RMQualtrough

"Do rocks have consciousness?"

9 posts in this topic

The questions posed like this are made from the perspective of duality. This in particular is extremely difficult to understand but there is not any such thing as internal and external.

When you say do rocks have consciousness, it's an implication that there is a separation between self and other. Which there is from our perspective but not truly.

Best way to say it, is that if you believing you're a character in a dream pursued this line of questioning, you're really saying you are separate from the dreamed up rocks, and an Idealist says "the rocks are in me (the character)" and a materialist will just see there are rocks and think they have an independent existence AS a "thing" like "rock" which is impossible.

The solution is that neither the character nor the rock exist in separate planes of reality. The rock is equally as real as the thoughts the dream character is having.

So look, when you ask if a rock is conscious what you are subtley thinking is that there is ULTIMATELY a private world IN you consisting of thoughts etc. But that the rock is something different from a thought that is in a place called out there.

Neither a thought nor a rock are the subject itself, they are both objects (which are also the subject - just like how both the subject and object of dreams are one mind - but forget this for now).

...

I think ultimately then, rocks have no consciousness BUT it must be understood that neither do you. It is quite the opposite in that only that exists, and the rock is equal to your inner world of thoughts and feelings. Consciousness has you and has rocks and has thoughts. You aren't conscious, you aren't having thoughts, the rock isn't having thoughts, you aren't perceiving the form of a rock, the rock has no perception. Consciousness is having them all.

Your thoughts are every bit originating and existing in you as they are in the rock. It is equally valid to say the thoughts you have right now are in you or in the rock. As both are equally unreal.

And the confusion is because from the relative level this is not true.

And this btw is how all paradox is solved. Can something omnipotent create a rock even it can't lift? Yes. Because you can't lift a super fucking heavy rock but maybe Ronnie Coleman can, or maybe a fucking bear can. And it IS you and Ronnie and the bear and even the rock. So it both can and can't lift the rock simultaneously.

...

It's especially interesting to think that if there was a way to move all your sense organs to a rock, but keep the brain in your human skull, such that you see, feel, hear, taste, and touch from the perspective of the rock (like taking a camera and recording someone, then passing them the camera to turn it onto you), you would truly feel as though you are the rock.

The actual origin of what is doing the sensing would never be felt to be inside the human skull. It would completely seem to you to be happening from inside the rock because that's where all the senses are located. You would literally feel you are located in the rock. Of course it would not be true, the origin would be the brain. As in even from inside this universe/dream, a mismatch would be experienced because in this universe the brain is directly linked to the human self-mind.

A mind is a singular object. There is not actual distinction between sights, sounds, etc. The color red is as different from the color blue as it is from the sound of a piano. It is processing of the mind which makes a distinction. Like looking at a tree and seeing leaf, leaf, leaf, branch, leaf, twig, trunk (etc) instead of just seeing "tree". So we say sight, sound, smell, but it's actually all one singular object. And objects like the brain are ultimately = to an "immaterial" thing like a thought, hence you mess with the brain and experience changes, as it is just two objects existent in the same exact place which are linked. Like hitting a billiard ball with another. Both are in the same place hence no boundary between mind and matter.

That is why separate minds exist and there seems to be a private mind possessed by you the human. Because the private mind is just a singular object which is observed by consciousness, which simultaneously observes infinite objects including the mind of another human.

...

At the level of objects inside the relative domain there is boundary, in fact total infinity could not be experienced and as such finitude within infinity is necessary (this is another topic but very well explained by Rupert Spira). So our self-minds are finite and separate relatively. All confusion and misunderstanding that ever takes place is due to mixing Absolute and Relative perspectives.

And though it is necessary for a human to look "inward" to understand reality, that idea actually propogates the problem to a large extent because it builds up the idea that there is such a thing as an "in here" from the Absolute perspective, and philosophies like Idealism then try to chop up reality into out there and in here and find a way to explain how out there is actually only in this place called in here.

It is STILL chopping up reality into immaterial and material rather than understanding both are completely equal, and are existent neither in nor out (since either concept relies upon its implied opposite to even become a concept) but rather in the same exact non-place. Reality is as much found out there as it is found in here, as there is no ACTUAL distinction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve been a rock with consciousness. Seriously. But I wasn’t really a rock nor was I not a rock. I was contemplating how a rock or immaterial matter would reach enlightenment if it had impermanence as the only of the three characteristics which it would have to work with. I was deeply visualizing being a rock as much as possible. I saw how this would eventually lead to no self by impermanence constantly changing what the rock was. Then the obvious next step from my perspective was to see how that rock could become a living being with conscious capacities similar to a human. You are already a TON of conscious rocks right now if we are speaking of the human being aspect of your present moment experience. So there’s another strange loop/paradox. This was a great thing to contemplate and visualize. I reached what I called for myself Ultimate Reality within 15-30 minutes of seriously doing this from the perspective of the three characteristics in Buddhism then listening to the Diamond Sutra. 

Edited by BipolarGrowth

Everybody wanna be a mystic, but nobody wanna dissolve themselves to the point of a psych ward visit. 
https://youtu.be/5i5jGU9wn2M?si=-rXSAiT1MMZrdBtY

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BipolarGrowth said:

According to the AI named Staples which has no consciousness but IS consciousness. 

Ownership, 'having', is a concept. A human invention ;)


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Staples said:

Ownership, 'having', is a concept. A human invention ;)

Consciousness is a human invention by the same accord. 

