The relationship between change and the passage of time

[guthrio]

Originally Posted by weareunity

Hi guthrio! howyerdoin? Ok I hope.

Thanks for link. Got any personal pondering, plodding, wondering, on this topic in manner of post 7?

All the v.b.

petex

Hi Petex,

Doing fine, Thank you!

From your post 7:
If we were to choose to explore the proposition that change is indeed dependent upon the passage of time, then we might also ponder upon the functioning of "cause and consequence" as also being subject to this same dependency. Such pondering may perhaps take us on a tangent away from what seems logical toward the conjectural--wondering perhaps if the relationship between change and the passage of time is itself somehow connected in terms of cause and consequence?--and which is cause and which is consequence? The original proposition may prove to be not valid in all circumstances, but the exploration may nevertheless be fruitful.

It occurred to me that the functioning of "cause and consequence" appears, at first glance, in this manner (cause comes "first", then consequence comes "after")

....is really a trick perspective we've been taught to accept as reality, when THIS is the reality behind the TRICK: https://iasos.com/metaphys/bashar/#present

The PRESENT is not the result of the PAST.
The PRESENT is the result of the PRESENT.

Continuity is an "illusion", just like the continuity in movies is an illusion, since it's really 24 discrete pictures per second. As you change your present (by changing your present beliefs), you are "shifting" into a different parallel reality and that different parallel reality has its own "future" and "past". Said another way, when you change your present, you are likewise also changing your past and your future. That is, you are shifting to a totally different hologram which contains its own "past" that is consistent with its "present", and also its own "future" which is likewise consistent with its "present". As I believe Bashar says: "You create the past and the future from the here and now."

All possible "versions" of your reality already exist. In fact, they are all here - right under your nose - right Here, right Now. However, most of these "versions" are invisible to us, and they become "visible" only when we "tune" ourselves (via our beliefs), to be compatible and resonant with the frequencies of any one particular "version". Furthermore, since Time is only a local "illusion" that does not really exist, everything you ever hope to "become" or "attain", you have already become and attained. If it's "invisible" to you, that's only because your beliefs do not yet have you vibrating in a manner that is synchronous with those versions. You contain it ALL - all possible "versions". And all these here/now versions are in various states of visible/invisible for you, depending on your beliefs relative to any particular version. You "see" and "objectively experience" the versions that are synchronized with how you are vibrating, and it's your beliefs at any given moment that determine how you are vibrating.

AND HERE'S THE KICKER: When you shift to another version of reality, you become the "you" that already existed in that version. And the "you" in the version you just left, is still "real" and still "there". Since EVERYTHING is CONSCIOUSNESS, and Since YOU are EVERYTHING, Shifting from one parallel reality to another is like "closing your eyes" in one version and "opening your eyes" in another version. Shifting from one parallel reality to another is like "viewing through the window of another you" and no longer "viewing through the window of the previous you". But keep in mind that this "new you" and the "previous you" are still both "real", and have both always existed..........since YOU are EVERYTHING and YOU have ALWAYS EXISTED. as excerpted herein: https://iasos.com/metaphys/bashar/#shift

What does all this mean? To me, it means that the idea of MOVEMENT, IS the trick! When what is actually happening is that the APPEARANCE of movement is because get this:

YOU ARE ALREADY EVERYWHERE AT ONCE.....as Spirit!

Change is NOT dependent upon time, except as an appearance, we've been fooled into believing is reality. Einstein, himself, who provided the world with a mathematical basis for viewing time, would not have believed the following was concurrently true OF him, even while his scientific labors produced the equivalency of mass, matter, and light, E=MC2. What he didn't suspect is that SPIRIT = CAUSE and CONSEQUENCE, too!

Don't believe me? Check out this cause / consequence relationship in the reference: https://iasos.com/metaphys/bashar/#transition

Right NOW, you are actually in Spirit. You are not in any physical dimension. You have never left Spirit.
Right NOW, you are in Spirit - dreaming that you are having this physical incarnation.

THIS MEANS ALL OF US!!

...one more thing. Please take a peek at my signature, please. On page 17/28 of the book Jonathan Livingston Seagull, there is the following passage: "Chiang spoke slowly and watched the younger gull ever so carefully. “To fly as fast as thought, to anywhere that is,” he said, “you must begin by knowing that you have already arrived ...” The trick, according to Chiang, was for Jonathan to stop seeing himself as trapped inside a limited body that had a forty-two-inch wingspan and performance that could be plotted on a chart. The trick was to know that his true nature lived, as perfect as an unwritten number, everywhere at once across space and time."

In light of the above, I hope you can ascertain what the term "the law of identical harvest" means in the article by Janet McKee entitled CONSCIOUSNESS (Post #39).

What do you think about the "conjectural" relationship between cause and consequence now?

P.S. Your questions are sooooo good!!

Originally Posted by guthrio

Hi Petex,

Doing fine, Thank you!

From your post 7:
If we were to choose to explore the proposition that change is indeed dependent upon the passage of time, then we might also ponder upon the functioning of "cause and consequence" as also being subject to this same dependency. Such pondering may perhaps take us on a tangent away from what seems logical toward the conjectural--wondering perhaps if the relationship between change and the passage of time is itself somehow connected in terms of cause and consequence?--and which is cause and which is consequence? The original proposition may prove to be not valid in all circumstances, but the exploration may nevertheless be fruitful.

It occurred to me that the functioning of "cause and consequence" appears, at first glance, in this manner (cause comes "first", then consequence comes "after")

....is really a trick perspective we've been taught to accept as reality, when THIS is the reality behind the TRICK:

All possible "versions" of your reality already exist. In fact, they are all here - right under your nose - right Here, right Now. However, most of these "versions" are invisible to us, and they become "visible" only when we "tune" ourselves (via our beliefs), to be compatible and resonant with the frequencies of any one particular "version". Furthermore, since Time is only a local "illusion" that does not really exist, everything you ever hope to "become" or "attain", you have already become and attained. If it's "invisible" to you, that's only because your beliefs do not yet have you vibrating in a manner that is synchronous with those versions. You contain it ALL - all possible "versions". And all these here/now versions are in various states of visible/invisible for you, depending on your beliefs relative to any particular version. You "see" and "objectively experience" the versions that are synchronized with how you are vibrating, and it's your beliefs at any given moment that determine how you are vibrating.

AND HERE'S THE KICKER: When you shift to another version of reality, you become the "you" that already existed in that version. And the "you" in the version you just left, is still "real" and still "there". Since EVERYTHING is CONSCIOUSNESS, and Since YOU are EVERYTHING, Shifting from one parallel reality to another is like "closing your eyes" in one version and "opening your eyes" in another version. Shifting from one parallel reality to another is like "viewing through the window of another you" and no longer "viewing through the window of the previous you". But keep in mind that this "new you" and the "previous you" are still both "real", and have both always existed..........since YOU are EVERYTHING and YOU have ALWAYS EXISTED. as excerpted herein: https://iasos.com/metaphys/bashar/#shift

What does all this mean? To me, it means that the idea of MOVEMENT, IS the trick! When what is actually happening is that the APPEARANCE of movement is because get this:

YOU ARE ALREADY EVERYWHERE AT ONCE.....as Spirit!

Change is NOT dependent upon time, except as an appearance, we've been fooled into believing is reality. Einstein, himself, who provided the world with a mathematical basis for viewing time, would not have believed the following was concurrently true OF him, even while his scientific labors produced the equivalency of mass, matter, and light, E=MC2. What he didn't suspect is that SPIRIT = CAUSE and CONSEQUENCE, too!

Don't believe me? Check out this cause / consequence relationship in the reference: https://iasos.com/metaphys/bashar/#transition

Right NOW, you are actually in Spirit. You are not in any physical dimension. You have never left Spirit.
Right NOW, you are in Spirit - dreaming that you are having this physical incarnation.

THIS MEANS ALL OF US!!

...one more thing. Please take a peek at my signature, please. On page 17/28 of the book Jonathan Livingston Seagull, there is the following passage: "Chiang spoke slowly and watched the younger gull ever so carefully. “To fly as fast as thought, to anywhere that is,” he said, “you must begin by knowing that you have already arrived ...” The trick, according to Chiang, was for Jonathan to stop seeing himself as trapped inside a limited body that had a forty-two-inch wingspan and performance that could be plotted on a chart. The trick was to know that his true nature lived, as perfect as an unwritten number, everywhere at once across space and time."

What do you think about the "conjectural" relationship between cause and consequence now?

P.S. Your questions are sooooo good!!

Pretty much agree with all of that, BUT, time is still a pesky critter to do without. I move back and see that all of the events just are, in all of their many different flavors and colors, here and now in the present moment. Yet, I can never really get ride of the backdrop of time.

I can see all the years Harry Potter was at Hogwarts, exist in the present moment in the pages of the books, and that my experience of those years, that time, is just an illusion created by my mind as I read through the events of the books. Yet I am still left with the experience of the passage of time external to the books as I sat and read them. It seems that no matter how I shift my perspective, I find time is still there. Differently perceived than it seemed in the previous perspective, yet still an experience of time. Sure, I can move between inertial reference frames and convert the different times using Lorentz transformations. Which makes me think this time thing is not real, yet I still have my before I transformed and after I transformed. Without time, I can't have before and after, without before and after I can't have sequence of events, in either reverse or forward directions, without that what can I experience at all? It seems to me although time always seems false in another inertial reference frame or in ones current perspective of reality, it nevertheless never really goes away, just transforms as we move between frames and perspectives.

Look at the block universe or the Akashic records as a whole, and time seems illusory. Yet it is through time that we look at them? There was the time before we looked and that understanding of time, and after we looked and that new understanding of time, but there is still before and after in some frame of time.

It seems to me the answer to the debate of whether time is real or an illusion is "YES".

Do you see what I mean?

[guthrio]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Pretty much agree with all of that, BUT, time is still a pesky critter to do without. I move back and see that all of the events just are, in all of their many different flavors and colors, here and now in the present moment. Yet, I can never really get ride of the backdrop of time.

I can see all the years Harry Potter was at Hogwarts, exist in the present moment in the pages of the books, and that my experience of those years, that time, is just an illusion created by my mind as I read through the events of the books. Yet I am still left with the experience of the passage of time external to the books as I sat and read them. It seems that no matter how I shift my perspective, I find time is still there. Differently perceived than it seemed in the previous perspective, yet still an experience of time. Sure, I can move between inertial reference frames and convert the different times using Lorentz transformations. Which makes me think this time thing is not real, yet I still have my before I transformed and after I transformed. Without time, I can't have before and after, without before and after I can't have sequence of events, in either reverse or forward directions, without that what can I experience at all? It seems to me although time always seems false in another inertial reference frame or in ones current perspective of reality, it nevertheless never really goes away, just transforms as we move between frames and perspectives.

Look at the block universe or the Akashic records as a whole, and time seems illusory. Yet it is through time that we look at them? There was the time before we looked and that understanding of time, and after we looked and that new understanding of time, but there is still before and after in some frame of time.

It seems to me the answer to the debate of whether time is real or an illusion is "YES".

Do you see what I mean?

Hi Ketzer,

Yes, I do.

...exactly as the view through a kaleidoscope "temporarily" alters one's perception, until you "real-eyes" the trick after putting them aside. Putting the kaleidoscope aside or choosing to forget that they're on...

...is our ever present privilege and choice.

Originally Posted by guthrio

Hi Ketzer,

Yes, I do.

...exactly as the view through a kaleidoscope "temporarily" alters one's perception, until you "real-eyes" the trick after putting them aside. Putting the kaleidoscope aside or choosing to forget that they're on...

...is our ever present privilege and choice.

I can't imagine what my real-eyes would see if I put down the kaleidoscope. I expect there would be nothing to see, just emptiness, which I suppose in and of itself is a valuable experience, and perhaps the only time that time might not be present (see how time snuck into that sentence anyway, sneaky bugger).

Yet, I wonder if it could also be a matter of making sense of that kaleidoscope while it keeps moving. It seems to be an ever changing, never the same thing. A moving jumbled picture that points to something(s) beyond its surface. A gestalt that cannot be directly shown to the eyes, or perhaps even really contained by the mind, yet can be known through an experience of that seemingly chaotic jumbled moving image.

[guthrio]

Originally Posted by ketzer

I can't imagine what my real-eyes would see if I put down the kaleidoscope. I expect there would be nothing to see, just emptiness, which I suppose in and of itself is a valuable experience, and perhaps the only time that time might not be present (see how time snuck into that sentence anyway, sneaky bugger).

Yet, I wonder if it could also be a matter of making sense of that kaleidoscope while it keeps moving. It seems to be an ever changing, never the same thing. A moving jumbled picture that points to something(s) beyond its surface. A gestalt that cannot be directly shown to the eyes, or perhaps even really contained by the mind, yet can be known through an experience of that seemingly chaotic jumbled moving image.

Ketzer,

What's sneakier than time? Being taught to act as if it actually exists.

This helped me clear it up: https://iasos.com/metaphys/bashar/#Time

"Time" is an illusion created by consciousness. This analogy will clarify:

In a film projector, the individual frames of the film are shown in a rapid steady sequence - one frame at a time. This rapid steady sequence of STILL frames creates the ILLUSION of flowing time. But in truth, all the actual frames that are used all exist simultaneously. There is the illusion of "time" only when the film projector displays those frames - one frame at a time - in a rapid steady sequence. Yet, ALL those frames exist simultaneously. In fact the projectionist can take out the roll of film, spread it out on the floor and view all those frames at the same time.

In a similar manner, our consciousness "projects" individual "still frames of reality" in a steady and extremely rapid sequence. Bashar says we do this BILLIONS of times per second - thus creating the ILLUSION of the steady flow of TIME. Each of these individual "still frames of reality" contains absolutely NO MOTION whatsoever! It is a frozen snapshot - perfectly still. And yet, by sequencing these still frames at a steady very-fast rate, we have the ILLUSION of time - the flow of time.

Our earthly consciousness functions like the film projector, which views these still frames only in a rapid steady sequence. Our Higher Self functions like the film projectionist, who can take out the roll of film and view ALL the frames simultaneously. Our Higher Self functions in a timeless eternal-NOW zone.


Besides, this, and other sources I've read (including those I've already stated in this thread), it finally dawned on me WHY we are always asked to "imagine what you want as if you already have it" or to "think FROM the desired result instead of thinking OF the desired result".

It's because the "result" exists right alongside the "desire FOR it" holographically.

But WE'VE been taught by the mechanism of our "sneaky time-producing "kaleidoscope consciousness" (i.e. via our body mechanisms) to believe in the mayaic appearance of separation to obscure the "real-eye-zation" of the eternal Truth....

"Love thy neighbor as Thyself, because thy neighbor is Thyself. How? All "things" are the same one thing vibrating at different rates https://iasos.com/metaphys/bashar/#one

....which, if you think about it, places the false arguments currently roiling our society about "whose lives matter more" in its proper loving light, doesn't it?

... It's about time, don't you think?

Reference: http://www.esolibris.com/articles/re...sciousness.php The Nature of Reality God and Consciousness (We are One)

[weareunity]

Hello.

Imagine a process displaying such a nature that if accepted as cause becomes also consequence.

petex

[guthrio]

Originally Posted by weareunity

Hello.

Imagine a process displaying such a nature that if accepted as cause becomes also consequence.

petex

....DONE! http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/sh...93&postcount=4

Originally Posted by guthrio

Ketzer,

What's sneakier than time? Being taught to act as if it actually exists.

This helped me clear it up: https://iasos.com/metaphys/bashar/#Time

"Time" is an illusion created by consciousness. This analogy will clarify:

In a film projector, the individual frames of the film are shown in a rapid steady sequence - one frame at a time. This rapid steady sequence of STILL frames creates the ILLUSION of flowing time. But in truth, all the actual frames that are used all exist simultaneously. There is the illusion of "time" only when the film projector displays those frames - one frame at a time - in a rapid steady sequence. Yet, ALL those frames exist simultaneously. In fact the projectionist can take out the roll of film, spread it out on the floor and view all those frames at the same time.

In a similar manner, our consciousness "projects" individual "still frames of reality" in a steady and extremely rapid sequence. Bashar says we do this BILLIONS of times per second - thus creating the ILLUSION of the steady flow of TIME. Each of these individual "still frames of reality" contains absolutely NO MOTION whatsoever! It is a frozen snapshot - perfectly still. And yet, by sequencing these still frames at a steady very-fast rate, we have the ILLUSION of time - the flow of time.

Our earthly consciousness functions like the film projector, which views these still frames only in a rapid steady sequence. Our Higher Self functions like the film projectionist, who can take out the roll of film and view ALL the frames simultaneously. Our Higher Self functions in a timeless eternal-NOW zone.


Besides, this, and other sources I've read (including those I've already stated in this thread), it finally dawned on me WHY we are always asked to "imagine what you want as if you already have it" or to "think FROM the desired result instead of thinking OF the desired result".

It's because the "result" exists right alongside the "desire FOR it" holographically.

But WE'VE been taught by the mechanism of our "sneaky time-producing "kaleidoscope consciousness" (i.e. via our body mechanisms) to believe in the mayaic appearance of separation to obscure the "real-eye-zation" of the eternal Truth....

