Secrets of Our Existence and Universe Unraveled

Originally posted by NorEaster
reply to post by 2manyquestions

 

So, I didn't want to load the entire board up with copy/paste monstrocities, but i did want to let you know that i appreciated your replies to my last post. I would like to send you a copy of that book when the revisions are finally proofed and approved. If you have a mailing address, or even just one of those pay-by-the-month mailboxes at the UPS store, U2U it to me, and when the thing's back and finalized, I'd like to send you one. I guess I'm just wanting to give you some good information that might give you an upper hand in another scenario like that last one. I'm never going to find myself in such a situation, and I'm okay with waiting until the passing event allows me access in the end.

As someone who seems very honest and committed to understanding what you experience, all I can really do is give you direct access to the information that I've received, and to allow you to employ it as part of your own over all data suite. Like you correctly stated, no translator can fully appreciate what you, as an experiencer, encounter, and with that being the case, the best option is to make the information available to you.

I appreciate your account and your willingness to really explore the possibilities inherent within since an experience. I wish more experiencers had your capacity for real discovery.

I would love that, and I do appreciate you sharing what you've learned. I think I'll be better prepared for next time. I'll let it surprise me and see what comes of it. I really do want to learn and examine this from all sides. The human mind is definitely a strange place to explore.

Originally posted by 2manyquestions
I'm interested in reading through it. I read and enjoyed a bit of what I was able to preview for the book you advertise in your signature, "Taking Down the Curtain". Very interesting subject, but I have to admit that I was a little disappointed to see that at the end the book didn't offer any credentials, which would make the reader believe the author studied or researched the subject long enough to offer an educated opinion. He very well may have and sounds like he's delved into it plenty, but it feels good to have the reassurance anyway. I like to be able to confirm that the author has mastered the subject through extensive research before I start fully trusting the content. For now, including that information in the book would be my only suggestion.

I agree with this statement, and if I had any credentials, I'd list them. If you do an Amazon.com search on my name, you'll find another book of mine that's still in print called "Black Flies in the Backyard With Snowshoes". That's the kind of writer I actually am, and that book's doing pretty well right now. Peek inside of that one, and you'll see a pretty noticeable difference in both subject matter and writing style. Truth is that I searched for anyone with credentials that was already into stuff that sat anywhere near where I was with Curtain so that I could talk with him or her to see if they'd like to partner with me by having the book be published in their name (we'd split whatever royalties would come of it) since they'd have the credentials needed to have people take the premise seriously. After a year of searching for anyone whose published material was anywhere in the ballpark at all, I finally gave up and put the damn thing out myself.

I never even bothered to shop it. Hell, I know better than to try and shop this kind of material without even a college education on my resume. It took real convincing from my wife for me to even publish it in my own name. And yet, I know that this stuff is authentic and in that book, everything is completely proofed (as in how math theories are proofed) with more layers of logic and direct ramification calculations than I've seen in any of those published premise pieces that are typically linked here in defense of this breakthrough or some other breakthrough. Of course, this is based on pre-formula, pre-math levels of existence, and the basic imperative/qualifier configurations that ultimately weave throughout all physical progressive developments, so forget the squiggles and dashes. Not a bit of that is primitive enough to address anything at this level, but the raw logic and chains of ramification, as compelling verification whole for the theory's many dovetailing tenets, is just as solid as a rock.

I guess you and I have that whole "what the hell was that about?" thing in common. The difference is that I never saw or felt anything unusual occurring. The information just appeared as if a no-brainer, in huge fully developed chunks, as I was writing what had already emerged in my mind as important enough to flesh out in essay form. I'm no physicist, and I've never even been interested in that sort of thing. I was a professional songwriter/performer with bands going back into the 70s and thousands of hours logged on stages and studios all over the country. I really have no idea why I'm working these days to verify the viability of concepts like The Unit Rate of Change (URC), the Contextual Environment, The Hierarchy of Kind, The Laws and Dynamics of Association and Their Impact on Identity Survival of Existential Uniques, or why any of it has reached out to derail what, for me, was starting to be a pretty lucrative writing career.

