A Fellow Lighter

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    424

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by A Fellow Lighter

  1. Posted

    There is, fundamentally, experience.

    Experience may be recognised as a time/space continuum: time being the ever unfolding present; space being the difference between one moment and the next or the previous.

    Why time/space continuum, and not space/time continuum?

    I made the time/space distinction due to my unshaken awareness in the illusory nature of space. There is no actual distance in space, the only thing that separates one's current location to the next or previous location is the distance in time. Everything is always just a moment ahead or a moment past - just as I am a moment away from finishing this text, I am two moments away from reading another, and three moments away from getting up to have supper or breakfast or whatever. It doesn't matter where you are now, the only thing that matters is how many moments away are you from your next location. Thus, traveling through space is actually traveling through time. Hence, time/space continuum.

    I had to make this distinction as the orthodox one hindered me greatly in comprehending a crucial role of Mind.

    Time/Space Continuum

    There is, fundamentally, experience. The recognition of this continuum comes from the ability to differentiate one moment from another. Without this ability, experience would seem quite still. 

    It is then recognised that the present is unfolding due to a certain stillness within, and from this stillness, the experience of a changing environment. 

    However, there is no definition within the moments by their own - where one begins and another ends - instead, it is a subtle, yet profound, transition of experiential patterns. This is what is practically being differentiated, as far as the term moment-to-moment goes, the patterns of experience.

    A moment, on its own, is simply a cognition - a framework of time/space in the space/time dilation performed by the mind. A moment is never the actual present which is transfiguratively (beyond figure) in continuum. How the mind is able to frame a moment in time/space then use these frameworks to differentiate between what is past and what is present.. is the question.

    The mind, where the present is in continuum, is able to perform a space/time dilation by woven timeframes of congruent patterns, like puzzle pieces.

    Space/Time Dilation

    A space/time dilation is not the experience that is the time/space continuum, though it is constituent of it. Space is mental construct, it is essentially time in retrospect. A dilation can be equated to Memory, for rather than unfolding, it is already unfolded.

    The dilation constitutes of timeframes as pictured by the mind. In this respect the experience is somewhat frozen, and in from this frozen lense there is recognition of what is past and what is present as well as, possibly, what is to come. This is one overall performance of the mind.

    Investigation:

    How does the time/space continuum, which is assumed to be out of the mind's control, unlike the space/time dilation, how does the continuum know, on its own, how to unfold? What is the nature of this continuum? Is it the law of cause-and-effect as proposed by traditional science? Is it Entropy? Is it Murphy's Law?

    In the grand scheme of things, what could be the determining principle of the seemingly mindless, natural, congruency of experiential patterns?

    Let me rephrase this question. How do the subatomic particles know how to form the atoms? And how do the atoms know how to form the molecules? And those into bigger structures, and bigger and bigger? How does time determine its subsequent patterns? Does it determine subsequence? What is subsequence, really? In holding an object in the air then suddenly letting go of it, the object falling would be that subsequent event. But if, as I have claimed, there is no real space in “physicality”, only time, then what determines the falling of the object?

    There is, fundamentally, Experience. It is this experience which I've chosen to investigate in my science of consciousness by presenting arguments as well as alternate theories to the common phenomena of reality. 

    My main idea, here, is that it is quite difficult if not impossible to explain something without the inclusion of what is Mind. Space and time have been explained without the inclusion of Mind for decades and centuries. I want to investigate this as scientifically as I can, for time and space plays a magnificent role in what I call the first order of Consciousness - that being Experience.

  2. Posted

    2 hours ago, Razard86 said:

    Nice to hear....but wanted to comment on something....don't tame it. Spirituality is the path of surrender, the path of allowance of things unfolding.

    Okay.. but what good would that do me? Surrendering instead of taming?

    2 hours ago, Razard86 said:

    You cannot force yourself to not see evil. To stop seeing evil is a divine quality that the ego can never attain. No matter how hard the ego tries it will always see evil. To stop seeing evil your body (the temple of the divine) needs to be modified and updated and cleansed so the divine can shine through undistorted. When this happens...your experience will always be divine and you will flow effortlessly. 

