Archive for October, 2011

The First Distortions 2

At first, the first distortions are one. Nothing chooses to become love; love immediately wills light into existence, and immediately becomes one with light, melting back into nothing. The resulting nothing is higher than original nothing. Nothing condenses itself in order to become love or light. Thus, if nothing were to condense itself into love, and then revert back to nothing, the resulting nothing would be of the same order as the original nothing. But, since love creates light, the amount of existence has been doubled; thus, when they melt back into nothing, the resulting nothing is double the original nothing. The resulting nothing is also more expansive than the love and light, because the condensation process is reversed when the two become one.

Thus the initial reaction between love and light simply results in an expansion of nothing, in which nothing, love, and light are perfectly united at all stages of the process, so that no distinction between them is visible. The expansion occurs in a quantized process of exponential growth.

In order for further developments to occur, there must be the experience of separation. The first distortion is free to choose separation. Due to the nature of free will and infinite possibility, the first distortion, upon moving from unity to separation, may immediately choose to become any experience. Therefore all of these experiences are in fact chosen, and experienced simultaneously. However, the progressively more distorted experiences are progressively less probable, and therefore we may imagine them as being shadowy and pale in comparison to the less distorted experiences. They are less probable due to the fact that the most distorted the experience is, the more the Creator must condense itself in order to become it.

The most probable separation is the separation between love and light. The most straightforward form of this is the experience of love by itself, and the experience of light by itself. Love is experienced alone, without a corresponding light to balance it. Light is experienced alone, without a corresponding love to balance it. Due to love’s desire to become one with light, both of these are unstable states. Love by itself will strongly tend to create light and melt back into nothingness. Meanwhile, light by itself will strongly tend to attract love to itself, with the same result. Thus both of these states are unstable and improbable, tending to collapse into nothingness.

Nonetheless, we can be assured that there are an infinite number of each of these states. We are currently dealing with infinite love and infinite light. The nature of infinity is such that for every infinity, there is a higher infinity which surpasses it. Thus, for every infinite light, there must be an infinite light which surpasses it. The same is true for love. All of these levels of light and love are experienced in the fashion just described; but each level is less stable, and thus less probable, than the preceding one. This is due to the fact that the attraction of love to light, the gravitational force if you will, increases with the quantity of each.

A more probable experience is the experience of love and light as simultaneous but separate. In fact, this experience becomes the focal point for the rest of the Creator’s experience of separation. We shall therefore discuss it in more detail momentarily; but first we shall consider other possibilities.

One possibility is the experience of light as separate from itself. This is similar to the experience of love and light as simultaneous but separate, except that both terms of the equation are light. Intuitively, light as separate from itself is a very unstable paradox which would strongly tend to become simply light. Then, as described previously, it would tend to attract love and melt back into nothingness.

Other possibilities are the experience of love as separate from itself, and the experience of free will as separate from itself, for which analogous comments may be made.

Another possibility is the experience of free will and love as simultaneous but separate, without the experience of light. What would be the outcome of this experience? Intuitively, we might expect the free will to become light, in order to satisfy love’s desire for light. But this would be a violation of free will. Free will is, inherently, free, and it would not be free if the simultaneous presence of love compelled it to become light. So this cannot be how the experience resolves itself. Most likely, rather, the love creates light and unites with it, thus becoming free will, and so the experience becomes that of free will as separate from free will, which resolves itself into simply free will.

Similar comments may be made for the experience of free will and light as simultaneous but separate.

We have seen, then, that most of the obvious, probable experiences of separation result in a rapid and uninteresting melting back into nothingness. All of them, that is, except for one: the experience of the separation between love and light. We had put off discussing this distortion, as it ends up being the most interesting one, which leads to the most further experience.

The separation between love and light is more stable than the other separations we have considered. Nonetheless, due to love’s desire to become one with light, it contains a strong tension which attempts to resolve itself.

We know that when one has a desire, and the object of desire is in sight, then that desire increases. If the desire is frustrated — that is, if the object is in sight, but unattainable — then that desire increases in a much more marked fashion. So this is what happens: because love can see light but cannot become one with it, love’s desire for light increases. This is a different way of saying that the quantity of love increases. This increased love immediately creates more light, so that the quantity of love and the quantity of light are equal. This results in a recurrence of the original scenario, and a positive feedback loop of increasing love and light.

One thought would be that the positive feedback loop would continue infinitely. But this seems impossible; the feedback loop is unbounded, but never infinite, in duration. Rather, eventually the tension will become too much, the separation will be overcome, and love and light will melt back into unity. The ending of the separation, like the beginning of the separation, will occur as a discrete, quantum event.

So we have seen that the experience of separation between love and light leads to a positive feedback loop between love and light, meaning that there is a rapid increase of both and an eventual overcoming of the separation and melting back into unity. Because this possibility is far more powerful than any of the other possibilities of separation, it becomes the focus of the Creator.

