Reference: Universe and Awareness.

SOMETHING is a manifestation. When there is something, we can look at it and know it. NOTHING is absence of any manifestation. When there is nothing then there is nothing to look at and to know.

Thus, one can only know what is manifested. One may only speculate upon what is not manifested.


Thus, knowable would be the characteristic of a manifestation. When there is no manifestation then there is nothing knowable. We may regard that as unknowable.

The idea of unknowable immediately invites a definition; and this definition may simply be thought of as the absence of manifestation. This thought immediately becomes known, and it is not unknowable itself. But, through this thought we come closer to grasping the idea of unknowable.

We make the mistake of using “unknowable” as a noun. The correct usage of “unknowable” is as an adjective, but the only problem is that there is nothing to qualify with this adjective.

More accurate than the statement “God is unknowable” would be the statement “Unknowable is identified, or personified, as God, Uncaused Cause, Supreme Being, etc.”

KNOWABLE is that which is manifested. UNKNOWABLE cannot be defined because there is nothing manifested to be defined.


We notice that there is no manifestation that could be regarded as unknowable. We may notice further that the thought of “unknowable” is, at least, knowable as a thought.

It is hard to conceive of unknowable. The ancients tried to describe it through the process of “neti, neti” meaning “neither this, nor that.” Then they said that even this description is not unknowable; and furthermore whatever remains after going through this process is not unknowable either. The ancients assigned to the unknowable, the label BRAHMA.

BRAHMA has nothing to do with a god.  BRAHMA is simply a label for Unknowable. Ancients used fables to make the meaning of BRAHMA understood. They weaved stories in which BRAHMA appeared as a character, or in which BRAHMA was personified. But these were merely devices to help one conceive the Unknowable. The fact is that BRAHMA never was, nor will ever be anything other than a label for Unknowable.

On the other hand knowable is anything manifested from the flimsiest of thought to the heaviest of heavenly body.

KNOWABLE is the nature of existence.


Note added December 11, 2010:

Both NOTHING and UNKNOWABLE are relative to a viewpoint from a cycle already manifested.  Please refer to the essay BEGINNING. This viewpoint uses the cycle already manifested as its reference point.

This universe is a cycle. A super universe would be a cycle within which the cycle of universe may exist. From the reference point of this universe any part of the super universe would be both NOTHING and UNKNOWABLE.

UNKNOWN is more like something manifested but not known. UNKNOWABLE is that which is not yet manifested.

UNKNOWABLE is a theoretical idea that provides motivation to discover what is being assumed or being taken for granted in reference to the current cycle. This would be akin to the discovery of the UNKNOWN.

UNKNOWABLE may also provide motivation to look beyond the current cycle by no longer using it as the reference point. This would be akin to the discovery of the UNKNOWABLE.


Note added November 3, 2011:

“Unknowable” is just an enticing placeholder that dares one to challenge it. It postulates that there always will be something that is not known no matter how deep one dives into the unknown… somewhat like an infinite series.  It is quite an exciting concept.


Note added October 17, 2014

The concept of Unknowable is better expressed as the non-awareness part of the “awareness – non-awareness” dichotomy.


Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  • R  On September 11, 2010 at 9:31 PM

    Yes but the way it is known it is not necessarily the same for all and thus a variety of universes can exist and a shared one could be an all inclusive. To know the mistery could be just to experiment it and feel it rather than theorize and state definite and defined qualities to it. But it could be otherwise. There are possibilities to all tastes. We have that potential.

    • vinaire  On October 7, 2014 at 6:51 PM

      An observer is part of the reality. We do not have various universes. We simply have various viewpoint from which reality is looking at itself.

      Reality is half of the dichotomy of “Knowable-Unknowable” or “awareness – non-awareness.”

  • vinaire  On September 12, 2010 at 10:58 PM

    Are you talking about there being a variety of considerations?


  • lakey  On September 14, 2010 at 1:37 AM

    It seems as if you have made a construct. You define some terms and then the construct is dependent on the definition of the terms. There can be no error in this construct since it is a representation of the very definitions which were used to create it. The question is whether the mental gymnastics which you have carried out have any benefit in furthering our understanding. To me, the answer is yes! By carefully defining your terms and then building a model to reflect the terms you have just defined, you are able to narrow one’s focus down as to what is knowable and what is unknowable. Per your model the unknowable is not possible to study (by definition, since if study-able it is automatically knowable). Also, you introduce two classes of the unknowable which falls out from your construct. God is one class of unknowable but it is different from “the unknowable” because it has various thought packages associated with it. This is an advancement over studying only the unkown because now we have two classes of unknowns.
    I think you are on to something good here!……Lakey

    • vinaire  On October 7, 2014 at 6:56 PM

      Thank you, Lakey. This model has now flowered into a better understnding for me during the last 4 years. The current model is described at Universe and Awareness and through the series of links starting from there.

  • larry  On October 4, 2010 at 8:01 PM

    Do you consider the silence and stillness of being to be that which is manifest or un-manifest? It seems to me both knowable and unknowable belong to the mind whereas such silence and stillness of being, for lack of better words, perhaps, transcend the mind (where opposites exist).

    If I were grading you on your mind on a scale of one to ten I would give you a ten. A Stephen Hawking of sorts of the philosophical variety. And though, the bliss I find in silence and stillness seems to have its place as part and parcel of both the knowable and the unknowable. I know that I am and can only speculate that I am not. To wit, I have never experienced not-being (which is somehow related to not knowing). Which is where the rubber meets the road (or in Stephens nomenclature, where the universe begins and ends, in a macro and micro black hole). Lol.

