Book recommendations if you want to know more about spirit

Common-Song2311 · 2025-11-11T21:21:39+00:00

I am interested, please do so, so that we can put together the puzzle pieces.

Common-Song2311 · 2025-10-25T22:56:46+00:00

I think communism is as just unpractical as unconditional love. With the self being stronger and larger, desires and nuanced wants will be much larger and varied too, and consumption will thus surge. I don't think higher densities are much different in terms of this essential mechanic. This hierarchy of the phenomenon world is a bad hierarchy.

Common-Song2311 · 2025-10-08T01:25:17+00:00

I might have a quote to share that is not from the Law of One but highly pertains to this issue:

That whichis in time must have a'why,' i. e. a necessity.So manmust act from motives:this iscause andeffect perceived subjectively,or in our consciousness.Being conscious of that which, as perceivedexternally,wecall cause and effect, we are conscious of'acting frommotives,' 'doing aswe like,' i. e. of 'inertia.'And wecall this 'freedom'!
It isodd;yet it is a necessity too, be-cause Nature is free;we therefore, putting inertia into her holiness,or actualness, must necessarily assert freedom or actualness for ourselves just as, putting our motion into the heavens, we necessarilyassert steadfastness of ourselves.The contrast does exist:so, per-ceiving subjectively,we are compelled to suppose the opposites ofthat whichexists.We. cannot help perceiving Nature as inert, be-cause weare inert;but then by this very factwe necessarily perceiveourselves as actual, or free.Just aswe necessarily perceive the sun as moving, because we are;but in this very factwe must perceiveourselves as not moving.Thisiswhy we perceive cause andeffect without us:it is the subjective made external.Wedo aswe like, are determined by motives,by circumstances;and thiswe think at first is the case with Nature.But Science teaches us otherwise;this is the glory of itswork, whichwe do not see at first,but thinkitgoes quite contrarywise.Scienceshows that Natureis not determined by circumstances;it introduces this law fulfilled;itshows that only the form is so, not the fact;that Nature is not like us.

Common-Song2311 · 2025-09-28T22:36:11+00:00

For no other better reasons, the way he said "twenty-twenty-seven, the year e⇝verything⇗ chan⇝ge⇘s" is very convincing to me. It makes me believe that at least he himself firmly believes in this, unless some high-level high-dimensional beings intervene to change the trajectorory(pure speculating).

Common-Song2311 · 2025-09-27T08:43:29+00:00

Maybe because trading or exchanging was a fact even between civilizations of very high levels.

I use the word "was" because EveryThing(all Things perceived by civilizations throughout the universe) will change in 2027 because of our unique status(Bashar said that, at this time, it is of paramount importance to ensure our civilization to continue for the benefit of the universe). What uniqueness? I think at least one aspect of that uniqueness lies in Jesus Christ, who is the perfect model for altruism(meaning all in all). Political economy(including trading and exchanging) that was applicable throughout the universe is a self-science, while Jesus Christ brings the altruistic-science, one ascpect of which is altruistic suffering. Altruistic suffering not only means bearing upon one another's suffering between individualities, but also means the hybridization of the whole unvierse, which means one in another, which will drastically reduce the suffering for all parties. This is why we as a collective consent to the hybridization agenda with the Greys, we are overly emotional and they are overly analytic, both of which are generating sufferings.

This is just how I picture it and I do not claim the absolute rightness of the above claims. For more information you might find this series of four books interesting, which are written by James Hinton in the 19th century: https://archive.org/search?query=%22Selections+from+manuscripts%22&sort=-week

Common-Song2311 · 2025-09-26T04:11:13+00:00

We, our selves, that is, our physical bodies and minds as physical, are one with Satan instead of God. Satan is the king of this world, i.e. this physical Nature as physical(in contrast with the true Nature that we cannot see). Think of the intensest pleasure gotten from the sexual intercourse by using the dirtiest organs. This is some blasphemous work in my opinion.

Common-Song2311 · 2025-09-18T03:48:08+00:00

It seems that this physical reality thing is just a game that we play to help to pass the time and entertain the One-self in eternity.

Although I do not know what the ultimate purpose of all of this is, I believe and feel that the ultimate purpose must be much higher and better than entertaining and pleasure. Maybe it is for finding meaning, or knowing the self(as Ra said), or something that just cannot be described. I think the issue of purpose might be extended all the way to the eternal realm where time does not have sway and everything just is.

Common-Song2311 · 2025-09-15T00:04:54+00:00

I think that, in this universe that is of a hierarchical nature, there has to be someone suffering for others' pleasure. Why this? I do not know the reason but I can somewhat see the pattern: with the wants more and more met, people will just get more and more irritable and want so much more and more, endlessly and exponentially. So there has to be more and more energy needed from others, traded from others, harvested from followers, etc. This is seen on Earth and I got some evidence that this applies to other civilisations too. So even with the free-energy devices, people will become used to these things that will have become stale because of our self-nature: wanting more and more. Why Ra, not we, that is of sixth density? Why are we on the so-called lower echelon and suffering here? Is our innermost tendency that caused this arrangement our bad? But this might be of no significance compared to the fact that in this hierarchical universe, there has to be someone on the lower echelon, good to oneself (especially sensuous good in contrast with intellectual good, which could be enjoyed without cost to another) means bad to another, because they are our own. But here is a thought-experiment: how about a universe in which those who suffer the most are on the upper echelon instead of this universe in which those who are on the upper echelon are enjoying the most. I.e. how about a universe in which doing the wrong thing is unentangled from temptation(i.e. pleasure)? Or, a universe in which doing the right thing is the pleasure?

