ‘higher self’.

NOTE: ABOUT 7A & 7B - They are my words derived from the following quote >>> My 'higher self' incarnates and lives many lives in this matrix I (this incarnation) am one of them. <<<

8.I am also my higher self. It is me.

9."inner psyche's" are many points of view, each with their own purpose, each in charge of certain information

10.(“inner psyche’s”) each with their own opinions and points of view.

11.(“inner psyche’s”) are WITHIN ME

12.I acknowledge them (“inner psyche’s”) as individuals

13.(“inner psyche’s”) are different aspects of ME and my overall "person" OR PERSONA - in this life.

14."self awareness." Is becoming aware of all of my inner psyche's and their purpose, their desires, their ideas and opinions etc.

15.“self awareness” is a growth process.

Before anyone can even begin to consider these points as part of an overall philosophy the contradictions within and between them must be resolved.

The only connectivity that seems to hold your ideas together is based on contradiction. How can such ideas be discussed or even compared to another person’s ideas if they do not form some kind of logical order.

Since there is no logic evident in your points of reference, as they stand, any attempt to comprehend them will only lead to further confusion and frustration.

The dialogue you’ve opened up could be an interesting one but not if we are spending all our time and effort attempting to gain clarification of your contradictions.

That’s why I have attempted to put some them in a list; these are only from a couple of your recent posts, not the whole thread.

Please connect the dots for us, make clarification and show us how your ideas on various incarnations and a universal matrix would form some logical argument (by argument I mean connective set of ideas).

Thank-you

Red,

Which ones do you feel are contradictions and why?

Whoooooooosh!!!!

There are contradictions between “division” (Individual) and “connection” (Part of ). If you are a unique individual you can not be part of another whole. Therefore, you need to develop a much better explanation of that which connects you to anything that is not uniquely you.

If you MUST be connected (part of) something else (something not uniquely you)to function as a whole, then your free-will is limited and total self-determinism is not possible.

>>>14. "self awareness." Is becoming aware of all of my inner psyche's and their purpose, their desires, their ideas and opinions etc.<<<

There is a difference between being “self” aware and aware of “others”. Others cannot share the same identity with you, or they would be YOU and would not be OTHERS.

There is a further question regarding why "other" manifestations that are just as divisible from you as you are from the prime source, would be hanging around doing your housework when they have an infinate matrix, full of individual experiences to be had, waiting for them???

If personna's are simply different aspects of your very individual and unique identity, then you have given those persona's YOUR views, they have no unique quality that would allow them to have their own views or they would not be you.

On the other hand if you have manifested "other" personnas then you have "divided" from them, just as you are a division of the prime source. Therefore, they are no longer you and can no longer be part of your "self-awareness".

If you are exactly like the prime source – able to divide and develop self-determinism by your will alone, then the 'views' of those ‘others’ are not your own (as you say) but neither are they you.

If you can access – views of others whom you have manifested why doesn’t it work in reverse – why can’t you skip the middle man-ifestation and deal directly with the Prime soure?

Then there is the contradiction that arises between #7 and 8.

>>>7. A. ‘universe’ & ‘matrix’ are synonymous
B - ‘higher self’ and JB are not synonymous therefore JB is a manifestation of the ‘higher self’. NOTE: 7A & 7B are my words derived from the following quote >>> My 'higher self' incarnates and lives many lives in this matrix I (this incarnation) am one of them.
8.I am also my higher self. It is me.<<<

Please read 7 and 8 do you REALLY want me to explain the contradiction there????


HI CREATIVE I see you were just doing a low 'fly-by'.

Regarding the bold statement above: This might be a contradiction if it were true. It is not true.

My body is made up of individual cells, each of which have their own brain, and each are individual. A human cell can live and thrive in a petri dish (if fed properly) completely separated from its original body. It was part of the whole body, and it is an individual cell with a brain. (Yes, cells have brains.)



"Free will" is an incorrect term. The will is simply the will. It can be used or not used. The power to use the will depends upon the level of awareness of the individual unit.

Also, I don't think I am arguing, nor did I state that anyone has TOTAL self-determinism.



The accuracy of this statement would depend on how you define "self" our "you."

If you are talking about an individual psyche you are correct. But if you are talking about a body, (for example my body) as being a single individual you are not correct.

My body is a universe teaming with life. It is an environment for the incubation of consciousness and life forms. Individual cells, good and bad bacteria, atoms, etc. etc.




Most probably stay within my universe for the same reason you stay within this universe. It is their matrix, which is like an incubator that supports their life and growth. (Although all do not stay as atoms leave and enter the body all the time and with every breath I take.



Since you have never met them, you would have no way of knowing that. They do not all have my views. Some of them have opposite views completely. But we still find ways to cooperate for the good of the whole body. We are similar in our views as like attracts like and I am not a self destructive person or at odds with myself.




