![\"\"](\"https:\/\/staging.kabbalah.info\/app\/uploads\/2025\/10\/perception_of_reality_photo_reference.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nContent:<\/h4>\n\n\n\n\n- Our world\u2014an illusion<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- The correct way of perceiving the world<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Why attain reality?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- What is meant by \u201cUpper,\u201d \u201cspiritual\u201d?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Does time exist?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- So where\u2019s God?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Do angels have wings?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- About time travel<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Life after death<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Kabbalah and the UFO<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Does matter feel?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- How to avoid suffering<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Letters are properties<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Our world\u2014an illusion<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
E. Litvar: <\/strong>Hello, dear friends! We\u2019re here in the studio with the foremost Kabbalist and scientist of our era, Dr. Michael Laitman. Our topic today is, \u201cPerception of reality.\u201d Speaking with Dr. Laitman are instructors with the Bnei Baruch Kabbalah Education & Research Institute, Michael Sanilevich and myself, Eugene Litvar.<\/p>\n\n\n\nFirst question: Any Buddhist or Taoist knows that our world is the world of illusions. They know it, but I still don\u2019t believe it, I don\u2019t understand how this could be. Can Kabbalah help me understand it?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
M. Laitman: <\/strong>Many Kabbalistic sources, including those that are thousands of years old, like the Book of Zohar<\/em> (written 2000 years ago), or the ancient Great Midrash,<\/em> (3700 years ago), speak of the problems concerning the perception of reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\nKabbalah has always viewed our world from a spiritual point of view. In other words, a Kabbalist is a person who ascends to a higher level, into another dimension, and from there observes our world and the world that has been revealed to him, perceiving both worlds as one whole. And he assesses all of our illusions from this standpoint.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Our world really is a world of illusions. To begin with, each living creature perceives it differently. Every one of us holds on to an illusion of the existence of this world\u2014our world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If our sensory organs were different, we would see the world differently as well. If we were to see in infrared, ultraviolet or x-rays, if we were to hear, smell or feel in a different frequency range, then our world\u2014the sum of our sensations\u2014would be completely different and would draw for us a completely different picture. We know that dogs perceive the world in spots of scent, and snakes in thermal stimuli\u2014both see the world differently. If we didn\u2019t have our sense of sight (which provides us with 90 percent of all the information we receive), we\u2019d perceive the world differently as well, and adapt to it accordingly: if I couldn\u2019t see any of these objects, but knew of their existence only through tactile sensations, I would create my inner world model based on those sensations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In other words, if we were to replace our five senses\u2014sight, sound, smell, taste and touch\u2014with different ones, or change their frequency range, our worldview would naturally be different. That fact alone tells us that the world is simply our subjectively perceived reality, which exists within us. If we were to add different sensory organs, we would complement the unrecognizably-different picture of the world. But we have not even the slightest clue as to what exactly we lack.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
To their usual five sensory organs, Kabbalists add one additional sense, called a \u201csoul.\u201d This isn\u2019t just an additional sense; it functions according to a fundamentally different principle\u2014one of bestowal, rather than consumption. In other words, he absorbs external information, thereby becoming similar to what exists outside of him. And then he perceives the true picture of the outside world, one that isn\u2019t perverted or disturbed by his own body and its parameters. That is the difference between a Kabbalistic perception of reality and our egoistic one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
An altruistic perception does not disturb one\u2019s worldview; rather, it gives a sensation, awareness and knowledge of the world just as it is, irrespective of the observer. And this is the main advantage of Kabbalah. This is why it is called, \u201cthe science of Kabbalah\u201d\u2014the science of receiving, of perception. Only one who observes the world in a truly objective way can acquire such a worldview, and based on this worldview, one can observe all of the illusions and metamorphoses that we undergo\u2014our body dies, we get another body, exist in it, exist outside of it, and so forth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
E. Litvar: <\/strong>Seeing as I represent the interests of those individuals who have never studied Kabbalah, my questions are such as they are. And I must say that I am not convinced. Or I must\u2019ve missed something. I don\u2019t understand how the things that you\u2019ve said show that the world is illusory.<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Because we perceive the world in one particular way. Animals and other creatures with sensory organs of different frequency ranges perceive the world differently, and have a completely different worldview. And if we were to change our senses arbitrarily, we would sense yet another, third worldview.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe question is this: does anything actually exist outside of us, which each of us perceives differently? Or is there nothing at all, and everything exists within us?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We insert electrodes into a person, transmit certain signals into his subcortex, into the various regions of his brain, thereby drawing up all kinds of pictures in his imagination, and they are incredibly lifelike and real\u2014even more real than what he feels in his usual state. Sometimes in our dreams we see breathtaking images, actions, and panoramas of events, and remain stunned by the experience long after waking up. Perhaps even now, though it seems to us that we\u2019re awake and exist here and now, we are actually in a dream, only we can\u2019t pinch ourselves and wake up?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Where\u2019s the proof that we exist in some actual scheme of events, that this life is real, and not some dream or illusory picture forced upon us by invisible electrodes? How can we know this for sure?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
E. Litvar: <\/strong>But the premise that it is potentially unreal or illusory\u2014it is still only a premise, and not a fact, right? I see a glass, Michael sees a glass, and you see a glass. I see you holding it. For me\u2014that\u2019s reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>In other words, any state that I experience at any particular moment is my reality. If, while I am sleeping, I experience certain states that arise within me, do those states comprise reality? Yes or no?<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>Yes, of course.<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Of course it\u2019s reality; after all, I exist in a state, where it is real with regard to me. Once I wake up, I enter into another state. So then, Kabbalists tell us that when we come out of this world into the next one (the spiritual one), we see that our existence in this world was as though a dream.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>Why?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Because we change realities.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>Are there many different realities?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Of course. But each time it is real with regard to me, to the observer\u2014we measure everything precisely according to Einstein\u2019s theory\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>Meaning\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Everything is relative.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>So, suppose that a hypnotist hypnotizes me, and right now it seems to me that I am in a jungle, for instance. But everyone else around me sees that we are here in this studio. So which reality is my reality?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\nThe correct way of perceiving the world<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