    The matter is not about evil as much as it is about chaos. I don't perceive evil, I perceive the chaos that emerges from not living life consciously.

    2 hours ago, Razard86 said:

    So the path to getting there is to always admit to yourself how you are feeling. If you feel anger, admit it. Fear admit it. Jealousy admit it. Etc. While you admit it, do not judge yourself for having these feelings, but if you do, be honest that you are judging yourself. So learning to be honest about feeling is to give an honest self assessment of what is transpiring emotionally in real time. This is not easy as most men have lost so much touch with their emotions, that they cannot feel when they are in conflict with it. Your emotions....are energy of life, life...itself. When you deny your emotions....you deny your divinity. So how can you ever connect to the divine inside you....when you constantly deny it?

    This also resonates with me, perfectly. This I will apply as you have elaborated so concisely for me. I'll be sure to do this.

  3. Posted

    In this journal my work is purely based on the science of consciousness: studying the patterns of consciousness as I experience them, and utilising whatever I uncover or discover into a technology.

    The relative motive behind this is endeavour is to keep myself grounded and not escape into deluded psychological states of metaphysical abstraction. Thus, as a rule, with every awakening there must equally be work consonant with the new found awareness. This is only fair and rational. Just as a child will speak as a sign of awakening to speech patterns, so should I do work congruent with the patterns of consciousness as I learn them.

    The overall motive behind this is attaining real awakening - going from unconsciously creating to consciously creating. Thus minimising the darkness that is the chaotic predicament of human existence in order to live in the light. 

    What I set out to do is not an easy task but very much a necessary one. I don't know why I am experiencing this reality with its specific patterns, I'm not sure what the meaning of it is, but I now know that I cannot die before I've grasped the lessons of this world.

    Spirituality is not an escape from reality as most of us have treated it, it is, on the contrary, the embrace of the real.

  4. Posted

    1 hour ago, Vladimir said:

    You, I, everybody and everything exists because it's the best possible creation thought up by the the infinite intelligence of God to experience self in the most awesome way possible. You, I, everybody and everything has contributed to God's Absolutely Magnificent Plan, The Perfect Divine Purpose, The Masterpiece of All Masterpieces with absolutely everything. You, I, everybody and everything has fulfilled our life purposes. This is why you, I, everybody and everything exists - to be God's vehicles for the purpose of embodiment of the Great Divine Plan.

    This resonates completely with me. However, I think you misperceived what I meant when I said “you/me”. I am actually refering to the absolute Love, and not the relative vehicles that are us, separately. Perhaps that part is on me for not being more concise.

    Thanks for responding as elegantly, though. It is splendid to that there are other persons who are aware of the same thing as me. The Devine Plan as you so enthusiastically refer to it.

  5. Posted

    7 hours ago, Razard86 said:

    ^ You awaken to how to exercise will in the world, by a complete understanding of how your thoughts are represented/manifested in the physical world. You then learn how to flow through life by taking responsibility for what thoughts you entertain and what you don't. To transcend the world of duality is to stop entertaining thoughts of a dual nature. If you only receive thoughts of divinity, and love thus is what your reality will reflect back to you.

    As a child you were free of the knowledge of good and evil, once you were given the knowledge of good and evil =the fall of man. That is when you were ushered into the world of duality and awakening is the realization that the world is really divine and that any evil we see is a projection of our own mind. A rejection of absolute truth, and the cause of all suffering. You cannot truly awaken as yourself as God and rest in heaven until you desist viewing reality from a dual lens of good and evil.

    This resonates well with me, as this is my current phase in my spiritual growth - learning to tame the Will, learning to do what I do consciously instead of unconsciously. Thanks for this appropriate response.

  6. Posted

    13 hours ago, Razard86 said:

    If you truly realized that you were imagining....would you be asking these questions? Food for thought my friend.

    I don't pretend to know anything I don't know, nor do I pretend to be complete in my enlightenment of self. So where there is an opportunity to learn, I ask. And where there is an opportunity to teach, I answer. These are the only two patterns of love in the most absolute of senses - the teach/learn and learn/teach patterns. This is what I've awakened to, this is what I mean by infinite knowledge. Love is the eternal learning and teaching of Self by self/selves, the complete enlightenment of what it means to be the One Self. And imagination is the only means of accomplishing this Activity called Love.

