It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Which Came First: Consciousness or Matter?

page: 6
12
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Neither consciousness nor matter came first.
Parabrahman came first.

Some of you need to learn some Advaita Vedanta.




posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 07:32 PM
link   
a reply to: micpsi

Tis good that you brought up Parabrahman which was what I had in mind when I approximated Awareness with "Father" to simplify things a little. Parabrahman is the proper word though a simpler word like Homeground or The Source is friendlier to the layperson. However, Parabrahman lies outside the field of time, being T I M E L E S S in nature. Yes, it is prior to consciousness but this view obtains only from the Consciousness perspective (i.e. a bottom-up, and not top-down, view). Awareness begets Consciousness (Father begets the son as the Christians would have it), Consciousness being inseparable from Matter and both co-exist in virtue of Awareness. For Consciousness-Matter to come into being, time and space have to both come into being as well; for them to co-exist, they have to be extended in time and space. Although epithets like eternity, infinitude, world-without-end, etc are ascribed and applied to Consciousness, these words denote and involve TIME fundamentally, which means that Consciousness-Matter are relative, not absolute, in nature. It's impossible for Consciousness (or Satchitananda) to become, or transform into, Parabrahman, that is, to shift or evolve from the Relative to the Absolute, except... well, let me leave you to work out the exception bit on your own!! Parabrahman is always untouched, pristine, peerless, for it can never be defiled by time... yes, it is veritably T i m e l e s s n e s s Itself, and in no way can eternity, infinitude be ascribed to, or compared with, it. The latter is only a second best, though, more often than not, it has been unwittingly treated and regarded as the be-all and end-all of Sadhana when in truth, it is really not so.

edit on Octpm15 11 20 by Rextiberius because: editing

edit on Octpm15 11 20 by Rextiberius because: amendments

edit on Octpm15 11 20 by Rextiberius because: further amendments

edit on Octpm15 11 20 by Rextiberius because: (no reason given)

edit on Octpm15 11 20 by Rextiberius because: (no reason given)

edit on Octpm15 11 20 by Rextiberius because: corrections

edit on Octpm15 11 20 by Rextiberius because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 08:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: SystemResistor
What if they happened at exactly the same time?

Outside of this false material linear time frame; this is exactly what happens; everything is occurring instantaneously (all happening at the same time).



posted on Oct, 13 2015 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Doesn't quantum physics show us that the material world outside of conscious observation literally exists as a probabilistic waveform? This would mean that consciousness dictates the workings of matter and insists our role as creators.

"Parabrahm (the One Reality, the Absolute) is the field of Absolute Consciousness"
In John 1:1-13, God is described as a conscious entity that creates by word(thought) alone.



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 07:40 AM
link   
a reply to: cooperton

When you start to walk the path, you will sooner or later understand that the observer (or seer/experiencer) is the observed (seen/experienced) or in your preferred framing, the creator is the created - the two are one and inseparable. But then this is only one step along the path. As the aspirant progresses, s/he understands a higher truth than the previously held one e.g. the observer, the observing and the observed become all one and the same. For what is 'true' at one level is not true at another, and it goes on and on.

In brief, one can't get the Absolute Truth on the path of Consciousness, all one gets is relativity as the whole field of Consciousness is about relativity. Even the Buddha taught this: Existence = Relativity. The so-called truth found in the field of Consciousness is about RELATIVE truth, never ABSOLUTE Truth. So in this context, there is no such thing as "Absolute Consciousness", since its existence (Consciousness) depends on, or is relative to, Truth (or Parabrahman/Pure Awareness).

The relationship is also unilateral. Consciousness is Awareness but the reverse is not true: Awareness is NOT Consciousness. The prefix PARA means going beyond - beyond Brahman or Consciousness. Yes, Consciousness is Brahman, equivalent to the Christian God. However, Brahman is forever expanding. The nature of Consciousness is like that, forever expanding into a greater (relative) truth. In Parabrahman, there is no movement whatsoever. I am using the two terms as given by a contemporary mystic - one who had actually gone through the whole process of investigating and apprehending it himself and not according to the definitions given elsewhere as in the theosophical literature where the term "Absolute Consciousness" is used but in a different context.

In Hindu occultism, first comes Divine Thought (= First Logos). This is followed by Sound or Vach/Svara (= Second Logos). After that follows The WORD/Verbum/Viraj (= Third Logos). The Primordial Sound (= 2nd Logos/Vach) actually precedes The Word/Verbum (= 3rd Logos) so, the WORD as used in the Bible is much more complex in reality as there are actually 3 Logoi and it does not neatly and singularly translates as Logos. What is often not realized is that Primordial Sound precedes Primordial Light and not the reverse. Light is actually sound made visible.

I have written quite a bit elsewhere, under a different thread titled "Is this Consciousness?" You can read the entries at the following link, if you're interested: www.abovetopsecret.com...


edit on Octam15 11 20 by Rextiberius because: amendments

edit on Octam15 11 20 by Rextiberius because: (no reason given)

edit on Octam15 11 20 by Rextiberius because: further edit

edit on Octam15 11 20 by Rextiberius because: (no reason given)

edit on Octam15 11 20 by Rextiberius because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 08:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Rextiberius
You can edit your edits.




top topics
 
12
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join