The unity which is the outcome of the process of love/light separation is a far greater unity than the unity which was its beginning (that is, the unity which originally chose to become an experience of love/light separation). The beginning unity condenses itself into love/light separation, then increases in separate form, then returns to unity, reversing the condensation and ending up much greater than it was originally.

Because the tendency of the Creator is to reach for love/light separation, we can be certain that this new unity will once again reach for love/light separation. Thus in its turn it will be transformed into a much greater unity. This will continue in an infinite upward hierarchy of alternations between love/light and unity.

This hierarchy of alternations can be thought of as a vibration, vibrating between the poles of unity and separation, or unity and love/light. It is not a sine wave, but a square wave, due to the quantized nature of the transition between unity and separation. A further distinguishing feature of this vibration is that each iteration is a transcendence. Thus it is both a cycle and a linear progression.

We have thus determined how to derive a vibration from unity. This vibration will be the basis for the experiences to come.

Separation creates confusion and chaos. The Creator’s attempts to resolve the paradox of love/light separation result in the output of many random distortions. At first these distortions are always various distortions of love/light. They are minute qualitative variations upon the basic theme of love/light, for which we do not have words.

As the distortions multiply, and the Creator discerns the relationships among them, some of them begin to coalesce into individualized portions of love/light, discernible as distinct, unified concepts. If love/light is the genus, then these individualized portions are the species.

Eventually some of these individualized portions of love/light will collapse into unity. These individuals will therefore become vibrations of their own, subordinate to the top-level vibration which gave birth to them. These sub-vibrations are like stars in the sky, and as they exponentially grow in power they lend enormous amounts of energy to the top-level vibration, accelerating its growth towards unity. Due to the exponential nature of their growth, the sub-vibrations quickly come to constitute the vast majority of the power of the top-level vibration.

Inevitably, the sub-vibrations will eventually give birth to sub-sub-vibrations, and these sub-sub-vibrations to sub-sub-sub-vibrations. Thus the structure of the love/light of the Creator comes to resemble the branches of a tree, or a system of roots, or the dendrites of a neuron.

It would seem that the sub-vibrations are most likely what Ra calls the Logoi; the sub-sub-vibrations, the sub-Logoi; and so forth.

Leave a comment

A Paradox of Time

Suppose that time is cyclical. It begins somewhere, and never ends. It follows that there is some finite n which is the number of the cycle that we are currently in. Let the first cycle be numbered one. Supposing that we have no knowledge about what cycle we are in, what do we estimate n to be? We can state the question differently: what is the average value of n?

There are infinite possible values for n. So for every n, P(n) = 1/infinity. So the average value A of n is A = (1 * 1/infinity) + (2 * 1/infinity) + … = lim as x->infinity of (1/infinity) * (x+1) * (x/2) = 0. So on average, we are in cycle zero. The first cycle, however, is numbered one; so this is not a cycle at all. It appears that on average we are outside time, before the beginning of the universe.

Of course, if we postulate that time is cyclical, but has neither a beginning nor an end, then on average — and in fact, at all times — we are on cycle infinity. This is a different way of stating that at every time, there are infinite number of cycles before us, and an infinite number of cycles ahead of us.

Leave a comment

The First Distortions

This is another attempt at explaining the first distortions. Since this is a difficult subject, I doubt that these will be my final thoughts on the matter; but I feel that I have made progress on the problem.

The first thing that exists is the Creator. The Creator is infinity, unity, or nothingness. It is worth explaining how these three words are synonyms. Infinity is the totality of possibilities. Since every possibility has a corresponding opposite possibility, when these possibilities are considered together as a single thing, each opposite cancels out, and that thing is found to be nothingness. This nothingness is unity, because it is the result of uniting everything into one thing.

Nothingness is the first thing; everything comes from nothingness. But nothingness is prior to existence. Nothingness is non-existence, and non-existence does not exist. Of course, since nothingness is infinity, it contains within itself all of existence; hence, it is both being and non-being.

All of existence is illusion, or distortion, while the truth is the Creator, which is beyond experience. (“Experience” and “existence” are synonyms.) It is worth asking: what are the first, most basic distortions: the first experiences which the Creator has of itself?

Tautologically, the first distortion is the experience of the Creator. Before the first distortion, there is no experience; the first distortion is the first experience, which is the experience of the Creator. Before the first distortion, the Creator is not; the first distortion is that the Creator is. First nothingness does not exist; then, nothingness exists. It experiences itself.

The first distortion is prior to light. Thus the Creator, in the first distortion, is seen not as a brilliant energy, but as darkness, nothingness, and the void.