All I know is that I dig and dig each day for contradictions in this stuff, and even toss bits of it up here to see if anyone can obliterate it with anything that has more substance than Youtube conjecture from some physics major who's pushing for a PhD, or some New Age faith-based assertion that fails miserably when taken out of the tabernacle and placed in the full light of examination, and so far, all I've gotten is verification and lots of resentment from folks whose oxen I've just gored with my rude insistence on their assertions making logical sense with what we already know to be consistent and reliably real.

I guess the only thing I can do is hope that I run into someone with some serious credentials who's not dependent on a professional conjecture for his/her paycheck, and is willing to take a good hard look at this thing that's decided to make me its bitch. Maybe with a nod from such a wizard, things could turn around for this poor maligned notion, and it'll let me go off and get back to my normal life before there's no normal life for me to get back to.

reply to post by NorEaster


College degrees aren't everything, and they are certainly not a reflection of intelligence. All we have to do is look at the people who run our country. Many of them attended Ivy League schools, yet they have nothing to show for it except one disaster after another. When we're done looking at our brain-dead politicians and economists, we can then look at the many "scientists" who come out with preposterous ideas and silly studies that just don't seem to pan out too well in the long-run. In other words there are many cases in which fancy pieces of paper don't mean a thing.

It sounds to me like you've tried hard to find someone to collaborate with. Although research is very important when it comes to most serious topics, there is a different approach you can take when it comes to book writing. You can still write on the same subject, yet you won't need any credentials for people to read and accept it. All you have to do is base it on personal experience and observation. In a way it's biographical story-telling. You can start out by introducing yourself and relaying the experience which brought you to think of the subject you're discussing. Describe it as a life's journey which led you to believe what you believe (sounds to me like you've had one hell of a life, and I'm sure you'll keep the reader entertained the whole way through). That way the reader immediately knows that the book is based on personal observation. If you approach the reader with honesty at the very beginning, he won't expect anything from you except to be entertained, challenged and stimulated with thoughts. Personal experience is (in a way) a form of research. We observe, we think and question, we draw a conclusion, and we share that conclusion with others. The more logical the conclusion, the more likely it is that you will persuade the reader to agree with you.

There's no need for technical jargon, no need for controlled test subjects, no need for credentials. I'd almost like to use Carlos Castaneda's books as an example. He did attend a University and claimed he was doing research, but in all honesty I've always had trouble accepting anything he wrote as hard scientific fact. Regardless of this I did enjoy the stories, because essentially his books were autobiographies into an interesting subject. To me the book would have been interesting and entertaining whether or not he had a College degree. Are people with degrees more trustworthy? Yes and no. It feels good to know someone is considered an "authority" on a subject, but then again I've read cases in which an "authority" was found guilty of stretching the truth, or simply making it all up just to make a buck or two. I would encourage you to continue writing, because it seems to me that you have what it takes. Forget the credentials, just change the structure as I suggested above. This will attract more people to read it, and nobody's expectations will be shattered by lack of credentials. They'll take it for exactly what it is,... which is a firm opinion formed by experience, observation and logic.

Maybe I'm wrong, you might want to check with a few people to see what they think, but it just seems to make sense to me.

reply to post by NorEaster


In finding a partner, I think that you should lower your criteria as you come off as a little demanding (see "I've been pissing off...". I also think that you shouldn't offer a piece of the pie (attracting greed), rather you should simply offer up an experience that can be shared.

I don't think that your emphasis on credentials is actually relevant and as such the best person you might find may also not have the greatest credentials, but he / she may be in the position to confidently provide the professionalism that you appear to be looking for. What's more, it seems that you are more interested in finding someone to 'best' you, however the journey should prove colourful, to say the least.

In the brief time I've known you I can see you have an excellent writing ability, unlike myself and solid, grounded logic. I expect things to unfold for you in a more gracious way. 2manyquestions is so humble that I see an interesting synergy afoot :-)

What also interested me, is the discussion over receiver and interpreter. Myself, I tend to find out what I know by relaxing my restrictions and just being creative. It crosses me as new information even though I personally expressed it and the logic is always flawless (that's how I sort the real from the gibberish). I can't strain myself to say anything of worth just because I want to. I have to humble myself with faith in the unknown to express the better part of my 'wisdom'. If I have a vision it usually comes in a flash and I can explore the vision to a point.. until I infuse my own tangent.