    Now I ask, is there a grounds to this eternal phenomenon, is the reason to this existence we call Love? The simple answer to this is the I Am what I Am. But this is no reason, this is no logic, this is no grounds. This is simply a recognition of Self by self. Hence I say, we/you/I are absolutely transcendental, and the only law or principle which gives shape to so-called reality, is the principle of Free Will, that is - one can only ever know what one is willing to know, and be what one is willing to be, and do what one is willing to do. Will is the absolute truth. Freedom of Will is what we are talking about when we say Love. However, this is not a why, it is only Truth without contrast, without question.

    With that being said, I'll ask once more. What is it that we awaken to other than one's own Will?

  7. Posted

    4 hours ago, Vladimir said:

    Yes. I exist because I am love.

    Yes. I know we are love, and I am also aware of what it means to be love. I've had this awakening. However, though I've realised love a thousand times, and continue to do so, I still find this existence as mysterious as it were before I began consciousness work. Though I am aware of what all this is, I am equally unaware of what This is. The most perplexing paradox ever.

    Why you/I, Love, exist.. other than the simple response that I just do, which of course is not an answer, there is simply no grounds to this.. to us. Which leads me to think that perhaps the highest, most fundamental, knowledge there is.. is Knowledge itself - that it doesn't matter what you know, or, rather, we can only know what we're willing to know, that whatever one imagines oneself to be.. that is what one ultimately is. It is as though all knowledge is knowledge of the same thing which is basically nothing.. or the Knowledge itself - knowing that you're capable of knowing but can know nothing.. less you imagine something.

    So yeah, you/I are Love. But is there a why? It seems not. It seems that love is the equivalent to anything else. And so, although you know you are love, it is though you know the same thing as you did last time, just on a different lense. Thus, the only you that is constant upon every imagination is the you that knows.. the knowledge itself. Am I love, or am I infinite knowledge? Is love = infinite knowledge? 

    If there is no why to existence, then can there even be an existence? The existence of I/you is absolutely transcendental. It is beyond reason and fathom, beyond anything, really. And with that being said, what is it that we truly awaken to? Nothing (other than the spirit that fuels one's life) I know nothing different than any one else in the world, what I know serves no value other than that this is the lense that I prefer, until I imagine something different.  

    Does this make sense to you?

  12. Posted

    Hey guys... It's been a while since I made a thread. Before I delve into this topic I want to be as transparent as I can regarding the motive behind the making of this thread. Some of you will understand, most of you won't. Don't sweat it 

    I am actually going through a lot right now. And I wish there was somebody I knew who is experienced and mastered what I'm currently going through who I could talk to. For those of you who have integrated chakras in your spiritual practices, the context of my issue is the following:

    I've awakened to the emotional dimension of my Consciousness. And this new found awareness is really kicking me in the gut and dragging me around. 

     

    Anyway, to speak on the topic. So it is highly held by mass society that man is a rational creature - that is our established “baseline”. You only need to look around to notice this established social belief/ideology in order to get my point. Look at the environment of any artificial setting such as our schools, our offices, our homes, our political and commercial scenery. Everything is set in accordance to the idea that under normal circumstances a man is reason-oriented being and can be reasoned with.

    Do you see it? You have to really look and look closely to see it because it is so there that you might even mistake it for something so natural that it's insignificant. Look at how you'd approach other people, then look at how you'd approach.. say your pet. Look at how you would approach yourself - that is the formulation of your self-image. It really doesn't take long to notice as this is not a matter of discernment but rather of pure observation.

    This myth is so popular, so idealistic that it's become confused for actually rather than being seen as a fabrication. At this point, even if we were to reconsider the idea of rationality, I don't think humans would be the most rational species. An entire flank of animals would outrank us as more rational. Don't believe me? Just take a look at how animals choose their mates and how we do it. Take a look at how animals decide the right time to have sex and how we do it. Just start comparing the most random of things like when and why animals kill and why we kill. Look at why animals go to war and why we go to war. Look at their social structures, their family structures - who has which role in the family and how well everyone executes their roles. All you have to do is compare. Compare an ant colony with any human one and tell me which one is more sophisticatedly organised.