Edited by BipolarGrowth

Everybody wanna be a mystic, but nobody wanna dissolve themselves to the point of a psych ward visit. 
https://youtu.be/5i5jGU9wn2M?si=-rXSAiT1MMZrdBtY

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything is Consciousness

From the imagined "person's" perspective, a rock probably has the same consciousness level as dirt ... but they are both imagined and part of Consciousness

Edited by GoobyBooby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BipolarGrowth said:

I’ve been a rock with consciousness. Seriously. But I wasn’t really a rock nor was I not a rock. I was contemplating how a rock or immaterial matter would reach enlightenment if it had impermanence as the only of the three characteristics which it would have to work with. I was deeply visualizing being a rock as much as possible. I saw how this would eventually lead to no self by impermanence constantly changing what the rock was. Then the obvious next step from my perspective was to see how that rock could become a living being with conscious capacities similar to a human. You are already a TON of conscious rocks right now if we are speaking of the human being aspect of your present moment experience. So there’s another strange loop/paradox. This was a great thing to contemplate and visualize. I reached what I called for myself Ultimate Reality within 15-30 minutes of seriously doing this from the perspective of the three characteristics in Buddhism then listening to the Diamond Sutra. 

Sounds like Salvia. I know Leo says smoke Salvia to experience being a door handle or whatever. But that is the thing of course that whatever experience takes place, including "being a door handle", is not actually happening anywhere at all.

There's no experience happening IN a rock or IN a human whatsoever, except relatively. Absolutely no human or rock or anything at all has consciousness or experience or a real and true independent existence. It's all literally without distinction and imaginary.

If you dream and have thoughts while dreaming, it seems that the thoughts exist somewhere different from the apparently physical landscape. But they don't. It's actually all from one singular mind. The "physical" and "non-physical" were never taking place in distinct locations.

In words I could just go to Nothing = Everything, but I find this important. Which is also perfect to do this philosophizing BS because the relative is part of the absolute like stripes on a blanket, and relatively it's fun. This is part of the perfection like the omnipotence paradox. That through "God" there can be a boulder it both can and can't lift simultaneously. So we get to act like egotistical little humans regardless of any divine truth and talk 100% relatively and it is still true in that identical paradoxical manner of the unliftable boulder.

...

I think it is a really critical thing that there is no "in". I think it is really critical that the external world can be seen as equivalent to the internal world and in fact it is just existence. Literally zero boundary between the two. I keep typing it in slightly different ways as I can tell it's really important but it's difficult to say it in a way that hits myself fully.

I think Idealism is a mistake, because it's drawing distinction still, between in and out. Rather than letting the two be equal precisely and exactly as they are. An atom = as immaterial as a thought. A thought = as material as an atom... There's something like this that is fundamentally wrong in Idealism and typically Eastern philosophy causes people to become Idealists. Most of Leo's videos align with what I am trying to say but he's more articulate.

Materialism might be equally as valid as Idealism because they are just trying to draw a distinction and pull in opposite directions. But I think it might be neither, and instead perfectly symmetrical.

Material = immaterial = material. Possibly neither word is right to explain what fundamentally "is". I can't QUITE grasp what my mind is trying to say.

Edited by RMQualtrough

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, RMQualtrough said:

Sounds like Salvia. I know Leo says smoke Salvia to experience being a door handle or whatever. But that is the thing of course that whatever experience takes place, including "being a door handle", is not actually happening anywhere at all.

There's no experience happening IN a rock or IN a human whatsoever, except relatively. Absolutely no human or rock or anything at all has consciousness or experience or a real and true independent existence. It's all literally without distinction and imaginary.

If you dream and have thoughts while dreaming, it seems that the thoughts exist somewhere different from the apparently physical landscape. But they don't. It's actually all from one singular mind. The "physical" and "non-physical" were never taking place in distinct locations.

In words I could just go to Nothing = Everything, but I find this important. Which is also perfect to do this philosophizing BS because the relative is part of the absolute like stripes on a blanket, and relatively it's fun. This is part of the perfection like the omnipotence paradox. That through "God" there can be a boulder it both can and can't lift simultaneously. So we get to act like egotistical little humans regardless of any divine truth and talk 100% relatively and it is still true in that identical paradoxical manner of the unliftable boulder.

...

I think it is a really critical thing that there is no "in". I think it is really critical that the external world can be seen as equivalent to the internal world and in fact it is just existence. Literally zero boundary between the two. I keep typing it in slightly different ways as I can tell it's really important but it's difficult to say it in a way that hits myself fully.

I think Idealism is a mistake, because it's drawing distinction still, between in and out. Rather than letting the two be equal precisely and exactly as they are. An atom = as immaterial as a thought. A thought = as material as an atom... There's something like this that is fundamentally wrong in Idealism and typically Eastern philosophy causes people to become Idealists. Most of Leo's videos align with what I am trying to say but he's more articulate.

Materialism might be equally as valid as Idealism because they are just trying to draw a distinction and pull in opposite directions. But I think it might be neither, and instead perfectly symmetrical.

Material = immaterial = material. Possibly neither word is right to explain what fundamentally "is". I can't QUITE grasp what my mind is trying to say.

Neither material nor immaterial while being both. In Christianity, it is said again and again that God is set apart. This is what brings us to a greater infinity within our experience right now. God is beyond these categories while including them. You have to be able to see more and more paradox and how it works. This being neither existence nor nonexistence is my favorite pointer a lot of the time. Whether true or untrue, it has gotten me pretty far in contemplation and results. 

Edited by BipolarGrowth

Everybody wanna be a mystic, but nobody wanna dissolve themselves to the point of a psych ward visit. 
https://youtu.be/5i5jGU9wn2M?si=-rXSAiT1MMZrdBtY

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now