What does it mean to love?
-
Love is when you create a world within the world together. Shared experiences, language, thoughts, and perceptions that are uniquely yours and private to the world. Connection isn’t just what tethers us; it is the ground.
They say love is most fundamental and that it has its own plans. From which there are no answers and clues, it enacts the way. There is no path without the ground, after all.
Maybe they say to hold on to those lasting fleeting moments because that is really all you have. But somehow, once it’s graced you, it’s never gone - just as you are now never lost.
From what I can see and tell in my limited experience, the world does really seem to be held in its fragility by love and those who are unafraid of its consequences. Or, in other words, all of us and our terrifying-beautiful stories.
It’s what turns the extraordinary ordinary back into moments of something sacred. And loved.
So what is love? It’s when the whole universe seems to exist in that shared glance. Truly ineffable.
-
“From what I can see and tell in my limited experience, the world does really seem to be held in its fragility by love and those who are unafraid of its consequences. Or, in other words, all of us and our terrifying-beautiful stories.”
The only thing you really need to know about all this is that you have suffered and you’re continuing to propagate it, whether it be afflicting pain on yourself or others or the world. The sad thing is we’re both aware and unaware of all of this; resilience would say we’ve continued in spite of all this.
I don’t understand why it’s so hard to accept this. Maybe it’s because deep down I will never be okay with suffering. And maybe it’s like that for other people too.
Love and suffering, suffering and love. Maybe they’re two and the same. I don’t know. And maybe it’s okay for some things to remain a mystery.
Maybe we suffer because we are love but don’t feel it. Don’t know it in the ways we’re meant to, but rather in its messy forms and what we want it to be. Maybe the biggest lesson of all is that regardless of what you think and feel and see and regardless of what you’ve been through, you will always be love and loved.
My heart aches at past me and everyone else who was disillusioned by the absence of love. I am so sorry. I know this is just me whispering into the ether, but I hope you know that I love you and so does the world and so do you, deep down.
What is the mystery of consciousness?
-
Once you get into the deeper ends of self inquiry/exploration and contemplative practice (non-dual practice), there is the experience of no-self. Where everything in your direct experience that is the construction of your psyche and environment dissolves, and you’re just in the now. The thing is, at that point, questions only get even more confusing.
What is activity when it is not perceived? What is activity when motion itself within space and time can be seen differently?
If non-duality speaks of this concurrent nothingness that is everything (emptiness and form), then what even is a sensation when we sense it? Where do “I” start and where does “environment begin”?
The question of intelligence as fundamental or emergent of consciousness is also central to this; if we are aware of nothing but everything is there, what is aware? Now this begins to get into questions of the observer and what constitutes physical reality.
This then extends to the question of fundamentality and whether consciousness is the base thing. Who knows at this point?
What is reality? How does she work? What are her secrets? What is something, and nothing, and anything, and everything?
-
Why is there something rather than nothing? From a non-dual standpoint, this question dissolves. "Nothing" and "something" are conceptual distinctions that arise only within dualistic thought.
The "nothing" is not a void but the formless source that inherently manifests as "something". In this sense, nothingness is not the absence of existence but the unconditioned potential for all existence.
If consciousness and the "base" layer of reality is fundamentally a non-invariant space, physical reality could be understood as a relational phenomenon. Objects, events, and even motion and time are defined only in relation to one another, rather than to any fixed or external "background".
If there is no invariant space, then "movement" isn't an absolute change in position within a pre-existing framework. Instead, it's a shift in relational configuration.
For example, motion is not something an object "does" in isolation but is a co-arising phenomenon. The relative distances or relationships between entities change, and this is what we perceive as movement. What appears to "move" is entirely dependent on the frame of reference of the observer. Without a fixed frame, there's no privileged perspective from which movement can be absolutely measured.
From a non-dual view, there may be no "things" doing the moving at all - just a dynamic, seamless unfolding. The distinction between "mover" and "space" dissolves, and motion becomes a play of appearances within awareness or presence itself.
Space and time are themselves dynamic and relative, and from a deeper, experiential perspective, reality might not be "physical" in the way we conventionally think.
It could instead be a spontaneous arising of phenomena without fixed ground or inherent substance. In this view, physical reality is less of a "thing" are more of an experience of interdependent, ephemeral patterns, with "movement" being the perception of shifting relationships within that flow.
