Universal Enlightenment Could End Existence

[Ajqij]

Yes, exactly . . . Carse nailed it and I second it with a word and phrase that came to me as I lived with the Maya in the Yucatan and learned about their Tzolin Calendar . . . "We are (In)finite being who embody the micro and macro, the mortal and immortal, and the finite and infinite."

 

[Voidmatrix]

Yes, exactly . . . Carse nailed it and I second it with a word and phrase that came to me as I lived with the Maya in the Yucatan and learned about their Tzolin Calendar . . . "We are (In)finite being who embody the micro and macro, the mortal and immortal, and the finite and infinite."

I sometimes like to ponder, wonder, consider, humor the idea of indeterminacy.



One love

 

[fink]

Consciousness may be infinite. But are the games it plays with itself not finite?

 

[Here&Now2]

Consciousness may be infinite. But are the games it plays with itself not finite?

It seems to me that duality is built directly into nonduality. Or rather, they seem to actually be the same thing when viewed from a high enough angle.

But from a relative perspective, if you're asking whether manifest reality goes through cycles of creation and destruction, I'd say that's probably true as well based on my own meager experience as well as the writings of those who are much more accomplished.

 

[fink]

I tend to agree, based on my experiences.

The purpose of this thought experiment is more to extrapolate this scenario, just for fun, rather than prove it as a truth. All philosophy should be fun and taken with a pinch of salt.

Is there anyone who might think that this topic could be in some way blasphemous, overly presumptuous or disrespectful to source?

The thought has crossed my mind

 

[Voidmatrix]

Is there anyone who might think that this topic could be in some way blasphemous, overly presumptuous or disrespectful to source?

Perhaps. The source could also think it's cute.

If we are mere manifestations of this source, it seems it could be an amalgam of both being disrespectful and not being so.

One love

 

[fink]

Yes, if the premise of the topic is to be believed, we are only upsetting or amusing ourself

 

[CommonConduit]

Are you suggesting ending one's own existence or saying that I can end all of existence if I wanted to?

noun: existence
the fact or state of living or having objective reality.
"the organization has been in existence for fifteen years"

I’m intrigued by the … fictional (?) aspect of one’s supposedly separate ‘existence’.
Noticing how there may not be any inherent separation, ontologically speaking, can bring one’s ‘own’ existence to an end, in a sense, and it can also end existence as a whole, or at least the way it’s commonly perceived?

 

[Voidmatrix]

Noticing how there may not be any inherent separation, ontologically speaking, can bring one’s ‘own’ existence to an end, in a sense, and it can also end existence as a whole, or at least the way it’s commonly perceived?

I feel like this is a semantic dance inherent to these kinds of discussions. We're distinct, but connected. One person's existence may not have come to fruition if everything else (or even one thing) were removed at that point in time. All the same, once that is the case, the continuation of said existence isn't dependent upon such variables to the same degree. There's not really any supervenience.

One love

 

[CommonConduit]

I feel like this is a semantic dance inherent to these kinds of discussions. We're distinct, but connected. One person's existence may not have come to fruition if everything else (or even one thing) were removed at that point in time. All the same, once that is the case, the continuation of said existence isn't dependent upon such variables to the same degree. There's not really any supervenience.

One love

Some people do like to argue that there is such a thing though!

What Is Supervenience?

 

[fink]

noun: existence
the fact or state of living or having objective reality.
"the organization has been in existence for fifteen years"

I’m intrigued by the … fictional (?) aspect of one’s supposedly separate ‘existence’.
Noticing how there may not be any inherent separation, ontologically speaking, can bring one’s ‘own’ existence to an end, in a sense, and it can also end existence as a whole, or at least the way it’s commonly perceived?

I see what you mean. The phenomena of ending one's 'own' current existence through moments of understanding. Almost like those light bulb moments mark a line in the sand that can never be returned over, even if we want to. I assume in most cases with replace that lost existence with a new one?

It's quite mad. When we realise that our imaginary persona can be changed irrevocably by an imaginary moment of understanding in what may well be a fully imaginary universe populated by infinite iterations of one 'us'.

There is a strong argument for breaking the game through philosophy. Ignorance was bliss. I see it slowly changing in my children as they grow.