You are not logged in.

#26 2022-04-04 09:19:28

07wideeyes
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

As a postscript to what I was staggering around trying to say yesterday. 'Things look different from above' is a phrase that anybody who watches many of the videos here will be familiar with. Conversely, things look different from below! Things, including memories, look different depending on where you are on the consciousness chart. There is no fixed reality.

Offline

#27 2022-04-04 10:29:33

pete
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

07wideeyes wrote:

So do I understand what you say, Genoveva, as similar to this?..... From the perspective of timelessness and non-duality, it's all an illusion. Yet from the perspective of getting out of bed in the morning, staring into the bathroom mirror, etc, it's all too very real. And the real 'trick' is to be able to incorporate both perspectives in our life simultaneously? If we can do this, we have finally 'achieved' something worthwhile. We will not be like some of those one-eyed non-dualists who I have known over the years, who take their holy non-dual status very literally, so have no concern for what's going on with genocide etc. 'It's all illusion, man.' I have little patience with such attitudes.

It's a conundrum that has plagued the more sincere and serious Buddhist practitioners over the centuries, but that's another story, except to say that the conundrum is real, and it is a matter for our urgent attention!   x

My impression is that this is a problem only for those buddhists who confuse repression with non-attachment.

E.g. if I don’t really understand what non-attachment means in real-life but still want to see myself (or be seen by others) as a buddhist (someone “with a few wishes, content with little”, etc) the only way to get there would be to repress my every desire, which usually end with becoming totally numb to my and everyone else’s needs and suffering. This often tends to happen to western buddhists because the focus on appearances, achievements and being seen in a certain way (e.g. as a “good buddhist”) is so ingrained in western culture.

But, spend a bit of time in South East Asia and you would see entirely different expressions of Buddhism, even though they are be based on the same texts. E.g. when non-attachment is a result of understanding the nature of how things really are, the natural outcome would then be growth of compassion, kindness, respect, etc, for others. In other words, when you are no longer preoccupied with attachments to your own crap, you would then end up with all this extra time and energy that naturally find expression in helping others, standing up for their rights, etc.

More on the original topic though, it always intrigued me that buddhism doesn’t really have the concept of “memory” as such. Instead, there are various faculties such as perception, attention, concentration, consciousness, etc, that momentarily come together to cognise an idea, regardless of whether it is an idea about the past, present or future experience. In a way, that makes sense because when you are “remembering” something, you are really just thinking by way of ideas that stand in for (or represent) the past. 

And if ideas about the past, present or future can be implanted nowadays via AI, haarp and whatnot, non-attachment to any and all ideas then seems even more important than ever. But, if one can’t tell the difference between non-attachment to those ideas and just repressing them, then it may be worth having a look at one's own behaviour towards others - if compassion, kindness, respect, open-heartedness, helping others, etc, don’t really seem to grow, then it's probably worth going back to basics.

Offline

#28 2022-04-04 10:58:52

Robert369
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

pete wrote:

...when you are “remembering” something, you are really just thinking by way of ideas that stand in for (or represent) the past.

This is in my view is one of the many misconceptions that all cabalistic belief systems try to impose on people, but it is only valid at the low frequency society level where they intent to program everyone to be in (e.g. with such beliefs):

True memories are not coming from the mind but from one's consciousness because they are stored "up there". Yet, "up there" spacetime is irrelevant, meaning that neither space nor time exist in the consciousness realm, because - remember that everything is waves - the involved consciousness waves do pass through spacetime.

This means that one can remember one's future (either of this or another timeline) from that memory to assist in this life and timeline, provided one is sufficiently connected to one's Higher Self, etc..

Comparing this to the above statement makes it obvious that "someone" is trying to limit people to the linear physical world which they can control at will...


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

#29 2022-04-04 17:41:54

07wideeyes
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

Thanks for your input, Pete. What you say makes sense, and fills in some empty spaces for me, whose only experience of practiced Buddhism has been in n.w. Europe.

I can see what you are getting at, Robert, but it doesn't seem to contradict anything that Pete says. And when we talk about 'remembering the future', we have expanded it from its consensus meaning, and need to define what we mean by 'memory'. For you, its meaning is very different to that given to the word by the guy waiting at the supermarket check out (although you never really know....!).

Offline

#30 2022-04-04 18:09:19

Robert369
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

07wideeyes wrote:

And when we talk about 'remembering the future', we have expanded it from its consensus meaning, and need to define what we mean by 'memory'. For you, its meaning is very different to that given to the word by the guy waiting at the supermarket check out (although you never really know....!).

This is a good example to understand why we must drop all the cabal-indoctrinated "consensus"  but instead go for the real understandings only. This obviously includes dropping all of their belief systems, including religion, fake-science, fake-medicine, etc..

Without doing that, Humanity will never get where it needs to be to have the future it deserves, as otherwise there'll always be another tyrant who will misguide people who seek fake-knowledge in the external world - and thus can easily be mind-controlled.

But one step at a time...


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

#31 2022-04-05 08:37:12

pete
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

Robert369 wrote:
pete wrote:

...when you are “remembering” something, you are really just thinking by way of ideas that stand in for (or represent) the past.

This is in my view is one of the many misconceptions that all cabalistic belief systems try to impose on people, but it is only valid at the low frequency society level where they intent to program everyone to be in (e.g. with such beliefs):

True memories are not coming from the mind but from one's consciousness because they are stored "up there". Yet, "up there" spacetime is irrelevant, meaning that neither space nor time exist in the consciousness realm, because - remember that everything is waves - the involved consciousness waves do pass through spacetime.

