Simultaneity, regarding the OIC's origins

[AnthroHeart]

Wow, religious people would never have discussions this deep.
You sound like philosophers.

[VanAlioSaldo]

I believe the Void/Everything is constantly, always present. It's not a paradox either because the Void is not exclusive to everything, nor is everything exclusive to the Void, in fact they necessitate eachother, they are One and the same.

Barring the Paradox mentioning (which I'll try my best to explain why), this is basically the best manner of explanation that most deeply resonated with me.

I think it can be a paradox, but does not necessarily mean it must be.  I think the possibility is closer to a yes than a no though the majority of the time.

I only think this because in the madness of Simultaneity, it allows for paradoxes of paradoxes.  Imagine this, that there was a Creator who created itself by simply Being.  That's a paradox of a paradox in and of itself.  A being who is unmade, creates itself, by simply Being, yet is unmade.

Which is wholly possible in the context of an unmanifest creator creating.  Which I think as mentioned before, also fits in well with how Ra refers to Purity of Being as that which is closest to the True Beingness of Anything.  True Rock (in terms of creating the Pyramids) as an example used by Ra might actually shed some light to this aspect of Purity of Beingness, that all things have a distorted and undistorted Beingness.

That all things are both perfect and imperfect.  That All Things are both One and Many.  If not paradoxically, than nonparadoxically, which again, in simultaneity, is not much different from saying a paradox that both is and is not a paradox.  Which would honestly allow for...I'm going to be a hypocrite here and say, unimaginable ways of operations.

A non/paradox aspect adds a new layer of depth, something new/different happening in ways that don't seem logically coherent or proper, yet possible.

Maybe we need to look at the point before manifestation of beingness, and instead try to understand how beingness is without a distorted/manifested aspect. What constitutes Undistorted and Perfect?

[Minyatur]

Which is wholly possible in the context of an unmanifest creator creating.  Which I think as mentioned before, also fits in well with how Ra refers to Purity of Being as that which is closest to the True Beingness of Anything.  True Rock (in terms of creating the Pyramids) as an example used by Ra might actually shed some light to this aspect of Purity of Beingness, that all things have a distorted and undistorted Beingness.

The only reason an unmanifest creator created itself is because with the infinite and simultaneous nature of time through both never ending ends of infinity, a source is always there to support the lower layer. And for the path of this "source" it always has an upper-source to itself. All created simultaneously into a perfect system, all in the perfect cosmos. The past is only the foundation of the future and that future is only a foundation for another past to generate another future. The void is the unmanifested creator and existence is the manifested creator.

There is never a starting point nor ending point. There was, is and will always be something in all spectrums of Infinity because else there would be no Infinity and as such no existence whatsoever.

[VanAlioSaldo]

Which is wholly possible in the context of an unmanifest creator creating.  Which I think as mentioned before, also fits in well with how Ra refers to Purity of Being as that which is closest to the True Beingness of Anything.  True Rock (in terms of creating the Pyramids) as an example used by Ra might actually shed some light to this aspect of Purity of Beingness, that all things have a distorted and undistorted Beingness.

The only reason an unmanifest creator created itself is because with the infinite and simultaneous nature of time through both never ending ends of infinity, a source is always there to support the lower layer. And for the path of this "source" it always has an upper-source to itself. All created simultaneously into a perfect system, all in the perfect cosmos. The past is only the foundation of the future and that future is only a foundation for another past to generate another future. 

There is never a starting point nor ending point. There was, is and will always be something in all spectrums of Infinity because else there would be no Infinity and as such no existence whatsoever.

Agreed.

So I see it as the most basic means of empowerment of Beingness is Self-Recursively Being.  Being that is in itself, Being through it's own Being.

Choosing to be happy by self-recursively choosing to be happy may be a good example.  This clause may very well be something I have looked for, for a long time.  Self-Recursive Beingness...  You create yourself.

I wonder if there was ever at a point, a literal, Singular Being, who having manifested itself, all alone, sought more, and discovered there was a lot more to itself, than originally...Thought.

Hah, what if everything we know is merely us exploring our selves, without our even knowing it?

[Minyatur]

The only reason an unmanifest creator created itself is because with the infinite and simultaneous nature of time through both never ending ends of infinity, a source is always there to support the lower layer. And for the path of this "source" it always has an upper-source to itself. All created simultaneously into a perfect system, all in the perfect cosmos. The past is only the foundation of the future and that future is only a foundation for another past to generate another future. 

