Life After Solipsism

My thoughts have been turned to the afterlife a lot lately. It’s not something I purposely mean to ruminate over. Rather, it’s something I find myself thinking about in my spare time. Now, I don’t believe in any version of life after death, and I am completely open to the fact that there may be no life after death, no matter how much I may personally want to believe that there is. Either outcome sits well for me. In the meantime, however, my mind has nothing better to do than to come up with some eccentric theories to questions such as “Is there an afterlife?” and “What is the nature of reality?”.

This article started from a simple question. A simple question of “what if?”
 
What if the afterlife isn’t as great a place as it’s made out to be? The most commonly held view of the afterlife is that once we die we will go to a better place. But what if we don’t go to a better place? What if the afterlife is pure misery? What if we were only partially sent here by our ‘higher selves’ in order to escape the hellishness of ‘reality’? 

This got my mind whirring. I was immediately reminded of this Matrix quote: 

Have you ever had a dream, Neo, that you were so sure was real? What if you were unable to wake from that dream? How would you know the difference between the dream world and the real world? 

Most people can attest to the fact that life feels like a dream. So, what if life is a dream? What if we take this concept and add it to the previous concept? What are we left with? 

We end up with the theory that life is but a dream. A dream that is but a fraction of reality. A dream that is a refuge from the harsh truth of reality. A place our minds are sent to to escape, to find solitude and peace. And every time we die we are reborn, awoken again into the real world. Awoken into hell. Reincarnation would be nothing more than falling back to sleep once more to escape into a sweet semi-conscious oblivion.  

I doubt suicide would continue to be a problem if we knew reality to be as harsh as this. 

This has to make one think about the absurd notion of Solipsism. Solipsism holds the view that one’s own mind is the only thing that is known and can be proven to be known. Therefore the Solipsist believes he is the only one in existence, and that reality is just an unconscious process of his imagination. For those who haven’t heard this philosophy before then it probably seems utterly ridiculous. And yet, the theory I proposed above would actually make Solipsism a viable possibility. Isn’t that just a weird thought? 

What would that make reality? What is ‘reality’? Is reality truly what you make it?

The Meaning of Life

So I was chatting to my best friend earlier, and this is part of a discussion we were having about religion, and the concept of God. Everything that’s written below is what I wrote. I basically had an epiphany and figured out the meaning of life.
***

Christianity is completely based on fear. They spend all their time talking about love, whilst in the back of their minds they’re telling people that without God they’re going to hell. It’s hypocritical at its best. The Christian God also doesn’t correspond to the laws of physics. I was watching this video last night about how scientists have finally figured out how something can come from nothing. Because the universe has a cosmological constant of zero. It actually has zero energy. In other words, “We live in a universe dominated by nothing”. The universe, or the zero energy that underlies everything, always has existed and always will exist. And the universe exists as it is stuck between the possibility of nothing and the possibility of everything. It’s a confusing concept to understand, but whether or not you believe that there is an all pervading consciousness, science is beginning to understand “God”.. and that’s certainly not the God of the Christian bible.

