I dedicate this site to the memory of my stepdaughter, Heather, who was murdered on Thanksgiving 2017. I want to chronicle some of the events and spiritual insights that happened. It is my hope that this may help some other souls who stumble upon this site. Maybe some good can come off this after all (read more here).  ~ May 2018

Inner Voices, TCB: All numbers are relationships based out of the first distinction

5/13/2019 6:21 a.m.

Hanns (H): Brilliant sunrise. But cold. Too cold to sit outside. Not sure what to write about. If anything I have no questions.

The Club Beyond Time and Space (TCB): Love.  

H: Yes I heard that before: Love. But we talked about that the other day.

TCB: Do you think we said all there is to say about love?

H: Ok, love. Go ahead. Let me concentrate.

[ And then nothing came. Long pause… some dialogue came, irrelevant, that did not flow.]

I am still tired. When I concentrate, meditate, it is a tired feeling, as if going to sleep and.

TCB: hat is the problem. You are not receptive. Your state of mind. You also have an attitude of “I don't care”

H: But the other day you said not to expect.

TCB: As a base mood.

[ Long pause.  I stop for a while. Have breakfast, coffee, read some news.  Read a paper on the imaginary number, thereby priming what is to come.  Then it continues. And now the dialog is bubbling, I mean it just flowed]
 
7:58 a.m.

TCB:  Aren't there enough topics you can ask of on? Now that your mind is receptive.

H: Yes. So OK, the imaginary number, again.

TCB: It's a relationship. It's an abstract concept not tied to a real object. But a relationship between perceived objects.

That is really what all numbers are. Relationships, with regard to the perceiving consciousness.

I vs. You.   Being vs. nothingness.  1 vs. 0, 1 vs. 2, 2 vs. 3.

That is all how it all starts, and then just builds on itself.

So negative numbers are also without basis in the real world, but they represent a relationship, to yourself.

So do fractions. No real basis in “the Real,” but a relationship.

And so does the imaginary number. Yes, abstractly, it is √-1 , which cannot have a basis in the real world, but the geometric representation is a ROTATION, which is a relationship, of how 2 points are related.

So, all numbers, really describe simply relationships.

And note, to say you vs. me, or 1 banana, 2 bananas, 3 bananas, that is ALWAYS, and we repeat, an arbitrary set, an arbitrary distinction.

Between what? How is their only this banana, and that one, out infinite objects. The term object being arbitrarily here as well, as it implies a separation between you and it.

So all objects, all perceptions, are based on the observer.

The observing consciousness sees a distinction between it and some other.

Observer vs. object.

That is the first relationship. That forms the numbers 0, 1, 2, 3, etc. And the others are just other relationships, locially extended, to help you, humans, explain the real world in terms of relationship to your individual consciousness.

So the whole system of math and science is very useful to explain reality.

But it is not based on real objects.

Because they really “do not exist.”  [ this is not meant to deny any material or physical reality, as clarified in the next sentence ]

You see, where is the difference, atomically, between your body and the chair you sit on? It is just visible at the scale your consciousness operates on.

The context --here is the word again-- of your body—of your body and perception apparatus sets what is real “to you.”

At other scales, different realities emerge:

Cosmic: planets, galaxies, universes (plural).
Atomic: electrons, atoms, the Hicks particle, and so on.  
But ALSO  fields, waves, that is very important to distinguish, because in the wave, the separation merges away.

So, “reality” is just the context given by scale, and so on.  And in the “reality that is your scale [… stopping mid sentence ]  -- You know, SCALE is not the right word. The context is the particle/singular nature VS the wave/community nature.

Scale, then, is an aspect of the particle nature.

The wave/community is a different context.

[There are two ways to see things: as a wave, a community, the All-consciousness,  instead of a singular particle, a human, a self, a single consciousness ]

So in that particle/human scale nature [see comment above] that your consciousness is in, it sees relationships between itself and the word, that reality it, our consciousness, CAST itself in (underline cast!).

Because it cast itself down for a reason: to learn.

And to learn about relationships. That's why earlier [today, see above] we told you love. So, you see, there is more to say on it all.

Love is also a relationship. Between two “particle/self/consciousnesses,” but when they dissolve again, they become the wave/one/all consciousness.

H: Wow. And I thought I was drawing a blank this morning.

TCB: Yes, YOU WERE. Because you were too tired, and you, again, doubted yourself.

As you can tell right now, you are in a completely different state of mind.

Receptive, and the thoughts just a flow through you. You also don't doubt right now. Just let it flow.

So you see: their relationship is different. The context has changed again.

H: So then, with the imaginary number, where does it leave “metaphysics?”

TCB: But that is what we are trying to tell you. It all comes down to the first distinction. I vs it.

And out of this, it all grows.

The first relationship. The first distinction.

Now, what is the space between I and It?  [between 0 and 1, etc.]

That is where only metaphysic has gone.

And science has also attempted the same, but does not see it yet. [it’s metaphysical basis].

It all comes down to consciousness. The “all-consciousness,” when there is just one, and the local consciousness [when there are many].

Atman, Brahman, call it if you like.

And out of it has grown the system of numbers, which describe only relationships, as seen by this local consciousness.

And out of this has grown a complete system, well, “complete” is obviously wrong, but you know what I mean, “complete” system of science.

So it is not that √-1 is “not real,” IT IS, but only as a relationship.

That was the logical conclusion of the whole number system. And it SHOWS the metaphysics behind it VERY clearly.

It is the fault line that shows the whole system…
… going back to the 1st distinction: I vs it.

And that is where the metaphysics comes in.

So all of science IS real AND metaphysics, because the space between “I vs it” is the real mystery.

Which you/all/we experienced. So you/all/we know. We know.  [referring to the experience “I once was part of.”]

But science cannot know other than through this system of numbers, and language, which is also based in the first distinction. [ a world of objects ].

I vs. it.  

And what is “versus”?

H: Yes, a relationship.

TCB: And what is I AND it?

H: Yes, also relationship.

TCB: So, there you have it. It is all about relationships.

TO RELATE.

There is that keyword. As Frank [DeMarco] / TGU said, what do spirits do in the afterward?

“We relate.”

As soon as you have particles/selves that is all you can do: to relate.

H: Wow.

TCB: Yes, Wow. Enough to stop?

H: Yes.

TCB: Just remember, you cannot force this. You have to get into the right state of mind and sometimes some reading will help.

Namaste — I bow to you and the Divine in you.
~Hanns

Add new comment

New comments may be reviewed for approval by an administrator.
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

Keywords

Spin the ball by moving your mouse in it. Click any keyword to go to it's page.