Hi!
What do you think about this statement?
Everything which has a beginning is by that very fact - a simulation.
Cheers!
W
OMFG...YOU HAVE JUST BLOWN MY FRICKIN MIND!!!!!!!
and he leaves the room brain damaged. :lol:
Sorry.. the way you said that was like you walked into a room... quietened everyone down... and dropped a massive profound bombshell... said 'cheers' then left. Each person suffering a stroke or haemorrhage as it slowly dawns on them. The potentiality of that revelation leaving them in a state of flux.
aaanyway
Yes... very true.
:-D :-DHold on... :-D :-D :-D, give me a sec... :-D :-D
Ok, Im good now. I couldn't help but picture you clicking on this thread and imagining you were gonna read any number of things. Anything other than what was actually written.
Beedeekin, tell me that wasn't weird. That statement was for all to see but it was directed at you.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 17, 2013, 18:05:49
OMFG...YOU HAVE JUST BLOWN MY FRICKIN MIND!!!!!!!
and he leaves the room brain damaged. :lol:
Sorry.. the way you said that was like you walked into a room... quietened everyone down... and dropped a massive profound bombshell... said 'cheers' then left. Each person suffering a stroke or haemorrhage as it slowly dawns on them. The potentiality of that revelation leaving them in a state of flux.
aaanyway
Yes... very true.
:-)
No seriously....it is nothing to be alarmed about. But yes, it does get one thinking, depending upon their personal and/or shared belief systems. It seems obvious once the realization settles that consciousness has ever always been...that is to say, has no beginning, and beginnings are like programs in a simulation in which the concept of having a beginning can be explored.
Brains need not be damaged by this information.
:-D
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 17, 2013, 19:18:13
:-D :-DHold on... :-D :-D :-D, give me a sec... :-D :-D
Ok, Im good now. I couldn't help but picture you clicking on this thread and imagining you were gonna read any number of things. Anything other than what was actually written.
Beedeekin, tell me that wasn't weird. That statement was for all to see but it was directed at you.
Seems like some kind of discussion in relation to this concept has perhaps recently happened on this board? It wasn't directed at anyone in particular...just placed there to stimulate thought and maybe discussion.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 17, 2013, 19:22:43
Seems like some kind of discussion in relation to this concept has perhaps recently happened on this board? It wasn't directed at anyone in particular...just placed there to stimulate thought and maybe discussion.
In a way, yes. I'm not sure about Beedeekin's personal thoughts on everything but he has a very good way of explaining things using programs and simulations as metaphors to get certain points across. Couple that with some recent talk about synchronicity, and I can easily picture him staring at the computer screen shorting the keyboard with drool. :-D
Actually, he's way over being wowed by synchronicity.
I was actually agreeing with the statement... but found the cool confident delivery of the initial post very amusing.. probably unintended by William.
I have been mulling it over and it makes profound sense. In a way that I can't seem to elaborate on it other than to agree at the moment.
Um. I guess I'm slow... but isn't a simulation simulating something that already exists and how could you simulate a process that has no concept and does not exist? :|
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 17, 2013, 21:53:17
Um. I guess I'm slow...
1: but isn't a simulation simulating something that already exists
and
2: how could you simulate a process that has no concept and does not exist? :|
1: Are there video games which simulate what is in the imagination of the game creators?
2: If something had no beginning and wanted to experience what a beginning would be like, what might be involved to 'make it so'?
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 17, 2013, 21:00:13
I was actually agreeing with the statement... but found the cool confident delivery of the initial post very amusing.. probably unintended by William.
I have been mulling it over and it makes profound sense. In a way that I can't seem to elaborate on it other than to agree at the moment.
Not intended but appreciated. :)
Sleep on it - maybe you will have elaboration upon awakening....certainly it helps if other minds are helping process the significance of this data together.
Then is not the imagination the source of all things then? :-)
I like the sound of it, but... I can't process that and I read it about fifteen times. How sad it that. xD
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 18, 2013, 12:12:13
Then is not the imagination the source of all things then? :-)
That which the imagination requires in order to be the imagination is 'The Source Of All Things'. The source of all things is Consciousness.
:)
Quote from: AstralCody on February 18, 2013, 14:36:14
I like the sound of it, but... I can't process that and I read it about fifteen times. How sad it that. xD
Come from a different angle...think in terms of what it would be like to never have had a beginning...come from that direction and it might be easier for you to process. :)
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 18, 2013, 14:45:57
Come from a different angle...think in terms of what it would be like to never have had a beginning...come from that direction and it might be easier for you to process. :)
Since all of our memories are just simulations, a favorite memory is a good place to start. Imagine how random each memory really is and then imagine that's where your life started.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 18, 2013, 14:50:42
Since all of our memories are just simulations, a favorite memory is a good place to start. Imagine how random each memory really is and then imagine that's where your life started.
I am not speaking of memories. These have beginnings and are thus also simulations - or subjective interpretations of the simulation experience of your 'life package' (inclusive of all extra...alternate states) and the statement
Everything which has a beginning is by that very fact - a simulation goes much deeper than a life package, the physical universe and even the astral realm...the only way to truly begin understand the implication is to imagine what it would be like to have never had a beginning and yet exist.
Then one can glimpse how all things which do have a beginning are simulations...fractals. To experience 'different states'.
It all hinges on how you define 'simulation'.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 18, 2013, 15:22:14
I am not speaking of memories. These have beginnings and are thus also simulations - or subjective interpretations of the simulation experience of your 'life package' (inclusive of all extra...alternate states) and the statement Everything which has a beginning is by that very fact - a simulation goes much deeper than a life package, the physical universe and even the astral realm...the only way to truly begin understand the implication is to imagine what it would be like to have never had a beginning and yet exist.
Then one can glimpse how all things which do have a beginning are simulations...fractals. To experience 'different states'.
I understand that you were not speaking of memories, but I was trying to trow an example out there to help another member.
I understand the concept but it's not very beneficial to the practical. If we are really honest with our selves, not too many of us can really grasp what it means for this reality or any other to not have a beginning.
Pondering this too long is as useful as wondering what it would be like for nothing to have ever existed in the first place.
After all, nothing itself must exist if nothing exists. Only there would be no consciousness to define the concept of nothing.
I think I just lost some brain cells.
Quote from: Volgerle on February 18, 2013, 16:15:09
It all hinges on how you define 'simulation'.
Exactly. But if he defines the simulation, then the definition becomes it's beginning in a sense. So we can point to that as being the origin.
The simulation of this reality by definition is very hard to define because we can only describe simulation based upon the way we 'simulate' things in this reality... computer generated... food... objects. we simulate every day. We use a simulation to work our way around a computer screen that involves pressing icons. The interface on your screen is a simulated user friendly way of navigating what is essentially a very abstract but logical process.
I am still trying to get my head around your statement William. Not get my head around it... but rather to expand on it.
I know what you mean.. but there needs to be a defined 'beginning' for the statement to exist. Do you mean the current theory that there was a 'big bang' type scenario?
Also... this reality is the at the bottom (or top) of the tree... at the moment anyway. So this is as real as it gets.. so this 'simulation' is an example of the most advanced simulation there is. We have no basis of comparison.. other than looking at other PMRs.
Calling it a simulated reality is also by definition of the word 'simulation' slightly wrong.
Quote from: Volgerle on February 18, 2013, 16:15:09
It all hinges on how you define 'simulation'.
Can it be defined more than one way?
I just can't imagine anything not having an origin. A reality can't have a beginning and simultaneously have a past and a future. That is to say, it can just exist in the middle of the game and not become a new game on to itself.
If we can exist outside of our concept of time, then maybe. But all we have is our concept of time.
Like I said, if there is nothing in existence, than nothing does exist and therefor nothing must be the beginning.
But I think William is trying to make us consider the possibility that we are really just some experiment that is playing out. If so, I would say yes.
But we mustn't confuse the idea of an experiment as being conducted by an outside influencer or 'experimenter'... like the Matrix or cosmic force.
Also... we should try not to imagine that we are an experiment taking place within another reality that is more real than this one. This isn't a copy or simulation of some other constrained reality... this is the result of a top down fractal process that is running a constrained simulation with the express function of cause and effect. The cause being free will and choice... the effect being intent.
We do exist outside/inside our concept of time when viewed from a nonphysical perspective. :-)
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 18, 2013, 17:37:40
I just can't imagine anything not having an origin. A reality can't have a beginning and simultaneously have a past and a future. That is to say, it can just exist in the middle of the game and not become a new game on to itself.
If we can exist outside of our concept of time, then maybe. But all we have is our concept of time.
Like I said, if there is nothing in existence, than nothing does exist and therefor nothing must be the beginning.
But I think William is trying to make us consider the possibility that we are really just some experiment that is playing out. If so, I would say yes.
Great Feedback!
I have written something since coming back to read these entries which I will share after I have replied...
You actually can imagine something which does not have an origin once you identify WITH it.
Part of the problem is that we are discussing a concept while WITHIN the simulation, and we are trained to think of ourselves as ...well many things like gender, race, political, sexual, religious, spiritual orientation etc – all of which are in themselves part of the simulation, or what is derived from experiencing the simulation.
This is to say, what we THINK we are is not what we really are. It is rather the by-product of this particular simulation.
Time has to do with the simulations of course. Timelessness is not an easy thing to understand because of this, but we DO have imagination which is somewhat more able to work in timeless conceptualizing.
'Nothing' is the thing which gives evidence of the simulation, for us within it. Remember what it is that calls something 'nothing' – and by that definition pronounces it to be 'something.' (This is not as mysterious as it may sound.)
To clarify – what I am doing is not trying to get you to consider we are some experiment being played out so much as suggesting the consideration that...at the source, WE are that consciousness which created the simulations and then embarked into them.
We forgot our self.
But, we are able to remember.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 18, 2013, 17:51:46
But we mustn't confuse the idea of an experiment as being conducted by an outside influencer or 'experimenter'... like the Matrix or cosmic force.
Also... we should try not to imagine that we are an experiment taking place within another reality that is more real than this one. This isn't a copy or simulation of some other constrained reality... this is the result of a top down fractal process that is running a constrained simulation with the express function of cause and effect. The cause being free will and choice... the effect being intent.
We do exist outside/inside our concept of time when viewed from a nonphysical perspective. :-)
I touch on this in what I wrote before coming back to see your replies...
I think we need to bypass the notion that we are an experiment, as I mentioned in my above reply.
The non physical – I am assuming – it that which I call 'The Astral Realm' – the NPMR as Tom Campbell calls it...or rather the AUM/AOM.
Whatever it is called, whatever the other PMRs which exist seemingly independent of this – our particular physical universe, altogether they are also simulations, because they too have a beginning.
Below is that which I wrote before seeing your replies: Sorry the post is so long. I am always working on trying to be more concise while not omitting any necessary data.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have defined the evidence of 'simulation' as everything which has a beginning. The definition is not its beginning in the sense that if I were to create an elaborate game in my imagination, the game itself remains there until I actualise it – so the seed of the notion or the complete blueprint of it in my mind could be seen as its beginning, but until actualised...it is only ever a potential.
That it exists in consciousness as an abstract or even a precise idea can be seen as its beginning.
Yet...
Every Thing which has a beginning derives this status from its actuality. It has become a 'thing.'
All things require consciousness in order to be, and remain potential beginnings which can be acknowledged as potential beginnings or through interactive experience as actual beginnings.
Everything which has a beginning is by that very fact - a simulation.
Would it be fair to say that if a potential thing becomes an actual thing, and its beginning can be traced to its source – therefore its beginning started as an idea, therefore the idea is a 'thing' which had a beginning and therefore is by that fact a simulation itself?
And if so, since ideas derive from consciousness, and begin there, then ideas are simulations – but the consciousness thinking the ideas is real.
In the sense of creating something in order to experience what it might be like to have a beginning, from the outside of this mechanism, it would be a 'simulator' and from the inside it would be...whatever it was designed to let you experience.
It would be a beginning.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 18, 2013, 17:09:07
The simulation of this reality by definition is very hard to define because we can only describe simulation based upon the way we 'simulate' things in this reality... computer generated... food... objects. we simulate every day. We use a simulation to work our way around a computer screen that involves pressing icons. The interface on your screen is a simulated user friendly way of navigating what is essentially a very abstract but logical process.
I am still trying to get my head around your statement William. Not get my head around it... but rather to expand on it.
I know what you mean.. but there needs to be a defined 'beginning' for the statement to exist. Do you mean the current theory that there was a 'big bang' type scenario?
Also... this reality is the at the bottom (or top) of the tree... at the moment anyway. So this is as real as it gets.. so this 'simulation' is an example of the most advanced simulation there is. We have no basis of comparison.. other than looking at other PMRs.
Calling it a simulated reality is also by definition of the word 'simulation' slightly wrong.
Now to further stretch the mind, lets say consciousness which ever and always has been wanted to create simulation of a beginning and no end.
That is 'birth' without death.
Could this simulation be what is referred to (among other things) as 'The Astral Realm'?
Now stretching the mind even more, what if that which had a beginning and no end, and some point in its evolution, wanted to know what it was like to have an end, thus created this physical universe as something that could simulate that?
Or more to the point, created many scenarios which have endings...and what happens at the end? The consciousnesses which experienced these PMR simulations return to the place where they entered into said simulations, which in this explanation would be 'returns to the Astral.'
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 18, 2013, 18:50:21
To clarify – what I am doing is not trying to get you to consider we are some experiment being played out so much as suggesting the consideration that...at the source, WE are that consciousness which created the simulations and then embarked into them.
absolutely MBT 101.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 18, 2013, 18:56:25
Could this simulation be what is referred to (among other things) as 'The Astral Realm'?
Now stretching the mind even more, what if that which had a beginning and no end, and some point in its evolution, wanted to know what it was like to have an end, thus created this physical universe as something that could simulate that?
Or more to the point, created many scenarios which have endings...and what happens at the end? The consciousnesses which experienced these PMR simulations return to the place where they entered into said simulations, which in this explanation would be 'returns to the Astral.'
Have you read My Big TOE?
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 18, 2013, 16:50:41
I understand that you were not speaking of memories, but I was trying to trow an example out there to help another member.
I understand the concept but it's not very beneficial to the practical. If we are really honest with our selves, not too many of us can really grasp what it means for this reality or any other to not have a beginning.
Pondering this too long is as useful as wondering what it would be like for nothing to have ever existed in the first place.
After all, nothing itself must exist if nothing exists. Only there would be no consciousness to define the concept of nothing.
I think I just lost some brain cells.
Pondering this is extremely useful because it allows the 'right of passage' not only back to the source, but to acknowledge you. I and everything IS (are/am) the source.
The source is Consciousness, has ever always existed and created the simulations for the purpose of experiencing beginnings and whatever else would unfold under those conditions, within the particular simulations.
Furthermore, simulations were able to be created WITHIN simulations, even without the creator(s) being aware of their true self as the 'source without a beginning' – simply thinking that they (or it) was the source of All That Is, and having only ever evolved outwards into creativity...from 'nothing' into an all powerful consciousness without end which could create simulations to explore. No need (or perhaps no known way...or no desire) to investigate where it came from, or penetrate that veil...commonly referred to as 'The Void'.
Yet the patterns are the same. Everything which has a beginning is by that very fact - a simulation.
The only thing which is not a simulation is Consciousness itself.
Thus, you me every 'one' is not a simulation. We are simply experiencing simulation(s).
This is essentially what Tom Campbell explains. In much more elaboration and over a massive trilogy. I personally never thought 'We' or 'I' was a simulation.. I mean... Our physically perceived bodies and the surroundings they reside in are.
You should read MBT if you haven't already Wi11iam. :) it will stretch your mind further.
Now stretching the mind even more, what if that which had a beginning and no end, and some point in its evolution, wanted to know what it was like to have an end, thus created this physical universe as something that could simulate that?
Why not flip that theory? Why couldn't the non physical be a result of that which could die and wanted to know what it was like to have no end. Since physical mass erodes and breaks down, a physical consciousness could not last forever, why couldn't non physical conscious existence be a consolation prize? In other words, if "we" can't exist forever in the physical, let's figure out how to exist in a non physical form as that is better than nothing.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 18, 2013, 19:10:15
absolutely MBT 101.
Have you read My Big TOE?
Not all of it. It is useful data and there is a lot of that about, albeit in pieces like jigsaw bits, able to be pieced together.
In regards to this tread subject, I could not get feedback from the MBTOE followers other than 'It is not what Tom says'... never-mind.
I know your frustration because I myself prefer to use my own metaphors for explaining stuff. I refrain from posting in the forum because of just that reason. It does explain in the rules on that forum that everything discussed must be explained using Tom's model.
I was actually just thinking that you would find MBT interesting because it is familiar. Please don't let what I said deflate you. :) I read MBT and sort of let the ideas develop in my own way. I wasn't being 'your idea is nothing new' I was more being 'cool.. .if you think this then you should read MBT'
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 18, 2013, 19:15:16
Pondering this is extremely useful because it allows the 'right of passage' not only back to the source, but to acknowledge you. I and everything IS (are/am) the source.
The source is Consciousness, has ever always existed and created the simulations for the purpose of experiencing beginnings and whatever else would unfold under those conditions, within the particular simulations.
Furthermore, simulations were able to be created WITHIN simulations, even without the creator(s) being aware of their true self as the 'source without a beginning' – simply thinking that they (or it) was the source of All That Is, and having only ever evolved outwards into creativity...from 'nothing' into an all powerful consciousness without end which could create simulations to explore. No need (or perhaps no known way...or no desire) to investigate where it came from, or penetrate that veil...commonly referred to as 'The Void'.
Yet the patterns are the same. Everything which has a beginning is by that very fact - a simulation.
The only thing which is not a simulation is Consciousness itself.
Thus, you me every 'one' is not a simulation. We are simply experiencing simulation(s).
What I meant by useful was that we will not be any closer to the answer than we were before we considered the question.
I happen to think this is a great thread and that of itself is useful.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 18, 2013, 19:26:36
Now stretching the mind even more, what if that which had a beginning and no end, and some point in its evolution, wanted to know what it was like to have an end, thus created this physical universe as something that could simulate that?
Why not flip that theory? Why couldn't the non physical be a result of that which could die and wanted to know what it was like to have no end. Since physical mass erodes and breaks down, a physical consciousness could not last forever, why couldn't non physical conscious existence be a consolation prize? In other words, if "we" can't exist forever in the physical, let's figure out how to exist in a non physical form as that is better than nothing.
In essence there is no such thing as 'a physical consciousness' although I understand what you are saying.
That consciousness within the physical realm created the non physical realm (and in some sense must have achieved this accidentally...through belief systems) and for some reason consciousness is thus able to create instantly whatever it imagines...whereas in a physical universe it has to imagined make blueprints and plans and then gather physical material and create the thing imagined.
If this were the case then what we have created in non physical realm(s) are beings which claim to be our creators fully knowing that we created them and also knowing that we are ignorant of that fact.
However, in order for 'them' to be 'beings' they too have to be conscious and therefore are not strictly speaking, anyone's creations and strictly speaking are equally the source...and if it is us in our imaginations which created them then essentially they are us...of course – would they want us realising this?
Do you see how complicated such a reversal can get? I am not saying it is not worth contemplating, but it does open itself up to...dark agendas...then again there may be truth in it...perhaps the two concepts can work the same simulation...there are both actual creators of this physical universe PMR and there is a 'feedback' thing where our imaginations also create things in that non physical realm which seem equally as actual.
Therefore we would do well to be able to determine the difference between the real and the false in regard to the consciousness expressing itself through any given form, non form...the easiest way would be to hear what they tell us and if there is any sign of 'we are your creators' and 'you are our lesser' etc...type of thing...then there is likely foul play at the worst, and lesson therein to learn at best.
Whatever 'way' the important thing I feel is to know that whatever situation one is in, if it can be seen to have a beginning (like the Big Bang or The Void) then it is in itself a Simulation.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 18, 2013, 19:36:16
I know your frustration because I myself prefer to use my own metaphors for explaining stuff. I refrain from posting in the forum because of just that reason. It does explain in the rules on that forum that everything discussed must be explained using Tom's model.
I was actually just thinking that you would find MBT interesting because it is familiar. Please don't let what I said deflate you. :) I read MBT and sort of let the ideas develop in my own way. I wasn't being 'your idea is nothing new' I was more being 'cool.. .if you think this then you should read MBT'
Yes – what I meant was that they are believers and anything they consider outside the box of Tom Campbell's theory, is not to be discussed on their forum. That was the message.
I can understand because Toms has not considered this himself. It is not part of his 'everything' and in some ways puts under question his own witness to what he has been told and shown by guides and such in his journeys into altered states. There are things hidden from him/us which we are informed are not for our eyes...hmmm...anyway, you can tell a lot about the theory by the way the followers behave, and truthfully they behave like believers – like any ardent adherents, which typically goes against the teachings being followed.
It happens all the time. It is just one of those traps beliefs create.
For now at least, that is all I want to say about MBTOE.
Well this may not redefine what a simulation is but it certainly constrains it with parameters. For practical purposes we do have to go with either the chicken or the egg.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 18, 2013, 19:41:56
What I meant by useful was that we will not be any closer to the answer than we were before we considered the question.
I happen to think this is a great thread and that of itself is useful.
What is making this thread so great is that we are contributing – not afraid to investigate – working things out...sure, I have pondered this for some time now and have gone through the same queries and reached some conclusions – which can be helpful...but I also don't mind if someone can debunk the statement.
I think though that you are not seeing what such a fundamental insight can actually help you achieve in terms of usefulness. It in someway may BE the answer once the ramifications begin to be understood...as the realization sinks in...
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 18, 2013, 20:02:50
Yes – what I meant was that they are believers and anything they consider outside the box of Tom Campbell's theory, is not to be discussed on their forum. That was the message.
I can understand because Toms has not considered this himself. It is not part of his 'everything' and in some ways puts under question his own witness to what he has been told and shown by guides and such in his journeys into altered states. There are things hidden from him/us which we are informed are not for our eyes...hmmm...anyway, you can tell a lot about the theory by the way the followers behave, and truthfully they behave like believers – like any ardent adherents, which typically goes against the teachings being followed.
It happens all the time. It is just one of those traps beliefs create.
For now at least, that is all I want to say about MBTOE.
Fair enough.
I agree with the mechanics behind the theory because, well, I was already onto these ideas independently through my own nonphysical exploration. The book just fleshed it out. :)
Anyway...
I have read your posts and I am still left wondering what you are
actually saying. Maybe I'm just a bit dense because although I fully understand what you are saying, the actual important message and ramifications of the statement seems to be going over my head.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 18, 2013, 20:07:20
Well this may not redefine what a simulation is but it certainly constrains it with parameters. For practical purposes we do have to go with either the chicken or the egg.
