Death

What is there to observe when the observer itself is no-observer?

What is there to experience when the experiencer itself is no-experiencer?

What is there to experience when the experience itself is no-experience?

What is there to exist when the existence itself is non-existence?

What is there to be when the being itself is non-being?

We die, it seems so normal about something so abnormal. It is abnormal because it is so inconceivable for those who die. Sleep isn’t abnormal, but death is? This is because sleep is, or appears, temporary, but death seems eternal with repect to one who dies, going even beyond time. This is because Death is Nothing, and Nothing is all-pervading [Visñu], even beyond time, beyond ‘space(s)’.

(By the way, Nothing is Everything, Everything is all-pervading [Visñu], even beyond time, beyond ‘space(s)’).

It seems inconceivable that this, that seems like ‘me’, will go out of existence forever. This is the only infinity, that is achievable. This is the only Absolute. Achieving this is not Achieving. Achievement of this lies in, and is, non-Achievement.

Every state/statement has ‘Not’/Not-statement. Any two states are complement or ‘Not’ of each other. Let’s call the states, state ‘A’, state ‘B’, or simply ‘A’, ‘B’. A is the complement of B, B is the complement of A. A is the nonexistence of B (i.e. the ‘Not’ of B), B is the nonexistence of A (i.e. the ‘Not’ of A). In spacetime ‘Basis’, the states are the events. They do not exist for, or with respect to, each other. They are non-existence of, or with respect to, each other. There is no relation between them, Nothing common. They are ‘Not’/Not-statement of, or with respect to, each other.

The ‘common’, or link, or connection, or relation, be it causal-link/causality or otherwise, is apparent, is all apparent.

The ‘common’ or link or connection or the aspects of ‘induction’/’law if induction’ or the relation(s), is apparent, is due to the information in, or that is, the state/statement. They are fundamentally different, they are not different, they are infinite in difference, and not, there is no notion of difference or relation, and there is, and not, and so on….. This is Infidefiception.

The “we” or “I” that appears as something common, something related, something invariant, something consistent, something law-like or inductive, something Absolute, like the Aatman or the ‘self’ or common experience/existence, is Nothing. It is Nothing. It is apparent and due to the information in, or that is, the state/statement/experience/existence itself. Fundamentally, it does not exist, and does, doesn’t, it’s Nothing. It’s Infidefiception, It’s State[ment]verse.

This ‘common thing’ (in/between states), that’s so powerful and ‘clear’ and obvious, is apparent. This ‘common-thing’, this ‘link’, this ‘relationship’, can be attributed to the Absolutism, or ideas of Absolutism, which is about attaining Immortality, about attaining the Absolute, about climbing the ‘Immortality Ladder’, about the expansion of one’s existence throughout the existence-verse or State[ment]verse.

The past/future state, or any other state than this and that is not this or ‘Not’/’Not-statement’ of this, appears to have something common with ‘this’ state that ‘I’ actually am. But as explained above, that’s not the case. The ‘other’ states are not this ‘me’. For this ‘me’/’I’, only this ‘me’ exists. The ‘other’ is non-existence.

Now, let’s for convenience call the set of states throughout my, or any one’s, lifetime, or that appears as ‘my’ life as ‘me’, and that life/set as ‘my life’.

So, this set called ‘my-life’, I’ll just refer to as ‘me’, or ‘my’, or as ‘I’, or ‘my-life’ or ‘my life’, or ‘life’, for convenience. This set, say, contains only five states as elements; A, B, C, D, E. Let’s call this set ‘E’, ‘E’ stands for ‘Everything’.

Now, as far as I’m concerned, i.e. with respect to me, I experience or have the feeling or appearance of experiencing or existing as only these states.

By the way, each state is the ‘I’/’self’/experience/existence, and the only one, with respect to or relative to a that particular state itself, and are the ‘Not’ of each other. But for convenience, lets involve all these states, or the set itself, as ‘I’.

So, I experience or have the feeling or ‘memory’ or appearance of experiencing or existing as only these states. This is not just the appearance now, as we have defined ‘I’ as that set of five states. But, fundamentally, or in State[ment]verse perspective or State[ment]verse eye-view, it’s, as mentioned above:

The ‘common’ or link or connection or the aspects of ‘induction’/’law if induction’ or the relation(s), is apparent, is due to the information in, or that is, the state/statement. They are fundamentally different, they are not different, they are infinite in difference, and not, there is no notion of difference or relation, and there is, and not, and so on….. This is Infidefiception.

Now, because ‘I’ is only or identifies with only these five States or set E, and because these states are the ones that share or appear or to which appears something common or linking between them, due to information in these states, ‘everything’ for them or with respect to them each is this set E.

There is Nothing beyond, the ‘Not’ of this set. The ‘beyond’ for ‘I’ then is Nothing, or the ‘Not’ of E, i.e. the ‘Not’ of ‘I’ or of ‘life’, i.e. is Death.

But, because Death (let’s call it ‘D’ for convenience) is the ‘Not’ of E or of ‘I’, ‘I’ is also the ‘Not’ of I/E. And therefore, I cannot be D, I is not D, I is ‘Not’ of D. I cannot experience D. I is not, or the ‘Not’ of, the experience/state D/’D’. I cannot exist as D. I cannot be Not-I, E cannot be Not-E.

Now, if as D or with D we are referring to some ‘other’ state that is the ‘other’ or ‘Not’ of I/E, then it’s relative Nothing with respect to I/E. Also I/E and any other state, is the ‘other’ or ‘Not’/Not-statement of D. But, D as state is not Absolute Nothing. Absolute Death is Absolute Nothing.

