There isnt that much freedom it seems...and INFINITY

[Quantum]

unity100 indeed makes very many compelling arguments for Infinity for which we owe him gratitude. Credit where credit is due. These are not at issue however. Its the ones that are contrary and openly so that I address.

I disagree that his points are contrary to the Law of One. I happen to agree with many (though not all) of his points.

To dispense with the point quickly, do you agree that Infinity was never unaware, contrary to what Ra teaches?
Do you agree that Infinity, to be infinity as unity100 states infinity is, that it must have also always been aware?

Anyway, why is it so important to scrutinize and analyze one particular member's opinions?

H-m-m-m-m...I assume this is one of the reasons we are here for. To learn/teach to teach/learn...to share?

Unity100 has expressed his opinions, and others have as well. Why are his opinions being singled out for scrutiny? If you wish to know more about his opinions, perhaps you can if/when he posts more. But I'm not in the habit of discussing other members' posts. I don't see the point of it. We can all express our own opinions without other members speaking for us.

I am not speaking for him. I am responding to him. It just so happens that it is now you and I that are speaking together to one another about his statements. He may join at any point. You say: "I'm not in the habit of discussing other members' posts." I'm confused???? We all are very much in this habit of speaking to others posts. We do it as a matter of function of the forum? unity100 may respond at any point. My original post was in fact to him, or anyone else

"Most illusion have their basis in reality"? You mean some do and some don't? Which ones do and which ones don't? More importantly, which ones as an example don't?

Maybe they all do. I can't think of any that don't. Even unicorns are real in some reality.

I guess I don't understand this

But except for that which does not exist, we may dispense with what is and is not within Infinity questions as it is self-evident that all that exists is within Infinity. But we must agree that there are things which do not exist.

A negative cannot be proven

Sure it can. Many many times over. My keys don't fall up to the ceiling in my living room. They always fall down to the ground.

There are things which do not exist within this context, are there not?

Not that I can think of. If I can think of it, then it's real in some reality, even if it's only in my mind.

Perhaps this might lend itself to an altogether interesting and different thread. But I don't believe that everything that's in between my ears or yours is real. Peter Pan didn't exist, even though I loved him as a child. I don't even know how to have a rational conversation about the fact that he might have?

Were it otherwise then Infinity would be less than Intelligent Infinity. Certainly the Creator wishes and desires for some things not to exist.

That is an assumption. We cannot speak for the Creator.

But we are the Creator in facets. In any case it seems abundantly clear that some things do not exist. I believe I can find at least one quote if not many wherein Ra corrected Don that something was not true that he assumed was. But using your logic in any case, then I must be correct in my thought that some things do not exist just by virtue of the fact that this thought is real because its in between my ears. Then if your logic were true, then reality is a hodgepodge in that every one's thoughts about it must be true, this in spite of what the Logos created for us to experience through it.

Certainly there exist fine laws, rules, order, and a system within Infinity as opposed to EVERYTHING exists in Infinity.

We have a fundamental difference in opinion as to what infinity is.

But do you agree that there are laws and rules created by the Logos? If so it rather naturally answers the point.

This does not limit Infinity but rather orders it intelligently. Galaxies and planets do not spin and revolve in both directions simultaneously just because it is a consideration within Infinity. Nor do dragons decimate villages and planets just because it is a consideration within Infinity. So no, not everything is in Infinity. In fact in this context it may be argued that there are a great many more things which are not in Infinity than there are those things which are in Infinity.

That is pure speculation.

I certainly hope that ordering the universes by virtue of laws and rules created by the Logoi is not an assumption on my part. I take it at face value by virtue of our own sciences if not the" Law(s) Of One." Even the title itself LOO is rather self-evident that Laws exist. As such, if there are laws, then it is rather self evident that there are also laws that govern certain actions and reactions against certain other things, e.g. I may think (believe) it is quite alright to behave in certain STS ways and yet still graduate into STO would fly in the face of those rules which govern STO protocol. It therefore seems abundantly self evident that there are rules which suggest that one may not make certain assumptions in accordance with certain other rules to the contrary and then assume they are true in any case.

An entity as I understand it is a sentient life replete with senses. How do you define entity?

Yes, but in this context, I was referring to entity as in a thing, something that exists, to distinguish it from that which is symbolizes; ie. illusion as illusion, rather than that which is it distorting.