The division is not complete, as they live within my universe. My body is their environment and their universe. The only division is that I have acknowledged their unique point of view and acknowledged them as individuals with their own ideas, desires, and the ability to use their will.



In the pantheist view we are all part of the body of prime source and we are also individuals with self-determinism and our own will. We live within the universal body.



It would be like a single atom in your body suddenly taking over control of your body. It is just not conscious enough to do that. It is like asking why an acorn can't become a tree when ever it wants. It has all the information to become a tree, but there is a process it must go through to do so. That process is growth.




I see no contradiction there at all. If my higher self is me, then it follows that I am that.

Because I can assume the point of view of any of my manifested psyches, yes, I am them. I can see what they see, feel what they feel, experience what they experience.

And because my higher self can assume my point of view, yes IT is me. It can see what I see, feel what I feel, experience what I experience.

We are one because we share experience, knowledge and point of view when it suits us to do so.

Cell do not have brains some cells do not divide and the ones that do accomplish this based on a complex set of ‘predetermined’ instructions called DNA. Cells do not manifest. Furthermore you have often argued that YOU are not your physical form, rather your physical form is a mechanism devised to increase you’re the experiences of your “higher-self”. So this is not an acceptable comparison.





Just so I understand – you believe every individual cell has or will gained consciousness and is or will think for itself, correct? What is ‘YOUR’ connection with the body then? Are you the keeper of your internal universe? Have you ‘manifested’ that universe?



You have just equated atoms to the cells in your body, meaning that atoms are individual life forms, conscious, self-aware, and capable of thought, (because they have a brain). Is that what you meant to say?







Back to the subject of personna’s – where are these personna’s generated from? Since you seem to connect them intimately with your body and your existence in this body I figured they must co-habit your physical form, do they? I mean if they each serve you in life’s functions then they must co-inhabit your physical form. Do they also come and go like the atoms and cells of your body? Do they train others to take their place?







So will YOU (whatever/whoever that is) continue until all have become completely divided? If you ‘leave’ before they are ‘mature’ does your leaving kill them?






Your comparison relates to physical growth, but I thought the real “YOU” was not a physical being but some spiritual entity which only incarnates as a physical being. What kind of growth prepares a cell (physical live form) to become such spiritual entity?





Maybe these question will help me see your meaning and better understand. When you incarnated in this present existence as JB – was the body you incarnated in a manifestation from your higher self? Like – did you choose to whom you would be born and when you would be born or was your incarnation a sort of random happening (which, I could add, would also preclude free-will?)

Let me give this a shot.

Here are the two statements being compared:

"My 'higher self' incarnates and lives many lives in this matrix I (this incarnation) am one of them."

and

"I am also my higher self"


Simplified:

I am an incarnation of my higher self

and

I am my higher self


So the two statments look like this:
"I" = "higher self"
"I" = "incarnation of higher self"

Then we substitue each of the terms with a variable:
(A) = "I"
(B) = "higher self"
(C) = "incarnation of higher self"

And present a rule:
If (A)=(B) and (A)=(C), then it must be true that (B)=(C).

And then substitute the terms back in for the variables:
"(B)=(C)" becomes "(higher self) = (incarntaion of higher self)"

And translate that back into plain English - which results in the following sentence:


"Higher self is an incarnation of higher self."


That's the apparent contradiction that needs to be resolved.

I’m still confused. Let me ask bluntly. What is it that you think you manifest?

If cells are how you divided then that can’t be manifestation because it is incarnation.

But dividing through cells makes little sense anyway, because you are dividing via a physical mechanism – but you are not a physical being but rather some form of spirit or energy or wave but not physical. Is that correct?

So when do the cells and atoms that have consciousness and brains become spiritual beings?

Red,

Your questions assume things that I did not state. I used the example of cells because of your statement that an individual could not be part of a whole. A cell is an "individual" and it is also part of a whole body. That was just an example.

New research into cells has found that they do indeed have what functions as a "brain" which receives signals and acts on those signals and even has the ability to alter its DNA. The nucleus houses the DNA,which is the programing, but the membrane of the cell is the functioning brain of the cell. (A cell can live indefinitely in a petri dish under its own function without signals from the brain if cared for properly.)

I cannot answer many of your questions because it is clear that we are not even on the same page about much of anything.

I believe that consciousness can be found in infinite degrees and is everywhere and that it flows through and exists in all things. That does not mean I think that a cell has the ability to use or develop a will of its own like a human does. Cells are living individuals and they are the building blocks of living organisms and spirit (consciousness) flows through them.

It is probably impossible to get your mind around most of this stuff, and so I don't expect to be able to explain it because I can't get my mind around it. We are dealing with INFINITY AND MULTI-DIMENSIONAL realities, and weird things like the non-existence of time and space.