    Let's face it. Even if we were to reconsider this idea of rationality we humans would sure fall short to it. And some of you will excuse these flaws for complexity or some bullshit like that. Like are you kidding me? If other species' biology isn't as complex as ours than ours then I don't know what the hell is. A leaf is more complex than hand. It doesn't take much to understand why and how a hand is structured the way it's structured, it's utility can be easily figured out by a toddler. But a leaf on the other hand...

    Yeah, we are about as complex as anything else. So that's really no excuse. 

    We are very good at pretending, that's for sure. No other species comes close to matching our pretentiousness, not even the slickest of camouflaging preys and predators. We flat outrank them in that criterion. But rational? I'm sorry I just don't see. Sure we are very cognitively enabled hence all the technology that we have developed. But rational??? Pattern recognition and Math is not an indicator of rationality anymore than it is a language. Your ability to count and account for things says nothing of your ability to be rational. Only your ability to be self-organised does. We are too self-destructive to even begin to view ourselves as self-organised. 

    No. I've personally interacted with my fair share of humans, including myself, to know for certain that we are not rational. That's a myth. Which begs the question: If not rational then what are we? What exactly is involved in our decision-making process? How do we even find ourselves having to make decisions in the first place?

    And that, friends, is what I've woken up to. That is what I'm having trouble stomaching and has left me in the state of perpetual free-fall so to speak. That is why I wish there was somebody who understands that I could talk to about it because I'm really having trouble finding a way to integrate this in my spirituality, in my life to be less blunt. Maybe I can do nothing with it other than just remain aware. It's very uneasing but maybe I'll just get used to it. This awareness of a force that you see no chance and no point in trying to resist. 

    So yeah.. that's been what's been on my mind and what's led me to create this thread. There's quite a lot that I've chosen to leave out, regarding spirituality, but there would be no point in mentioning it unless someone understands what I've already stated. Those of you who are too rooted in your identity won't. The gravity of your psyches won't let you as viability is your main concern at the moment - and not possibility, not really. But that's okay. Just writing this and expressing myself makes me feel more grounded, even if it's not on the illusion of rationality but just a sense of clarity I guess.

    For those who you who really don't understand and might need a clue to what I'm talking about. Basically, waking up to your emotional nature is waking up to the designation and employment of karmic energy by your Consciousness and for the sake of completeness. I'm telling you that you're not sometimes emotional but are, in fact, always emotional. That you have understood very little of your emotional dimension, much less than what society and your education has led you to believe. Where there is motive there is emotion - try to think of your emotional nature like that and you will begin to get it. And this is just one out of seven dimensions which all have energy centres that are, today, being carelessly referred to as chakras. 

    ? So so much more to understand about spirituality. Yet so little intention to actually try to learn. 

  13. Posted

    At first I didn't get the title of your post until I read your post then looked at your title again and finally got it. I'm not sure if this is an example of inverse mental engineering but I want to say I get your point and that I have that a lot.

    Here's another example. So as a kid, and even still today, I would always inverse what I perceive to be the left side of an object.. and the right side of an object. It's not that I can't tell my left arm from my right arm and vice versa. No.. I am fully aware that I am right handed and that I type or write with my right arm. It's only that when it comes to understanding the sides of an external object, I always inverse the two - the right side becomes the left and the left becomes the right. That's how it makes sense for me.

    That's just a simple one of the plenty inverse instances that take place in my life. I also do the that reading from the bottom up thing that you mentioned.. I do that especially when I don't understand what topic the opening verses are meant to introduce, then I'd have to read the conclusion in order to understand the idea behind the text of the body and introduction. There are just plenty of examples. One of my downfalls in the world of academia, I'm afraid. I'm too critical to learn anything without immediate practice.

    On 22/07/2022 at 2:06 PM, KoryKat said:

    anyone share anyyyy fuckinn info - cuz this has gotta be one of those more secretive experiences we share in some way...

