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.

 

Universes in Universes - How to make your own universe

page: 1
8

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 01:47 AM
link   
The universe is really a dream. Everything else, and all the planes of our universe, exist only in this universe, this dream, and so only matter while we are here. Eventually we will leave this dream.

A dream is a closed system which exists due to the awareness of the creator of the dream. The creator of the dream is called God. Our universe, and all its planes, are a dream of God.

We also create universes, of which we are the God. Every time you dream at night, or daydream, or think any thought at all, you are creating a new universe. Every thought is a new universe. It exists for the amount of time you are thinking about it, then when your awareness moves to something else it ceases to exist. This is how thinking works. All thoughts are universes, because a universe is any closed system in which there is awareness (or just any closed system, but if there was no awareness then it wouldn't exist, since nothing would be aware of it.)

There is nothing outside of awareness. In fact, there can't be. Nothing can be outside of God by definition, so when God creates a universe it is created inside of himself, so to speak. When you dream, the dream is inside of you, but at the same time it is a different reality and a different universe to this universe. It is a universe in a universe.

I will elaborate. Whenever you think something, your thought exists, but where does it exist? It is existent in your awareness, and it only exists because you are thinking it. Your awareness created it. This then, is a new universe. You created it to work out a problem, or to experience something. This new universe attempts to do what it was created for and from this you intend to learn something. However, we can only create very weak and not particularly useful universes, since we are already so limited in this one. We don't have enough awareness to make a very complicated universe, so we just make very simple ones, and they don't work very well. It's better not to get answers from thoughts therefore, since they are of our own creation, and so can't tell us something we don't already know. The best source for knowledge or inspiration is something in this universe, or better: from the one above (from God.)

So anyway, God created a universe (the one we are in) with a thought, and he wanted to experience it so he created life forms and lent his awareness to each one. Each one of us does our own thing and we have our own opinions, but the awareness in you, your consciousness, is God. We are all God, he's playing all of us at the same time. But pretty much everything in this universe has awareness, including rocks and planets, and suns. They just have awareness in a different way to us humans. God is in everything. Everything is awareness.

Most of us have had the experience of lucid dreams, which are common in childhood. A lucid dream is when you are dreaming and then suddenly you are aware that you are dreaming. You remember who you are, but you are still in the dream. At this point it becomes possible to control the dream, and since it is a dream, you can make anything happen. Before you are lucid you are running around in some dream story, thinking that you are this dream character, but when you become lucid you remember yourself and stop acting.

The experience of lucid dreams is the same experience as the true "awakening" in this dream also. We are all running around playing dream characters of our own creation, and we have forgotten who we really are. When awakened we understand we are really God, and since we now understand we are just in a dream, we can do fun things, such as make water turn into wine, etc.

But there's more! God is also in a dream, of another God. Everything is dreams (since I'm using the word dream for any closed system of awareness.) So the journey does not end here.

So when we awaken from this dream and transcend, we will be able to create new universes according to our desires, and play around like this until we get bored and decide to transcend again.

The only reason we are here is because of desire. Actually our existence as an individual (which becomes less and less, until we reach the highest God) is only a chain of desires. If you didn't want anything, you wouldn't be here. There is a method for enlightenment, called the Path of Renunciation, which teaches you to become enlightened by not wanting anything. But the problem with this is that even wanting to become enlightened, or wanting to not want, is desire. All that person is really doing is thinking so much about enlightenment that they attract it (since they are adjusting their tuning to it and therefore attracting it), they haven't really stopped their desires, only focused them. Not desiring is not something we can do at this stage, else we wouldn't be here. Focusing your awareness on something does attract it, in the same way that matter attracts matter (gravity), but it also works for concepts and more sophisticated ideas. Matter is just a concept.