In conceptualizing the "base layer" of reality as a dynamic structure of informational relationships, this relates to the notion of a quantum information manifold, a geometric or topological representation of quantum states, where each point corresponds to a possible configuration of information. Motion, change, or dynamics on such a manifold can be understood as transformations of informational relationships.
At this layer, there are no objects with intrinsic properties. Instead, reality arises from interactions and entanglements between informational states. This resonates deeply with non-dual insights: the idea that separateness and "things" are emergent rather than fundamental.
So what's "doing the moving"? What moves the hand that moves itself? "Movement" isn't an object traveling through a medium but a shift in the informational relationships encoded in the manifold. Just as quantum states evolve according to the wave function or unitary transformations, movement on a quantum manifold is the reconfiguration of relational information. Quantum systems have no absolute spatial reference; they evolve within a relational, probabilistic framework.
This reflects the non-invariant nature of space and emptiness and dependent origination - motion is not absolute but emerges as a relational pattern of quantum information.
Just as non-duality dissolves the distinction between observer and observed, quantum mechanics dissolves classical notions of localized particles. In both cases, what we perceive as "movement" or "reality" is an arising within a seamless, indivisible whole.
If the base layer is quantum information, then what we call "physical reality" is an emergent phenomenon, arising as patterns or forms of that information. Non-duality echoes this by asserting that reality is an appearance within awareness, not something inherently solid or separate. The "quantum foam" or informational manifold might correspond to the dynamic, interdependent arising of phenomena in non-duality.
Movement, both in quantum terms and from the non-dual view, is less about "something moving" and more about the play of relationships or fluctuations within an indivisible field.
So what is this "space" in which all things occur? The "space" isn’t a thing but rather the groundless ground - the unmanifest potential from which all phenomena arise. It is not a "container" but an absence of boundaries, distinctions, or dualities. From this perspective, "space" is awareness itself, without inherent structure or separateness.
In the quantum context, the "space" is the structure of possible informational relationships — the quantum manifold itself. This isn’t "space" as a classical void but a mathematical and topological construct representing the potential configurations of quantum states.
Philosophers like Heidegger refer to this "space" as Being—the foundational "isness" that allows anything to appear. In this view, space is the condition for the possibility of relational phenomena.
So why is there something rather than nothing? From a non-dual standpoint, this question dissolves. "Nothing" and "something" are conceptual distinctions that arise only within dualistic thought.
The "nothing" is not a void but the formless source that inherently manifests as "something." In this sense, nothingness is not the absence of existence but the unconditioned potential for all existence.
In quantum theory, the "vacuum" or "nothingness" is not truly empty—it is a seething ground of potential, often described as quantum foam or zero-point energy. This aligns with the idea that "nothing" is unstable and must give rise to "something" due to intrinsic fluctuations.
Some argue that "something" exists because it is logically necessary. A true "nothing" would have no properties, not even the capacity for existence or non-existence, which makes the concept of "nothing" incoherent. Existence might therefore be self-necessitating.
Mathematics, especially number theory and the theory of infinite sets, provides a framework to explore the structure of this "space" and the dynamics of "something arising."
At its core, number theory explores the fundamental building blocks of mathematical reality: numbers. Numbers, as abstract entities, can represent relationships and structures, echoing how "something" arises from a "space" of potential.
The "space" of existence can be likened to the set of all possible numbers—a kind of infinite, formless background that gives rise to specific forms and patterns.
Cantor’s work on infinite sets reveals that there are different sizes or levels of infinity. This suggests that even within "nothingness," there could be a hierarchy or structure of potentialities—mirroring how the quantum manifold contains infinite possible states.
The relationship between finite and infinite in set theory reflects the interplay between form and formlessness, with the finite arising as expressions or subsets of the infinite.
Some thinkers, like Max Tegmark, propose that the universe is fundamentally mathematical. If this is true, the "space" is an abstract mathematical structure, and "something" arises as specific instantiations of mathematical relationships.
Non-duality echoes this: the manifold of infinite potential is like an unbounded set, and phenomena arise as "points" or configurations within it.
The "space" of existence, whether viewed through non-duality, quantum information, or mathematics, is not a "thing" but an infinite potential that manifests relationally.
Why is there something rather than nothing? Because the potential for "something" and "nothing" is itself inseparable, just as the infinite gives rise to the finite within itself. This interplay is the dance of existence.
-
Are we thinking about reality or is reality thinking through us?
