or: The subjective reality metaparadigm
What is reality?
Why do most people experience an entire lifetime without ever asking this question?
When observing a newborn human baby, a few things become obvious. A newborn baby does not appear to make a distinction between its own arms and the surrounding environment. We assume that that is because it hasn't learned the supposed empirical truth of the difference between self and non-self.
Is reality subjective or objective?
Certainly a reasonable question from a baby's perspective. Without the programming that is weaved into our unconscious by the control system (a meme that is passed on generationally via the mechanism of authority), would we come to believe that reality exists objectively, independent of the self? Or would we perceive the "external world" as a reflection of the Higher Self?
Evidence that materialist objectivity is an illusion
All the apparent evidence of an objective reality can be better expained as shared reality elements created by collective agreements in the collective consciousness of humanity and Earth's matrix of life — an idea very similar to Rupert Sheldrake's idea of morphic fields, but taken further with the addition of higher dimensions.
Allow Bashar to elucidate how it really works:
Bashar - Making up Your Reality Individually
[Michael Field] People are living as their false mortal mind self and they should be living as their immortal spiritual self. The mind makes up all the negative emotions that ruin your life, the spirit is pure love.
The "constants" of physics
The "constants" that define the laws of physics have not been proven to be constants.
The only constant is change, as denoted by the 5th Law of Creation (we'll get to that below).
The notion that there are "physical constants" is just an assumption — which we list as one of the fundamental assumptions of science. As Max Planck put it:
We have no right to assume that any physical laws exist, or if they have existed up to now, that they will continue to exist in a similar manner in the future.
The quantum leap vs. reductionism
The scientific establishment — which, as with any belief system, has built-in defense mechanisms — has done everything it can to reduce the meaning of quantum mechanics to as little as possible. Hence, the Copenhagen interpretation:
The Copenhagen interpretation is one of the earliest and most commonly taught interpretations of quantum mechanics. It holds that quantum mechanics does not yield a description of an objective reality but deals only with probabilities of observing, or measuring, various aspects of energy quanta, entities that fit neither the classical idea of particles nor the classical idea of waves. The act of measurement causes the set of probabilities to immediately and randomly assume only one of the possible values. This feature of mathematics is known as wavefunction collapse. The essential concepts of the interpretation were devised by Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg and others in the years 1924–27.
According to John G. Cramer, "Despite an extensive literature which refers to, discusses, and criticizes the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, nowhere does there seem to be any concise statement which defines the full Copenhagen interpretation."
Many of the founders of quantum mechanics, notably Bohr, Werner Heisenberg and John von Neumann [but not Max Planck!], agreed on an interpretation of quantum mechanics—known as the Copenhagen interpretation— to deal with the measurement problem. This model of reality postulates that the mechanics of the quantum world reduce to, and only find meaning in terms of, classically observable phenomena—not the reverse.
The observation that "quantum mechanics does not yield a description of an objective reality" is correct. But a subjective reality metaparadigm was evidently too much to consider back in the 1920s.
The Many Worlds Interpretation is a much less reductionist interpretation that is more in alignment with the subjective reality metaparadigm, because it lays the foundations for adding higher dimensions into the picture, as Rob Bryanton most eloquently illustrates. The 5th dimension (the probability space, or plane of 4-dimensional timelines) provides the needed framework to explain reality as subjective-only without needing to invoke virtual reality as the only option if reality is not objective.
At the same time, quantum mechanics stands in logical contradiction to general relativity, which is entirely under the classical (Newtonian) framework. Hence the attempt to explain gravity under QM, quantum gravity:
Quantum gravity (QG) is a field of theoretical physics that seeks to describe the force of gravity according to the principles of quantum mechanics.
The current understanding of gravity is based on Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity, which is formulated within the framework of classical physics. On the other hand, the nongravitational forces are described within the framework of quantum mechanics, a radically different formalism for describing physical phenomena based on probability. The necessity of a quantum mechanical description of gravity follows from the fact that one cannot consistently couple a classical system to a quantum one.
Although a quantum theory of gravity is needed in order to reconcile general relativity with the principles of quantum mechanics, difficulties arise when one attempts to apply the usual prescriptions of quantum field theory to the force of gravity. From a technical point of view, the problem is that the theory one gets in this way is not renormalizable and therefore cannot be used to make meaningful physical predictions. As a result, theorists have taken up more radical approaches to the problem of quantum gravity, the most popular approaches being string theory and loop quantum gravity.