M. Laitman: <\/strong>Kabbalists, who examine our state from the other world, tell us: \u201cYou are all asleep. It seems to you that you exist in a real world, but you are actually in a dream.\u201d But the reason they can tell us this is because they observe our \u201chypnotic state\u201d from the side.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>In other words, I exist in certain individual sensations that create for me a certain reality\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman:<\/strong> Presently, you and I exist in a dream.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>Does that mean that Michael perceives a different reality?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>No, our sensations are similar. Our sensory organs have an identical structure, which is why we imagine one another similarly\u2014that we exist, live and develop.<\/p>\n\n\n\nAll that we include in the domain of our world is merely a reflection of our consciousness. Does it actually exist? With regard to whom? This needs be discussed and researched. With regard to man, we say: \u201cYes, with regard to the observer\u2014this is precisely the reality observed.\u201d However, should he abandon his position, he will observe a different reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Perhaps there are many different dimensions or universes, in which we exist in various states. And there time may exist in a particular state, or it may not, or the state may be above time, beyond time. Or there may be other states, which exist according to entirely different parameters\u2014without time, space or motion, without notions of above or below or other parameters that define our \u201cI,\u201d our existence. They may be totally different, but we know nothing about any of this. And Kabbalists, because they attain this other dimension vividly in this life, tell us about it, describe it to us, explain that this is the dimension that we must enter, that a completely different existence awaits us, which is so far removed from ours that it\u2019s as though on a different planet\u2014and we must achieve it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
E. Litvar: <\/strong>And that existence is not illusory?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>With regard to us right now, it is illusory, because we don’t believe in it. But they reached this state, this existence, and with regard to their state they are telling us that ours is a complete illusion, like a dream.<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Sanilevich: <\/strong>Are there any other states, besides those that are attained by Kabbalists?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>They can’t tell us anything beyond what they actually attain. After all, man attains only from within himself, from his tools of perception, from his sensations. If he acquires some other sensations, then he’ll be able to tell us about them, but otherwise\u2014he cannot.<\/p>\n\n\n\nMoreover, when Kabbalists attain all this, their attainment is absolutely accurate and scientific\u2014with graphs, formulas, and precise measurements; they convey it to one another in such a way that enables others to make those same movements toward this other world, to observe from it, describe their sensations, and the commonalities of their research. Meaning, it is just like the sciences of our world, in which scientists work together so as to expand on their research. At the same time, Kabbalists also warn us that all their observations are strictly subjective to their own attainments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
And just as in our world with regard to the observer, science studies our illusion, or reality, or illusory reality, (it doesn\u2019t matter what we call it), Kabbalah too studies the other dimension only with regard to the observer, and warns us about this. It is therefore said: \u201cAll man has is what he attains in his Kelim,<\/em>\u201d\u2014his tools. The actual proverb goes: \u201c<\/em>Eyn Le Daiyan Ele Ma She Eynav Rohot<\/em>\u201d\u2014\u201cA judge has only what his eyes see\u201d\u2014as his strongest, most reliable attainment.<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Sanilevich: <\/strong>This reality that Kabbalists attain\u2014is it the same for all of them? Or does everyone have their own?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>No, it\u2019s the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Sanilevich: <\/strong>Just as in our world?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Just as in our world our sensations are similar, even though each of us experiences them in our own way. It\u2019s the same with Kabbalists.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>All the Eastern teachings that claim that our world is illusory are in agreement with Kabbalah. However, the position from which they consider this world illusory may not coincide with what Kabbalists see and feel?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>These days even science is developing a clear understanding that our world is illusory. What does \u201cillusory\u201d mean? It depends solely on our sensory organs\u2014their frequency range and mode of operation. That\u2019s the \u201cillusion,\u201d though it is not really an illusion; rather, it is an entirely subjective picture that I draw for myself. Were I to have different eyes, different ears, different tactile sensations and so forth, I would perceive a different picture: an object that appears solid to me right now may appear gaseous. If, for instance, I were to see and relate to our world like neutrino or some other particles that penetrate everything, and sense that I penetrate and see as if through this matter, then, naturally, my perception of this entire world would be completely different.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>Meaning, I simply wouldn\u2019t see this desk?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Of course, it would be transparent to me. And why not? In my current sensations, a certain combination of certain elements manifests as this particular solid object, whereas in truth there are other states in our world, where its solidity is not perceived as a problem or an obstacle one bit. Under a certain amount of pressure, I sense these obstacles; that is what we call \u201ctactile sensations\u201d\u2014the object presses back on me, and out of this pressure, out of my reaction I construct the object in my sensations: what it is, what it\u2019s like, etc.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>I think I\u2019m beginning to understand. What you\u2019re saying is that my perception is subjective because it is I who receives this information, right?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Of course.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>Meaning, Michael could\u2019ve received it differently?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>No, Michael would\u2019ve received it the same way, because our sensations are similar, our sensory organs have identical structure.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>Then it\u2019s objective? Because if I, he and another hundred people\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Objective for whom? With regard to man in our world. This is how our world manifests within man. But whether or not it exists on the outside, I cannot say. I detect certain sounds and certain images; they are drawn within me, but not on the outside. For instance, I see this table and this glass. Do they actually exist outside of me? I do not know, I cannot say. The only thing I can say is that images are drawn within me that appear to me as though they exist on the outside. This glass here\u2014does it have the same form outside of my senses? No, it does not have the same form; it just appears to me this way. But what is it actually like? I cannot say what it\u2019s actually like\u2014only with regard to the perceiver, to the observer.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThere are four approaches to perceiving reality. The Newtonian approach states that the world outside of us is the same as we perceive it within.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There is another approach that was developed by Hugh Everett, (American physicist, who first proposed the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics), which states that the world is the same as we perceive it, but also dependent upon the disturbances that we ourselves introduce to it. In other words, the world is something in between the observer and the picture he observes: I exist in certain contact with the world, and our common properties, our points of contact draw for me a certain picture. In this case, the picture of the world that I receive does, in fact, depend on my own properties.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Why is this so? Because even in our daily life there are certain things that I notice, and other things that I don\u2019t, certain things that I perceive, but they escape my consciousness right after I perceive them. Meaning, there are certain things out there that I simply don\u2019t pay attention to, or, conversely, focus my attention on. I exist in greater or lesser contact with various objects, which determines how they are drawn within me. In other words, I perceive only a portion of the world that exists around me. It may contain other objects that I don\u2019t yet perceive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