You know what I think? I think that Jesus, (if he even existed, since there are no legitimate records), I think that he was just an average simple Jew who taught the philosophy of love and people started idolizing him and thought he was God. The first part of the old testament itself was written two thousand years after it supposedly happened. Of COURSE it’s not going to be correct! It’s just mumbo jumbo. Second of all, the new testament was written two hundred years after Jesus died, by Paul and some other guy, who were the ones responsible for making Christianity a cult and spreading it across the whole world like a plague in the first place. It’s all just a bunch of lies. I don’t think it was deliberate. I just think religions are like Chinese whispers, passing on each others mythology and changing it ever so slightly over time until it’s unrecognizable.
As for morality and the afterlife, I believe that an afterlife probably exists, but I kind of have different views on it to probably almost everyone else. The universe is 70% dark energy and 30% dark matter. The matter we see is barely 5% of the total mass (or non-mass, if you consider how it has zero energy) of the universe. My body is made up of 70% water and 95% space. That space, is what I like to call the quantum void. (Not sure if that’s the proper name for it or not). But basically in this space, is the zero energy that pervades the universe. In it everything and anything can happen. Even the impossible. Now considering how quantum mechanics states that everything is interconnected, and considering how human consciousness is just an extension of the energy that is found in the quantum field, I believe that when we die, our ‘energy’ if you like, returns to the quantum void.
Now, whether or not we’re still actually conscious after we die, I’m not sure yet. If we’re not then we’ll probably be reincarnated. After all, “energy can either be created not destroyed”. But if we DO remain conscious (as many people who have died and come back to life can attest to, so it’s a strong possibility), then I believe the saying “as above, so below”. Meaning that if we were bad people on earth, then the ‘realm’ we go to after we die will be bad too. It will be a hell of our own making. HOWEVER, I don’t believe that hell is actually a bad place. A) It can be like a place where we learn from our mistakes and move on to a better place, or B) people who thrive off that kind of horror may actually like it and will not want to move on.
At the end of the day, this system is (in my opinion) completely logical, and doesn’t rely on some ‘God’ to judge whether or not you go to a happy place or a sad place when you die. You’re the person who judges that. And what’s more, what’s a happy place for one person may be a sad place for another person. It’s ALL subjective. The entire freaking universe is completely subjective! God is just something our ancestors came up with to explain how the sun stayed in the sky, and then later to explain why we, as such small and insignificant beings, exist in such an ENORMOUS universe. But science is proving more and more that there doesn’t need to be a reason. It just is.
Actually I was just rereading what I wrote (earlier) about limitations: I believe that there needs to be limitation in the first place in order to appreciate, and even understand the whole concept (of freedom) in the first place. To limit is to define. We are limited by things like language, our bodies, and thus we are defined. Now this is more philosophical, but what if the universe is evolving with us on an interdependent level? That the universe actually limited itself in human form in order to understand itself better? We are all parts of ‘God’, trying to understand why it exists? And we’re evolving together as one entity? Because complete chaos couldn’t be understood. But once it’s limited, it’s defined, and it can be understood. Perhaps if there’s a meaning to life, that would be it? I think all the religious people are gonna hate me.
This is license for me to do whatever the fuck I want and not even be worried about anything ever again? Religions are all based on fear, when in reality LIFE IS THE COMPLETE OPPOSITE OF THAT. IT’S EXPLORING FREEDOM THROUGH LIMITATION. Well I guess that’s what most religions do anyway.. but the meaning of life is.. dun dUN DUN: LIFE! Wow. I just logically reasoned why the meaning of life is to live.
So now when people say what’s the meaning of life, I can just say, the meaning of life is to live. And they’ll be like, it can’t be that simple? Religious people have everything so backwards it hurts.
Or maybe they really are right and I’m just insane.

The Beginnings of Christianity and an Alternate Path

My views of religion have been shifting a lot lately. I’m starting to see the world in a different light. No longer am I afraid of the Christian devil coming to haunt me at night. I’m still paranoid, but not for that reason. No. These days I embrace the darkness. I embrace my fear of the unknown, and I embrace all and any negative feelings I may have. Only through acceptance can we grow.
Lately I’ve been reading Adversarial Light – Magick of the Nephilim – by Michael W. Ford. It describes the beginnings of Luciferianism, and also the beginnings of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religions. They all date back to Zoroastrianism, an ancient Persian religion. The Zoroastrians believed that there was one true God, called Zurvan, or if you want to switch to Greek mythology – Chaos, that gave birth to two gods called Ahura Mazda and Ahriman. Ahura Mazda was the first to be born. However, Ahriman, his brother, pushed past him and out of the womb first. The Zoroastrians believed that Ahriman was evil, and although he was as much as an equal god as his brother, they decided that his brother, Ahura Mazda, was the one true God.
 