There is never a starting point nor ending point. There was, is and will always be something in all spectrums of Infinity because else there would be no Infinity and as such no existence whatsoever.

Agreed.

So I see it as the most basic means of empowerment of Beingness is Self-Recursively Being.  Being that is in itself, Being through it's own Being.

Choosing to be happy by self-recursively choosing to be happy may be a good example.  This clause may very well be something I have looked for, for a long time.  Self-Recursive Beingness...  You create yourself.

I wonder if there was ever at a point, a literal, Singular Being, who having manifested itself, all alone, sought more, and discovered there was a lot more to itself, than originally...Thought.

Hah, what if everything we know is merely us exploring our selves, without our even knowing it?

We are fragments of infinity exploring infinity. Infinity is the Whole through all spaces and all times. The singular being in my view (which haven't been agreed with on this forum) is ever the same and changes not.

Time is but the illusion that all changes has not yet happened. In Infinity there is only a single instant which is distorted simultaneously as infinite instants. A single wave with infinite states. We perceive ourselves as small but even just the entities that we are today are nearly infinite wave states. We are echos of each windows of grouped up states experiencing each instant or frame of present that is part of the One Infinity.

I think you said something of the sort but the One Infinity is not just indirectly us. It is fully us. It already has experienced our futures just as it also experienced our current lack of awareness of our own futures. Right now there's you tomorrow thinking back about your current now. In truth you never got past it, both are ever-existing within Infinity.

[VanAlioSaldo]

I honestly think our disagreements bring us closer together in understanding each other. I feel in an existence where All is One, is the disagreement not in itself an agreement? If you can make opposites whole, in my mind specifically, you can make All, One. The good, the bad, and the beginning, the end, the forward and backwards, the past and future, the living and dead, the sadness and the happiness, the disagreements and the agreements. Reading this list backwards, or forward.

If All is One, then is everything we've said not both exactly wrong and right? Is everything we've said not possible in the great infinity of beingness that is both One, and All? From a Primordial Void that itself was Beingness, to a Plenum that itself was Beingness, to the paradox of Beingness, to the Recursive-Being, and back again?

[Minyatur]

I honestly think our disagreements bring us closer together in understanding each other.  I feel in an existence where All is One, is the disagreement not in itself an agreement?  If you can make opposites whole, in my mind specifically, you can make All, One.  The good, the bad, and the beginning, the end, the forward and backwards, the past and future, the living and dead, the sadness and the happiness, the disagreements and the agreements.  Reading this list backwards, or forward.

If All is One, then is everything we've said not both exactly wrong and right?  Is everything we've said not possible in the great infinity of beingness that is both One, and All?  From a Primordial Void that itself was Beingness, to a Plenum that itself was Beingness, to the paradox of Beingness, to the Recursive-Being, and back again?

Without disagreements we would be non-evolving fools. Far too often in my life have I come back on past ideas I rejected only to integrate them within my mind.

Most of disagreements on this thread came from the way things are worded. Not saying it is necessarily the case here and now, but a lot of disagreements on these subjects can be caused by negative entities interfering with our minds. The chaos is generates can be fruitful in developing ideas further where a simple agreement would've been stagnant.

[VanAlioSaldo]

Ah. The Negative Entities thought. I try not to attribute such cause in admitting their doing. I say offer Love to them, thank them for providing us disagreements. Is that not catalyst, to utilize the opportunity to provide Love?

[Minyatur]

Ah.  The Negative Entities thought.  I try not to attribute such cause in admitting their doing.  I say offer Love to them, thank them for providing us disagreements.  Is that not catalyst, to utilize the opportunity to provide Love?

I did say that it can be fruitful. I picture negative entities as friends that do not want to partake with us in a body of light, yet they are still there with us. Shy people.

I do not think they necessarily need to be provided love, they're more like hanging out with us.

[VanAlioSaldo]

Ah.  The Negative Entities thought.  I try not to attribute such cause in admitting their doing.  I say offer Love to them, thank them for providing us disagreements.  Is that not catalyst, to utilize the opportunity to provide Love?

I did say that it can be fruitful. I picture negative entities as friends that do not want to partake with us in a body of light, yet they are still there with us. Shy people.