This means that one can remember one's future (either of this or another timeline) from that memory to assist in this life and timeline, provided one is sufficiently connected to one's Higher Self, etc..

Comparing this to the above statement makes it obvious that "someone" is trying to limit people to the linear physical world which they can control at will...

Thanks for your input, Robert. Your argument would likely be valid for those who subscribe to the belief that consciousness is everything and that everything comes from consciousness. I don’t though. E.g. to me buddhists, jains, etc, seem a bit closer to the truth when they say that consciousness is just another one of those things that are dependent on other conditions to arise or cease, which makes it impermanent and therefore not worth attaching to (or basically not worth identifying with).

Of course, it’s worth noting that “consciousness is everything” is the prevailing belief on Earth, as well as in new age, and seemingly among the most ETs and beings from other planes. And I think that’s understandable - e.g. if you can see your past lives, or if you lived for so long that you cannot remember being born, or if everybody just keeps preaching to you about divine consciousness, source, etc, it seems more than natural to assume that consciousness really is all there is and that everything comes from it.

Of course, being the prevailing majority belief does not necessarily make it true. But I’m not looking to convince you. That’s the job of one’s own considering the nature of reality and understanding how things really are.

Personally, I’d say that any being that is pushing “consciousness is everything” onto humans while posing as a higher self, spirit guide, enlightened teacher, god, etc, is really just exploiting us. I mean, much is said about regressive beings feeding off our fear, anger, etc, but our love, devotion, joy, etc, are so many more times powerful. And how do you get to that energy if you are a being from another plane? You pose as a higher self, as a spirit guide, an enlightened master, etc. You convince the human that we are all source and that we are all the same consciousness / energy / soul and so the human identifies with you and willingly gives you their energy, while feeling great at it. The perfect scam.

Of course, it is not quite that simple - I’d say that most of these beings are not intentionally malevolent. That is, they (and particularly the evangelising type) really believe that consciousness is everything, that we are all one, that there are higher selves, etc. So, when they feed off your energy, they don’t actually realise that it is happening, or if they do, they don’t see it as something wrong. Kind of like most humans don’t see anything wrong with eating animals. Everyone does it, so how could it be wrong…

So, yeah, if you ask me what is the ultimate propaganda / brainwashing, then I’d say that it is the belief that consciousness is everything (and by extension the ensuing beliefs in source, higher self, etc). Why? Because they (ETs, beings from other planes, etc) themselves believe it to be true and feel they need to convert us / convince us that it is true.

Offline

#32 2022-04-06 08:12:21

07wideeyes
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

That is a very interesting and revealing post, Pete, thank you for putting your thoughts into coherent form! One thing it demonstrates is how our 'metaphysical notions or beliefs' influence, colour, many other of our attitudes. Different metaphysical beliefs will be the foundation of some of the differences that turn up on this forum.

When I say 'belief' I don't here mean an idea or system that is mainly the result of intellectual speculation. If it has any weight, it comes out of feeling and intuition, at least as much as thinking. Or, rather, it is hopefully the result of the whole of ones being attending, where the divisions between thought, feeling etc don't really hold water, as they are all intimately connected. Most importantly, these 'beliefs' are the reflection of direct experience, nothing less.

I am a 'consciousness is everything' man..... This has become more obvious to me over recent years. It is what deeper intuitions and experiences, through meditation, kundalini, shamanic practice, assistance from psychedelics in earlier times, and others, have all pointed to, time and time again. Source, therefore, is consciousness, and what we consider the physical or material world is something that is result of the continual interpretation of 'consciousness' information into this physical format. This is what I see.

I suppose that the closest in more traditional categories to how I experience things is what is sometimes called 'emanationism' or 'emanation theory'. Everything emanates from, kind-of spins out from, an original Source. What you wrote also helps to point out how, despite being Buddhist for many years, I was never a totally convincing - or totally convinced - Buddhist! And the Buddhism that resonated most deeply was a bit on the fringe - some Indo-Tibetan tantra, for example, which congruence with more orthodox forms of Buddhism is sometimes quite suspect, I propose. It is practice rather than theory, and is influenced by earlier shamanic (Bon) traditions, not to mention Vedic and other Hindu-style stuff. The Nying-mas don't even take Buddha as their main root, but instead Padmasambhava.

It is very helpful to ascertain ones metaphysical base; it is valuable in understanding many things. Always bearing in mind that it is nothing fixed, but may well change as ones experience unfolds.

Offline

#33 2022-04-06 11:02:48

Genoveva
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

pete wrote:

Thanks for your input, Robert. Your argument would likely be valid for those who subscribe to the belief that consciousness is everything and that everything comes from consciousness. I don’t though. E.g. to me buddhists, jains, etc, seem a bit closer to the truth when they say that consciousness is just another one of those things that are dependent on other conditions to arise or cease, which makes it impermanent and therefore not worth attaching to (or basically not worth identifying with).

Of course, it’s worth noting that “consciousness is everything” is the prevailing belief on Earth, as well as in new age, and seemingly among the most ETs and beings from other planes. And I think that’s understandable - e.g. if you can see your past lives, or if you lived for so long that you cannot remember being born, or if everybody just keeps preaching to you about divine consciousness, source, etc, it seems more than natural to assume that consciousness really is all there is and that everything comes from it.