The human mind just can't grasp all of it and mine is a human mind, so please don't expect me to be able to explain it, or even help you to understand what I try to say here.



Cells are part of the building blocks of the body. Like the body, they are containers or environments for consciousness.. or life. They live, hence spirit/consciousness inhabits them.



MKultra - mind control experiments are based on the many psyche's involved in human consciousness. Multiple personalities are created by inducing trauma on children at a very young age that splinters their personality.

These psyche's do exist even if you are not aware of them and even if they are not 'splintered.' For most people they are very well integrated so that they are not seen as separate persona's, or maybe they are simply ignored.

They are simply different aspects of the single developing physical person that you identify as yourself. When you begin to get to know yourself you might find them, but they are a part of the whole you.

If you don't want to acknowledge them as individuals holding a different point of view that is certainly a choice you are free to make. I find it works very well for me towards my goal of self realization to acknowledge them as individuals. (I am not even aware of all of them.)



As far as I know, I will never leave them. I am always with them.

More in next post.

Cells and bodies are environments for consciousness, but they are finite. Consciousness is infinite.




Yes, my body is basically a manifestation from my higher self but there is a lot of pre-programing options to choose from in the building of a body in the womb from a fertilized egg. I certainly don't remember how all of that transpires, but I did choose my parents in this life with the help of others within the body of my higher self. (Yes, there are many of us.)

I realize it is confusing how one can be one and still be many. It is confusing to me too. But when you ultimately share experiences with all of your other incarnate selves, it is as if you are as one.

This could be what a higher self looks like:

1. Consciousness manifests form and creature bodies for the purpose of life, experience and existence.

2. See above for cells. They are about the body, and the form.

3. You ask WHEN? In the face of infinity? You must have a frame of reference to ask when.

(I have an acorn. When will it become a mighty oak? )

In the face of infinity, it won't take long at all.

In reference to your life, (this physical one) .... a very long long time I would venture to guess.

Amazing topic. I enjoy the various knowledges and theories coming together. What if there is just one of an individual, instead of being split? (Like in "The One" starring Jet Li, but without the killing. If the other selves never existed to begin with.)

Ghost rider to tower requesting permission for fly-by...

Hey Di!

Yeah, that's a very good question. I base my beliefs on that premise. And it seems to work. So I'm actually interested in why the added complexity of the whole "heriarchical" system is considered necessary.

All I can guess is that either there is some datum that Jeannie is aware of that I'm not, which requires a more complex theory to cover all the data, or we simply draw different conslusion from the same data.

You could actually be completely correct that there is just only ONE.

Consider that there is only one of me.... and there is no one else. Consider that I have many different moods, opinions, points of view.

Have you ever looked at a situation and attempted to see it through another person's point of view? "If I were you I would probably feel the same way..."

So what if the ONE consciousness has many points of view including apposing and opposite ones? What would you then have???

CHAOS!

What better way to experience a different point of view than to become it?

So how do you change chaos to ORDER? You create a MIND and that mind begins to sort things out and organize information.

SO HOW DOES IT DO THAT?

It divided the information and the points of view.

It gives those "things" the ability to do the same.

After all, we are talking massive amounts of information and points of view. We are talking about infinity. A single entity cannot possibly do it all.

So we are simply a filing system for information and experience with built in minds and a will of our own.

We have been given life and individuality, but we are still part of the ONE entity that is consciousness. We just don't know it.

We have the illusion that we are separate and individual... but we are not really. ..And.. Yet we are because we have all the properties of a separate and unique individual and we all have a unique point of view and unique experiences.

We are a storage system for information and experience for consciousness. We are taking on the CHAOS and turning it into ORDER. We are part of the universal MIND of the One.

I hate to break it to you, but that is what we are. Sorry Sky. You Pulled the truth out of me.

What makes you unique is that NO OTHER INDIVIDUAL has your experience and unique point of view.

If things were the way you think they are, -- an infinite number of equal and separate individuals, CHAOS WOULD REIGN! There would be no reason whatsoever to cooperate with each other. Why should they? IF They are NOT DEPENDENT ON THE OTHERS? It would amount to dog eat dog and who cares? Nobody would much care about 'the others' Or each other.

Consider how we store information in this reality in computers. Why the drive to make computers smarter? Why the drive to enable them to think?

And most of all, why the drive to make them intelligent and even conscious or creative?

Probably so we don't have to constantly program them and tell them what to do. Let them do their own thinking.

Why the drive to make an operating system "user friendly?" So we don't have to do all the work installing drivers etc.

So why do you think the ONE consciousness gave us the ability to think and create and be conscious?

Same reason.

As above, so below.