What came first must be that which had no beginning. As we know, simulations are for experiencing 'things' and that in itself is not 'good or bad' but if we had even a smidgen of an inkling that 'we' are the sole 'source' of all simulations, we redefine our own ...ummm... 'Self' or 'is-ness' ...we remove the need of 'others' to tell us who we are, or to exert their will or influence over us as somehow superior.
This is not to say that we cannot listen and learn. Specifically it is a tool which, having helped redefined our sense of self, no longer leaves us open to possible/probable manipulation...wherever and whatever state of reality we are consciously involved within.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 18, 2013, 20:21:29
Fair enough.
I agree with the mechanics behind the theory because, well, I was already onto these ideas independently through my own nonphysical exploration. The book just fleshed it out. :)
Anyway...
I have read your posts and I am still left wondering what you are actually saying. Maybe I'm just a bit dense because although I fully understand what you are saying, the actual important message and ramifications of the statement seems to be going over my head.
The mechanics of the theory may well be agreeable but the practicalities of making them beliefs are not.
I do not know what it is that you have experienced as far as your own journeys into non physical exploration go.
Perhaps the importance or ramifications have to do with your beliefs about your experiences? I don't really know.
Do you believe that the non-physical is of itself the source of all that is? Do you believe it has no beginning?
Do you have beliefs?
I think what I am actually saying may have already been said since your post. The ramifications and importance of this simple yet profound insight have to do with how you see yourself, others, and how this shapes your personal decisions wherever you may be and what you might tell others who might feel listening to you is a good thing to do...and how much information you pass on comes from 'guides and teachers etc' and are these trustworthy...do they understand that they are themselves within a simulation or do they believe it to be real, all there is etc...these are some of the things which do have ramifications yes?
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 18, 2013, 20:22:00
What came first must be that which had no beginning. As we know, simulations are for experiencing 'things' and that in itself is not 'good or bad' but if we had even a smidgen of an inkling that 'we' are the sole 'source' of all simulations, we redefine our own ...ummm... 'Self' or 'is-ness' ...we remove the need of 'others' to tell us who we are, or to exert their will or influence over us as somehow superior.
This is not to say that we cannot listen and learn. Specifically it is a tool which, having helped redefined our sense of self, no longer leaves us open to possible/probable manipulation...wherever and whatever state of reality we are consciously involved within.
I can sum up "that which had no beginning" as God or the source. But to do so just points out that we are not discussing a new idea or pushing the boundaries of conventional thinking. This is really an age old debate.
If god created the universe, then who created God?
You say you are open to new ideas if your current line of thinking can be debunked but isn't that the same as saying you aren't? I mean no one can prove or disprove any of this.
But in a sense this thread is a simulation and you are it's creator so you certainly have a right to steer it back to your point. Which begs the question. What is your point?
Not trying to be rude but if this discussion has an endgame that you have not yet ran past us, it may help to do so.
Every time we deviate from the original concept you point us right back and knowing what your purpose is may help us help you. :-D
Read this as if we were old friends so don't assume any harshness in my words. I like this discussion but it seems as if there may be an agenda.
Do you have a much larger theory and are just looking to see if someone can throw an idea out there to make you rethink some aspect of your theory?
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 18, 2013, 20:39:36
The mechanics of the theory may well be agreeable but the practicalities of making them beliefs are not.
I do not know what it is that you have experienced as far as your own journeys into non physical exploration go.
Perhaps the importance or ramifications have to do with your beliefs about your experiences? I don't really know.
Do you believe that the non-physical is of itself the source of all that is? Do you believe it has no beginning?
Do you have beliefs?
I think what I am actually saying may have already been said since your post. The ramifications and importance of this simple yet profound insight have to do with how you see yourself, others, and how this shapes your personal decisions wherever you may be and what you might tell others who might feel listening to you is a good thing to do...and how much information you pass on comes from 'guides and teachers etc' and are these trustworthy...do they understand that they are themselves within a simulation or do they believe it to be real, all there is etc...these are some of the things which do have ramifications yes?
I have lived with and by my NPMR experiences since a child... some very profound.. that have eventually shaped my reality and life.. my attitude towards it and how I conduct my belief in and understanding of others.
I never used a guide to direct me nonphysically... I never thought I needed one nor never sought one out. I have come to a conclusion that I have met it but it hasn't changed my overall conduct towards my experiences or how I perceive reality.
I figured out it was a top-down relationship when it came to reality and nonphysical reality... as in.. this reality is shaped from a soup of a non-constrained reality rather than the other way around. The fractal nature of this is simply indicated by our natural invention and evolution of digital technology. It is a result of our 'habit' as consciousness beings/entities to create simulation with which to experience things but based within our 'constrained' reality simulation thingy... we have to build and expend energy to create a physical system with which to run the digital ideas.
Whether it has a beginning or not doesn't effect me intellectually nor emotionally. It changes nothing for me 'personally'. Maybe this is why the message isn't sinking in... because it's already in and is absorbed by the importance of just 'being'.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 18, 2013, 20:48:38
I can sum up "that which had no beginning" as God or the source. But to do so just points out that we are not discussing a new idea or pushing the boundaries of conventional thinking. This is really an age old debate.
If god created the universe, then who created God?
You say you are open to new ideas if your current line of thinking can be debunked but isn't that the same as saying you aren't? I mean no one can prove or disprove any of this.
But in a sense this thread is a simulation and you are it's creator so you certainly have a right to steer it back to your point. Which begs the question. What is your point?
Not trying to be rude but if this discussion has an endgame that you have not yet ran past us, it may help to do so.
Every time we deviate from the original concept you point us right back and knowing what your purpose is may help us help you. :-D
Read this as if we were old friends so don't assume any harshness in my words. I like this discussion but it seems as if there may be an agenda.
Do you have a much larger theory and are just looking to see if someone can throw an idea out there to make you rethink some aspect of your theory?
Good points there sir!
I have to admit that I have never once questioned the motive of my guides. It never seemed necessary since they only project unconditional love and understanding.
Up until now, I never considered there could be any way to mask their true agenda. William has made me think about this because I have always considered them superior to me but not because they implied this or told me so. If nothing else, they are intellectually superior.
But they always admit that our intellectual capacity is limited by our physical existence and not because some info is being withheld.
But who really knows? I have a very interesting OOBE to look forward to next, as if that isn't always the case.
Exactly.
like I stated I never perceived there was a guide. No one ever came to me and stated they were my guide or that I needed guiding.
I only heard about them when I came online in about 2003... maybe 2004. I was very late in the game as far as the internet goes. I also never read any OOBE based books other than Oliver Fox's 'Astral Projection' and Monroe's 'Journeys Out of the Body'.. and I didn't read them until I had already had an experience base of 10 years. I've lived quite a sheltered life as far as paranormal literature goes.. other than UFO books.. and they were because of my job.
When I did read about them online I instantly dismissed them as something created or imagined... I actually only entertained the idea after reading MBT about 2 years ago. Then I searched and found what I consider my guide. He never speaks... or conveys any information like those I have read about. He is completely silent and seems to only communicate via actions by showing me certain things or taking me certain places of interest. Which is curious by itself don't ya think?
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 18, 2013, 21:07:16
I have lived with and by my NPMR experiences since a child... some very profound.. that have eventually shaped my reality and life.. my attitude towards it and how I conduct my belief in and understanding of others.
I never used a guide to direct me nonphysically... I never thought I needed one nor never sought one out. I have come to a conclusion that I have met it but it hasn't changed my overall conduct towards my experiences or how I perceive reality.
I figured out it was a top-down relationship when it came to reality and nonphysical reality... as in.. this reality is shaped from a soup of a non-constrained reality rather than the other way around. The fractal nature of this is simply indicated by our natural invention and evolution of digital technology. It is a result of our 'habit' as consciousness beings/entities to create simulation with which to experience things but based within our 'constrained' reality simulation thingy... we have to build and expend energy to create a physical system with which to run the digital ideas.
Whether it has a beginning or not doesn't effect me intellectually nor emotionally. It changes nothing for me 'personally'. Maybe this is why the message isn't sinking in... because it's already in and is absorbed by the importance of just 'being'.
Refreshing...do you have a purpose for 'just being'?
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 18, 2013, 22:16:11
Exactly.
like I stated I never perceived there was a guide. No one ever came to me and stated they were my guide or that I needed guiding.
I only heard about them when I came online in about 2003... maybe 2004. I was very late in the game as far as the internet goes. I also never read any OOBE based books other than Oliver Fox's 'Astral Projection' and Monroe's 'Journeys Out of the Body'.. and I didn't read them until I had already had an experience base of 10 years. I've lived quite a sheltered life as far as paranormal literature goes.. other than UFO books.. and they were because of my job.
When I did read about them online I instantly dismissed them as something created or imagined... I actually only entertained the idea after reading MBT about 2 years ago. Then I searched and found what I consider my guide. He never speaks... or conveys any information like those I have read about. He is completely silent and seems to only communicate via actions by showing me certain things or taking me certain places of interest. Which is curious by itself don't ya think?
To be honest, I never used the term guide until I found this forum. But for me it makes perfect sense and I'm comfortable with it. I must of had at least a couple dozen OOBE's before I met my guide. I was annoying an old man and he told me he couldn't really help me so I asked him who could. He told me to ask the angel who was always following me. She appeared and said she was there to help me when I needed it. And that's how it went until about two years ago and Sarah became Sarak. For the longest time I viewed everything through my dying belief system and only wanted to have non-challenging experiences.
Another term I just learned was 3-d blackness. I'm amazed by some of Lion's post wherein he describes his shift from one "locale" to another. If I go to the 3-D blackness, it's always at the end and there is a lesson or something "profound" for me to understand. This usually warps my mind and sends me back.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 18, 2013, 22:16:11
I only heard about them when I came online in about 2003... maybe 2004. I was very late in the game as far as the internet goes. I also never read any OOBE based books other than Oliver Fox's 'Astral Projection' and Monroe's 'Journeys Out of the Body'.. and I didn't read them until I had already had an experience base of 10 years. I've lived quite a sheltered life as far as paranormal literature goes.. other than UFO books.. and they were because of my job.
This is impressive but also depressing, but makes sense. You're wasting such an excellent mind. You could do so much more than me if you had my occult knowledge *sigh*.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 18, 2013, 20:48:38
I can sum up "that which had no beginning" as God or the source. But to do so just points out that we are not discussing a new idea or pushing the boundaries of conventional thinking. This is really an age old debate.
If god created the universe, then who created God?
You say you are open to new ideas if your current line of thinking can be debunked but isn't that the same as saying you aren't? I mean no one can prove or disprove any of this.
But in a sense this thread is a simulation and you are it's creator so you certainly have a right to steer it back to your point. Which begs the question. What is your point?
Not trying to be rude but if this discussion has an endgame that you have not yet ran past us, it may help to do so.
Every time we deviate from the original concept you point us right back and knowing what your purpose is may help us help you. :-D
Read this as if we were old friends so don't assume any harshness in my words. I like this discussion but it seems as if there may be an agenda.
Do you have a much larger theory and are just looking to see if someone can throw an idea out there to make you rethink some aspect of your theory?
Okay. :)
The age old debate you mention has to do with the question 'who created this thing called "GOD" which is a human conception at best, although some stories reported from the 'other' realm indicate there are indeed beings who say they are 'God.'
The answer of course is that no one created the source because it has always ever been.
The argument might then go 'where is the evidence? which could be answered 'you will have to go there and find out for yourself (as Tom Campbell and others suggest.)
Go where?
I have not confirmed 'where' having no memory of 'going there' myself, and in no need to do so to be convinced that there is in fact 'the other side' etc...the stories that others share are sufficient at this time.
What those stories suggest is that there is a void and the general understanding is that this is where 'consciousnesses derives or was created from.
My statement and following discourse conveys that this 'Void' is the evidence of a beginning, and thus the 'other realm' is a simulation, as is this one.
That is the evidence or the proof.
You may then say 'so if the void can be penetrated, how would we know that we are not in another simulation? And I would answer – 'look for the evidence of a beginning', but I made my point already when saying that it is enough to understand that at some point outside all simulation, consciousness exists and has always existed. In theory this should end the debate.
As to being debunked, that would be fine too because it would give me more data, but as you say, it is not that possible to disprove what cannot be proved.
But the theory as it stands is very useful, as I have already pointed out.
There is no real 'endgame' unless of course it has to do with the need to adjust understanding that one need never have to wonder ever again. We simply take the information wherever we go and act on the fundamental value of that data...nice in working around being hoodwinked for example.
So my purpose is to share the data, the reason the data is worthwhile to the individual and how it might even be expanded upon and improved.
That is the agenda and to spread this information, especial among those who would most likely be able to get it enough to appreciate it usefulness.
As I said in my last post, you have opened my eyes to possibilities that I need to consider during my OOBE's, so for that I am grateful.
I have never had a problem acknowledging to myself that my intellect is inferior to beings that are in fact intellectually superior to my own. But I try to never let them know. And usually I can remedy the problem with a little studying but nothing can make up for hereditary limitations. And knowing my own limitations helps me as much as knowing someone else may have none. In other words, I can steer clear of them.
As history has shown us here on this planet and in this reality, the intellectually inferior have much to fear.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 18, 2013, 19:52:45
consciousness ... create instantly whatever it imagines...whereas in a physical universe it has to imagined make blueprints and plans and then gather physical material and create the thing imagined.
M-Band Static I say!
Actually you can use thought to create anything you desire in the physical that is possible to exist (or within the frequencies parameters). They key here is that different vibrational 'conscious planes' effect each-other in some small degree. Think of different realities as different ration stations that sometimes interfere with each other over distance. Think of radio waves as thought, the ones that each of us generate. And incoming radio waves increase in speed and strength with the level of power used to generate them.
Or in human terms thoughts vibrate out into different realities creating for the most part indiscernible static. Key phrase here is "for the most part". For the most part because because these planes (radio stations) are not directly focused on each other (are not tuned to the same channel). However, it is possible to craft thoughts (radio wave packets) using power raw emotional energy (level of power) to decrease the time and increase the likelihood that the thought will manifest physically (to increase the speed and strength of the radio wave so that on a different ration stations will receive the thought above the static).
You can also create a lighting rod or antenna to direct the energy to within the radio station be more effective, but to translate that gives away more than I should. Something along the lines of crafting thought tunnels for the thought each acting as a repeating, that flows through the planes and is reinserted directly from the original radio station broadcast. When inserted in this method manifestation happens as specified. It however can take a very long time depending on the wave's complexity and power used in it's original broadcast, it can only be broadcast if it is within the frequencies parameters. These parameters change over space and the laws governing them slowly begin to lift where more complex waves wash ashore. Of course, being bound within this process means that not every thought you wish for can come true within your perceived life time. Thus the feedback loop is born and we have constant souls re-birthing until reaching the outer rim or end of this cycle or sphere of broadcast range of this station.
It all appears if we're just riding bands of energy through the universe, ever expanding with each cycle.
Possibly. Or it's all a lie and I'm going to eat some cookies.
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 00:37:24
M-Band Static I say!
Actually you can use thought to create anything you desire in the physical that is possible to exist
I suggest that if what you say is true and you can instantly manifest things in this physical universe, then contact James Randi.
In the beginning there was 1 and 0. And then 1 and 0 came together and made 10. The eternal calculation was thus. It's infinite inevitability lead to PI and then came the simulation that is our existence.
So there you go the answer to the beginning. We are the sum of a calculation that due to quantum probability of everything on an infinite scale of time. The structure and shape of our reality is due to the nature of PI. Or in other words shoot out enough random 1s and 0s over an infinitely long period of time and eventually the binary source code to Windows XP would appear within that stream of 1s and 0s.
Given enough time so would God.
Please debunk my thinking too, so that I may learn. Specially the statement: We are the sum of a calculation that due to quantum probability of everything on an infinite scale of time.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 19, 2013, 01:03:25
I suggest that if what you say is true and you can instantly manifest things in this physical universe, then contact James Randi.
Ah, but I never said instantly. Reality manipulation requires time, less time is needed when the thought is more conforming with the patterns of this reality, this can be further sped up by increasing the amount of energy into the initial thought. Energy takes the easiest path to manifestation. Just as lighting takes the most conductive and easiest path to the ground. In any case the thought must conform within the parameters of this reality. Nothing mystical appears to be taking place because the manifestation is using the most conductive method to manifest which follows the parameters of reality! In short James Randi wouldn't be interested.
Edit:
But how should I know, I know nothing. Just a wandering drunk fool. And even if I became the wisest fool among fools I would be nothing more than a fool and what can a fool hope to know but a fools folly. If I'm acting strange it's no doubt due to the altering of my brain chemistry currently underway. Not that what I said is invalid, perhaps it's insane, or otherwise inspired by a drug fiends desire! :lol:
Bleh.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 18, 2013, 23:17:14
Refreshing...do you have a purpose for 'just being'?
I think that "just being" is our natural state that needs no purpose. WHAT IS ... IS.
Recently, I looked more into channelled messages and I found that I like Bashar's take on it:
QuoteThere are only Four Laws in Creation:
1. You exist.
2. The One is All and the All are One .
3. What you put out is what you get back.
4. Change is the only constant...
Except for the first three laws, which never change.
http://bashar.org/aboutprinciples.html
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 18, 2013, 22:16:11
like I stated I never perceived there was a guide. No one ever came to me and stated they were my guide or that I needed guiding.
They generally only 'show up' if you want to see them. Otherwise they stay in the background. I think you might always have a ("your"?) guide with you but you usually do not see them.
That's my experience and that of many others. I have a lot of experience with guides or helpers. Almost 50% of my projections was an interaction with them (alhtough often they were still invisible to me). I know how some "look" and know two by name now. It is comforting for me to be 'not alone out there' which is NOT related to fear issues, but just that I like cooperation.
on an afterthought:
Quote
There are only Four Laws in Creation:
1. You exist.
2. The One is All and the All are One .
3. What you put out is what you get back.
4. Change is the only constant...
Except for the first three laws, which never change.
http://bashar.org/aboutprinciples.html
1+2 = no end or beginning, creation itself
3+4 = the act of creating "simulations" by creation
PI plays it part in cyclic operations.
The fibbonacci series plays a far greater part in everything.
Have a read,
http://www.maths.surrey.ac.uk/hosted-sites/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fibnat.html
:wink:
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 18, 2013, 23:17:14
Refreshing...do you have a purpose for 'just being'?
Yes.. to soak up life and experience and to love. It's amazing in every way. Even the bad and crappy bits always evolve into memories that diminish into learning curves. I don't live in the past.. it is utterly pointless to the point of being a functionality retarder.
Sorry that my answer doesn't involve theory or OOBEs in general... but the simple act of living in the now needs no analysis or reason.
Have you ever marvelled at this 'simulation'? Stopped the noise in your head while walking outside and looked at say... a leaf... to take in what it is and how it works.. it's shape and colour.. every detail... felt it.. and simply just noticed its texture and temperature. Noticed it to the point it cuts out noise? Made it a memory.
I do this sort of thing every single day without provocation. I stop and take everything I can into my senses. This is living in the present and just being.
Forgetting that it's a simulation is the key.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 19, 2013, 09:03:49
Yes.. to soak up life and experience and to love. It's amazing in every way. Even the bad and crappy bits always evolve into memories that diminish into learning curves. I don't live in the past.. it is utterly pointless to the point of being a functionality retarder.
Sorry that my answer doesn't involve theory or OOBEs in general... but the simple act of living in the now needs no analysis or reason.
Have you ever marvelled at this 'simulation'? Stopped the noise in your head while walking outside and looked at say... a leaf... to take in what it is and how it works.. it's shape and colour.. every detail... felt it.. and simply just noticed its texture and temperature. Noticed it to the point it cuts out noise? Made it a memory.
I do this sort of thing every single day without provocation. I stop and take everything I can into my senses. This is living in the present and just being.
Forgetting that it's a simulation is the key.
Why forget this is a simulation?
I have marveled at this physical universe, life on earth etc...still do...and to be clear, that this is a simulation does not diminish its usefulness – purposefulness...
Nor do I forget what I am – it took a lot of work to remember.
I don't mind that your answer doesn't involve theory or OOBE etc...I asked because I am interested in who you think you are and what you think your purpose is...in your be-ing.
Quote from: Volgerle on February 19, 2013, 06:11:44
1+2 = no end or beginning, creation itself
Creation...had a beginning...
Quote from: Volgerle on February 19, 2013, 05:55:27
I think that "just being" is our natural state that needs no purpose. WHAT IS ... IS.
I understand that behind this wise sounding expression is a personality who does have a purpose and is acting out that purpose in relation to what is
put out and what returns.
What IS is the simulation....it needs no purpose but that which consciousness bestows on it. Consciousness by its nature finds purpose with what is.
Edit to correct typo out to put (bold)
I understand that behind this wise sounding expression is a personality who does have a purpose and is acting out that purpose in relation to what is out out and what returns.
Is that a nice way of saying it isn't a wise statement? Because I think it is wise to understand that no matter how much knowledge we gain, unless that knowledge helps us to figure out away to change what it is, it will serve us well to accept things that are beyond our control. Or else we risk going mad.
I'm not trying to speak for Beedeekin, but I'm pretty sure that what he was saying is that trying to understand when this simulation began and for what purpose is a good thing, but it becomes purpose defeating if we stop trying to live in the moment. You know, making the best of what we have and what we have been dealt. Even if there is a malevolent intent behind this simulation, what do we have to gain by worrying about it? In contrast, there is much to lose.
Why forget that this is a simulation?
Because I 'personally' have a different view of reality as you. I have lived more than half my life heavily influenced by my NPMR experiences. I have done my marvelling at this and theorised till I am blue in the face. I still receive new information... or 'data' if you want to use that term, but I keep this to myself.
I have come circle on this. I find this reality ultimately more rewarding than others. It's very very simple.
"and to be clear, that this is a simulation does not diminish its usefulness – purposefulness..."
I know... obviously... that is what I am saying.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 19, 2013, 11:15:55
I asked because I am interested in who you think you are and what you think your purpose is...in your be-ing.
Are you truly interested? or are you trying to tell me what my/our purpose is by stripping away whatever I/we reply? :lol:
I feel as if there really is some good info in his posts but it's as if our ideas are quickly dismissed with no consideration.
Which is fine, but it leaves a bitter taste.
Wi11iam, it would be useful to know if you are speaking from a theoretical stance or more of an affirmative one. You seem really dismissive. It's like I'm back in college and some pompous kid keeps challenging the professor.
Only I'm not sure who is the pompous kid and who is the professor.
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 01:44:00
Ah, but I never said instantly. Reality manipulation requires time, less time is needed when the thought is more conforming with the patterns of this reality, this can be further sped up by increasing the amount of energy into the initial thought. Energy takes the easiest path to manifestation. Just as lighting takes the most conductive and easiest path to the ground. In any case the thought must conform within the parameters of this reality. Nothing mystical appears to be taking place because the manifestation is using the most conductive method to manifest which follows the parameters of reality! In short James Randi wouldn't be interested.