I do not think they necessarily need to be provided love, they're more like hanging out with us.

Specifically regarding those discarnate entities that offer greetings was more what I was referring to. As far as negative incarnated entities goes, I'd like to just offer love and be let be by them.

[Minyatur]

Ah.  The Negative Entities thought.  I try not to attribute such cause in admitting their doing.  I say offer Love to them, thank them for providing us disagreements.  Is that not catalyst, to utilize the opportunity to provide Love?

I did say that it can be fruitful. I picture negative entities as friends that do not want to partake with us in a body of light, yet they are still there with us. Shy people.

I do not think they necessarily need to be provided love, they're more like hanging out with us.

Specifically regarding those discarnate entities that offer greetings was more what I was referring to.  As far as negative incarnated entities goes, I'd like to just offer love and be let be by them.

I was speaking of discarnate entities. I said "friends that do not want to partake with us in a body of light".

[VanAlioSaldo]

OH! I thought you meant Body of Light as in 'Plenum'

I'll call that one, that's my bad~

[Minyatur]

OH!  I thought you meant Body of Light as in 'Plenum'

I'll call that one, that's my bad~

With the whole thread and all of it's terms, I get the confusion. 

[VanAlioSaldo]

Do you think Unity and Simultaneity are the same? Ive been wondering if its a semantic issue or an actual difference in style.

[AnthroHeart]

I think in Unity, a cat and a dog are the same thing.

[Minyatur]

Do you think Unity and Simultaneity are the same?  Ive been wondering if its a semantic issue or an actual difference in style.

I would say Simultaneity is part of Unity.

[VanAlioSaldo]

I think in Unity, a cat and a dog are the same thing.

This, sounds like a proverb... I...Might use this in explanation one day. Thank you~

So if Simultaneity is part of Unity, is Infinity part of Unity or Unity a part of Infinity? Or are they closer to a Infinity/Unity relationship?

[Minyatur]

I'd say Unity is a caracteristic of Infinity. There is One Infinity. But I guess you also could call Infinity: The One Unity. But Unity does not imply Infinity whereas Infinity does imply Unity.

[VanAlioSaldo]

I'd say Unity is a caracteristic of Infinity. There is One Infinity. But I guess you also could call Infinity: The One Unity. But Unity does not imply Infinity whereas Infinity does imply Unity.

Infinity: The One Unity.  So poetic.  Love it.

Well, you exhausted my questions on this subject at the moment.  A very rare thing indeed.  Thank you for this satisfaction

[anagogy]

So if Simultaneity is part of Unity, is Infinity part of Unity or Unity a part of Infinity?  Or are they closer to a Infinity/Unity relationship?

Ra: That which is infinite cannot be many, for many-ness is a finite concept. To have infinity you must identify or define that infinity as unity; otherwise, the term does not have any referent or meaning. In an Infinite Creator there is only unity. You have seen simple examples of unity. You have seen the prism which shows all colors stemming from the sunlight. This is a simplistic example of unity.

I think infinity and unity are synonymous.  It is not that one is part of the other, they are the same thing.

[VanAlioSaldo]

That's what I was wondering. Its a paradox to me.

One thing cannot be many and yet is.

Maybe not a traditional paradox, but one that is inferred by Infinity and Unity being synonymous. That's why I felt like, originally, that we could reference the Universe as a Simultaneity/Infinity/Unity being. Those three things seem to be synonymous in a way similar to a Mind/Body/Spirit being.

[Minyatur]

That's what I was wondering.  Its a paradox to me.

One thing cannot be many and yet is.

Maybe not a traditional paradox, but one that is inferred by Infinity and Unity being synonymous.  That's why I felt like, originally, that we could reference the Universe as a Simultaneity/Infinity/Unity being.  Those three things seem to be synonymous in a way similar to a Mind/Body/Spirit being.

The concept of trinity, there's probably an infinity of trinity fractals.

But that's more about how the system subtains itself, as a whole there is One.

[VanAlioSaldo]

I don't know, I think the one is many. I confess the hope for a linking between parallel worlds through an understanding and hope that if our micro is an m/b/s being, which is also many things yet one.

Then maybe our macro is an S/I/U being who is still many but one, and additionally is us.

Of course I think this is closer to true, just not in a...Practical way. Ra mentioned they had a few wanderers who went to far off and away places. They seemed to have had quite an experience from it that Ra didn't really comment much on, I think they called it strange.

