Is Reality subjective or objective?

A few friends were inquiring with me into the nature of reality- asking if reality is subjective or objective- asking if reality could be known... one of them brought forth this quote from Philip K. Dick:

"reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."

they commented:

This is of course an inherently personal definition

I said this:

there is another way to take this quote- that when the subjective is in abeyance, then the objective can be seen... this quote could be speaking of KNOWING the subjective so completely, as to have it disappear, and there what remains, is pure objective...

that seems to be the difficult part for our looking- that once something is seen in its completeness, then it is no longer as it was...

put in another way: if the subject is partial, it will measure the world partially- and from there, notions of object are also bound to be partial...

if the subject comes upon itself completely- that is, it sees itself wholly, then the objective can also be understood wholly, because the subjective as a partial can no longer interfere...

what formerly existed as an opposite, no longer has an opposite- and this can be seen, upon understanding the whole of that which measures (makes partial)

that which measures - IS that which limits- to measure is to make partial- is to separate- that is what limits the immeasurable- the whole...

end the measurement, and then find that which is not partial... the wholly objective...

measurement will read this, and defend itself from the partial in all its cleverness...

"you cant do this-and-that because" - or - "oh, what youre talking about is just this-and-that"

these will be just partial defenses on something that insists on limiting itself for its own survival... the subjective is perfectly designed to keep itself alive as long as it is possible, BY separating into twos (opposites) and defending those partials that will feed it- and opposing those partials which are perceived as threat...

so, a non-belief is still a belief- that is to say, a partial that speaks of the whole, is still making a partial out of it... the whole, does not argue with itself

this, is reality

the difficulty in achieving this "state", is that it is not a state at all! the ending of the partial comes at the ending of time... above, I stated that IF we can see the partial wholly, THEN we can come upon the whole- but the partial will see this and understand this "in time"- time is as fundamental as "IF/THEN" - the if/then approach to the problem is itself a result of the partial being partial- in the whole, there is no time, there is no "if/then"- time is the block to the partial seeing itself- end time, and the whole will appear- the partial, the subject, IS time... they are inseparable... it is impossible for the partial to end time, by trying to end time- the partial has motive to end time, so that it can see itself as whole, and that motive HAS to exist in time- motive does not exist out of time, that is, in the whole- motive is time is partial... these things will not come upon the whole...

what will come upon the whole?

the whole...

can the partial, see its own end?

can the partial see the end of time?

who wants to know?

what remains, is what you are looking for...

call it something, and lose it! you have named it, you have measured it- it is partial!...

LOOK, at motive- and find out the ending of motive, the ending of measurement and time- and then, the whole will be there, as it always was... this we call reality, when we are partial beings...we call it nothing, when we are whole- when "we" are not...