Did the big bang really happen?

Originally Posted by MikeS80

...someone more than likely complained and would rather live in la la land. .....

By physical realism do you mean a reality that is independent of mind?
......
The physical reality/universe being an illusion is for the concept of non-duality and that is where I draw the line.
...
Concepts, beliefs, knowledge and the ego's/I mental and emotional conditioning and programming that are not based on absolute reality are illusions, dreams, fantasies and delusions.

Wouldn't we all rather live in la la land? Well, maybe not those who already live in candy land. Best if you could live in Willy Wonka's chocloate factory and have both music and candy.
Oompa, oompa, oompa de do.... we've got a quantum riddle for you.

Yes, physical reality that exists independent of the mind, and independent of whether any conscious observer is conscious or aware of it. That is what I mean to say I don't believe physically exists. Consciousness creates physical reality, it is not real, in any "physical" sense, outside of it. This I believe is one of the implications of quantum mechanics and relativity. Of course, outside of conscious observation, in the mathematical imaginary world of Hilbert space, it exists mathematically in every possible way it could, even though most of those possibilities are vanishingly improbable. It is, I believe, up to U to decide which of those possibilities are going to become reality for U, whether you know it or not.
It really is "a world of pure imagination".
Here it is....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGpcsMpHZn8


I am not following what you mean regarding "being an illusion for the concept of non-duality only". Are you trying to say that duality is the illusion?

Also, you often use the term "absolute reality". What do you mean by or see as the "absolute reality"? Every reality that I may have once thought to be absolute reality, has upon a shift in perspective, turned out to not be so absolute after all. Have you found a reality that is not relative to perspective of the observer?

[MikeS80]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Wouldn't we all rather live in la la land? Well, maybe not those who already live in candy land. Best if you could live in Willy Wonka's chocloate factory and have both music and candy.
Oompa, oompa, oompa de do.... we've got a quantum riddle for you.

Yes, physical reality that exists independent of the mind, and independent of whether any conscious observer is conscious or aware of it. That is what I mean to say I don't believe physically exists. Consciousness creates physical reality, it is not real, in any "physical" sense, outside of it. This I believe is one of the implications of quantum mechanics and relativity. Of course, outside of conscious observation, in the mathematical imaginary world of Hilbert space, it exists mathematically in every possible way it could, even though most of those possibilities are vanishingly improbable.
It really is "a world of pure imagination".

I am not following what you mean regarding "being an illusion for the concept of non-duality only". Are you trying to say that duality is the illusion?

Also, you often use the term "absolute reality". What do you mean by or see as the "absolute reality"? Every reality that I may have once thought to be absolute reality, has upon a shift in perspective, turned out to not be so absolute after all. Have you found a reality that is not relative to perspective of the observer?

Absolute reality and truth are the same thing. Truth is that which corresponds to reality. Truth is the word used to describe things that actually are as opposed to those things that are not. This is important in the context of discussing true or “absolute” reality, which is inevitably the same thing as absolute truth. Reality (truth) must, eventually, be absolute, or else there is no such thing as truth at all. If truth is not absolute, if there is no ultimate, single, all-encompassing truth, then there is literally nothing else to discuss. All statements of all kinds would be equally valid or wholly invalid, and there would be no meaningful difference. Truth is able to tell the difference.

The very nature of the question “what is reality (truth)” assumes a subject that can be defined by statements that are either true or false—accurate or inaccurate—real or unreal—actual or nonexistent. Even those who claim everything is relative must make an absolute statement about the way all things are. In other words, there is absolutely no escape from absolute reality (truth) and no denying some form of absolute truth. A person who chooses to jettison that idea is simply operating outside of the bounds of logic. Truth is logical, reason and not so common, common sense. Truth or absolute reality is absent of all beliefs, concepts, knowledge and mental and emotional conditioning and programming that is not based on truth/absolute reality. A person can only find and know truth/absolute reality by being in the right here and right now present moment, and not going back to or thinking of the past or thinking about the future.

Everything exists in true reality, all at the same time. True reality is the past, and future, in the right here and right now. Concepts and beliefs ect influences and moves your attention away from true reality to give you the reality you perceive, experience, and interact with, which is not truth/absolute reality.

Originally Posted by MikeS80

Absolute reality and truth are the same thing. Truth is that which corresponds to reality. Truth is the word used to describe things that actually are as opposed to those things that are not. This is important in the context of discussing true or “absolute” reality, which is inevitably the same thing as absolute truth. Reality (truth) must, eventually, be absolute, or else there is no such thing as truth at all. If truth is not absolute, if there is no ultimate, single, all-encompassing truth, then there is literally nothing else to discuss. All statements of all kinds would be equally valid or wholly invalid, and there would be no meaningful difference. Truth is able to tell the difference.

The very nature of the question “what is reality (truth)” assumes a subject that can be defined by statements that are either true or false—accurate or inaccurate—real or unreal—actual or nonexistent. Even those who claim everything is relative must make an absolute statement about the way all things are. In other words, there is absolutely no escape from absolute reality (truth) and no denying some form of absolute truth. A person who chooses to jettison that idea is simply operating outside of the bounds of logic. Truth is logical, reason and not so common, common sense. Truth or absolute reality is absent of all beliefs, concepts, knowledge and mental and emotional conditioning and programming that is not based on truth/absolute reality. A person can only find and know truth/absolute reality by being in the right here and right now present moment, and not going back to or thinking of the past or thinking about the future.

Everything exists in true reality, all at the same time. True reality is the past, and future, in the right here and right now. Concepts and beliefs ect influences and moves your attention away from true reality to give you the reality you perceive, experience, and interact with, which is not truth/absolute reality.

I don't disagree with what you are saying, but my question is not whether such a thing as absolute truth is absolutely real, but whether you or I or any finite minded time bound entity can "know" what that is. Personally I find the concept of an absolute truth to feel more real then the idea that everything is relative, despite the fact that any truth or reality I have come up with has always turned out to be relative in the end. But then again, perhaps it is also true that nothing can be said to be the absolute truth. Not because there is no absolute truth, but because the Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tao. Your first paragraph seemed a bit circular or self referencing. This I expect is probably inevitable as any attempt to define this absolute truth or absolute reality ends up doubling back on itself as it runs out of words and concepts and starts going back to the ones it started with. Perhaps this is a limitation of language, perhaps this is a limitation of the finite capacity of mind, or perhaps it is a limitation when trying to define the undefinable mystery. We may have this sense that we know there is an absolute truth or reality, we may even feel that somewhere inside we know what it is, but any attempt to define and communicate this truth always falls short. Maybe because we don't have it, or maybe because the Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tao. In any case, without the ability to communicate this absolute truth or define this absolute reality, we lack the ability to use it to measure any other statements as truth or constructs as "real" with any absolute degree of confidence. Especially if we spend a bit more time with these truths and realities, walk around them and look at them from different perspectives, and find they are not as absolute as we first thought they were. We hear and speak many truths, but just how true they are relative to the absolute truth, we can never really say. We can feel it, but not "know" it, because we can not "know" what that absolute truth or absolute reality is. The realities we construct within our consciousness with space, time, and the myriad forms, are never the absolute realities, they are just straw dogs. We create them, use them to symbolize and explore deeper truths, and then when we are done with them, we burn them up and move on. These realities and truths we create within our consciousness, are not the ultimate truths and realities themselves, they only help us relate to them. Exactly how relative these truths are to those ultimate truths, we can't really say for sure.

[MikeS80]

Originally Posted by ketzer

I don't disagree with what you are saying, but my question is not whether such a thing as absolute truth is absolutely real, but whether you or I or any finite minded time bound entity can "know" what that is. Personally I find the concept of an absolute truth to feel more real then the idea that everything is relative, despite the fact that any truth or reality I have come up with has always turned out to be relative in the end. But then again, perhaps it is also true that nothing can be said to be the absolute truth. Not because there is no absolute truth, but because the Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tao. Your first paragraph seemed a bit circular or self referencing. This I expect is probably inevitable as any attempt to define this absolute truth or absolute reality ends up doubling back on itself as it runs out of words and concepts and starts going back to the ones it started with. Perhaps this is a limitation of language, perhaps this is a limitation of the finite capacity of mind, or perhaps it is a limitation when trying to define the undefinable mystery. We may have this sense that we know there is an absolute truth or reality, we may even feel that somewhere inside we know what it is, but any attempt to define and communicate this truth always falls short. Maybe because we don't have it, or maybe because the Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tao. In any case, without the ability to communicate this absolute truth or define this absolute reality, we lack the ability to use it to measure any other statements as truth or constructs as "real" with any absolute degree of confidence. Especially if we spend a bit more time with these truths and realities, walk around them and look at them from different perspectives, and find they are not as absolute as we first thought they were. We hear and speak many truths, but just how true they are relative to the absolute truth, we can never really say. We can feel it, but not "know" it, because we can not "know" what that absolute truth or absolute reality is. The realities we construct within our consciousness with space, time, and the myriad forms, are never the absolute realities, they are just straw dogs. We create them, use them to symbolize and explore deeper truths, and then when we are done with them, we burn them up and move on. These realities and truths we create within our consciousness, are not the ultimate truths and realities themselves, they only help us relate to them. Exactly how relative these truths are to those ultimate truths, we can't really say for sure.

It is not circular at all. I was just explaining truth/absolute reality. The truth does not speak in concepts as concepts are not truth. Concepts are subjective not absolute/objective. The truth is just the truth and the observerable truth/absolute reality is not dependent on the observer. The truth/absolute reality is that oneness is all and all is oneness-nothing is seperate from each other, thus we humans are dependent on other humans as a whole/in general, we humans are not dependent on one particular person. When I realized this truth for myself and I stopped fighting that truth, life got a whole lot better and easier for me. Concepts, beliefs and our mental and emotional subconscious conditioning/programming alters our attention and awareness so we attract or get what we have our attention/focus on, tuth or otherwise-like energy attracts like energy-you reap what you sow, you plant rose seeds, you will get rose bushes, if you cut or scratch yourself on rose thorns, you will bleed.

The issue is not wether the physical universe is an illusion or not, the issue is that our concepts, beliefs and our mental and emotional subconscious conditioning/programming that is not grounded/based on truth alters our attention and awareness so our consciousness perceives subjective personal and individual fantasy/dream realities for us,
that are based on our concepts, beliefs and mental and emotional conditioning/programming.

ATTENTION DRIVES/DIRECTS ENERGY
Take into consideration the concept of thoughtforms, a western belief based on the Tibetan Buddhist concept tulpas: when a person focuses on a singular belief, concept, thought or presence, whatever it may be, and thinks that it is real/true, a metaphysical manifestation will be created from the energy the attention/focus created. This means, the ego/I (thinking) outer self, drives/directs energy to whatever thought, belief, feeling, and concept the (thinking) outer self has his/her attention/focus on. The creator of this energy is more likely to be the feeling of your I AM/higher self/feeling of being inner self, in your heart. This is the foundation of like energy attracts like energy-"the law of attraction"/manifestation/synchronicity.

Attention/focus is the ego personalizing and individualizing awareness/consciousness. Awareness is aware of everything, all at the same time, including the ego.

Most people assume and think that "the law of attraction"/manifestation/synchronicity only influences wealth/money, when it influences how a person perceives/views his/her personal and individual reality.

Originally Posted by MikeS80

... I was just explaining truth/absolute reality. The truth does not speak in concepts as concepts are not truth. Concepts are subjective not absolute/objective.

Yes, so very true.

The truth is just the truth and the observerable truth/absolute reality is not dependent on the observer. The truth/absolute reality is that oneness is all and all is oneness-nothing is seperate from each other, thus we humans are dependent on other humans as a whole/in general, we humans are not dependent on one particular person. ...

And yet to convey that ultimate truth, you must present concepts. This is the dilemma inherent in trying to communicate the Tao.

"The unnamable is the eternally real.
Naming is the origin of all particular things."

The first verse of the Tao Te Ching opens on an almost cautionary note, warning us that the ultimate truth is beyond conceptualisation and abstraction. How then can we seek to express the inexpressible with words and concepts without losing its very essence? How do we approach this eternal Tao and understand the mystery from which all life arises? ...
http://daily-tao.blogspot.com/2011/12/verse-1.html

Great blog post btw, worth clicking on and reading....

[MikeS80]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Yes, so very true.

And yet to convey that ultimate truth, you must present concepts. This is the dilemma inherent in trying to communicate the Tao.

Great blog post btw, worth clicking on and reading....

Concepts are suppose to help the outer ego/I, go beyond the outer ego/I to discover the inner I AM. But the outer ego/I misconceptualizes concepts and do not go beyond concepts to discover the inner I AM.

Absolute truth does not require concepts to convey and to know absolute truth, just come out and say what absolute truth is. Absolute truth is not hocus pocus magic. The dilemma is that no one can show you absolute truth to you. To see absolute truth for yourself, you need to learn to be conscious of and reject all your beliefs based on negativity, limiting, lack and scarcity among others mental and emotional conditioning and programming that is inside your head. Starting anywhere else is putting the cart before the horse.

[Ewwerrin]

Originally Posted by MikeS80

Absolute reality and truth are the same thing. Truth is that which corresponds to reality. Truth is the word used to describe things that actually are as opposed to those things that are not. This is important in the context of discussing true or “absolute” reality, which is inevitably the same thing as absolute truth.

Non-existence doesn't exist, that is the definition of non-existence.

Absolute truth's are unchanging laws of existence/creation.

1. Existence exists. (There is no room in non-existence for that which does exist, because non existence doesn't exist, and you exist. Everything is subject to existence.)
2. The one is the all and the all are the one.
3. What you put out is what you get back. (law of ever expansion/attraction, infinity eternity variety, etc. Humans have a difficult time understanding this one, because they often forget their primary ability to know energy offering and receiving (expansion) is of the ability to sense emotion as energy in motion)
4. Everything changes, even change changes into the unchanging 3 laws of existence/creation.

[Ewwerrin]

Originally Posted by ketzer

I don't disagree with what you are saying, but my question is not whether such a thing as absolute truth is absolutely real, but whether you or I or any finite minded time bound entity can "know" what that is. Personally I find the concept of an absolute truth to feel more real then the idea that everything is relative, despite the fact that any truth or reality I have come up with has always turned out to be relative in the end. But then again, perhaps it is also true that nothing can be said to be the absolute truth. Not because there is no absolute truth, but because the Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tao. Your first paragraph seemed a bit circular or self referencing. This I expect is probably inevitable as any attempt to define this absolute truth or absolute reality ends up doubling back on itself as it runs out of words and concepts and starts going back to the ones it started with. Perhaps this is a limitation of language, perhaps this is a limitation of the finite capacity of mind, or perhaps it is a limitation when trying to define the undefinable mystery. We may have this sense that we know there is an absolute truth or reality, we may even feel that somewhere inside we know what it is, but any attempt to define and communicate this truth always falls short. Maybe because we don't have it, or maybe because the Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tao. In any case, without the ability to communicate this absolute truth or define this absolute reality, we lack the ability to use it to measure any other statements as truth or constructs as "real" with any absolute degree of confidence. Especially if we spend a bit more time with these truths and realities, walk around them and look at them from different perspectives, and find they are not as absolute as we first thought they were. We hear and speak many truths, but just how true they are relative to the absolute truth, we can never really say. We can feel it, but not "know" it, because we can not "know" what that absolute truth or absolute reality is. The realities we construct within our consciousness with space, time, and the myriad forms, are never the absolute realities, they are just straw dogs. We create them, use them to symbolize and explore deeper truths, and then when we are done with them, we burn them up and move on. These realities and truths we create within our consciousness, are not the ultimate truths and realities themselves, they only help us relate to them. Exactly how relative these truths are to those ultimate truths, we can't really say for sure.

What you are talking about, absolute truth, is very simple. It is simply existence.
As you are referring to Dao, as the non-yearning purely allowed to be purely realised pure desire for the greater allowed realisation, which is the source of all creation, which is the natural path of least resistance, through which all that exists is being and becoming evermore naturally and effortlessly here and now. Which is the greatest power that exists, which does nothing and leaves nothing undone, as unconditional love, as existence itself, pure positive energy, the greatest enabler and allower, being and becoming evermore naturally and effortlessly here and now, under any and all conditions, regardless of any and all conditions, unconditionally, energy motionally, emotionally, as your true ability to be without yearning and come to evermore effortless and natural greater allowed realisation of the gate of evermore being and becoming here and now wonders of all infinity and eternity. As the energy motional, emotional, alignment, is the only thing that is necessary. Which is also why in chapter one of dao it says to be without YEARNING. Not to be without desire. But to be with evermore greater allowed realisation of desire. Which happens through the energy motional alignment with Dao. Which is the source of all creation as that which man calls god or source. Tho in the past the word god was used to refer to conditions which is often unable to acknowledge the totality of existence.