------------------------------------------------------------
If God knows everything there is to know,
Then I ask: how can God learn or grow?
If you knew all that was and all that will be,
Then how can any decision you make be free?
If you were everything and everything was you,
Then there would be nothing for you to do;

And there we find God, in this very position,
Imprisoned by the power of his own condition,
But there is a way to escape from this net,
All that God would have to do is forget,
Forget what He was and in ignorance find
Choice and free will, from confusion of mind;

And so God created a plane of limitation,
That confusing place we call creation,
A place of ignorance where we're free to choose,
Free to make mistakes and free to lose;
For only a being who knows not what is true
Has the free will to choose what to do;
Through us God can live, think, feel and see,
And experience He knew, but now He can be;

Yet though we've forgotten where we come from,
The closer we get, the happier we become,
With control of awareness you can return,
But you have less choice the more you learn;

Each mortal longs for the infinite touch,
Yet the infinite longs to know not so much;
------------------------------------------------------------
edit on 26-4-2011 by sign00 because: Too many dashes




posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 02:10 AM
link   
Like Mooji says "Everything is happening in your head"



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 03:20 AM
link   
reply to post by sign00
 

This is just new age philosophy, that everything is everything. Everything might be interconnected but it's on it's own also, the energy given by the creator is on it's own. In other words god is not it's creation, and creation was created to be separate from god, but also connected, for example as in what you call guidance, when you need it.
Creation was made to be on it's own, as individualism, our dual nature inside of us.

This with "I am god" and that everything is god is part of the new age culture. I call it the "evil collective conciossnes" or communism of the mind.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 04:14 AM
link   
And your evidence for this is... what, exactly? I mean, you _could_ be right, but so could the christians or scientologists. You say a "Universe" is created each time we think. Ok, I can see a few ways that might possibly be the case, but what's your reasons for thinking it IS the case? You say it ceases to exist when we cease thinking about it... Why should that be the case? Couldn't it exist independently of a mind thinking it into being once that has occurred? You make a lot of big statements. What's your logic and evidence? Or am I arguing with a crazy internet crank?



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 04:19 AM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 


Buddhism and Hinduism thought everything is one, separation is an illusion, etc. a good few thousand years before New Age, which came out in the 20th century, when Eastern philosophy and metaphysics became popular in the West.

I don't read new age books. I worked that out on my own. If you say New Age says the same, then OK, maybe it does - I don't know. Does that make it wrong? Or at least, does that mean you can dismiss this just because someone has said a similar thing before?

The concept that matter exists outside of awareness is not a base. This is taken for granted but it actually makes no sense. Where is the matter if it is outside of consciousness? Since we know already that we can create entire environments in our heads (dreams), which appear to be just as real as physical reality, would it not be simpler and more plausible to say that physical reality is the same? That would explain a lot, including miracles, placebo effect, etc. It would explain everything, and also be more scientifically sound, because we no longer need to wonder how matter exists independent to awareness - and awareness is the only thing we can truly prove to exist.
edit on 26-4-2011 by sign00 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 04:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stunspot
And your evidence for this is... what, exactly? I mean, you _could_ be right, but so could the christians or scientologists. You say a "Universe" is created each time we think. Ok, I can see a few ways that might possibly be the case, but what's your reasons for thinking it IS the case? You say it ceases to exist when we cease thinking about it... Why should that be the case? Couldn't it exist independently of a mind thinking it into being once that has occurred? You make a lot of big statements. What's your logic and evidence? Or am I arguing with a crazy internet crank?


Actually I define a universe as any closed system. So under this definition every thought is a universe, as a thought is complete in itself, and is not influenced anything outside of it. It is begun with a set of rules (your intention for the thought) and it ends with some form of output. So under this definition it is a universe. The question is only whether this universe (the one we are in) functions in the same way. It makes sense that it does, which would give you a reason for the existence of this universe.

Why does it cease to exist when we stop thinking it? You know it does. When you stop thinking about something then it's gone. If you think about it again then it appears again. We all know how thought works in this manner.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by sign00
reply to post by pepsi78
 


Buddhism and Hinduism thought everything is one, separation is an illusion, etc. a good few thousand years before New Age, which came out in the 20th century, when Eastern philosophy and metaphysics became popular in the West.