I could see an infinite universe build ona different premise of archetypes instead of Mind/Body/Spirit, it could be something else entirely but still similar to us in concept.

[Kiron]

can somebody explain me please on what is he pointing on???

[Aaron]

I don't know, I think the one is many.  I confess the hope for a linking between parallel worlds through an understanding and hope that if our micro is an m/b/s being, which is also many things yet one.

Then maybe our macro is an S/I/U being who is still many but one, and additionally is us.

Of course I think this is closer to true, just not in a...Practical way.  Ra mentioned they had a few wanderers who went to far off and away places.  They seemed to have had quite an experience from it that Ra didn't really comment much on, I think they called it strange.

I could see an infinite universe build ona different premise of archetypes instead of Mind/Body/Spirit,  it could be something else entirely but still similar to us in concept.

I don't think the mind/body/spirit complex are archetypes. Archetypes are the language of the Logoi, the specific pathways in which Creation manifests in localized areas of the universe. The mind/body/spirit complex is a method of experiencing those archetypes. Ra says that because we, as the One Infinite Creator, have experienced the previous octave, we now know that the mind/body/spirit is the most efficient method of experiencing that we as the Creator have "devised" so far. In other words, it is a harvest of the previous octave. But the mind/body/spirit only became complex because of the veiling process which was discovered during this current octave.

78.10 Questioner: Now, I realize that we are on very difficult ground, you might say, for precise terminology here, since it is totally displaced from our system of coordinates for evaluation in our present system of language.

These early Logoi that formed in the center of the galaxy wished, I assume, to create a system of experience for the One Creator. Did they then start with no previous experience or information about how to do this? This is difficult to ask.

Ra: I am Ra. At the beginning of this creation or, as you may call it, octave there were those things known which were the harvest of the preceding octave. About the preceding creation we know as little as we do of the octave to come. However, we are aware of those pieces of gathered concept which were the tools which the Creator had in the knowing of the self.

These tools were of two kinds. Firstly, there was an awareness of the efficiency for experience of mind, body, and spirit. Secondly, there was an awareness of the most efficacious nature or, if you will, significator of mind, body, and spirit. Thirdly, there was the awareness of two aspects of mind, of body, and of spirit that the significator could use to balance all catalyst. You may call these two the matrix and the potentiator.

Additionally, each of these, mind, body, and spirit, have different functions. You attempt to draw a comparison between mind/body/spirit and simultaneity/infinity/unity as if they are microcosm and macrocosm. But I believe this falls apart when we look at the function of each. Mind is the link between spirit and body, the switchboard, the array which contains all things in potential. Spirit is the shuttle through which Intelligent Infinity flows. And Body is the vessel by which light manifests and interacts with itself. How are simultaneity, unity, and infinity analogs of these? I'm thinking simultaneity is just time, but completely undistorted. Unity is essentially the same thing as infinity, as pointed out by Anagogy earlier in the thread. Or rather, in infinity there is only unity. And in unity, the infinite creation is seen as one.


Regarding far wanderers, I think the difficulty stems from the uselessness of our native archetypal nature of manifestation once attempting to manifest the self in that new area, using different archetypes. Everything that the mind/body/spirit "knows" about manifesting the self is useless under that different archetypal light. Thus, "new" ways of manifesting the self need to be learned. When you see a person within incarnation who has wandered from a different Logos, you see the difficulty they have in manifesting themselves, the diseases, the deformities, etc, in an otherwise brightly shining, happy and healthy person. The mind/body/spirit is still in use for experience under both Logoi (and all Logoi in the universe right now in our Octave).


Anyway, what kind of comparison are you drawing between the functions of the two triads?

[VanAlioSaldo]

I didn't mean to say mind/body/spirit complexes are archetypes, but oriented by archetypes.  So mind/body/spirit oriented archetypes.

However, that's not archetype like one we'd utilize, but archetype in the etymological sense I suppose that the mind/body/spirit is a construct of an archetypical nature (in my eyes) that is needed, and utilized, similarly to such archetypes.

