I never claimed the the theory I proposed was not unlike another theory out there, if it is so be it. However, you have simply went on to point out the difference, and that is about the monad. BTW once again, I say that what I am discussing here, in this thread in particular is not new, nor am I saying the other aspects of the Agnaw I allude to somehow "prove" what I am saying here etc. I am simply addressing those who claim I have not presented anything new. Now, back to this issue of the monad. The Multi universe theory does not prove my theory, and I never said this, I said it was "evidence" for it. The point I was making was that science agrees there are unseen parallel universes out there. The theory I am trying to explain is based upon that idea, but of course is not one and the same. What you are missing is the proposition that each of these parallel universes is it's own monad, that there are no other monads within each that could conflict.Asurendra wrote:I cannot speak to the subject of how you developed your worldview since I do not know. It may be that you have reached these conclusions on your own in a vacuum. However, they are not sui generis creations in themselves.
When you write, “What I am saying is, that each individual is the center of their own personal universe, literally alone within it.... This ALL is a reflection of these individuals” This is Subjective Idealism. In Western philosophy, the way you are using the term 'individual' would be called a monad. So, this is all basically Leibnitz. (Multiple Universe Theory, as taught, does not support your view, by the way.) You run into the same problem that Rose Red alluded to, that of how a consensus reality exist at all which we all experience. It is not so simple that we create our own reality as such since we must interact with other monads as well as broader forces. I cannot effect the drought that is currently afflicting California where I live by any act of will of belief on my own. To reduce this to its modern incarnation, my use of the Law of Attraction will often conflict with other monads using the same force. I can change how I relate to events, but, as a monad I am clearly not sovereign.
From my viewpoint, you are going in exactly the wrong direction. There is only one Consciousness of which all things are the playful manifestations. When I say each person is the center of the universe, what I mean is that our real identity is that we are all Paramashiva in an ultimate sense.
Much has been written about the subject of evil (pain & suffering) by humanity. Your opinion is certainly one often expressed. If this view is where you are in your relationship to the Supreme Lord then I think it's fine. I'm not personally emotionally attached to any view. Ultimately, this is a subject in which people must make an existential choice as it is not reducible to some verifiable calculus (to go back to Leibnitz). I'm sure you think this Agnaw is exactly that, but, that remains to be seen.
On that subject, if you think that your views on the nature of illusion are unique then I challenge you to outline them on a separate thread. Given that Subjective Idealism seems to be your core construct I have my doubts. But, as you say, I do not know the full system.
Because people disagree with you does not mean they do not understand you. This, and to claim that there is really a hidden component that somehow makes it all clear but others are not ready are really only rhetorical devices to shield weak positions.
I believe, correctly, that you do not understand me, and nor has anyone else. Once again, proven by your words here. Obviously, just from reading this post I can see this. And again, I am not making a claim that "there is really a hidden component that somehow makes it all clear but others are not ready", where did I say this? Quote where I have said this? My point was only in reference to the claim I haven't provided anything "new", which of course I have not, as I have not at all discussed any particulars about the magical system of the Agnaw, besides a few theories about life in general.
I will post another thread about the viewpoint of the Agnaw in regards to the illusion of suffering, so that we may go into it deeper. I do feel it is different that what you are describing.
LF