    • vinaire  On October 7, 2014 at 7:20 PM

      Universe consists of all possible dichotomies and that includes “knowable-unknowable” or “awareness-non-awareness” as well.

      Yes, this is the universe of awareness, but this is not all that could be. We needn’t be stuck in awareness. We should be able to simply blink out.

      The Universal viewpoint is attached to neither awarness, nor non-awareness. It is free of both.

  • vinaire  On October 4, 2010 at 11:19 PM

    Thank you. You are very kind. I shall be addressing the concept of “being” in my next essay.


  • vinaire  On October 5, 2010 at 10:18 PM

    Today I revised this Essay #3: KNOWABLE AND UNKNOWABLE. Please feel free to vote at the top.


  • vinaire  On December 11, 2010 at 8:11 AM

    Today I added a note at the end of the essay, which Geir Isene prodded out of me with his incessant questioning. This is one of the benefits of a “peer review.” The dormant ideas are forced to the surface, which then clarify the subject matter further.

    I am totally against the idea that anyone can own knowledge. These essays are not “my essays.” These essays are the resultant of all the thinkers on this subject. I just happen to be a scribe. Somebody else will take over this job of being the scribe on this topic after I retire.


  • vinaire  On May 3, 2011 at 7:57 AM

    It is impossible to know everything that you don’t know. That is the idea underlying the concept of unknowable.


    • marildi  On October 16, 2011 at 3:47 AM

      Hi Vin!

      (Okay, now I’m going to give you practice explaining your theories. Better roll up your sleeves, my friend! ;-))

      So I reviewed the first three essays on Unknowable and was trucking along pretty darn well up to your last comment above:

      “It is impossible to know everything that you don’t know. That is the idea underlying the concept of unknowable.”

      Now, that itself appears to be a consideration as I can’t imagine what manifestation it would be based upon. I mean, one could just as well have the consideration that it IS possible to know everything (given enough time, let’s say). Or is what you’re saying actually a speculation that is based on certain considerations?

      • vinaire  On October 16, 2011 at 6:50 AM

        Welcome Marildi!

        Now that I am going, once again, over that sentence, which you pointed out, I am not sure what I had in mind when I wrote that.Yes, it is a consideration. Anything that I have ever written about Unknowable is a consideration. None of those considerations are capable of defining what Unknowable is.

        Unknowable is neither is, nor isn’t.

        Unknowable is “absence of manifestation.” Unknowable isn’t a manifestation itself.

        Any consideration about Unknowable, including the word UNKNOWABLE, is, at best, a pointer. My recommendation, which I myself am trying to follow, is to become cognizant of all inconsistencies that exist, one by one. And, somewhere along the way, suddenly, I may be able to pierce the veil.


      • marildi  On October 16, 2011 at 9:22 AM

        Okay, got it. Thanks, I shall carry on…

        BTW, my sister read a comment of yours about mathematics and decided to read your essays on the subject. She was so enthusiastic about them, and the subject of mathematics, that I’ve now got those on my reading list too. 🙂

      • vinaire  On October 16, 2011 at 9:50 AM

        Actually, the subject of spirituality is quite mathematical at its roots. Your sister seems to be quite intelligent. 🙂

        And, so are you… it seems. 🙂


      • vinaire  On October 16, 2011 at 9:56 AM

        My dream is to retire from my current work as an engineer, and engage in full-time research of physics and mathematics, and to discover whatever inconsistencies that I can find there.

        That dream gets my juices to flow…


        • vinaire  On October 7, 2014 at 7:27 PM

          Ha! After 4 years I am retired now and living my dream. 🙂

      • marildi  On October 16, 2011 at 2:57 PM

        Juices flowing = correct line of endeavor. I feel your excitement! Don’t put it off any longer than you have to.

        Yes, my sister is highly interested in both the spiritual and the scientific. She was reading about quantum physics before I even put my toe in those waters (and that was only because of all you guys talking about it). Speaking of purpose lines, right now she is learning how to get better at remote viewing. She has a 4th dynamic purpose for it.

        Okay, Vinnie, to think that spirituality has its roots in mathematics makes me even more interested… 🙂

      • vinaire  On October 16, 2011 at 3:43 PM

        Zero was discovered in India. It was inspired by the idea of Brahma.

        Natural Numbers are counting numbers. They start from 1. They do not include 0. Take a look at Roman Numerals. They do not have 0.

        Discovery of zero solved a lot of problems. Now there was a reference point. Zero did not create other numbers. But it explained them. Now there was a common reference point for all numbers.

        Remote viewing is nothing but visualization. The problem is simply how to get accurate in your visualization. Maybe the grid is there, and the problem is that of linking into that grid, much like linking to internet. May be so… because I don’t know.


      • marildi  On October 16, 2011 at 4:08 PM

        Vin, please tell me what you mean by visualization in this context.

      • vinaire  On October 16, 2011 at 5:37 PM

        By visualization, I mean simple imagination. Many novelists can visualize the whole novel. Then they simply express it using their language skills. It doesn’t take much effort to write a novel if the visualization is there.

        Visualization is simply extrapolation in visual terms based on what one has been exposed to or has experienced. There is no mystery there. One simply must be consistent, just like a novelist must be consistent in terms of how the various characters think and act in the novel.

        So, accuracy in visualization, in my opinion will depend on knowledge, experience, and the consistency in extrapolation.