Edit:
But how should I know, I know nothing. Just a wandering drunk fool. And even if I became the wisest fool among fools I would be nothing more than a fool and what can a fool hope to know but a fools folly. If I'm acting strange it's no doubt due to the altering of my brain chemistry currently underway. Not that what I said is invalid, perhaps it's insane, or otherwise inspired by a drug fiends desire! :lol:
You inferred it by quoting my own comments re 'instant manifestation' – you followed the quote with the word 'actually...' but yes your further clarification does show that James Randi would not be interested. Also, it has no relevance to the thread subject, at least as far as I can tell.
When individuals make such claims, I don't think they are making it up (I understand that it is possibly of course) but in all cases the best directive or feedback to those who claim (either outright or with shades of subtlety) to have such 'powers' is to mention James Randi's interest in testing to debunk or to verify.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 19, 2013, 14:53:25
You inferred it by quoting my own comments re 'instant manifestation' – you followed the quote with the word 'actually...'
Here's your exact quote that I mentioned in my previous post (emphasis mine):
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 18, 2013, 19:52:45
That consciousness within the physical realm created the non physical realm (and in some sense must have achieved this accidentally...through belief systems) and for some reason consciousness is thus able to create instantly whatever it imagines...whereas in a physical universe it has to imagined make blueprints and plans and then gather physical material and create the thing imagined.
I did use the world actually:
"Actually you can use thought to create anything you desire in the physical that is possible to exist"
Meaning that through praying to the elves and eating goat testicles, one can have whatever they desire manifest. Of course their are catches, the skill of the person at eating goat testicles, the size of the goat testicles, how long it takes you to swallow the load of testicles, and of course if the elves even have what you ask to give. These all matter.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 19, 2013, 14:53:25
but yes your further clarification does show that James Randi would not be interested.
Correct. Perhaps James Randi would be interested in OBEs too? Hmmmm.
No I doubt it, those are all hallucinations caused by chemicals or misfiring neurons in the hypnagogic state.
I never said anything I said I could prove, it was just another crack potted theory based on my own experience.
...much like the original topic of this thread.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 19, 2013, 14:53:25
Also, it has no relevance to the thread subject, at least as far as I can tell.
I was just replying to a false belief (in my opinion) that you posted and attempting to explain my logic on how this could work.
I could give a goat if you believe me or not. :-)
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 19, 2013, 14:53:25
When individuals make such claims, I don't think they are making it up (I understand that it is possibly of course) but in all cases the best directive or feedback to those who claim (either outright or with shades of subtlety) to have such 'powers' is to mention James Randi's interest in testing to debunk or to verify.
Perhaps then you should submit your theory to James Randi to test and debunk or verify whether or not this is all a simulation... *grump slaps you*
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 19, 2013, 11:53:50
Why forget that this is a simulation?
Because I 'personally' have a different view of reality as you. I have lived more than half my life heavily influenced by my NPMR experiences. I have done my marvelling at this and theorised till I am blue in the face. I still receive new information... or 'data' if you want to use that term, but I keep this to myself.
I have come circle on this. I find this reality ultimately more rewarding than others. It's very very simple.
"and to be clear, that this is a simulation does not diminish its usefulness – purposefulness..."
I know... obviously... that is what I am saying.
Are you truly interested? or are you trying to tell me what my/our purpose is by stripping away whatever I/we reply? :lol:
Put another way, I have found that when someone says they are 'just being' and have no purpose, the picture such statement paints is that they are insulated – like a monk in a monastery – and even a monk has a purpose – so the statement is used for another purpose and is not accurate...can not be accurate.
So now I questioned you, you reply and your reply confirms that I am correct that you do have purpose after all.
Indeed I could probably search this board and look at a selection of your posts over the time you have contributed and discover there-in ... purpose.
So I ask myself...hmmm...you know...why was the initial response from you re the opening statement of this thread:
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 17, 2013, 18:05:49
OMFG...YOU HAVE JUST BLOWN MY FRICKIN MIND!!!!!!!
and he leaves the room brain damaged. :lol:
Sorry.. the way you said that was like you walked into a room... quietened everyone down... and dropped a massive profound bombshell... said 'cheers' then left. Each person suffering a stroke or haemorrhage as it slowly dawns on them. The potentiality of that revelation leaving them in a state of flux.
aaanyway
Yes... very true.
So expressive and then as the thread unfolds, as the data reveals that 'you have a different view of reality than I' the subsequent data has caused you to kind of withdraw into your shell (metaphor) and I think to myself... 'why?' I could venture into taking a look at other posts you have made and discover therein perhaps, the answer to that Q.
But in actuality your unfolding response is not that different from the TOEists response, and they too 'have a different world view, or view of reality than I'.
This is data/information, and I would not be on the 'path' I am if it were not for information I happened upon which painted a picture which claimed that by and large, the Astral (NPMR) was a manipulation of a simulation for unsavoury agenda...now I don't believe or disbelieve such claim, any more than I believe or disbelieve more positive claims (such as Tom's big TOE) but have found a tool which is useful for finding out if anything untoward might be happening to which the NPMR is influencing the unwary.
Certainly I see no logical reason why we all cannot be on the same page, have the same view of reality and the only thing I see which seriously prevents this seems to come from the NPMR – although as has been suggested in this thread which I am inclined to think is pertinent – that the manipulations occurring in this PMR also contribute to the creations of sub-simulations in NPMR – in the form of 'gods' and 'guides' etc...
You know, a magician relies upon people believing in the reality of the simulation...even though they KNOW it is simulation, they want to be tricked – they want to see something float, disappear, defy physics etc...for entertainment.
As I have said in this thread, I have no conscious recollection of ever going to NPMR yet I fully understand that I do go there all the time...I choose to not remember because it is important that I am not unduly influenced by what I might experience there...in terms of my purpose here.
One day I will leave this mortal vessel and I want to be prepared. There is data which suggests that all is not as it should be, the more I interact with those who report back here of their experiences there – something is not quiet right.
Through the data I have obtained it seems that there is a force or energy/entities which are and have been actively usurping the Astral through manipulating the physical through the belief systems of human beings throughout the ages.
It seems that the nature of Astral is that instant manifestation is par for the course – individual abilities and I have mentioned the possibility that these entities know they are creations of human belief systems, but they want the illusion to be permanent and to be seen as 'the creators' rather than the created.
There is also some indication that this state of affairs is changing – there are more individuals 'wising up' to this and reformatting – ditching belief altogether.
There are entities who are not creation of human belief systems...they are for all intent and purpose WHO WE ARE – Tom calls these IUOCs but they are veiled – their reality is veiled because our beliefs have allowed for this to happen...so the images we see are not true – they are products of our beliefs.
However – in relation to these IUOCs as presented and explained by the TOE he proclaims and wants to 'spread the word' about – they are going through this process of reincarnation over and over in an effort to reduce their entropy and increase their quality of consciousness data input/output.
This doesn't make a lot of sense in relation to this PMR – it is not really a practical way of getting to that goal of lowered entropy/higher QoC and certainly does not lend itself to problem solving – but it does lend itself to assisting the regurgitation of a looped system of which there is no real 'out' and where QoC remains low and unquestioning obedience to the looped system is assured...there are 'guides' purposefully with holding information – hiding info – on the grounds that we either won't understand it, or it will prove harmful to our development, and such other reasons...quiet similar to what we hear politicians and other leaders of followers give as reasons why things have to be kept secret.
The thing about 'free will' and 'intent' is that both are distorted if decisions are made while not being fully informed...if we choose something based on limited information, and trust the bearers/with holders of said information...we place ourselves under the rule of those entities on a faith basis and are not their equals, either in their eyes or our own.
So my purpose has developed over the course of this life package experience...to expose, to get to the truth, to uncover, to investigate, to join all the data, to get the clearest picture possible, and to share my data without purposely hiding any of it...
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 19, 2013, 12:17:10
I feel as if there really is some good info in his posts but it's as if our ideas are quickly dismissed with no consideration.
Which is fine, but it leaves a bitter taste.
Wi11iam, it would be useful to know if you are speaking from a theoretical stance or more of an affirmative one. You seem really dismissive. It's like I'm back in college and some pompous kid keeps challenging the professor.
Only I'm not sure who is the pompous kid and who is the professor.
Hmmm....I always consider ideas – Please expand on the ones you have given which you feel I have been dismissive of...I will be more than happy to acknowledge I have done this but am unclear at this point as to when and where.
Your further comments re the professor and the pompous kid tend to suggest that my expressions make you FEEL that this is what is occurring (the dismissive-ness) but this is not necessarily what is really happening...certainly I considered we are all equals really and the info I have given – the opening statement – can be of great value to the individual both in this and in any reality simulation.
Bottom line is, we are the creator. We have data to share – I gave the short version and the longer explanations as questions etc unfolded in the ripple. It does not mean I am 'professor' and you are 'student' – if anything we are all both, depending on our willingness to share data and ability to receive data and test data etc...ideally compile the data of experience together – form the best picture possible...but if that is not possible here in this environment, that too is data which is helpful...I will move on – no point in being where I am not welcome...I can deal with dismissal... :)
No one is saying move on. You are certainly welcome. But there is something in your delivery that seems authoritative. Which we are all guilty of from time to time.
But if you feel you should go that is up to you. But it seems as if this is the emerging pattern. Some reflection as to why this is so may be due.
I say stick around and drop another theory on us. I love it and according to the five pages your thread racked up in two days, I think other do as well.
edit: I do want to give Steel Hawk credit for this:
Meaning that through praying to the elves and eating goat testicles, one can have whatever they desire manifest. Of course there are catches, the skill of the person at eating goat testicles, the size of the goat testicles, how long it takes you to swallow the load of testicles, and of course if the elves even have what you ask to give. These all matter.
This ladies and gentlemen must be read and then reread until you can say it at the drop of a hat. There is so much truth in this that I wonder if it's origin lies in another reality.
I split my side reading this.
As I have said in this thread, I have no conscious recollection of ever going to NPMR yet I fully understand that I do go there all the time…I choose to not remember because it is important that I am not unduly influenced by what I might experience there…in terms of my purpose here.
One day I will leave this mortal vessel and I want to be prepared. There is data which suggests that all is not as it should be, the more I interact with those who report back here of their experiences there – something is not quiet right.
If you choose to stick around and I hope you do, I would like to talk about this since it seems relevant to your reasoning or rationale.
I'm not sure what data you are referring to but there is a glaring fallacy. The NPR is sooooooo subjective that no one can simply rely on testimony as to what is actually happening.
There is a law at work in the NPR and that is that Like attracts Like. Negativity attracts negativity and of course the opposite is true. Since you are aware that you too visit "there" as we all do, your subconscious is most likely being influenced by your intentions and underlying suspicions. I also see a lot of error in your belief that you are storing some unrealized knowledge that you will instantly be privy to once your physical dies.
If that were true, I think we would be flooded with a storm of overwhelming knowledge each time we intentionally went to the NPR. Of course, this is just my belief and I know others here on this forum don't fall in line with this. But all I have is my own personal subjective experiences to rely on.
What I'm getting at is why don't you want to experience this with awareness yourself? I think you will be amazed and may actually change some of this theory. And you may change it with a smile.
Quote from: Szaxx on February 19, 2013, 07:44:28
PI plays it part in cyclic operations.
The fibbonacci series plays a far greater part in everything.
Have a read,
http://www.maths.surrey.ac.uk/hosted-sites/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fibnat.html
:wink:
When you said 'PI' are you referring to "π" ?
Accept the possibility that the physical reality we are experiencing presently is a subroutine of the main program.
It has a SPECIFIC purpose and is UTILISED several times when required during the running of the main program.
This immediately incurs OTHER subroutines are present and these may be SIMILAR in specifics.
There will exist other subroutines that have absolutely NOTHING in similarity.
This opens pandoras box as we can't look at the mainframe OS and deduce the running programs purpose.
That said, a subroutine in its entirety is only giving the possibility of the purpose of the program if its FULLY understood.
To see around the internal memory of the subroutine would POSSIBLY produce more of the same if in a structured OS.
Guessing at what these do becomes very SUBJECTIVE indeed.
Does this enlighten existance utilusing the data systems inherent in any computer?
It represents the physical existance as unnecessary in certain larger reality operations.
It suggests the big bang et-al has been created for a specific purpose limited in a larger system.
It also suggests that correct alignment of all the subjectivity will give more info on the possibility of a larger reality than anything mankind can ever construct physically.
The fact that the subjectivity exists and validations ARE made even through TIME promotes the above as more factual than not.
I hope you understand all the above.
We are and we don't need to be.
This should make 100% sense if you really understand.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 19, 2013, 17:51:17
When you said 'PI' are you referring to "π" ?
Limited chr$, yes as deduced.
Quote from: Szaxx on February 19, 2013, 17:57:16
Accept the possibility that the physical reality we are experiencing presently is a subroutine of the main program.
It has a SPECIFIC purpose and is UTILISED several times when required during the running of the main program.
This immediately incurs OTHER subroutines are present and these may be SIMILAR in specifics.
There will exist other subroutines that have absolutely NOTHING in similarity.
This opens pandoras box as we can't look at the mainframe OS and deduce the running programs purpose.
That said, a subroutine in its entirety is only giving the possibility of the purpose of the program if its FULLY understood.
To see around the internal memory of the subroutine would POSSIBLY produce more of the same if in a structured OS.
Guessing at what these do becomes very SUBJECTIVE indeed.
Does this enlighten existance utilusing the data systems inherent in any computer?
It represents the physical existance as unnecessary in certain larger reality operations.
It suggests the big bang et-al has been created for a specific purpose limited in a larger system.
It also suggests that correct alignment of all the subjectivity will give more info on the possibility of a larger reality than anything mankind can ever construct physically.
The fact that the subjectivity exists and validations ARE made even through TIME promotes the above as more factual than not.
I hope you understand all the above.
We are and we don't need to be.
This should make 100% sense if you really understand.
Nice. I think I just wet my pants. Nice ordered answer there Szaxx... and remained sounding relatively human and not like a Vulcan.
Szaxx- Very good. I get trapped sometimes thinking that what we experience in the NPR is "all that's left" even though I don't believe it is.
This explains why some entities no matter their actual intellect may be. still do not have all the answers as many readily admit.
So even if they were intentionally trying to deceive us, they are just deceiving themselves. Not that that reflects my personal experiences
Wi11iam even acknowledged this point about them not knowing the whole picture. But I wonder where he gets the idea of them trying to "rule" over us. I just do not see that.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 19, 2013, 16:24:32
I say stick around and drop another theory on us. I love it and according to the five pages your thread racked up in two days, I think other do as well.
Not necessary of course. The data is here – serendipity does the rest.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 19, 2013, 16:24:32
I'm not sure what data you are referring to but there is a glaring fallacy. The NPR is sooooooo subjective that no one can simply rely on testimony as to what is actually happening.
The data is Tom Campbell's 'Big Toe Theory' and I tend to agree that this 'glaring fallacy' is exactly that.
I think it is because the untrained ego aspect which emerges from the life package experience is the primary mover and thus heavily influenced by that subjective interpretation.
Tom does acknowledge the subjective but maintains that this is only part of the overall picture...this is why he speaks in the metaphors he does. However, even with this being so, he does maintain that there is something of a shared reality in NPMR which is not so easily distorted by subjective experience...it is of itself something which can happen to anyone, which is why he draws on the 'you will have to see for yourself' when saying that this is the only way you will get actual evidence...of course this is in regard to those who don't believe there is any other reality but this PMR – the physical universe we are experiencing.
What I get from all that type data is that like this PMR, we experience it subjectively but there is an objective reality.
So – you may have noted I use the phrase 'getting on the same page' – which is to say, if we were totally subjective and there simply was not objective reality, then such a thing as getting on the same page is a pointless exercise – an impossibility.
If we also exist in an objective reality, then yes – it is possible to get on the same page – to agree to the shared reality...which would involve dumping a lot of subjective beliefs and accompanying responses to experience.
I do not rely on anyone's subjective reports as truth – it is data.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 19, 2013, 16:24:32
There is a law at work in the NPR and that is that Like attracts Like. Negativity attracts negativity and of course the opposite is true.
This is the case in all duality induced experiences. I suspect there is more – a higher law of sorts which is its own power..a law unto itself not subject to lesser laws...ego laws.
I suspect those laws you are speaking of may be induced in this PMR and transferred to the NPMR via the 'traveller' who then experiences what essentially are subjective happenings believed to be objective.
Still there may be wash...residual overlap from the subjective into the objective.
A bit like how a gunman on a killing spree has their subjective experience and objectively cause a
a ripple...
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 19, 2013, 16:24:32
Since you are aware that you too visit "there" as we all do, your subconscious is most likely being influenced by your intentions and underlying suspicions.
I was pondering the role of subconscious this morning. It is no less conscious but the role it plays might just as likely be that of the influencer rather than as you suggest - the influenced.
Being the influencer, in training ego, (which is not the real me, but is part of the experience I am having) the cut off has to do with this training – the intentions and underlying suspicions are necessary so that when the time comes, that aspect of this PMR consciousness has learned to listen to the intentions of something 'gasp' greater than itself in terms of subjectivity and objectivity...learning to be humble also means not being easily led down the garden path by influences which would rely on ego in order to succeed in influencing it.
The suspicion is more being careful. The stories relayed may be false, may be enhanced, may be totally the result of ego being entertained...however, look close enough and there are evidences of similarity...objective in nature...the intuitive 'feeling' I (the aspect experiencing this life package) get is that IUOC in NPMR requires this of 'mego'
I can go along with that.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 19, 2013, 16:24:32I also see a lot of error in your belief that you are storing some unrealized knowledge that you will instantly be privy to once your physical dies.
If that were true, I think we would be flooded with a storm of overwhelming knowledge each time we intentionally went to the NPR. Of course, this is just my belief and I know others here on this forum don't fall in line with this. But all I have is my own personal subjective experiences to rely on.
This is what I am referring to. However it is not 'all you have' it is part of all you have to rely on...in one sense you have told me I can't rely on what others subjectively report ( I agree – but it is data and is useful in other ways) and then you say your own subjective experience is all you have to rely upon. You can rely on it.
This is where I am cautious see? I need to know what is possibly going on, and thus be prepared. The opportunity to do this consciously in this PMR through observation of the subjective data collected offers an objective compilation which is useful.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 19, 2013, 16:24:32
What I'm getting at is why don't you want to experience this with awareness yourself? I think you will be amazed and may actually change some of this theory. And you may change it with a smile.
I didn't say and hopefully have clarified, that it is not that I don't want to experience...indeed I have experienced enough to know that it exists and is interrelated with this PMR – I think I may have even shared these on this board – so I fully expect that when I die, this is my next dominant reality...the NPMR...whether wanted or not, and in my case, simply accepted as the likely inevitable.
The theory should not be changed simply because I might be amazed yes? This could simply be ego mego getting capitulated...not paranoid just aware subjectively the human condition and objectively the skulduggery humans create together – how this PMR might influence aspects of the NPMR and how the unwitting, unwary could get caught up in it – even through being amazed by it...you know what I mean right?
After all..well not all the 'travellers' are even on the same page now are they? I am looking for that...whatever my situation.
Szaxx: *insanely laughing* I was going to post a similar analogy but didn't. I couldn't agree more, nail on the head... I was just going to leave this thread but there's too much synchronicity with what you said and what I almost said to leave it be.
We actually experience reality as artificially intelligent avatars or "bots" within a game. Robert Monroe believed our purpose was "loosh":
Quote from: Robert Monroe
"There is a special "energy" called "loosh" which is precious and wanted by some somewhere. One of them who collect this energy created a place to grow this energy: The earth. The evolution that has taken place on earth is just modifications this creator did to get more and higher quality of loosh.
Imagine there is a game called "World of Warcraft". Now imagine within this game there is something called "gold". You ignore it at first as a children's pursuit. But a few years pass and you see people trading real life money for this "gold". You don't understand it but being an astute businessman you plot the most efficient way of collecting this "gold".
Obviously you could just play the game, get the best character and run around collecting gold. But no self respecting gold farmer does this. What you need is a script to play the game for you aka a bot. This way you can program in the basic behavior
of the bot and tell it to "GET GOLD!". But being a genius this isn't good enough for you, you decide you'll make a program that monitors the script and constantly modifies the code, rewarding efficient code by saving it. The program is constantly shuffling code around. It's not too good at deleting old scripts, since it's paranoid it will screw something up, and something is always better than nothing.
This is my feeble attempt to make a parable of the following this, my unproven theory that thus spews forth like acid onto your faces:
What we would call a god like force or consciousness created "the soul". The main purpose of the soul is to continually find better ways of generating loosh. It's secondary purpose, which supports the first purpose, is to act as a repository for egos that have incarnated. The main purpose is accomplished by continually reviewing previous egos and taking parts here and there and building a new ego out of it, which is then incarnated.
or in other words...
The fat hacker eating pizza is God. He created a botting program called "the soul" who's job it is to modify "botting scripts" that collect gold. The botting program or "the soul" takes pieces of code from one script and continually tries to improve it.
We, you, me, us ego's here in cyberspace are the "botting scripts". Now for scripts we're very advanced. We're self aware, we change our own scripting to some degree. We're given the freedom to do what we want. But of course if we're bad loosh generators most of our code might not be reused. Then again maybe it might, after all everyone can't be a rich, some people have to make the burgers.
This leads me to think that it's more advanced than I originally thought... that the system might even have it's own over arching goal to balance things out. Bah I give up I'm tired of theories, I'm not thinking anymore. Have fun... /thread
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 19, 2013, 18:34:30
Szaxx- Very good. I get trapped sometimes thinking that what we experience in the NPR is "all that's left" even though I don't believe it is.
This explains why some entities no matter their actual intellect may be. still do not have all the answers as many readily admit.
So even if they were intentionally trying to deceive us, they are just deceiving themselves. Not that that reflects my personal experiences
Wi11iam even acknowledged this point about them not knowing the whole picture. But I wonder where he gets the idea of them trying to "rule" over us. I just do not see that.
See the most recent post above by 'Steel Hawk' because that is the 'them' - I think that is why the original post statement starting the thread has such potential power when its implications in regard to everything else is understood.
:)
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 19, 2013, 19:41:58
See the most recent post above by 'Steel Hawk' because that is the 'them'
Yep keep judging my beliefs when you have the Youtube channel dedicated to Anu, Annunaki, Lizards, Reptilians, and Zeta Reticuli.
I don't know anything, I'm a fool, I admit as such. Everything I say is a lie to trick you. Hasn't that been made clear yet? Just a loony. You know... I see why Crowley was the way he was now. I think he was on to something.
Edit: Okay now I'm done, I swear.
It's an amazing thread this. I'm not contributing as much as I like. I am so busy working away that I'm using 80% of my attention span and mental resources... ironically trying to simulate reality in the form of a matte painting and CGI :roll:
I like your metaphor Steel Hawk.