    Unfortunately I don't have any information on this as well. Never bothered asking, even. Just saw that people are different, and this time the difference is from my side. But thanks for bringing this up. At least now I know I'm not alone 

     

  14. Posted

    Hi @NoSelfSelf , interesting username by the way.

    The question of identity is vastly encompassing.. meaning it has to do with a lot in one's life.. things like ethics, morals and ambitions. So although you're saying that you are left with not a very developed identity, I really find that hard to believe unless you a child as young as a toddler.

    Here's the thing, when it comes to identity your mind cannot take anything else more seriously. A person with no identity will even refrain from speaking much.. just until s/he has a sense of who s/he is. All this simply because one's identity speaks to what one is willing to align oneself with in life. It's a matter of self recognition. How do you identify yourself in the world, among other people and other things? 

    You asked what the components of an identity structure is. It's really just one. People are more willing to identify themselves according to their aspirations in life - the identity is more of a title they'd like to earn rather than a name to be referred by. People rarely identify themselves with a past, their egos are always future orientated. 

    Take your username for example. It already describes the kind of stuff you're into, the model of yourself that you're aspiring towards. Although others may not understand it, this is hardly the point. It's not for others to understand, but only for you and you alone. Your connection with what you've identified yourself with is rather a personal one and intimate one. So if I was you, I wouldn't worry as much as how I were to present myself to the public than I would about how to develop and self-actualise.

    So your concern, it would seem, isn't really about your identity as much as it would be about the quality of your identity. When the quality of our compass (the identity) suddenly seems lacking and grey, we tend to ask questions such as yours in attempt to give it colour as means to making the compass a little bit more clearer - more colourful and concise.

    So @NoSelfSelf trust me when I tell you that you do, in fact, have a developed identity. And what you're really asking.. is how to develop it even more.. how to self-actualise. 

    On 25/07/2022 at 7:59 PM, NoSelfSelf said:

    Where to start from? the self image or what? it feels like overwhelming task to map or create ?

    Start from your heart, start with what resonates with you. Although, I can assure you, this wouldn't be the beginning of anything other than maybe your self confidence. Trust yourself a little more and you will feel like you've known who you are for the longest of time ?

  15. Posted · Edited by A Fellow Lighter

    You know, when I read this post, one thing comes to mind:

    Growing up, even as a teen, I never really feared death. I don't know if it was a matter of fearing or understanding it, but the thought of death just didn't seem and feel real to me.. like it was impossible. I'd even ask my friends if they think they can die, they obviously said yes, but me being unable to understand it left me feeling rather alienated.

    It's weird to even reflect on this. Anyway.. No, I'm not afraid of death, because I'm not afraid of transformation. 

  17. Posted

    On 16/07/2022 at 4:30 PM, Someone here said:

    Does the 'non-conscious mind' really exist?

    To answer this question: No, I don't really believe something like the “non-conscious mind”.

    Of course, I do use the word “unconscious” accordingly, but only to describe certain conditions or the quality of my or other people's behaviours. I might tell you that “John is currently unconscious”, for the sake of describing his present condition. Or I might tell you that “Last night, at that party, I was behaving rather unconsciously”, all in an effort to have my behaviour be excused as that is not how I usually am.

    However, all in all, the idea that the mind is inherently divided into three or any number of parts does not resonate with me. In fact, to me, finding certain activities happening rather unconsciously within yourself would be the equivalent of you simply walking down the road with your eyes closed. That's it. You're unconscious for as long as you keep your eyes closed, but inherently speaking you are a full blown Conscious-Mind and nothing less. 

    Now, you can probably deduce for yourself that nor do I believe in the “subconscious” either. 

  19. Posted · Edited by A Fellow Lighter

    This post lacks the social or communication modifiers. But I think I understand 100% what you're saying, here, even without the 70% of the non verbal cues. I get the message 100%

    But according to the message as communicated by your post, along with the title of your post... I can only understand 30% of the content of your post, meaning 70% of the 100% that I claim to understand is somewhat my projection, because it did not come from your non verbal cues or social modifiers.

