What is actually happening right NOW?

a reply to: Andy1144

Yes! I totally agree, everything exists in the now, hence from the "now" we percieve the past and the future.

Being in the "Now", and knowing that everything you can imagine in your mind exists, and therefore is percieved or experienced from the "Now".

Peace

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So how does it not having a boundary negate it being mostly empty space? I still don't understand your question fully.

I'll try to answer your question anyways. The basket is no more "full" with apples in it than when there are no apples in it. Everything is the same amount of empty space. Those apples have just as much empty space in them as the air that took their place when dumped out. Everything including the apples, air, and basket are 99.99999% empty space according to science on a quantum level.

Even though the apples, basket, and air are virtually empty space, they have substance and mass to us as observers, the appear to be full.

Your not arguing against science are you?

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Please see my earlier reply.
I called you out on how you would explain that.

a reply to: SachaX

Yes, it's all a matter of perspective. I never claimed it wasn't. At a quantum perspective the world is virtually empty, at a normal perspective it is not. I don't see how that disproves what I say.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

It doesn't disprove anything.
I was just saying it because it appeared to needed to be said.
It's all a matter of perception, and how reality is defined on perception.

And "most" don't actually think what they think they think...

originally posted by: JimNasium
And "most" don't actually think what they think they think...

That's quite an ambigious statement. Why not just to explain your views and start up a conversation and learn from the discussion.

Peace

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Andy1144

It does contradict. The intellectual explanation of it does. The experience of it is true however , because it is not a belief, but rather a direct experience of things. The self being an illusion is pretty obvious in science now. The experience of the computer is happening inside your experience, not separate from you. There is no subject perceiving an object, there is only experience of something.

The "self" science is speaking about as an illusion is the idea that a little observer in the head is observing experience, which is the exact same illusion you are trying to sell now.

So what 'self' is not an illusion?

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

What he's trying to say is that what is happening right now, not in the past or in the future (they do not exist) but right NOW, your awareness, is all there is and nothing resides outside of it.

The past is not provable nor is the future.... Hence Last Thursdayism....

originally posted by: SachaX
a reply to: Andy1144

Gotta disagree with some things here.
I am experiencing and thinking about how little the post makes sense, in the present, right now as I am typing. But my experience is different than yours because I have a very pretty girl smiling at me from across the room at this moment and this moment is different from yours. I see and experience this screen, the hot woman smiling, and my mind is processing the information in the now in my individual perception of the world.

As far as experiencing now.... We are always in the present, but as humans we have brains that remember the past and we can think about the future, and plan ahead to do things. Our brain is always working when we are awake.
But a little more into this subject... ever heard the term "living in the past"?
Post-traumatic stress disorder is quite about living in the past -- the remembrance of such an ordeal makes the person's perception of the world to actually be in the past. Also the smile you get when you remember your grandmother telling a funny joke many years ago, you are experiencing the past in the present by means of your brain's ability to remember.

Oh, and thoughts can be used to describe the here and now - that hot chick still smiling has me wanting to ask for her phone number so I can see what my future will be like with her (if any). She's hot [that's a thought and my brain is telling me that being close to her would be a nice feeling

]

Your examples are all thoughts about experience, not actual direct experience. The thought "women" implies a separate person over "there". This only exists in thought however. In direct experience you can only experience this moment without labels. And everything appears as oneness/one experience/no separation. When you talk to a person, there is no separate person doing the talking from the other person over "there". These events are all happening in this moment without any separate entities whatsoever. The problem is that thoughts divide experience into thoughts, which are then believed to be real. It's not however. You can verify separation is an illusion for yourself in direct experience. It's available for anyone to see.

a reply to: Andy1144

That was a direct experience I had that you did not have at that time and place.
The woman WAS "over there" and it was proven when I got up, walked across the room, and talked to her.
Of course there was separation, after all, I had to do these things to get her number - if there was no separation I wouldn't have had to ask for her number because it would have magically been known due to your theory, and you would have had her number too, and so would everyone else.