So a mind/body/spirit archetypical orientation is in a sense a mind that interfaces with reality, a body that interacts with reality, and a spirit that manifests reality as it's needed.  So a Simultaneity that is (and I will stress this) not time, but allows for Time, an Infinity that allows for Space, and a Unity that allows for Experience.  These are extremely dull concepts though, it'd be closer to Simultaneity allows for the instance of say, a One Creator traveling down it's path, then meeting it's future self that interacts with it's current path, and then later down the path may once again experience what was already experienced, but now from the other end in order to get the full spectrum of experience, while still being the One being aiding yourself.  Simultaneity allows for such paradoxes as self meeting, and aiding self.  It allows for the Self to do anything with the Self in an array of experiences that we as Human's thought wouldn't make plausible sense.  Like meeting yourself as a 6D entity while 3D, and then eventually making it to 6D, reexperiences a prior 3D experience from the 6D perspective, or 5D if you want to make it less united with more Doctor Whosits-like feel.

Imagine if your future self could travel through time, and was you but amnesiac so was a different person from you.  They could come back in time, aid you in the present, not remember it, and still not break the universe because simultaneity not only allows paradoxes, it also basically resolves them all by saying, paradoxes are not real, they're simultaneity's illusion.

Similarly like we understand Time and Space as not real, we have Infinity and Unity, which are not synonymous for us, but may be in the sense of what Ra was saying, but I do not think synonymous is the correct word to use regarding the comparison of Unity with Infinity, you need to reference Unity as Infinite because the Universe is Infinite in the sense of it's being fractal-like repeating endlessly.  Infinity is not Unity, infinity is United though, and Unity takes on its own inference from Infinity.  Infinity references Unity, Unity infers Infinity.  The two are closely related because the Universe is actually United by Awareness and Consciousness, which could simply mean the Original Thought, as it spreads, is spreading Consciousness by merely providing Awareness to the Presence Available Without Conscious Awareness.  Ra has said that absence or chaos becomes ordered and reflective by Love/Light, does that mean everything is Alive and simply Unity implies those areas that are Aware and organizing into Awareness inside of Infinity?  Furthermore does it imply that Awareness is a Reflective and Ordered structure of being?

I view it as, if it's fractal like, a concept such as a mind/body/spirit can be available in other ways.  Maybe a S/I/U structure isn't wholly correct, but I feel like it may not be completely wrong to view this with the past in mind.  Patterns repeat endlessly in Fractals, we have the Golden Spiral (singular pointed with an upward spiral in either direction, and equally attractive to my brain), we have Triads (pretty~) and Octaves (sexy~), and then we have a lot of distortions of many repeated things to look completely new.  Is a m/b/s complex new, or being repeated, if so, what can I learn from the prior, what's new now, what is being added on now to be experienced later?

If it is any of that, I wouldn't feel too off by saying that perhaps another such complex on a much more massive scale exists, which may be no different from its perspective from our scale from our perspective, or basically it scales reciprocally, the more advanced you are the more you perceive but the more there is to perceive that you can see, the universe doesn't get smaller as you get bigger, it stays constant and relative across all areas of the scale perhaps because we could view it all in the sense of...

We're building and creating as we go, but it's also already built and made and coming back to interact with us to recreate and reexperience itself to currently and constantly and always be bettering its self and growing and learning no matter from what area in Creation in Space or Time in space/time or time/space at any Octave in any Density.  Simultaneity, Infinity, and Unity, allow for a pretty action packed and fast paced evolution when you look at them across an octave interacting with all other parts (6D to 3D, 5th to 4th, 3D to 6D, 5D to 3D, 2D to 3D, 3D to 1D, 6D to 2D, it's all there, and 7D encompasses it all happening).

So we get some huge depth in just this octave, we go from being the literal sparks and gusts of planets growing in 1D, to the total expression of Existence in 7D that encompasses the Fire all the way to the becoming a portion of your own Totality which directed you, as you directed it.  All the way to comprising the manifest being perhaps.  Ra says they don't plumb the next Octave but know enough about it to provide some details on Guardians and directing Light into our Octave (which tells me from the next octave we may begin going into multiple Creations, or a universe comprised of Universes on a scale too huge for us to even comprehend from our...current 'mass' if you'll consider the gaining of spiritual mass in 7D an indication of literal growth to a new level of perspective, where our current Universe may even appear...Small or containable in contrast to the new perspective of it from a 7D or 8D Perspective.

I'm not certain I drew many functions from those two triads per say, but as you see, my views tell me a story of possibilities.  I think the Universe is closer to one thing, being experienced, over and over in various distortions, pulling the consciousness back to Source where it started moving away from ever so long ago, and may even still be doing.