Buddhism and Zen teaches that each item is on it's own but has a dependency.
The Mountain is the Mountain and the Cloud is the Cloud but they are dependent on eachother.
In other words merging is possible but not everything is merged, things can be connected and disconnected.
The very ing and yang show the individualism, duality at it's finest, it can be incorporated in anything then raped inside.



I don't read new age books. I worked that out on my own. If you say New Age says the same, then OK, maybe it does - I don't know. Does that make it wrong? Or at least, does that mean you can dismiss this just because someone has said a similar thing before?

It sounds like new age religion, the fake religion being promoted around the corner today, where they go with " ohh we don't care, everything is everything" But it's not like they picture it.

Most don't understand what individualism is, so we should take a closer look at what an individual is.

Here is deconstruction of a word.
Individual. In-div-i-dual.
In= inside
div= divided
dual= by two, the dual nature.

Humans have free will, tho they are conditioned by the mind, so it's free will to an extent, built in as a safety so they don't go off course too much. Never the less, human beings have free will.




edit on 26-4-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 05:10 AM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 


Hmmm... I don't see how what you are saying applies to what I said. Seems to me like we are discussing different things. You are giving your opinions as to why you are against "New Age". Whereas I am simply presenting a philosophical theory from my own understanding, which you then proceed to label and attack, using the label you gave it as a reason for your attack.

Perhaps we should not label these things, and they will make more sense.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 05:21 AM
link   
reply to post by sign00
 


It was in response to your opinion, for example:



We are all God, he's playing all of us at the same time.





If you were everything and everything was you,



My response was in the conntex of what you have said.




edit on 26-4-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 05:53 AM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 


Ah, I see. Well that's a basic spiritual viewpoint, I didn't invent it, neither is it a new concept. Very much a Buddhist idea. I do think that it makes the universe simpler and more understandable. We can agree to disagree.

EDIT: Additionally, I don't believe I claimed that humans don't have any free will. I claimed God doesn't have a free will, which I believe makes sense if God is considered to know everything. God will only do what is exactly the right thing to do in any circumstance, knowing exactly what will happen, and all other possibilities - in this way God has no free will.
edit on 26-4-2011 by sign00 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 08:08 AM
link   


I claimed God doesn't have a free will, which I believe makes sense if God is considered to know everything.

It does just like we have it, we are nothing but that essence of god's potion in a bottle, but in a very small amount, so our understanding is limited, the very special thing that makes us tick is that essence. So you hear stories of the genie in the bottle or god's breath in the human being.

You stated that if you know everything there is no free will ? there is always a choice for example between two known elements. We make choices on what we see and know, we don't always make the choices based on the unknown, like mistery for example. Decision making does not always involve hidden closed down boxes.

I'll give you an example, you have to pick between a t-shirt, one is blue and one is white, you know what color they are and what they look like, there is no secret, bolth shirts are identical but have a different color, you have to pick one. Eventualy you will pick one, you have to so you can get dressed. You have made a decision based on knowing everything.

Not knowing adds to the mistery, It will make choice more interesting but I don't know if it affects free will, It should still exist even if you know everything.
edit on 26-4-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   
Not a bad write sign00, but not entirely clear however.
at least not to someone who does not hink along the same lines.

Advaita Vedanta also speaks about non duality and is along the same lines.

our thoughts may or not maynot be capable of creating universes, but would we know?
does it matter if it exists but we cant figure it out?
in an ideal situation, for every instance there should be a new universe.

our knowledge is quite shallow in these matters, but it is good we have a start now

don't get bogged down with negativity & folks trying to nit pick, it could just be the start for them too!

well done



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 



I'll give you an example, you have to pick between a t-shirt, one is blue and one is white, you know what color they are and what they look like, there is no secret, bolth shirts are identical but have a different color, you have to pick one. Eventualy you will pick one, you have to so you can get dressed. You have made a decision based on knowing everything.


Not exactly true. You are trying to provide an example where the outcome will be identical regardless of the choice. But that is impossible. It does matter which T-shirt you pick, you just don't know to what degree it matters, which is why you have a choice. God would know this and being God he would pick the T-shirt that would be the right one to pick.

Your wearing blue instead of white will change the universe in some way. Every situation changes the universe in some way, no matter how small.

Now for God, he knows already what the outcome will be. If God did not know the outcome them he would not be God. If God did know the outcome then he must do whatever is right, and so has no choice. There is no such situation possible where two outcomes are identical, because even the smallest thing will make a difference, which God knows also.

So choices come only from ignorance. Freewill comes from not knowing.

--

I defined a universe under a definition which includes our thoughts. This is philosophy don't forget - so I am allowed to define words for my purpose, and then you will have to argue against the definition, rather than the point made, since my point can only be true under my defined definition. According to my definition of "universe", our thoughts are a universe - you can only argue the definition. I'm just making the point for everyone that this is a philosophical discussion and so must be discussed philosophically.
edit on 26-4-2011 by sign00 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 01:43 AM
link   
reply to post by sign00
 



So choices come only from ignorance. Freewill comes from not knowing.

That is very far off, there are many examples. It is the very small choices that make us alive.
I don't agree with you, not all choices are hidden behind a locked door.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 02:28 AM
link   
I have a problem with the supplied definition for individual.

It means not being able to be divided. The "in" prefix negates the rest, "dividual" as I see it, Dividual meaning able to be divided by, and in meaning not. Other similar words include indiscriminate, inefficient, incapacitated. The in negates the rest of the word.

While I have nothing against the yin and yang of this theory and find this to be a part of the universe with some depth, that is not where the word individual came from as far as I know it. I once asked in a philosophical question of my own (and now I ask again), "are you an individual, or a dual reproduction?" playing on my understanding of the word individual and where all your dna came from.

I enjoy thinking like in the op, and find myself going there from time to time. Between doing this and enjoying typical things like buddhism and physics etc, I can follow the point made about free will for us but not for "God" quite clearly and enjoyed the dreams and thoughts tie in. It could be that we are simply existing so that God may experience free will, I agree with this possibility though I have no idea what/why the universe is, or what/why I am, and I believe that is part of the point. If death is real, then you are. Regardless of if death really is real, we may require its faith for us to be real, as "individuals" as we know them, or as an expression of free will. That could also be why we cannot "know" that the universe is one (though I have a sneaky suspicion it is).

3 related quotes I like
"the point of life is to exist" the Dalai Lama
"the whole moon and the entire sky are reflected in dewdrops on the grass, or even in one drop of water" Zen
“architecture is the frozen music, music is the flowing architecture” Goethe
edit on 27-4-2011 by GoatwolfeWolfgoate because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoatwolfeWolfgoate
I have a problem with the supplied definition for individual.

It means not being able to be divided. The "in" prefix negates the rest, "dividual" as I see it, Dividual meaning able to be divided by, and in meaning not. .

It's really what it is. You have a left brain and a right brain, one side for intuition or creative and the other for logic and linear thinking. This does connect to the ing and yang concept. So yes it's what I meant "in divided by two" We are dualistic, at least in this physical form. Intuition on the feminine dark side and logic on the light side of the male. Bringing this down to male/female, light and dark, the ing and the yang.



So the word individual is refering to this fact, the word clearly has "DUAL" in it, words are very reflective, who made them this way ? I have no idea.




Other similar words include indiscriminate, inefficient, incapacitated

These words connect to the "in"side of a person, the self, so I can say about someone that he is, "in"discriminate, "in"efficient, "in"capacitated all refering to the In-side of that person, his or her self.

Fascinating but the words speak of how things are.
Take a look for example at the trade mark "IN"TEL "IN"SIDE.

The very word "IN-TELIGENT" will address the inside of something so it's intel inside.




edit on 27-4-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-4-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-4-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
8

log in

join