The awareness of nothingness is the awareness of infinity, which is infinite possibility. At this point all of the possibilities still cancel each other out, leaving us with a state in which no possibility is actual, and all is in darkness. The awareness of nothing thus implies the possibility, but not yet the actuality, of becoming aware of an infinite number of somethings.

We know, because we are here, that these possibilities were actualized. But how did this come about? What led from the awareness of nothing to the awareness of something? To answer this, we must digress into a discussion of the nature of experience.

The basic nature of experience is light. This can be verified in the following way. Sufficiently intense introspection on any experience reveals that the experience is made of light. Similarly, thought experiment will reveal that any imaginable experience can be produced by beginning with light, and shaping the light into the constitution of that experience.

It would seem, then, that we require some way of getting from the first distortion to light. If we can produce light, then all other experiences will follow from light. Light is the first possibility which we must actualize. How are we to achieve this?

We said earlier that the possibilities are not actual in the first distortion because every possibility has an opposite, and these opposites all cancel out. It follows that light is not yet actual because it is in a relation of being canceled out by its opposite.

Ra tells us that the opposite of light is love. We must understand what is meant by “love.” It is a form of will or desire. Will or desire for what? Will to experience something, will to accept something, will to become one with something.

Love is a passive, receiving principle. Light is an active, giving principle. They correspond to the yin and yang of Chinese philosophy.

The Creator progresses beyond the first distortion by developing a desire to experience further distortion. This desire is love, or the second distortion. Love perceives the nothingness which is the first distortion as a void which must be filled. This perception pulls light into existence; light fills the void; the darkness is illuminated.

It is because of love’s existence that it is possible for light to come into existence. Without the desire for light, there would be no reason for the possibility of light to be actualized, and thus it never would. There is a need for a negative to balance light’s positive; an emptiness to take in light’s fullness.

Love and light are opposites. Thus, by coming into existence together, they preserve the balance of the Creator, so that the Creator remains the Creator, i.e. nothingness.

Let us summarize our findings so far. First, the Creator experienced nothing. Then, the Creator became aware of experiencing nothing; this was the first distortion. Then, the Creator desired to experience something; this was the second distortion. Then, the Creator experienced something; this was the third distortion.

Many have observed that there is a basic two-ness to existence; they have also observed a basic three-ness, and a basic seven-ness. Our material so far allows us to clarify the principle of two-ness, and the principle of three-ness.

The principle of two-ness is the observation of the abundance of important dualities which characterize existence: good/bad, true/false, male/female, right/wrong, thinking/feeling, light/dark, etc.

The desire for parsimony would tend to make us wonder if there is not a single duality which is the fundamental duality from which all other dualities are derived. Such a duality would not be equal to all of the other dualities, as it would be obviously absurd to equate every duality with every other duality. Rather, we would postulate that all other dualities are distortions of the fundamental duality.

The foregoing comments suggest that the fundamental duality is love/light: i.e., the duality between the second distortion and the third distortion. Love/light refines and makes more precise the passive/active or yin/yang duality which is often taken as fundamental.

Now let us consider the three-ness of existence. Many people have suggested that there is a trinity from which all else springs; and the first distortions are clearly such a trinity.

We can observe a connection betwen the principle of duality and the principle of trinity. In many systems of thought, we can arrive at the concept of trinity by taking the concept of duality, and adding a third principle which is the unity, synthesis, or balancing of the duality. Consider, for instance, Hegel’s trinity of thesis/antithesis/synthesis, or Gurdjieff’s trinity of active, passive, and neutralizing forces.

This is the case with the first distortions. Love and light are the first opposites, and, as with all opposites, when they unite they return into nothingness. This nothingness is the first distortion. Thus the first distortion is the unity of the second and third distortions.

The first distortions thus satisfactorily capture both the two-ness and the three-ness of existence. They are the fundamental trinity, and this fundamental trinity contains the fundamental duality.

At first, love and light come into existence in a perfectly balanced manner; thus, they cancel each other out, and immediately return to nothingness. This results in an infinite expansion of the awareness of nothingness (the first distortion), without either love or light becoming independently visible.

It may seem that an “expansion of the awareness of nothingness” is a contradiction in terms. Nothingness is already infinite, and therefore we may think that we cannot surpass nothingness to something higher. But this is a confusion. The nature of infinity is such that for every infinity, there is another infinity which is greater than it. The only infinity which cannot be surpassed is the pre-experiential Creator. Any awareness of infinity, therefore, can be surpassed to a greater awareness of infinity. This, then, is precisely what happens as the initial result of the reaction between love and light.

In this initial reaction, the three first distortions are perfectly united. Yet, due to the nature of infinite possibility, there must develop further reactions.

The next two reactions which we can name are the emergences of love and light as independent entities. Love exists by itself, without immediately being balanced with light and canceling out. Light exists by itself, in the corresponding manner. At first these are infinite love and light, which is sufficient to imply an infinite number of these distortions. This is for the same reason that we saw before, with the first distortion. Every infinity can be surpassed towards a higher infinity. Thus, for every infinite light, there must be an infinite light which surpasses it; and the same for infinite love.

