Dissolution of the Paradoxes

Questions / paradoxes and dissolution of the paradoxes.

1. Religion.
A.) God says that he is spirit and that we are his children. Now the children are like parents. This should mean that the children of God are also spirit. Now if we, who are spirit, do not perceive ourselves as spirit, there must be some kind of misperception. B.) How can the spirit create something that is not like himself, that is, that is not also spirit?

Resolution. Misperception is nothing more than dreaming. The dream is a product of dream thoughts and therefore a kind of illusion that can appear as amazingly real as if it were real. The spirit dreams of things with which he can identify as if he were identical to them (body = dream figure or mask or some kind of clothing). Reality (= spirituality) is veiled in a dream. This reality, because it is there, is only in the invisible (= beyond the sensual perceptible, what we call metaphysics). The product of creation of dream thoughts is the illusion (= the non-spiritual). The product of creation in wakefulness is the real (spiritual).

2. Natural science.
A) Physics cannot say whether the world of real numbers (material world) or the world of imaginary numbers (imaginary world) is real. B) The observer must be real because what can think cannot be imagination. Consequently, there must be a clear answer to the question in A).

Resolution. We who observe, see illusions and imagine that we would really experience what we experience. Illusions can appear to be real, which is the idea of the dream, because a dream must be able to pretend to us that it is real. We have to distinguish between our true identity, which is called spirit, and the false identity, which is called body (body = dream figure).

3. Life.
A) A former friend of mine told me that when he was a child he once told his parents that the so-called dream – when the body is sleeping – is reality, and that the so-called reality – when the body is awake – is a dream. And was this friend really wrong at the time? If we e.g. dreaming of a nightmare, we can wake up drenched in sweat because it seemed pretty real to us. So who can really tell us what is dream and what is reality? This undecidability is in line with the statement in 2. A). B) Quite often sayings such as: ‘I think I dream’ or ‘That can’t be true’ or ‘You perceive this quite wrongly’ or ‘You don’t understand (that)’ or ‘You are a dreamer / illusionist ‘.

Resolution (in steps). On the one hand, the dream should pretend to us that it is real. On the other hand, it must never leave an unequivocal feeling that it is real, because otherwise it could never be dissolved. After all, what is a dream if it is no longer possible to wake up? The dream would be made absurd per se.

The feeling of doubt is supported by the statement of 2.A). In the dream we can have the feeling of being a realist and the other the dreamer. The so-called dreamer can be a realist in the dream in that way that he recognizes the dream as such and draws the appropriate conclusions in order to be able to wake up from the dream.

The feeling that the dream is real can be strengthened by creating both a kind of waking state and a kind of sleeping state within the dream. The fact that both states are brought into a cyclical sequence and interdependency gives the impression that dream state and waking state must be mutually dependent. For example, we think that we need sleep in order to recover and that after a state of complete rest, it is time to get active again. After all, relaxation must follow tension and tension must follow relaxation. Because of the mutual condition, we have to conclude that the waking state cannot be without a dream state, just as the dream state cannot be without a waking state. The question of whether the existence of a completely independent wakefulness, which can be without a dream, is nevertheless imperative, no longer arises here. Or still?

My logic says that the dream only makes sense if there is wakefulness and if wakefulness is something like an indestructible foundation. A foundation that can stand on its own – that is, can exist without a dream. If there is such a foundation, it is only veiled in the dream (= invisible or imperceptible). In order for there to be such a foundation, we have to demand that, in addition to the visible, there must also be the invisible. What is the evidence?
– Statement in 2. A).
– Statement in 1. A), which is supported by the statements of Eastern religions.
– Nonlinearity of the universe (the whole is larger than the sum of its parts).
– Quantum physics, the gateway to metaphysics

– –>The Emanations

– Further evidence is given in my book.

Basic statements of Eastern religions (see ‘die fünf Weltreligionen’, Helmuth von Glasenapp, Diederichs, 1996).

  • The world outside of absolute is just an idea. Life and death are appearances. The I also has no special-existence. Only the ubiquitous TAO exists in TRUTH.
  • The world of transient, emerging, and passing world laws (Dharmas) can be seen as a deception, mirage, or dream.

The 5 truths of Eastern religions:

  1. Man is because of his natural ‘blindness’, i.e. because of the inadequate nature of his knowledge, a priori unable to grasp the actual facts.
  2. Because of the limited nature of his abilities, man can only recognize part of the whole truth.
  3. Man can only clarify and describe the transcendent according to the analogy of his own world of experience.
  4. Man tends to erroneously generalize the individual, whereby what is right in and of itself is put in a wrong perspective and a distorted picture of the whole is created.
  5. Man considers what he thinks he has recognized to be universal. He therefore sees all other opinions as wrong and strives to impose his own views on others, which leads to bitter struggles.

Note: There are also enough places in the Christian Bible that indicate a dream.

  • Ps 39,6: Surely everyone goes around like a mere phantom;  in vain they rush about, heaping up wealth without knowing whose it will finally be.
  • Col 2,17: These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.
  • Eph 5,14: This is why it is said: “Wake up, sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you.
  • Sir 34,3: The dream face is only a reflection, the image of a face instead of the face itself.
  • 1 Cor 13,12 : For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
  • Sir 40,7: When he is saved, he wakes up and wonders of his fear of nothing. 

From the above, we can already see the necessary connection between science and religion. However, science must recognize the existence of the metaphysical and incorporate it in its theories. With this integration, as we saw in the previous sections, further paradoxes were resolved. For example, we could see that the paradox that things are both separate and connected could be resolved. Just as from a metaphysical point of view all things are connected to one another, from a purely materialistic point of view, things can appear as if they were separated from one another and would still be managed as if by magic. With the integration of the metaphysical, the energy conservation law no longer needs to be violated within the Planck time of 10-43 seconds. Likewise, causality can now also apply here, with which we can view the fundamental laws of physics everywhere and at any time as certain. The demand for such a violation was only necessary on the assumption that the metaphysical does not exist. Or in other words. This requirement was perfectly correct on this assumption. But since this assumption (there is no metaphysical quantity) is wrong, the conclusion from it is also wrong.

–> Who or what are we?