And then there\u2019s another view, which is closer to Kabbalah\u2019s view, (there are also all kinds of other theories that exist between these), and it states that, in reality, we don\u2019t perceive anything<\/em> that exists outside of us. Nothing at all. We perceive only what is constructed within us.<\/p>\n\n\n\nYou can look at it this way: there is a certain source that exists outside of us; if I knock on this table\u2014you hear a sound. A certain action is made, and it creates a certain wave. This wave reaches your ear, strikes the eardrum, moves through all the systems, (electrical, chemical), reflects in your brain, which juxtaposes it against familiar data, determines that it is a sound, and informs you of it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What does your own perception have to do with the outside sound? All sorts of reactions took place: mechanical pressure from this wave, followed by electrical phenomena, followed by all kinds of chemical reactions, juxtaposed against your various memories, recollections, and so forth. What does all this have to do with whatever took place on the outside? Very-very little. That is why it is said that there are similarities between the observer and various external phenomena.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But Kabbalah tells us that even these similarities don\u2019t exist, and neither are there any external phenomena\u2014everything exists within man. And outside of us there\u2019s nothing. There is a constant force, within which we exist, and based on our compatibility with this constant force (this absolute constant), various kinds of internal phenomena occur within us, and create within us all sorts of sensations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In other words, I sense and perceive only my own inner changes, my inner development with regard to this constant external force. And this picture of my inner changes is presented to me as my worldview. This is what Kabbalah states and describes, and does so scientifically\u2014using mathematics, physics, graphs, and so forth, inviting us to enter into this reality. And when you begin to study it, research it, and enter into these states, you see that it is truly so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
And science is gradually coming to this conclusion as well. A time ago people\u2019s trust lay in Newton alone, then Einstein, then Hugh Everett, and now they\u2019re beginning to agree with or least to listen to what Kabbalah has been saying and describing for many thousands of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
E. Litvar: <\/strong>It follows from what you\u2019re saying that, throughout man\u2019s whole life, while he thinks that he is studying the world around him, in reality he is studying himself?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Absolutely right. Yes, we study only ourselves. Generally speaking, all this is no more than an act of self-awareness.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\nWhy attain reality?<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>But why should one attain another reality that exists outside of him? How does it benefit him? Does it teach him how to live his life or something?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>We are being pushed toward the entrance to this new reality, and we must enter it. We must feel ourselves in it. We must exist in it, because existence in this uppermost external reality is eternal and complete. This is what nature is pushing us toward.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt doesn\u2019t matter whether we desire it or not. This is how we\u2019re structured from the very beginning\u2014we must undergo this gradual development and come to feel this external reality, enter and exist within it. So much so that the sensation of this world and our contacts within it disappears. And the present picture ascends, little by little, as though transforming into the images and forces of that external, upper reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>Alex from Berlin is asking the following question (I think that you\u2019ve partially answered it already): \u201cOnce upon a time, Lao Tzu, the founder of Taoism, dreamt that he was a butterfly. When he woke up, he spent a lot of time thinking about what he was in reality: a butterfly, who dreams that it is Lao Tzu, or Lao Tzu, who dreams that he is a butterfly?\u201d What can Kabbalah tell him?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Kabbalah can tell him this: eventually he will enter into yet another reality. He exists both in life, at least what we call \u201clife,\u201d and in a dream, but because his sensations are so vivid, he cannot tell one apart from the other. By the way, one\u2019s sensations in a dream may be even more vivid than in life\u2014is that not so? And the opposite can also be true, so this doesn\u2019t mean anything. Whenever we fall asleep and then wake up, we are in control of ourselves, because we divide these two things\u2014this is life, and this is a dream. However, in essence, both states are illusory.<\/p>\n\n\n\nKabbalah would have shown Lao Tzu that there is yet another state, which exists beyond both dream and vigil, a state that contains an absolute and constant flow of information, and this state is called \u201ceternal and perfect life or existence,\u201d although this is not our understanding of \u201clife.\u201d And looking from that existence at our present state, the entire inanimate, vegetative and animate nature of our world, our universe, including man, is merely an illusion, clusters of energy\u2014and nothing more. So, both of his states\u2014dream and vigil\u2014would appear to Lao Tzu as mere illusion with regard to those who exist in it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>And one can exist in both worlds simultaneously?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Until a Kabbalist fully completes his ascension into the Upper World, into this next dimension, he retains the sensation of our world. As soon as he fully enters this upper reality, he retains the sensations of this world only because he needs to maintain contact with other people. However, there is essentially no need for him to return to this illusion anymore.<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Sanilevich: <\/strong>But as he lives here, does he also exist in that world at the same time? Or, for instance, in this world I can look or not look, I can hear or close my ears and not hear; does a Kabbalist also, while existing in this world with his five senses and in the spiritual world simultaneously, sometimes \u201cdrops out\u201d of there?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Sometimeshe does \u201cdrop out,\u201d and this depends on whether or not he associates himself as the inner stress with the Upper World. In order to exist in the Upper dimension, one needs to act in a particular manner. For instance, if a person is very sick, if he loses consciousness or if he has no opportunity to focus himself appropriately and relate himself to this dimension, he may drop out of it.<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Sanilevich: <\/strong>But does he know that he dropped out? Is he conscious of it?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Yes. That is, the contact with the Upper World remains in a person forever. And reestablishing this contact depends on him alone.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\nWhat is meant by \u201cUpper,\u201d \u201cspiritual\u201d?