ABSOLUTE NOTHING is INFIDEFICEPTION. ABSOLUTE NOTHING is STATE[MENT]VERSE

Now, because I, that is E, can only exist as itself, and can only experience itself, and because I or E is the only existence for I/E, Death or D, or any ‘other’ state Not-I/Not-E, does not exist for I/E and is the nonexistence of I or E i.e. ‘Not’ of I/E.

This holds fundamentally, for any state K. This, obviously, holds for states A, B, C, D, E.

One is the death of the or for the or relative to or with respect to the other. One is the ”other’ for the other. One is the non-experience/nonexistence of the or with respect to or relative to the other. One is the ‘Not’/’Not-statement’ of/for the other.

[Note: As discussed in the articles titled ‘Arbitrary Existence’ and/or ‘Existence with no Justification’, in a sense, any statement A and Not-A also require each other for existence. But that requirement is no-/non-requirement. It us required and not, and is, and isn’t, and so on….. It is Infidefiception.]

So, I or ‘I’ cannot die. In a sense, for ‘I’, be it any state A or collection of state like or unlike E, the ‘life’ or its life will loop round and round and round. In a sense, for ‘you’, be it any state A or collection of state like or unlike E, the ‘life’ or its life will loop round and round and round. Yes the ‘looping’ won’t be experienced by the ‘I’ or ‘you’ or any state or collection of states like or unlike E.

It is like a movie, the characters in the film, even if the film is not rolling or being played or playing, the entities ‘of’/’in’ the film doesn’t experience stoppage of ‘time’, no looping of time, no looping, no experience of things happening again and again. The entities that we call “of” or the film, or “in” or being “in” the film, are the film(s) themselves. In fact, there are no entities, no plural, each film is and corresponds to ‘an’ entity. The only entity(s) is the Film(s) itself. It’s not like it contains something as parts, it is everything and every thing. The Film is everything and every thing. It is not reducible to anything. It is the Quantum of existence, it is existence, it is the entire, the whole, the complete, the Absolute, it is all parts, non-reducible. It is State/Statement. It is an example/analogy of the State/Statement or the fundamental idea or concept of State/Statement.

By the way:

STATE/STATEMENT is the fundamental entity of the STATE[MENT]VERSE

The looping picture/perspective mentioned above, is a sense in or perspective in State[ment]verse, which is no-/non-picture, no-/non-perspective, no-frame of reference, no state, no statement, non-existence, existence, statement, state, and isn’t, and is, and isn’t, and so on….. This is Infidefiception, Nothing, Everything, State[ment]verse.

The same happens in or with the universe/Multiverse/Ananntaverse (Infinite Multiverse or Infinite layers/degree of ‘Multi’ in Multiverse or infinite layers of Multiverse), as with any state A, or with that set E, or the film, or the entire movie. It not that it’s running or playing out in time, it’s as explained above, and the article titled “State[ment]verse”, there are only states, and that’s it. There are states. In fact, there is state, and that’s it. There is state. Also, every state/statement has ‘Not’/’Not-Statement’.

Each state/statement is the Universe for, or relative to, or with respect to, that state itself. Each state/statement is Everything for, or relative to, or with respect to, that state itself. Each state/statement is Nothing for, or relative to, or with respect to, that state itself. Each state/statement is Indefiception for, or relative to, or with respect to, that state itself. Each state/statement is the Infidefiception for, or relative to, or with respect to, that state itself.

So, you don’t die with respect to yourself. And for ‘others’, you don’t even exist, even if you just take the consciousness-picture or the ‘self-perspective’ or the ‘I-perspective’/’I-picture’. In a ‘sense’ or some ‘sense’ you do exist for ‘others’ or with respect to others, but fundamentally you don’t. It’s all just induction and relation and Absolutism-thing.

As with the movie, and Universe, etc, this ‘looping-thing’ is for and is such for any finite thing or existence. This looping is such for any zero entity, any infinitesimal entity, any point, and any finite entity, even for your finite dimensional ‘screen’. This is such for any set, from the most fundamental entity, state/statement, to any collection/set of states/statements.

Also, in the State[ment]verse perspective or sense or picture, i.e. framework or frame of reference, which is no perspective, no picture, no frame, no framework, no sense,….. Infidefiception, the states exist, don’t exist. So, in the State[ment]verse picture, [state A, state B] or [state A – state B] or state A – state B or A-B or ‘A, B’ or [A, B], is same as [A, B, C], is same as [A, B, C], is same or equivalent as [A, B, C, D] is the same as ….. is the same as [A, B, C, D, E, …..], and is not, is, is not, and so on….. is Infidefiception.

But in the frame of state, it exists. For any state D, therefore, [A, B, C, D] is not or ‘Not’ of [A, B, C], or ‘Not’ of any other. But again, for any state D or in the perspective of or with respect to any D, [A, B, C, D], or [A, B, C], or any other, is Nothing, is non-existence, does not exit, is Indefiception or Infidefiception. All there is is D, for D.

So, the question is, what is the correspondence between state[ment]verse [A, B, C, D], or [A, B, C], which is Indefiception, and D? Or, what is the corresponding perspective of D, corresponding to [A, B, C, D], and D’s perspective corresponding to state[ment]verse [A, B, C]?

Also, what’s the relation of “D’s reality corresponding to state[ment]verse [A, B, C, D]”, with “D’s reality (or maybe non-reality) corresponding to state[ment]verse [A, B, C]”?