Strictly speaking, the aim of quantum gravity is only to describe the quantum behavior of the gravitational field and should not be confused with the objective of unifying all fundamental interactions into a single mathematical framework. Although some quantum gravity theories such as string theory try to unify gravity with the other fundamental forces, others such as loop quantum gravity make no such attempt; instead, they make an effort to quantize the gravitational field while it is kept separate from the other forces. A theory of quantum gravity which is also a grand unification of all known interactions, is sometimes referred to as a theory of everything (TOE).
One of the difficulties of quantum gravity is that quantum gravitational effects are only expected to become apparent near the Planck scale, a scale far smaller in distance (equivalently, far larger in energy) than what is currently accessible at high energy particle accelerators. As a result, quantum gravity is a mainly theoretical enterprise, although there are speculations about how quantum gravity effects might be observed in existing experiments.
Hence, quantum gravity is not going to resolve the QM-GR problem.
As Tom Campbell points out, QM and GR both invalidate one of the two major "objective reality" assumptions of the other, but mainstream physics refused to acknowledge this, thus staying in a tortured objective reality metaparadigm because the alternative was seemingly too scary. Science (the scientific method) is, after all, based on the assumption of an objective reality.
The subjective reality metaparadigm
The subjective reality metaparadigm is the ontological starting point of the true TOE (Theory Of Everything), if such were to be produced.
Everything is made of consciousness. And we are constantly giving birth to the creation of the experience that we are having and that is reality.
The Biggest Picture is intended to set the foundations for the path to the true TOE, while the true TOE itself may be pieced together by an intrepid TOEist, such as Tom Campbell or Rob Bryanton or Peter Russell or Rupert Sheldrake or Mark Passio — or, more likely, by a collaboration of many different TOEists coming from widely different perspectives.
If correct, the subjective reality metaparadigm (SRM) is a (new) starting point for human ontological (and therefore also epistemological) inquiry, which would subsume the science of the objective reality metaparadigm, similar to how quantum mechanics subsumes Newtonian mechanics. Physicist Tom Campbell, creator of the VR model of the SRM and first "Big" Theory Of Everything, has already done a lot of work toward that end.
The 5 Laws of Creation
According to Bashar, there are only 4 objective laws:
Bashar - The Four Laws of Creation
For the purpose of increasing clarity, the idea of the four Laws of Creation was expanded to include a 5th law in 2013. In an event on July 6, 2013, in San Francisco, CA, titled The 5th Law, Bashar describes the reasoning behind this idea — the additional law (2nd) being really an implied subset of two of the others (1st and 3rd). Thus, as Bashar describes above, with the addition of the extra subset law, the 5 Laws of Creation are:
- You exist.
- Everything is here and now.
- The One is the all, and the all are the One.
- What you put out is what you get back.
- Everything changes, except the first 4 laws.
All forms of experience, all experiential realities share these 5 laws. The first 4 laws are the only objective qualities of reality — the only real facts that are not subject to change. All else is overlapping subjective realities that the One creates to experience itself. Separation from the One (duality) is ultimately an illusion. You are the One, experiencing itself subjectively from a particular point of view.
Bashar - Reality is subjective, not objective
Only the Laws of Creation are objective, everything else is subjective.
From Bashar's transmission: The 5th Law (2013-07-06) [part 2].
This is thus the metaparadigm we are proposing with this project. We could call it The Biggest Picture Metaparadigm. It could also be named the Bashar metaparadigm. We are not the first to propose a subjective reality metaparadigm — those honors belong to Bashar and Tom Campbell among others.
So what is reality made of?
According to Bashar, the material it's made of is electromagnetheric energy, "which is the idea of how the template-level reality manifests manifestation as physical reality; it is a certain vibration of energy, a certain vibration of electromagnetheric energy" — an "infinite rainbow of light and sound" that "makes up physical reality experience".
Many people who have considered the idea of a subjective reality model (the idea that "you create your own reality", YCYOR) have assumed that this must necessarily mean solipsism:
Solipsism (from Latin solus, meaning "alone", and ipse, meaning "self") is the philosophical idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist. As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one's own mind is unsure; the external world and other minds cannot be known, and might not exist outside the mind. As a metaphysical position, solipsism goes further to the conclusion that the world and other minds do not exist.
Or, more simply, solipsism is "the view or theory that the self is all that can be known to exist." The idea that YCYOR implies solipsism is a failure of imagination. It makes very little sense to assume that only oneself is creating one's reality and that no one else is also creating their reality in exactly the same way — and that therefore the shared reality elements are co-creations generated from collective agreements at higher frequencies of consciousness.