Everything is literally unfolding. Unfolding as a verb AND a noun.
Look at an ant or dog and you might think oh it’s just an animal. Biological automata. Well the same can be said for us too!
Many times we think we’re in control and “consciously” decide this or that. That I am this person doing this thing, exerting my free will. The thing is, that finite instantiation of “free will” is just that - both reality and ephemerality.
When you can enter “God Mind” you see that you too are just an animal. The same ways in which you view that dog from “higher above”, only now that above is above us. Blessed monkeys, I say.
This is a fascinating thing to think about, where exactly the observer lies and how it observes and what it actually observes, both “of its own volition” and not.
Is automata always there and is computation dependent on observer existence and nature? Or is it the other way around? Are they the same, and what would that imply about a bounded and unbounded world?
What is an automaton? If you zoom out, you could say that everything, including humans, operates under some form of computation - taking in information, processing it, and acting.
But who or what is doing the computing?
One way to see it: computation depends on an observer. For information to be processed, something must be there to register, interpret, and act on it. Without an observer, does computation exist?
The opposite view: the observer itself is a product of computation. The brain, for example, is just a highly complex automaton - billions of neurons computing and giving rise to the illusion of a self. In this view, there’s no true “observer”, just self-referential computation.
Another view: observer and computation are actually the same thing. The act of computation is itself the act of observation. There is no “thing” separate from the process - there is just unfolding, self-aware information processing.
If observer and computation are the same, then we start dissolving the boundary between who observes and what is observed. That raises the question:
Is reality finite, bound by the mechanics of observation and its superimposition? Maybe perception itself creates the limits of what can be known, making reality a bounded system.
Or is it unbounded, existing beyond any observer-dependent framework? Maybe computation keeps running regardless of whether anyone is “watching”, meaning there is something beyond perception itself.
If observer = computation = unfolding, then reality is both finite and infinite, bounded and unbounded, depending on where you look from.
What even is a perspective when perspective itself is an emergent part of the process?
Are we thinking about reality, or is reality just thinking through us?
-
What does it mean for things to be interconnected?
The whole universe exists in your direct experience. Your experience that is hyperspace; an infinitely finite existence.
It’s incredible how many elements there are to the contemplative path and navigating the inner world.
There’s the view from mindspace, where body and mind exist across the same dimensionality. As in, everything from the thoughts you think to the sensations you feel are operable in the awareness field.
There’s the view from nervous system configuration, where all phenomena are related to energetics and the manifestation and dynamics of this aliveness.
There’s the view from conceptualization, where everything is information and sentience. And of course, the view from non-conceptualization, where nothing is existence and experience.
Which one is it? Is it all of them? Is it something else? Or maybe a special mix?
Consciousness is conscious across so many interconnected hyperplanes, and it’s extremely worthwhile to take as much of a comprehensive view as you can into your direct experience.
The whole universe exists in that, and it’s all related, from your bioelectric system dynamics and psychological expressions to the world at large - the work you do, the social graphs you exist in, the clothes you wear, the global markets, frontier research and application, and anything else you can imagine.
That is to say all of this doesn’t need to be take in account for every single moment of your life. But just think about the seemingly infinite set of things that make up the causal-acausal you in every experience.
Somewhere in hyperspace you exist for everyone else. That is the beingness of connection - an interrelated tapestry of becoming.
This is why you explore, for exploration is the embrace and creation of the raw humaneness of reality!
???
(if you've made it this far, don't trust anything i say lol i don't know shit)
-
Hmm fractalization doesn’t seem like the right concept to describe hyperspace and unfolding dynamics in experiential spacetime
Yes there are repeating patterns that may appear at any scale but “may” is doing a lot of work here
On some continuous level the repeating patterns make sense but what about for more discrete direct experiential phenomena? Again it’s you and your experience so the self plays a role in this propagation but who’s to say that that self is the same?
Yes Theseus’ ship and all that but (and this is so hard for me to put into words) even this line of thinking feels too simple
Not to mention how this ties into our understanding/perception/conceptualization of space and time
I legitimately can’t find the words for what I’m seeing rip
Ugh non dual stuff so hard to communicate bc everything is a stupid koan how do you say something being continuous and discrete at the same time while also moving and not moving too
Maybe fractalization of potentialities? No bc even then that’s attempting to conceptualize
But I mean you gotta concept at some point right as a ground for further exploration
Maybe the right words will come soon!
