I Desperately Need Advice Guys- Having a bit of a Breakdown

[Akasha]

BB44, thanks for those insights- very much appreciated.

Yes, in a philosophical sense, I do understand what you’re saying. The thing is though- we need to make the theory work for us, otherwise it is simply theory. Yes, everything=nothing=source. I have reached a point where I comprehend that, but I see it as aligning with either the state of ‘to be’, or alternatively the ‘not to be’ (yeah I know: To Be Or Not To Be-lame lol). To choose the LHP, is choosing ‘to be’, in fact ‘to me more’, and a Hindu or Buddhist, or example is choosing to align with ‘not to be’- both are two sides of the same coin-its just a matter of choosing which state of source you want to align with.

It seems to me that many people on this forum have experienced the same revelation: I am source=nothing=everything=god. I am a god because I am part of everything and therefore I can command the power of the All=omnipotence. And yet I am also nothing. That’s great, in theory.

The thing is though, having this knowledge- I can now pronounce I AM A GOD- and yet, well here I am, still in the same human body, still facing the same limitations as I did yesterday. Godhood, is something we have to work for- yes this does seem paradoxical- why do we have to work for something we already are? I don’t know the answer to that yet- but for practical purposes- the evidence would suggest that that is how it is. If I look at all the people on this forum, who have experienced this fact, this self-realisation- well, they are all still working on (yet definitely progressing towards) attaining godlike powers.

Similarly, I can pronounce - I am nothing! and yet, well again, here i am, still me-in my human body- still living and breathing and conscious. Again, practically, achieving that state of ‘not to be’, nothingness (which is just as valid as ‘to be’), takes some work- work in the form of renouncing all aspects of ‘to be’. Again, I’m basing this on the evidence that this method seems to work - it is used by so many of the RHP religions, and people like Lady Eva (sorry that I have to keep using you as an example Lady E), experienced that in a very real way when she was doing all that RHP stuff.

I think, the knowledge that one can either align with the ‘to be’ or not to be’ is reassuring to me in a way- because that means that I can indeed achieve both my goals (of to be-now) and (not to be-later), because it would mean simply deciding at some point that- I now longer want to align with ‘to be’, it’s time for me to align with the ‘not-to-be’, in exactly the same way that the RHP follower, at some point in his or her life, makes the same desicion.

And yet, in practicality, it isn’t quite so simple. As we have demonstrated, once I decide that its time to align with ‘not to be’- I’m still going to have to do the work. So currently I’m trying to figure out how this process is going to work in practical terms- because my start point (for the descent into the nothing) is going to be from the consciousness of someone who has striven for more- more power, more ego, more desire etc (in other words the LHP). This is why I have been theorizing that the journey back so to speak would most likely be a longer one than were I starting from the point of normal human consciousness. or perhaps easier, since having burnt out some of those desires and goals- it would make it easier to renounce what it is ‘to be’?

Fuck, reading that back- maybe I have finally lost it lol. Hopefully what I’ve written makes sense on some level. Anyway, this is pretty much where I’m at, atm- trying how figure out how, in practical terms- I am going to go from achieving my LHP goal, to achieving the EVENTUAL RHP goal.

[Lady_Eva]

@Akasha

Lady Eva, with reference to the whole point A to C thing that I spoke about above- how would you view the process of ‘backtracking’? Would you agree that it would involve a hell of a lot more ‘detachment’ or whatever the correct phrase is? As in renouncing not just the normal stuff you posted above- likes, dislikes, emotions etc- but also the very essence of your godhood? Based on your experiences with this stuff- do you reckon it would be a longer/more difficult process, compared to going from point B (normal human consciousness)?

Easier - the first human “ascent” (for want of a better word) towards Union and dissolution is done against the tide of animal instinct to remain alive, conscious, and attached to various things, not least the basic “reality” of everything around us - a second attainment of it, after having surpassed the boundary between perceived individuation, and dissolution, should be as simple as an act of will, since the previous illusions about reality have already been… altered.

@Diazin

Isnt the dissolution thing the means by which union is achieved?

Yes.

God isnt dissolution, but it causes dissolution in our current state of being.

Actually, we cause it - the individuated self that knows it must be more than “just” this world. That’s a small but important distinction, insofar as “God” isn’t doing us any favours, we’re simply seeing the truth of reality.

By sublimating what limits God's manifestation in us and in our flesh, we allow it to express at least some of its qualities through our flesh. The more limits we sublimate, the more our flesh becomes like It.

Yes, but the problem that many people meet is that the more they attain dissolution, the less they’re yearning deeply for results (of any kind, from “new Jimmy Choo shoes” to “world peace”) and so impressing desires into the All when one is virtually dossolved into it, is difficult - to use a cartoonish analogy, the higher one climbs up the ladder towards the control rooms of reality, the less one feels a deep drive to control anything at all - aversions, passions, attachments all slowly slip away.

This has been my discovery so far, and why I posted that “To become a god, you have to essentially embrace and attain the focus of a demon” - and: “the RHP requires detachment from the things that individuate you, and a dissolution of seperation and things like preferences and aversions.”

This has been my experience so far, with this area.

@BB44

Non-existence doesnt exist. As in, the state of being non-extant has no concrete basis; its purely an abstract concept, and exists only as such.

It can be experienced - the universe, all that is, falling back into your mind as a No Thing. I’ve done this, people I know in offline life have done this, so it isn’t an abstract thing, any more than gravity.

So that’s something I just want to throw into the pot.

You are ALREADY in this state. There is nothing (pun not intended) to change into... you are already there.

I don’t know what Akasha’s goals are, but my goals are to change rteality from this state - something I have good reason to believe I have alrteady achieved, several times.

Yes, we are all “God”/Source whatever, but the magician asks, what can we do with it?

Can the fly who falls into a cup of cold tea rescue himself by knowing, intellectually, that he is always of and within the All?

Usually we have to initiate/pass through certain barriers, some of which are unpleasant and uncomfortable, to get our hands on “God’s toolbox”…

And Akasha, please stop thinking you’re paranoid, silly, crazy - you’re trying to make reality stop being real, and exist inside you instead.

A little freak-out is both healthy and natural, ffs! ;D

[element]

There is no path my friend! I hold my tongue alot and really never give my outlook on what magick, life and death is. The truth is magick is life and death exist to bring closure to the experience. This goes the same with time and space, there is no time nor is there space this is the structure of the illusion to allow experience. This goes the same with projects you believe you are going there but the truth is you are there and you are just becoming aware. You are all there is no secret you do not know nor is there lands you have not seen!
So do not seek a path just experience change the experience. There is no right there is no wrong. Find what you want it this life, you are simply feeding the soul what it needs to know.

[BB44]

@Lady Eva

[quote=“BB44, post:20, topic:7109”]Non-existence doesnt exist. As in, the state of being non-extant has no concrete basis; its purely an abstract concept, and exists only as such.

It can be experienced - the universe, all that is, falling back into your mind as a No Thing. I’ve done this, people I know in offline life have done this, so it isn’t an abstract thing, any more than gravity.[/quote]

Akasha is talking about “true” non-existence. “True” non-existence is an absence of everything, including the capacity to experience. If a state were possible, it is unknowable, because the lack of ability to experience it is intrinsic to it, and indeed if it were experiencable, it would no longer not exist.

[quote=“Lady Eva, post:22, topic:7109”]

You are ALREADY in this state. There is nothing (pun not intended) to change into… you are already there.

I don’t know what Akasha’s goals are, but my goals are to change rteality from this state - something I have good reason to believe I have alrteady achieved, several times.[/quote]

That is accepting that there is a dichotomy to begin with, is it not? But supposedly the dichotomy is artificial, and really the two states are the same thing. All (existence) = Nothing (non-existence) is the assumption, which accounts for everything already both extant and not.

So what exactly is there to change into?

This leads back to the unknowable state. If there is something “other”, so to speak, that is beyond both existence, and non-existence, that we cannot possibly comprehend because it is so foreign, and even beyond our capacity to even think about abstractly… how can we plan to go there?

I say it cannot be thought about, because in our definition of all and nothing, we already have everything there is. All/nothing is both infinite and eternal; its unending. Thus it encompasses all possible states. Any state thinkable, and even unthinkable, is already contained by necessity within infinity. There is nothing “outside” infinity, unless we are going to use the word in a way that is contrary to the concept.

Saying our fundamental state of being can be changed is breaking the assumption that all = nothing, which is a form of monism. If there is another state outside this, you either have a trinity of states (existence, its negative, and an unknowable “other”), or you are back to a duality (all/nothing, other).