I don't understand. Perhaps using the term entity is just a misnomer?

What is at issue here is that the points that you consider to be in disagreement with the Law of One are not necessarily the points that others (including the author of said points) consider in disagreement.

Same question as above so that we may move through this to resolve it:" Do you/do we know that Ra stated unequivocally that Infinity was at one time unaware? Yes or No? unity100 states otherwise. There it is. Why may we not discuss this with the suggestion that unity100 is in disagreement to Ra, and openly so by his own admission? This is a simple contrary statement to Ra. If we then wish to have a more enlightening response from unity100 or any other member why Ra might be wrong, should that be their or our desire, we may.

Just because someone says "I disagree with Ra sometimes" that is not an admission of disagreement on points we happen to personally disagree with.

I don't understand the structure or meaning of this sentence.

I happen to agree with some points and consider them in alignment with the Law of One, so it's simply not accurate to assess the entire disagreement as being contrary to Ra's intention.

Agreed whole hardheartedly. That's why I said credit where credit is due and that unity100 made some remarkable observation with regard to Infinity, notwithstanding the main point of the ones that were simply pointed out as contrary to Ra quotes...not as a personal disagreement or interpretation, but as simply openly contrary by his own admission, e.g. Infinity was always aware.

Each person's truth can indeed stand on its own. Speaking for someone else is entirely different.

It is continually suggested that I am speaking for unity100? I am responding to his statements. Thats all. I am questioning them yes. But this is a far cry from speaking for him???

I see this as a contradiction. If we are the Creator, and we are infinity, then we are ALL. If, as you say, the illusion is not part of us, then how can it be part of ALL?

This clearly is a dicey conversation that perhaps must by definition be circular. It is circular btw. I did not say that illusion stands outside of infinity. Please re-read my post. If the Creator fashioned said mask and offered it to us for our more expeditious processes towards polarization then it exists. All that the Creator creates is within infinity. Only that which it does not create is not within infinity. This has been addressed previously

I contend that the illusion too is part of infinity. Nothing can be outside infinity.

Sure it can. That which is not created and so illusory that it does not exist.

If it doesn't exist, then it's not an it, is it?

Correct

I don't think that's accurate. As I stated above, I see many points which unity100 (and I, as well) consider to be in alignment with the Law of One, according to our interpretations, and you are stating that he claims to be in disagreement with the Law of One.

Not fair. I've said many times credit where credit is due. I've said many times that unity100 has brought much to the conversation with respect to concepts regarding infinity. I've never stated he disagrees with the Law of One as if though in total? Please free to cut and paste one single example of any of this from any of my posts. I've simply drawn a single quote from unity100 here and there that as simply is in non-accordance with the Ra quotes, which I in fact take less credit for having drawn out than I do for giving to my predecessor in the conversation who I acknowledged as being a vanguard for the material.

While it is true that unity100 has admitted to being in disagreement on some points, they are not all the same points you consider them to be. Therefore, I ask you again to please avoid making blanket assessments about unity100 or any other member's views.

Blanket assessments? Same response as throughout to your whole and repeated incorrect assessments. Not fair. I repeat as above: I've said many times credit where credit is due. I've said many times that unity100 has brought much to the conversation with respect to concepts regarding infinity. I've never stated he disagrees with the Law of One. Please cut and paste one single example of any of this from my posts. I've simply drawn a single quote from unity100 here and there that as simply is in non-accordance with the Ra quotes which I in fact take less credit for having drawn out than I do for giving to my predecessor in the conversation who I acknowledged as being a vanguard for the material.

Infinity is not all things ? The Creator wishes for things to not exist ?
The moment you wish for something to not exist it exists, otherwise you would not be able to imagine it in the first place. (you are focusing on it). Consciousness is boundless and unconditional and undefined, that is why it can be bounded and conditioned and defined in infinite ways.

Hi E. Perhaps this might be an interesting topic by itself. You can see much of my response to monica above.

Hello Aaron...thanks for the brevity. Hello Lavazza...I'm still trying to figure out how to cut and paste pictures in the text rather than as an attachment. Instructions are welcome

In closing, I believe these to have been important points that have in fact been drawn out, as well as important conversations to them. I'm not sure much more can be added?

~ Q ~