Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Spirituality & Beliefs > Science & Spirituality

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 11-06-2020, 07:22 PM
JustASimpleGuy
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamthat
It does not take a genius to work out that our sense of self remains constant although our physical bodies are always changing because our sense of self has nothing to do with the body.

What does puzzle me is why it requires interviews with five people to investigate this??

Peace

On a surface level, yes, but even so how many people will say something like "I'm not the same person I was twenty years ago"?

Then there's the deeper level where one can actually experience they are not their thoughts, memories or emotions. Very, very few experience that perspective outside of an intellectual exercise, even thought it's right there all the time. It's so very close yet so very far because of all the conditioning of one's life experiences.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-06-2020, 02:59 AM
ketzer
Posts: n/a
 
From the standpoint of science, I have found that it is rather easy to explain away time as an illusion, and just as easy to shift perspective and explain it back into reality. However, when one finally tires of playing this logical ping pong game, they realize that they find it almost impossible to conceptualize any sort of existence without turning to the language of time. Time and space are actually one thing (spacetime), and beyond the event horizon of a black hole, space and time actually exchange roles. I can also conceptualize how space is an illusion, yet I can turn around and argue that from another perspective that illusion can be seen as reality. Time creates when just as space creates where, and the two are actually mathematically linked by the parameter C (often called the speed of light).

And then there is form. What is here and there, what is length without a starting reference and an ending reference? What is now and then without reference points? There can be no form without here and now, but can there also be no here and there, or now and then , without some thing or event to serve as reference points to define those spacetime intervals? All things occur in a context that helps to give them meaning, but can the context have any meaning without the things?

Perhaps this seeming spacetime conceptual prison is all just a result of the fact that I am living, and typing, from a 4 dimensional experience of reality. IDK, because that is where I find you, and that is the backdrop of our common experience, that is where we relate and must communicate. What lies beyond it, I could not communicate to you even if I did know, as I am limited here by our common 4 dimensional spacetime theater of existence.

From the standpoint of my spirit however, time is an experience. A river that flows and has different moods, different currents, eddies, rapids and quiet pools. Time gives my life motion, and it reminds me of my mortality, as I can never stop my motion through time. When looking backward in time, the time of my own life, it can be experienced almost like standing in the ocean surf and feeling a powerful wave wash over you. Time can be a warm comforting profoundly meaningful feeling, something that acts like a common thread that ties me back to everything and everyone that came before me. Time offers the promise of change, and that opens up an horizon of possibility ahead of me. Time can be a frightening feeling of something chasing me that I run from knowing full well it will inevitably overtake me. Time can feel like an endowment I have been gifted and wish to spend wisely, yet am regretful and feel like a fool because I seem to keep wasting it anyway.

When I look back in time, I see “I”, an ever changing “I”, but an “I” nevertheless. It may be that there really is no such thing as spacetime and an “I” that does exist outside of this illusion, IDK. However, whatever that “I” would be, I don’t know that “I” could know of its existence without that experience of spacetime in which to experience its existence.. Perhaps “I” need a when and where to exist as an “I”, a subject defining and being defined by objects. This past tense defined “I” may be a motion picture illusion, but it may be as real of an “I” as I can ever know. Perhaps this is one place where the duality of reality and illusion merge back into one. A singularity where spacetime springs from, into which an incarnation of form and action arises, and slowly just fades away back into empty formlessness.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-06-2020, 10:34 AM
JustASimpleGuy
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ketzer
When I look back in time, I see “I”, an ever changing “I”, but an “I” nevertheless. It may be that there really is no such thing as spacetime and an “I” that does exist outside of this illusion, IDK. However, whatever that “I” would be, I don’t know that “I” could know of its existence without that experience of spacetime in which to experience its existence.. Perhaps “I” need a when and where to exist as an “I”, a subject defining and being defined by objects. This past tense defined “I” may be a motion picture illusion, but it may be as real of an “I” as I can ever know. Perhaps this is one place where the duality of reality and illusion merge back into one. A singularity where spacetime springs from, into which an incarnation of form and action arises, and slowly just fades away back into empty formlessness.

You can "touch" the empty formlessness. I suggest that's your true identity as it is mine. It's the Divine. Nothing is closer yet nothing farther away as conditioning and mind form quite a formidable barrier, however it can be penetrated.

One way to touch it is deep meditation and not just any meditation. It has to be open meditation where there is no focus, no object of attending. That being said one must first focus and concentrate mind through focused meditation practices, but when mind is sufficiently concentrated the attending has to be let go and open meditation techniques practiced. Resting in awareness, choiceless awareness, do nothing meditation.

Just like focused techniques (breathe, sound, bodily sensations, mantra, etc...) the fruits of open techniques begin to manifest outside of formal practice, eventually and with enough practice.

It's interesting to experience body, mind, thoughts, emotions, memories just like external stimuli. That is as not Me (well not "Me" but "me", not Self but self) but just events in the field of awareness and no different than anything else we perceive via sense organ perceptions.