<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>But why this word\u2014\u201cupper\u201d?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>\u201cUpper,\u201d because from there our present state is perceived as lower, limited and transient. A spiritual state is dominant and truly better. That is why it is called, \u201cupper.\u201d In our world, this is how we assign the correlation\u2014\u201cupper\u201d and \u201clower.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Sanilevich: <\/strong>And why is it the, \u201cspiritual world\u201d?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>\u201cSpiritual,\u201d because it bears no relation to corporeal objects\u2014it is above them, beyond them.<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Sanilevich: <\/strong>And where is the word \u201cspiritual\u201d itself from? From the root of \u201cspirit\u201d?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>In Kabbalah, the word Ruach <\/em>is used. Generally speaking, though, the force that governs our world is broken down into five forces: Nefesh<\/em>, Ruach<\/em>, Neshama<\/em>, Chaya <\/em>and Yechida<\/em>. And combined they are called the \u201cUpper Light.\u201d It is not the light of our world, but the Light of the Upper World, meaning completely different frequencies and properties. So then, the concepts of Light and spirituality are one and the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>If I\u2019m not mistaken, one of the things that Julius Caesar was famous for was his ability to do 5 things at once. Can a Kabbalist use the mind of our material world to, let\u2019s say, be engaged in a conversation with the two of us, while using his Kabbalistic mind to converse with, for instance, Julius Caesar?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Constantly! Because these are two absolutely unconnected sections of his \u201cI\u201d: the animal one is the lower section of our world, and the spiritual one pertains to the Upper soul. Naturally, he exists in both worlds.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>And if the mind of one asks the mind of the other which place is more fun, what would be the answer?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Well, what do you think? There\u2019s nothing worse than our world.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>But there are so many interesting things here.<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Just like the kids in a kindergarten are also amused with their toys. But there really is nothing worse than our world.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>In every way?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Absolutely.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>So, in all seriousness, any person in this world is always worse off than in the other?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Any person. Because in this world that we live in, we are constantly fleeing from suffering. And even a tiny drop of pleasure we perceive as happiness. This drop is then immediately extinguished, and yet again we resume our hunt for illusory pleasures. And this hunt is what we call \u201clife.\u201d In truth, it\u2019s nothing more than an endless pursuit or search for any kind of fulfillment. Hence, we really cannot call it interesting or good, except perhaps for want of a better alternative. But I suggest that you try the alternative, and then you\u2019ll see.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>A two-part question from the internet: \u201cAre there parallel worlds?\u201d is the first part, and the second is addressed to you directly: \u201cWere you ever in them?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>I don\u2019t know what they mean by, \u201cparallel worlds.\u201d There\u2019s a variety of our reflections in other words. There are a total of five worlds: Assiya<\/em>, Yetzira<\/em>, Beria<\/em>, Atzilut<\/em>, Adam Kadmon<\/em> and Olam Ein Sof<\/em>\u2014the so-called parallel worlds, but they\u2019re all spiritual. There are no other corporeal universes or worlds, like ours.<\/p>\n\n\n\nWe exist at the lowest possible level. All that exists above this level by even one degree is already the spiritual\u2014a total of 125 degrees, divided by five worlds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
E. Litvar: <\/strong>In the 60-70s there were lots of disputes as to whether there\u2019s life on Mars. So your answer is no?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Mars is neither a parallel universe nor a parallel world.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\nDoes time exist?<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>Next question: how and why does a sensation of time appear?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>A sensation of time is a strictly subjective sensation. In accordance with this subjective sensation, we observe that our world is in motion, witness cause-and-effect processes, where cause always precedes effect, and effect, in turn, becomes cause for the next effect, and so forth. These changes, as they manifest to us in this sequence, create in us a sensation of time.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn reality, even science, beginning with Einstein, states that time does not exist in and of itself. There are probabilities, and not only probabilities, but also instances where effect precedes and determines cause, and both life and time flow not in a fixed direction, but in a completely different one. These are the findings of modern science. And Kabbalah states that there is not even the notion of time. It doesn\u2019t exist.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
E. Litvar: <\/strong>Time or notion?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Time doesn\u2019t exist. In other words, the real world (the spiritual world) is not a world of time; rather, it is a world of categories and forces. We cannot imagine this, because our lives are completely deterministic. Our pulse, our life: all that we perceive is recorded in us automatically in terms of time\u2014when said event took place\u2014just like in a computer. You press a button, and the time of its pressing has been recorded. The next action\u2014the next button\u2014recorded again. And whatever it is you do (receive or send messages), everything is always recorded in terms of time, according to the computer\u2019s inner clock. And that same inner clock exists in us.<\/p>\n\n\n\nBut in reality (in the spiritual world), this is not so. And science is gradually uncovering and agreeing with this, just as with everything else that Kabbalah says. It\u2019s quite amazing. Imagine, The Book of Creation<\/em>, written back in the times of Ancient Babylon (that\u2019s four and a half thousand years ago!) speaks of the same \u201cnew\u201d concepts and worldviews that science is only beginning to approach today. Everything that you and I are talking about right now stems from there.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar:<\/strong> If I understood you correctly, the sensation of time arises in a person as a result of a change of state, an emergence of new states\u2014they as though give him some inner indication or perception of time?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>If there were no changes, we would not feel time.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>And you\u2019re saying that there\u2019s no time in the spiritual. Perhaps my question will sound foolish, but doesn\u2019t that mean that the spiritual contains only one state?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Yes. That\u2019s absolutely right. The spiritual cannot contain multiple states. Otherwise they would be classified in relation to one another: better or worse. The spiritual is absolute.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>But you yourself said that it contains five worlds.<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Those five worlds pertain to a gradual ascent to the final world. A true spiritual state is this final world, in which the notions of time and causality are fully nullified.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>Does the person get dumber or something?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>No, he doesn\u2019t get dumber; on the contrary, his attainment becomes absolutely boundless.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>So time disappears because it is no longer needed?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>Time is what binds us, and is the reason for our foolishness. Whereas without time our bindings disappear, and we can truly be all-intelligent and all-attaining. Cause-and-effect contracts, combines into a single whole, and we attain the Universe in full capacity.<\/p>\n\n\n\nE. Litvar: <\/strong>In other words, the sensation of time in the spiritual changes from the way I perceive it now to the final state, when this sensation disappears altogether? Meaning, it disappears gradually? And the sensation of time does exist in the spiritual worlds in some way, right?<\/p>\n\n\n\nM. Laitman: <\/strong>It exists as cause and effect. Time is when cause and effect are separated: here\u2019s the beginning and here\u2019s the next stage. In our world these two events may be separated by many years, but since nothing took place between them, in the spiritual they remain linked, standing close to one another, with one following the other.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Our world\u2014an illusion<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
E. Litvar: <\/strong>Hello, dear friends! We\u2019re here in the studio with the foremost Kabbalist and scientist of our era, Dr. Michael Laitman. Our topic today is, \u201cPerception of reality.\u201d Speaking with Dr. Laitman are instructors with the Bnei Baruch Kabbalah Education & Research Institute, Michael Sanilevich and myself, Eugene Litvar.<\/p>\n\n\n\n First question: Any Buddhist or Taoist knows that our world is the world of illusions. They know it, but I still don\u2019t believe it, I don\u2019t understand how this could be. Can Kabbalah help me understand it?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Many Kabbalistic sources, including those that are thousands of years old, like the Book of Zohar<\/em> (written 2000 years ago), or the ancient Great Midrash,<\/em> (3700 years ago), speak of the problems concerning the perception of reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Kabbalah has always viewed our world from a spiritual point of view. In other words, a Kabbalist is a person who ascends to a higher level, into another dimension, and from there observes our world and the world that has been revealed to him, perceiving both worlds as one whole. And he assesses all of our illusions from this standpoint.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Our world really is a world of illusions. To begin with, each living creature perceives it differently. Every one of us holds on to an illusion of the existence of this world\u2014our world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If our sensory organs were different, we would see the world differently as well. If we were to see in infrared, ultraviolet or x-rays, if we were to hear, smell or feel in a different frequency range, then our world\u2014the sum of our sensations\u2014would be completely different and would draw for us a completely different picture. We know that dogs perceive the world in spots of scent, and snakes in thermal stimuli\u2014both see the world differently. If we didn\u2019t have our sense of sight (which provides us with 90 percent of all the information we receive), we\u2019d perceive the world differently as well, and adapt to it accordingly: if I couldn\u2019t see any of these objects, but knew of their existence only through tactile sensations, I would create my inner world model based on those sensations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In other words, if we were to replace our five senses\u2014sight, sound, smell, taste and touch\u2014with different ones, or change their frequency range, our worldview would naturally be different. That fact alone tells us that the world is simply our subjectively perceived reality, which exists within us. If we were to add different sensory organs, we would complement the unrecognizably-different picture of the world. But we have not even the slightest clue as to what exactly we lack.<\/p>\n\n\n\n To their usual five sensory organs, Kabbalists add one additional sense, called a \u201csoul.\u201d This isn\u2019t just an additional sense; it functions according to a fundamentally different principle\u2014one of bestowal, rather than consumption. In other words, he absorbs external information, thereby becoming similar to what exists outside of him. And then he perceives the true picture of the outside world, one that isn\u2019t perverted or disturbed by his own body and its parameters. That is the difference between a Kabbalistic perception of reality and our egoistic one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n An altruistic perception does not disturb one\u2019s worldview; rather, it gives a sensation, awareness and knowledge of the world just as it is, irrespective of the observer. And this is the main advantage of Kabbalah. This is why it is called, \u201cthe science of Kabbalah\u201d\u2014the science of receiving, of perception. Only one who observes the world in a truly objective way can acquire such a worldview, and based on this worldview, one can observe all of the illusions and metamorphoses that we undergo\u2014our body dies, we get another body, exist in it, exist outside of it, and so forth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>Seeing as I represent the interests of those individuals who have never studied Kabbalah, my questions are such as they are. And I must say that I am not convinced. Or I must\u2019ve missed something. I don\u2019t understand how the things that you\u2019ve said show that the world is illusory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Because we perceive the world in one particular way. Animals and other creatures with sensory organs of different frequency ranges perceive the world differently, and have a completely different worldview. And if we were to change our senses arbitrarily, we would sense yet another, third worldview.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The question is this: does anything actually exist outside of us, which each of us perceives differently? Or is there nothing at all, and everything exists within us?<\/p>\n\n\n\n We insert electrodes into a person, transmit certain signals into his subcortex, into the various regions of his brain, thereby drawing up all kinds of pictures in his imagination, and they are incredibly lifelike and real\u2014even more real than what he feels in his usual state. Sometimes in our dreams we see breathtaking images, actions, and panoramas of events, and remain stunned by the experience long after waking up. Perhaps even now, though it seems to us that we\u2019re awake and exist here and now, we are actually in a dream, only we can\u2019t pinch ourselves and wake up?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Where\u2019s the proof that we exist in some actual scheme of events, that this life is real, and not some dream or illusory picture forced upon us by invisible electrodes? How can we know this for sure?<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>But the premise that it is potentially unreal or illusory\u2014it is still only a premise, and not a fact, right? I see a glass, Michael sees a glass, and you see a glass. I see you holding it. For me\u2014that\u2019s reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>In other words, any state that I experience at any particular moment is my reality. If, while I am sleeping, I experience certain states that arise within me, do those states comprise reality? Yes or no?<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>Yes, of course.<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Of course it\u2019s reality; after all, I exist in a state, where it is real with regard to me. Once I wake up, I enter into another state. So then, Kabbalists tell us that when we come out of this world into the next one (the spiritual one), we see that our existence in this world was as though a dream.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>Why?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Because we change realities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>Are there many different realities?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Of course. But each time it is real with regard to me, to the observer\u2014we measure everything precisely according to Einstein\u2019s theory\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>Meaning\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Everything is relative.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>So, suppose that a hypnotist hypnotizes me, and right now it seems to me that I am in a jungle, for instance. But everyone else around me sees that we are here in this studio. So which reality is my reality?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Kabbalists, who examine our state from the other world, tell us: \u201cYou are all asleep. It seems to you that you exist in a real world, but you are actually in a dream.\u201d But the reason they can tell us this is because they observe our \u201chypnotic state\u201d from the side.