Of course, being the prevailing majority belief does not necessarily make it true. But I’m not looking to convince you. That’s the job of one’s own considering the nature of reality and understanding how things really are.

Personally, I’d say that any being that is pushing “consciousness is everything” onto humans while posing as a higher self, spirit guide, enlightened teacher, god, etc, is really just exploiting us. I mean, much is said about regressive beings feeding off our fear, anger, etc, but our love, devotion, joy, etc, are so many more times powerful. And how do you get to that energy if you are a being from another plane? You pose as a higher self, as a spirit guide, an enlightened master, etc. You convince the human that we are all source and that we are all the same consciousness / energy / soul and so the human identifies with you and willingly gives you their energy, while feeling great at it. The perfect scam.

Of course, it is not quite that simple - I’d say that most of these beings are not intentionally malevolent. That is, they (and particularly the evangelising type) really believe that consciousness is everything, that we are all one, that there are higher selves, etc. So, when they feed off your energy, they don’t actually realise that it is happening, or if they do, they don’t see it as something wrong. Kind of like most humans don’t see anything wrong with eating animals. Everyone does it, so how could it be wrong…

So, yeah, if you ask me what is the ultimate propaganda / brainwashing, then I’d say that it is the belief that consciousness is everything (and by extension the ensuing beliefs in source, higher self, etc). Why? Because they (ETs, beings from other planes, etc) themselves believe it to be true and feel they need to convert us / convince us that it is true.

Pete, very interesting. Yesterday when I read your post I was left with the question: ok, if consciousness is not everything, then what is?

Today, I'm entertaining the idea: what if this is just a belief? Wtf? Right? I am not what one may call a believer.

To cut it short, it seems to me that just by naming it "consciousness" we do indeed open ourselves to error. Actually, any name we give it, it would lead to the same thing.

I am tempted to ask you: if not consciousness, then what? But as soon as you give it a name, we'll fall into the same trap, lol. So, we may just as well keep calling it consciousness, in order to know between us what we're talking about.

I also sense a false note when people refer to self and higher self. Probably this is because I am increasingly rejecting any notion of hierarchy. David Icke comes to mind, when he says that I am all there is and all there can be. (I don't remember his exact words).

Therefore, I propose to you that the word consciousness is still the best way to name it. But maybe the problem starts when we consent to give it a dimension: high/low, big/small... Because the question becomes: bigger/smaller than what? Higher/lower than what?

What is this "what"? The mind has no answer. Hmm, this is because the mind is trained to make comparisons: biggest/smallest (particle?)... etc.

The only answer which makes sense is the teaching given to Arjuna by I don't remember whom: action is all there is, and without action nothing is. In other words, absolute stillness implies dissolution of the manifestation.


In reality, the only thing that will never change is the fact that almost everything is going to change, to a greater or to a lesser degree. (Gregorian Bivolaru)

Offline

#34 2022-04-06 18:04:24

07wideeyes
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

I like your answer, Genoveva. It's like a knee-jerk reaction, to want to give a name to 'something', even if that something is everything. But by naming something, we automatically limit it. Put it in a box, invoke that 'I've got it under control, I understand what I'm talking about' reaction. Which for 'consciousness' is immediately off the mark. Maybe one thing to bear in mind is that, by using the word 'consciousness' (about which I agree with you) we are not literally naming it. We are just using a word because that's what we do. But, like in Zen, the word is only the finger pointing at the moon. (unfortunately, Zen did not realise that the moon is not a very appropriate symbol for something that is real!!!).

Offline

#35 2022-04-06 18:15:11

Robert369
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

Right, I'd go even further and say that no matter what words are used, what counts is the intention and visualization which one puts into the word. At least for those who live beyond simply using words of one of today's many utterly cabal-ruined/dumbified languages which have more limitations than use (though people who live by that will not notice).

We need to be aware that the the true language of the universe is waves and by that emotions. If we imprint our words (or even a written book that we may produce) with them, we are able to transmit a multitude more than the word seemingly transmits. If a skilled "energy writer" creates a book filled with "unwritten messages", it allows people who are sensitive to such to "read" a book from just feeling the energies that it emits while never having opened it ever.


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

#36 2022-04-06 21:17:19

Cocreatr
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

This came my way again yesterday, resonating with what I learn now from this valuable discussion.

Intelligence = Understanding + Reasoning

In his book “Thinking Fast and Slow”, Daniel Kahneman discusses the idea that human minds use two different and complementary processes, two different modes of thinking, which we call Understanding and Reasoning. The idea has been discussed for decades and has been verified using psychological studies and by neuroscience.

Understanding and Reasoning by Monica Anderson

“Subconscious Intuitive Understanding” is the full name of the “Fast Thinking” or “System 1” thinking. It is fast because the brain can perform many parts of this task in parallel. The brain spends a lot of effort on this task.

“Conscious Logical Reasoning” is the full name of “Slow Thinking” or “System 2” thinking. To many people’s surprise, this is very rarely used in practice. My soundbite for this is “You can make breakfast without Reasoning”. Almost everything we do on a daily basis in our rich mundane reality is done without a need to reason about it. We just repeat whatever worked last time we performed this task; we are experience driven. “

More: https://artificial-understanding.com/wh … 82a42b1ba3 by Monica Anderson.

Edit:  I replace “brain” with “mind” or “consciousness” to work around some limiting beliefs being propagated in our educated society.  Use your own discernment about wording and intentions.