      • marildi  On October 16, 2011 at 6:18 PM

        There are two concepts of visualization – to make (create or imagine) or to see (perceive) an image. When you mentioned “linking into that grid, much like linking to internet” I thought you meant the latter, which would be my understanding of remote viewing (and I believe my sister’s too). However, the idea of extrapolation would be the former. In any case, Lor has sent you a link which should clarify the idea.

        Incidentally, I said her interest was in remote viewing but to be accurate I should say it’s in “remote viewing and influencing.” Anyway, the link should tell you all about it. It’s cool that you’re interested.

      • vinaire  On October 16, 2011 at 7:03 PM

        At the moment my interest is in preparing for future retirement.


      • marildi  On October 17, 2011 at 12:46 AM

        Absolutely as it should be, Vinnie! I wasn’t thinking you were going to take up remote viewing or anything like that, just that you were interested in checking out the link. Me too. It may support our other quests.

  • Lorraine Daly  On October 16, 2011 at 4:42 PM

    Hello Vinaire,

    I am Marildi’s sister Lorraine . I am sending a link I hope you enjoy . Iam a reader on Geir’s blog.Ihave read also your blog. I like it very much

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2011 at 5:44 PM

      Anybody connected with Marildi is most welcome here, and you especially, Lorraine. Marildi has announced you to me in glowing terms.

      Thank you for your appreciation of my blog. Geir gave me the idea for setting it up, and I am very thankful to him. Besides trying to understand the fundamentals of life, my passion has been to put a simple technology out there that people can use to enhance themselves. I have been using it myself with great benefit.

      I shall certainly take a look at the link that you have provided.


    • vinaire  On October 7, 2014 at 7:34 PM

      I think it is about time that I look at this link provided by Lorraine more thoroughly and comment on it right here..

    • vinaire  On October 7, 2014 at 8:17 PM

      I shall be using the: Model of the Mind to study Remote viewing.

      I see all the minds and selves being part of a sea of awareness.


      OT Experience is made up of looking at the Universe as the Sea of Awareness and understanding the overall simplicity. “Solidity” comes in as one gets caught up in a whirlpool of awareness and starts to sink in towards the solidity of self.

      For remore viewing, it seems that one has to come out of this whirlpool.

    • vinaire  On October 7, 2014 at 8:26 PM

      “If thou would’st hear the Nameless, and wilt dive
      Into the Temple-cave of thine own self,
      There, brooding by the central altar, thou
      May’st haply learn the Nameless hath a voice,
      By which thou wilt abide, if thou be wise.”

      Tennyson (1809-1892)

      To me that nameless is the very intelligent and alive Universe that includes both awareness and non-awareness, knowable and unknowable… as I have tried to express it at Universe and Awareness.

      I am just a “cell” of this Universe.

    • vinaire  On October 7, 2014 at 8:39 PM

      “In order to successfully remote view, an individual must operate at a level of mind where he/she will show electrical brain wave traces where Theta waves oscillating between 4 to 5 cycles per second will predominate. Psychophysiologists call this the deep Theta level of the mind.

      “The deep Theta zone is precisely at the interface with the Delta level of mind (deep sleep), where the human brain waves oscillate between 1 to 4 cycles per second.”

      Per KHTK Theory, a person needs to be pretty close to the reference point of awareness (transition point of “from non-awareness into awareness”) to comprehensively view awareness.

    • vinaire  On October 7, 2014 at 9:02 PM

      “Time and space exist only within the Universal Mind. The Universal Mind is not separated from us, and we are not separated from It. Since everything interconnects through thought, thought is the only reality that can bridge space and time.

      “The universal mind creates us constantly. We are but epiphenomenona of It.”

      This seems to be very close to KHTK Whirlpool Model. In KHTK model everything connects through awareness, which has wavelike form. Thought is an expression of awareness, which has not yet been fully investigated in KHTK.

      Space and Time are dimensions that describe awareness. They are secondary to awareness. See Motion and Space-Time.

    • vinaire  On October 7, 2014 at 10:18 PM

      “The ego (sense of separated self) opposes such notions and fears the notion of the “One.” It reveres and finds security in the notion of the “many.” That is why it fears death and wants to prolong life as a perception of individual separateness for as long as possible, and even projects this fear into its understanding of the so-called afterlife. The stronger the ego, the bigger the need to differentiate from one another, and remain differentiated.”

      That is an interesting way to define ego. I would say that ego, or self, is the sense of separation from the Universal Self, which is the Sea of Awareness. The ego or self is the condensed awareness associated with the human body. It is separated from the Universal self. The remote viewpoint that we are seeking does not have to identify with any such ego or self.

      All observers are part of the reality. They do not have to be identified with any self. In Remote Viewing it is the reality observing itself and not any self.

    • vinaire  On October 8, 2014 at 6:19 AM

      “Everybody wants to remember having been somebody, nobody seems to want to remember having been Everybody.”

      Self by its very nature is subjective. Remote viewing requires a viewpoint that is totally objective one hundred percent.

    • vinaire  On October 8, 2014 at 6:24 AM

      “When recorded on an electrocardiogram, the human heart shows electrical vibration patterns that, like the brain’s Delta waves, range between 1 and 4 cycles per second. When either the brain or the heart stop vibrating electrically, death ensues.”

      That is very interesting. Body is the vestige of self. Remote viewing doesn’t seem to be possible through the filter of self.