So why don't you quickly tell me the colour of our shirts while reading this sentence. After all, if there is no separate entities then you are at one with me and inherently know. Press that enter key and wait for the 1's and 0's to travel through the connections so that I can see your response "over here".

a reply to: InnerPeace2012

My deepest apologies. I got cut off or timed out. There was a big long soliloquy dealing with 'Solipsism'.

www.iep.utm.edu...

I'll try and stay out of any threads where You 'may' contribute so our lines don't cross again.

This is non-dual awareness.
en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Andy1144

In direct experience you can only experience this moment without labels. And everything appears as oneness/one experience/no separation. When you talk to a person, there is no separate person doing the talking from the other person over "there".

Taking a label and applying it to everything is no different, and even worse than distinguishing between objects. You're never experiencing something called a "moment" or "now". This label is a conceptual net you've tossed over the things you see, and everything within it you haphazardly call "direct experience" as if it was all one thing. That's as far as your truth will ever go.

originally posted by: ProleUK


Looking into the future is how we survive and take lessons learned from the past in order to prevent reoccurring mistakes.

Looking in the mind at thoughts and ideas about 'the future' is not looking into the future!! The thoughts and ideas about some other time is what makes it seem as though there is a you that needs to survive. Do you need to survive right now? The mind imagines that there is danger somewhere else, some when else and then it prepares for the danger - where is the danger right now? The mind has images about 'before' and then projects those images (imagines them) as happening in the 'future' - so the mind carries the past and tries to prevent it happening again - but nothing really happens again - this ever present happening is always appearing different - never the same. Deja vu happens very rarely and that is when there does seem to be sameness.

How well is the human race doing at securing the future of the human race? Or the planet?
The reason the human race is doing so badly is because there is incoherence. It is the thought system - it has corrupted everything.
This is an amazing breakdown, by scientist David Bohm, of how thinking about curing the future does not work.

"I would say that in my scientific and philosophical work, my main concern has been with understanding the nature of reality in general and of consciousness in particular as a coherent whole, which is never static or complete but which is an unending process of movement and unfoldment...."
(David Bohm: Wholeness and the Implicate Order)

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Andy1144

In direct experience you can only experience this moment without labels. And everything appears as oneness/one experience/no separation. When you talk to a person, there is no separate person doing the talking from the other person over "there".

Taking a label and applying it to everything is no different, and even worse than distinguishing between objects. You're never experiencing something called a "moment" or "now". This label is a conceptual net you've tossed over the things you see, and everything within it you haphazardly call "direct experience" as if it was all one thing. That's as far as your truth will ever go.

Labels like "this moment/direct experience/now" are all labels. You are correct. The pointers aren't meant to be believed, but you have to see where they point to. DE means experiencing this moment without judgement, mindfully. It's a paradox because we sometimes need labels in order to see without them.

originally posted by: Andy1144
a reply to: SachaX


By DE I mean nonjudgmental experience. All your examples are judgments about experience.

edit on 16-9-2015 by Andy1144 because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-9-2015 by Andy1144 because: (no reason given)

a reply to: Andy1144

YOUR thoughts aren't true.

We need to look at reality as it is, not how we think it is.

WE don't need anything. YOU need to see a shrink.

We've been living in thought and mistaking it for reality for too long.

I would agree that YOUR thoughts, if mistaken for reality, is a mistake.

I haven't covered too much here,

You haven't covered anything of any substance. Under what mind altering substance did you conceive this nonsense?

a reply to: icewater

Thoughts aren't true.
We don't need anything.
And my thoughts if mistaken for reality is a mistake.
Agree with everything.
My perception is constantly being altered by life in a good way, and my parents have threatened me with the doctor in the past. Not anymore though.

a reply to: Andy1144

Labels like "this moment/direct experience/now" are all labels. You are correct. The pointers aren't meant to be believed, but you have to see where they point to. DE means experiencing this moment without judgement, mindfully. It's a paradox because we sometimes need labels in order to see without them.

They point to nothing. Tie a string from the label to what it is labelling, and it arrives at nothing. A moment, the now, or whatever you want to call it is still a conceptual time frame. One doesn't experience this or that "moment". He only believes he does. It's a paradox because it isn't true.