I get a strong feeling from the OP's experience. The responses helped flesh it out and I'm having a much easier time grounding my musing with almost no adversarial feelings to my fellow human. What is odd is that I don't feel alone at all - not just connected, but that it seems everyone feels the same way and more. I really think that underneath it all there's a shared wisdom that makes sense to everyone (and everything), which is not a rare thing but the most enacted, simplest thing that motivate all of us, everyday.

Originally posted by 2manyquestions
reply to post by NorEaster

 

I would encourage you to continue writing, because it seems to me that you have what it takes. Forget the credentials, just change the structure as I suggested above. This will attract more people to read it, and nobody's expectations will be shattered by lack of credentials. They'll take it for exactly what it is,... which is a firm opinion formed by experience, observation and logic.

Maybe I'm wrong, you might want to check with a few people to see what they think, but it just seems to make sense to me.

I may see about doing this as an associated offering. Maybe a fiction novel based on what I believe I've learned as a result of this book. After all, the technical book exists now, so there's no sense in not making it available as a reference book to support the novel or novels. Maybe a trilogy that fleshes out three distinct aspect of the premise as sort of "using the word in a sentence" exercise. I already have an immediate inspiration, as a result of your suggestion. The book could be called "The King of Hell", and about a guy who learns the truth about human existence, and how absolutely unfettered post-corporeal existence is, and he decides to unlock all the prison-hells that have been imposed upon human victims by the more truly evil amongst those who've propagated the myth of eternal damnation. Like a hero-type story.

I just had a flash of another one (no title idea yet) that could be set in the period of time after the "move-to-isolate" event takes place, featuring a corporeal human who learns from an ancient text-affected Residual Information source about the period of time before that (Judgement Day) event took place, but doesn't realize that the event has already occurred billions of years beforehand. Basically, he's driven to teach the world about this impending event that happened long ago, and doesn't realize that that there is no "Heaven" or anything like that left for them. They're simply part of the natural progression of existential development within the contextual environment that is left to exist after the original mission of the environment has been accomplished.

I can see a lot of potential here. I'm a fiction/memoir book writer. The plots practically write themselves off this premise. Thanks for the suggestion.

I think I like this idea. Thanks.

Originally posted by squandered
reply to post by NorEaster

 

In finding a partner, I think that you should lower your criteria as you come off as a little demanding (see "I've been pissing off...". I also think that you shouldn't offer a piece of the pie (attracting greed), rather you should simply offer up an experience that can be shared.

I am hell on wheels when challenged, and I do have to fight that inclination. As far as the money, I spent decades in the music industry, and that's always been the only carrot or stick that I ever saw work. I'm probably affected by all of that, but then I look around even now, and most of what I see is money driven. Me? I don't give a damn about money. I like everything I own already, and I can only wear so much clothes at one time or eat just so much food. Money is worthless until you hand it off and someone gives you something to either do something with or to eat.

I don't think that your emphasis on credentials is actually relevant and as such the best person you might find may also not have the greatest credentials, but he / she may be in the position to confidently provide the professionalism that you appear to be looking for. What's more, it seems that you are more interested in finding someone to 'best' you, however the journey should prove colourful, to say the least.

I think that what I need is someone who knows how to take the next step to allow this premise the life it deserves. It's like an 18 yr old kid fresh out of high school, and how they need that hand up and out of their parent's house and toward a life of their own. This premise could be wonderful for so many people, and I worry that I can't give it what it needs to become available for those people. The translation of the information, and the mechanics of properly rolling out the entire thing as information that most people can probably understand as a book, was something that I could give it. I'm a writer, and while this was a real challenge, it was something I was qualified to work on. This next step involves expertise that I've never had, and as a professional music-related product for nearly 30 years, I know exactly how little expertise I have in that arena.

As far as trying to find someone who can "best" me, what I'm trying to do (until the next corner is turned somehow) is ensure that this premise isn't a lie or a fabrication of my own in some way. It's an extremely powerful change in the way that a person sees everything, even if it doesn't demand anything from them. The intellectual transformation is profound, and ultimately it migrates to the visceral experience of human existence. I need to make sure it's airtight so that I'm not launching a damaging notion unwittingly. This is why I come here. There are real *ssholes here that feed off people like me with assertions like this. If they can rip this premise to shreds, then it should be ripped to shreds. The hard part is that the whole of it is much too comprehensive and expansive to simply post. I've posted very small, but highly significant, aspects over the last several months and even those have ended up being too cumbersome for an effective level of precise exchange. It has helped me suddenly notice ancillary ramifications (like the point of conscious perspective difference between the corporeal and post-corporeal human mind, and why it's positioned as it is) and so that's a good thing.

In the brief time I've known you I can see you have an excellent writing ability, unlike myself and solid, grounded logic. I expect things to unfold for you in a more gracious way. 2manyquestions is so humble that I see an interesting synergy afoot :-)

Thanks. I'm certainly hoping for less tension. This thread has been a much better experience, and I appreciate that.

What also interested me, is the discussion over receiver and interpreter. Myself, I tend to find out what I know by relaxing my restrictions and just being creative. It crosses me as new information even though I personally expressed it and the logic is always flawless (that's how I sort the real from the gibberish). I can't strain myself to say anything of worth just because I want to. I have to humble myself with faith in the unknown to express the better part of my 'wisdom'. If I have a vision it usually comes in a flash and I can explore the vision to a point.. until I infuse my own tangent.

I get a strong feeling from the OP's experience. The responses helped flesh it out and I'm having a much easier time grounding my musing with almost no adversarial feelings to my fellow human. What is odd is that I don't feel alone at all - not just connected, but that it seems everyone feels the same way and more. I really think that underneath it all there's a shared wisdom that makes sense to everyone (and everything), which is not a rare thing but the most enacted, simplest thing that motivate all of us, everyday.

What I've learned is that there is a very active and thriving realm that exists right along side this corporeal realm, and that the placement of the mind's point of conscious perspective is key to why the two realm are generally hidden from one another. Also involved is the nature of natural in-kind perception, and while the post-corporeal realm certainly can "see" us, they normally are not "seeing" what we're seeing, as they watch the "us" that they can perceive focused intently on what we, as corporeal humans, are deeply engrossed in. Of course, this is simply their unique post-corporeal perspective, and the blend of both perspectives is literally impossible due to the profound incompatibility between each realm's physical nature.

However, there are those people who in rare moments, breach the natural divide, and this is why we know that "they" exist. People from both sides. I picture the corporeal "medium" as one who, when tapped by a post-corporeal person, looks up from their intense focus and can acknowledge that person who tapped their shoulder before dropping back down into their natural trance as they return to the business of corporeal life, with the important developmental effort that he or she is involved in - as we all are. Yes, it's kind of an analogy, but I suspect that it's not that much of an analogy. In essence we all physically exist within the same contextual environment, even if the perception realms divide us from our passed brothers and sisters. Simple placement of the point of conscious perspective, and why not make allowances for occasional, or even intentional shifts in that placement? I'd be an idiot to dismiss it as a possibility. I can't shift it, but I can't play piano either.

reply to post by NorEaster


Because of how this information has come to you, how do you explore it and further the concepts? most importantly, how do you apply them to actual usable mechanics? i am just curious Has the knowledge been incorporated into your conscious continuous movement?

Once i had explored my own perspective to the extent i felt possible (at the time), i started to explore others perspectives on the same universe. i give equal credence to all perspectives and have been.. amazed more times than i could recall, by just how different iterations can look at the same thing. The very fact that both systems are simultaneously supported and present is amazing (to me). i see that we are all exploring the same concept (the universe, if you will) but through different contexts, all individually limited. Those that have explored the concepts in-depth will have great stories to tell, no matter the context, and one can learn just that little bit more about the totality of the universe in which we reside. By learning others perspectives, i feel it gives deeper insight into the concept which we inevitably approach so limitedly as individuals.

After the initial concepts were revealed, what have you done to further the research and application of the contexts which you present?

Originally posted by sinohptik
reply to post by NorEaster

 

Because of how this information has come to you, how do you explore it and further the concepts? most importantly, how do you apply them to actual usable mechanics? i am just curious

Has the knowledge been incorporated into your conscious continuous movement?

