This is going to start off seeming to jump around, but builds to a perspective or way of viewing consciousness that I haven't seen expressed quite
this way. It's an exploration down a path. If you hate smithjustinb's threads, probably want to avoid here too.
No matter what philosophy a person holds... there is one single thread of truth that runs through all of them. Interestingly, there is also a single
thread of truth that runs through every piece of "good advice" ever given.
1) The current life you live (the experience of birth to the experience of death), is a Bubble on the surface of an infinite waterfall that feeds
itself. From the deepest nihilist to the Highest Theist, this holds true.
2) Be your TRUE self, and love every moment as if it were the first and last.
No matter what is or isn't consciousness... no matter whether it goes forever, or is actually just a moment pretending to last a second... what else
is there *really* worthwhile to do than to just sit there and marvel at and love every single thing thrown at you... whether from heaven or hell.
How do you convince -1 that it is "Negative" compared to 1 without language... instead with emotion?
Is a plane higher than a car?
Is a plane in China higher than a car in America?
Is a plane on Saturn higher than a car on Earth?
Nothing is true, everything is relative to 1) Who is asking? and 2) What is their intent? Without those factors, no answer or question has meaning.
The most loving thing you can do is be the most true you you can be. Yet find anything in our culture/civilization that *genuinely* encourages this
that doesn't carry some form of hefty baggage blocking it from being ultimately experienced.
When you are perfect, you don't exist because you don't have anything to contrast yourself with. The most skillful do the least when it matters the
If you were the Mandlebrot set... which side would you call "life" and which side would you call "death"? The portion that goes into black for all
circumstances ever for all observers... or the portion that has infinitely redfinable colors depending on your position/judgement and doesn't actually
exist except in the observer's imagination? Which side of the Mandlebrot Coin is the most interesting to walk? How would you walk it? How do you
traverse an infinite number of paths? You split into two at each point. However how do you remember what you've learned? You leave a third person
behind to listen to both of you as you go down your separate paths.
One person... Three Bodies. Shared Now but also a Shared Separation all at the same paradoxical time when viewed from the two separated
One Person, Three Bodies.
H20 = Ice, Water, Steam
0-32 = Ice to Water. Unfrozen 33rd degree Free Mason.
Other forms of Masonry = 3 Degrees. Ice, Water, Steam.
Each is a level of consciousness. All are one, but each is manifestly and fundamentally different.
Ice requires structure, and each part is not allowed to be unique, however the whole forms a unique, if rigid and easily broken structure. Individuals
vibrate at a very low frequency at this level of existence.
Water requires a container (some very loose structure), however there is room for individual expression of self, and mobility... even if it requires
great energy to move significant distances. Individuals vibrate at a higher and more variable frequency at this level of existence, but for the most
part still flow with their environment.
Steam generally obeys no constraints and is free to just be as it will be. If it encounters a barrier that is too strong, it freely moves off as if
nothing happened (though some energy may still be exchanged). Sometimes however, enough of the light touches can encounter the barrier to cause it to
move, though the barrier will detect little more than it feels hotter. There is an enormous amount of freedom of individual expression here.
In all stages, the whole also had a form, and had certain patterns that could be repeated... however the fundamental nature of the individual and the
society, as well as how they affected each other when interacting... is fundamentally different.
"Airheads" and "He's so spacey" carry certain biases to us regarding how the person behaves. "Dense" and "he's so rigid" also carry certain biases.
It's no mystery that we would have a great deal of overlap between nature, our mind, and our language... but perhaps we've gotten the order of
operations wrong here? Doesn't it make more sense that an un-interpreted sense is experienced. No knowledge is available of how this experience was
created... only that it was experienced. Thus... feeling/experience is first. Then... after consistent feeling patterns are determined either language
or visualization progressed. This was a branching. One was a "set of instructions to predict/remember" the other was a "picture to see now". Both the
inner "mathematical language" and the "image produced" had to develop in parallel... similar to programming languages and monitors/output
This means they are both two sides of the same coin... feeling or experience... being interpreted in mutually exclusive but... just like two
eyeballs... when paired together create a perspective that allows us to bring understanding to the feeling and become conscious of both how it feels,
but what might be causing the feeling.
However since both branches of explanation are by definition and requirement... incomplete... it's easy for conflict over who is right to develop. The
conflict is in fact what creates the potential for increased understanding, however if allowed to become the only way to see things (as either *this*
OR *that*.... either right eye OR left eye... for a good metaphor), then we become trapped. Neither eye is correct, both add to the total picture.
Then I sleep and wake up, and need someone to point for me again.
edit on 21-12-2011 by ErgoTheConfusion because: (no reason given)