    • vinaire  On October 8, 2014 at 6:53 AM

      Here are the various levels of the mind:

      Delta – 1 to 4 Hertz (human brain waves)
      Deep sleep… also surgical unconsciousness, and certain pathological conditions such as epileptic petit mal… no dreaming present… consciousness is lost… the unconscious region of thought activity… but something can be recalled from that state… It is the level of mysterious universal mind… interface with deep Theta…

      Theta – 4 to 7 Hertz
      Deep relaxation… more internally focused self-reflective state… (Suggestions may be entered?)

      Alpha – 8 to 13 Hertz
      Deep concentration… more internally focused self-reflective state… a more focused, expanded state of awareness…

      Beta – 14 to 30 Hertz
      Awake and totally active… the so-called conscious level of mind… a focus of concentration by the mind upon the outside or perceptually separated world… Human adults operate mostly at Beta…

    • vinaire  On October 8, 2014 at 7:12 AM

      “Small children function mainly at the Theta, Alpha and Delta states of mind, as do animals. Human adults operate mostly at Beta.”

      Beta stage seems to be connected with “awareness of awareness” or deeper subjectivity.

    • vinaire  On October 8, 2014 at 7:42 AM

      “In a nutshell: As the mind focuses upon the external (perceptually separated and material) world, it is at the Beta level. When the mind focuses and increasingly concentrates self-reflectively upon itself and its inner processes, it climbs in awareness from Alpha to Theta, and finally to Delta.”

      One is looking at the physical world objectively at beta level, but it is accompanied by extreme subjectivity. This subjectivity comes from looking through filters. Filters are mental objects that one is attached to. Filters may not affect the perception of physical objects that much but they do affect the perception of mental objects greatly.

      The influence of filters tend to reduce as one climbs in awareness from Alpha to Theta, and finally to Delta, but consciousness seems to reduce at the same time.

      The solution is to get rid of filters at the Beta level. Remote viewing does not seem to be possible when one is looking through filters.

  • Maria  On November 3, 2011 at 4:13 AM

    I understand what you are describing here. It aligned extremely well with my past experience but it does not align with my own experience very accurately these days. Probably the language, which becomes very clumsy.

    There is a level beyond knowing that we can and do “experience.” I cannot say “I” experience it to even halfway accurately describe this. It does not have any manifestation associated with it and “I” becomes a meaningless word. What follows is the best description I can presently offer:

    Knowing, perceiving, experiencing in this reality (in which I am typing) as me is never anything more than a perception of the past and with a successive series of present moments. They are successive ONLY in interchange and they are not particularly precise. Even the future in this reality is already past. It is already past because it was already created as what will be. So there is really only now and then in this reality.

    Simultaneously and always there is a true now. It is NOT in the time stream. It is the source of the time stream. It is not past, present or “future.” And this is where me goes beyond the limited being me.

    While it is true that this state is not knowable in any “concrete” way, including concept, thought, mental images, physical forms, emotion, perception (bodily or otherwise) it is also true that it is a some kind of wellspring or source of these things. I don’t “know about” it. “I” don’t “know” it. I am and I am more than I am no fixed state and the words fail miserably.

    I am sorry I cannot be more clear about this. I assure you this is real, more real than any manifestation of anything and I love it beyond all things. In my “self” it is a state of complete ease that often reflects into emotion as unbelievable joy, and from there into the body as lightness and brightness and sheer exuberance.

    It is unknowable in the terms of this world, in terms of things, yes. But it is real beyond all limited reality.

    • vinaire  On November 3, 2011 at 6:03 AM

      Maria, I think I have some inkling of what you are talking about. Let’s put it in the category “Research into unknowable.” If you can put your “experience” in the form of an essay, I shall publish it on my blog identifying you as the writer. I may act as an editor providing my comments as necessary.

      “Unknowable” is just an enticing placeholder that dares one to challenge it. It postulates that there always will be something that is not known no matter how deep you may dive into it…. somewhat like an infinte series. It is quite an exciting concept for me.

      Please express what you have written above in the form of an essay and I shall publish it for everyone’s benefit. Thanks.

    • vinaire  On November 3, 2011 at 6:41 AM

      Oh! Heck, I published what you wrote above anyway. If you want to revise it as an “essay” please do let me know. 🙂

      See Research into Unknowable

  • Maria  On November 3, 2011 at 1:20 PM

    LOL – I think that if you added to your essay what you just wrote in your response to me, then it all becomes very clear:

    “Unknowable” is just an enticing placeholder that dares one to challenge it. It postulates that there always will be something that is not known no matter how deep you may dive into it…. somewhat like an infinite series. It is quite an exciting concept for me.

    Otherwise it reads like nihilism, which I know is not what you intend. Your response escapes the box of nihilism and the box of absolutism both.

    This is why I probably don’t care for the actual WORD unknowable. It has unfortunate connotations of nihilism or absolutism (depending on the individual’s state) and so it looks like a dead end, when it is really an open end.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 9:10 PM

      Hi Maria,

      I am no longer emphasizing the word Unknowable. It has now become a transition point from Non-awareness to Awareness in the “awareness – non-awareness” dichotomy.

      Please see Universe and Awareness

  • vinaire  On November 3, 2011 at 7:03 PM


    Looks like I fooled Geir… but I could not fool you. 🙂

    an extreme form of skepticism: the denial of all real existence or the possibility of an objective basis for truth.

    nothingness or nonexistence.

    I do not deny what exists. I am simply saying you cannot know what does not exist to start with. One can only speculate about what does not exist.

    any theory holding that values, principles, etc., are absolute and not relative, dependent, or changeable.

    I believe that all perception and understanding are relative. All existence starts and ends in itself like “circular logic.” Nothing can be said about what does not exist. All you can do is speculate.