Due to the desire of love to become one with light, the independent existences of love and light are fairly unstable states, strongly tending to collapse back into nothingness. These distortions, then, do not lead to much subsequent distortion. A greater avenue of possibility is found when love and light form themselves into a vibration. This basic distortion of vibration between light and love leads to much of the subsequent experience. I am still clarifying my thoughts on the topic of vibration, so I end here.


A Metaphysical Ramble

We must depart from the rationalist understanding of existence in the following way. Existence is not a complex of logical relations; rather, existence is the totality of possible experiences. This understanding is in line with a loose reading of the principle of empiricism, that we should not believe in things we cannot observe. Something which is not an experience is, tautologically, something which we cannot observe. Experience is precisely what we know, and what we can know. Something which could never possibly be experienced, is not worth believing in, because we could never come to know it; so we conclude that such a thing does not exist.

The first thing in existence is the Creator. From the Creator come the archetypes, or laws. (The term “law” and the term “archetype” are synonyms, placing emphasis on different aspects of the concept.) First come the most basic archetypes, which are least distorted, and closest to the true nature of the Creator. Then come the more advanced archetypes, which are progressively more distorted, and progressively further from the true nature of the Creator. The more advanced laws are derived from the more basic laws by further distorting the more basic laws.

This process of distortion eventually gives rise to the world we experience. Among the laws of the Creator are the laws which govern our own particular universe. These include the physical laws, but also the laws of the mental and spiritual aspects of our universe. The laws of our universe, in turn, give rise to everything within it; the contents of the universe are distortions of its laws.

A distortion is anything which is not the Creator. Paradoxically, distortions are the Creator. The distortions include the archetypes, which we have also called laws, and those things which follow from the laws: the planets, the people on them, and the experiences they have.

Distortions proceed from basic to advanced. The basic distortions are what we call archetypes. Examples of advanced distortions are the events of our everyday lives.

We have said that existence is the totality of possible experiences. It follows that nothing can exist which is not an experience. Yet, things such as rocks, stars, and planets exist. Science thinks of these as dead, inanimate objects. This is inconsistent with our understanding, according to which an existent unconsciousness is a contradiction in terms.

Some people, who believe that existence is what can be experienced, resolve the problem by saying that the rock does not actually exist; only the experiences which humans may have of the rock exist. But this does not mesh easily with the findings of science, which have studied the rock from countless different angles and determined much about its composition. Science indicates that the rock is an independent, objective entity. So we obtain a more satisfactory synthesis in the following way.

The physical reality is alive and conscious. A rock, for instance, is the Creator experiencing being a rock; and the planet Jupiter is the Creator experiencing being Jupiter. The experience of being a rock is, presumably, far dimmer and paler than the experience of being a human; but it is an experience nonetheless.

This resolves the problem according to which we have to draw the line between consciousness and unconsciousness in the hierarchy of beings. We believe that humans are conscious, and we believe that intelligent animals such as dogs and cats are conscious. What about fish? Insects? Plants? Bacteria? Viruses? Computer programs? Machines? Hunks of metal? Molecules? Atoms? We are faced with the puzzle of having to draw the line somewhere, but with no clear place to draw it. If instead we declare that everything is conscious, we face no such problem.

Existence is infinite. There is no end to experience. If there were an end to experience, that would be tragic, because then we would find that there was an end to all the fun we’re having here. But existence is not a tragedy.

From the postulate that existence is infinite, it follows that every possibility is actualized. This means, for instance, that every course which my life could have followed, but which it did not, has already been or will be followed at some point in the Creator’s experience of itself.

The same experience can never occur twice. However, two experiences can be arbitrarily similar to each other. This means that there are in existence an infinite number of minutely different variations on every one of my experiences. In turn, each one of these variations gives rise to an infinite number of variations on itself. This means that each person and each situation constitutes a law of its own, giving birth to its own infinite universe.

The Creator eventually understands and accepts every distortion as the Creator. This is evolution. The process of evolution consists of the Creator seeing its distortions with progressively more love and light. One by one the distortions are understood and accepted, and finally seen as the Creator. The more that a distortion is understood and accepted, the more its sub-distortions become visible, opening up the possibility of further understanding and acceptance. Thus each of us is potentially a god, a Creator amidst the pantheon of existence.

We can visualize this process by imagining the space of possibilities/distortions as a tree structure, centered around the Creator. Love/light radiates outward from the Creator, resulting in progressively greater illumination of the Creator, then the basic distortions, then the more advanced distortions. As the process moves forward each distortion is more and more illuminated, and the sphere of illumination expands to include more and more advanced distortions.

1 Comment