Last edited by Cocreatr (2022-04-06 21:26:47)


☀️ What looks foolish at first may be genius in another context. Or vice versa. Always test
☘️ Everyone is a beginner at something. All rights reserved to know more tomorrow than today.

Offline

#37 2022-04-06 21:46:21

Robert369
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

Cocreatr wrote:

This came my way again yesterday, resonating with what I learn now from this valuable discussion.

Intelligence = Understanding + Reasoning

Sly people talking about "understanding", yet not understanding what they talk of and trying to press all their findings into fake-science patterns. If only these people understood how these things actually worked, they'd not write any of the above. But then, such makes them look like "authorities in their field" and distracts people from their inner powers - which is quite a well-known pattern...

In short: If we are of sufficient high frequency and properly connected "up there", we do not need our brain for thinking or memory access, because everything is stored "up there" (aka in the quantum field) and can be directly accessed and processed. This process is not based on any biological functions but on consciousness waves and intent, and thus near-instant, potentially even allowing access to knowledge/understandings from other lives, timelines or even people.


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

#38 2022-04-07 07:56:51

07wideeyes
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

It was one of those revolutionary lightbulb moments, about ten years ago I guess. When I saw that the brain does not create, but is a mediator between the individualised human being and something else. It's more like a television, and saying that the brain creates our reality is similar to claiming that the television creates the programmes that some people still watch. I would take Daniel Kahneman's model to be one way to describe the different functionings of the left and right side of the brain. But to me the terms 'understanding' and 'reasoning' need to be properly defined, since many people mean different things when they use 'understanding' especially. Both words sound a bit too 'brainy' to me! (which is rather similar insight to what you say clearly and wisely in your edit, Cocreatr!). But the notion of there being a higher, or wider, or more whole, synthesis which is genuine 'intelligence' very much fits the bill.

Offline

#39 2022-04-09 04:22:07

pete
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

07wideeyes wrote:

That is a very interesting and revealing post, Pete, thank you for putting your thoughts into coherent form! One thing it demonstrates is how our 'metaphysical notions or beliefs' influence, colour, many other of our attitudes. Different metaphysical beliefs will be the foundation of some of the differences that turn up on this forum.

When I say 'belief' I don't here mean an idea or system that is mainly the result of intellectual speculation. If it has any weight, it comes out of feeling and intuition, at least as much as thinking. Or, rather, it is hopefully the result of the whole of ones being attending, where the divisions between thought, feeling etc don't really hold water, as they are all intimately connected. Most importantly, these 'beliefs' are the reflection of direct experience, nothing less.

Thanks for bringing up “direct experience” - it’s one of the most interesting things to discuss for me. It’s also interesting that you bring thought, feeling, and direct experience together and don’t see division between them. I particularly liked your “whole of ones being attending” - perhaps you could say a bit more about that.

In the meantime, I’m seemingly coming from an entirely opposite direction, which of course does not invalidate your experiences in any way. E.g. to me it seems valuable to consider how direct experience actually relates to belief, thinking, understanding, attention, consciousness, attachment, etc, as well as whether they always arise together or not, how their different combinations differ experientially, etc.

In particular, the coming together of direct experience and understanding (of the nature of that experience) interests me most, because I think that is what ancient sramanas like the historical Buddha, Mahavira (of the Jains) and other truth seekers of their time, used to call “direct understanding”, “insight” or “wisdom”. An instantaneous understanding of the nature of direct experience that neither requires nor relies on words, thoughts, speculation, ideas, beliefs, philosophy, cosmology, metaphysics, etc. 

On the other hand, when direct experience comes together with thinking about its nature, I’d say that is what gives birth to beliefs. Finally, when direct experience, beliefs and attachment come together - I’d say that is what gives birth to a worldview, philosophy, cosmology, metaphysics, religion, etc.

All of these have a place in life, but their differences seem important. That is, I’d say that beliefs, worldviews, metaphysics, etc, are the actual matrix. Attachment to these beliefs, etc, is what keeps us in the matrix. Wisdom is what liberates us from the matrix.

07wideeyes wrote:

I am a 'consciousness is everything' man..... This has become more obvious to me over recent years. It is what deeper intuitions and experiences, through meditation, kundalini, shamanic practice, assistance from psychedelics in earlier times, and others, have all pointed to, time and time again. Source, therefore, is consciousness, and what we consider the physical or material world is something that is result of the continual interpretation of 'consciousness' information into this physical format. This is what I see.

Sounds good - knowing where you happen to be is always valuable. While my life experiences appear similar to yours, I’m at a different conclusion at this point. Direct understanding is what matters to me most, so beliefs, cosmology, metaphysics, etc (such as “everything is consciousness” etc) have taken a back seat since they seem to neither impede nor promote understanding of the nature of direct experience.

To illustrate, regardless of whether I believe that “everything is X” or “everything is Y”, what would be my actual direct experience if someone criticises my beliefs, for example? Anger most likely, but it would be the understanding of the nature of anger that is most interesting to me at that instance, rather than trying to prove to the other person that X or Y is correct. And since this direct understanding does not actually depend on words, thoughts, beliefs, cosmology, etc, it then seems entirely irrelevant whether I believe that everything is X or Y.

Not sure if you want me to go into what it is that could actually be understood about the nature of anger (or any other direct experience such as pride, kindness, compassion, consciousness, attention, etc) directly, without having to rely on words, beliefs, metaphysics, etc? I could go on about that for ages, but don’t want to bore you if you are not interested.


