Do you think the world is an illusion?

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by ketzer

...
Quote:
“Govinda said: "But what you call thing, is it something real, something intrinsic? Is it not only the illusion of Maya, only image and appearance? Your stone, your tree, are they real?"

"This also does not trouble me much," said Siddhartha. "If they are illusion, then I also am illusion, and so they are always of the same nature as myself. It is that which makes them so lovable and venerable. That is why I can Love them. And here is a doctrine at which you will laugh. It seems to me, Govinda, that love is the most important thing in the world. It may be important to great thinkers to examine the world, to explain and despise it. But I think it is only important to love the world, not to despise it, not for us to hate each other, but to be able to regard the world and ourselves and all beings with love, admiration and respect”
― Herman Hesse

A tall order no doubt. Can one have love, admiration, and respect for the shark that is about to eat you? Or for that matter for the soldiers who are about to nail you to a tree.

That's a stretch:

• Your stone, your tree, are they real? ...
• If they are illusion, then I also am illusion ...
• It is that which makes them so lovable and venerable ...
• It seems to me, Govinda, that love is the most important thing in the world ...
• I think it is only important to love the world, not to despise it, not for us to hate each other, but to be able to regard the world and ourselves and all beings with love, admiration and respect.

Originally Posted by ketzer

Originally Posted by ketzer
Yes, and the past, present, and future, all exist and are all equally real in the present moment.



One of the implications of Einstein's theory of relativity is that one persons past could be another future. No two people experience time and space in exactly the same way, and depending on velocity and gravity, they could be quite different. One theory that tries to make sense of this is known as the block universe and/or eternalism. In this conception, all of time simply exists and it becomes a matter of "where" in this block universe you are and where and how fast you are going.... so to speak.
Many will say that this implies that time is an illusion, and that time is not real. I think time is an illusion, at least as we experience it in this life anyway, but that does not mean it is not real, or does not exist, it is at any rate, something very different than what we perceive it to be.

Anyway, here is a link that helps explain.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idsw99SSwKc

Keep in mind that Einstein's theories we're well theories and he was a person like the rest of us so I don't place much on his opinion especially because he was an atomist

I view time as just a concept and not a reality but I also think that mankind has attracted this concept to something that is real in order to try to understand it and that "real" thing is change.

Everything seems to go through change and so by labeling it with the word "time" and the concept we make of it do to are memory (the past) and the future (present contemplation of the past and the imagination creating the future from it) and that eternity (for lack of a better word) is now and always has been and always will be

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by MAYA EL

Keep in mind that Einstein's theories we're well theories and he was a person like the rest of us so I don't place much on his opinion especially because he was an atomist

I view time as just a concept and not a reality but I also think that mankind has attracted this concept to something that is real in order to try to understand it and that "real" thing is change.

Everything seems to go through change and so by labeling it with the word "time" and the concept we make of it do to are memory (the past) and the future (present contemplation of the past and the imagination creating the future from it) and that eternity (for lack of a better word) is now and always has been and always will be

You could've explained your view without being dismissive about Einstein. Doing it, you weakened your argument.

Originally Posted by inavalan

You could've explained your view without being dismissive about Einstein. Doing it, you weakened your argument.

If by NOT believing in a CONCEPT made by a guy that nether one of us has ever met in person somehow makes me seem less wise to you then I'm sorry but your not the kind of person I would be willing to invest time into a discussion with

Originally Posted by MAYA EL

Keep in mind that Einstein's theories we're well theories and he was a person like the rest of us so I don't place much on his opinion especially because he was an atomist

I view time as just a concept and not a reality but I also think that mankind has attracted this concept to something that is real in order to try to understand it and that "real" thing is change.

Everything seems to go through change and so by labeling it with the word "time" and the concept we make of it do to are memory (the past) and the future (present contemplation of the past and the imagination creating the future from it) and that eternity (for lack of a better word) is now and always has been and always will be

What do you have against atomists? Anyway, atomist or not, Einstein was still probably the greatest scientific mind we have yet seen. Relativity overturned the foundations of science up to that point and the predictions it made were so beyond it's time that it has taken a century before we could even figure out how to test them.... and so far most if not all have passed. Of course nobody is perfect, eg. EPR.
Are particles real? From the standpoint of the quantum field or quantum wave function evolving in Hilbert space, particles might be seen as an illusion created by local maximums interacting between the fields. Yet, even whether the quantum field, the wave function, or Hilbert space can be called real is debatable. I have found that real is as pesky a critter to pin down as time is. It seems that experience is real, yet every thing that is experienced can be seen as real or illusion depending on ones perspective. Perhaps the experiencer of the experience could be said to be real, even if any definite definition or conception of what that experiencer "is" can be seen as illusory. If you find your internet goes down, you can entertain yourself by debating what is real and what is illusion with yourself. You will always both win and lose, so choose your side wisely .
Try as one might to explain time away, one cannot seem to come up with an explanation that does not also implicitly rely on time in some way. Change, yes I have said that myself, but change with respect to what? What we call time may be seen as an illusion, but I suspect if we truly see through that illusion, we will once again find time. Its a pesky critter, one that I have not been able to shake. I can debate myself all day on whether time is real or an illusion, but first I would have to declare a clear winner in the debate on what is "real" and so far that debate remains a draw.

Originally Posted by ketzer

What do you have against atomists? Anyway, atomist or not, Einstein was still probably the greatest scientific mind we have yet seen. Relativity overturned the foundations of science up to that point and the predictions it made were so beyond it's time that it has taken a century before we could even figure out how to test them.... and so far most if not all have passed. Of course nobody is perfect, eg. EPR.
Are particles real? From the standpoint of the quantum field or quantum wave function evolving in Hilbert space, particles might be seen as an illusion created by local maximums interacting between the fields. Yet, even whether the quantum field, the wave function, or Hilbert space can be called real is debatable. I have found that real is as pesky a critter to pin down as time is. It seems that experience is real, yet every thing that is experienced can be seen as real or illusion depending on ones perspective. Perhaps the experiencer of the experience could be said to be real, even if any definite definition or conception of what that experiencer "is" can be seen as illusory. If you find your internet goes down, you can entertain yourself by debating what is real and what is illusion with yourself. You will always both win and lose, so choose your side wisely .
Try as one might to explain time away, one cannot seem to come up with an explanation that does not also implicitly rely on time in some way. Change, yes I have said that myself, but change with respect to what? What we call time may be seen as an illusion, but I suspect if we truly see through that illusion, we will once again find time. Its a pesky critter, one that I have not been able to shake. I can debate myself all day on whether time is real or an illusion, but first I would have to declare a clear winner in the debate on what is "real" and so far that debate remains a draw.

Atomistic science is a religion by definition.
I know that's a big pill for most to swallow but its true science is the one world religion spoken of in the book of Revelation because you ask anyone and the will all believe in science in one degree or another

Hell I'm using a scrying mirror to communicate with you right now how is that possible? Well with science anything's possible (sounds like the Christian phrase huh?) .

Time makes sense to are human brain but so does eating 3 times a day having fun or having clothes on my point being that we have tendencies that are alike because all humans are alike to a certain degree so we share habits like any other species does

Only it's a bit more difficult for us to break the habits because whatever the collective mind believes IS the reality we experience so as you try to break free from time you will find it pulling you back in

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by MAYA EL

If by NOT believing in a CONCEPT made by a guy that nether one of us has ever met in person somehow makes me seem less wise to you then I'm sorry but your not the kind of person I would be willing to invest time into a discussion with

You're rude, and wrong in your arguments.

[Lynn]

Hello Members

I am busy dealing with those that are a bit more "Fragile" on the site behind the scenes.

Please stop and remember that we are in difficult times that is at times not bring out the "best in us" but respect is key here.

Respect is a rule here on site. So statements like "your wrong" is not permitted. Please help me help others.

Lynn
SF Admin

Originally Posted by inavalan

You're rude, and wrong in your arguments.

Your opinion of me is only yours and so only matters and has value to you personally

Also your feelings are invisible to everyone but yourself and so no one can be held accountable for your feelings getting hurt

So you will have to grow and adapt in order to survive.

And I will ignore the "your wrong " statement because it is to immature to justify me explaining why .

[Lynn]

Hello

I am past done with "babysitting" in thread.


This one is now closed.

Agree to disagree and move on do not start another thread on this topic.

Lynn
SF Admin