It looks like our differences here may stem from our different viewpoints on “time”.

In my view, there is only one viewpoint that can be assumed at one time. (That could actually be used as a definition of “time” – the changing of viewpoints.) Yes, we may have many different viewpoints, but we can only be (or “assume”) one at a time. Just like we may have many toys, but we only play with one at a time.

Sorry, but I don’t agree that information and points of view have volition. They can’t “do” anything. In the linguistic sense they are “objects”, not “subjects”. In other words, information is not what I am, it is a thing that I have. And likewise for a point of view.

And there we must part ways. By my definition of “spirit”, the spirit can and does “do it all”.

And per your statements on the matter (e.g. “the ONE entity that is consciousness” – from below), it seems to me that a single entity does, in fact, “do it all” in your view as well.

I think this is just a semantic error. I don’t consider that I am the filing system. I consider my that my mind contains the filing system.

And we must part ways here to. To be “given” something requires a dependency (on time if nothing else) which violates my definition of “spirit”.

Well of course that’s just conjecture, with no possibility of any logical connection being made. (One can’t make a logical connection to something unknown. There’s nothing to connect to.)

However, from a logical perspective, you said “we just don’t know it”, but then you proceed to say that you do know it. So you’ve really just said “I know something you don’t know” and I could say the same. But where does that leave us?

But in any case, I acknowledge that you hold that opinion.

Well if that’s simply a definition of “unique” then ok. If that is what unique means to you, then I am unique by your definition. But it doesn’t change the fact that I, as a spiritual being, am not dependent for my existence on anything.

But you see, any dependency on anything at all violates the very nature of free will. In my book, the concept of “free will” dictates that a spirit can decide whatever it wants.

Just as in a team sports competition, a person can decide to play or not. But in order to play a game one must “play by the rules” or one is not really playing that game - one is playing a different game. It is the choice of the players to abide by the rules, but they are not inherently dependent on them. They can decide to play the game or not.

So from that perspective, yes it is true that if everyone decided to play a game together, but no one agreed to follow the rules of that game, then chaos would reign in that game. But chaos itself is nothing but “not playing by the rules”. That is what defines chaos.

In short, it is the game (how things work) and the rules (what things are) that are dependent on the players, not the other way around.

The perception of "Time" is different for everyone, just as the perception of reality is different for everyone. I don't know how you can be talking about the concept of time at all in the face of an infinite system with infinite perceptions of time.

The perception of "time" is unique to the perceiver. But if the perceiver is an infinite being it is not subject to any time but its own perception of it. If it can assume any point of view that descends from it, it can also travel forwards and backwards in time and experience any event in the entire matrix. Time is meaningless.



The points of view are simply the eyes of THE ONE. These eyes are a part of the one entity, but they do much more than just 'see' in a visual sense. They collect information and experience and store it within their field.



YES spirit does it all. A single entity does it all. But it is the manner in which it is done that creates 'others' which are the eyes of infinity, or the eyes of THE ONE SPIRIT.



The universal mind of the ONE is the where the 'filing system' is. We operate within that mind. We are also equipped with our own minds.

There are so many levels and so many dimensions involved with this concept I can see why we are not communicating. I don't think we disagree as much as you might think... except you are just an independent cuss that doesn't think he needs anyone else and wants to be all alone and independent.



No it doe not, and for the millionth time.
THE TERM 'FREE WILL' IS AN IMPROPER TERM.

There is only THE WILL. The will is just the will. It is there to be used or not -- by anyone who is CONSCIOUS ENOUGH TO DO SO.

If you are not conscious enough, you cannot use THE WILL.

But Sky if you feel better by believing that you are totally independent of everyone and everything else, and totally free to do what ever you wish then you certainly are free to think that.

My question to you would be, why are you still hanging around here? Why don't you go create your own universe?

While composing my previous reply, it struck me that your philosophy is seems to be largely dependent on the logic that "because there is a below, there must be an above". But I don't see a reason to make that assumption. I don't see it as being necessary to the explanation of all observed phenomena.

Yes, we can observe that there are multiple viewpoints, and that we can assume various different viewpoints. But the logical extrapolation of that is that we can assume any viewpoint - which your philosophy appears to agree with (cf. the "tree" analogy). So the main difference here is that you've postulated a specific type of structure (heirarchical) to explain the relationships between the different viewpoints.

And this goes back to my definition of spirit. In your "tree" analogy, the spirit is dependent on the structure (rules) of the tree (game) to assume any particular viewpoint - which conflicts with my definition of spirit.

In other words, you're saying that spirit is dependent on the game and its rules, whereas I'm saying the exact opposite – the game and its rules are dependent on spirit. Spirit is what creates the game and its rules.

So? Why would the ONE spirit create rules if it had no intention of following them? In your system, there is no order, only chaos. There is only a bunch of entities, all independent, floating around doing their own thing with no need for anyone else and no reason to cooperate with anyone.

If that is true, why on earth are we here together? Why do we form societies? Why do we manifest universes? Why are you here? Why don't you just fly away to some distant reality and create your own universe? You don't need anyone else. You are completely free and independent. Right?

P.S. "Above and Below" are always in relation to where YOU ARE RIGHT NOW THIS MOMENT.

Oh pish and tosh. “Proper” is totally subjective. It’s nothing but a value judgement based on personal opinion. And since I have a different opinion, “free will” is a proper term in my opinion. And again in my opinion. The term “free will” means “will that is independent of any constraints. So by my definition, dependency on anything does violate the very nature of free will.

Likewise, if you feel better by believing that you are totally dependent on everyone and everything else, and not totally free to do what ever you wish then you certainly are free to think that.

And my answer would be: I did create my own universe (in cooperation with others) and that’s the universe I am hanging around in.

You have no need to cooperate with others. Try creating your own universe all alone, see how far you get.

No reason that I can think of.

Why would the game and rules of football be created if no one intended to follow them?

Again, no reason that I can think of.

Not really true. The key thing to understand is that in my system, order and chaos are dependent on a viewpoint.

As an example, a small child looking at chalkboard full of quantum equations would see chaos. Whereas a quantum physicist would see very precise order.

It is the assumption of a viewpoint that creates order, not the other way around.

Neither order, nor chaos can exist without a viewpoint.

And again, “floating around”, “need” and “reason” are all dependent on a viewpoint. Without a viewpoint, none of those could exist. Need and reason and floating around are properties of a viewpoint. The are not inherent properties of spirit.

Yes, and that is exactly why I am here – to do things together with others. That’s the game I chose to play.

But actually, “doing things with others” is pretty much the very definition of “playing a game” – in the very most abstract sense, which is what we’re talking about.

And that leads me to think that you believe spirit has no choice in whether it plays a game or not. That something external to itself can somehow force it to play a game against its will.

Agreed.

I have no need to create another universe all alone either. I simply chose to co-create this one.

But if I were to create a univers all by myself, "far" in that universe would have no relationship to or bearing on "far" in this universe. It would simply be a differnt game - or actually, no game at all since there would be no one else to interact with. The very concept of "far" would have no meaning at all in that universe other than what I chose to assign to it. So in fact, I would be able to get infintely far in that universe.

I am on my 8th life now and I know many of the details of my other lives which have provided clues as to why this life is what it is..I know my deaths from several lives including the one that led me to have Spina Bifida in this life..I also know why I have headaches that no doc in this life can cure..its because I died of a dead injury from being pushed and hitting my head on a table by my drunken husband in that life..which also explains why I won't date a drinker in this life.

How do you know these things?

I think you are talking about opinions, not viewpoints.

Well in the context of this discussion, I consider them to be virtually synonymous.

Well through a few ways actually..most of which would get me called insane if I said in here..lol.

I always answer that with a simple "I remember them", or some variation thereof.

Yup..I do remember alot of them..I have had dreams and visions of them.

The post is too long for me to chew through, so I don't know if anyone has brought this up, but what about concarnations?

People with multiple personalities may be people with more than one soul inhabiting (carnating) their bodies.

This becomes rather self-evident when you look at it.

Also, people with amalgam fillings have a higher chance of drowning in a water-vessel catastrophie, since their specific gravity is high, than people who have birds as ancestors.

Although its highly improbable for a person to consciously recalling one's own past life -- which would be equivalent to having multi-consciousness -- but I have personally witnessed such an act -- though the person had to be put into the hypnotic trance!..
Such a phenomenon indicates that past experiences are burried deep within our subconsciousness. Usually, such recallections remain dormant... Yet, at times, they might manifest themselves as flashes -- insights, intuitive breakthroughs, etc. -- that we often confuse with the "inner voice" of reason!

However, aside from the hypnosis, I'm not aware of any other method of bringing such experiences into the "open".

* * * Nevertheless, such a knowledge is not popularized because that might give the individual a false hope, and might prevent one from living one's life to the fullest -- as if experiencing the last day of existence...

Besides, we're shielded psychologically from past experiences -- so that we do not suffer from the previous trauma (or excessive joy)!