Ahura Mazda and Ahriman represent Light and Dark, respectively. The interesting thing though, is that these gods seem to have be born out of ancient Hinduism (Brahamism), which is probably the oldest religion on earth. Another interesting thing, is that Ahura Mazda, actually seems to be the Asura Varuna, who is god of the sky, water and the celestial ocean, as well as god of law and the underworld. Now in Hinduism, an Asura is usually seen as a spirit of darkness and night, whilst his brother, Ahriman, is actually the Deva Aryaman: A spirit of Light and Sun, also known as the sun god, or the Egyptian god Ra. You see where this is going?  

Now Ahriman, is one whole of two separate halves. One half of Ahriman is Samael, also known as Satan in the Latin translation, and the other half of Ahriman is Lilith, also known as Lamia in the Latin translation. If you see one of my older posts, you will see that Lilith is actually the same as the Greek god Prometheus, the god of intelligence, and Samael is equated with the Greek god Aphrodite, the goddess of beauty and love. They are all different aspects of the same being, and if you put them together, you have Ahriman – aka, Lucifer. 

I realize this is a large leap to take. It’s not so much pure Lucifierianism as it is a mixing of all world religions to understand one concept. But that’s the beauty of Lucifierianism, the truth is what you make it. You’re not held down by laws and rules of what you should or shouldn’t believe. 

No matter whether you worship the more socially accepted Ahura Mazda – The Abrahamic God, or the more mysterious Ahriman, Ahura Mazda’s counter force, you have to conclude that every person, being, diety, and atom has a light and a dark side. A negative and a positive. The universe is made of balance. Worshiping Lucifer doesn’t make me any more evil or even good than worshiping Ahura Mazda.. instead it just means that I’m searching for the truth in a different way that is more meaningful to me. Christian’s can carry on worshiping their Christian God. It makes no difference to me. I just don’t like to see them so enslaved. Ahura Mazda is a god of law, after-all, a god of slavery to rules and to the underworld, which is nothing more than being bound to the chains of ignorance. I would prefer to worship a God of intellectual freedom any day and rise beyond into the heavens where the true light is at, where my true self lies. 

Of course I am pantheist, so all this is symbolic. I don’t actually believe the mythology. But I am spiritual either way, so as I’ve said before – I believe that reality is what you make it. And Christians wonder why they’re always being attacked by the ‘enemy’? Because the law of attraction states that if you constantly push something away and ignore it – something such as the darker things in life – it will eventually catch up with you and hit you face on. So now I’m no longer ignoring my dark side. I’m embracing it, accepting it, and therefore, now I don’t have to be afraid of it. Heaven and Hell aren’t places. Heaven are Hell are what you make it.

Saying goodbye to Christianity and hello to Pantheism. The afterlife and the search for truth.

I’ve been thinking a lot about my spirituality lately, and the whole concept of ‘religion’ in general. I’ve come to the realization that despite the fact I was raised in a Christian home, I am not by any means a Christian, nor have I been for a long time now, although that was unconsciously known to me at the time.
At first when I came to the conclusion that Christianity, and all other religion in general is a lie, I labelled myself as atheist. However, the doctrines I’d been brought up made me scared for the first time. What will happen when I die? What if God really does exist? I don’t want to burn in the fires of hell for eternity. Logically of course this makes no sense. The illusion that Christianity is based on love is just that – an illusion. At its very hidden core it is built on fear. In a nutshell, that is the ultimate contradiction. It also defies most of the laws of nature and science. But enough about why I don’t believe in it anymore, perhaps that is for another post another time. The fact is, no matter how illogical it is, there is that indoctrinated part of me that won’t let the fear of the afterlife go. And of course at its heart: human inquisitiveness. 

So in the wake of the death of my instilled Christian values, I decided to read up on Near Death Experiences. What I read surprised me. The results are the collective experiences of people being clinically dead from anywhere between two minutes and two hours before being revived. The experiences have objective themes, such as looking down at your own (physical) body, passing through a dark tunnel, seeing a bright light, being embraced by the light and/or love, and talking to the light. What surprised me the most though was that there were also subjective themes. The afterlife seemed to be influenced by whatever that persons cultural/religious experienced on earth. For a example, a Christian will see Jesus in the light, a Buddhist will see Buddha, and the atheist their dead relatives. From a spiritual yet non-religious point of view, this makes a lot of sense. All religions are right and all religions are wrong.  

There are also hellish experiences, but it seems to be more a result of self-inflicted hell that the person lead on earth and carried on into the afterlife, or a type of karma, that the person experiences subjectively also. If they were born in America, chances are they’ll see fire and brimstone, and if they were born in the East then chances are they’ll be in some sort of void empty of everything ‘good’. However, unlike traditional Western belief, non-belief doesn’t send you there, and that there is always that Light visible to pull you out when you are spiritually willing to move on. There’s always a choice of heaven. This I understand. It’s not so much punishment by some other deity as it is a painful yet necessary self-inflicted form of spiritual growth. 

On a non-spiritual and more scientific approach, however, there is a chance that these people who die and come back to tell us about it, are not completely brain dead when they die, and are merely experiencing some form of hallucination that is created by the brain when placed in a life threatening situation – and the ultimate one at that. The tunnel scenario has often been described as due to lack of blood in the brain and happens in many real life situations such as fight or flight.

I want to continue to call myself atheist because logically there is no objective proof for God’s existence, and yet neither is there proof for his non-existence. The argument could go either way. And the fact is it will probably take me many years to be consciously comfortable with the idea that Christianity is a load of bull. And in that aspect, it’s more likely I’m anti-Christian and most things anti-religion than I am de-facto atheist. 

Instead, I’ve come to the conclusion that at the most basic level, I’m a pantheist, and an Agnostic one at that. The truth is, I don’t know what exists, but due to logical reasoning my belief at the moment is approaching something (somewhat ludicrous) like this: (The atheistic logical beliefs will be written in bold, and the more agnostic views I have concerning the God, the supernatural, and the afterlife which have yet to be proven will be italicized.) 

1) God and nature are one. Everything is connected, and it may or may not form one universal mind. 

2) The universe is self-sustaining and interdependent. Nothing is truly created and nothing is truly destroyed. There was never a beginning and there will never be an end. 

3) If there are lower forms of consciousness (plants, animals, ect.) then it serves to reason that higher forms than humans must exist, or be capable of existing. Through the learned process of evolution, the universe is in a constant state of growth through the cycle of life and death, until a being attains the highest level of consciousness and becomes one with the universal mind, with God. 

4) Reincarnation is the shifting of physical energy at its simplest form and a shifting of consciousness at its most complex form, meaning that if an afterlife does exist then its more of a reincarnation into another reality formed by the universal consciousness of the universe. 

5) It also serves to reason that if there is a non physical afterlife, then it must be a different realm, although not outside the laws of science and nature, lending to the theory that the afterlife is perhaps a fourth or nth dimensional, or even multi-versal. Based on the karmic levels of a person’s earth experience there will be different subjective realities that a person is born into. Much like all the Hindu variations of heaven and hell.

I know a lot of that makes no sense and is probably another attempt of my psyche trying to hold onto some greater meaning to my life in place of Christianity, and I’ll be sure to keep tabs on it. For now however as a transitional point away from Christianity its a large step to take, and perhaps real clarity will come in time. For the time being however, I’m surprised by how much Eastern philosophy pervades my beliefs, despite the fact the only thing I’ve known for most of my life is Christianity. Maybe at a spiritual level this is actually an intuitive thing, although I don’t really hold that much in account if it clashes with rationality. If I’m going to be spiritual, then reincarnation into a temporary heaven certainly seems more plausible than burning in hell for eternity for not believing in something that makes no sense. Then again there’s always that possibility that God does really exist but he’s just an evil bastard who thrives off contradictions and likes to watch people suffer..

Either way. I hope this concludes this really long revaluation of my values. At the heart of it, the concept of God, especially a religious one, is really illogical, and based on other peoples Near Death Experiences, I have nothing to fear of death either way. Either the afterlife and some form of non-contradictory God does exist and we live happily ever after, or it doesn’t exist and our physical bodies decay and release energy to help the cycle of life continue.

Interdependence of Yin and Yang

Good and evil have always fascinated me, the fine distinction separating the two. I have spent many a night trying to understand the concept behind both, and how they’re connected. Over time I have come to a few conclusions which I thought I would care to share. What I write may sound like complete rubbish, but it has taken me many years to finally understand the mechanics behind these most basic instincts, and my life has become greatly enriched in the process of realization. I no longer aim for that impossible standard of being good, because the consideration of good is not the whole picture, instead it is an illusion. I feel like these upcoming concepts have really helped me understand who I am, and accept, even praise, my darker nature, but in conjunction with my better nature. Instead of becoming weak, I have found myself strengthened.
 
Good and evil are different sides of the same coin. Good and evil need each other, one cannot exist without the other. They are interdependent. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction, is that not Newton’s Third Law of Motion? If there were no evil then how would we know what good is? The universe works off a strong notion of black and white, dark and light, however the mixture is blended for the best results, such as that of a black and white photograph. It utilizes opposite halves to create a whole picture, it could not work otherwise. This concept ends up ruling morals as subjective, based on a flawed system of preconceived misconceptions, one of those being that one can only be whole when they are good. Then they will be pure. However this is false. There can be no standard when dealing with morals and the fine line between good and evil. Balance is the most crucial, eliminating that need for a distinction in the first place.

The truly happy person understands this well and accepts both parts of themselves with open arms. Such is the concept of Yin Yang. Being only good is like denying half of yourself, whilst equally being only evil is still only half the picture. Being only good is as detrimental as being only evil. One can only be happy when they’re whole, and to be whole you have to be comfortable with not just the good, but the evil too. Balance is crucial.
The intention to do only good can often cause a relapse in evil nature. For example, you may only want the good for those around you, but when it comes at your own expense you may unconsciously end up going to extreme lengths to balance out the good inside to understand the evil around you. This can lead to endlessly depressive cycles where selfish yet misguided thoughts become prominent. And then a once only good person has been converted to becoming truly evil, maybe even without realizing it. Often, the innocent are most susceptible to corruption. The same case can also be said with those who are only evil, just reversed in measure. However, in the case of the evil, society tends to deem this as good, which philosophically speaking, is not true at all. This is why often many services promoting the good of the individual fail; prison, rehab, and so forth.
A good person will have dark thoughts, just as an evil person will have sincere thoughts. This is nature trying to balance itself. Often, though, our subjections deem it wrong to indulge in the opposite end of the spectrum, for many reasons. If there ever were an error it would be this. It is shameful because the two sides are complementary to each other. They are naturally attracted and opposed. Hope means nothing without worry, and likewise with courage and fear, love and hate, happiness and sadness, and so on. The fine line separating the two means nothing as the opposite alternative seems to be connected by a lifeline. And of course, both opposites can be experienced at the exact same time, creating an ambivalent relationship with ones’s true nature, whether it be consciously or unconsciously. 
However, is true, that the line between good and evil is fine indeed. Although it is important to have clear cut standards on both sides of the coin, total perfection is impossible. The irony is when a person doing evil uses good as a motivator, or when a person doing good hates evil. They are still exercising the opposite functions of themselves, unknowingly to them. It is impossible to completely escape the grey area that acts as common ground and an intermediate between good and evil. The separation between the two is only there because without it, it would not function. Life would cease to be. Unless a balance is achieved you will be lying to yourself about your true nature and will never feel complete in yourself.
And so ends my blog on the relations standing between good and evil. As a conclusion: black needs white to survive just as white needs black, opposites are merely an illusion of independence, the whole picture can only be seen with the subjective lenses of truth set to both and all perspectives. This is the fastest way to become happy of and within yourself. As a side thought, the understanding of this also improves external relations as once you realize that neither you or anyone else can truly be perfect, judgemental thoughts skid to a halt and you no longer find yourself living to impress, to feel whole and complete.
I do not think I have missed anything, but if I have I will be sure to update it. I want to emphasize that this is however, solely my interpretation on such a controversial field. Although everything I have written stems from my own thought processes, and hasn’t been garnered from other sources, I am not the first and neither will I be the last to try and tackle the immense chasm of understanding between that of good and evil. Maybe one day judgement day will come and the truth will be revealed for what it really is.

