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.

 

What Does It Mean To Be "Free?"

page: 3
8
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 06:12 AM
link   
reply to post by die_another_day
 


die_another_day,

I am just guessing here but....

To realize that duality is necessary for this reality to work. True freedom comes from the absence of duality.

Peace




posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 08:35 AM
link   
Being free means not being limited be unnecessary restrictions.



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 


Transcendence just means to go beyond. I find transcendence and psychosis to be nearly the same thing. In my personal experience, when someone experiences a traumatic event and is not able to otherwise cope, they find the need to project their selves onto the whole of the cosmos, or find some other irrational belief.

I personally think everyone who experiences transcendence is going through a diseased state of being. Have you ever noticed that many of the gurus from eastern philosophies have gray hair early?! Even the Buddha did. I have no need for transcendence. There's nothing to go beyond. I am as I am. Always have been, always will be.



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   
Freedom may be following the heart.

Freedom may be giving to take.

Freedom may be living in balance.

Freedom may be saying what you mean, and meaning what you say.

"Flying, like butterflies, meeting new people, unknown and unimaginable
realities and views of overwhelming beauty, forever unchanged.
Befriending people of all ages, races, and religions, rich inside with
strong personalities, open and generous towards fellow man."

-ENJOY - Robert Miles



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by plutoxgirl
We are born with invisible chains, slaves of the system...-
but we are also born with THE KEY-
to break free.
Freedom is a state of mind.
I am free and so are you- just embrace it


No. "Just embracing" a thought isn't sufficient to break free. It isn't THAT easy.



[edit on 6-1-2010 by IAmRobot]



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by die_another_day
 


Freedom is death. Death is freedom. This has been grafted into the EMPIRE doctrine.



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by operation mindcrime

I am just guessing here but....

To realize that duality is necessary for this reality to work. True freedom comes from the absence of duality.

Peace



This is my belief as well. There is no such thing as right and wrong, only in the thoughts of the observer.

To be totally free, there can be no right or wrong, as otherwise they impinge on the freedom.



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 01:53 AM
link   
reply to post by tribewilder
 


We might differ though on the functionality of duality. Most "enlightened" people are trying to escape this state or say that this reality is merely an illusion.

The leave cannot become the branch nor the trunk whilst he is a leaf. It might return as such but that is only after he has done his job as a leaf and completed it's circle.....

I suspect duality is a necessity for the education of our eternal soul. I look upon this reality as a school for the soul. When you are good and ready the illusion of duality will disappear.

People should really stop trying so desperately to escape this reality. Eternal means forever......what's the rush??

Oh wait, that is the ego not willing to admit that it is not ready yet...


Peace

[edit on 7/1/2010 by operation mindcrime]



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by tribewilder

Originally posted by operation mindcrime

I am just guessing here but....

To realize that duality is necessary for this reality to work. True freedom comes from the absence of duality.

Peace



This is my belief as well. There is no such thing as right and wrong, only in the thoughts of the observer.

To be totally free, there can be no right or wrong, as otherwise they impinge on the freedom.


And this is why I think a fair share of "enlightened beings" are psychopaths.

No right or wrong? Why don't I just go ahead and chop off this persons head? Rape this beautiful woman? Steal from this old man? There's no wrong in this. It's simply what I want. I want to be free! Must be free!!



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 11:50 AM
link   
In order to truly be "free" you must first be dead. Otherwise, you are bound to the laws of the physical world. You are a slave to nutrition, a slave to society, a slave to your own thoughts & desires...Freedom is only an illusion.



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by unityemissions
And this is why I think a fair share of "enlightened beings" are psychopaths.


Agree, a little more then a fair share if you ask me.



No right or wrong? Why don't I just go ahead and chop off this persons head? Rape this beautiful woman? Steal from this old man? There's no wrong in this. It's simply what I want. I want to be free! Must be free!!


Is it not the duality that infact makes you rape,steal,kill? This is not so hard to comprehend and at the same time incomprehendable...

We cannot comprehend non-duality because we are not suppose too. All "messiah's" that claim they can, can FO!! The ones who do comprehend probably wouldn't reside in this reality because of the realisation that it is an illusion, i guess.