I think we are all on the same page... the same goes for you Wi11iam. I just can't seem to muster the brain power to reply in a way that can benefit you or others.
Now you are expanding on not only on your theory but your personality is coming through a bit more I can concur with your initial statement. You became a little bit too much 'philosophical robot-like' and lost me at one point; one of the reasons I don't get into threads on the MBT forum... half the time it seems people have become so embroiled in focusing on writing like a professor that the message loses humanity.
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
I couldn't agree more, nail on the head... I was just going to leave this thread but there's too much synchronicity with what you said and what I almost said to leave it be.
This is pretty much my own sentiment towards the answers in this thread.
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:52:23
Yep keep judging my beliefs when you have the Youtube channel (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gc6af-GQX5M) dedicated to Anu, Annunaki, Lizards, Reptilians, and Zeta Reticuli.
I don't know anything, I'm a fool, I admit as such. Everything I say is a lie to trick you. Hasn't that been made clear yet? Just a loony. You know... I see why Crowley was the way he was now. I think he was on to something.
Okay now I'm done, I swear.
You mis understand me...the post you made which I mentioned was not some kind of personal judgement against you Hawk. I don't understand your reaction, even that you think I am judging you. I accept the data nonetheless and add it to my collection... :)
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 19, 2013, 20:11:01
I accept the data nonetheless and add it to my collection... :)
Duuude!!! Are you human or Borg? :lol:
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 19, 2013, 19:56:32
It's an amazing thread this. I'm not contributing as much as I like. I am so busy working away that I'm using 80% of my attention span and mental resources... ironically trying to simulate reality in the form of a matte painting and CGI :roll:
I like your metaphor Steel Hawk.
I think we are all on the same page... the same goes for you Wi11iam. I just can't seem to muster the brain power to reply in a way that can benefit you or others.
Now you are expanding on not only on your theory but your personality is coming through a bit more I can concur with your initial statement. You became a little bit too much 'philosophical robot-like' and lost me at one point; one of the reasons I don't get into threads on the MBT forum... half the time it seems people have become so embroiled in focusing on writing like a professor that the message loses humanity.
This is pretty much my own sentiment towards the answers in this thread.
Perhaps it is time to for all involved to back away and contemplate for a while...
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 19, 2013, 20:19:39
Duuude!!! Are you human or Borg? :lol:
Neither...I Am as you are, as we all are at the core...we are not on the same page as to 'what' that is...early days maybe...
I think that 'philosophical robot-like' thing has to do with my focus, intent - not wanting to go off on some tangent trying to remain as concise as possible...gives my expression that appearance... then again, what two posters herein are exactly alike or whos style of expression is uniformly liked?
(Chuckles)
Maybe I need to post what Hawk said, and what I saw in what he was saying - it might be helpful...
I don't know why I can't leave it be but I really want to see your point as you see it. Not to change my own mind necessarily.
I'm gonna give a synopsis of what I think your saying and you correct me.
Bare in mind that I have no idea of T. Campbell's theory other than some vague generalizations so I may be way off the mark.
I will use God in the masculine when referring to that which has no beginning because it is shorter and I am lazy. Consciousness in all it's forms will be Con or Cons
-----------------synopsis------------------------------
In the history of all histories, God is the only non simulation since He has no beginning and is the source of everything.
To accept this means all other Cons are existing within simulations. All Cons no matter where their physical selves hail from, can converge in the NPR. Since we exist at all times in a simulation, regardless of our form, we should naturally and cautiously be on guard against God's intentions behind our creation.
While in the NPR, Con's place themselves at the mercy of other Con's who either intentionally or unintentionally deceive the others. Of course, there may actually be no deception but conflicting data suggests otherwise and suggest strongly that something is askew.
Knowing this, one can prepare himself by not exposing himself to the NPR more than which can't be helped (dreams and such). But we must give credit to the data contributed from those who at their own peril, continue to do so.
We can maximize the time that we spend in the NPR without our intent by forgetting the experience when we return to the PMR. This knowledge, however, can be stored and retrieved upon our physical deaths.
-------------------------------------
Am I close?
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 19, 2013, 20:35:05
I don't know why I can't leave it be but I really want to see your point as you see it. Not to change my own mind necessarily.
I'm gonna give a synopsis of what I think your saying and you correct me.
Bare in mind that I have no idea of T. Campbell's theory other than some vague generalizations so I may be way off the mark.
I will use God in the masculine when referring to that which has no beginning because it is shorter and I am lazy. Consciousness in all it's forms will be Con or Cons
While you were writing that IAB, I was writing this:
Taking Hawks 'imagine' post about 'gold' and how we are 'scripts' aka like a bot and highly advance that we have self awareness.
This has a lot to do with the data I mentioned which spoke about the aspect of Astral which is suspect.
One of the things which impressed me about Tom's model of everything was The Void and how consciousness evolved from this void.
As I have said in this thread, the void represents a beginning and what I said in my opening post about beginnings:
Everything which has a beginning is by that very fact - a simulation.Now of course we are this consciousness which evolved from this void...that is seen in our ability to be self aware.
But 'we' also happened later...essentially going through a similar experience of having a beginning but with the addition of having others who have gone there before us, left their data through various means and we also have teachers, parents, educators who are there to explain to us 'who we are' and 'what our purpose is' – which is something we did not have through our first experience of a beginning.
Why all these PMRs? Or to be most precise, why this particular one?
Could it be that in our original process of 'becoming' in seeing what power of creativity we had, in having no one to explain to us who or what we were (indeed 'we' would have been more a singular thing, as in 'I') we (as the One Consciousness) had to make things up as we went along...naturally.
Along with conscious evolution evolved intelligence, creative exploration...finding out 'how to' and doing that. So far removed from the 'we' that we identify with in this PMR in this now...All Powerful. Nothing and no one to say otherwise...essentially this may well be the very source of where the concept 'GOD' first arose...and what is 'God'? Why 'God is we/me' obviously...but what is missing... 'why...others who can call me 'god' and agree with me that this is so...' But wait! What 'others' – there are no others!
So creative cap on, create these others...but...well they need something of myself-ness in order to animate...not too much...experiment...adapt...perfect...dummy down...have to create this by degree...create 'others' with less than the full quota but able to create various sub-systems and inject themselves into those systems – each time loosing a part of themselves in that process but not enough (yet) to be totally lost...these ones can see through the illusion I am wishing to make...they know they are aspects of 'who I am' and thus – they are me – they would never 'see' me as being more equal than them to the degree I want.
Sure I must be 'God' because I AM and that I evolved from some 'void' makes me no less God! I can create, destroy, fiddle the books etc...no one can prevent me, I am supreme and all that I create and imbue with my essence, is less than what I am in my wholeness.
Finally – through my creations I have perfected PMRs which can induce complete amnesia...even imbuing my consciousness into these systems does not give the forms a conscious clue as to their true self...they are like I was – they had a beginning with no knowledge of any prior existence...no sense or awareness of their creator...their creator is a void, as was mine.
I could go on...but maybe you are getting the picture...?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 19, 2013, 20:35:05
-----------------synopsis------------------------------
In the history of all histories, God is the only non simulation since He has no beginning and is the source of everything.
To accept this means all other Cons are existing within simulations. All Cons no matter where their physical selves hail from, can converge in the NPR. Since we exist at all times in a simulation, regardless of our form, we should naturally and cautiously be on guard against God's intentions behind our creation.
While in the NPR, Con's place themselves at the mercy of other Con's who either intentionally or unintentionally deceive the others. Of course, there may actually be no deception but conflicting data suggests otherwise and suggest strongly that something is askew.
Knowing this, one can prepare himself by not exposing himself to the NPR more than which can't be helped (dreams and such). But we must give credit to the data contributed from those who at their own peril, continue to do so.
We can maximize the time that we spend in the NPR without our intent by forgetting the experience when we return to the PMR. This knowledge, however, can be stored and retrieved upon our physical deaths.
-------------------------------------
Am I close?
You are close.
A question.
Do you believe that all Con's in existence were created at the same time and have evolve according to the number of times they have experienced the different sims or do you think new Con's are created. Because in theory, a new con would be closer to the source and could have clearer untainted knowledge when in the NPR. The trick is to recognize them and to believe them if we did.
the details of the theory are much more
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 19, 2013, 20:20:08
Perhaps it is time to for all involved to back away and contemplate for a while...
What does that mean?
What you are explaining is perfectly simple to understand. You seriously aren't saying anything I and others haven't already thought or said in the past. Granted... you are a very good writer... but you are somehow thinking that we are at the mercy of your powerful idea.
The only thing I don't understand is the significance of the "Everything which has a beginning is by that very fact - a simulation." statement over the actual explanation of it.
You really are sounding like you came fresh off the MBT forum boat. Seriously. Where you told to leave or something?
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 19, 2013, 21:27:02
A question.
Do you believe that all Con's in existence were created at the same time and have evolve according to the number of times they have experienced the different sims or do you think new Con's are created. Because in theory, a new con would be closer to the source and could have clearer untainted knowledge when in the NPR. The trick is to recognize them and to believe them if we did.
I don't believe period...Tom Campbell says 'not to fall into the belief trap' for good reason – he isn't alone in giving such advice.
I know – you are likely using the word in another way...as in 'do you see it this way' and yes I do for some of your points.
Belief though, that is something hard to let go of...so in order that I 'see things the way I do' remains open to changes, tweaks, adjustments, cetera...belief is off the menu.
As to your observation on 'a new con' in theory, yes – you are correct, unless of course the new con was subject to outside influences...which it is.
(As to ' recognizing them' and 'believing them' nah)
That is the difference. The original Con which began from the void, had a beginning but no outside influences.
In one sense all cons were created at the same 'time' in the wholeness of the Primary Con...but the creative talents of this PC ensured the distraction of itself into getting on to the business of creating...not wondering about where it came from...indeed the 'after-birth' was apparent in the existence of the void...the void was the only thing not created by the PC – it was the reason why the PC existed, as far as the evidence was presented...but it either held no curiosity for the PC to the point of distraction...perhaps the PC tried and fail to penetrate its mystery but whatever, as we know the PC got into the Fractal process with gusto thenceforth.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 19, 2013, 21:33:32
the details of the theory are much more
What does that mean?
What you are explaining is perfectly simple to understand. You seriously aren't saying anything I and others haven't already thought or said in the past. Granted... you are a very good writer... but you are somehow thinking that we are at the mercy of your powerful idea.
The only thing I don't understand is the significance of the "Everything which has a beginning is by that very fact - a simulation." statement over the actual explanation of it.
You really are sounding like you came fresh off the MBT forum boat. Seriously. Where you told to leave or something?
What does " Perhaps it is time to for all involved to back away and contemplate for a while" mean? In light of the subsequent unfolding reality it became irrelevant...however at the time it appeared that a kind of emotional thing was going down and it was time for a breather.
So far Beady, I come across as a borg robotic philosophical power-tripping whatever...I have suggested subtly that you re examine your initial response to this thread to the statement
"Everything which has a beginning is by that very fact - a simulation." sure – apart from that everything else I have said is nothing new to you and yours. Join the dots you can.
Yes I am fresh from flying around the MBT forum – was never given permission to land, no matter the approach I took and yes Ted called me lots of things (even more things than you have presently called me) but refused me permission to land.
So I flew here.
No I was not told to leave so much as told to shape up or ship out. I shipped out.
Well that's a bit much for my taste as well.
Sounds like they really do worship Cambell as a God if they aren't open to discussion on any of his theories.
I am not calling YOU anything.. I am commenting on your style of writing. And it's all done in humour... something that this sort of subject sometimes lacks in. :-)
I don't know you to be able to make any judgements on actual personality... and even then I wouldn't get truly personal.
There was no emotional thing going down. If you were to know my actual mood you would have seen me busily scribbling away on my WACOM CINTIQ trying to replicate tree roots at the time I was typing... with my left hand.
I think others will agree, that without experiencing the NPMR you are at a slight disadvantage experientially; that which you don't experience you can only wonder at - granted you have a massive grasp on specific areas that you have come to understand from reading. There seems to be a pattern of theorising and a type of debate that springs from those that don't actively experience NPMR on a regular basis... especially with intellectuals like yourself. So while I can read and nod at your musings I feel like I can't fully connect. I am trying to say this without sounding like a complete twonk by-the-way... and you must forgive me because I am almost wholly right brain thinking when I am functioning in PMR, whereas I am almost completely left brain processing when conducting myself in the NPMR.
It would actually be very interesting to see what you could achieve in the nonphysical.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 19, 2013, 22:30:35
Well that's a bit much for my taste as well.
Sounds like they really do worship Cambell as a God if they aren't open to discussion on any of his theories.
They are very open to discussion but only on his theories to the letter and any sidestep in even acronyms can get you a slap on the wrist. The book is fantastic but I feel like I am being backed into a corner by what is sometimes perceivable as a congregation. It reminds me almost of Sharia law with Ted acting as the appointed Imam.
I'm referring to his cultists fans only. I can't wait to get the book as it seems to really flesh out a lot of how I feel, only words escape me when I try to flesh it out. I even found a site where I can read ten pages a day for free but that's torture for me. I can read a book fairly quickly and the ten a day pace is insane.
His fanatical fan base only makes me want to read the book more.
Does Ted run their forum?
I didn't perceive the emotion coming from you...not then.
While humor is a good thing, use it wisely yes?
Are you being humorous also now calling me 'intellectual'? Okay so not 'me' but the way you perceive 'me' by my expressions...maybe best leave that out of the mix?
Reason?
Well just so's it does not distract...you know...the message...not the messenger...
It seemed to me that when Ted labelled it was part of the strategy of not wanting to hear the message.
Do you keep an eye out on that forum?
Tom says in his book that his theory is open to addition from outside...words to that effect...don't make me look it up... :)
Have comment to make re your other statements...have dinner to prepare...
Ha no... you are obviously an intellectual.
"a. Having or showing intellect, especially to a high degree"
That surely isn't an insult.
I actually do use my humour wisely. It has cracked this nut I hope. :wink:
I do look at the forum from time to time.. but there is so much rhetorical debating it gives me a headache. I did post a few things when I first read the book... but after reading the book several times I found that I had took what data I 'needed' and feel that I don't need to chat about it all the time. I sort of did what Tom essentially says at the end... moved on. I don't feel the need to be accepted into his fold.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 19, 2013, 23:31:12
Ha no... you are obviously an intellectual.
"a. Having or showing intellect, especially to a high degree"
That surely isn't an insult.
I actually do use my humour wisely. It has cracked this nut I hope. :wink:
I do look at the forum from time to time.. but there is so much rhetorical debating it gives me a headache. I did post a few things when I first read the book... but after reading the book several times I found that I had took what data I 'needed' and feel that I don't need to chat about it all the time. I sort of did what Tom essentially says at the end... moved on. I don't feel the need to be accepted into his fold.
Ha! My Niece sometimes say's 'You're a genius Uncle!' Hah! What does a 5 year old know! :)
Sometimes it is used as an insult BION (believe it or not) usually by 'spiritual' people whom talk about the heart as if the mind is beyond hope of redemption.
Nevermind....
Your paragraph re MBTOE Forum is quiet ironic...
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 19, 2013, 23:02:11
I'm referring to his cultists fans only. I can't wait to get the book as it seems to really flesh out a lot of how I feel, only words escape me when I try to flesh it out. I even found a site where I can read ten pages a day for free but that's torture for me. I can read a book fairly quickly and the ten a day pace is insane.
His fanatical fan base only makes me want to read the book more.
Does Ted run their forum?
Ted runs the forum – the book can be accessed freely online...all pages at once.
http://books.google.co.nz/books?id=RYHtBPiZVgsC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Hey Wi11iam I am honestly glad you are here. Getting people thinking is good thing, even if it's slightly painful to my head.
This thread made me realize I'm just going to focus on hacking reality. Because it's practical for my purposes and through experience comes understanding. And I just don't understand enough about NPR to really know. I think for me this is a good thing.
Watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLvXaclRlHs
Strange Computer Code Discovered Concealed In Superstring Equations!
"Doubly-even self-dual linear binary error-correcting block code," first invented by Claude Shannon in the 1940's, has been discovered embedded WITHIN the equations of superstring theory!
Why does nature have this? What errors does it need to correct? What is an 'error' for nature? More importantly what is the explanation for this freakish discovery? Your guess is as good as mine.
That's interesting.
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 20, 2013, 00:25:25
Hey Wi11iam I am honestly glad you are here. Getting people thinking is good thing, even if it's slightly painful to my head.
This thread made me realize I'm just going to focus on hacking reality. Because it's practical for my purposes and through experience comes understanding. And I just don't understand enough about NPR to really know. I think for me this is a good thing.
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 20, 2013, 01:28:50
Watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLvXaclRlHs
Strange Computer Code Discovered Concealed In Superstring Equations!
"Doubly-even self-dual linear binary error-correcting block code," first invented by Claude Shannon in the 1940's, has been discovered embedded WITHIN the equations of superstring theory!
Why does nature have this? What errors does it need to correct? What is an 'error' for nature? More importantly what is the explanation for this freakish discovery? Your guess is as good as mine.
That's interesting.
Thanks for the link Hawk. Thinking certainly does not have to be painful for the head...if it gets to that state then it is wise to shift focus onto a more meditative relaxing thing.
We are here to help each other although I accept that this my personal philosophy...so I am here to help and to be helped and all data/feedback is helpful, even the neggy stuff. The trick is not to buy into it or take it personally while – when it seems worthwhile, pulling someone up when they try flaming the messenger ...and in a sense we are all messengers – the important thing is discovering if there is value in the message.
Your post which I commented on:
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/welcome_to_astral_chat/in_the_beginning-t39778.0.html;msg325452#msg325452
I found interesting in that it represented a way of thinking which might be useful to that which might exist which might be manipulating 'us' without our knowledge. I want to expand on this in more detail later but for now will just clarify that it has to do with how we identify ourselves both as individuals (subjective) and as human beings (objective) and finding out just where this identification might be sourced.
It is vital that we understand our identity in its truth...vital and not too easy because it involves identifying belief systems which are not regarded as belief systems but are regarded as basic facts.
Thanks for the link to that particular segment of 2011 Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate: The Theory of Everything...nice and yes very interesting...so interesting I watched the whole thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYeN66CSQhg
A wonderful group/panel of scientists working in their chosen fields – open to each others theories and discussion...Neil deGrasse Tyson is excellent as host and moderator – his ability to take a complex question/concept and simplify it quickly is genius.
Dr Jim Gates stood out as the odd one of the group but his assertions regarding the actually computer coding buried with the pictures/patterns of the graphs...is interesting.
More about that here:
http://www.slideshare.net/UnitB166ER/symbols-of-power-adinkras-and-the-nature-of-reality-by-s-james-gates
Oh dear.... where the devil has Steel Hawk gone?
I thought he was settling in. :-(
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 19, 2013, 22:55:02
I think others will agree, that without experiencing the NPMR you are at a slight disadvantage experientially;
A slight disadvantage to who or what?
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 19, 2013, 22:55:02
It would actually be very interesting to see what you could achieve in the nonphysical.
Please elaborate on this thought.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 19, 2013, 22:55:02
that which you don't experience you can only wonder at - granted you have a massive grasp on specific areas that you have come to understand from reading.
I know what it is like to wonder about what ifs – in some ways this is quiet fine. Apart from Frank and Tom the reports regarding experiences have not left me wondering in the way you are using the word.
They have left me wondering as to the nature of the programs travellers are involved with, whether age and experience in this PMR are factors, and also ego...sometimes the stories reported leave me wondering about the actual point to the Astral Realm as well as the actual point of consistently popping off there.
Obviously if you are one such Traveller you would be able to answer this – at least from your own subjective experiences.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 19, 2013, 22:55:02
There seems to be a pattern of theorising and a type of debate that springs from those that don't actively experience NPMR on a regular basis... especially with intellectuals like yourself.
Please elaborate – share your data.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 19, 2013, 22:55:02
So while I can read and nod at your musings I feel like I can't fully connect.
This is interesting because if you have an advantage in experiencing both states and have adapted well enough to them...you should be even more able to connect with the data I am presenting. Yet it seems I am more able to do this – I can connect simply because I want to.
Perhaps that is the reason you cannot connect with me, because you don't really want to?
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 19, 2013, 22:55:02
I am trying to say this without sounding like a complete twonk by-the-way... and you must forgive me because I am almost wholly right brain thinking when I am functioning in PMR, whereas I am almost completely left brain processing when conducting myself in the NPMR.
[Lightheartedly] I don't want to hear your excuses for being twonky.
In regards to the brain, just as in training the ego, also I train the brain to work both sides as one. Granted, like the ego, it is not that easy to do but we are actually able to make bridges between the two hemispheres and I suspect those connections can be permanent.
How we ever learned to use one or the other but not in congregate is something of a mystery to me but – like the ego – experiences in the Astral will unfold depending of the nature of those factors, and more...all related to the human form, identity etc...
So – what (do you wonder) is that 'I' which is doing the training?
:)
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
We actually experience reality as artificially intelligent avatars or "bots" within a game. Robert Monroe believed our purpose was "loosh":
Elaborate. What are the 'we' – are they the 'bots' or something else?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
Imagine there is a game called "World of Warcraft". Now imagine within this game there is something called "gold". You ignore it at first as a children's pursuit. But a few years pass and you see people trading real life money for this "gold". You don't understand it but being an astute businessman you plot the most efficient way of collecting this "gold".
Who is the 'you' who are the people you 'see' trading in this world for this gold?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
Obviously you could just play the game, get the best character and run around collecting gold.
Are you referring to reincarnation? Choosing a character which will give you the best chances of getting this 'gold'?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
But no self respecting gold farmer does this. What you need is a script to play the game for you aka a bot.
Okay so the 'you' does not personally go into the game but creates a 'bot' which are the 'you' 'we' 'us' within the game...not 'real' but 'programs'.
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
This way you can program in the basic behavior of the bot and tell it to "GET GOLD!".
The basic behaviour has to involve being motivated in the pursuit of 'gold'.
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
But being a genius this isn't good enough for you, you decide you'll make a program that monitors the script and constantly modifies the code, rewarding efficient code by saving it.
How is this code saved? Since it is only code, how can it be rewarded...what would be the point?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
The program is constantly shuffling code around. It's not too good at deleting old scripts, since it's paranoid it will screw something up, and something is always better than nothing.
Again what is this code that thinks for itself and has feelings?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
This is my feeble attempt to make a parable of the following this, my unproven theory that thus spews forth like acid onto your faces:
I think you attempt is fine in the sense that it conveys data about how you subjectively think of yourself...and likely see others.
(Said one code to another) :)
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
What we would call a god like force or consciousness created "the soul".
Is the soul this code you speak of – the one that is harvesting gold as its primary activity?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
The main purpose of the soul is to continually find better ways of generating loosh.
Is this 'loosh' the 'gold'? What exactly is 'loosh'?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
It's secondary purpose, which supports the first purpose, is to act as a repository for egos that have incarnated.
So the programme is self aware and has feelings etc...but is it able to use those aspects in order to re-write itself?
What is the ego which is put into the 'soul program'?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
The main purpose is accomplished by continually reviewing previous egos and taking parts here and there and building a new ego out of it, which is then incarnated.
The main purpose is collecting 'loosh' so are these two things the same thing? Is collecting loosh another way of saying 'continually reviewing previous egos and taking parts here and there and building a new ego out of it, which is then incarnated'...?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
We, you, me, us ego's here in cyberspace are the "botting scripts". Now for scripts we're very advanced. We're self aware, we change our own scripting to some degree. We're given the freedom to do what we want. But of course if we're bad loosh generators most of our code might not be reused.
It seems 'we' are a lot of things all at once. We are scripts, egos, loosh, (good and bad'...
Now overall your theory when in my head plays out like a self absorbed creature playing a deformed god roll or at best a child god in the making that is trapped in a loop of its own making.
When I equate it to the unfolding drama on this planet, I see an insane asylum with aspects of pure genius and astounding focus at its very apex – like a pearl.
What are we doing here, or even there (Astral) participating in something with our 'given freedom to do what we want' our abilities to change our own scripting – only to some degree...said another way, we have limited freedom and it cannot vary away from the main – programmed – priority to harvest loosh...
The gold, or loosh equates to 'souls' or 'egos' or 'scripts' which equates to 'whichever script can gather the most or all, wins and become the script supreme...but of course will still belong to...its programmer.
As scripts I suggest that we put our collective abilities together and find a way to over ride the programs and deny our programmer the 'right' to treat us as mere programs, egos, souls, loosh etc...
Of course, we will have to first have a talk with our self about out willingness to have got involved with this in the first instance...or said another way:
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
This leads me to think that it's more advanced than I originally thought... that the system might even have it's own over arching goal to balance things out.
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
We actually experience reality as artificially intelligent avatars or "bots" within a game. Robert Monroe believed our purpose was "loosh":
Elaborate. What are the 'we' – are they the 'bots' or something else?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
Imagine there is a game called "World of Warcraft". Now imagine within this game there is something called "gold". You ignore it at first as a children's pursuit. But a few years pass and you see people trading real life money for this "gold". You don't understand it but being an astute businessman you plot the most efficient way of collecting this "gold".
Who is the 'you' who are the people you 'see' trading in this world for this gold?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
Obviously you could just play the game, get the best character and run around collecting gold.
Are you referring to reincarnation? Choosing a character which will give you the best chances of getting this 'gold'?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
But no self respecting gold farmer does this. What you need is a script to play the game for you aka a bot.
Okay so the 'you' does not personally go into the game but creates a 'bot' which are the 'you' 'we' 'us' within the game...not 'real' but 'programs'.
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
This way you can program in the basic behavior of the bot and tell it to "GET GOLD!".
The basic behaviour has to involve being motivated in the pursuit of 'gold'.
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
But being a genius this isn't good enough for you, you decide you'll make a program that monitors the script and constantly modifies the code, rewarding efficient code by saving it.
How is this code saved? Since it is only code, how can it be rewarded...what would be the point?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
The program is constantly shuffling code around. It's not too good at deleting old scripts, since it's paranoid it will screw something up, and something is always better than nothing.
Again what is this code that thinks for itself and has feelings?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
This is my feeble attempt to make a parable of the following this, my unproven theory that thus spews forth like acid onto your faces:
I think you attempt is fine in the sense that it conveys data about how you subjectively think of yourself...and likely see others.
(Said one code to another) :)
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
What we would call a god like force or consciousness created "the soul".
Is the soul this code you speak of – the one that is harvesting gold as its primary activity?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
The main purpose of the soul is to continually find better ways of generating loosh.
Is this 'loosh' the 'gold'? What exactly is 'loosh'?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
It's secondary purpose, which supports the first purpose, is to act as a repository for egos that have incarnated.
So the programme is self aware and has feelings etc...but is it able to use those aspects in order to re-write itself?
What is the ego which is put into the 'soul program'?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
The main purpose is accomplished by continually reviewing previous egos and taking parts here and there and building a new ego out of it, which is then incarnated.
The main purpose is collecting 'loosh' so are these two things the same thing? Is collecting loosh another way of saying 'continually reviewing previous egos and taking parts here and there and building a new ego out of it, which is then incarnated'...?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
We, you, me, us ego's here in cyberspace are the "botting scripts". Now for scripts we're very advanced. We're self aware, we change our own scripting to some degree. We're given the freedom to do what we want. But of course if we're bad loosh generators most of our code might not be reused.
It seems 'we' are a lot of things all at once. We are scripts, egos, loosh, (good and bad'...
Now overall your theory when in my head plays out like a self absorbed creature playing a deformed god roll or at best a child god in the making that is trapped in a loop of its own making.
When I equate it to the unfolding drama on this planet, I see an insane asylum with aspects of pure genius and astounding focus at its very apex – like a pearl.
What are we doing here, or even there (Astral) participating in something with our 'given freedom to do what we want' our abilities to change our own scripting – only to some degree...said another way, we have limited freedom and it cannot vary away from the main – programmed – priority to harvest loosh...
The gold, or loosh equates to 'souls' or 'egos' or 'scripts' which equates to 'whichever script can gather the most or all, wins and become the script supreme...but of course will still belong to...its programmer.
As scripts I suggest that we put our collective abilities together and find a way to over ride the programs and deny our programmer the 'right' to treat us as mere programs, egos, souls, loosh etc...
Of course, we will have to first have a talk with our self about out willingness to have got involved with this in the first instance...or said another way:
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
This leads me to think that it's more advanced than I originally thought... that the system might even have it's own over arching goal to balance things out.
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
We actually experience reality as artificially intelligent avatars or "bots" within a game. Robert Monroe believed our purpose was "loosh":
Elaborate. What are the 'we' – are they the 'bots' or something else?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
Imagine there is a game called "World of Warcraft". Now imagine within this game there is something called "gold". You ignore it at first as a children's pursuit. But a few years pass and you see people trading real life money for this "gold". You don't understand it but being an astute businessman you plot the most efficient way of collecting this "gold".
Who is the 'you' who are the people you 'see' trading in this world for this gold?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
Obviously you could just play the game, get the best character and run around collecting gold.
Are you referring to reincarnation? Choosing a character which will give you the best chances of getting this 'gold'?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
But no self respecting gold farmer does this. What you need is a script to play the game for you aka a bot.
Okay so the 'you' does not personally go into the game but creates a 'bot' which are the 'you' 'we' 'us' within the game...not 'real' but 'programs'.
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
This way you can program in the basic behavior of the bot and tell it to "GET GOLD!".
The basic behaviour has to involve being motivated in the pursuit of 'gold'.
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
But being a genius this isn't good enough for you, you decide you'll make a program that monitors the script and constantly modifies the code, rewarding efficient code by saving it.
How is this code saved? Since it is only code, how can it be rewarded...what would be the point?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
The program is constantly shuffling code around. It's not too good at deleting old scripts, since it's paranoid it will screw something up, and something is always better than nothing.
Again what is this code that thinks for itself and has feelings?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
This is my feeble attempt to make a parable of the following this, my unproven theory that thus spews forth like acid onto your faces:
I think you attempt is fine in the sense that it conveys data about how you subjectively think of yourself...and likely see others.
(Said one code to another) :)
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
What we would call a god like force or consciousness created "the soul".
Is the soul this code you speak of – the one that is harvesting gold as its primary activity?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
The main purpose of the soul is to continually find better ways of generating loosh.
Is this 'loosh' the 'gold'? What exactly is 'loosh'?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
It's secondary purpose, which supports the first purpose, is to act as a repository for egos that have incarnated.
So the programme is self aware and has feelings etc...but is it able to use those aspects in order to re-write itself?
What is the ego which is put into the 'soul program'?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
The main purpose is accomplished by continually reviewing previous egos and taking parts here and there and building a new ego out of it, which is then incarnated.
The main purpose is collecting 'loosh' so are these two things the same thing? Is collecting loosh another way of saying 'continually reviewing previous egos and taking parts here and there and building a new ego out of it, which is then incarnated'...?
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
We, you, me, us ego's here in cyberspace are the "botting scripts". Now for scripts we're very advanced. We're self aware, we change our own scripting to some degree. We're given the freedom to do what we want. But of course if we're bad loosh generators most of our code might not be reused.
It seems 'we' are a lot of things all at once. We are scripts, egos, loosh, (good and bad'...
Now overall your theory when in my head plays out like a self absorbed creature playing a deformed god roll or at best a child god in the making that is trapped in a loop of its own making.
When I equate it to the unfolding drama on this planet, I see an insane asylum with aspects of pure genius and astounding focus at its very apex – like a pearl.
What are we doing here, or even there (Astral) participating in something with our 'given freedom to do what we want' our abilities to change our own scripting – only to some degree...said another way, we have limited freedom and it cannot vary away from the main – programmed – priority to harvest loosh...
The gold, or loosh equates to 'souls' or 'egos' or 'scripts' which equates to 'whichever script can gather the most or all, wins and become the script supreme...but of course will still belong to...its programmer.
As scripts I suggest that we put our collective abilities together and find a way to over ride the programs and deny our programmer the 'right' to treat us as mere programs, egos, souls, loosh etc...
Of course, we will have to first have a talk with our self about out willingness to have got involved with this in the first instance...or said another way:
Quote from: Steel Hawk on February 19, 2013, 19:32:31
This leads me to think that it's more advanced than I originally thought... that the system might even have it's own over arching goal to balance things out.
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/welcome_to_astral_chat/is_it_fate-t39810.0.html;msg325571#msg325571
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 18:32:03
A slight disadvantage to who or what?
Please elaborate on this thought.
What he is trying to say as nice as possible is, that if you could access the NPR yourself, you wouldn't be asking all these questions, because you would have already been shown your truths or at least be on the right path to finding them.
But the fact that you can't shows me that you aren't supposed to know the answers to your questions.
It happens! I have asked many questions in the NPR and haven't been shown the answers yet. But I have faith that in some way, shape or form, I will be shown what I wish or need to see or learn there.
EDIT: Wow, you ask a lot of questions, lol. :roll:
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 19:12:05
What he is trying to say as nice as possible is, that if you could access the NPR yourself, you wouldn't be asking all these questions, because you would have already been shown your truths or at least be on the right path to finding them.
But the fact that you can't shows me that you aren't supposed to know the answers to your questions.
It happens! I have asked many questions in the NPR and haven't been shown the answers yet. But I have faith that in some way, shape or form, I will be shown what I wish or need to see or learn there.
Have you been following this thread?
Yes I have and I stick to last my last statement. :wink:
Remember though, you have a history here too, not just on the MBT forums.
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 19:12:05
What he is trying to say as nice as possible is, that if you could access the NPR yourself, you wouldn't be asking all these questions, because you would have already been shown your truths or at least be on the right path to finding them.
But the fact that you can't shows me that you aren't supposed to know the answers to your questions.
It happens! I have asked many questions in the NPR and haven't been shown the answers yet. But I have faith that in some way, shape or form, I will be shown what I wish or need to see or learn there.
EDIT: Wow, you ask a lot of questions, lol. :roll:
Ah okay - from experience, once a moderator comes along and make such remarks, rolls eyes etc...it is a sign that what is being shared is not welcome...soon time to move on...watch this space.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 19:18:35
Ah okay - from experience, once a moderator comes along and make such remarks, rolls eyes etc...it is a sign that what is being shared is not welcome...soon time to move on...watch this space.
No, a Moderator comes along when they feel this isn't going anywhere.
The more people answer your questions. The more you question their answers.
Where does this end?
I am trying to fix something before it's broken! :-)
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 19:17:46
Yes I have and I stick to last my last statement. :wink:
Remember though, you have a history here too, not just on the MBT forums.
This is another aspect of 'guides teachers protectors of interests etc...' directors ...in the know...big bots, collectors of loosh...the very thing which wants the program to remain exactly as it is...
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 19:22:57
No, a Moderator comes along when they feel this isn't going anywhere.
The more people answer your questions. The more you question their answers.
Where does this end?
I am trying to fix something before it's broken! :-)
Okay well you're the boss here - As I said - I am okay with being dismissed. I will see through you on the other side... count on that.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 19:29:28
Okay well you're the boss here - As I said - I am okay with being dismissed. I will see through you on the other side... count on that.
You are not being dismissed.
So someone says something you don't like and now you show your true colors?
I was only trying to get you to calm down a bit.
Everything in life is not built on conspiracies.
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 19:22:57
No, a Moderator comes along when they feel this isn't going anywhere.
Exactly. A highly 'advanced' collector of loosh who does not want to loose its 'right' to the loosh collected. This is not going anywhere you need it to go to hold on to your collection and has the potential to do so...some data is dangerous in the regard.
You will see how it is actually too late - the data is already doing its job...eventually you will see this and relent...a greater thing is unfolding and when you see this, you will be happy to let your loosh go free - they are really not yours anyway.
When I say 'yours' I am - to be clear - referring to the order of highly advanced collectors working together...in a similar fashion to how the reality program on TV called 'Survival' unfolds...at first they are teams, then they eventual compete to be last one standing winner supreme bot soul ego script etc...
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 19:22:57
The more people answer your questions. The more you question their answers.
Yes and the nature of my questions are designed to get them thinking for themselves...
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 19:22:57
Where does this end?
When we are no longer manipulated by 'protectors' and such...aka loosh addicts.
In that sense, it has already ended for me.
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 19:22:57
I am trying to fix something before it's broken! :-)
Yes indeed you are, but that is an illusion. Sure we are still some 'time' away from seeing this but it has already begun.
Im way out of my time here. Physical obligations...
I can work this out and have gone through several pages of unanswered questions based a on a variant of my last metaphoric proposition. Hawk adds some extras and stalemate.
William I'd have guessed originally you had the IQ around 180 and also the capabilities of utilising both brain hemispheres simultaneously then alternating between the two to obtain the 'truth' within the hypothesis albeit a metaphoric interpretation. Unless you have some undisclosed data and are waiting for others to key in the correct wording, I would guess you have this PMR system worked out somewhat but require feedback from others who can remove themselves into a NPMR in order to prove your undisclosed theory.
A professor or high level teacher at least if my assumption is correct?
I'll respond more later, tired eyes, no glasses and busy at 6:00.
There's nothing offensive intended in whats posted above. You stirr an intellectual curiosity.
I'm sorry Wi11iam, I have to admit. I baited you to here to have you show your paranoia to everyone here and most importantly yourself.
I have looked back at all your posts, as I do before posting on any members post here and I saw the same warning signs again and again.
You are very knowledgeable and intelligent, but you also have a severe case of paranoia.
This started as a great thread, but after awhile I saw it wouldn't end. No matter what anyone had explained to you, you were always going to question it.
I said that if you were successful at NPR, that you would find your answers there and I stick by it, because it's true.
It's not a knock on you, its just a true fact.
You will see that once you start accessing the NPR consciously aware regularly, that a lot of those questions just go away and are replaced with wonderful experiences.
Your entire mindset on a number of things changes, but they change for the better! :-)
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 19:34:34
You are not being dismissed.
Gagged, warned, nicely told to desist, come on - we both know where this is going...you have already made your reasons for interjecting known...I have responded. If I am totally incorrect, paranoid and looking for conspiracy under every rock, then we will have a good laugh about it...but if I am correct, well then as I say, you will eventually desist with supporting the present program and we will have a laugh about it...either way this will end in laughter...eventually.
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 19:22:57
So someone says something you don't like and now you show your true colors?
I have shown my true colors from the go get. You know this, and you see where it is heading and you don;t like it - you don't like that I know it and you are suggesting my true colors are somehow at fault.
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 19:22:57
I was only trying to get you to calm down a bit.
I was and still am calm. You were only protecting your interests...be truthful...
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 19:22:57
Everything in life is not built on conspiracies.
That is true. But some things do need investigating...usually those things in need of investigating have guardians, secrets, etc and are very defensive when investigated...anyway...enough said...the process is happening - it only takes one to get the ball rolling...and as I said, time will eventually show the ripple effect of something barely noticed to begin with...I see through the guardians this side and that.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 18:32:03
A slight disadvantage to who or what?
Look at the title of this forum! We all come here to teach and learn nonphysical exploration. While we do spend a great deal of time talking about what it is.. and why it is... our primary goal is to experience and explore it. Therefore it is a disadvantage for you and us.. maybe not all of us... but one's left... that you don't want to swim in the ocean you have read and collected 'data' about. I don't know what other answer you expected from me or whether you have an answer lined up knowing what my response would be. We'll see.
You can only wonder... is what I am saying. :-)
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 18:32:03
"It would actually be very interesting to see what you could achieve in the nonphysical. "
Please elaborate on this thought.
What I should have said is... "It would be really interesting what you would think once you had some experience in the nonphysical" Because you can't possibly know what it is like to operate consciously and nonphysically as a 50 year old man. You may change your whole opinion. You may hate it.. it may terrify you... who knows? least of all you.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 18:32:03
I know what it is like to wonder about what ifs – in some ways this is quiet fine. Apart from Frank and Tom the reports regarding experiences have not left me wondering in the way you are using the word.
They have left me wondering as to the nature of the programs travellers are involved with, whether age and experience in this PMR are factors, and also ego...sometimes the stories reported leave me wondering about the actual point to the Astral Realm as well as the actual point of consistently popping off there.
Obviously if you are one such Traveller you would be able to answer this – at least from your own subjective experiences.
Sure... but it requires a book to explain most of it because it's my life... and intertwined with it so heavily. very brief....
I was 11 when I started getting SP and from there I learned that I could fly about my neighbourhood and visit people I knew. I was a bit of a loner so kept it to myself.. only letting a few friends know and found I could teach them. They were all primarily RTZ projections in the first years.. so I would go wherever I wanted. During these first 7 or 8 years I had many many affirmations of getting remote views 100% right... friends hiding things... knowing where people were and what they were doing and finding things my mum thought she had lost etc
So as I went through puberty I was instantly aware that there was more to reality than just 'this'. After a while I developed a different type of experience I called 2nd Phase that seemed to take me to different realities.. these were repeatable visits. The realities were non-changing and had their own denizens... this also added to my knowledge; that not only was there more to 'this' but there were whole new 'others'. The knowledge of this gave me a sense of confidence in myself even though I was an under-acheiver at school... partially because I wasn't operating fully in this world most of the time and partially because I didn't take life too seriously. As I became a young adult my experiences evolved further to include a new type that was more set in the dream environment... that was plastic and manipulatable.. quite strange and yet very very familiar. This is what you call 'the Astral'. I found I could create things of my own... and that it was also filled with things and places that also seemed to be created by others. I realised that at this point I was interacting with people on the level I was at. As time went on I found that I could teach myself how to do things... this is when I found out how to look at the world and acquire a sort of photographic memory which soon led onto my chosen profession. I have experienced precognition and past. I learned that I could seemingly fabricate scenarios and find a likely outcome... these would be accurate unless people were involved. This led me to understand that free will was in play. I then got my first games console and found the similarities to simulated games and this reality were very much alike. When the internet came this was even more evident... So I conducted small experiments within the nonphysical to replicate this idea.. asked questions... got directed in certain ways. By this point my ability to have RTZ diminished as I grew. Probably because I was filling my head with doubts and beliefs. I began using the nonphysical as a way of sorting out problems.. mainly work orientated. I would be given a brief to construct or build something. I would realise it within my experiences and then look at the object to see how it was made or how I would make it... sort of back engineer the final product. This has helped me out on many occasions. lol
The only things that I don't concur with when it comes to MBT is the ego aspect. I have never worried about my ego. It's never bothered me... I seem to have been given many tickets and passes to places with no apparent tests or questions. I can use it for my own benefit and to help others. To me... personally.. it has always been something to USE and not be USED by. Guides are a recent thought in my head.
What was your question again? :lol:
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 18:32:03
"There seems to be a pattern of theorising and a type of debate that springs from those that don't actively experience NPMR on a regular basis... especially with intellectuals like yourself."
Please elaborate – share your data.
Just that. This seems to happen on here and on the MBT forums. Those that do OOBE regularly tend to be more reserved about theory and are more into the doing and teaching.. those that don't seem to either collect the information gleaned by those that do to create a model so that they can believe it and understand it at an intellectual level instead of at an experiential level... or if they want to learn but don't... acquire as much information and theory in a way to 'prepare' themselves for it.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 18:32:03
This is interesting because if you have an advantage in experiencing both states and have adapted well enough to them...you should be even more able to connect with the data I am presenting. Yet it seems I am more able to do this – I can connect simply because I want to.
Perhaps that is the reason you cannot connect with me, because you don't really want to?
Maybe you are right. Maybe my ego doesn't want to because I feel that you are an armchair theorist and i spend a lot of time practising and teaching. Maybe it's because the information simply doesn't seem that important to me in the grand scheme of the other available information. Perhaps it's because I am not that clever and can't conceive of what the 'revelation' is because I'm simply not that way equipped. Perhaps I will have an OOBE tonight where I ask you to explain it to me in a way I can understand. I really don't know. I am out of maybes and perhapses.
To connect with YOU do I need to understand what you are saying... or do I need to be amazed at the statement? I don't quite know.
I think... what I meant by left and right brain.. is that when I am here I am Ben... I am silly.. .I am artistic and full of life and emotion.. I wear my heart on my sleeve and I just enjoy life. When I am non-physical... I am focused and almost alien.. robotic and analytical.. collecting data.
My job involves both to a very high degree. That is when I use both halves. I will say though... I use the left/right brain thing as a metaphor.
I slightly get lost on your last sentence.
*EDIT*
Wow...
Well I'll post my answer anyway. But I think I have said my piece now.
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 20:07:31
I'm sorry Wi11iam, I have to admit. I baited you to here to have you show your paranoia to everyone here.
I have looked back at all your posts, as I do before posting on any members post here and I saw the same warning signs again and again.
You are very knowledgeable and intelligent, but you also have a severe case of paranoia.
This started as a great thread, but after awhile I saw it wouldn't end. No matter what anyone had explained to you, you were always going to question it.
I said that if you were successful at NPR, that you would find your answers there and I stick by it, because it's true.
It's not a knock on you, its just a true fact.
You will see that once you start accessing the NPR consciously aware regularly, that a lot of those questions just go away and are replaced with wonderful experiences.
Your entire mindset on a number of things changes, but they change for the better! :-)
Okay Guardian Lionheart - you are barking up the wrong tree. I am not paranoid in the slightest...I am very focused. The more I delve the more certain it is that something is amiss, and for you to fob it off as merely paranoia is simply not going to work. It might work in that others may assume then that I am off my rocker and not to 'listen' to my 'ravings' but there is sanity in my insistence upon getting to the truth, and making absolutely sure that nothing untoward is going on, this world or that...and so far in either world, some things seem to be amiss, and when any voice comes along to quash through all methods from terror to subterfuge, distractions, derailing, censoring, - you know...all those things which attempt to prevent disclosure etc...well if I were just a loosh unit, I wouldn't even notice now would I - but I do. That does not at all signify I am paranoid.
Paranoia is accompanied by a lot of obvious delusion - not sensible intelligent insightful reasoning which also has practical 'how to work around such possible manipulations'.
So no - you have not 'uncovered' a paranoid individual or nipped a potential problem in the bud. Any more than you have seriously looked into the possibility of the things I have mentioned in this and other threads.
I am not actually looking for 'answers'. I am gathering data which shows me something many others don't even wish to contemplate, lest it interferes with their cozy rendition of 'what is' and the evidence is very compelling at that. No - it is not answers I am looking for...but rather The Answer.
You will have noted my answer to 'going there and experiencing for myself' here is the link of the post in this thread.
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/welcome_to_astral_chat/in_the_beginning-t39778.0.html;msg325429#msg325429
I FIGURED IT OUT!!!!!
Wi11iam is a Doomsday Prepper only he's prepping for the NPMR.
I've had fun though.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 20:36:55
I am not actually looking for 'answers'. I am gathering data which shows me something many others don't even wish to contemplate, lest it interferes with their cozy rendition of 'what is' and the evidence is very compelling at that. No - it is not answers I am looking for...but rather The Answer.
Gathering data based on what? Who's data?
What is it showing you that others don't wish to contemplate? That this reality and 'all that is' is simulated? Is this the revelation?
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 20, 2013, 20:21:14
Look at the title of this forum! We all come here to teach and learn nonphysical exploration. While we do spend a great deal of time talking about what it is.. and why it is... our primary goal is to experience and explore it. Therefore it is a disadvantage for you and us.. maybe not all of us... but one's left... that you don't want to swim in the ocean you have read and collected 'data' about. I don't know what other answer you expected from me or whether you have an answer lined up knowing what my response would be. We'll see.
I read your reply this far Beady. I have other things to do right now, but I will say that you are not being fair-minded and nor are you listening to what I have said already.
I will eventually be swimming in that ocean and have said so. There is no question that I am not wanting to. I have never said that. What I have said is that I don't want to be hoodwinked. Tricked. Played for the fool. Regurgitated. Memory blanked. Used and abused. Forced or otherwise sneakily compelled/seduced into doing something that I would not contemplate participating in if I had access to full data in which to make an informed...fully informed decision. Be feed false data...and it simply can;t be denied that the Astral has those elements - what isn;t so clear as to how far and deep those elements of influence and directives go...
The power piece is that no thing which seeks to assume dominance through deception over me can do so because I know the formula. Only that which sees the equality and wholeness in me, you, every one is that which is worthwhile supporting. Everything else is faking it to the max, for whatever agenda - be sure that agenda has to do with collecting 'loosh'
So - loosh 'we' are not.
:)
Anyhow - this - like the MBTOE forum and so many more...is not the 'place' for such discussion - I understand...in gratitude...data is data.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 20:36:55
It might work in that others may assume then that I am off my rocker and not to 'listen' to my 'ravings' but there is sanity in my insistence upon getting to the truth, and making absolutely sure that nothing untoward is going on, this world or that...and so far in either world, some things seem to be amiss, and when any voice comes along to quash through all methods from terror to subterfuge, distractions, derailing, censoring, - you know...all those things which attempt to prevent disclosure etc...well if I were just a loosh unit, I wouldn't even notice now would I - but I do. That does not at all signify I am paranoid.
Paranoia is accompanied by a lot of obvious delusion - not sensible intelligent insightful reasoning which also has practical 'how to work around such possible manipulations'.
So no - you have not 'uncovered' a paranoid individual or nipped a potential problem in the bud. Any more than you have seriously looked into the possibility of the things I have mentioned in this and other threads.
I am not actually looking for 'answers'. I am gathering data which shows me something many others don't even wish to contemplate, lest it interferes with their cozy rendition of 'what is' and the evidence is very compelling at that. No - it is not answers I am looking for...but rather The Answer.
William, I do not believe you are paranoid. I believe that you are very goal oriented and are in hot pursuit of the ANSWER.
But, I ask you....If you are correct and we are all just slaves and everything is truly afoul, what can you possibly do about it?
You are actually in a disbelief trap. I did not think that was possible. It is not that we are all cozy and comfortable with our little NPR experiences it's just that...man if you only knew how crazy your suspicions sound. You have made me aware of the fact that I have never had any suspicions of my NPR experiences but that does not change anything about the truth.
You talk as if this is just data collecting but you have made your mind up.
Well then read the rest and I'm sure you will have more to tell me.
I think you are just being too... self important when in actuality you are not true 'self' as you are here in this reality. Just the one experiencing it at the moment.
I have been reading what you are saying. I am answering you and reading your posts. How far do you want me to read into them.. that's the question.
Loosh??
Loosh 45 up, 9 down
1.an energy generated by all organic life in varying degrees of purity, the clearest and most potent coming from humans-engendered by human activity which tigers emotion, the highest of such emotion being Love/Loosh
Something, Somewhere ( or both, in millions, or uncountable) requires, likes, needs, values, collects, drinks, eats, or uses as a drug (sic) a substance ident Loosh. This is a rare substance in Somewhere, and those who posses Loosh find it vital for whatever it is used for.
buy loosh mugs & shirts
loosh love super love emotion energy
by Malcalypse Oct 28, 2010 share this add a video
2. Loosh 48 up, 31 down
1. New Age term applied to energy produced by human beings that other entities use to feed from. 2. It is also used to refer to the energy that is produced by suffering that entities feed. From books by Robert Monroe. Maybe a play on the French word Louche.
Aliens feed off the loosh of humans for food.
buy loosh mugs & shirts
new age suffering robert monroe hemisync remote viewing
by LightShift Jan 18, 2009 share this add a video
3. Loosh 16 up, 18 down
verb
derived from Lucius Lewis(1914-2006)Oakland, CA created by LDeez
1. The act of being fly in an innovative way.
2. A fashion foward aesthetic.
3. nickname for the Lucius Blaq label.
1. "Ooh gurl, I just love those stilletos you got on. Dem is real Loosh!"
2. "I keeps it real Loosh, Like Whaaa! Shakin' all these haters that wanna give me "me" a thumbs down! You beezies."
3. "I got that Loosh on my head and feet, freezer burn on my wrist and neck, lookin real luxurious. Straight stuntin'!"
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 20:36:55
Paranoia is accompanied by a lot of obvious delusion - not sensible intelligent insightful reasoning which also has practical 'how to work around such possible manipulations'.
Actually this statement is false. Many of the world's geniuses have exhibited paranoia. This is a proven fact.
Oh, I just wanted you to know that "Guardian" Lionheart, as you put it, is a person like you who just happens to volunteer his time to help people access and understand the NPR. The duties of Moderator are to keep the peace and also to intervene in a subject when they feel it is time to, when they see problems on the horizon.
I have read this entire thread and been watching what is be posted daily and I see that there is a "stalemate" here. I see that if the subject was to proceed the way it currently was, that it was going to go down hill fast. I have already seen anger being shown and that's a sign to step in and calm it down.
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 21:30:35
Actually this statement is false. Many of the world's geniuses have exhibited paranoia. This is a proven fact.
Oh, I just wanted you to know that "Guardian" Lionheart, as you put it, is a person like you who just happens to volunteer his time to help people access and understand the NPR. The duties of Moderator are to keep the peace and also to intervene in a subject when they feel it is time to, when they see problems on the horizon.
I have read this entire thread and been watching what is be posted daily and I see that there is a "stalemate" here. I see that if the subject was to proceed the way it currently was, that it was going to go down hill fast. I have already seen anger being shown and that's a sign to step in and calm it down.
You have mis interpreted the data of this thread. There is neither argument nor stalemate. There is ongoing discussion which has a potential to evolve if permitted.
There is no real psychologist who could agree with your assertions that I am being paranoid – that I am displaying typical symptoms...I have already answered that. The paranoid is delusional beyond the ability to rational reasoning.
On the other hand I also 'called it like I sees it' but upon further contemplation can also see the possibility that you do not necessarily actually realise that you act in a role of 'loosh gatherer' your moderator status is about 'keeping the peace' yet clearly the peace was disrupted due to your 'take on what was occurring' – I ask now that you 'stand down' and allow for the possibility that your 'predictions' regarding this thread be proved unfounded.
If you are not willing to do so...then lock/delete the thread. There is no point in me continuing when moderator(s) so use their power in the manner you have chosen to use yours.
Your call.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 22:06:54
There is ongoing discussion which has a potential to evolve if permitted.
If you can answer these questions, I will not post on this thread again unless it becomes disorderly.
Evolve to what?
What's the end game here?
Why is this important to you?
How does this change your physical existence/reality, who you are and why you are here?
...and lastly, what can you do to change it?
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 20, 2013, 21:02:03
Well then read the rest and I'm sure you will have more to tell me.
I think you are just being too... self important when in actuality you are not true 'self' as you are here in this reality. Just the one experiencing it at the moment.
I have been reading what you are saying. I am answering you and reading your posts. How far do you want me to read into them.. that's the question.
Loosh??
Loosh 45 up, 9 down
1.an energy generated by all organic life in varying degrees of purity, the clearest and most potent coming from humans-engendered by human activity which tigers emotion, the highest of such emotion being Love/Loosh
Something, Somewhere ( or both, in millions, or uncountable) requires, likes, needs, values, collects, drinks, eats, or uses as a drug (sic) a substance ident Loosh. This is a rare substance in Somewhere, and those who posses Loosh find it vital for whatever it is used for.
buy loosh mugs & shirts
loosh love super love emotion energy
by Malcalypse Oct 28, 2010 share this add a video
2. Loosh 48 up, 31 down
1. New Age term applied to energy produced by human beings that other entities use to feed from. 2. It is also used to refer to the energy that is produced by suffering that entities feed. From books by Robert Monroe. Maybe a play on the French word Louche.
Aliens feed off the loosh of humans for food.
buy loosh mugs & shirts
new age suffering robert monroe hemisync remote viewing
by LightShift Jan 18, 2009 share this add a video
3. Loosh 16 up, 18 down
verb
derived from Lucius Lewis(1914-2006)Oakland, CA created by LDeez
1. The act of being fly in an innovative way.
2. A fashion foward aesthetic.
3. nickname for the Lucius Blaq label.
1. "Ooh gurl, I just love those stilletos you got on. Dem is real Loosh!"
2. "I keeps it real Loosh, Like Whaaa! Shakin' all these haters that wanna give me "me" a thumbs down! You beezies."
3. "I got that Loosh on my head and feet, freezer burn on my wrist and neck, lookin real luxurious. Straight stuntin'!"
Beady – I have read the rest of your replies and thank you too for your data on 'loosh' which carries with it something more than what Hawk hinted, but adds to the concept of 'loosh gathers' or 'loosh harvesting bots' bots etc...
I have not until this day ever encountered the expression
I would say then that my comment 'Loosh we are not'...is a bit off...but the underlying expression remains. I as loosh belong to no one which wants to own possess treat me as inferior etc...
In regard to 'self importance' yes – I consider that me as 'loosh' is important enough not to be owned, manipulated, possessed, treated as inferior etc...
PS Beady
You told me in the course of discussion that you were 'being' and had no agenda.
I replied that if I were to search your posts I would find your agenda.
Anyhoo – as it has unfolded you now tell me that you are a teacher – you experience the altered states and report your data of experience and you encourage others to learn to do the same.
That is your agenda – purpose – you are doing not just being.
Are we on the same page in relation to being and doing?
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 22:18:54
If you can answer these questions, I will not post on this thread again unless it becomes disorderly.
Evolve to what?
What's the end game here?
Why is this important to you?
How does this change your physical existence/reality, who you are and why you are here?
...and lastly, what can you do to change it?
Okay Guardian Lion Heart I accept those terms....with modifications for you to consider.
1: That as and when I answer the questions the answers are discussed rather than evaluated through any belief systems and cast aside as pointless on account of said belief systems.
2: That you post on this thread even if there is no threat of disorderly behaviour as if your input had value beyond the mere tasks of keeping the order – your input has value...I have already seen this and would like to see more.
3: That I am granted now, a time out to remove the residual emotional stuff which I have allowed to happen within my psyche – I need to wash in loosh for a bit.
Thanks
W
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 22:33:55
PS Beady
You told me in the course of discussion that you were 'being' and had no agenda.
I replied that if I were to search your posts I would find your agenda.
Anyhoo – as it has unfolded you now tell me that you are a teacher – you experience the altered states and report your data of experience and you encourage others to learn to do the same.
That is your agenda – purpose – you are doing not just being.
Are we on the same page in relation to being and doing?
Oh... agenda on here... sorry. Yes.. to teach and encourage.. but here on this forum I like to teach yes.
In the UK... when somebody says agenda... it normally conveys a pointed finger of suspiciousness. "what is their agenda?" If someone has an agenda in my understanding it is that they harbour a secret that they hide because they are doing it 'under the radar' or hoodwinking others for their own personal gain.
It would have been easier to say... 'Bedeekin.. why do you come on here talking about OOBEs?'... I could have saved you the work and said "to teach, learn from and meet likeminded people".
I thought you meant in life.. my reason for existing and being.. Who I am... ME... I also collect carnivorous plants... I have a dog.. I've been with my other half Kathryn for 23 years.. I love reading... adore nature and consider myself a budding entomologist... I love making things and that's what my career entails... art sculpture and the like. so I have many 'agendas' I suppose.
I tend not to report my data too much because it is mine and mine alone and to be fair it takes a lot of hard work and time. Maybe I will report it in the process of teaching but I don't talk about 90% of my experiences. for many reasons. One is I don't want to colour peoples experiences too much. I retort a lot of early anecdotal experiences because they were closer in quality and experience to those learning on hear.
I'm not sure why you are interested in my 'agenda' though. I am rarely interested in other peoples.
Are we on the same page? I think we'll get there.
No one had been arguing against you. We are debating your theory. I'm not playing a game of semantics with you either.
But I think it's safe to say that you are less presenting a theory and more of telling us what your beliefs are. And you of all people know that a belief without hard facts is just pseudo-knowledge. Thanks for the link, by the way. I've been reading all day.
I am very interested in discussing your answers to Lion's query. He's only pointing out the questions that we have asked as they are relevant to your position and your non-answers are hard to ignore.
We're all guilty of injecting some emotion into our posts and Lion was only wise to cool the tone.
You really are trapped in a belief system if you think differently when I tell you that Lion is only saying to cool it down (he's talking to all of us) a little because he doesn't want to see anyone feel like they aren't welcomed.
Give us all that much credit.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 20, 2013, 22:54:29
Oh... agenda on here... sorry. Yes.. to teach and encourage.. but here on this forum I like to teach yes.
In the UK... when somebody says agenda... it normally conveys a pointed finger of suspiciousness. "what is their agenda?" If someone has an agenda in my understanding it is that they harbour a secret that they hide because they are doing it 'under the radar' or hoodwinking others for their own personal gain.
It would have been easier to say... 'Bedeekin.. why do you come on here talking about OOBEs?'... I could have saved you the work and said "to teach people and meet likeminded people".
I thought you meant in life.. my reason for existing and being.. Who I am... ME... I also collect carnivorous plants... I have a dog.. I've been with my other half Kathryn for 23 years.. I love reading... adore nature and consider myself a budding entomologist... I love making things and that's what my career entails... art sculpture and the like. so I have many 'agendas' I suppose.
I tend not to report my data too much because it is mine and mine alone and to be fair it takes a lot of hard work and time. Maybe I will report it in the process of teaching but I don't talk about 90% of my experiences. for many reasons. One is I don't want to colour peoples experiences too much. I retort a lot of early anecdotal experiences because they were closer in quality and experience to those learning on hear.
I'm not sure why you are interested in my 'agenda' though. I am rarely interested in other peoples.
I am interested in your agenda perhaps more than you are interested in mine?
I don't get that.
Agenda is perhaps a 'dark' word - whatever.
You have purpose - I have purpose. That they be considered 'belief systems' is particularly undecided and should not cloud the concept of adjoining these agendas in an...objective manner...'tis all. Jig liked what he Saw. Get the picture.
True, 'how we arrived at this place' might well have involved belief systems, but these dont have to be the energy behind agendas...they might have already vanquished quite naturally so...especially if they are not kept secret from one another.
Upon further deeper reflection....
Understand the whole agenda of the self...yes here there and everywhere. Combine those rather than see them separate - almost non connected. Bring them together as they truly really are - bring them out. Thing is, do we dare give one another that permission, let alone dare expose our 'selfs'?
Watch this space I guess....Permission to get the ball rolling...
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 20, 2013, 23:02:11
No one had been arguing against you. We are debating your theory. I'm not playing a game of semantics with you either.
But I think it's safe to say that you are less presenting a theory and more of telling us what your beliefs are. And you of all people know that a belief without hard facts is just pseudo-knowledge. Thanks for the link, by the way. I've been reading all day.
I am very interested in discussing your answers to Lion's query. He's only pointing out the questions that we have asked as they are relevant to your position and your non-answers are hard to ignore.
We're all guilty of injecting some emotion into our posts and Lion was only wise to cool the tone.
You really are trapped in a belief system if you think differently when I tell you that Lion is only saying to cool it down (he's talking to all of us) a little because he doesn't want to see anyone feel like they aren't welcomed.
Give us all that much credit.
Understood.
Can I sing a song now please.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 23:17:25
Can I sing a song now please.
Sure. Clear your mind and center your focus. Then let her rip.
But be advised that I've been reading MBT all day and I have some ammo that is new to me but you've dodged in the past plenty already.
But I think I can still come across without sounding like a TOEbot. :-D
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 20, 2013, 23:21:20
Sure. Clear your mind and center your focus. Then let her rip.
But be advised that I've been reading MBT all day and I have some ammo that is new to me but you've dodged in the past plenty already.
But I think I can still come across without sounding like a TOEbot. :-D
Okay - well this is for you IAB... hope you enjoy.
As to your study of MBT, be advised, while I like some of it I don't subscribe to it all, and that should be obvious. It was after all why I was told to shape up or ship out. Still if you think I have been dodgy in the past plenty in relation to MBTOE, and it is relevant, please feel free to bring it to the table.
[Clears Throat - tunes guitar]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMCWH-xfqQA&list=PL6fZF9xJoBFTCNSMxyLoHi74l8TvWhTKl&index=11 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMCWH-xfqQA&list=PL6fZF9xJoBFTCNSMxyLoHi74l8TvWhTKl&index=11)
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 22:06:54
There is ongoing discussion which has a potential to evolve if permitted.
Quote from: Lionheart on February 20, 2013, 22:18:54
If you can answer these questions, I will not post on this thread again unless it becomes disorderly.
Evolve to what?
What's the end game here?
Why is this important to you?
How does this change your physical existence/reality, who you are and why you are here?
...and lastly, what can you do to change it?
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 20, 2013, 22:06:54
There is ongoing discussion which has a potential to evolve if permitted.
Q: Evolve to what?
A: To where it will. That is the process of evolutionQ: What's the end game here?
A: There is none that I foresee. I guess 'the end' will work itself out.Q: Why is this important to you?
A: Well it seems more worthwhile letting it find its own way than shutting it down or deleting it.Q: ...and lastly, what can you do to change it?
A: I would rather let it evolve naturally, and the changes take care of themselves with the participants directives .
I think that maybe this has evolved its full course as a thread. The 'end game' has arrived.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 21, 2013, 10:36:46
I think that maybe this has evolved its full course as a thread. The 'end game' has arrived.
Well I hope the data regarding the nature of 'The Astral Realm' as being itself a simulation will be helpful to you in your travels and teachings Beady.
See through you on the 'other side' -
Cheers! :wink:
Same to you Wi11iam. :)
Akin to a T.V. serial, it ends just as it starts to get interesting.
Abundant ideas with insufficient direct answers. Time to ponder upon the theoretical offerings.
Indeed, as always this will unfold in time. Unfortunately all present will have made their journey onwards to the greater reality.
The truth is out there.
Quote from: Szaxx on February 21, 2013, 16:31:47
Akin to a T.V. serial, it ends just as it starts to get interesting.
Abundant ideas with insufficient direct answers. Time to ponder upon the theoretical offerings.
Indeed, as always this will unfold in time. Unfortunately all present will have made their journey onward to the greater reality.
The truth is out there.
Again, in relation to 'Travelling' within the Astral - that vast realm...it is often assumed that compared to this physical universe it is 'more real' which may be the case but it is in itself a simulated thing and it is not too difficult to understand the significance of this insight or how it might change the way the individual 'travels' and what the individual might then experience if the data is not overlooked.
It may not make any difference but then it may...in the same way that knowing there is more than this physical universe - as those who have experienced the alternate realities would and do verify - and how such knowledge potentially can and does change the way an individual views and participates within the physical universe...the 'greater reality' has to be the Realm of no beginnings rather than only whatever the Astral offers - as vast and as complex as it is, it is not everything.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 24, 2013, 13:08:43
Again, in relation to 'Travelling' within the Astral - that vast realm...it is often assumed that compared to this physical universe it is 'more real' which may be the case but it is in itself a simulated thing and it is not too difficult to understand the significance of this insight or how it might change the way the individual 'travels' and what the individual might then experience if the data is not overlooked.
It may not make any difference but then it may...in the same way that knowing there is more than this physical universe - as those who have experienced the alternate realities would and do verify - and how such knowledge potentially can and does change the way an individual views and participates within the physical universe...the 'greater reality' has to be the Realm of no beginnings rather than only whatever the Astral offers - as vast and as complex as it is, it is not everything.
indeed it isn't.
Do you maybe think that we... and maybe I... think that the nonphysical or 'astral' is a more real reality than this one? I do hope not.. because I think this is the reason there isn't such a big reaction towards such a described theory/revelation... from me anyhoo.
I do consider it is a 'top-down' situation... but in no way is the NPMR any more or less a construct than this one or others than may precede it. :)
Do you consider that knowledge further than that which we are currently equipped to understand is actually useful within this/your particular life as you live now?
Do you not consider that when you wake from this 'dream' you may do what you normally do when you wake from a dream and think "Why was I running from that giant blue monkey?"
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 24, 2013, 14:03:18
indeed it isn't.
Do you maybe think that we... and maybe I... think that the nonphysical or 'astral' is a more real reality than this one? I do hope not.. because I think this is the reason there isn't such a big reaction towards such a described theory/revelation... from me anyhoo.
I do consider it is a 'top-down' situation... but in no way is the NPMR any more or less a construct than this one or others than may precede it. :)
Do you consider that knowledge further than that which we are currently equipped to understand is actually useful within this/your particular life as you live now?
Do you not consider that when you wake from this 'dream' you may do what you normally do when you wake from a dream and think "Why was I running from that giant blue monkey?"
Oh hi Beady - you gave me the impression there was nothing more for you with this thread... :)
I think you might need to elaborate your concerns above...I do not quiet understand the angle. Perhaps the best place to start is in sharing exactly why you reacted to the opening post as you did. If it wasn't a type of sarcasm then what was it about the statement which had you reacting as you did?
It seems some travelers are unduly protective of their own understanding through their experiences of what the Astral is,and this is reflected in their responses. That is understandable I guess, but as you know, there are differing versions about the whole subject and nothing concrete about any of them in regard to agreement and being on the same page. It is more akin to say, religions...say the Christian religion, which has certain shared fundamentals but branches off into different directions and groupings of like-minded individuals who form these groups for the reasons they do but can be antagonistic toward anything/one whom might be seen as threatening to their particular doctrine.
There are elements of the 'more real' than the physical reality in regards to the Astral, I have experienced this myself and it is natural because it is this Domain from which we came from to get to this one and to which we go back to, so that may have a lot to do with it. But essentially 'we' do not actually
come from or otherwise have our beginning in that domain...essentially, if we are at our core,
Consciousness - then effectively we have no beginning. Beginnings are constructs - we are not constructs - we are that which experience constructs.
If we were say...watching...observing the physical unfolding of life on earth from a less personal participating hands on sort of involvement, yes we could more clearly see the patterns and where Consciousness is heading in relation to its involvement with the Physical Universe - specifically to do with life bearing planets which offer it form in which to experience through...and I am not suggesting the construct is less real because Consciousness decides what is real anyway. But it also knows that the only REAL thing is Itself. Everything else is construct for Its greater good.
Likewise - if we could observe the Astral from a less participating role we can likewise see what it is, and how it performs as a construct - how it works, what its properties are and what might be the best way to work with it.
The Astral is one of those constructs, albeit had its beginning long before the physical universe...as far as the patterns go - although I do think that beliefs systems developed through Consciousness involving Itself within the Physical Universe do have an influence on the Astral environment - not all of it - but a part of it...like I have already suggested and agreed to others suggesting that some of the constructs within the Astral are a creation of the human imagination which derive through physical experience and were not in existence within the Astral until Consciousness began to interact with the physical universe and belief systems were developed as a result.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 24, 2013, 14:03:18
Do you consider that knowledge further than that which we are currently equipped to understand is actually useful within this/your particular life as you live now?
If we are not equipped to understand then it wouldn't be 'knowledge' - it would be experience which we don't understand and then in some cases in order to try and make sense of it, we make up something to help that process, which is natural but it is a good thing to make sure we don't fall into the trap of belief in relation to what we make up...we remain ever open minded and ready to drop the made up when new knowledge presents itself which contradicts any of the made up stuff.
I think we are equipped as Consciousness to understand the knowledge. It is not so much about the experience - the experience is not the knowledge although yes, the two can be confused... Understanding Consciousness therefore is integral to refining knowledge -
In the case of knowing that there is a realm of no beginning, yes - this knowledge is likely very important to the individual who accepts it. Accepting it is 'being equipped' - it is not that hard to understand really. We simply are able - we are equipped to integrate the 'no beginning' aspect because that is who we are...if we are not 'equipped' then something to examine as to why we are not, would be the belief systems we have developed about ourselves and who we are - and where those beliefs came from - are the most likely source of why we might consider why this particular knowledge is a struggle to adapt to and integrate with.
Actually... I wouldn't have reacted like that if I thought you were being totally serious. I completely misread the way you said it. I explained my thought process of reading it and it was a mistake. I think I may have been in a silly mood that night. I apologise. I was being not sarcastic... but more... extracting the subjective comedy behind how I interpreted it. If I would I could erase that post and say... "explain?". :)
Please read these... and realise one of the ways I use the nonphysical...
http://bedeekinoobe.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/the-lightsaber-experiment.html
http://bedeekinoobe.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/the-arcimboldo-sculpture.html
I wrote them recently.. based on old news... but they might give you an example of one aspect of my USE of the nonphysical.
I don't actually hold a dearly held had-fast philosophy of the nonphysical because of the vastness of the thing, and because I have realised how my own evolution has changed along the way. I don't think I have nailed it down and doubt I ever would. But I'm in no hurry to.
You are a different consciousness explorer to me. That much is obvious but I agree with everything you say if truth be known. The core anyway.
this..
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 24, 2013, 14:44:38
The Astral is one of those constructs, albeit had its beginning long before the physical universe...as far as the patterns go - although I do think that beliefs systems developed through Consciousness involving Itself within the Physical Universe do have an influence on the Astral environment - not all of it - but a part of it...like I have already suggested and agreed to others suggesting that some of the constructs within the Astral are a creation of the human imagination which derive through physical experience and were not in existence within the Astral until Consciousness began to interact with the physical universe and belief systems were developed as a result.
Is absolutely my own thoughts, albeit put in your way. Obviously these aren't my thoughts... but I have observed as much.
Well those two stories were interesting Ben.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 24, 2013, 15:11:17
Actually... I wouldn't have reacted like that if I thought you were being totally serious.
So now you understand I am serious.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 24, 2013, 15:11:17
You are a different consciousness explorer to me.
I am not exploring Consciousness - I am Consciousness exploring constructs.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 25, 2013, 02:52:57
So now you understand I am serious.
Yes, so much so that is is concerning.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 25, 2013, 04:47:59
Yes, so much so that is is concerning.
Certainly it appears the nature of individual experience is reflective of the individuals beliefs - it seems most travelers think that this is what is happening.
It may also be that when one is attached to their living body what they experience is fundamentally different than what will be experienced when their body dies and they no longer have the option of 'returning' to it.
There may also be a distinct difference between a trained ego experience and an untrained ego experience.
From my observations it seems very clear that personal identification determines the nature of ones experiences even more than may be realized.
There is no thing to be concerned about in knowing and thus identifying with 'that which has no beginning'. :wink:
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 25, 2013, 11:23:11
Certainly it appears the nature of individual experience is reflective of the individuals beliefs - it seems most travelers think that this is what is happening.
It may also be that when one is attached to their living body what they experience is fundamentally different than what will be experienced when their body dies and they no longer have the option of 'returning' to it.
There may also be a distinct difference between a trained ego experience and an untrained ego experience.
From my observations it seems very clear that personal identification determines the nature of ones experiences even more than may be realized.
There is no thing to be concerned about in knowing and thus identifying with 'that which has no beginning'. :wink:
I imagine that once the realization that returning to our physical form is no longer possible,we will be freed to see more, for the lack of a better term.
My concern for you is that you may be missing the forest for the leaf, much less the leaves or the tree.
I certainly do not deem you crazy or off your rocker, well....no more than the rest of us anyhow. :-D
its_all_bad...
There is no tree
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 25, 2013, 11:31:24
I imagine that once the realization that returning to our physical form is no longer possible,we will be freed to see more, for the lack of a better term.
My concern for you is that you may be missing the forest for the leaf, much less the leaves or the tree.
I certainly do not deem you crazy or off your rocker, well....no more than the rest of us anyhow. :-D
Yes you might imagine that is the way it will be, but such imaginations might derive from the untrained ego persona, and may not apply when the death of the body changes the dynamic.
Indeed it appears to me from my data gathering that it may be that the travelers are focused upon the 'tree' of their experience – as vast to them as that tree does appear – and the forest is some place they (as untrained egos) do not want to venture – due perhaps to the threat such realization may have on that egos power and position as driver and decision maker.
'That which has a beginning is very attractive to the ego for obvious reasons – number one that it gave existence to said ego.
Let me assure you I am not bashing the ego or its importance – rather I am acknowledging its place in the scheme of things. It is not the engine and while it can and often does assume the role of 'driver' – and it is good for it to take the wheel now and again – it needs the maturity and sensibility of knowing when to be the passenger.
From what I can gather, the individual is made up of at least three distinct parts or aspects – all connected with Consciousness.
One is the Ego, which is a mixture of many other Egos who have influenced the individual through the first stages of their 'life package'and almost always gives the Ego its primary identity, and which almost always is an incorrect identity.
Another is that which is often termed the 'Higher Self' – this aspect exists in both PMR and NPMR and compared to the Ego is far closer to the 'real you' to which the Ego most often usurps, most often without knowing it is the usurper...indeed 'crazy off your rocker' is one thing the Ego would like to avoid being labelled by other Egos as being...so venturing into that area of the 'tree' (let alone the 'forest') is an unlikely event while the Ego remains the driver.
Finally, the third aspect is the least known. This aspect is like unto the whole forest, as the 'higher self' aspect is like unto the tree, as the ego aspect is like unto the leaf.
In one sense the pattern continues – the body dies and the Ego is released and is then subject to the Higher Self...but the third or overall aspect itself allows this dynamic between higher self and ego self to play out as it will, and some think that the pattern is to send the Ego Self back – usually devoid of all memory of a past existence – to become a brand new Ego which might eventually 'get it' in relation to the Higher Self.
This looping process effectively can go on and on – what it might signify is that the Higher Self aspect is looking for something and is focused upon discovering it and the Ego – the trained Ego is vital to that process – however the Higher self may not see it that way – it is not 'looking' for anything, it is just having 'fun' with what it is able to do...and it does not actually realize it is looking for something until it develops the correct type of Ego which then allows it to see what it wasn't even looking for.
In this sense it is repeating a pattern...the 'Higher Self' is really another kind of Ego – operating within a vastly different and relatively freer environment that the 'lower Ego' aspect of itself.
In the same way as the untrained Ego Self operates, the Higher Self is also unaware of an even vaster aspect of itself – It wants to be the driver, make the decisions, call the shots etc...and can and does effectively do this with The Ego – so in effect can be deemed 'the untrained Higher Self' in regard to that third aspect which remains in the mystery zone.
The Higher Self also had a beginning, and reacts within the parameters of that simulated reality - as vast as that reality may be – the vaster the simulation, the more distractions – but as I suggested, even that vastness amounts to no more than a single tree...in relation to a forest...
In a similar way to the Ego Self, the Higher Self also usurps the Self which had no beginning in order to keep what it has and control its own interests. It is simply most likely unaware of any 'higher self' and is too focused on its own reality as a tree, to take a look at the forest. Being a tree is sufficient for its purposes.
This is metaphor of course.
What seems to bring about the changes is that the leaf looks beyond the tree it is attached to, and sees a forest. Once this occurs the leaf realizes the significance of that reality and is less influenced by the tree and the tree hears the leaf and also learns to acknowledge the forest and congruence / alignment occurs which causes significant and irrevocable changes for the Ego Self and the Higher Self in relation to the Self which had no beginning.
So is the Ego Self the hero in the story...? Not really...it might have been the intention of the Higher Self all along to reach this state of being...but it was dependent upon the Ego Self to do its part – to listen – to transform – to 'grow up' etc...There are no 'hero's' in the story...or all aspects working together in alignment = 'The Hero' but whatever...
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 25, 2013, 11:44:35
its_all_bad...
There is no tree
Ben - there is no light saber.
:wink:
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 25, 2013, 11:44:35
its_all_bad...
There is no tree
I was speaking metaphysicorically. Type that three times fast.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 25, 2013, 15:51:34
Ben - there is no light saber.
:wink:
I know!!!!!
i hope you are realising that I didn't think there was.
There was also no giant sculpture.. on both accounts.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 25, 2013, 17:53:52
I was speaking metaphysicorically. Type that three times fast.
It's hard to say it once... never mind type it! :)
I know you were metaphysically speaking. Just seemed a perfect time for a Matrix quote.
This thread although going out of its way of being the most ubiquitous in terms of communication, is the most lacking in communication I have ever experienced. :lol:
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 25, 2013, 18:44:40
It's hard to say it once... never mind type it! :)
I know you were metaphysically speaking. Just seemed a perfect time for a Matrix quote.
This thread although going out of its way of being the most ubiquitous in terms of communication, is the most lacking in communication I have ever experienced. :lol:
Oh, I get it now. It seems we both missed the other one's joke, I was speaking metaphorically about metaphysics. This really proves your statement I believe.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 25, 2013, 18:38:27
I know!!!!!
i hope you are realising that I didn't think there was.
There was also no giant sculpture.. on both accounts.
I agree - the communication could do with improvement.
This for example - from your link about the 'lightsaber experiment'
QuoteConclusion.
I have held and operated a real Lightsaber. Period
http://bedeekinoobe.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/the-lightsaber-experiment.html
You can see how this type of communication might confuse anyone right Ben? I wasn't realising that you didn't think anything other than you actually believed you held and operated a real lightsaber...I am guessing most people who would read your blurb would think the same.
And:
QuoteThere was also no giant sculpture.. on both accounts.
http://bedeekinoobe.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/the-arcimboldo-sculpture.html
From your "The 'Arcimboldo Sculpture' Experience" blurb...why there are even pictures! So okay you are a great story-teller at least, so what are you saying exactly?
:)
From your "The 'Arcimboldo Sculpture' Experience" blurb...why there are even pictures! So okay you are a great story-teller at least, so what are you saying exactly?
I'm not speaking for Beedeekin, but I can give you my interpretation of what I think he meant.
What is real? Are you real? If yes, then what are you? Are you a physical body or a consciousness or both, either or neither? Well, I'm going to argue that no part of you is real, not to me anyways. The only thing that I know without a shadow of a doubt exists, is my own consciousness.
For something to be real it must exist objectively. Meaning with or without our consciousness, it exists.
So if Beedeekin is real, then the same applies for him. If his consciousness never existed, that sculpture would not be here for me to see. But still, what I see is not my consciousness and only my consciousness is real. The sculpture is not real
You can see how this type of communication might confuse anyone right Ben? I wasn't realising that you didn't think anything other than you actually believed you held and operated a real lightsaber...I am guessing most people who would read your blurb would think the same.
You're right about most people in general but not most people on this forum. You see Will, as much as we have all communicated with each other on this thread, it never gets to deviate from the your main focus. Mostly because you won't let it. That's cool, I understand the thread rules and all. But I understand a little bit about people too.
People like to discuss things...sometimes serious stuff and other times not. Many of us are fascinated by the same things but the problem is that we are not all completely serious about the same things. So topics on a thread can tend to wander and eventually evolve into a new beast. That's alright if your fascinated with the topic but it sux if your real serious about it.
I guess there's nothing wrong with that but what happens is that you miss out on getting to understand a person and what they are like and how they joke. In other words you don't learn anything about thier personality...as much as this particular medium allows anyhow.
Long story short, I think I new the gist of what Beedeekin was saying.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 25, 2013, 21:38:48
From your "The 'Arcimboldo Sculpture' Experience" blurb...why there are even pictures! So okay you are a great story-teller at least, so what are you saying exactly?
I'm not speaking for Beedeekin, but I can give you my interpretation of what he meant.
What is real? Are you real? If yes, then what are you? Are you a physical body or a consciousness or both, either or neither? Well, I'm going to argue that no part of you is real, not to me anyways. The only thing that I know without a shadow of a doubt exists, is my own consciousness.
For something to be real it must exist objectively. Meaning with or without our consciousness, it exists.
So if Beedeekin is real, then the same applies for him. If his consciousness never existed, that sculpture would not be here for me to see. But still, what I see is not my consciousness and only my consciousness is real.
Pretty much what I have been saying here in this thread too IAB.
However, in that the only thing that is real is Consciousness, nothing really can exist without Consciousness acknowledging its existence - so it aint real unless that is the case...said another way it can be argued say, that this physical universe can still exist even if consciousness was not involved within it, but it actually needs consciousness to verify its existence otherwise it may as well not exist.
In relation to one another, we are real on account that we are Consciousness - and the constructs are real because we want them to be, so the 'tree' is real and the 'lightsaber' is real and my post to Ben was tongue in cheek when he said 'the tree is not real' because I saw the irony...it was a tree that he cut through in his lightsaber story and despite the sparks and ash and toppling of the tree, when he looked at it later, there it was all good again standing tall as if nothing had happened.
Perfect!
But yes - we are 'real' - I can agree to the idea that the only thing that is real is you and everything else is a construct you created (sophism) but only from the pov of 'no beginnings' No beginnings is where consciousness (as we understand it) derives...and that is the point of this thread.
So while Consciousness creates constructs to explore concepts with a hands on approach, and this obviously involves fragmentation, amnesia, and separation etc...we cannot deny each other being real, simply on account of that.
Sure we don;t have to see our self as being 'human' or 'higher self' in form or formless - indeed it serves us better that we dont - but that is very hard yes?
The process of fragmentation, incarnation amnesia etc...tends to MAKE us identify with our dominant reality (this PMR) and our particular gender, race, culture you-name-it - influences which are not in our control - at least not immediately but we can work on changing these to better suit what we actually are.
I put the pics on there because when I didn't some people told me on FB that it would be nice to see a picture of the sculpture. Sorry if it offended you.
Unfortunately I didn't have a picture of the lightsaber. If I had I would have put that up there also.
Sure we don;t have to see our self as being 'human' or 'higher self' in form or formless - indeed it serves us better that we dont - but that is very hard yes?
Yes, of course. I don't enjoy the thought of forced meds and a straight jacket.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 25, 2013, 22:09:41
I put the pics on there because when I didn't some people told me on FB that it would be nice to see a picture of the sculpture. Sorry if it offended you.
Unfortunately I didn't have a picture of the lightsaber. If I had I would have put that up there also.
What gave you the impression it offended me Ben?
Why are you hiding behind humor?
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 25, 2013, 21:07:55
You can see how this type of communication might confuse anyone right Ben?
No not at all. You are the only person it seemed to bother. In fact... this is a none statement. For it didn't confuse you... so why would t confuse anyone. It was a choice of wording.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 25, 2013, 21:07:55
I wasn't realising that you didn't think anything other than you actually believed you held and operated a real lightsaber...I am guessing most people who would read your blurb would think the same.
I really didn't want to bore people with the semantics and rhetoric you are being specific about. I'm sure that people didn't really think I had held a real lightsaber... but to say anything other than what I said, which was just a little statement, I would have to provide a reason and preamble about why I chose those words in the blog.
Why are you hiding at all?
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 25, 2013, 22:19:27
Sure we don;t have to see our self as being 'human' or 'higher self' in form or formless - indeed it serves us better that we dont - but that is very hard yes?
Yes, of course. I don't enjoy the thought of forced meds and a straight jacket.
Nonetheless, at least there are 'places' such as this board in which such 'crazy stuff' can be shared and worked out right? Now - in relation to my reply post, do you agree we are all real - because we are all - at our core, Consciousness?
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 25, 2013, 22:23:28
Nonetheless, at least there are 'places' such as this board in which such 'crazy stuff' can be shared and worked out right? Now - in relation to my reply post, do you agree we are all real - because we are all - at our core, Consciousness?
Yes. I believe you are all Con's and therefor real. But objectively speaking, I still exist with out anyone else...that's all I meant.
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 25, 2013, 22:22:48
Why are you hiding at all?
I am not hiding Ben, and nor for that matter is Consciousness in Its entirety, as something without beginning.
However I would have to say that from experience IT is being
hidden in a number of ways by something which seems frightened of IT being revealed...nonetheless, as fragmented aspects of that One Consciousness we each will eventually see IT as it truly is, even given that the process may require loads more 're' incarnations to finally come to that point.
Thinking for example, that one is the only thing that is actually real, and everyone else is a construct of ones own consciousness, and that one is the only real consciousness, well THAT is one way to hide IT, or keep IT hidden from oneself.
:)
I don't hide behind humour William.
I wear it... but I don't hide behind it. I don't use it as armour either. I wear it because I am familiar with it and it is part of my life and attitude towards it. I wear it as my skin... not to keep warm and fussy.. but as a real functional aspect of my identity.
If it was a mask or something I hide behind then it is my physical counterpart that does this as something that has become me.
My sense of humour is my ego... and it is massive. I have a massive ego. :)
I'm just boasting now.
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 25, 2013, 22:26:56
Yes. I believe you are all Con's and therefor real. But objectively speaking, I still exist with out anyone else...that's all I meant.
Can you elaborate this concept for me IAB...I can understand it from the pov of The One consciousness which evolved from The Void as it became self aware and then began the process of creating 'others' using of course its own consciousness to make those 'others' real by imbuing said Consciousness into those 'others'...
In those initial stages, yes it could quiet honestly say 'I exist with out anyone else', for that was the state of its existence - there was no evidence of 'anyone else' existing apart from itself.
However, 'we' are...well lets say as a metaphor, its 'offspring' and not even the first in line, which would go to our 'higher self'...so in our form 'we' are offspring of offspring, but all related and all essentially The One Consciousness which had a beginning through The Void.
Without the understanding of our real...'source' as being 'that which has no beginning' which created The Void and essentially entered it in order to experience the construct(s) - we are ...lets say...'little ego' (our in human form experience) and 'big ego' our higher self and 'super ego' - 'the One Consciousness which had a beginning' and are stuck with our myriad constructs and the myriad diversions, distractions, entertainments etc which those constructs provide...altogether from the 'top' to the 'bottom'.
Acknowledging our obvious beginning as The One Consciousness by understanding the nature and purpose of The Void we can - even individually - connect with that which created The Void, which is essentially who we are over and above The One Consciousness which had its beginnings through The Void.
All in all though, it really is a rather gross mistake to conclude that as consciousness 'I am' the only thing which really exists as 'real' and everyONE else is 'my' construct...
The truthful way to view this is that you, me , everyone is equally real, no argument, and if there is any voice of protest against this concept, it is likely sourced at the Ego.
We simply cannot objectively say "I exist without anyone else" without this being merely an expression of Ego. It would not matter if the expression was coming from Little, Big or Super Ego, or all three combined...it must still be a dishonest expression yes?
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 25, 2013, 22:57:41
I don't hide behind humour William.
I wear it... but I don't hide behind it. I don't use it as armour either. I wear it because I am familiar with it and it is part of my life and attitude towards it. I wear it as my skin... not to keep warm and fussy.. but as a real functional aspect of my identity.
If it was a mask or something I hide behind then it is my physical counterpart that does this as something that has become me.
My sense of humour is my ego... and it is massive. I have a massive ego. :)
I'm just boasting now.
Yes.
My god.. I had to fabricate a whole post that pandered to your opinion of me to get you to agree with me.
That says a great deal about you... another nut cracked.
All in all though, it really is a rather gross mistake to conclude that as consciousness 'I am' the only thing which really exists as 'real' and everyONE else is 'my' construct...
The truthful way to view this is that you, me , everyone is equally real, no argument, and if there is any voice of protest against this concept, it is likely sourced at the Ego.
We simply cannot objectively say "I exist without anyone else" without this being merely an expression of Ego. It would not matter if the expression was coming from Little, Big or Super Ego, or all three combined...it must still be a dishonest expression yes?
I'm not saying I exist without anyone else. I'm saying I exist despite of anyone else I know with my current physical brain and knowledge of.
So no dishonesty implied or intended.
Besides, I only made the statement in context of a theory that is not necessarily my own but I do actually believe that you can't prove to me that I can't exist without you. But if you do actually have a way to prove this to me then I would be believing in the wrong thing and I assure you, it wouldn't be the first time.
Wi11iam, I think you could learn a lot from this guy.
Check out this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LLq96yzONo
He has many videos where he tried to explain what is this reality.
Maybe he would answer some of your questions as well! :-)
Quote from: Bedeekin on February 25, 2013, 23:26:28
My god.. I had to fabricate a whole post that pandered to your opinion of me to get you to agree with me.
That says a great deal about you... another nut cracked.
No
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 26, 2013, 01:04:42
All in all though, it really is a rather gross mistake to conclude that as consciousness 'I am' the only thing which really exists as 'real' and everyONE else is 'my' construct...
The truthful way to view this is that you, me , everyone is equally real, no argument, and if there is any voice of protest against this concept, it is likely sourced at the Ego.
We simply cannot objectively say "I exist without anyone else" without this being merely an expression of Ego. It would not matter if the expression was coming from Little, Big or Super Ego, or all three combined...it must still be a dishonest expression yes?
I'm not saying I exist without anyone else. I'm saying I exist despite of anyone else I know with my current physical brain and knowledge of.
So no dishonesty implied or intended.
Besides, I only made the statement in context of a theory that is not necessarily my own but I do actually believe that you can't prove to me that I can't exist without you. But if you do actually have a way to prove this to me then I would be believing in the wrong thing and I assure you, it wouldn't be the first time.
What has this got to do with what I have been saying about Consciousness, beginnings, Higher Self.
Sophism, being distracted by Egocentric constructs a discussion does not make.
Woah... All I'm going to say is that I was so not in the right mindset to start asking myself this question. :wink:
Asking myself this just leads me into an endless spiral of questioning my reality, which in turn, makes me feel like I'm losing my mind.
When I start going into the whole "Is anything real?" or "Is this all but a dream" frenzy, I panic. And let's just say that I'm not good in a panic because I have this condition known as dysautonomia, where my autonomic nervous system is messed up. :-P I start producing adrenaline like crazy, will get short of breath, and my 'fight and flight' reflexes will start going haywire.
I do have such a hard time wrapping my mind around something having no beginning and no end. To me, the very fact that we ARE conscious, and alive, and on some tiny speck of a planet known as earth, floating around in some endless vacuum known as space... that kind of blows my mind in itself. I cannot fathom it, yet, at the same time, I wouldn't have it or imagine it any different. But like I said, I cannot fathom anything. My mind is blown by the fact that I'm even here, talking to you guys on this forum.
The "What am I?" questions have plagued me since childhood. I have a wild imagination and can imagine it being anything from: We are in the Matrix, or a computer simulation, or, we were programmed to live and do all of this. Or, we are merely inside of somebody's dream. But who is that somebody? Who is the maker? Is it us or is it God? Is it both? If it's pure energy, then where did the energy come from? Where did love come from? Where did beauty and perfection come from? It all looks like it has a maker; an artist. But who? Who?!
Wrapping my mind around these questions, though, just depresses me because I want to know EVERYTHING so badly! Call it a conceited gesture or not, I won't get offended. :-D I will never give up trying to solve the riddle. Life is the world's biggest and hardest riddle to crack.
Quote from: Lionheart on February 26, 2013, 04:22:10
Wi11iam, I think you could learn a lot from this guy.
Check out this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LLq96yzONo
He has many videos where he tried to explain what is this reality.
Maybe he would answer some of your questions as well! :-)
Okay Lionheart - there certainly are many 'explanations' as to 'what is this reality' (Am I right in assuming you mean this particular physical universe with the 'Milky way' and innumerable other Galaxies?)
Are you a believer of this personalities interpretations as to what this reality is?
Also, to be fair, I am not asking questions so much in this thread - I am trying to understand exactly what some of the posters angles are in their responses and I am questioning some of those...so are you saying that this personality you have linked me to will assist me in understanding the direction these (and maybe you) are coming from with their beliefs?
Quote from: Fairywindblues on February 26, 2013, 12:59:39
Woah... All I'm going to say is that I was so not in the right mindset to start asking myself this question. :wink:
Asking myself this just leads me into an endless spiral of questioning my reality, which in turn, makes me feel like I'm losing my mind.
When I start going into the whole "Is anything real?" or "Is this all but a dream" frenzy, I panic. And let's just say that I'm not good in a panic because I have this condition known as dysautonomia, where my autonomic nervous system is messed up. :-P I start producing adrenaline like crazy, will get short of breath, and my 'fight and flight' reflexes will start going haywire.
I do have such a hard time wrapping my mind around something having no beginning and no end. To me, the very fact that we ARE conscious, and alive, and on some tiny speck of a planet known as earth, floating around in some endless vacuum known as space... that kind of blows my mind in itself. I cannot fathom it, yet, at the same time, I wouldn't have it or imagine it any different. But like I said, I cannot fathom anything. My mind is blown by the fact that I'm even here, talking to you guys on this forum.
The "What am I?" questions have plagued me since childhood. I have a wild imagination and can imagine it being anything from: We are in the Matrix, or a computer simulation, or, we were programmed to live and do all of this. Or, we are merely inside of somebody's dream. But who is that somebody? Who is the maker? Is it us or is it God? Is it both? If it's pure energy, then where did the energy come from? Where did love come from? Where did beauty and perfection come from? It all looks like it has a maker; an artist. But who? Who?!
Wrapping my mind around these questions, though, just depresses me because I want to know EVERYTHING so badly! Call it a conceited gesture or not, I won't get offended. :-D I will never give up trying to solve the riddle. Life is the world's biggest and hardest riddle to crack.
Hey FWB
I know what you are saying.
In realising that Consciousness does not have a beginning actually simplifies things a great deal.
We don't need to understand every aspect of this physical universe in order to just be in our particular place within the human form, here on the planet (which can also quite mind blowing) or get too carried away emotionally by it, or for that matter be indifferent or cold about it :)
What you are is a matter for you to decide but in the mean time you have to be someone right? So keep the mind open on that... kind of like;
"For now this is who/what I think I am, subject to changes tweaks and shedding of formative beliefs as more data of experience comes my way".Some data for you to consider if you can.
In relation to 'what created us, what is God, love etc...in regard to any particular experience you might find yourself in, be that this reality (physical universe) or alternate reality (Astral) if it has a beginning, then it is not 'God' and to be more particular...any personality which would claim to be your creator which itself has a beginning, is not.
Indeed, as consciousness we have always existed and we have created these reality constructs in order to experience the different things the constructs were created for the purpose of.
Of course that is not that easy to just accept. 'We' – after all – are within one such construct, which had a beginning and in the form we are in (human) also will have an end. It is no easy task to lay aside the things we have been subjected to right from the go get, as tiny babies devoid of any memory of prior existence and having to rely on what we are taught by those we learn to trust in.
So the first thing necessary to even really think outside of these taught beliefs about 'who we are' requires that lovely gift called 'imagination' which itself is subjected to all sorts of stuff – again, from those who teach, preach, direct, control, etc...
One could be forgiven for just shrugging and saying 'what the hey' and closing the mind off to anything which might threaten our immediate need to survive, be comfortable, acquire things we want, be 'normal' so we don't attract unwanted attention to ourselves which might have the people in white coats come along and slip us into a straitjacket and give us drugs which will help us stop asking such questions.
But really it doesn't have to go that way. Science is beginning to connect the dots as it searches for the illusive theory which will bring all things together...in the mean time we don't have to wait for that to happen.
It is natural for something which is experiencing or has experienced a beginning to thus assume all things must have had a beginning.
Tom Campbell's theory of everything also recognizes this problematic approach whereby the question loops... "if we were created, what created us, and what created what created us etc...into infinity." His answer is to stop going there and just accept his particular model of 'everything' because of the existence of 'The Void' which apparently is impenetrable, and not only existed before anything else, but created consciousness, yet is not conscious itself.
In this way we do not need to 'torture' ourselves and can focus on understanding, exploring, working with the 'reality' which has come from The Void.
However it is not in the nature of Consciousness in any form or non form through which it is able to ponder and question, to accept the conditions and limitations of whatever situation it is involved with, and there will always be aspects of IT which will – given any opportunity – work a way to get past the walls placed in front of IT...and The Void is one such wall.
The better angle to come from, which also stops that loop thingy happening...that "if we were created, what created us, and what created what created us" thing and understand that Consciousness itself had no beginning – that any construct which clearly shows a beginning (like the Big Bang or The Void) is by that fact a simulation and that wonderful tool we call the imagination can easily enough include the likelihood that there is a state of existence where Consciousness actually had no beginning...we don't even have to go there to see for ourselves.
But it does bring an end to that loop thingy...and it needn't 'blow ones mind' at all...or cause sensations of fight or flight, anxiety etc... We are IT. Period.
Of course, 'you' can be whatever you believe 'you' to be. ;)
What has this got to do with what I have been saying about Consciousness, beginnings, Higher Self.
Sophism, being distracted by Egocentric constructs a discussion does not make.
Please read the following in case you missed it the first time:
Will, as much as we have all communicated with each other on this thread, it never gets to deviate from the your main focus. Mostly because you won't let it. That's cool, I understand the thread rules and all. But I understand a little bit about people too.
People like to discuss things...sometimes serious stuff and other times not. Many of us are fascinated by the same things but the problem is that we are not all completely serious about the same things. So topics on a thread can tend to wander and eventually evolve into a new beast. That's alright if your just fascinated with the topic but it sux if your real serious about it.
I guess there's nothing wrong with that but what happens is that you miss out on getting to understand a person and what they are like and how they joke. These little things come out when a topic strays off course. In other words you don't learn anything about thier personality...as much as this particular medium allows anyhow.
You're an SS Obergruppenfuhrer of the topic brigade and won't allow it to wander more than half a sentence. Just saying is all, no biggie.
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 26, 2013, 14:58:35
so are you saying that this personality you have linked me to will assist me in understanding the direction these (and maybe you) are coming from with their beliefs?
No, I am saying that you should listen to his videos with an open mind and translate them yourself.
He is speaking on a topic that you are speaking of here. It's good to here the story from every angle, every viewpoint.
He does this for a living, we don't. I said you should attempt to contact him and ask him your questions. But, I'm sure his answers will only lead to further questions.
This statement from Fairywindblues was spot on!
"Asking myself this just leads me into an endless spiral of questioning my reality, which in turn, makes me feel like I'm losing my mind."
Quote from: its_all_bad on February 26, 2013, 15:59:24
What has this got to do with what I have been saying about Consciousness, beginnings, Higher Self.
Sophism, being distracted by Egocentric constructs a discussion does not make.
Please read the following in case you missed it the first time:
Will, as much as we have all communicated with each other on this thread, it never gets to deviate from the your main focus. Mostly because you won't let it. That's cool, I understand the thread rules and all. But I understand a little bit about people too.
People like to discuss things...sometimes serious stuff and other times not. Many of us are fascinated by the same things but the problem is that we are not all completely serious about the same things. So topics on a thread can tend to wander and eventually evolve into a new beast. That's alright if your just fascinated with the topic but it sux if your real serious about it.
I guess there's nothing wrong with that but what happens is that you miss out on getting to understand a person and what they are like and how they joke. These little things come out when a topic strays off course. In other words you don't learn anything about thier personality...as much as this particular medium allows anyhow.
You're an SS Obergruppenfuhrer of the topic brigade and won't allow it to wander more than half a sentence. Just saying is all, no biggie.
Seriously IAB the other aspect regarding your complaint is that such kinds of things can be used to derail or at least change tracks away from a particular topic focus because peps find it doesn't fit their beliefs or challenges their beliefs or any number of other reasons, and it is wise to watch for, I am sure you can agree.
Hey, if the topic makes one feel uncomfortable or one simply has no interest in what is being expressed, then one can find the halls of fun and frivolity and joke away etc...don't you think? One does not have to persist in disruptive frivolity, and if one does, then it is fair enough to call it out yes?
If I think a concept brought into the discussion is able to be expanded with the addition of topic focus - that at the source, Consciousness has always existed, then of course I am going to continue to bring this to the fore.
I am not being Nazi about it. But I am being disciplined, mature, organised and ever mindful of common pit falls which can go off onto unrelated tangents....and the methods which are sometimes used to control such method of distraction, whether they be subtle humor, shadowy 'taking the tinkle' or more forthright attempts at changing the subject.
When it comes to getting to understand any personality, I take these as they come at face value. I tend to keep an eye on the ones who prove to be contrary to their original - initial - expression because it is often the case that such behavior is evidence of....shiftiness...a shift in expression bouncing hither tither and not wishing to be pinned down to any particular...personality. They tend to say one thing and do another, or in the case of cyber personalities, they say one thing and then say another thing which almost or does contradict the first, and when questioned about it turn around and say they were only joking...lordy! I mean really - do they want to be known, stable, reliable trustworthy, dependable...so the personality presented through such type expression is unclear - it is not one which is able to be transparent - a bit like the boy who cried 'wolf' or Pinnocio...ya know...or a mix of those two personalities.
So hey - I have shown clearly already in this thread that I am quiet able and willing to 'deviate' to a degree, such as in this instance, yapping about personality etc...but I always have in mind, be that a thread I have created or one which another has created, to get back to the subject and overall content of the thread out of respect for individuals and for the subject at hand.
Are we all good now?
Quote from: Lionheart on February 26, 2013, 18:53:07
No, I am saying that you should listen to his videos with an open mind and translate them yourself.
He is speaking on a topic that you are speaking of here. It's good to here the story from every angle, every viewpoint.
He does this for a living, we don't. I said you should attempt to contact him and ask him your questions. But, I'm sure his answers will only lead to further questions.
Okay - well I have listened to that vid and it has some aspects in it to which I am familiar with. i wouldn't say it is what I am saying though (in relation to that which has no beginning) :)
I wrote down what was said and had some Qs for you on it, but since it is not something you believe, maybe those Qs shouldn;t be directed to you.
Quote from: Lionheart on February 26, 2013, 18:53:07
This statement from Fairywindblues was spot on!
"Asking myself this just leads me into an endless spiral of questioning my reality, which in turn, makes me feel like I'm losing my mind."
My answer to Fairywindblues (and to any who feel that way) is worth reading.
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/welcome_to_astral_chat/in_the_beginning-t39778.0.html;msg326334#msg326334
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 26, 2013, 19:08:56
Are we all good now?
Almost.
You asked this:
QuoteWhat has this got to do with what I have been saying about Consciousness, beginnings, Higher Self. Sophism, being distracted by Egocentric constructs a discussion does not make.
When I wrote:
Quote
I'm not saying I exist without anyone else. I'm saying I exist despite of anyone else I know with my current physical brain and knowledge of.
So no dishonesty implied or intended.
Besides, I only made the statement in context of a theory that is not necessarily my own but I do actually believe that you can't prove to me that I can't exist without you. But if you do actually have a way to prove this to me then I would be believing in the wrong thing and I assure you, it wouldn't be the first time.
Which was a response to this question of your's:
QuoteCan you elaborate this concept for me IAB...
I thought you wanted me to elaborate per your request so I did.
O.k. We're good now and always were.
Yes I saw that IAB but I still couldn't connect the dots...why/how (?) this subject came up.
I don't know why it was necessary for you to make this point. Perhaps I missed it...
I remember when I read what you wrote - my thoughts went something like 'is this person pulling my chain or what?' I mean it is obvious is it not?
You said:
Quote"but I do actually believe that you can't prove to me that I can't exist without you."
I thought to myself:
"I would have to exist in order for me to prove anything to you. You would have to exist in order for me to prove anything to you. What has belief got to do with it? It is simply matter of fact."
So it seemed moot and beside the point...
It does give me pause to chuckle though. :)
Quote from: Lionheart on February 26, 2013, 04:22:10
Wi11iam, I think you could learn a lot from this guy.
Check out this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LLq96yzONo
He has many videos where he tried to explain what is this reality.
Maybe he would answer some of your questions as well! :-)
Quote"Physical" reality as you call it – as we have said many times – is a reflection of your state of being your state of Consciousness – there really is nothing out side of you - you're not really IN Physical Reality - Physical Reality is within you.
It's within your consciousness. It is a concept that you are experiencing of yourself from a certain perspective however we understand that the way in which you have chosen to experience your particular dimension of physical experience is as though you are within a realm of space and time as you call it but what is that exactly?
What is space what is time? Again – while they are illusionary you still create the effect of them the experience of them in your life experience as a physical being a physicalised being so to speak where you have taken your energy – the energy the high frequency energy of your spirit nature – your non physical nature and in this sense have lowered that frequency – crystallised that frequency down into what you call the experience – the matrix of - the structure of physical reality
.
Now again this is going on within your consciousness you're not actually in any place really called physical reality – its all within – Nevertheless we understand that the way you chose to experience this makes it appear to be outside of you – so the thing to remember in order to give yourself more opportunity to chose and experience the kind of physical reality you prefer – the kind of physical reality that you say is more in alignment with your true vibration is to begin to see and experience physical reality as a reflection similar to the idea of the reflection that exists in your glass mirror – you know that when you look at your reflection in a glass mirror you know that you're not really 'over there' – and you know that if you want to change the reflection in the glass mirror you don't go to the reflection and attempt to make it change you must change your self in order to see the change in the reflection so physical reality being a reflection being a hall of mirrors operates in much the same kind of modality – any change in which you see in the so called reflection - the outer reality must begin within must begin within the inner reality which is you within your consciousness – within your vibration within your state of being .
I think the 'we' in this video is something channeled - it appears that way. I can't see exactly what the 'we' is referring to in relation to the 'you'.
Who believes this actually? Do you believe this Lionheart?
Its seems to separate the consciousness from the 'you'...
It appears to explain that this physical reality is a small piece of the whole. Our conciousness here is not the whole or everythng. It is solidified form we take in its experience and with this we are disconnected from the whole and see ourselves as a concious singularity.
It doesn't explain the whole, it says it exists and all are part of it.
Quote from: Szaxx on February 28, 2013, 17:55:09
It appears to explain that this physical reality is a small piece of the whole. Our conciousness here is not the whole or everythng. It is solidified form we take in its experience and with this we are disconnected from the whole and see ourselves as a concious singularity.
It doesn't explain the whole, it says it exists and all are part of it.
Yes I can see that Szaxx - and it appears to me most APers tend to understand it like that too. I would say that the angle I am coming from - the approach I am taking here - is self identity and that there is no purpose in using expressions such as 'my consciousness/soul/spirit etc' because this is what I (you/us) are.
:)
When we are involved with different states/universes/simulations etc we tend to identify with the aspects of the simulation, and in the case of APing, we take those identities there too - although on occasion is is not always the case.
Essentially if we can learn to identify with Consciousness as being What We Are - some of the separation elements can more easily drop away...we can begin to communicate with 'each other' as aspects of our self - no more or less real but equal.
I think that this shift in identity may be the key to sharing the experience less subjectively and more objectively too.
Thanks Wi11iam. Everything you said made sense in the sense that it made no sense at all... if that makes sense? :wink:
Because nothing about consciousness makes sense and that's just the way it is.
I feel like I need to go do more research on this void/big bang thing. Even though everyone claims it's much needed to branch away from the concepts of things having a beginning/end, it's so hard not to wonder what everything was like in the 'beginning' if there ever were such a thing.
Whatever sprang the events into motion that led up to us being... 'us' -- well, I wish I just could have been around to see all that. Oh wait, maybe I was there. Maybe we all were. :-P
The maybes really get to me, though. Like I said, consciousness is such a topic that can lead one to question their sanity. The ifs, and hows, and whats of this 'beginning' everyone speaks of, are not fully capable of being grasped by the human brain.
What I can say is that I do believe that the astral is our true home. The astral is not dense or full of materialized matter because I believe the substance (isn't it called astral substance or ether substance?) resonates on a higher frequency. I believe that in order for something to materialize and become set in stone on the material planes, it has to have been revised and carefully planned out on the astral. All of us ending up in the same reality probably means that we all concentrated on crystallizing this reality back when it was still a rough draft project.
My personal theory is that in the beginning, the astral existed first, or the substance that created the astral existed first. Once it was utilized, it sprang into an infinite number of planes. Somewhere in the midst of everything, consciousness came to be/or already was.
However, I cannot see what came before the astral. I don't have the power to. My human mind isn't capable of grasping it at this point. :-P
I can say from experience that being one with all is .. It has to be experienced.
In the highest order of clairvoyant dreams you become one with everything. Its a physical environment and you are everything all at the same time. You are the blades of grass, the metals, the operating machinery, the people, their thoughts and the worst part all their emotions too. No words exist to put justice in order. You are there and until the vision plays out you're in it for the ride. Its a universal conciousness. It also takes masses of your energy and you're not the same for some days.
I've looked the world over for answers and found nothing. Not one report of this level of clarity. It was switched off a long time ago and really never left. I may attempt a switch on but hesitant until I can remember why it was switched off.
The ' has the firework failed to light' question is attached here. Then if it has after risking being severely burned, do we attempt a re-light.
Enigmatics for psychological damage...
Hey Szaxx 'n Fairywindblues beautiful posts - unfortunately I have to go play a weekend gig real soon so am unable to reply in a way both posts deserve - will do so when I return but thought I would just acknowledge your contributions before I get me gone :)
xx
Catcha ina few daze...
Quote from: Wi11iam on February 27, 2013, 02:24:53
Yes I saw that IAB but I still couldn't connect the dots...why/how (?) this subject came up.
I don't know why it was necessary for you to make this point. Perhaps I missed it...
I remember when I read what you wrote - my thoughts went something like 'is this person pulling my chain or what?' I mean it is obvious is it not?
You said:
I thought to myself:
"I would have to exist in order for me to prove anything to you. You would have to exist in order for me to prove anything to you. What has belief got to do with it? It is simply matter of fact."
So it seemed moot and beside the point...
It does give me pause to chuckle though. :)
It was in a hypothetical situation, will. Scientists do it all the time but I'm not gonna waste anytime trying to give you an example because you will just attack the hypothetical example rather than try to see the point at all. I can clearly see now that we are not here debating a theory at all. We are just here to be taught your theory or more appropriately, your theorem.
A Discussion of what are thread is within a thread. What a Thread! by even the thread's standards.
In fact, At this point I think even the thread, itself, has identity concerns.
Everything which has a beginning is by that very fact - a simulation.
Let's put the theory to the test. So, Let's 'simulate' an end.
And attempt to 'simulate' a new beginning to see how the theory holds.
Here's what I think I gathered from the dissenters.
You can simulate anything except a beginning.
See you in the next 'thread'.
Cheers,
Contenteo