Love as a Concept

This is my first attempt in a long while at writing a deep post. I used to have a blog a couple of years ago where I would post extremely deep things on, but I haven’t done that in ages because although I would get plenty of compliments of a mind boggling nature, as a rule of thumb people didn’t care. I’ve been encouraged to try again though, and seeing as currently I have nothing better to do, I may as well give it a shot. A big apologies if it’s not that amazing though, it has been a long while.

Love as a Concept: 

I’ve been thinking a lot about love recently. I’m not sure why exactly, maybe because I’m so devoid of it. Love seems to me a complex thing. I think love is a more complex than it should be. In theory the idea is simple, yet in reality true love is twisted beyond the point of recognition. I don’t trust anyone for this exact reason. I will always have a doubt niggling at the back of my head because I’ve noticed that people will even unconsciously manipulate people under the false pretense of love. 

I’ve always felt like I’m never loved, by anyone, friends and family alike. Sure, I know that they respect me, but that’s as far as it goes, sometimes not even that. I think the idea of being loved is what compels me through life; some of the biggest fuck ups I’ve made have been searching for some apparently non-existential deep connection of love. Maybe this is an unhealthy romanticism and what I feel will vastly improve when I stop thinking about myself and start actually thinking about others. 

I’ve often heard it said that, “love isn’t a feeling, it’s a choice,” which I believe is entirely true, but why then is it that when we make the choice to love someone completely unselfishly you feel worse than if you decided to just let fate decide for you? People take advantage, that’s why, they drain you dry. Love needs to be replenished, and if you’re constantly giving love yet never feeling like you’re receiving then you will eventually end up depressed, like a zombie, devoid of what’s supposed to be the most basic substance in life, and ready to commit suicide.

That’s why now I’m generally very select to who I show love to because deep down I’m actually an incredibly sensitive person, hell I even hide it from myself. When I do show it I’d like to think that it’s pure and 100% unselfish, but this has to obviously be untrue. There are many presumptions that affect us as people on a subconscious level, presumptions that incline us to make decisions that we’re not entirely aware of, decisions that only a select few of external persons can understand.
 
Does love really exist though? If it were a substance then surely it would be tangible? Ideas and concepts are not tangible, just like hypothesis’ and theories. So then, is love merely an illusion of hope for the weak-minded? Or maybe a chemical by-product for the theory of evolution? Or a way God uses to keep us in line, if even just slightly? I find that the scripture “love thy neighbour as thyself and all the rest shall come to pass,” is useful only as a moral compass, not necessarily useful for emotional well-being.
 
Personally I’ve given up on trying to find love, or even it’s meaning. I find that I can recharge better when I let other people do the loving yet making sure that I stay emotionally distant from them in order to not expend any of my own reserves. Maybe this sounds selfish but it gets me by quite nicely. I find myself quite content. There are times though when I do get an overwhelming urge to just pour my heart put to someone, just anyone, and love them till they bleed, but if I did that then I’d be an emotional wreck because I’d end up using it all and not getting any back.  

I hate the idea that I’ve fallen into the trap of being like everyone else and taking this concept of love instead of giving it, but it’s self preservation above self sacrifice at the end of the day. Maybe one day the right person will come along, maybe not, and maybe love is just one big fantasy. Either way, I’ve accepted that love may not the big answer everyone is looking for, and until then I’ll be alone, and happy for it more so than if I were a free giver of love and personally depleting myself of all that’s good and true.