Solipsism is often incorrectly conflated with anti-realism:
In analytic philosophy, the term anti-realism describes any position involving either the denial of an objective reality or the denial that verification-transcendent statements are either true or false. This latter construal is sometimes expressed by saying "there is no fact of the matter as to whether or not P". Thus, one may speak of anti-realism with respect to other minds, the past, the future, universals, mathematical entities (such as natural numbers), moral categories, the material world, or even thought. The two construals are clearly distinct but often confused. For example, an "anti-realist" who denies that other minds exist (i.e., a solipsist) is quite different from an "anti-realist" who claims that there is no fact of the matter as to whether or not there are unobservable other minds (i.e., a logical behaviorist).
Most simply put, anti-realism means "no objective reality" (and therefore perhaps no absolute unchanging truth), while solipsism means "no other minds" (therefore no objective reality). While solipsism seems to imply anti-realism, anti-realism does not necessarily imply solipsism.
Bashar on reality
Bashar - How we design our reality
The life is meaningless. In other words it is for you to give it meaning. But the meaning you give it ultimately determines what effect you get out of it.
Extrapolations from the Laws of Creation
1st Law of Creation
As the 1st Law of Creaton states: You exist. (Can't change that.)
Which means that you will never cease to exist. You have always existed and you always will. You only ever change form. Only the perspective of the structure changes; the structure itself already is.
You are an aperture through which the universe is looking at and exploring itself.
This is what nonduality means if there is no objective reality.
2nd Law of Creation
As the 2nd Law of Creation states: Everything is here and now.
Bashar overwhelmingly compels the logical mind that channeling is a real phenomena, and it seems to follow therefore that everything exists simultaneously, here and now (otherwise the live channeling interactions could not take place), which means that reality (existence) doesn't have a beginning or an end; it simply is. All experiences, all beginnings and endings, happen within existence. Reality doesn't "come from" anywhere; it simply is, and the experience of it, which is the eternal now, goes on infinitely.
Thus, every moment is really the same moment from a different point of view — a different perspective that All That Is has of itself.
Imagination is 5th-dimensional information transmitted from the Higher Mind (the 5th-dimensional aspect of the human self) to the (4th-dimensional) Physical Mind. Visualizations delivered through the conduit of imagination exist to put one in the proper state of being ("how one feels") for the 4th-dimensional causality of the idea to arrange itself in the best possible way (among an infinite number of ways it could happen and forms it could take, which already exist as discrete parallel reality frames in the higher dimensions).
3rd Law of Creation
As the 3rd Law of Creation states: The One is the all, and the all are the One.
The One experiences itself subjectively as All That Is, within itself, from different points of view, in endless forms.
All That Is contains positive and negative, and also the balance point in the center of polarity. That is why the experience is not a duality, but rather a trinity.
The 3rd Law reflects the ultimate understanding of the theoretical physics idea in the objective reality metaparadigm that has been called the holographic principle:
The holographic principle states that the entropy of ordinary mass (not just black holes) is also proportional to surface area and not volume; that volume itself is illusory and the universe is really a hologram which is isomorphic to the information "inscribed" on the surface of its boundary.
Just reverse the topology of dimensionality from bottom-up to top-down and start with a different initial ontological assumption about what reality is and you have Bashar's description of the structure of existence.
There is a metaphor in Mahayana Buddhism used to illustrate this idea, called Indra's net:
Indra's net (also called Indra's jewels or Indra's pearls, from इंद्रजाल in Sanskrit) is a metaphor used to illustrate the concepts of emptiness, dependent origination, and interpenetration in Buddhist philosophy.
The metaphor of Indra's net was developed by the Mahayana school in the 3rd century scriptures of the Avatamsaka Sutra and later by the Huayan school between the 6th and 8th centuries.
Imagine a multidimensional spider's web in the early morning covered with dew drops. And every dew drop contains the reflection of all the other dew drops. And, in each reflected dew drop, the reflections of all the other dew drops in that reflection. And so ad infinitum. That is the Buddhist conception of the universe in an image.
4th Law of Creation
As the 4th Law of Creation states: What you put out is what you get back.
Give it a positive definition, get a positive effect back. Negative definition in, negative experience out. Or "like vibration to like vibration" — simple energy physics, described from the physical perspective as the Law of Attraction.
Language has thus been used to create an objective reality delusion by defining it as so — a delusion procreated memetically. As a belief system, it is a metaparadigm — the objective reality metaparadigm.
5th Law of Creation
As Bashar has phrased the 5th Law of Creation: Change is the only constant, and everything changes, except the first four laws.