My point is, that if we are to accept a monistic view of reality, its necessary to also accept that there is “nothing” to change that reality into, on a fundamental, core level.

That changes if we are not accepting a monistic view, of course. But the whole basis of all=nothing, is that this is what is, objectively, and its only our perception of this thing (the subjectivity of it) that can change.

So… is it really possible to change reality on an objective level within a monistic paradigm? Or just ones subjective perception of it?

If the answer is “yes”, then the paradigm isnt monistic, it is at least dualistic, and either all =/= nothing, or they are the same, and there is at least one other irrational state of something else alongside it that cannot be explained by anything within infinity (which is already everything, which is why the state would be an irrational one).

BTW Im not arguing, I just really like philosophy and logic and the chance to ramble back and forth on it.

[Lady_Eva]

@BB44

Akasha is talking about “true” non-existence. “True” non-existence is an absence of everything, including the capacity to experience. If a state were possible, it is unknowable, because the lack of ability to experience it is intrinsic to it, and indeed if it were experiencable, it would no longer not exist.

Indeed, it doesn’t - that’s why Parasiva is portrayed turning on his toe, caught within the gaps between the beating of a heart (portrayed by the damaru, the drum made of skulls pounded by the pulse, by desire’s restless beat, formed like an hourglass or a symbol of eternity) - and this is why he dances and meditates covered in ashes… that ancient symbolism speaks volumes about the transitory and self-contradictory nature of this stuff.

If paradoxes seem uncomfortable, then I guess that makes this Hell for some people.

That is accepting that there is a dichotomy to begin with, is it not? But supposedly the dichotomy is artificial, and really the two states are the same thing. All (existence) = Nothing (non-existence) is the assumption, which accounts for everything already both extant and not.

So what exactly is there to change into?

As Source, the Null/Manifold/Singular Source of All, we hold reality within our minds.

A thought, in the thought of the All, becomes reality, as we witness with the creation of this and other universes.

But we cannot easily become that, without giving up our personhood - our desires, aversions, crazy lust for shoes and a really GOOD ink pen.

So, what there is to change into (IMO) is that human vessel - living, flawed, and imperfect - who can yet HOLD, be, have root access to, that Source, whilst retaining limitations.

It’s the imposition of the finite, upon the infinite.

Not “God” playing at being man - man becoming the living God.

This leads back to the unknowable state. If there is something "other", so to speak, that is beyond both existence, and non-existence, that we cannot possibly comprehend because it is so foreign, and even beyond our capacity to even think about abstractly... how can we plan to go there?

RHP, for example yoga has this covered.

LHP appears to lead to it, when you reach a point of being a vessel so large that no normal power can fill the void your will creates.

I say it cannot be thought about, because in our definition of all and nothing, we already have everything there is.

I say that given what I experienced, and the way (real experience, not just concepts) that I was able to edit reality with my mind after those experiences - yes, it is.

It is possible to be a living God, so to speak.

On this, I gave up my RHP pursuits, and eventually found the LHP phsilosophies I like so much - but they came from real experience.

I’m not asking you to believe me, I could just be a crazy lady, but I’m telling you I experienced this and that it goes beyond semantics, into being something I was told humans need to learn, and become, and do.

[BB44]

Eva, Im not trying to discount your experience or “prove” you wrong, just to be clear. I approach these things academically, knowing that most of the time its going to come down to semantics. Thats hard to convey in subtext on the internet. Many times I play devils advocate and try to pry out more information from people, not least for my own further enlightenment and better understanding of the subject at hand. Also, even if we end up saying the same thing but in a different way, it still gives another perspective, and another point of view, leading to more information and understanding still.

[Lady_Eva]

I didn’t think you were!

I was just taking examples of classical metaphors and imagery that were related to how a seemingly impossible thing is perceived, and represented.

[BB44]

Ok good. I hate to appear Im being combative when that not my intention. Too many years on muggle forums where theres nothing but arguing over anything and everything trying to “win” an argument, I guess

[Biosynth]

The purpose of life is to have alot of Sex. Sex creates Gods =p Sex creates ideas, inventions…and toys so Gods can evolve Sex. When you get too stressed and start breaking down thats a sign you need to have sex…unless of course you are like some Hardcore Draconic Sorceror devouring your way out of the cocoon to awakening to being a Living God.

[Akasha]

Thank you so much to everyone who replied (and special thanks to Lady Eva

I have now resolved this issue.