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>In other words, I exist in certain individual sensations that create for me a certain reality\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman:<\/strong> Presently, you and I exist in a dream.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>Does that mean that Michael perceives a different reality?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>No, our sensations are similar. Our sensory organs have an identical structure, which is why we imagine one another similarly\u2014that we exist, live and develop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n All that we include in the domain of our world is merely a reflection of our consciousness. Does it actually exist? With regard to whom? This needs be discussed and researched. With regard to man, we say: \u201cYes, with regard to the observer\u2014this is precisely the reality observed.\u201d However, should he abandon his position, he will observe a different reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Perhaps there are many different dimensions or universes, in which we exist in various states. And there time may exist in a particular state, or it may not, or the state may be above time, beyond time. Or there may be other states, which exist according to entirely different parameters\u2014without time, space or motion, without notions of above or below or other parameters that define our \u201cI,\u201d our existence. They may be totally different, but we know nothing about any of this. And Kabbalists, because they attain this other dimension vividly in this life, tell us about it, describe it to us, explain that this is the dimension that we must enter, that a completely different existence awaits us, which is so far removed from ours that it\u2019s as though on a different planet\u2014and we must achieve it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>And that existence is not illusory?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>With regard to us right now, it is illusory, because we don’t believe in it. But they reached this state, this existence, and with regard to their state they are telling us that ours is a complete illusion, like a dream.<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>Are there any other states, besides those that are attained by Kabbalists?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>They can’t tell us anything beyond what they actually attain. After all, man attains only from within himself, from his tools of perception, from his sensations. If he acquires some other sensations, then he’ll be able to tell us about them, but otherwise\u2014he cannot.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Moreover, when Kabbalists attain all this, their attainment is absolutely accurate and scientific\u2014with graphs, formulas, and precise measurements; they convey it to one another in such a way that enables others to make those same movements toward this other world, to observe from it, describe their sensations, and the commonalities of their research. Meaning, it is just like the sciences of our world, in which scientists work together so as to expand on their research. At the same time, Kabbalists also warn us that all their observations are strictly subjective to their own attainments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And just as in our world with regard to the observer, science studies our illusion, or reality, or illusory reality, (it doesn\u2019t matter what we call it), Kabbalah too studies the other dimension only with regard to the observer, and warns us about this. It is therefore said: \u201cAll man has is what he attains in his Kelim,<\/em>\u201d\u2014his tools. The actual proverb goes: \u201c<\/em>Eyn Le Daiyan Ele Ma She Eynav Rohot<\/em>\u201d\u2014\u201cA judge has only what his eyes see\u201d\u2014as his strongest, most reliable attainment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>This reality that Kabbalists attain\u2014is it the same for all of them? Or does everyone have their own?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>No, it\u2019s the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>Just as in our world?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Just as in our world our sensations are similar, even though each of us experiences them in our own way. It\u2019s the same with Kabbalists.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>All the Eastern teachings that claim that our world is illusory are in agreement with Kabbalah. However, the position from which they consider this world illusory may not coincide with what Kabbalists see and feel?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>These days even science is developing a clear understanding that our world is illusory. What does \u201cillusory\u201d mean? It depends solely on our sensory organs\u2014their frequency range and mode of operation. That\u2019s the \u201cillusion,\u201d though it is not really an illusion; rather, it is an entirely subjective picture that I draw for myself. Were I to have different eyes, different ears, different tactile sensations and so forth, I would perceive a different picture: an object that appears solid to me right now may appear gaseous. If, for instance, I were to see and relate to our world like neutrino or some other particles that penetrate everything, and sense that I penetrate and see as if through this matter, then, naturally, my perception of this entire world would be completely different.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>Meaning, I simply wouldn\u2019t see this desk?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Of course, it would be transparent to me. And why not? In my current sensations, a certain combination of certain elements manifests as this particular solid object, whereas in truth there are other states in our world, where its solidity is not perceived as a problem or an obstacle one bit. Under a certain amount of pressure, I sense these obstacles; that is what we call \u201ctactile sensations\u201d\u2014the object presses back on me, and out of this pressure, out of my reaction I construct the object in my sensations: what it is, what it\u2019s like, etc.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>I think I\u2019m beginning to understand. What you\u2019re saying is that my perception is subjective because it is I who receives this information, right?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Of course.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>Meaning, Michael could\u2019ve received it differently?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>No, Michael would\u2019ve received it the same way, because our sensations are similar, our sensory organs have identical structure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>Then it\u2019s objective? Because if I, he and another hundred people\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Objective for whom? With regard to man in our world. This is how our world manifests within man. But whether or not it exists on the outside, I cannot say. I detect certain sounds and certain images; they are drawn within me, but not on the outside. For instance, I see this table and this glass. Do they actually exist outside of me? I do not know, I cannot say. The only thing I can say is that images are drawn within me that appear to me as though they exist on the outside. This glass here\u2014does it have the same form outside of my senses? No, it does not have the same form; it just appears to me this way. But what is it actually like? I cannot say what it\u2019s actually like\u2014only with regard to the perceiver, to the observer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There are four approaches to perceiving reality. The Newtonian approach states that the world outside of us is the same as we perceive it within.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is another approach that was developed by Hugh Everett, (American physicist, who first proposed the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics), which states that the world is the same as we perceive it, but also dependent upon the disturbances that we ourselves introduce to it. In other words, the world is something in between the observer and the picture he observes: I exist in certain contact with the world, and our common properties, our points of contact draw for me a certain picture. In this case, the picture of the world that I receive does, in fact, depend on my own properties.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Why is this so? Because even in our daily life there are certain things that I notice, and other things that I don\u2019t, certain things that I perceive, but they escape my consciousness right after I perceive them. Meaning, there are certain things out there that I simply don\u2019t pay attention to, or, conversely, focus my attention on. I exist in greater or lesser contact with various objects, which determines how they are drawn within me. In other words, I perceive only a portion of the world that exists around me. It may contain other objects that I don\u2019t yet perceive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And then there\u2019s another view, which is closer to Kabbalah\u2019s view, (there are also all kinds of other theories that exist between these), and it states that, in reality, we don\u2019t perceive anything<\/em> that exists outside of us. Nothing at all. We perceive only what is constructed within us.<\/p>\n\n\n\n You can look at it this way: there is a certain source that exists outside of us; if I knock on this table\u2014you hear a sound. A certain action is made, and it creates a certain wave. This wave reaches your ear, strikes the eardrum, moves through all the systems, (electrical, chemical), reflects in your brain, which juxtaposes it against familiar data, determines that it is a sound, and informs you of it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What does your own perception have to do with the outside sound? All sorts of reactions took place: mechanical pressure from this wave, followed by electrical phenomena, followed by all kinds of chemical reactions, juxtaposed against your various memories, recollections, and so forth. What does all this have to do with whatever took place on the outside? Very-very little. That is why it is said that there are similarities between the observer and various external phenomena.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But Kabbalah tells us that even these similarities don\u2019t exist, and neither are there any external phenomena\u2014everything exists within man. And outside of us there\u2019s nothing. There is a constant force, within which we exist, and based on our compatibility with this constant force (this absolute constant), various kinds of internal phenomena occur within us, and create within us all sorts of sensations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In other words, I sense and perceive only my own inner changes, my inner development with regard to this constant external force. And this picture of my inner changes is presented to me as my worldview. This is what Kabbalah states and describes, and does so scientifically\u2014using mathematics, physics, graphs, and so forth, inviting us to enter into this reality. And when you begin to study it, research it, and enter into these states, you see that it is truly so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And science is gradually coming to this conclusion as well. A time ago people\u2019s trust lay in Newton alone, then Einstein, then Hugh Everett, and now they\u2019re beginning to agree with or least to listen to what Kabbalah has been saying and describing for many thousands of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>It follows from what you\u2019re saying that, throughout man\u2019s whole life, while he thinks that he is studying the world around him, in reality he is studying himself?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Absolutely right. Yes, we study only ourselves. Generally speaking, all this is no more than an act of self-awareness.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>But why should one attain another reality that exists outside of him? How does it benefit him? Does it teach him how to live his life or something?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>We are being pushed toward the entrance to this new reality, and we must enter it. We must feel ourselves in it. We must exist in it, because existence in this uppermost external reality is eternal and complete. This is what nature is pushing us toward.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It doesn\u2019t matter whether we desire it or not. This is how we\u2019re structured from the very beginning\u2014we must undergo this gradual development and come to feel this external reality, enter and exist within it. So much so that the sensation of this world and our contacts within it disappears. And the present picture ascends, little by little, as though transforming into the images and forces of that external, upper reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>Alex from Berlin is asking the following question (I think that you\u2019ve partially answered it already): \u201cOnce upon a time, Lao Tzu, the founder of Taoism, dreamt that he was a butterfly. When he woke up, he spent a lot of time thinking about what he was in reality: a butterfly, who dreams that it is Lao Tzu, or Lao Tzu, who dreams that he is a butterfly?\u201d What can Kabbalah tell him?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Kabbalah can tell him this: eventually he will enter into yet another reality. He exists both in life, at least what we call \u201clife,\u201d and in a dream, but because his sensations are so vivid, he cannot tell one apart from the other. By the way, one\u2019s sensations in a dream may be even more vivid than in life\u2014is that not so? And the opposite can also be true, so this doesn\u2019t mean anything. Whenever we fall asleep and then wake up, we are in control of ourselves, because we divide these two things\u2014this is life, and this is a dream. However, in essence, both states are illusory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Kabbalah would have shown Lao Tzu that there is yet another state, which exists beyond both dream and vigil, a state that contains an absolute and constant flow of information, and this state is called \u201ceternal and perfect life or existence,\u201d although this is not our understanding of \u201clife.\u201d And looking from that existence at our present state, the entire inanimate, vegetative and animate nature of our world, our universe, including man, is merely an illusion, clusters of energy\u2014and nothing more. So, both of his states\u2014dream and vigil\u2014would appear to Lao Tzu as mere illusion with regard to those who exist in it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>And one can exist in both worlds simultaneously?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Until a Kabbalist fully completes his ascension into the Upper World, into this next dimension, he retains the sensation of our world. As soon as he fully enters this upper reality, he retains the sensations of this world only because he needs to maintain contact with other people. However, there is essentially no need for him to return to this illusion anymore.<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>But as he lives here, does he also exist in that world at the same time? Or, for instance, in this world I can look or not look, I can hear or close my ears and not hear; does a Kabbalist also, while existing in this world with his five senses and in the spiritual world simultaneously, sometimes \u201cdrops out\u201d of there?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Sometimeshe does \u201cdrop out,\u201d and this depends on whether or not he associates himself as the inner stress with the Upper World. In order to exist in the Upper dimension, one needs to act in a particular manner. For instance, if a person is very sick, if he loses consciousness or if he has no opportunity to focus himself appropriately and relate himself to this dimension, he may drop out of it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>But does he know that he dropped out? Is he conscious of it?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Yes. That is, the contact with the Upper World remains in a person forever. And reestablishing this contact depends on him alone.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>But why this word\u2014\u201cupper\u201d?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>\u201cUpper,\u201d because from there our present state is perceived as lower, limited and transient. A spiritual state is dominant and truly better. That is why it is called, \u201cupper.\u201d In our world, this is how we assign the correlation\u2014\u201cupper\u201d and \u201clower.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>And why is it the, \u201cspiritual world\u201d?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>\u201cSpiritual,\u201d because it bears no relation to corporeal objects\u2014it is above them, beyond them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>And where is the word \u201cspiritual\u201d itself from? From the root of \u201cspirit\u201d?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>In Kabbalah, the word Ruach <\/em>is used. Generally speaking, though, the force that governs our world is broken down into five forces: Nefesh<\/em>, Ruach<\/em>, Neshama<\/em>, Chaya <\/em>and Yechida<\/em>. And combined they are called the \u201cUpper Light.