07wideeyes wrote:

It is very helpful to ascertain ones metaphysical base; it is valuable in understanding many things. Always bearing in mind that it is nothing fixed, but may well change as ones experience unfolds.

I like what you say here.

Not sure if you would agree with the following - in the many moments when wisdom does not manifest, one is bound to turn to beliefs, worldviews, metaphysics, etc, to fill the gaps that have not yet been penetrated by wisdom. But if there is no attachment to these beliefs, etc, they will easily change or just fall away when wisdom provides a better answer.

Offline

#40 2022-04-09 04:32:22

pete
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

Genoveva wrote:

Pete, very interesting. Yesterday when I read your post I was left with the question: ok, if consciousness is not everything, then what is?

Today, I'm entertaining the idea: what if this is just a belief? Wtf? Right? I am not what one may call a believer.

To cut it short, it seems to me that just by naming it "consciousness" we do indeed open ourselves to error. Actually, any name we give it, it would lead to the same thing.

I am tempted to ask you: if not consciousness, then what? But as soon as you give it a name, we'll fall into the same trap, lol. So, we may just as well keep calling it consciousness, in order to know between us what we're talking about.

Not sure I can give a satisfactory answer, but thanks for considering this. I suppose what I’m trying to say is this:

I am interested in undoing of the matrix, in liberation from the matrix. This supposedly happens via wisdom - understanding the nature of direct experience without having to resort to words, ideas, cosmology, philosophy, metaphysics, etc. Or at least that’s what the ancient sramanas (the historical Buddha, Mahavira of the Jains, and their contemporaries) seem to say.

If that is the case, then the metaphysical questions - such as whether consciousness is everything or not, whether god exists or not, whether X is the meaning of life or not - don’t actually matter anymore because they actually do not have a direct bearing on development of wisdom.

Why not? Because the direct experience of believing “consciousness is everything” or that “X is Y” would actually be thinking, believing, attaching, etc. I mean if you are saying, considering or believing that “consciousness is X”, the only way for that to happen in terms of direct experience is for you to think, believe, attach, etc.

So, if you are interested in understanding the nature of such direct experiences like thinking, believing, attachment, then it won’t actually matter whether you believe “X is Y” or “W is Z”. In other words, wisdom wouldn’t be concerned with the actual ideas that are thought about, or believed in, or attached to, but with the actual acts/direct experiences of thinking, believing, attaching, etc.

Not sure if you want me to go into what could actually be understood about thinking, believing, etc, and how does that actually lead to liberation from the matrix?

Genoveva wrote:

I also sense a false note when people refer to self and higher self. Probably this is because I am increasingly rejecting any notion of hierarchy. David Icke comes to mind, when he says that I am all there is and all there can be. (I don't remember his exact words).

Therefore, I propose to you that the word consciousness is still the best way to name it. But maybe the problem starts when we consent to give it a dimension: high/low, big/small... Because the question becomes: bigger/smaller than what? Higher/lower than what?

What is this "what"? The mind has no answer. Hmm, this is because the mind is trained to make comparisons: biggest/smallest (particle?)... etc.

Perhaps that is because all of the comparing would still really on just more thinking, believing, etc - trying to make sense of experiences intellectually via ideas and thinking about them. So, it's easy to then slip into thinking up a worldview, cosmology, etc. And then it's even easier to get attached to these and so one ends up building one's matrix further instead of getting out of it.

That’s why I like ancient Buddhists, Jains, etc, because they seem to propose that there is a different way to make sense of one’s experiences that does not require words, ideas, cosmology, etc (and thus does not require creating more matrix and getting attached to it) - the understanding of direct experiences, or wisdom basically, which for them is just another thing that everyone has, just like everyone has attention, concentration, thinking, etc.

In fact, and contrary to popular opinion and religious propaganda, development of wisdom does not require meditation, effort, gurus, energy empowerments, special powers, study, books, or whatever. All it takes is remembering in a particular moment that you do have such an ability, just like you have the ability to think, or concentrate, etc. That’s pretty much it. And this can happen at any time, whether walking, talking, seeing, thinking, or whatever, as all of these would involve some sort of direct experience, the nature of which could potentially be understood rather than just thought about.

Once you’re more interested in understanding the nature of direct experience, rather than thinking about it and trying to make sense of it intellectually, all the cosmological and metaphysical stuff just becomes unnecessary. Of course, I’m not saying that you shouldn’t be interested in cosmology, metaphysics, etc, that is up to you. What I am saying is that I personally found it such a relief when it turned out that metaphysics, beliefs, religions, cosmology, etc just aren’t important anymore.

What this often leads to is having lots of extra energy since it is no longer used for all the thinking, believing, attaching, etc. Often this means the energy naturally flows into things that actually make a difference in the world - open-heartedness, compassion, kindness, etc.

Genoveva wrote:

The only answer which makes sense is the teaching given to Arjuna by I don't remember whom: action is all there is, and without action nothing is. In other words, absolute stillness implies dissolution of the manifestation.

Perhaps it is Krishna’s Arjuna of Mahabharata / Bhagavad Gita? Either way, I agree re stillness, and I’d be further interested in understanding what is stillness, what causes its manifestation, and what causes its ceasing to manifest?