"Love thy neighbor as Thyself, because thy neighbor is Thyself. How? All "things" are the same one thing vibrating at different rates https://iasos.com/metaphys/bashar/#one

....which, if you think about it, places the false arguments currently roiling our society about "whose lives matter more" in its proper loving light, doesn't it?

... It's about time, don't you think?

Reference: http://www.esolibris.com/articles/re...sciousness.php The Nature of Reality God and Consciousness (We are One)

I do like the motion picture analogy, it is one I have used myself. I agree that time is created by consciousness, and one can say it is an illusion, or they can equally say it is real. An illusion not in the sense that it does not exist, but only that it is not what we otherwise had mistakenly believed it to be. Yet even if one understands time in the context of that ever changing still frame present moment reality running at one Planck second per frame, giving rise to the illusion of motion, we still have one Planck second of time. This new time may not be inherent on the film itself, yet we need time to create the frame rate of the projector, and so time just changes perspective from the film to the projector rate. Just the word simultaneously implies time. It seems to me that although existence may not be dependent upon time, the knowledge and experience of it by consciousness is, perhaps including the knowledge or awareness of its own existence. The subject is aware of itself as the observer of the object(s).

Oneness shares a somewhat similar characteristic. In a true experience of oneness, it would seem that there is nothing to have that experience. As soon as we introduce a consciousness to have the experience of oneness, there is once again the subject and the object. ‘I’ am experiencing ‘oneness’, which is really twoness as there is I and there is oneness.

Of course neither the persistence of time through different perspectives or scopes, or the necessity of an I to experience oneness are showstoppers for the experience of reality or spiritual unity, but they do seem to place interesting limits on how our experience of existence comes about. We seem to rely on the existence of “other” and the constant change of that other through some kind of backdrop of time in order to have any sort of persistent awareness of an “I”.

[guthrio]

Originally Posted by ketzer

I do like the motion picture analogy, it is one I have used myself. I agree that time is created by consciousness, and one can say it is an illusion, or they can equally say it is real. An illusion not in the sense that it does not exist, but only that it is not what we otherwise had mistakenly believed it to be. Yet even if one understands time in the context of that ever changing still frame present moment reality running at one Planck second per frame, giving rise to the illusion of motion, we still have one Planck second of time. This new time may not be inherent on the film itself, yet we need time to create the frame rate of the projector, and so time just changes perspective from the film to the projector rate. Just the word simultaneously implies time. It seems to me that although existence may not be dependent upon time, the knowledge and experience of it by consciousness is, perhaps including the knowledge or awareness of its own existence. The subject is aware of itself as the observer of the object(s).

Oneness shares a somewhat similar characteristic. In a true experience of oneness, it would seem that there is nothing to have that experience. As soon as we introduce a consciousness to have the experience of oneness, there is once again the subject and the object. ‘I’ am experiencing ‘oneness’, which is really twoness as there is I and there is oneness.

Of course neither the persistence of time through different perspectives or scopes, or the necessity of an I to experience oneness are showstoppers for the experience of reality or spiritual unity, but they do seem to place interesting limits on how our experience of existence comes about. We seem to rely on the existence of “other” and the constant change of that other through some kind of backdrop of time in order to have any sort of persistent awareness of an “I”.

Ketzer,

While reading the description of your understandings, it became increasingly clear to me that the medium of exchange transporting our respective ideas, (i.e. language).... is itself rife with the limitations imposed via description.

... Which description is then taken by its correspondents, you and I, as meaning truth.

Our tendency to utilize language to describe experience, HIDES its most glaring deficiency:

There are no concepts or definitions to transport the experience that "all things are the same one thing vibrating at different rates"....to another, because the "other" is yet yourself.

Language, whether spoken or calculated as formulae...yet remains only the map that attempts to describe the indescribable territory.

Language imploringly asks "what is is"?

Experience silently echoes the only answer, "what is is".

I am in silent awe of the closest expression I have ever read concerning this "question / answer" dichotomy, which is a quote from the last line in Miss Hepburn's signature by Sri Lahiri Mahasaya:

"Meditate unceasingly that you quickly behold yourself as the Infinite Essence".

Speaking of which, what language is the Infinite Essence speaking here?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...xVc UVRb_sboG

[weareunity]

Hello fellows.
Re post 46

I think loving is a candidate.

petex