But in the Cyclical nature of being, we start from a point that can be seen as a source, and we move away from that source to a complete opposite of source (I think this octave that may have begun or is already occurring) until we begin to reseek the source having found ourselves 'lost', only to naturally and inevitably as we always would, fall back into the source having grown along the way.

But then again I also think we go through 8 Major Octaves as one Creation before the Original Thought is re-coalesced into One to be re-created and re-experienced.  And I think this may be the 4th Major Octave now that we're at points where complete forgetting is being utilized to push for faster experience gain.

But keep in mind, each Major Octave would work with each other in a S/I/U beingness concept.  So even though we're in the 4th (I think), the prior is still effecting us, as is the Octave above us, and it may not even be the 8th Density above us that leads into the next Major Octave, it could simply lead into the next Sub-Octave of the next Big Octave.

For clarity sake.  You have Our Octave, we'll call it the 4th Major Octave, I'm not referring to our 3D sub-octave bearing Octave, but what our Octave is contained inside of, which that Octave is then held inside the Major Octave.

So we're on Major Octave Density 4, containing Big Octave...We'll say Density 5, which contains Our Octave where many of us are at Sub-Octave 6 experiencing Incarnation in Sub-Octave 3. (omfg how the hell does Ra translate Chakras across Densities?!?!?!!  I can barely explain nested Octaves...  It's like subnetting almost!)

so...
Major 1-8 containing a nested Big 1-8 containing a nested Minor (Current) 1-8, which contains inside each, more 1-8 within itself, going on endlessly.  But I think at the Major 1-8 Octave at the very top of the Octave System, we have a wrapping around from the most Minor smallest Octave on the bottom.   Or basically it's like the Atoms that make up the Sun, consciousness can be seen as starting at the level below those Atoms, and progressing to a level above that Sun.  The depth of scale can be endless, Space and Time are illusion, there is no limit on how big or small something can get.

So there shouldn't be a limit on Octaves but there should be a cyclical means of deriving through patterns remembered from past and being re-experienced in distorted or 'new' ways to continually aid in seeing the unknown that exists not only as that unknown being explored, but those aspects of self in unimaginable ways being stumbled upon by surprise across the whole spectrum.

The current system seems good enough.  A few areas within might need tweaking but overall.

Even for Earth...And it's horrors as I see them.  The One Infinite Creator has a pretty good system going on, whether created that way originally or tweaked across infinity.  I'm very happy to be in a Creation composed of Love, rather than say, Warhammer40k's Creation, which terrifies me that infinity implies that entire fictional universe could actually be real, potentially but probably not practically.

That got pretty long but it felt fresh, I hope it helps everyone understand my views a bit better.

[Infinite Unity]

The process of the emergence of Creation in the Ra Material is very, very similar to the construction of the universe in Kabbalah. (Which shouldn't be surprising if you consider the history of the Jewish people...)

First there is Ain which means the void or nothingness of nothingness. This is considered the primordial 'blank slate' in which the Creator exists. I would equate it with the absolute potential of Intelligent Infinity. This is like Wuji or the Tao or the Void.

Then, the Ain becomes the Ain Soph which means 'limitless, boundless, infinite'. This corresponds with the first distortion of Free Will, I believe, in that it represents the fundamental freedom of the One Infinite to embody all things.

The third aspect is then called Ain Soph Aur which means 'limitless light', which of course would correspond with the second distortion of Logos or Love. Ain Soph Aur I believe is the same as Intelligent Energy.

The difference here is that Ra never mentions the primordial state except to refer to Intelligent Infinity prior to its discernment of finity. Thus, the first distortion happens to Ain, producing Ain Soph, then the second distortion occurs in Ain Soph and produces Ain Soph Aur.

In Kabbalah, these three are considered to be the primordial foundation of all of Creation. Creation occurs out of these by something called tzimtzum or a contraction in which the inward moving force produces an outward moving force thereby producing within it space, time and all of creation. I see this as the concentration of the principle of Logos.

The difficulty of a 'timeline' begins to appear however since I am personally not entirely sure the universe ever 'began' per se. This cycle began at some point but I don't believe that to be the beginning of the One Infinite Creator. In fact, I don't think the One Infinite Creator has a beginning or an end, it is simply there.

There is only one substance: Identity/Will.