Offline

#41 2022-04-09 04:40:05

pete
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

Robert369 wrote:

In short: If we are of sufficient high frequency and properly connected "up there", we do not need our brain for thinking or memory access, because everything is stored "up there" (aka in the quantum field) and can be directly accessed and processed. This process is not based on any biological functions but on consciousness waves and intent, and thus near-instant, potentially even allowing access to knowledge/understandings from other lives, timelines or even people.

Personally, whenever it is implied that I need to raise my frequency, get connected up there, etc, in order to understand things better, or be better in some way, it seems like someone is trying to condition me into believing that I am actually deficient as I am right now and that I can’t actually understand things properly and I can’t be open-hearted, compassionate, kind, etc, right now.

That is disempowering, not empowering.

The wisest person I ever met never meditated or concerned themselves with raising frequency, higher self, or even any sort of spirituality. Their understanding, compassion, kindness, calm, etc, nonetheless developed to a degree that is impossible to fathom.

Similarly, I’ve met severely disabled people, both mentally and physically, who are nonetheless so open-hearted, kind and compassionate that it is difficult to even believe it.

Hence, I’d like to say that if one happens to value open-heartedness, compassion, kindness, understanding, etc, you don’t actually need to raise your frequency, you don’t need to be “connected up there”, or talk to your higher self, aliens, gods, god, etc, and you certainly don’t need to remember your other lives, be able to jump timelines, have special powers, etc.

Would special powers, meditation, higher self, etc, help develop open-heartedness, etc? For some they might, while for others they would be an obstacle.

Either way though, as a human being, you already have everything you need to be open-hearted, compassionate, kind, wise, etc, right now. These are our inherent abilities, we have them by default, and nobody can take them away from us no matter what we are told.

Offline

#42 2022-04-09 09:43:26

Genoveva
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

pete wrote:

Perhaps it is Krishna’s Arjuna of Mahabharata / Bhagavad Gita? Either way, I agree re stillness, and I’d be further interested in understanding what is stillness, what causes its manifestation, and what causes its ceasing to manifest?

Stillness existed up to the moment prior to manifestation/creation, from a linear point of view. Intention causes the manifestation.

Ceasing to manifest? It's built in the initially emanated intention. And, if we are to drop the linear thinking, it means that Stillness is also simultaneous with everything else.

However, I don't subscribe to the concept of simultaneity, and I can bring two examples in support of this:

1. When you drink a glass of water, you cannot take sip number one and then sip number three. In other words, you cannot skip sip number two. Therefore, simultaneity does not exist, because everything occurs sequentially.

2. The story of a man who ate his lunch by mixing all the food in one bowl: first course, second course, salad and desert. His logic was: since all of that goes to the same place (in the stomach), why bother to eat them separately?

I cannot bring myself to eat like that man. However, many times I tried various combinations of ingredients when cooking, by not respecting the traditional quantities and by combining ingredients which traditionally don't go together. What I discovered is that the combination of ingredients has to be precise (respect the proportions), even if you create a new recipe.

Another example: Hydrogen and Oxygen. It has to be 2 Hydrogen atoms at one Oxygen atom, in order to obtain water...

Therefore, I conclude that nothing in manifestation is pointless: attachments are good/necessary when they are within a certain proportion, and so on.


In reality, the only thing that will never change is the fact that almost everything is going to change, to a greater or to a lesser degree. (Gregorian Bivolaru)

Offline

#43 2022-04-09 10:00:02

Robert369
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

To all those who question the need to raise one's frequency: Blaming this on certain individuals or the new-age environment because it somehow triggers a counter-reaction in your isn't helping anyone - including you.

To me it looks like either didn't understand the Taygetan content on the matter of consciousness and frequency, including that all the universe is just a "wave soup" aka frequency, and that one's own consciousness awareness (aka frequency) defines what we can do and perceive in the universe. Or you are trying to dismiss this critical understanding and by that claim that our Taygetans are spreading new-age trash.

Please chose wisely, because your belief system will not change how the universe works.

This being said, if one is a bit more open-minded than counter-reacting to trigger words, then it should be easy to see that there are many paths to achieve the same. Yet, technically all of them will base on the same frequency/wave universe, even if it is refused to be seen and the dots connected to gain this technical understanding of how spirituality, physicality and consciousness are one.


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

#44 2022-04-14 10:53:17

pete
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

Genoveva wrote:

Stillness existed up to the moment prior to manifestation/creation, from a linear point of view. Intention causes the manifestation.

Ceasing to manifest? It's built in the initially emanated intention. And, if we are to drop the linear thinking, it means that Stillness is also simultaneous with everything else.

However, I don't subscribe to the concept of simultaneity, and I can bring two examples in support of this:

1. When you drink a glass of water, you cannot take sip number one and then sip number three. In other words, you cannot skip sip number two. Therefore, simultaneity does not exist, because everything occurs sequentially.

2. The story of a man who ate his lunch by mixing all the food in one bowl: first course, second course, salad and desert. His logic was: since all of that goes to the same place (in the stomach), why bother to eat them separately?

I cannot bring myself to eat like that man. However, many times I tried various combinations of ingredients when cooking, by not respecting the traditional quantities and by combining ingredients which traditionally don't go together. What I discovered is that the combination of ingredients has to be precise (respect the proportions), even if you create a new recipe.

Another example: Hydrogen and Oxygen. It has to be 2 Hydrogen atoms at one Oxygen atom, in order to obtain water...