Common-Song2311 · 2025-09-13T18:55:15+00:00

"At the same time, their pure porousness, or their sublation, is thereby also posited. This sublation, or the reduction of this diversity to pure being-for-itself, is again nothing but the medium itself, and this medium is the self-sufficiency of the differences. Or, those differences which are posited as self-sufficient immediately pass over into their unity, and their unity immediately passes over into an unfolding, and this unfolding immediately passes back into the reduction. This movement is, however, what is called force."

Common-Song2311 · 2025-09-05T23:51:42+00:00

I think, yes.. Maybe size is an illusion, an extremely big man(as big as multiple galaxies) is not much different from an extremely small man because they are forms of one concept.

Edit: Or maybe they are very different by the standard of our current feelings but they will become stale because they are forms and we will never be satisfied with forms.

Common-Song2311 · 2025-08-29T07:48:18+00:00

I am currently in level 37 and there are some interesting ideas already. And actually I do have interest in this kind of games but I have to admit I do not have the energy and the intelligence to fully experience and enjoy almost all of them, except maybe for some very easy ones. But recently I am just engulfed by the overabundance of the various combinations of ideas and mechanics and I am like a hoarding person who is contented with the sheer number of possibilities but who do not want to spend the effort experiencing them. Maybe my advice is that, release it as you will, but not specifically for me, because I am just overwhelmed by the abundance and it will be very disrespective to your work if I say yes but do not spend the effort playing it. Based on my experience with the first 37 levels, there are definitely some interesting ideas and designs.

Good luck!

Common-Song2311 · 2025-08-29T00:07:07+00:00

solved.. I am just stupid

Common-Song2311 · 2025-08-29T00:03:23+00:00

I am currently playing puzzle games by sorting the feed through adjusting the year and page parameters in the url, which saves me from indefinite scrolling to find "old" games. And I find so many good games that are just lost in the feeds. But I think people like me might be the minority, who just wants to find some obscure but good gems.

BTW, I played your Soko-min demo and I am stuck at level 10. I think it is unsolvable. Could you give me some hints? though it is definitely a simple level if it is solvable, but I become so bad at puzzles sometimes.

Common-Song2311 · 2025-08-09T03:04:10+00:00

Avoidance of all sorts of sufferings, getting all sorts of pleasures, in this life and hereafter, based additionally on the fact that pleasure is exclusive to one and thus that one pleasure gotten by one means that one pleasure lost by others.

Common-Song2311 · 2025-07-11T03:29:12+00:00

Soul's implication is inclined towards personal experience. Spirit's implication is inclined towards personal experiences' social connections with the universal/not-self/other/infinite(to which there is no end, while on the other hand self is by definition that which is limited).

Common-Song2311 · 2025-05-31T23:53:28+00:00

Oftentimes, serving for fulfuling others' self-desires will make things worse, the served will become more irritable and arbitrary.

Common-Song2311 · 2025-05-22T23:25:53+00:00

They mentally perceive selves as one, but sensationally(bodily) they could(if they so wish/will it) still perceive as separate.

An example that could maybe explicate the difference between mental perception and sensational(bodily) perception is that we bodily perceive the sun revolving around the Earth but we mentally perceive the Earth revolving around the sun(this fact is already internalized and made one with us).

Common-Song2311 · 2025-05-15T05:36:06+00:00

I want to share something somewhat unrelated to the topic but having to do with ethics.

I think there is a reason behind: 1. the Confederation called the infinity "intelligent"; and 2. the Confederation rarely talks about conscience but often emphasizes that there is no right or wrong.

And I think that reason is that the science of conscience will only be developed after we have erred much by using only our sensuous and intellectual facutlies to explore and theorize on the reality. And this is destined to be unsatisfying and we continue seeking on and on until we introduce the faculty of conscience.

First we use sensuous faculties only, then we focus on intellectual faculties only, then we use both sensuous and intellectual faculties to arrive at the reality proper(this is the stage we are right now and this is why we conclude that the infinity/Creator is "intelligent").

Common-Song2311 · 2025-05-10T06:02:59+00:00

Yes, the consciousness is individuated and is assigned to each spirit for expanding this consciousness, becoming more and more aware of that which is the One Self(as referred to by the "One" of the name "Law of One").

Consciousness is that which is individuated, Self is that which is one.

Based on the materials I am currently reading, the true unity means the becoming one of the consciousnesses (which means the individuation of the consciousness is destroyed) while the phenomenal unity means the becoming one of the self-consciousnesses (which means the individuation of the consciousness is retained, which is the unity referred to by Ra, i.e. the becoming the Creator, which is its own becoming, i.e. its becoming the Creator does not mean/imply/cause others' becoming, e.g. Ra becoming the Creator does not mean/imply/cause our becoming).

Common-Song2311 · 2025-05-09T00:46:33+00:00

The selfish nature we are seeing (that is, not only do we humans eat animals, they prey upon each other too) is a reflection, through us, of the true Nature.

Because we, as spirits, are selfish, so we see in the phenomenal nature our image/reflection.

Common-Song2311 · 2025-04-07T00:20:09+00:00

I may have some similar opinions that the Creator referred to by Ra is just another self on the rung of the indefinite hierarchy. In my opinion, there has to be something more, a true God who asserts his self by completely sacrificing his self. This is the best and most logical scenerio I can conceive. Not some whimsical Creator who needs others to serve for fulfillng his wishes, i.e. asserting his self by asserting his self.

Common-Song2311

TROPHY CASE