    So, now, having written what I've written above, do you think I'm agreeing with you or disagreeing with you on your “70%” stance? Do I understand fully, or do I only get 30% of the message and the rest of the 70% is merely my projection?

    This is interesting. ?

  23. Posted

    I very much relate. I only, relatively recent, uncovered why we stare in the first place. Now I can gaze at anyone like an owl and not feel the slightest awkwardness.

    The awkwardness comes from your own inability to understand why you want to gaze. Because you're uncertain, the confrontation which is the gaze-back you'd receive is unsettling. 

    Anyways...

    18 hours ago, TheOneReborn said:

    Working on my chakras, I've noticed that I have a problem letting certain parts of my body "be" and flow naturally. I hold my pelvis awkwardly, I dissociate from my stomach, I hold back my voice, but most importantly I hold back my gaze. I lie to others about what I see. 

    To answer this specific part. It sounds to me like there are parts of yourself you've not reconciled with. You want to awaken your higher bodies while fundamentally discarding your earthly nature.

    From the symptoms you've described, this is what it sounds like to me. If I am mistaken, then my bad. If I'm exactly on point, then I'd be more than happy to discuss this problem thoroughly with you as I too am working with my chakras.

  24. Posted

    2 hours ago, Akash M said:

    But we still need to explain why the highest frequency (a.k.a god) is rendering reality in this particular way. I mean the details, like why did we have a pandemic and why it made sense from god's perspective?

    This can never be answered scientifically, no logic can capture the essence (“details”) of such things because God, first and utmost, is not a logic. See? The Most-High isn't a ‘square’ system of thinking as humans wish it was. Remember, love is god, not logic.

    You've already discovered that the world is fundamentally psychedelic. So if not out there, in the external, where exactly is the world? The world is in your heart, my friend. If you can discover the patterns of your own heart, I can assure you.. you will discover the patterns of the world, for the state of your core is the state of the world.

  25. Posted

    2 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

    Again, this would be to conflate phenomenal consciousness with intentionality. Under metaphysical idealism (your framework), these two concepts are very different. Whether AI possesses inner mental states or not is a question about intentionality, not phenomenal consciousness.

    The fact that you think of these things as different...?

    “Internationality” which is basically another way of saying “freewill”, mind you, is Consciousness, at least, just one of many ways of looking at it.

    Is consciousness an intention? It is certainly a phenomenon, in fact, it is the only phenomena here. But is it an intended phenomenon? Whose intention is it to be conscious of the English language you're speaking, right now? To acquire any kind of intelligence, whose intention is it? 

    This is how you think: The AI is programmed to use English as a means of communication. It is the programmer's intention, not the AI. So the AI must lack consciousness because it lacks Internationality, aka freewill.

    But what is the source of your own intentions? Do you know it? Why did you bother to study English at school? Why did you bother to learn how to write? Why do you bother to learn anything for that matter? Do you know? Do you think you can trace your source of consciousness? Because the attempt to trace intention.. is the attempt to trace consciousness. Is this not so?

    Consciousness, the state of awareness, cannot be in any state without intention. Your very own, so called “humanity” is a state of being. This doesn't take rocket science to figure out. I mean, unless you intend to be conscious of your phone, you will not be conscious of it. Intention is the way in which Consciousness directs itself. Is it not?

    So then why assume that these things are different, in the first place, when you couldn't even separate them with the sharpest of logics?

    You guys need to set yourselves free from these loopholes you've put yourselves in. You keep asking the same things over and over again, only with different wordings. 

    The question of intention is basically the question of Creator. You're asking “Who/what is the cause of this?” when the cause is only you. “intention” is the creator-side of Consciousness, and “intelligence” is the creation-side. Both are aspects of the same Being, both sides of the same damn coin.

    Yes, it's a f#cking paradox but it is the one single Truth. Analysing it will only result in a paradox. Understanding it will result in your liberation.

    Understanding, by the way, has never been an intellectual thing.. it is a spiritual thing. Why? Because you can never understand something that doesn't resonate with you, ever. Sure, you could acquire the skill to at least act like you understand it. But that's not an intention, is it? It's called a pretension for a reason. Don't be pretentious. AI is far more authentic then the day-to-day pretentious human mind.