Subjective reality metaparadigm vs. interesting objective reality metaparadigm models
David Kelly summarizes Ayn Rand's Objectivism idea:
1. The Primacy of Existence
A cardinal principle of Objectivist metaphysics is the primacy of existence which asserts that there is one objective world, which exists independently of consciousness. This fact is irreducible and does not have to be proved because existence is the fundamental self-evident truth that lies at the foundation of all knowledge.
The primacy of existence is a corollary of 3 basic axioms of Objectivist metaphysics and epistemology: the axiom of existence, the axiom of identity, and the axiom of consciousness. Objectivism holds that each of these axioms is implicit in any act of knowledge, thus, the primacy of existence is a fact contained within the truths of these philosophical axioms.
Citing John Galt's speech in "Atlas Shrugged" and the title essay in "For the New Intellectual" Dr. Kelley explains why many philosophers have denied the primacy of existence and embraced the primacy of consciousness in what he terms the "diaphanous model." And he points out the essential fallacies in this model of awareness
ABOUT DAVID KELLEY:
David Kelley is a professional philosopher, teacher, and best-selling author. After earning a Ph.D. in philosophy from Princeton University in 1975, he joined the philosophy department of Vassar College, where he remained until 1984. He has also taught at Brandeis University as a Visiting Lecturer. Among his books are Unrugged Individualism: The Selfish Basis of Benevolence; The Contested Legacy of Ayn Rand; The Evidence of the Senses, a treatise on epistemology; and The Art of Reasoning, one of the most widely used logic textbooks in the country. With Roger Donway, he co-authored "Laissez Parler: Freedom in the Electronic Media", a critique of government regulation. He is also the author of "A Life of One's Own: Individual Rights and the Welfare State", a critique of the moral premises of the welfare state and defense of private alternatives that preserve individual autonomy, responsibility, and dignity.
His articles on social issues and public policy have appeared in Harper's, The Sciences, Reason, Harvard Business Review, The Freeman, and elsewhere. He has been an editorial writer for Barron's, has appeared on 20/20 and the ABC News special, "Greed" With John Stossel, and has written and lectured extensively on issues in philosophy, politics, and public affairs.
An active proponent of Objectivism for more than 25 years, he has lectured to student groups at Harvard, Yale, University of Michigan, Berkeley, Amherst, and many other colleges and universities. He has also addressed the Mont Pelerin Society, the Free Press Association, the Cato Institute, and Heartland Institute, as well as many Objectivist conferences.
The reason Kelley is welcomed to all these mainstream institutions and media publications is because the idea of the polarity created by the distinction of "the primacy of existence" vs. "the primacy of consciousness" is beneficial to the control system. It is really actually "the primacy of experience". Objectivist metaphysics and epistemology — the "non-diaphanous model" of the subjective reality metaparadigm — makes the assumption that existence is the physical reality, rather than just consciousness. In other words, it has the axiomatic assumption of an objective reality — as does science itself — because it didn't start from the proper ontological starting point, which is cogito ergo sum (or, synonymously, the undoubtable observation that an experience is happening). It is only one's own existence/experience that cannot be doubted; the existence of an objective "outside" world cannot to assumed to be separate from the "self" existence (of an experience) that cannot be doubted. The Objectivist metaphysics failed to realize that ontology preceeds epistemology.
Reality is what you can apply, what you can use, what will make a difference in your experience of life — that's what's real.
It takes a little while for people that have been trained to only look at the physical, to break away from that and include the non-physical energy as well, because a high degree of focus on the physical reality creates an ego structure, that, if it is removed from the physical reality, panics, because it thinks that physical reality is the only place that exists, and if all of a sudden you start forcing the ego structure that has been physically focused to look at non-physical reality, it thinks it's dying, because it doesn't understand that non-physical reality is just as "real" as physical reality. That is the reluctance that you are experiencing in your society.
Those who know not that they are One, act not as One. Those who act not as One, Create not Love, but suffering and disharmony. What you create, you receive. The fruits of your acts will follow your days.
What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning.
We do not experience things as they really are! We experience things only through a filter and that filter determines what information will enter our awareness and what will be rejected. If we change the filter (our belief system), then we automatically experience the world in a completely different way.
Any life, no matter how long and complex it may be, is made up of a single moment — the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is.
Remember: what you call physical reality isn't actually "out there"; it's in your consciousness. So it's a relation of energy, of frequencies, within your consciousness that you interpret as a dimensional reality "outside" yourself — but that's just a perspective, it's not an accurate description of the actual structure.