The most surprising aspect of it all is that so much else verifies it by being entwined with it in ways that would literally wreck both if you tried to pull them apart. Keep in mind that this premise is enormous. I just got my proof back today (about an hour ago) and the book, not counting the title pages, table of contents, acknowledgements and the little bio blurb in the back, is packed into 352 pages. And when I say packed, I really mean it. I literally lay out the step-by-step description of the instant of physical genesis, and logically defend it in full from the top of page 112 to the middle of page 116. Not even four full pages. I flesh out the entire structure that contains every expression of the existential Imperative Survival, and how it manifests within the corporeal and post-corporeal realms as a malleable whole of shifting influences (after previously detailing the Masculine and Feminine natures of each Imperative expression in a separate Glossary section) that drive and shape the world that we know to exist around us, and fit it all between pages 256 and 278. To say that I can just lay out all the interconnections that exist between this premise and what you see right in front of you right now is to make a claim that I can't defend. The interlacing is just to profound.

Still, the basic logic structure is very familiar, and the direct impact on the human experience (the difference between a 5 yr old, a 15 yr old, and a 35 yr old, and why those differences exist - at a more elemental level than simple brain development, hormones and life experience) is the kind of thing that parts of this premise are extremely good at detailing from a very new perspective than what you'll find anywhere online or in reference journals. The reason why the human being is so profoundly different in its survival choices than any other animal on this planet - it's very clearly detailed, and when you read it, you suddenly recognize (not just realize) that what's being suggested makes more sense than anything else that's been suggested about the obvious dichotomy of an intelligent species that often works to sicken and destroy itself, while not being dysfunctional as an organism in any other manner. Like I said, there are many, many threads that weave between what I've got here and what we've either known or have wondered about for a very long time.

This is what keeps me working to verify what I can't prove. The same rigid logic connects the mundane revelations (like those above) to the more inaccessible assertions by way of airtight ramification stages, and these stages have all been vetted by logicians that I met through a close friend who worked (recently retired after a long rewarding career) in the payroll dept at MIT in Cambridge, MA. I presented just the logical impact on the ramification stages, in multiple levels of progression, with the specifics themselves (represented as all logical formulas are) unassociated beyond the specific stages themselves, to prevent cultural or psychological biases. The logical structure is solid, even if the ramifications are anything but what we've all accepted as traditional.

Once i had explored my own perspective to the extent i felt possible (at the time), i started to explore others perspectives on the same universe. i give equal credence to all perspectives and have been.. amazed more times than i could recall, by just how different iterations can look at the same thing. The very fact that both systems are simultaneously supported and present is amazing (to me). i see that we are all exploring the same concept (the universe, if you will) but through different contexts, all individually limited. Those that have explored the concepts in-depth will have great stories to tell, no matter the context, and one can learn just that little bit more about the totality of the universe in which we reside. By learning others perspectives, i feel it gives deeper insight into the concept which we inevitably approach so limitedly as individuals.

I do feel as though a lot of work is being done on aspects of what's real that my examination doesn't address. Like the impact of intellectual agenda on the experience of post-corporeal existence. I really have no idea what the social structure on the other side is like, or what one human being is capable of imposing upon another human being in those instances where faith and expectation have a dominant influence. In that arena, I read and try to learn like everyone else. It does make me feel a little sorry for those who've been heavily indoctrinated, as I worry about their capacity to manage what will be a perception-heavy realm when they leave this life.

After the initial concepts were revealed, what have you done to further the research and application of the contexts which you present?

The whole of it continues to come in as I find new information that verifies one aspect while launching the introduction of another aspect by way of direct ramification. In fact, I'm checking over the new edition now, to see if it's okay to launch back up for sale again. I had to add a full digression From Here To There: The Crossing-Over Event, and flesh out the impact on the human brain of the corporeal point of conscious perspective, after examining the 13 April 2008 paper Unconscious Determinants of Free Decisions in the Human Brain www.nature.com... and discovering a ramification that I hadn't even considered until looking at what this research suggested if associated with what I had already learned about the relationship between the mind and the brain of the corporeal human being.

Right now, the effort is to find traction in the real world, since it'll take more minds than just mine to really develop this thing. If I'm anywhere near right on this, the net effect will be extraordinary.

reply to post by NorEaster

There are real *ssholes here that feed off people like me with assertions like this. If they can rip this premise to shreds, then it should be ripped to shreds.

Who cares about aresholes? I think the best people for you those who can accept your premise because they have lived it and lifted their energy to a level whereby they can tap the non-corporal realm. Such people are likely to be seekers and respectful of your efforts as well as encouraging. I'd hope you only pay attention to people who can address your concerns from a point of love.. tough love sure enough, but you really should wish for saint.

As for books being ripped to shreds, well the better they are the more interest they will garner. The more good a book can espouse the more evil will be done in it's name. Obvious example is the bible. I should look for a quote in a very old bible I have which has chapters of cannon lore. In one paragraph it states how good deeds will cause an imbalance that allows for a higher calibre of evil.

Sorry to butt in but

... but doesn't realize that the event has already occurred billions of years beforehand. Basically, he's driven to teach the world about this impending event that happened long ago, and doesn't realize that that there is no "Heaven" or anything like that left for them

Oooh, I like that. This is the basic premise of the new testament / garden of Eden / end times. (I refer things to the bible a bit, but only because it's been a grounding point for me for so long). Anyhow, it has an eerie quality.

What I've learned is that there is a very active and thriving realm that exists right along side this corporeal realm, and that the placement of the mind's point of conscious perspective is key to why the two realm are generally hidden from one another.

I know that realm. It is like an unlit cave to me. It's an extra dimension that doesn't bare calculation in the physical mind (although the evidence of this place is all that is real). Every answer is there and it's only a matter of faith to find them. The thing is, you can't intellectualise what you find. It's mainly evident by the trail you leave behind - that's the closet you can get to grasping it in real time.

and the blend of both perspectives is literally impossible due to the profound incompatibility between each realm's physical nature.

I believe this a succinct definition of enlightenment, albeit a corporal one. My understanding of enlightenment is that by dissolving your conceptional reality completely your biology changes, whereby you die and are reborn. Once enlightened the world is full of miracles and you live in a purely moment by moment reality. The best analogy I have is a dream where I looked at a mountain and it was beautiful and I was one with it. Unlike any other mountain I didn't attach a country, some choice ski slopes or thoughts about usefulness etc. It just was. I assume everything is like this, even if you only manage to free yourself from the concept of duality.

I picture the corporeal "medium" as one who, when tapped by a post-corporeal person, looks up from their intense focus and can acknowledge that person who tapped their shoulder before dropping back down into their natural trance as they return to the business of corporeal life

Look, here's a bit of superstition. I believe that we have an angel living in heaven. I've progressed that notion to be that our soul isn't bound by this dimension and is part of the infinite being, but I still call upon my angel and I still feel a weight lift when I do. I honestly think that the place you speak of is only as far away as you let it be, yet I think it's preferable to just allow the two realities to combine - even though you can't intellectualise the synergy. It's like Jesus saying that children hold the key to heaven. This is what I meant when I mentioned that the missing part of the world is the most in your face, obvious stuff that we all live buy.

I tend to interpret the OP's vision as a thought realm made up of ideas; that everything is made up of thought and in fact god is thought. The thought stream is not subject to time / space and all things are made of light energy. Things in the thought stream are incremental. Something happening 1 million years ago can be connected to something happening now - butterfly flaps it's wings and...

The thought stream has every possible idea floating by and we chose what we would like to explore. We may well chose the mundane and known ideas and hope only to conform with society but in fact we are so much more than this. I will start quoting Ramtha is I go on. My initial suspicion was that the OP was actually channelling Ramtha. He says that he does that. There must quite a lot of activity from ascended being on this plane. Even Buddha is supposed to be active here and there. ;-)

Just to finish. If you think about how we appear to entities in other realms, you know they don't see what we see. From the perspective of time / space we are vibrational energy moving in a completely different fashion with concrete objectives in another realm that has no time / space.

I think both universes can be rationalised. It must have already happened a billion years ago though...

reply to post by sinohptik


Well said. I enjoyed reading that. Let's never be bogged down by ideas that limit us... Unless you want to explore what being bogged down by limitations is like. Life always moves on and every moment is new.

We are designed to experience anything we fancy and can be judged by the things we chose to experience.

Originally posted by NorEaster
This is what keeps me working to verify what I can't prove.

i would say be wary of spending so much time on the roots that the leaves suffer.. No matter what, there will always be more to know about what you know but putting it into action and usable forms is where the rubber meets the road. i also feel the capability of human logic is quite limited and such thinking is no more than a finger pointing towards the moon. It can be fun pointing though How have you changed through all "this?"

I do feel as though a lot of work is being done on aspects of what's real that my examination doesn't address. Like the impact of intellectual agenda on the experience of post-corporeal existence. I really have no idea what the social structure on the other side is like, or what one human being is capable of imposing upon another human being in those instances where faith and expectation have a dominant influence. In that arena, I read and try to learn like everyone else. It does make me feel a little sorry for those who've been heavily indoctrinated, as I worry about their capacity to manage what will be a perception-heavy realm when they leave this life.

So, you feel there are two "sides," or "arenas" to All That Is?

If I'm anywhere near right on this, the net effect will be extraordinary.

If you wouldnt mind elaborating, i would be interested to hear in what ways you expect to see change. How do you plan on getting past the initial yea/nay response mechanism of semi-aware systems? i think we are currently in a time where people are beginning to be open to a new cultural story.

Originally posted by squandered
reply to post by sinohptik

 

Well said. I enjoyed reading that. Let's never be bogged down by ideas that limit us... Unless you want to explore what being bogged down by limitations is like. Life always moves on and every moment is new.

We are designed to experience anything we fancy and can be judged by the things we chose to experience.

i agree, i think we must constantly set out to prove ourselves wrong, but shouldnt have hesitation to build upon foundations that look sound. If one can base consistent assumptions accurately, then some confidence can be had there is some sort of pattern there. i think the problem comes when one starts dismissing new information that disagrees with "old standards" with no actual exploration.

reply to post by sinohptik


I don't think too many people actually hold onto old standards in a real sense. That sounds more like lazily applying scenarios that you can live by. I tend to think that our sub-conscious is more active than we realise and that we know a lot more than we accept, so even on a shallow level people know how something they don't actually believe is just as much a folly as a daydream...

It's shame that people need to have their ideas verified by societal norms. I don't think I'm capable of that. My biology wouldn't allow me to feel satisfied.

Ed:
Can I assume that "old standards" refers to religions?
The way many people handle it is really a matter of using doctrine to put religion / god out of the question. (You / we don't hear from the others). I see a lot of that. To some the corporal realm is all that's real and what is acceptable is dictated by the hierarchy of societal norms.

People who are sincere about having faith, acknowledging a higher power or just seeking (and it doesn't matter where you look for information) are always going to have a unique experience, as you suggested, and while the information that goes against having a spiritual connection is superfluous, we don't handle it well.

It's like nothing is sacred.

Originally posted by squandered
reply to post by sinohptik

 

Can I assume that "old standards" refers to religions?

i mean that in a broader sense. In that specific context, i was speaking of the decision to stop "evolving" ones thinking. Instead of actually examining new, possibly contradictory information, the information is discarded without honest exploration. That, or effort is put into defending the current way of thought at all costs. i assume it is part of the human condition in some regard.

i think that overall, the consistency of what goes on day to day has made it lackluster to the general public. Even many scientists are so wrapped up in the numbers, they can forget what they represent. All of the forces involved in even our individual movement is amazing (to me). i think it is too bad that just because people see it everyday, so many have lost that glimmer of awe..

reply to post by sinohptik


That's a good description of what bogs us all down.

Sorry to interrupt the conversation. I just had a thought I needed to share. It just sort of popped into my head a few minutes ago. It's not fully fleshed out, it's based on the experience, I haven't got a shred of proof, but I'd like to throw it out there anyway.

Since this supreme/collective consciousness is generating infinite possibilities trying to experience and learn all there is to experience and learn,....and since this consciousness is the building blocks of the Universe (including everything and all within), could it then be possible that all things alive and "dead" (dirt, rocks, etc.) are 'conscious' to some degree? If the consciousness is EVERYTHING, then it is also the dirt and the rocks and stars and galaxies and the air, and the "empty" space in between. If it wishes to experience all possibilities, then it must experience different levels of consciousness. For example on a scale of one to 10, a rock may be on a consciousness level of 1, a plant might be a 2, animals might be on a level of 3 or 4, human beings may be on a conscious level of 5 or 6, and the upper and most extreme levels of consciousness I leave reserved for beings we've never encountered before, who might be on a higher level of consciousness. The highest level of 10 should be reserved for the supreme consciousness itself, as it is the thing which has created and is generating these possibilities for it's own purpose.

Maybe that's crazy, maybe it's nothing,... but I couldn't leave it unsaid.

Good stuff here. I enjoyed taking a break to read up on everyone's thoughts. I'm up to my ears all of a sudden with some amazing new inspirations concerning ways to describe the insanely technical stuff after getting the book proof yesterday and deciding to do more than just check the formatting and cover colors. I appreciate the higher level focus that you folks have in this over all investigation, but I'm happy with being tasked with working to establish how all that stuff can make complete sense to people who desperately need to find the connection between the transcendent and what they instinctively understand about physical existence.

It's going to be the key for millions of these meat and potatos folks, and once they can finally connect the dots between where they exist and where the most enlightened roam free, their lives will be completely transformed. It's what I feel is needed right now, since so much of the world has fully rejected the faith-based assertion. This technical examination of the staples of physical existence does it all without demanding a shred of faith from the reader, and introduces them to the same sort of realities that you guys already feel at home with.

After all, anything that's real has a defineable sub-structure, and some people just need to know that such a sub-structure does actually exist before they can enjoy what's been built upon it. The good news is that the sub-structure is knowable and explainable. Okay, back to work.

Originally posted by 2manyquestions
Since this supreme/collective consciousness is generating infinite possibilities trying to experience and learn all there is to experience and learn,....and since this consciousness is the building blocks of the Universe (including everything and all within), could it then be possible that all things alive and "dead" (dirt, rocks, etc.) are 'conscious' to some degree? If the consciousness is EVERYTHING, then it is also the dirt and the rocks and stars and galaxies and the air, and the "empty" space in between. If it wishes to experience all possibilities, then it must experience different levels of consciousness. For example on a scale of one to 10, a rock may be on a consciousness level of 1, a plant might be a 2, animals might be on a level of 3 or 4, human beings may be on a conscious level of 5 or 6, and the upper and most extreme levels of consciousness I leave reserved for beings we've never encountered before, who might be on a higher level of consciousness.

In my very, very humble (and apprentice) experience, I do not see it that way, although I do like your train of thought.
Because it totally depends on the ENERGY that is being transmitted.
And this is all about energy.
A rock has no, or little energy, yes?
So, a plant, a rock, a tree - not enough, not near enough to garner any sort of attention to a higher conscious. An animal? Maybe, just maybe.
A human? Oh yes, when in the right context!
Oh - imho anyway.

(NorEaster - you have a PM)

Certainly have this knowledge my friend that you won't exploit it, for having that power of certain knowledge can leave you vulnerable, spiritually and physically.

Either way that was an excellent experience you shared with us. Certainly enjoyed reading it to a great extent, entering that state of meditation. I would be interested in learning on how you got there.

Originally posted by 2manyquestions
Since this supreme/collective consciousness is generating infinite possibilities trying to experience and learn all there is to experience and learn,....and since this consciousness is the building blocks of the Universe (including everything and all within), could it then be possible that all things alive and "dead" (dirt, rocks, etc.) are 'conscious' to some degree?

Thank you 2manyquestions for sharing your experience. Your initial post and the one I have quoted above remind me very much of Neale Donald Walsch's Conversations With God trilogy.

Here's a little excerpt from book three.

After you experience the Oneness for an infinite time-no-time, you will cease to experience it, because you cannot experience the Oneness as Oneness unless and until That Which Is Not One also exists. Understanding this, you will create once again, the idea and the thought of separation, or disunity. Then you will keep travelling on the Cosmic Wheel, keep going, keep circling, keep on being, forever and ever and even forever more.

and

Yet you chose to experience the magnificence of here and now in its every detail and to experience your Divine Self as the here and now creator of that reality. There were only two ways - two fields of experience - in which you could do that. Time and Space. So magnificent was this thought that you literally exploded with delight! In that explosion of delight was created space between the parts of you and the time it took to move from one part of yourself to another. In this way you literally tore yourself apart to look at the pieces of you. You might say that you were so happy, you fell to pieces. You've been picking up the pieces ever since.

None of this is really real, is it? No. You are living an illusion. This is a big magic show. And you are pretending that you don't know the tricks - even though you are the magician. It is important to remember this, otherwise you will make everything real.

You are both the creator and the created.