    On the other hand, the concepts of God, thetan, and Self smack of absolutism.


  • vinaire  On October 8, 2014 at 8:03 AM

    Let me continue here from this last post on Remote Viewing.

    In Scientology, remote viewing is not possible even from OT levels because the whole subject of Scientology is built on Human-Centric Fixations, especially that spirit and matter are separate.

    I do not think that remote viewing can be successfully used in espionage because human-centric filters associated with espionage are present on both sides of a conflict.

    • vinaire  On October 8, 2014 at 5:22 PM

      “In a nutshell: As the mind focuses upon the external (perceptually separated and material) world, it is at the Beta level. When the mind focuses and increasingly concentrates self-reflectively upon itself and its inner processes, it climbs in awareness from Alpha to Theta, and finally to Delta.”

      From Alpha to Theta, and finally to Delta, mind seems to be increasingly focused on underlying processes that are producing the reality at Beta level.

    • vinaire  On October 8, 2014 at 9:02 PM

      At this point I need to understand the relationship of thought to awareness. Is thought some specific bit of awareness?

      Does awareness condense as thought? Is thought a particle of awareness?

      Is thought some awareness looking at itself? Is it awareness confined to a small volume?

      • vinaire  On October 8, 2014 at 9:10 PM

        Awareness is a general sense of relative motion. Thought would be a piece of recognizable motion that would exist in the broad field of relative motion.

        All reality probably precipitates from and within a broad field of relative motion.

      • vinaire  On October 8, 2014 at 9:15 PM

        At quantum level, the observer and the observed are probably one and the same. It is awareness looking at itself. Awareness is the whole of reality at this level. Awareness interacting with itself forms thought particles that have some persistence.

        It is like wave motion interacting with itself and producing spots of standing waves.

  • vinaire  On October 9, 2014 at 6:50 AM


    “One cannot make a cognitive bypass from the Beta level of mind to the Delta level (universal mind) without first receiving the sensory thought-data through the interface of the Alpha and Theta levels. Even though one might not be aware of it because of his/her increased concentrated awareness at the level of Beta (full awareness), thought flows as it expands down or restricts itself up and correlates in opposite directions with the brain waves’ rhythms.”

    I don’t think I understand this fully. Sensory-thought-data would be how reality has precipitated within a broad field of awareness. Universal mind is this broad field of awareness. It is now looking at the precipitation of reality within it.

    It seems that the Beta, Alpha and Theta states would be contained within the Delta State, but the way they are defined by means of brain wave frequency makes it difficult to understand.

    Maybe the Delta state is always there and needs to be recognized as the reference point to fully understand the Beta state.

    • vinaire  On October 9, 2014 at 7:05 AM

      In “remote viewing” the observer is no longer the self. The observer is the universal mind that is observing the precipitation of reality within itself.

      I have no idea how this would relate to the brain activity, which this study is trying to correlate.

    • vinaire  On October 9, 2014 at 9:49 AM

      A particle is defined by small size and a structure that is irrelevant. At Quantum level both size and structure become relevant in spite of how small they are. Therefore, we cannot talk in terms of particles at quantum levels.

      Therefore, nuclear particles need to be looked at as complex motions. They should not be referred to as particles as that acts as a mental filter.

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 9:16 AM

      I would like to think that Delta state is the base in which precipitation of reality takes places gradually in the order of Theta, Alpha, and Beta states.

  • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 10:27 AM


    Electric encephalographic tracing of the brain, or any other recording of its biological activity (neurotransmitters, PET scanning), are correlated with expressions of thought processes or levels of the mind. These electrical phenomena are neither the source of mind, nor even part of its real mechanisms. Other, up-to-now unrecognized, fields of light/thought fiber/optic-like strands operating within the bio-computer of the brain are involved in encoding and processing information. These fields are totally unknown to and undetected by modern science, and are paramount in the data processing of thoughts received from Source Itself.


    (1) Fields of light seem to correlate with the base awareness or basic motion.
    (2) Thought seems to precipitate in this base of motion as complex motion.
    (3) The DNA seems to provide the basic programming instructions.
    (4) The precipitation of complex motion (thoughts) seems to manifest itself as the electrical activity in the brain.
    (5) The more complex is the motion, the more detailed is the awareness, and the higher is the frequency (and lower is the voltage) of the electrical manifestation.
    (6) The bio-computer is based on the electronic circuits in the outer shells of the macromolecules that make up the DNA.

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 10:38 AM

      This precipitation of complex motion (thoughts) in the field of basic motion (awareness) is what forms the reality. This reality is activated by sensory input, which is processed by the bio-compter of macromolecules that form the DNA.

      Thus, Beta stage (total awareness) is formed by complete processing of the sensory input.

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 10:43 AM

      We try to figure out where the perceptions originate from. At the basis of it seems to be eternal motion or disturbance that loops through and gets better defined through some universal bio-computer.

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 11:25 AM

      “Reality, which is our perception of space/time, is perceived through our senses, and each individual’s sensory perception is unique. Our senses condition us and define our needs. Thus, we cannot avoid catering to them. “


      We are part of this grand illusion. We are the observer and the observed. We are the reality observing itself. We are the most fantastic phenomenon in this universe. In a way, we are the universe.

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 11:32 AM

      “When all senses are gone, life ends. The space/time dimension of reality is then over, because it can no longer be perceived.”


      A body is like a reciver, processing and experiencing unit. When the mechanism fails then there is no more receiving, processing and experiencing.

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 12:51 PM

      “All individuations of thought operating within the space/time continuum are different in order to keep the challenge great and life interesting.”


      The universe seems to be like a huge tree branching out in myriads of ways. Each individuality would be the tip of the ultimate small branch.

  • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 3:23 PM


    It is only the sensory (material phenomenal) world that binds thought to the external realities of space/time. Thought, in itself, is not bound by either.


    It is incorrect to say, “Thought, in itself, is not bound by either [space/time].”

    Thought is not separate from matter. Thought is part of matter, as matter is part of thought. The two go hand in hand as a single phenomenon. Space and time provide dimensions to this phenomenon. Space and time do not occur by themselves.

    Therefore, thought-matter phenomenon is not bound by anything but by inconsistencies within itself. Any inconsistency restricts the phenomenon a little bit. Thinking that thought and matter are separate and independent of each other is a big inconsistency in itself.

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 3:27 PM

      “It has been recently estimated by neurophysiologists that if mankind were to use all of its recent knowledge and resources to build a utopian computer that would try to somehow replicate the feats of the human mind, that computer would need to be at the very least the size of our planet, and – even then – nobody would know how to program it. “


      The thought exists as programming in matter at the macromolecule level. That is why bio-computer can exist within the size of a brain.

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 4:47 PM

      It is an erroneous belief that thought or an ‘spiritual entity’ can exist by itself separate from matter. Thought-matter structure exists at macromolecular level, and it can function even when the larger solid structures of brain are destroyed.

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 6:43 PM

      “Mind does not need the brain at all in order to operate. The Brain is only a restricting data processing mechanism framing and filtering ,alike a colander, thoughts originating from the Quantum source of ALL THOUGHT POSSIBILITIES.”


      I think that the above is an incorrect conclusion. Mind does need brain in order to operate. Thought impulses come from “thought-matter” structure of the macromolecule.

      What is “Quantum source of ALL THOUGHT POSSIBILITIES?” It is just an imaginary construct.

  • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 6:49 PM


    The main reason human beings perceive thoughts to originate from and be located in the head area is because all sensory apparatus (visual, olfactory, auditory, etc.), is located there. It is only when all biological sensory data is totally gone that the mind expands automatically everywhere, i.e. “death.”


    The base (Delta) is a sea of awareness in which reality (complex motion) precipitates as DNA and other programming is activated by sensory stimulation.

    When there is no sensory stimulation, or there is complete absence of inconsistencies, then a calm and consistent sea of awareness results.

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 8:16 PM

      “The fact that the brain shows signs of activity when one is engaged in the process of thinking does not mean that thought originates in this physical organ. Nevertheless, it processes it. In the same way as laughter and smiling are but the outer expression of an inner emotion, they are not the cause of it. To solely concentrate on the smile and methodically try to understand it would make no sense. And the fact that forcing a smile sometimes evokes a slight emotion of happiness does not prove that smiling is the origin of happiness.”


      It is difficult to contemplate on the ultimate source of thought. It is like thought trying to find its own source. All that thought can see is that it is… that there is awareness. The source of awareness may lie behind the curtain of non-awareness. One can only speculate on that.

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 8:22 PM

      “In the ever-evolving fields of psychophysiology and neurobiology, the concept of the brain as the seat of thought may eventually be recognized as one of the major scientific blunders of the twentieth century, if not of all times, and the scientific and cultural snapshot of this century will portray a misuse of human energy of staggering proportions.”


      The mind is basically a “definition-logic” matrix that processes “thought motion” input into a “thought motion” output. We need not consider in this equation where the input comes from. We can simply be aware of change. We cannot be aware of absolutes.

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 8:31 PM

      “This is exactly what the brain does: it is a transducer and decoder of nonlinear information (digital-like) into linear (analog-like) sensory data. That information is then processed by the individual’s restricted mind. Information only passes through it. As a feedback mechanism, thought (MIND) makes decisions based upon the linear 3D sensory data experienced. And based on these decisions, more sensory information is then projected to each and every thinking individual.”


      Here the article is assuming that brain and mind are two different phenomena. I don’t think that is the case. Brain and mind in operation is a single phenomenon just like the hardware and software of a computer. They cannot be separated.

  • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 8:48 PM


    “Man is asleep,” said Ouspensky. However, man is not dreaming, since man is the object of the Dream; A facet/character relationship. This Subject/Dreamer is the Eternal Higher Self, and the object of the Dream is the illusory man/woman entity operating within a spatial/temporal illusion for a fleeting moment.


    It is reality observing itself. Man as observer is part of this reality. Man as observed is also part of this reality. “Man is asleep” simply means that there are inconsistencies in this reality that needs to be straightened out.

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 8:56 PM

      “Often, when the sensory world produces undue stress, fear, grief, and anxiety, human beings try to alter their sensory experience by taking drugs that alter and distort those experiences by poisoning the brain, whose role is to produce the linear sensory temporal/spatial reality.”


      Stress, fear, grief, and anxiety are simply the expression of inconsistencies. Drugs simply anesthetize the perception of inconsistencies that needs to be sorted out by messing up the “definition-logic” matrix of the mind.

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 9:00 PM

      “The brain is really a colander of thought that only restricts the experience of thoughts within slow, linear sensory processes. If the brain is damaged or impaired in any way, the filtering processes increase even more, and the individuation of Thought receives a distorted notion of sensory reality.”


      What restrict the experience of thoughts are the unresolved inconsistencies that act as filters.

    • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 9:07 PM

      “Many “learned” behavioral “scientists,” particularly in the United States of America, have even come to the irresponsible conclusion that naturally inward-focusing (day-dreaming) children that easily get bored with the external reality are at risk of becoming potentially non-productive members of society, and have therefore recently invented a new psychological syndrome which they coined “Attention-Deficit-Disorder (ADD /ADHD),” that they peddle very efficiently to an unaware public. This newly discovered “disease” has recently been extended by many medical and psychological mental health “experts” to even apply to some of the U.S. adult population. European medical mental health authorities, for the most part, deride this approach, and refuse to recognize ADD as a real mental disorder.”


      ADD may be caused by lack of healthy diet and confused family environment froth with inconsistencies. Drugs alone cannot resolve it. They may help restrain acute situations though.

  • vinaire  On October 16, 2014 at 9:23 PM


    “Most paradigm-shifting creative geniuses (great scientists, spiritual giants, social and political visionaries, healers, artists, composers, writers, etc . . .) always projected this type of lonely and unruly inward-focused behavior in their childhood years, and were often bothered and easily distracted by the rigid indoctrinations and environments of most Western and Eastern dogmatic educational systems that, for the most, have shunned and stifled questioning minds.”


    This type of lonely and unruly inward-focused behavior in their childhood years is an indicator of unresolved inconsistencies. Drug treatments are being used because systems to spot and resolve inconsistencies, such as mindfulness, are not known or properly understood.

  • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 7:02 AM


    “In the seventies and eighties, millions of people worldwide took mind control classes such as the Silva mind control course where the trainee is taught to operate at Alpha levels of the mind. As anyone having taken the courses can testify, rudimentary remote viewing becomes easily achieved even at the Alpha level as one gets closer to the Delta level of mind (universal mind) and away from the Beta level of consciousness. At the Alpha level of mind concentration, millions of people experienced remote sensing (viewing) as they drew information from the Theta level of mind who in turn collected it from the Delta level operating outside of the realm of time/space.”


    Was that remote viewing proved to be valid objectively, or was it simply a subjective feeling? The only way remote viewing may be verified subjectively is through broad consistency of what is viewed.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 7:09 AM

      The reliability of data through remote viewing seems to be assessed by how close the mind is to Delta Level when viewing. It does not seem that the data is not being verified directly.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 7:27 AM

      Remote viewing is essentially a guesswork based on a certain theory.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 7:41 AM

      Animal mind operates on the principles of mindfulness naturally. But it does not have as deep and sophisticated awareness of mental objects as humans have. Thus, there is less interference in terms of feedback loops.

      With greater subjectivity there are more sophisticated feedback loops that are difficult to manage. The problem of remote viewing seems to lie in the management of the feedback loops associated with mental objects.

      This is the area referred to as “mental noise” filtering down from Beta level.

  • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 10:55 AM

    Remote viewing seems to be interpreted mostly as “mental sensing”. There is a lot of guesswork involved. It is not any kind of diect perception.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 11:00 AM

      Mental sensing shall depend on working out the consistency among all sense perceptions.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 11:02 AM

      Remote viewing (mental sensing) can be achieved at Beta level by focusing on resolving all inconsistencies.

  • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 11:13 AM


    This culminated in the establishment of an effective methodology designed to rapidly shift one’s concentration upon the deepest layers of his/her self-awareness (deep Theta). The goal being thenceforth to operate from that mental level in a passive/active manner by first sending actively out an information request and in turn taking on a passive role when one receives from the Delta level (universal mind), as an answer, a formidable steam of compressed instant (packet) nonlinear sensory and informational data (delta to theta). This information needs to be reconstructed automatically by the Alpha and Beta level of mind when an individual emerges out of deep Theta.


    This is better accomplished at Beta Level by following the methodology described in Memory Recall. The information request can be received at Beta Level if the mind is not stacked up with filters of unresolved inconsistencies.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 11:27 AM

      “It was found that the Beta state does not allow for any remote viewing. If an individual perceived that he/she was receiving remote viewing data whilst being fully awake, he had to be at that moment focusing on his thought processes in order to be aware of it and a cursory examination of his/her brain encephalographic tracing would always reveal that the subject had slipped into the Alpha state or very rarely even into Theta. The moment an individual focuses on internal self-reflective thought processes, he/she enters the subconscious (alpha or Theta ) levels of mind operation.”


      The mind seems to rapidly move among the various levels Beta to Delta. It is not productive to focus on any one level. When remote viewing one needs to put attention on the broadest context possible and rapidly resolve the inconsistencies visible. The needed answer will become available during this process of resolving inconsistencies.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 1:55 PM

      “The time/space restrictions imposed by our “advanced” societies upon the ability to self-reflect is causing all the modern stress that the mind is experiencing.”


      It is the inability to deal with complex motion that causes all difficulty. The motion becomes more complex because of the loops of introversion involved. Mindfulness helps respolve a lot of this complexity of motion.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 2:20 PM

      “Young humans (children of less than 7 years of age and especially those of less than 2 years old) and animals of all ages operate mainly at Alpha, Theta and Delta. For them Beta has not hitherto been imposed and learned. The external phenomenal world has yet to take on such a strong concentrated reality. They are less concerned with external stimuli and self-reflect constantly. They learn and evolve through this mental act. They all remote view naturally. They need to. Otherwise, they could not possibly learn and survive. The humans will forget this, for most, when they proudly enter the highly ego-centered world of Beta operation and embrace adulthood.”