Peace



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 11:41 PM
link   
Hi unityemissions, thanks for your posts.

My own approach to this subject is based on an educational and professional background in psychology and a 45 year personal interest in the practise and theory of transcendence; including a scientific perspective. Not saying this to pull rank, but to emphasize a considered attitude. I don't buy sensationalism or new-age clichées, and I don't follow 'gurus' (though I sometimes, after a critical examination, can learn something from them).

As you and I obviously don't agree on the value of transcendence, possibly even if it exists, I'll try to support my own views. You write:

"I find transcendence and psychosis to be nearly the same thing. In my personal experience, when someone experiences a traumatic event and is not able to otherwise cope, they find the need to project their selves onto the whole of the cosmos, or find some other irrational belief."

It is true, that both practised transcendence and psychoses contain 'going beyond', as you call it; trying to escape from mundane life. But the means and manifestations of these two processes are completely opposite. Transcendence requires selfknowledge, selfdiscipline and strives towards inner integration. Psychosis is on the other hand mostly outside the control of the victim and is characterized (actually defined), by a far-reaching disintegration of the victim's personality.

There's nothing interchangeable between them, and any reasonable competent therapist would try to stop a psychotic from using advanced transcendental methods.

In a later post you write:

"And this is why I think a fair share of "enlightened beings" are psychopaths".

(You do know, that psychosis and psychopathy aren't the same?)

I wholeheartedly agree with you, that the 'holiness' market is overflowing with shady types; from scammers to the selfdelusioned, but this doesn't say anything about authentic transcendence. I would therefore be interested in knowing, if you have any firsthand contact with the 'real thing'. I'm aware that there doesn't exist any transcendometers, and that your definition of transcendence may differ from mine, but I believe, that your criticism of transcendence should be expanded to include verifiable sources/information and how you go from A to B.

If this thread doesn't die, I'll answer to the aspects of dualism and ethics in a later post.






[edit on 7-1-2010 by bogomil]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 04:49 PM
link   
To me "being free" means that i control my life and fate, i do what i want to do and not what somebody else tells me.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by bogomil
Hi unityemissions, thanks for your posts.

My own approach to this subject is based on an educational and professional background in psychology and a 45 year personal interest in the practise and theory of transcendence; including a scientific perspective. Not saying this to pull rank, but to emphasize a considered attitude. I don't buy sensationalism or new-age clichées, and I don't follow 'gurus' (though I sometimes, after a critical examination, can learn something from them).

As you and I obviously don't agree on the value of transcendence, possibly even if it exists, I'll try to support my own views. You write:

"I find transcendence and psychosis to be nearly the same thing. In my personal experience, when someone experiences a traumatic event and is not able to otherwise cope, they find the need to project their selves onto the whole of the cosmos, or find some other irrational belief."

It is true, that both practised transcendence and psychoses contain 'going beyond', as you call it; trying to escape from mundane life. But the means and manifestations of these two processes are completely opposite. Transcendence requires selfknowledge, selfdiscipline and strives towards inner integration. Psychosis is on the other hand mostly outside the control of the victim and is characterized (actually defined), by a far-reaching disintegration of the victim's personality.

There's nothing interchangeable between them, and any reasonable competent therapist would try to stop a psychotic from using advanced transcendental methods.



Do therapists acknowledge the spiritual/transcendental at all? I thought this was a bit outside of their realm. I understand Jung and others taught this, but thought therapy today was mostly based on Freudian methods.


In a later post you write:

"And this is why I think a fair share of "enlightened beings" are psychopaths".

(You do know, that psychosis and psychopathy aren't the same?)

Sure do. Psychosis is a disintegration of the self. Psychopathy is the lack of an inherent ability to grow a conscience. An artificial one can be created, but it's not in accordance of one's will. It's just their so that one may get what one wants via manipulation and staying out of prison.



I wholeheartedly agree with you, that the 'holiness' market is overflowing with shady types; from scammers to the selfdelusioned, but this doesn't say anything about authentic transcendence. I would therefore be interested in knowing, if you have any firsthand contact with the 'real thing'. I'm aware that there doesn't exist any transcendometers, and that your definition of transcendence may differ from mine, but I believe, that your criticism of transcendence should be expanded to include verifiable sources/information and how you go from A to B.

Agreed. Most are scammers. Those who aren't just seem to be disillusioned and/or sycophants. To go beyond ones current limitations. That can be done. To go beyond an emotional or psychological blockage, sure that can be done. To go beyond this reality we call the universe, I think this is hogwash. I guess it's best to say that I consider myself a spiritual atheist. IMO, nothing exists outside the universe, but we all root from the same source. We're all somehow interconnected by laws we don't yet understand, and may never be able to comprehend! That's okay. It is, nonetheless. I see no reason to attribute divinity to this being.

I have had "peak experiences" before. I've had moments where everything seemed to be one, and nothing could really effect me. I think this is a sickened state, now. The last time I had this happen, my brother was killed in a car accident. When we can't accept the reality of our situation at hand, we create our own bubble. It's a defense mechanism. We go into la-la land. This is all I see "material transcendence" type spirituality as being. Nonsense. I don't find the need to be any more critical than that. There's nothing to be critical about. Transcendence as defined by spiritual gurus is sickness, period. These people haven't a clue of what reality is.




If this thread doesn't die, I'll answer to the aspects of dualism and ethics in a later post.


I look forward to hearing this.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 03:11 AM
link   
A couple of quotes:

Florynce Kennedy:

Freedom is like taking a bath -- you have to keep doing it every day!

Franklin D. Roosevelt:

The only sure bulwark of continuing liberty is a government strong enough to protect the interests of the people, and a people strong enough and well enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over the government.

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe:

None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free.

Marilyn Ferguson:

Ultimately we know deeply that the other side of every fear is a freedom.

......and finally

MATS Video, The Broadcaste

The irony of not being fully aware of your freedoms is that you do not percieve those freedoms which you lack.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 10:56 PM
link   
DUALITIES AND ETHICS

Hi unityemissions, thanks for your post.

As you reject a non-cosmic situation, I will reformulate myself and talk about non-matter/energy and non-space/time situations, which these days are quite housebroken in science. E.g. faster-than-light information, zero-point fields and event horizons. That we could be able to percieve such states, after a change in awareness level, seems quite reasonable to me, as we after all are made from the same basic stuff as the rest of cosmos (where information on this level takes place).

When matter/energy and space/time manifest, the various parts are already polarized (dual), and because of this polarization with attraction and repulsion patterned structures will be formed (e.g. atoms). These structures aren't totally balanced or symmetric; if they were, the outcome would be a reciprocial annihilation, a zero. There's just so much balance and symmetry as to keep the structures loosely attached, with always a small asymmetry/unbalance present. This means a dynamic universe, with everlasting exchanges between the various structures. E.g. an atom will gain or loose electrons, possibly form more complex 'alliencies' with other atoms into molecules.

This asymmetry is the base of growing complexity, structures strive for symmetry/balance, never quite finding it, and recombining constantly. At the complexity level of 'life' hitherho unknown macro-cosmic laws (but with pragmatically observable outcome) will result in the foodpyramid. Sometimes known as Darwinism. This is a mechanical process, and is observable in such phenomena as reptilebrain activity, alpha-behaviour, territorial behaviour etc. In short, predation.

Predation is a 'natural' process, following mechanistic laws of the universe. As an alternative option humans have postulated the concept 'ethics', which from religious/compassion/utilitarian principles reverse the predatory process. Oriented towards more symbiotic relationships.

From different perspectives this can be seen as a non-dynamic, non-participating or non-mechanistic process, where a central point is the ability to make choices; to become conscious/aware and to use this state as the base for decision-making in life. This starts out with aiming for non-matter/energy and non-space/time experience; as called in buddhism: Silence. It demonstrably functions, but it is not completely identical with peak-experiences (which can be very dynamic at times).

(Symbiosis can ofcourse also have other motivation and methodology than my example above.)

PS Traditional (psycho)therapists often use the same techniques as meditators/religionists, just skipping the spiritual aspect, which is just as well, as the functional part of religion etc. seems to be attitude and practise, not doctrine.

[edit on 10-1-2010 by bogomil]



new topics




 
8
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join