Therefore, I conclude that nothing in manifestation is pointless: attachments are good/necessary when they are within a certain proportion, and so on.

Thanks for your response. I think you present it well.

I also find it valuable to consider stillness as an experience. For example, when stillness is experienced, how does it feel - pleasant, unpleasant or neutral? What is happening with the attention at the time - does it stay with a single object or does it change objects? What is that object(s)? What is happening with concentration at the time - is it fixed or not, does it have the usual depth or not? Etc. Similarly, what happens with feeling, attention, concentration, etc, when stillness is no longer experienced?

This sort of considerations don’t require much thinking at the time, but it does seem to reveal how things work, how they arise, how they cease, etc, on the experiential level.

Offline

#45 2022-04-14 10:59:29

pete
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

Robert369 wrote:

To all those who question the need to raise one's frequency: Blaming this on certain individuals or the new-age environment because it somehow triggers a counter-reaction in your isn't helping anyone - including you.

To me it looks like either didn't understand the Taygetan content on the matter of consciousness and frequency, including that all the universe is just a "wave soup" aka frequency, and that one's own consciousness awareness (aka frequency) defines what we can do and perceive in the universe. Or you are trying to dismiss this critical understanding and by that claim that our Taygetans are spreading new-age trash.

Please chose wisely, because your belief system will not change how the universe works.

This being said, if one is a bit more open-minded than counter-reacting to trigger words, then it should be easy to see that there are many paths to achieve the same. Yet, technically all of them will base on the same frequency/wave universe, even if it is refused to be seen and the dots connected to gain this technical understanding of how spirituality, physicality and consciousness are one.

Thanks for the warning, Robert. I’m already self-censoring so as not to counter your or Taygetan materials as this is your / Taygetan home. In this case though we are talking about some pretty fundamental human experiences, so it seems appropriate to speak up.

I like it when Yazhi says “I insist…”, so in this case I too will insist:

If anyone happens to value open-heartedness, kindness, compassion, etc, then it's important to know that you don't need any prerequisites to actually be open-hearted, kind, compassionate, etc.

That is, as a human being, you already have these abilities by default, which means you don’t need a guru, god, religion, higher frequency, shadow work, etc, to actually be open-hearted, kind, compassionate, etc. In other words, you can actually open your heart anytime and anywhere, even right now, if you wish.

If you have forgotten how to open your heart though, then this might remind you:

Think of someone you respect - a friend, colleague, neighbour - and just wish them good health, wish them happiness, freedom, and anything else you find valuable.

A simple and sincere wish like that is already enough to open the heart. Keep that up for a few minutes, and you might actually start to feel warmth and pleasant feeling radiating from your chest. Do this anytime you remember it, towards anyone you meet, and your days will be filled with kindness, compassion, etc.

No prerequisites are required to open your heart.

Last edited by pete (2022-04-14 11:00:34)

Offline

#46 2022-04-15 12:14:33

Genoveva
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

Pete, nice questions but what's the point of asking them? Stillness does not exist anywhere in manifestation. Regardless of how deep inside you look (or outwards, lol), you find that all manifestation is vibration. Nothing stands still - absolutely nothing. All is flow.

On the other hand, the illusion of stillness can be simulated by two objects by matching each other's flow (movement+vibration). Stillness can be defined/determined through a reference point: I could choose to be still in reference to you, and viceversa. But we will not be still in reference to the rest of the universe because the solar system and the galaxies will continue to do their own thing. And, even this relative stillness is an illusion because you and I are different, energetically. Every bit of our individual energy is the result of an endless transformation = like the result of a (unique) complex mathematical formula which has an infinite number of variables.


In reality, the only thing that will never change is the fact that almost everything is going to change, to a greater or to a lesser degree. (Gregorian Bivolaru)

Offline

#47 2022-04-16 09:45:13

pete
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

Genoveva wrote:

Pete, nice questions but what's the point of asking them? Stillness does not exist anywhere in manifestation. Regardless of how deep inside you look (or outwards, lol), you find that all manifestation is vibration. Nothing stands still - absolutely nothing. All is flow.

On the other hand, the illusion of stillness can be simulated by two objects by matching each other's flow (movement+vibration). Stillness can be defined/determined through a reference point: I could choose to be still in reference to you, and viceversa. But we will not be still in reference to the rest of the universe because the solar system and the galaxies will continue to do their own thing. And, even this relative stillness is an illusion because you and I are different, energetically. Every bit of our individual energy is the result of an endless transformation = like the result of a (unique) complex mathematical formula which has an infinite number of variables.

Ah, if I’m not mistaken then, you are talking about absolute stillness. In that case, yes, you are probably right. Though, I’d still like to think that stillness could be experienced in this life to some degree at least.

For example, simple moments of calm throughout the day certainly make life a bit easier. And then, any instance of kindness, compassion, respect, etc, also seems to be accompanied by a degree of stillness / calm (unlike instances of pride, greed, jealousy, etc, which are usually accompanied by a restlessness of sorts).

And then, looking at various Eastern traditions, they have an endless number of spiritual practices dedicated to the development of ever increasing degrees of calm / stillness of mind - e.g. dhyanas or jhanas, during which the experience of calm gets to be so profound that your consciousness seems to become one with the entire creation.

And then if you scour their ancient texts further, they continue to talk about even more rarefied states, such as the state of infinite nothingness, or the state of cessation of perception and feeling, or complete cessation of consciousness for a time. And then of course, there is nirvana / nibbana, etc, which supposedly equates to complete and final cessation of consciousness (though the definition varies depending on the tradition), and thus the end of the matrix.

Perhaps the experience of nirvana would be equivalent to the experience of absolute stillness? I don’t know of course, but it makes me wonder if perhaps absolute stillness could be experienced at that point after all.

More in relation to the original topic, a mind that is calm is perhaps less likely to be influenced by the AI. I mean if the difference between a mind that is calm and a mind that is disturbed gets to be clearly understood, it would be perhaps easier to recognise thought patterns, memories and emotions that are implanted by AI. Or at least I’d like to think so smile

Offline

#48 2022-04-16 12:40:28

Genoveva
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

Stillness: does it exist? Is it subjective? Example: 2 particles moving in identical pattern/vibration are still, in relation to each other, but they are not in a state of stillness in relation to anything else that doesn't match their vibration.

When we meditate on something we synchronise with that. We may also influence that. So, when I pray to Source, and my prayer is answered, we could say that I influenced Source. In reality, I don't influence Source, because the asking and the manifestation pre-existed as potential. But what I do in fact is to increase the quantity/quality of energy in manifestation with that specific energy. Therefore the prayer is a process of transmutation of a potential.

The same occurs in shadow work. An energy is transmuted and then sublimated.

In conclusion, anything in manifestation can be changed by awareness. Prayer is just a crutch, a trick of the mind.

Therefore, humans are built with a perfect design of transforming realities. We are the real portals to the manifestation. And, contrary to popular belief, our power is called "choice".

Right?

There are situations when you can't go from A to B directly. However, everything is linked in manifestation. This is the proof that you do have free will and that no dirty trick (by cabal controlled AI or even by black magic) would ultimately succeed. Because, if you can't go from A to B due to a (let's say malevolent) intervention, you can go from A to C, D,... and at some point you will reach B, simply because nothing exists in isolation, therefore B is ultimately linked with something.

Question: is this a valid statement? From my point of view, it is valid. But from the point of view that some entities will become space dust, it doesn’t appear as valid. This question does not derail the thread, in my opinion, because the allegedly future space dust has memory too. Hmm, what happens to that memory, huh?


In reality, the only thing that will never change is the fact that almost everything is going to change, to a greater or to a lesser degree. (Gregorian Bivolaru)

Offline

#49 2022-04-18 22:27:05

pete
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

Genoveva wrote:

Stillness: does it exist? Is it subjective? Example: 2 particles moving in identical pattern/vibration are still, in relation to each other, but they are not in a state of stillness in relation to anything else that doesn't match their vibration.

When we meditate on something we synchronise with that. We may also influence that. So, when I pray to Source, and my prayer is answered, we could say that I influenced Source. In reality, I don't influence Source, because the asking and the manifestation pre-existed as potential. But what I do in fact is to increase the quantity/quality of energy in manifestation with that specific energy. Therefore the prayer is a process of transmutation of a potential.

The same occurs in shadow work. An energy is transmuted and then sublimated.

In conclusion, anything in manifestation can be changed by awareness. Prayer is just a crutch, a trick of the mind.

Therefore, humans are built with a perfect design of transforming realities. We are the real portals to the manifestation. And, contrary to popular belief, our power is called "choice".

Right?

There are situations when you can't go from A to B directly. However, everything is linked in manifestation. This is the proof that you do have free will and that no dirty trick (by cabal controlled AI or even by black magic) would ultimately succeed. Because, if you can't go from A to B due to a (let's say malevolent) intervention, you can go from A to C, D,... and at some point you will reach B, simply because nothing exists in isolation, therefore B is ultimately linked with something.

Question: is this a valid statement? From my point of view, it is valid. But from the point of view that some entities will become space dust, it doesn’t appear as valid. This question does not derail the thread, in my opinion, because the allegedly future space dust has memory too. Hmm, what happens to that memory, huh?

Thanks, not sure I have any useful answers to those questions, but one thing is certain - you are a very deep thinker. Hats off to you!

Offline

#50 2022-05-12 13:09:40

Cocreatr
Member

Re: Hypothetical? Or... Fact?

Genoveva wrote:

There are situations when you can't go from A to B directly. However, everything is linked in manifestation. This is the proof that you do have free will and that no dirty trick (by cabal controlled AI or even by black magic) would ultimately succeed. Because, if you can't go from A to B due to a (let's say malevolent) intervention, you can go from A to C, D,... and at some point you will reach B, simply because nothing exists in isolation, therefore B is ultimately linked with something.

Question: is this a valid statement? From my point of view, it is valid. But from the point of view that some entities will become space dust, it doesn’t appear as valid. This question does not derail the thread, in my opinion, because the allegedly future space dust has memory too. Hmm, what happens to that memory, huh?

Thank you, good question and deep at that. From experience I would answer yes, valid.  If I set my sights on B with a light heart and intention, and get distracted to C, D, …, I find myself pleasantly surprised when B pops up again in my view and delighted when it appears closer than before. Hey, I am on my way, even though I do not remember holding a course for the recent past.

From the view of those about to return to space dust, maybe this holds true:  How right can you be in 3D life? Surviving and enjoying it. How wrong can you be? Dead. We can imagine it will look quite different for those once they are on the other side of the veil.


☀️ What looks foolish at first may be genius in another context. Or vice versa. Always test
☘️ Everyone is a beginner at something. All rights reserved to know more tomorrow than today.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB