In The Beginning...

[Bedeekin]

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.

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?

[Wi11iam]

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).

[Bedeekin]

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.

[Astralzombie]

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.

[Wi11iam]

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. 

[Bedeekin]

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'

[Astralzombie]

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.

[Wi11iam]

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.

[Wi11iam]

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.

[Astralzombie]

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.

[Wi11iam]

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...

[Bedeekin]

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.

[Wi11iam]

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.

[Wi11iam]

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?

[Astralzombie]

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.

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?

[Bedeekin]

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'.  

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.

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!

[Astralzombie]

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.

[Bedeekin]

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?

[Wi11iam]

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'?

[Astralzombie]

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.

[Steel Hawk]

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*.

[Wi11iam]

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.

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.

[Astralzombie]

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.

[Steel Hawk]

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.

[Wi11iam]

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.