What's even more interesting is this "new" way of experiencing isn't "new" at all. It's always been there, just never realized. It's more of an exercise in deconstructing a false identity vs. constructing a new identity.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-06-2020, 11:00 AM
weareunity weareunity is offline
Ascender
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 754
 
Hello all.

It feels good--imo-- to be able to read of each others knowledge, thoughts and musings.
We don't have to be "right"--imo--I guess we are all enabled to share a certain something when we choose to explore openly without intention to "put down" or without fear of being "put down". Doesn't mean we all have to agree, just agree to make that choice. --It makes for inspiring and interesting discussion from which to learn.

petex
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 13-06-2020, 07:00 AM
BigJohn BigJohn is offline
Master
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: अनुगृहितोऽस्म
Posts: 16,048
  BigJohn's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by weareunity
Hello.

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.

petex
"Cause and consequence" seem to resonate with Cause and Effect. "Cause" seems to disappear as one goes back before the Big Banf Effect when there was no Time.
__________________


 
   ⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜ ⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜

        Happiness is the result of an enlightened mind whereas suffering is caused by a distorted mind.
   ⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜ ⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜


Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 13-06-2020, 01:48 PM
weareunity weareunity is offline
Ascender
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 754
 
Hello BigJohn.
Likewise, have long time wondered what would be the consequence of change of some sort -even small change-suddenly and somehow introduced into some sort of static state?
Would the whole of that stasis be obliged to accommodate such change by becoming almost instantly dynamic?
Personal conjecture only--don't have the scientific knowledge to explain how or if etc. this might be possible.

petex
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 13-06-2020, 02:25 PM
Kioma
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ketzer
From the standpoint of my spirit however, time is an experience.
I wrote this recently in another topic:

Quote:
...a soul does not experience time like a physical consciousness. It cannot, other than how it interfaces with existence in it's reduced cognitive capacity as a physical being. In it's normal 'spiritual' capacity it experiences all time as a single moment - past, present and future all at once. How it does this and yet we still have free will is an ineffable mystery - perhaps the soul's experience of the future is simply the past and present 'echoing' into the future, meaning the 'future' the soul knows is malleable - the actual future is not written until it occurs. My personal belief is that is why we reincarnate - to 'reshape' the future to a spiritual goal.

But the point is that the soul is aware, it has cognition and responses, there is an energetic process, but without time it cannot make change occur. This is why the soul undergoes incarnation and life - to enter time and make change occur to it's future (and by extension all interactive others) and it's self.
I wrote that based on an several deep meditations in which I had typical 'mystical' experiences.

https://lonerwolf.com/mystical-experience/

If you scroll down the page a bit he gets to a list of "9 characteristics of the mystical experience". From the web site:

Quote:
1. Conscious Unity
The boundaries of where you perceive your individual identity to begin and end completely vanish (otherwise known as ego death). Instead, you’re left with a boundless and infinite union with all that is around you.

2. There Is No Time or Space
With a lack of a definable identity or spatial recognition, your sense of time feels infinite. You go from perceiving time from moment-to-moment as a static individual, to perceiving it as a stream of eternal present moments.

Without time space is endless.

Because your sense of identity is gone, your ability to separate “your” (now non-existent) surroundings into individual “spatial” elements also disappears.

I worded it somewhat differently, but what he says is generally true in my experience. This is the source of the unity (All is One) perspective gained from the mystical experience. Without time and space, of course eternity is experienced all at once, and of course all of space is experienced as a single 'location'. It is very difficult to describe, but it is real.

So, I agree with you - so long as your spirit is incarnated.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 14-06-2020, 11:23 AM
ketzer
Posts: n/a
 
[quote=JustASimpleGuy]You can "touch" the empty formlessness. I suggest that's your true identity as it is mine. It's the Divine. Nothing is closer yet nothing farther away as conditioning and mind form quite a formidable barrier, however it can be penetrated.

One way to touch it is deep meditation and not just any meditation. It has to be open meditation where there is no focus, no object of attending. That being said one must first focus and concentrate mind through focused meditation practices, but when mind is sufficiently concentrated the attending has to be let go and open meditation techniques practiced. Resting in awareness, choiceless awareness, do nothing meditation.

Just like focused techniques (breathe, sound, bodily sensations, mantra, etc...) the fruits of open techniques begin to manifest outside of formal practice, eventually and with enough practice.


Yes, while I do not disagree with anything you say, I do bristle a bit, as I often seem to these days, as such words as “your ‘true’ identity”. Not so much because it is wrong, but perhaps that it seems to imply a completeness or absoluteness that is not really there. While it is true that nothingness is a fundamental aspect of my nature, creation is a fundamental aspect as well. I am that emptiness in the vessel, but if I fill the vessel with my creation, then I am that which fills it as well. When there is nothing, then there are no things to undergo change, when there are no things undergoing change, there is no experience of time. When there is no time, things, or action, then there is no persistence of “I”, yet I want to say “I” have touched this state of nothingness. With no things or action to be aware of, then what can awareness be aware of other than nothing. So nothing becomes the something one is aware of, and the absence of change becomes the time against which the nothing persists and makes it feel real. A contrast with an expectation of change to no change becomes what I am aware of. Nothing and something merge back into unity as one thing, time persists, and the rate of change in this state of nothing goes to zero. So perhaps now I can say with just as much confidence, that my “true” identity is everything, and it is equally true as saying I am nothing, which when held still in awareness becomes a something persisting eternally through time. My exploration of spacetime and form, as it undergoes change, is really just an exploration of me, as represented by an ever changing series of “I”s through time.

It's interesting to experience body, mind, thoughts, emotions, memories just like external stimuli. That is as not Me (well not "Me" but "me", not Self but self) but just events in the field of awareness and no different than anything else we perceive via sense organ perceptions.

What's even more interesting is this "new" way of experiencing isn't "new" at all. It's always been there, just never realized. It's more of an exercise in deconstructing a false identity vs. constructing a new identity.


And again, I am with you but I am not comfortable with the term “false identity”, not because it is not a false identity, but because it implies a “true identity” against which such an assessment can be made. Any identity I have tried to permanently rest my hat upon, has eventually been seen to fade away when viewed from another perspective. Nothing, being just one more of those supposedly ‘solid?’ identities that given time and change in perspective, I come to see as no more or less true as any other identity. If there is one model of “true identity” that I can use to judge the others as false, I have not found it, and my interest in doing so seems to be fading as of late. Although I do see how questions can have true or false answers within a given paradigm, perspective or context, these days I find myself more and more satisfied with “yes” as a more fundamentally wider perspective acceptable answer to “true” or “false” questions.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 14-06-2020, 01:54 PM
JustASimpleGuy
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ketzer
Yes, while I do not disagree with anything you say, I do bristle a bit, as I often seem to these days, as such words as “your ‘true’ identity”. Not so much because it is wrong, but perhaps that it seems to imply a completeness or absoluteness that is not really there. While it is true that nothingness is a fundamental aspect of my nature, creation is a fundamental aspect as well. I am that emptiness in the vessel, but if I fill the vessel with my creation, then I am that which fills it as well. When there is nothing, then there are no things to undergo change, when there are no things undergoing change, there is no experience of time. When there is no time, things, or action, then there is no persistence of “I”, yet I want to say “I” have touched this state of nothingness. With no things or action to be aware of, then what can awareness be aware of other than nothing. So nothing becomes the something one is aware of, and the absence of change becomes the time against which the nothing persists and makes it feel real. A contrast with an expectation of change to no change becomes what I am aware of. Nothing and something merge back into unity as one thing, time persists, and the rate of change in this state of nothing goes to zero. So perhaps now I can say with just as much confidence, that my “true” identity is everything, and it is equally true as saying I am nothing, which when held still in awareness becomes a something persisting eternally through time. My exploration of spacetime and form, as it undergoes change, is really just an exploration of me, as represented by an ever changing series of “I”s through time.


And again, I am with you but I am not comfortable with the term “false identity”, not because it is not a false identity, but because it implies a “true identity” against which such an assessment can be made. Any identity I have tried to permanently rest my hat upon, has eventually been seen to fade away when viewed from another perspective. Nothing, being just one more of those supposedly ‘solid?’ identities that given time and change in perspective, I come to see as no more or less true as any other identity. If there is one model of “true identity” that I can use to judge the others as false, I have not found it, and my interest in doing so seems to be fading as of late. Although I do see how questions can have true or false answers within a given paradigm, perspective or context, these days I find myself more and more satisfied with “yes” as a more fundamentally wider perspective acceptable answer to “true” or “false” questions.

Perhaps a better way to frame it is there's the permanent and unchanging and there's the impermanent and changing, the prior having independent existence and the latter dependent existence. The prior doesn't negate nor diminish the latter
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 15-06-2020, 01:49 AM
ketzer
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy
Perhaps a better way to frame it is there's the permanent and unchanging and there's the impermanent and changing, the prior having independent existence and the latter dependent existence. The prior doesn't negate nor diminish the latter
Yeah, I think that is better. Nothing is a state of quiescent mind / consciousness, and while it remains quiescent, there is no change. Forms on the other hand, in accordance with the laws of thermodynamics are always changing, always moving from low to high entropy. Now when it stirs to create forms, in a sense nothing changes as something arises from that nothing, but form always decays back into that nothing from which it came so there is a certain permanence in the backdrop of nothing from which every thing must arise and eventually return to. And certainly, no things, physical things anyway, are permanent.

I agree, neither negates or diminishes the other. In fact, when you think about it, they seem to depend on each other. Kind of like music. The notes are necessary, but so is the background of silence against which the notes are heard. Both the vibrations and the stillness are necessary to make music. Both the forms, and the background of formlessness are necessary to create a picture. Changing forms against the background of the unchanging formless consciousness, are necessary to create the experience of time.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums