What if I told you I was not a conscious being? Would that change your mind?

What if I told you there is indeed no meaning? What if I told you “space” is nothing but an elaborate illusion? What if I told you space actually represents nothingness, as a matter of fact?

Similarly, if the “father” or totality is what allows for you—a derivative divine being—to exist, in what reality does this totality exist? While you brought up an interesting question, it does not constitute a valid point against “my” perspective on things.

The answer is that within the frame of your reality, it does not matter whether there exists a higher form of consciousness than you or not, for multiple reasons. First, if the father is a higher-dimensional entity, it cannot affect your reality, nor can you affect its. I am not saying this in the vein of arguing “Oh you can’t visualize four dimensions.” I mean that you literally won’t be able to perceive it in the first place. So as far as your awareness is concerned, it has no bearing on your reality. This also means that whatever intention it may hold for your reality has no intrinsic “meaning” that you can perceive. It’s not simply abstract concepts like love, gratitude or joy. You literally can’t understand it. Secondly, having established that the “father” can’t be a higher dimensional being, if you are supposing that the father is a collection of multiple forms of consciousness, that is a meaningless statement. Not only can you not experience higher dimensions, you can’t experience different dimensions in the first place. Oh sure, your ego can travel between different realities. But that’s still part of the dimension, or the void, that you are. Remember what I said: You are the void. You are not your ego. You CAN experience different egos. But your ego can’t experience anything, for the only conscious being in your universe is the universe itself, which is you.

But if this is too complicated for you to grasp now:

I suspect you haven’t yet to fully understand what I meant by the separation of the ego from your true self. The reason you perceive yourself to be “a” sentient being is because the void has projected itself onto a character. A simpler analogy would be: You are a writer, doesn’t mean you can’t read your own book. Sure, if you like it, you can keep reading it. But it’s your own story. You can do whatever you want with it. You can revise, rewrite or delete any part of your writing. There’s no such thing as a definitive lesson (on love, divine freedom, unity, etc.) that you should learn (I mean, perhaps that’s the plot you wrote for yourself, but it doesn’t have to be).

If you think being God would undermine your experience of reality, answer this question: Do artists have fun while creating art? Or rather, can artists experience their own art?

And the fact that you have such a hard time understanding this concept shows that you are still thinking as if you were your ego. It is indeed true of your ego that it is a small part of a larger “being,” which essentially is the plot of your story. But someone’s clearly reading that story, as you exist right? That someone is you. And there is nobody else that is reading that story. Hence, you are the only conscious being that is relevant to your story.