Biased view of STS...and INFINITY

[Monica]

You're saying :
Infinity cannot create...
Everything that exists exists inside infinity. Nothing is apart from infinity.
Ergo, nothing can create.

Yet humans can create as evidenced by the existence of that word and your argument is therefore wrong.

If I may interject here...

It's all about perspective. The way I understand what unity100 is saying, he is attempting to describe infinity from infinity's perspective.

Sure, elements within infinity can create...but infinity can't create because all of creation is already included in infinity. There can be no separation, no distortion, else it wouldn't be infinity.

Infinity cannot manifest. However, parts of infinity can manifest.

If I'm understanding you correctly, Ali, what you're saying is that, if an element of infinity can do something, then infinity can do it, since the element is included in infinity. I do understand your point, in that it may seem reasonable to assume that the whole would include all its parts. However, that still is residing in the concept of distortion. To even say that there are parts of the whole, implies separation, distinction, distortion. That is indeed true from OUR perspective, but it is true from infinity's perspective? I think not.

If I'm understanding unity100 correctly, what he's saying is that, as soon as you define an element of infinity, it's no longer infinity you are describing; thus, no amount of describing or defining can ever be applied to infinity. Infinity cannot be subdivided, else it's no longer infinity! The Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao. To attribute even the attribute of being able to create, cannot be applied to infinity. This doesn't negate your accurate statement that elements of infinity can indeed create. It may just be a matter of semantics. Or, it may be that the concept of absolutely zero description, zero distinction, zero distortion...is difficult to describe with words. We are attempting to name the eternal Tao, which cannot be done, no matter how you slice it, no matter how you justify it. It's no longer the Tao.

infinity doesnt change its nature from where you look at it. it still is infinite, before you look at it, and after you look at it. even the concept of looking at something, contemplating, thinking about it or perception are things that are in infinity.

Here again you ignore the existence of perspective... Perspective and relativity...

You may think that the infinite is unchangeable.. And this is correct. But your understanding of it is not.. You may think that the infinite can only exist in one way. But your perspective on it changes as you evolve through the densities.

Respectfully, I don't think either of you are ignoring perspective. You're just focusing on a different perspective. It appears to me that you, Ali, are making the point that OUR perspective changes (which I agree with), while unity100 seems to be making the point that infinity's perspective never changes. Unity seems to be attempting to describe infinity's perspective.

And, if I'm understanding unity100 correctly, he's saying that infinity has no perspective, because the very concept of perspective indicates distortion. Since infinity has no distortion, it cannot have perspective either.

This, it is appropriate to ignore perspective when describing infinity. Perspective only applies to distortions of infinity, not to infinity.

(That's my perspective, anyway! )

You are wrong

Boys, boys! How about we leave out the 'you are wrong' and just try to see the other person's perspective?