\u201d It is not the light of our world, but the Light of the Upper World, meaning completely different frequencies and properties. So then, the concepts of Light and spirituality are one and the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>If I\u2019m not mistaken, one of the things that Julius Caesar was famous for was his ability to do 5 things at once. Can a Kabbalist use the mind of our material world to, let\u2019s say, be engaged in a conversation with the two of us, while using his Kabbalistic mind to converse with, for instance, Julius Caesar?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Constantly! Because these are two absolutely unconnected sections of his \u201cI\u201d: the animal one is the lower section of our world, and the spiritual one pertains to the Upper soul. Naturally, he exists in both worlds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>And if the mind of one asks the mind of the other which place is more fun, what would be the answer?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Well, what do you think? There\u2019s nothing worse than our world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>But there are so many interesting things here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Just like the kids in a kindergarten are also amused with their toys. But there really is nothing worse than our world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>In every way?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Absolutely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>So, in all seriousness, any person in this world is always worse off than in the other?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Any person. Because in this world that we live in, we are constantly fleeing from suffering. And even a tiny drop of pleasure we perceive as happiness. This drop is then immediately extinguished, and yet again we resume our hunt for illusory pleasures. And this hunt is what we call \u201clife.\u201d In truth, it\u2019s nothing more than an endless pursuit or search for any kind of fulfillment. Hence, we really cannot call it interesting or good, except perhaps for want of a better alternative. But I suggest that you try the alternative, and then you\u2019ll see.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>A two-part question from the internet: \u201cAre there parallel worlds?\u201d is the first part, and the second is addressed to you directly: \u201cWere you ever in them?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>I don\u2019t know what they mean by, \u201cparallel worlds.\u201d There\u2019s a variety of our reflections in other words. There are a total of five worlds: Assiya<\/em>, Yetzira<\/em>, Beria<\/em>, Atzilut<\/em>, Adam Kadmon<\/em> and Olam Ein Sof<\/em>\u2014the so-called parallel worlds, but they\u2019re all spiritual. There are no other corporeal universes or worlds, like ours.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We exist at the lowest possible level. All that exists above this level by even one degree is already the spiritual\u2014a total of 125 degrees, divided by five worlds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>In the 60-70s there were lots of disputes as to whether there\u2019s life on Mars. So your answer is no?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Mars is neither a parallel universe nor a parallel world.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Sanilevich: <\/strong>Next question: how and why does a sensation of time appear?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>A sensation of time is a strictly subjective sensation. In accordance with this subjective sensation, we observe that our world is in motion, witness cause-and-effect processes, where cause always precedes effect, and effect, in turn, becomes cause for the next effect, and so forth. These changes, as they manifest to us in this sequence, create in us a sensation of time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In reality, even science, beginning with Einstein, states that time does not exist in and of itself. There are probabilities, and not only probabilities, but also instances where effect precedes and determines cause, and both life and time flow not in a fixed direction, but in a completely different one. These are the findings of modern science. And Kabbalah states that there is not even the notion of time. It doesn\u2019t exist.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>Time or notion?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Time doesn\u2019t exist. In other words, the real world (the spiritual world) is not a world of time; rather, it is a world of categories and forces. We cannot imagine this, because our lives are completely deterministic. Our pulse, our life: all that we perceive is recorded in us automatically in terms of time\u2014when said event took place\u2014just like in a computer. You press a button, and the time of its pressing has been recorded. The next action\u2014the next button\u2014recorded again. And whatever it is you do (receive or send messages), everything is always recorded in terms of time, according to the computer\u2019s inner clock. And that same inner clock exists in us.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But in reality (in the spiritual world), this is not so. And science is gradually uncovering and agreeing with this, just as with everything else that Kabbalah says. It\u2019s quite amazing. Imagine, The Book of Creation<\/em>, written back in the times of Ancient Babylon (that\u2019s four and a half thousand years ago!) speaks of the same \u201cnew\u201d concepts and worldviews that science is only beginning to approach today. Everything that you and I are talking about right now stems from there.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar:<\/strong> If I understood you correctly, the sensation of time arises in a person as a result of a change of state, an emergence of new states\u2014they as though give him some inner indication or perception of time?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>If there were no changes, we would not feel time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>And you\u2019re saying that there\u2019s no time in the spiritual. Perhaps my question will sound foolish, but doesn\u2019t that mean that the spiritual contains only one state?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Yes. That\u2019s absolutely right. The spiritual cannot contain multiple states. Otherwise they would be classified in relation to one another: better or worse. The spiritual is absolute.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>But you yourself said that it contains five worlds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Those five worlds pertain to a gradual ascent to the final world. A true spiritual state is this final world, in which the notions of time and causality are fully nullified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>Does the person get dumber or something?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>No, he doesn\u2019t get dumber; on the contrary, his attainment becomes absolutely boundless.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>So time disappears because it is no longer needed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>Time is what binds us, and is the reason for our foolishness. Whereas without time our bindings disappear, and we can truly be all-intelligent and all-attaining. Cause-and-effect contracts, combines into a single whole, and we attain the Universe in full capacity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n E. Litvar: <\/strong>In other words, the sensation of time in the spiritual changes from the way I perceive it now to the final state, when this sensation disappears altogether? Meaning, it disappears gradually? And the sensation of time does exist in the spiritual worlds in some way, right?<\/p>\n\n\n\n M. Laitman: <\/strong>It exists as cause and effect. Time is when cause and effect are separated: here\u2019s the beginning and here\u2019s the next stage. In our world these two events may be separated by many years, but since nothing took place between them, in the spiritual they remain linked, standing close to one another, with one following the other.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe correct way of perceiving the world<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Why attain reality?<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
What is meant by \u201cUpper,\u201d \u201cspiritual\u201d?<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Does time exist?<\/h4>\n\n\n\n