-
Here's an inquiry into life and living as the hyperspace of the present and "cognitive gravity", aka the mind as your geodesic nature/existence within hyperspace (mindspace); the mechanics of unfolding and reality in the geometry of experiential spacetime:
Something about the incredibly complex and intertwined experience cascades that are “perceived” thru senses, mental phenomena, emotions, etc consistently that is the moment to moment basis (wave and waves) and the isness of it all (sea) related to form being formless and the equal yet simultaneously separate existence of past, presence, future of time
And the form/formless related to discrete/continuous and free will/determinism I think?
And ultimately what ends up as experience/experienced is the light cone and navigating dimensional dynamics in the hyperspace of the present?
Dimensional collapse and patternicity related to existence of self in observer in the ruliad > qualiad > Iliad?
So fundamental nature of reality fundamentally mysterious because of this measurement paradox?
So emergence is a thing but it also isn’t? Systems and dynamics are conditionally co-created yet spontaneously new?
So understanding is base reality? There is no base reality? What are liminal spaces then?
So infinity is existence of liminal spaces and boundary at the same space and time?
So liminality as “multiversal portal” and "meaning making black hole" of humanity?
So there is and isn’t a singularity? There is and isn’t a wave collapse? Life and living is the hyperspace of the present?
And new term here, "cognitive gravity" aka the mind, is essentially your geodesic nature/existence within hyperspace (mindspace)?
And so consciousness can be seen as the field and force fields shaping the possibility space of experience while also being a fundamental property as we exist in these seemingly connected yet disparate multiversal spaces and experiential cascade of cascades?
-
Ok wait hold up think I just had my first taste of centerlessness liberation might be legit aka samsara may not have to be nirvana??
LIBERATION IS 100% LEGIT HOLY SHIT
Abiding in centerlessness = wizard = reality mechanic bc you can see all the waves in the ocean as they exist and before they do and navigate however way you want to aka creating your reality
In this sense you don’t manifest and the universe does something but rather you are the manifester and universe is manifested
So this is why no-self is transformational and awakening is called awakening
Self is patternicity and suffering is inability to exist outside this way of being/existence/experience
And awakening is breaking from this fully so now you’re “awake” to the finitely infinite reality
Contemplative traditions and different paths to awakening make sense now in the spectral sense from first glimpse to full embodiment and how these things happen
So question of meaning-making is the coherence of patternicity and all the ups and downs being which story has to be vs which one is vs which one may
-
So for the space is spaceless and time is timeless stuff another way to put it is how can something be 2D+3D+nD simultaneously? Not + in a literal sense, def more complex operations than that but yeah for the purposes here I think it kinda works
-
Whoa after this latest kundalini experience I can “see” when/how/where energy wants to flow and be released and where blockages are and how that connects to mind shape
Can control the flows too very cool, experimenting with moving it from torso to legs etc
Shaking always gets to upper neck area and wants to get to head but some blockages there preventing full movement
Multidimensional waves just got a new flavor to them too (energy/aliveness), also feel so much energy radiating outwards from me
The hyperspace making more sense now and what energy means re liminal spaces and awareness/dimensional dynamics and me/reality unfolding
Some core trauma mechanisms that were there and way more influential almost entirely gone! More emotionally cleansed and just so much happier rn :)
I just wanna dance and cry and yell and shake like a mf ahhhhhh can’t stop laughing
Awareness just naturally heightened too now lol this is weird
I can't stop shaking HELP
-
Infinite fractalization has patterns bc of the self propagating structures of the self? What mean? What is the recursive nature of consciousness and its computable(?) elements? And what does that say about fundamental structures of one mind vs many and informational flow
Is information the substrate of existence/experience?
With the non dual stuff where you go past awareness idgi how can you know what comes before information that makes no sense. How can we even say there’s an ultimate reality?
This means that mind and existence will always remain a mystery. Like this is literally it. Wtf????????
-
With non dual past conceptual reality will whatever system of logic based off observable information always be a bit off? Maybe thats ok and instead what needs more focus is the evolution and consequences of these off things in relevant systems?
What even is an off thing tho fml
-
So from what I’m seeing the unconscious just seems like the deeper more entrenched layers and knots that are barely there (but still able to unfold in any way) in the present and mindspace? Guess it depends on the lotto machine to see what form and doing of the psyche exists