      Children are naturally mindful, because they are not assuming and trying to predict consciously. They ask the question and let the mind function normally without trying to control it obsessively. Anxiety comes in Beta phase because of making assumptions and digging for the answer when it is not there. Obstructions in the mind come from unresolved inconsistencies. Mindful contemplation helps resolve such inconsistencies. After that one can operate at Alpha, Theta and Delta with full awareness.

  • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 2:27 PM


    Eventually, with specialized training, when the concentration has remained at deep Theta for long enough, one seems to span all the levels of the mind and integrate them in a single cognitive awareness. The remote viewer can then operate from the Theta level in concentration and even open his/her eyes and be aware of both his/her external and internal realities at once. With practice, he/she might make a last perceptual jump and realized that his/her external and internal realities are but mirror expressions of each other.


    Remote viewing boils down to becoming aware of both physical and mental objects as they are without further distinction. In most cases, the physical and mental aspects of what is being viewed go together without any separation. If there is any separation it is because of mental filters. Mindfulness works better and better as mental filters are recognized as inconsistencies and are resolved.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 3:07 PM

      “The remote viewing techniques taught by the Academy of Remote Viewing are unique in that they concentrate upon the easily attainability by any individual of a state where his/her awareness will be focused upon the level of the Universal Mind (undifferentiated knowing). The trainee is taught to locate his/her awareness at the border of Delta (deep Theta) and operate a sort of “mental dance” where his/her attention concentrates upon the data originating from the Universal Mind on (passive-receiving state) and off (active-questioning state), while avoiding to be sucked in by the powerful pole of attraction of the Higher Delta level (sleep and/or somnambulistic unconsciousness).”


      Universal Mind = undifferentiated knowing
      Active-questioning state = bring to attention what one wants to know about
      Passive-receiving state = attention focused upon the data originating from the Universal Mind
      Deep Theta = awareness at the border of Delta while avoiding sleep and/or somnambulistic unconsciousness

      I believe that remote viewing is possible without deliberately trying to evoke Deep Theta. It requires focus on the broad context of interest, brief Active-questioning state, followed by Passive-receiving state, and then spotting and resolving any inconsistencies that become visible.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 3:53 PM

      “The ego can be defined as the ability a life-form has to be able to differentiate between thoughts that it will perceive as being one’s own (self-reflective) and thoughts that seem to originate outside of one’s realm.”


      Ego is the individuality of the “definition-logic” matrix that is responding to the Universal Mind.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 4:15 PM

      “Delta is the level of non-individualized non-reflective intelligence. Beta, Alpha, and Theta are but brain-wave epiphenomenona of states of self-reflective awareness by perceptually individualized intelligences (levels of individuated thought-concentrations). One only travels in awareness within these states.”


      These are interesting definitions based on electric encephalographic tracing of the brain. Such categorization is not really needed when mindfulness is practiced.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 4:32 PM

      “The deeper within Delta one finds oneself, the more concomitant parallel thought processes there are. Up to an All-aware potential Infinity. The ancient Greek letter Delta shaped like an upward pointing triangle symbolizes this reality of the Mind. Delta (alike its ancient cousin the Hebrew Deleth) means a door, an entrance to another realm. The realm of El (the Universal) and Data.”


      The Delta level seems to be entering through the curtain of non-awareness to the other side.

  • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 5:47 PM


    Middle Delta does not use any imagery whatsoever. Only vibratory light, swirling within different levels of intensity, remains. The Light contains, stores, and processes information.


    Vibratory light is the very form of basic awareness. See Motion and Space-Time.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 6:48 PM

      “The level of Beta is a level of knowledge where the focus of attention is upon the external material reality and a slow intellectual type of learning is attempted.”


      It is erroneous human-centric viewpoint that spirit and matter are separate. As long as thinking is going through this filter it will not be able to understand Remote Viewing completely

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 6:51 PM

      “The major evolutionary jumps, inspirational writings, creative endeavors, scientific discoveries and inventions of all times always originate from the level of knowing and not of knowledge.”


      The level of knowledge consists of many inconsistencies. The level of knowing comes about with the resoilution of these inconsistencies.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 6:54 PM

      “The search for an unification factor outside of one’s self, within linear space/time, is a perceptual dead-end that, at one point, mankind will need to realize. The unification point is not outside of one’s self, within space or out-of-space, masters, gurus, but within oneself.”


      The unification comes about with the dissolution of self.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 7:18 PM

      “Your mind (Spirit) is nor bound by and into a “material” body. It is only bound by and connected to the physical senses that make you aware of a physical reality.”


      That is an incorrect view that spirit and matter are separate. They appear to be separate, but they are the same. The mind and the body is bound by itself only

  • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 7:23 PM


    Let go of these senses, by allowing yourself not to concentrate upon them (i.e. physical reality and biology), and you will then allow yourself to unbound your self and expand Everywhere and Everywhen.


    It is not a matter of letting go of senses. It is not a matter of willing anything. It is a matter of resolving the will itself. That will happen automatically as one spots and resolves inconsistencies one after another as they appear.

    • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 7:29 PM


      “You create everything, including your restrictions. Argue for your limitations, and/or believe someone else’s opinion about them, and they surely become yours.”


      Even the sense of “you” and “I” is just how it appears. Even creation is just an appearance. Anything that persists is an inconsistency and must be looked at closely until it is understood in terms of consistency with its background.

  • vinaire  On October 17, 2014 at 7:44 PM

    I guess that’s about it. I am done with the review of Remote Viewing.. The basics seem to be as follows.

    Universe and Awareness
    Awareness and Motion
    Motion and Space-Time
    The Human-Centric Fixation

%d bloggers like this: