Who is the One? Who is God?

[Sol Logos]

So, by this reasoning only the physical world exists. So 6th STO Unified Thought Beings Of Light do not exist. They are entirely non-physical, not of the physical universe, but they are living consciousness energy. Then there was the recent communication with Pierre and his conveying of his experience in 5th density, but by your above definition Pierre has no awareness / consciousness / mind.

Why assume there is nothing to be aware of beyond physical existence, even as a hypothetical?

Depends on your definition of physical. Given there was an experience to convey of the 5th density, are you saying there was no perception of time nor space involved in that experience? This wasn’t the impression I got. And what does one experience with no time nor physical/non-physical objects for consideration (including conceptual)? Is there anything to be aware of? If there’s nothing to be aware of, what is awareness itself or what is the state of consciousness?

 

[christx11]

Depends on your definition of physical.

My definition of physical is anything possible from the consciousness energy realm that is collapsible into what we call 3-dimensional physical space-time.

Given there was an experience to convey of the 5th density, are you saying there was no perception of time nor space involved in that experience?

Yes, exactly.

This wasn’t the impression I got. And what does one experience with no time nor physical/non-physical objects for consideration (including conceptual)? Is there anything to be aware of? If there’s nothing to be aware of, what is awareness itself or what is the state of consciousness?

Now you have changed the basis of your original statement and added 'non-physical objects'. That was not in your original statement(s).
You original statement was:
As a hypothetical, say there’s no time or space, so absolutely nothing to be aware of. This means there can be no awareness / consciousness / mind either.
You are limiting your thinking to the realm that consciousness can only be aware of physical things and if there is no time and space that means nothing exists. If it is not physical then it does not exist.

I see logic here of: If A and B, then C.
If there is no time or space, then there is absolutely nothing to be aware of.
Then you follow that with a conclusion you derived from 'If A and B, then C': 'This means there can be no awareness / consciousness / mind either.'
I interpreted your statement(s) to mean "There can be no awareness / consciousness / mind without physical space and time.

Since you have now introduced something new from your original statement 'non-physical objects', perhaps it would help if you explained what you mean by that.

I would agree that there is something like non-physical object(s). I am not sure if I would call it objects, but there are non-physical 'things' and that was part of the point I was trying to make. For instance, does joy, or sadness, or compassion require time and space? Does thinking require time and space? There are probably types of perception and perceiving in the non-physical that we cannot even contemplate. These things can only occur if time and space exist? I think 6th density STO (which has no physicality, no space-time) perceives one another, communicates with one another, networks with one another, learns from one another, but there is absolutely nothing physical on that level, there is no space and no time, yet they are alive and extant. That was the only point I was trying to make. Life, consciousness, awareness, mind, do not require physicality. The only caveat is the first four densities. In the first four densities physicality and consciousness are 1/2 and 1/2 of the experience. In the first four densities physicality cannot exist without non-physical conscious energy and non-physical conscious energy cannot exist without physicality. They are bonded, merged, in perfect balance, and one cannot exist without the other. At levels 5 and 6, yes non-physical consciousness exists without physicality at all. And all of this arises naturally from first principals in reality.

I am not trying to be contentious. Your original statement to me sounded as if mind could not exist without the physical universe and that is the same thought to me as current cosmology/cosmogony, that mind is is just a random accident of the physical universe. And to that I would add an adage from both Einstein and the C's. No dice baby!

 

[Sol Logos]

My definition of physical is anything possible from the consciousness energy realm that is collapsible into what we call 3-dimensional physical space-time.

Yes, exactly.

Now you have changed the basis of your original statement and added 'non-physical objects'. That was not in your original statement(s).
You original statement was:
As a hypothetical, say there’s no time or space, so absolutely nothing to be aware of. This means there can be no awareness / consciousness / mind either.
You are limiting your thinking to the realm that consciousness can only be aware of physical things and if there is no time and space that means nothing exists. If it is not physical then it does not exist.

I see logic here of: If A and B, then C.
If there is no time or space, then there is absolutely nothing to be aware of.
Then you follow that with a conclusion you derived from 'If A and B, then C': 'This means there can be no awareness / consciousness / mind either.'
I interpreted your statement(s) to mean "There can be no awareness / consciousness / mind without physical space and time.

Since you have now introduced something new from your original statement 'non-physical objects', perhaps it would help if you explained what you mean by that.

I would agree that there is something like non-physical object(s). I am not sure if I would call it objects, but there are non-physical 'things' and that was part of the point I was trying to make. For instance, does joy, or sadness, or compassion require time and space? Does thinking require time and space? There are probably types of perception and perceiving in the non-physical that we cannot even contemplate. These things can only occur if time and space exist? I think 6th density STO (which has no physicality, no space-time) perceives one another, communicates with one another, networks with one another, learns from one another, but there is absolutely nothing physical on that level, there is no space and no time, yet they are alive and extant. That was the only point I was trying to make. Life, consciousness, awareness, mind, do not require physicality. The only caveat is the first four densities. In the first four densities physicality and consciousness are 1/2 and 1/2 of the experience. In the first four densities physicality cannot exist without non-physical conscious energy and non-physical conscious energy cannot exist without physicality. They are bonded, merged, in perfect balance, and one cannot exist without the other. At levels 5 and 6, yes non-physical consciousness exists without physicality at all. And all of this arises naturally from first principals in reality.

I am not trying to be contentious. Your original statement to me sounded as if mind could not exist without the physical universe and that is the same thought to me as current cosmology/cosmogony, that mind is is just a random accident of the physical universe. And to that I would add an adage from both Einstein and the C's. No dice baby!

I think the issue is we're talking about time and space in different ways. I could have been clearer on this; sorry for any unintentional confusion that resulted from my lack of clarity. I'm glad you're not trying to be contentious too.

What I meant is that a description of something requires time (i.e., before and after said event) and space (between the observer and what is observed). This could be physical, non-physical, or conceptual. For example, in a dream, we perceive time and space very differently from our waking reality, but there's still a continuum of a sort.

That's what I was getting at with my use of "time" and "space." It's worth noting that when I said, "If there is no time or space, then there is absolutely nothing to be aware of," I didn't use nor intend to confine this to the physical 3D realm.

 

[Menna]

It seems so, but for what?

A kind of introspection and learning through us...

For what?

What is the one?

The learning through us is part of it IMO

The one “shatters” itself into a trillion pieces “soul” “conciousness” so it/us can experience different situations and make decisions free will the one records/gathers this info and becomes gathers the data for creation/learning/knowledge/love/light.

There are systems in place with rules such as 3rd density realms, the human bodies and its rules/limitation’s. 4th density rules

The souls/concousness/the one experiences it all in all it’s variations to gain and assimilate and to observe for its own free will decisions choices…


To me the question needs a reframe. Its like saying there is one U.S quarter .25 cents but there are millions of quarters out there experiencing its own experience.

I would more like to ask how/who created the one who then fragments itself did the one create itself. If there are other “ones” who created them.

This is an endless topic and question like chicken and the egg.

I do understand you want a better understanding and for me personally I just want to get to 4D and not reincarnate back to 3D and then after 4D my question will be how to get to 6D and so on.

Who creates us the fragmented souls??? The one in the context of what I believe your talking about I don’t think created us but gives us autonomy/experience/agency I think the real question is how was the one created how did it come to be.

We lower our entropy and make STO free will decisions and then we improve our being/concousness as we improve in this manner through learning about reality and improving ourselves we become more valuable to the one the system we keep improving get rid of programs see reality lower entropy continue on and then hopefully graduate to 4D.

With a 4D experience/knowledge I assume one will be closer to “the one” as you are closer with your full capabilities because you are in a different reality with different rules thus I assume closer to how the one lives to know the one you I assume need to live as the one lives…Absolute is 7th D well 4th is closer to 7D than 3D so to know the one and who it is it behooves us all to graduate to 4D

How can one know what it’s like to be a CEO of a company as an associate? One would have to be promoted to Manager, Director, executive, CFO and so on to know…One must experience all the steps to have knowledge and experience/being

Maybe we are parts of the one on our way to becoming the one ourselves?

I know I have more understanding, compassion, empathy, will, strength, tact during this 3D experience now in 2024 than I did in 1997 and based on average life expectancy I am still just under halfway done.

Imagine 25% of the way “done” with a 4D experience the perspective one would have?

I think the best thing we can do is keep building our capacity for love, hurt, happiness all reality so we have the ABILITY to exist in another “higher” “closer” reality we need to be able to exist in higher realities to know the higher realities and the realities above we won’t exist in the higher of we can’t optimally exist in the lower

 

[Evan]

The learning through us is part of it IMO

The one “shatters” itself into a trillion pieces “soul” “conciousness” so it/us can experience different situations and make decisions free will the one records/gathers this info and becomes gathers the data for creation/learning/knowledge/love/light.

There are systems in place with rules such as 3rd density realms, the human bodies and its rules/limitation’s. 4th density rules

The souls/concousness/the one experiences it all in all it’s variations to gain and assimilate and to observe for its own free will decisions choices…


To me the question needs a reframe. Its like saying there is one U.S quarter .25 cents but there are millions of quarters out there experiencing its own experience.

I would more like to ask how/who created the one who then fragments itself did the one create itself. If there are other “ones” who created them.

This is an endless topic and question like chicken and the egg.

I do understand you want a better understanding and for me personally I just want to get to 4D and not reincarnate back to 3D and then after 4D my question will be how to get to 6D and so on.

Who creates us the fragmented souls??? The one in the context of what I believe your talking about I don’t think created us but gives us autonomy/experience/agency I think the real question is how was the one created how did it come to be.

We lower our entropy and make STO free will decisions and then we improve our being/concousness as we improve in this manner through learning about reality and improving ourselves we become more valuable to the one the system we keep improving get rid of programs see reality lower entropy continue on and then hopefully graduate to 4D.

With a 4D experience/knowledge I assume one will be closer to “the one” as you are closer with your full capabilities because you are in a different reality with different rules thus I assume closer to how the one lives to know the one you I assume need to live as the one lives…Absolute is 7th D well 4th is closer to 7D than 3D so to know the one and who it is it behooves us all to graduate to 4D

How can one know what it’s like to be a CEO of a company as an associate? One would have to be promoted to Manager, Director, executive, CFO and so on to know…One must experience all the steps to have knowledge and experience/being

Maybe we are parts of the one on our way to becoming the one ourselves?

I know I have more understanding, compassion, empathy, will, strength, tact during this 3D experience now in 2024 than I did in 1997 and based on average life expectancy I am still just under halfway done.

Imagine 25% of the way “done” with a 4D experience the perspective one would have?

Beautifully stated! I may have to save this to a note for a personal reminder. Thanks @Menna

 

[Menna]

Beautifully stated! I may have to save this to a note for a personal reminder. Thanks @Menna

And then someone within the next 24 months or so will pose a similar question and I hope my future response is “better” and builds on this response. I don’t think in 3D this question has an answer but it is a good exercise a guage for what one understands where they are what the see and their being/knowledge and a good exercise in intuition, reading between the lines and seeing the unseen.

If one wants to advance past physical reality one has to see and know the future, how “things” go and see what isn’t physical and even then one can be wrong so like a scientist one has an idea based on experience/wisdom/rules/understanding and marches forward as one goes forward one recalibrates to attain what they want/experience what they want working with “The 4th way” reality and its feedback - if the feedback is other than what one desires or works toward one has to THINK and understand to course correct and move forward gaining/advancing improving to STO while interacting with 3D STS

Its extremely difficult requires methodical nature, observation and the WILL to try/do/experience and improve on responses/perspective month after month year after year

 

[Sol Logos]

My definition of physical is anything possible from the consciousness energy realm that is collapsible into what we call 3-dimensional physical space-time.

Yes, exactly.

Now you have changed the basis of your original statement and added 'non-physical objects'. That was not in your original statement(s).
You original statement was:
As a hypothetical, say there’s no time or space, so absolutely nothing to be aware of. This means there can be no awareness / consciousness / mind either.
You are limiting your thinking to the realm that consciousness can only be aware of physical things and if there is no time and space that means nothing exists. If it is not physical then it does not exist.

I see logic here of: If A and B, then C.
If there is no time or space, then there is absolutely nothing to be aware of.
Then you follow that with a conclusion you derived from 'If A and B, then C': 'This means there can be no awareness / consciousness / mind either.'
I interpreted your statement(s) to mean "There can be no awareness / consciousness / mind without physical space and time.

Since you have now introduced something new from your original statement 'non-physical objects', perhaps it would help if you explained what you mean by that.

I would agree that there is something like non-physical object(s). I am not sure if I would call it objects, but there are non-physical 'things' and that was part of the point I was trying to make. For instance, does joy, or sadness, or compassion require time and space? Does thinking require time and space? There are probably types of perception and perceiving in the non-physical that we cannot even contemplate. These things can only occur if time and space exist? I think 6th density STO (which has no physicality, no space-time) perceives one another, communicates with one another, networks with one another, learns from one another, but there is absolutely nothing physical on that level, there is no space and no time, yet they are alive and extant. That was the only point I was trying to make. Life, consciousness, awareness, mind, do not require physicality. The only caveat is the first four densities. In the first four densities physicality and consciousness are 1/2 and 1/2 of the experience. In the first four densities physicality cannot exist without non-physical conscious energy and non-physical conscious energy cannot exist without physicality. They are bonded, merged, in perfect balance, and one cannot exist without the other. At levels 5 and 6, yes non-physical consciousness exists without physicality at all. And all of this arises naturally from first principals in reality.

I am not trying to be contentious. Your original statement to me sounded as if mind could not exist without the physical universe and that is the same thought to me as current cosmology/cosmogony, that mind is is just a random accident of the physical universe. And to that I would add an adage from both Einstein and the C's. No dice baby!

I think the issue is we're talking about time and space in different ways. I could have been clearer on this; sorry for any unintentional confusion that resulted from my lack of clarity. I'm glad you're not trying to be contentious too.

What I meant is that a description of something requires time (i.e., before and after said event) and space (between the observer and what is observed). This could be physical, non-physical, or conceptual. For example, in a dream, we perceive time and space very differently from our waking reality, but there's still a continuum of a sort.

That's what I was getting at with my use of "time" and "space." It's worth noting that when I said, "If there is no time or space, then there is absolutely nothing to be aware of," I didn't use nor intend to confine this to the physical 3D realm

Actually to revise I did use the word “physical” later on. See here:

If there are many universes, what do we call that set of many universes? And if there are many universe sets, what do we call the set of all those sets? Let’s say we call the whole lot “everything”, then we have to deal with the pesky concept of “nothing”. And now there’s another set, with everything and nothing together. The same could be said for beingness and non-beingness - whenever we land on a concept of totality, like the word “universe”, then we and legitimately ask, what makes us sure there’s only one of those?

As a hypothetical, say there’s no time or space, so absolutely nothing to be aware of. This means there can be no awareness / consciousness / mind either.

idea of reflection plays a big role.

If there are many universes, we might call that collection a "multiverse." And if there are many multiverses, perhaps the set of all those sets could be called the "omniverse." But even if we call the whole lot "everything," we still have to grapple with the perplexing concept of "nothing." Now we seemingly have another set, encompassing both everything and nothing. The same could be said for beingness and non-beingness - whenever we settle on a notion of totality, like the word "universe," we can legitimately ask, what assures us there's only one?

Hypothetically, consider a state where there's no time or space, thus absolutely nothing to be aware of. This implies there can be no awareness, consciousness, or mind either. However, within this void lies the prime potential for awareness,waiting to unfold.

The idea of reflection plays a crucial role here. In this scenario, the prime potential for awareness recognizes itself,sparking a single point of self-awareness ("I know I am"). This creates a conceptual space between observer and observed ("I observe myself as being aware"), establishing two conceptual points with space between them. Now, given this event of self-reflection, there's also time, i.e., before and after.

From this single point of awareness, a connection is formed to a collective awareness, a web of interconnected conscious beings, each aware of themselves and others. Both this individual and collective awareness interact with and take action within the physical reality of space, matter, and time, shaping and being shaped by it.

This creates a type of relationship model of reality:

1. The prime potential for awareness reflecting upon itself to spark the single point of awareness.
2. The single point of awareness connecting to a collective awareness and acting to create the experience of a world.
3. The collective awareness and individual points of awareness interacting with and taking action within physical reality
4. The physical reality of space, matter, and time reflecting the actions of awareness.

As each of these is directly linked and dependent on each other, it can be represented by a tetrahedron with each of those four points directly connecting to every other point.

This illustrates the interconnectedness and interdependence of awareness and the spacetime continuum, offering a perspective on the nature of reality. Each point in this model is not only connected but engages in relationships of reflection, connection, and action, emphasising the dynamic and co-creative nature of existence.

So I’d more precisely describe as follows:

1. The prime potential for awareness reflecting upon itself to spark the single point of awareness.
2. The single point of awareness connecting to a collective awareness and acting to create the experience of a world.
3. The collective awareness and individual points of awareness interacting with and taking action within physical reality
4. The physical reality medium of our experience, space, matter (ie “things”), and time (not exclusive to 3D and/or physical reality) reflecting the actions of awareness

Of these points, only the 4th is where physicality would be. I’ve changed this to ‘medium’, as a more neutral word describing the category for and in which experience and ability to express our will and actions occur.