The experience of the ONENESS of ‘the ALL’ The natural^1 philosophers of ancient India who presented their fantasies about ‘the all’^2 and its emergence in the Upanishads some 2800 years ago were right smart^3 observers. They observed that ONE (i.e. 1), that is to say, a ‘ONE without a Second’, hence any quantum, is perfect because complete, because certain.^4,5 So they called ‘the ONE without a Second’ Brahman/God.^6 And then they reasoned that there had to be 2 ONES. First there was the (i.e. any) actual ONE^7 they observed/experienced and that emerged via contact as undeniable realness^8 in time and form.^9 And then they inferred/fantasized that there had to be a virtual ONE and which supposedly ‘waited’ prior to contact and therefore prior to time and form and realness.^10 Since that particular bunch of Indians were set on escaping ‘this horrid universe,’ to wit, Samsara, they set about figuring out how oneness with^11 the quality free ONE, i.e. the nirguna Brahman could be achieved. And the solution was quite simple, easy for natural yogis^12 but fiendishly difficult for acculturated yogis. The solution was (and is) is to reduce data scanning from wide angle to narrow angle,^13 indeed to the point^14 when only one datum^15 is scanned/probed^16 and @100% brain processing capacity.^17,18 Then, when only one datum is processed and @100% capacity, that one datum becomes the one’s whole world/universe. Indeed one experiences oneself as the whole universe.^19,20 In other words, I am, that is to say, become conscious of myself as actually one, when I contact one.^21 I am virtually one (actually none) when I contact none.^22 Hence ‘As I think/imagine, so I am.’ @one,^23 an individual is free from the turmoil and pain (and pleasure) of multiplicity, free from incompleteness, uncertainty and imperfection.^24 @1 she actually experiences herself as, indeed ‘is’ the Brahman/God (in situ), or so she, as pantheist, will rightfully claim.^25 Home © 2018 by Victor Langheld

1. For ‘natural’ read: the ‘all’. Indeed those and all other philosophers (and scientists) never observed and still don’t observe more than their own particular ‘all’ decided/framed by the limitations of their data accessing and processing capacities. That’s why all observation is limited, hence incomplete, hence uncertain; hence an inference. 2. Ancient Greek: Epicure’s to pan (from which pan’theism is derived). If and when individuals chose to imagine ‘all’ rather than ‘their all’ as God they mutated as pantheists. 3. Because naively curious, open-minded and highly motivated. They were not priests/brahmins imprinting the village folk with archaic and redundant hand-me-down rules designed to function as placebos. 4. Therefore enstatic, i.e. an ens. 5. And because certain therefore absolutely real and true. Alas. oneness as such (therefore a closed system) is actually incomplete because unprovable (so Goedel), hence prior to identifiable experience and so consciousness. In short, actual @oneness, hence absolute completion and certainty and the sense of absolute realness and trueness happens by means of once-off contact with an ‘other’ one in a relativity vacuum. Without contact @oneness ceases to be absolutely real/true and reverts to virtual status, hence to actual incompleteness and uncertainty. Hence ‘It is not good that man (or God) should b alone.’ Genesis 2 6. That was a beginner’s mistake. G.O.D./Brahman is not in fact ‘All’ but merely emerges as ordering template of ‘All’ (Greek: to pan),, indeed of every particular (hence niche) ‘all’. G.O.D (natura naturans) responds to disorder as ordering/constraining device/algorithm. A thing (i.e. natura naturata) emerges as g.o.d. if and when it serves to change (i.e. differentiate, thus mutate) order. 7. In the Upanishads called the saguna (i.e. with qualities/form) Brahman and which expresses, emerges (its qualities/form) via serial contact. 8. Sanskrit: sat ≈ is’ness, realness, trueness 9. For ‘form’ read: identifiableness, identity (Sanskrit: cit). Form (i.e. indentity) emerges with series (or strings), i.e. with serial contact/interaction/karmic residue transfer. 10. The nirguna (without qualities/form/identity) Brahman. The nirguna Brahman ‘waits’ (inactive) as ordering ≈ constraining template, hence as virtual possibility. 11. i.e. merging or unifying with, demerging or reverting back into. This led to the ancient Indian cultural, hence unnatural ideal of moksha as ‘release from’ (form, time and so on), and which so damaged India in the long run. Ordinary Indians, behaving naturally, continued to attempt to achieve the moksha of differential emergence, i.e. ‘freedom to’. 12. i.e. those behaving naturally and therefore being compliant with/obedient to the basic ordering template, i.e. G.O.D./Brahman. Acculturated yogis behaving on line to a selected niche (or culture) ordering template (i.e. a henotheistic GOD) struggle to achieve release into @oneness because they fail to act naturally. 13. In other words, data processing shifts from analogue (or process) to digital (or quantum) processing, that is to say, from the ‘movie’ back to the ‘still.’ The ‘mystic’ (or yogi) reverts from the movie to a still, then from the still to a pixel (and then reverts back to the original ordering template prior to local ordering). Then she absorbs into the pixel, that is to say, absorbs the pixel @ 100%. In other words, she floods herself, i.e. her brain as simulating device, with one pixel (or any data bit) until all else, i.e. all otherness, is eliminated and nought but the one pixel/datum exists and when she experiences himself as the pixel, or indeed, any datum/focus/contact. 14. i.e. to ‘one-pointedness.’ 15. i.e. any quantum as enstatic (i.e. @ min. entropy) whole, hence ‘all.’ 16. i.e. processed. 17. @100% ≈ maximum personal (hence relative) processing capacity and which may or may not be increased or decreased to facilitate not just wide and narrow angle processing but also to manipulate the experience of realness/trueness (i.e. wholeness) or the reverse. 18. That’s the essence of yoga, i.e. of the attainment of absolute stillness ≈ certainty ≈ completeness ≈ oneness (i.e. isolation), namely the reduction of mental turbulence resulting from scanning. See: Patanjali’s Yoga Sutra No2. 19. When scanning (for multiple foci) ends and a single datum/focus is probed @100% capacity the observer appears to ‘rest’, i.e. ‘is’ @1 and experiences herself initially as the observed, then as simply present (i.e. as universal because unbounded/unlimited) without either an observer or an observed. This is a self-generated fantasy albeit real like a dream image. 20. The diagram shows how the world of multiplicity (and imperfection, and delivering ‘pain’) is reduced to the world of oneness (and perfection, and delivering first pleasure, then indifference) by simply processing one datum (or dream) only and @ maximum capacity. This is how a dream (or any fantasy, or any imagined datum) is made to come true/real. And with the achievement of oneness (i.e. when the dream comes true) comes completeness, certainty, peace and joy, at least initially, and thereafter, for lack of ‘difference that makes a difference’, indifference, dissolution, depression, misery and death, unless the sense of oneness is maintained by means of selected playback or step by step (i.e. one step at a time) data input. 21. @ 1 to 1 contact I momentarily exist as a real (hence true) quantum, hence as actually, albeit not yet identifiable emerged ordering template, i.e. as g.o.d. When serial contact happens I emerge fully as real and true identifiable entity. 22. When contact does not happen I don’t actually exist, to wit, I am not (real and true). That is to say, I have not emerged as local application of the universal ordering operating system. 23. That is to say, locked inside her oneness fantasy and which she experiences as real and true, and meaningful too. 24. She achieves moksha/liberation from the turmoil and pain of the interaction of the many by incarcerating herself in the ONE/Brahman, with or without qualities. 25. The @oneness experience (in Yoga called: kaivalja (i.e. isolation)) happens from moment to moment as natural, albeit low impact emergent of contact/communication. @oneness is so ordinary, so ‘everyday’, that it is rarely experienced in consciousness. However, sometimes the @oneness experience burst forth spontaneously and powerfully into consciousness or it is trained, as in Yoga, so to present. That can happen with profound effect to anyone, anywhere, anytime. Since the @oneness experience emerges as natural by-product of communication (i.e. interaction), it can, as an experience (i.e. as a datum or focus), be selectively trained (like one’s capacity to cook or to reason) to express in a more powerful way, indeed to the ‘point’ where that experience alone floods the brain @100% and when only that experience exists as real/true and therefore as universal. At which point tattvamasi (i.e. ‘You’re IT.’