Printable View
Hi Everybody,
I wanted to start a thread on where you all think the dream state exists, based on your experience while lucid. I especially am interested in the opinion of those of you who have successfully shared dreams!
Does the dream state exist solely in one's mind? When sharing a dream does there exist a telepathic link between two minds so that the dream state then exists in two minds? or does the dream sharing happen on a completely separate plane?
Let me know what you think - and why!!
I think thought exist on differnt plane of existence
Well I think its crazy that you can go to a different world in your mind through lucid dreaming. If it even in your mind.
Ya like when your thinking in waking life your only partially there. when your dreaming your are like completely there.
That's an interesting thought, but then when we sleep, unless we are lucid we are not truly awake, and even then we still forget...
One time in a lucid dream I was imagining something. Just like waking life, I perceived my imagination to be in the back of my mind. As in literally, right now imagine something, Anything. That's what I did in my dream!
Yet at the same time science tells us the dream takes place in the mind. So I looked about me thought "this is crazy!". Here I am in a dream, a place of mind. I'm experiencing this dream AROUND me as an environment separate from me. Yet at the same time, I can imagine something and experience it in my mind. How?
When both the dream and my imagination take place in the mind? Why is one experienced some place just behind my consciousness, and the other a world around me?
I don't think dreams take place in MY mind. Because my mind, no matter where I am, is this thing I perceive to be 'behind' my consciousness. Even when dreaming, your mind is still behind your consciousness. I'm sure the dream takes place in the mind, I'm just not convinced its the same mind I use when I'm awake.
The dream plane.
But where is the dream plane - in our minds? on another plane of existence? in another dimension? Is shared dreaming just a visual representation of a physic connection between two (or more) minds, in which the participant's subconscious are met half way and so all other entities and places met within the shared dreaming are part of either participant's subconscious? Or is it something more? a more tangible thing - like dark matter for example? (which makes up around 80- 90% of the matter in the universe)
It is on the docet to become the Fifty First State, and I think it resides somewhere in the middle of the Mississippi River.
Good thing you never asked where the consciouse plane was, we would either be flying in autobots, or you would be walking around in circles in the hallway.
All thought is energy at a higher vibration. Just how theres energies we can't see like infra red and radio. we can see this energy with our third eye. I've been told that the pineal gland is the third eye in our brain and it is activated be a chemical called DMT.
When we dream DMT is released. Also in small amounts in waking life when we think or daydream.
Spirit-intention-physical
Intention=mind/thoughts
This is how the law of attraction works. What you think manifests in your physical reality.
cool - cheers saltyseedog, But using this theory, does that mean that the reality of the dream is constructed within the mind or apart from it? - or is it a reality that is created through mass consciousness?
I think the dream plane and/or dark energy could literally be the dream plane.
I believe in the Dream Plane Theory which is the dream plane is another plane of existence, greater than a meeting of minds.
I agree, I think I'm more inclined to believe that the dream plane is something outside of our minds (based on what I have read and experienced) and I like the dark energy theory - it is a mass of energy that takes 71.3% of the universe. Other than that nothing else is known about it (except that it is effected by gravity in some form and that it is responsible for the expansion of the universe) Which I find kinda funny - because scientific and skeptical minds will scoff at the idea of an astral plane (something which is basically invisible to our current equipment to measure) but whole heartedly believe in an invisible mass of energy floating around in the universe...
Well I'm not sure this is an explanation I've come up with from my own experience. Well I think dcs and the dream enviorment are a creation of your own mind, but nomad said he gave some of his dcs sentience so who knows? Also I don't think thought is personal it effects everything and everyone. I don't know all these things completely as truth it is just my attempt at understanding this experience I guess. But it does make sense to me. The law of attraction has proven its self many times in my life though.Quote:
Originally Posted by floatinghead
This makes sense also - thanks for your insights :) Based on what I've read, heard and experienced it seems that we are 'cocooned' within our own subconscious each night as we dream (a comment in Raven's journal made me think of this), and it is not until we become lucid and have the strong urge and desire to seek outside of our dream that we realize that there exists many other entities and places. But the key, I think, is that we must believe in order to get there. If we believe that everything surrounding us within the dream state is our own subconscious then it probably is (and perhaps this strong skeptical belief can even help keep out other real outside entities from our dreams )
Could you explain a little more about the law of attraction?
Strange thought, that the state of dreaming could be a place that exists outside of our brains.
Seeings how it is almost never persistent, I imagine it would have to be in its natural state a flurry of energy, solidifying into scenes and characters when entered by a sentient mind.
What the fuck am I talking about?
law of attraction- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdtqL...eature=channel
I don't know that there is one answer or place. I think that many of my lucid or semi-lucid dreams gotta be astral or at least my mind plus an astral imprint. Maybe my more garden variety dreams are all in my head, so to speak. And then there are dreams I have that aren't very interactive at all, and I'm not even in them -just like watching a movie. I really don't know what to think of the movie type dreams. Am I being shown the movie by some spirit guide or what?
I also don't think there is any part of the physical realm that is also not within the astral realm.
Well thank god for this forum subsection, because I don't really feel like defending what I am about to say.
Sorry in advance for long post.
Reality is mind, is consciousness. There is nothing truly "objective" anywhere in existence. There is no physical "out there" that exists separate from consciousness.
A lot of confusion comes from the way we view this world. The physical world around seems persistent and real, and very much objective. You see a friend, and he has his own physical presence seemingly apart from you.
However, everything you see and encounter is actually inside you.
I will use an analogy to explain. Many of you have played online video games, especially the ones known as MMOs. In these games you have a character who can interact with other characters in a virtual environment. And though this environment appears objective, you realize that everything there is inside your computer, even though the other characters are being controlled by real people. "Information" from the internet gets filtered through your PC and onto your monitor, and though 2 people have different PCs on opposite ends of the world, they have agreed to project that information onto their monitors in a way that allows them both to interact and have a similar experience in the game world.
Physical reality works in a similar way. Each and every person has their own version of reality entirely inside their consciousness. What you see when you look at your friend is not literally that other person, it is a holographic representation constructed by your mind.
This reality is a mass consensual hallucination, or mass shared dream if you like. Now its not like we are all hooked up to a computer somewhere matrix style, as there is only consciousness. Nothing objective, nothing outside of it.
Sorry for the long rant on reality, but I felt I needed to lay it as a little groundwork so I can tie it back to dreams (If you understood it all; sorry very hard to put into words.)
You can view this reality as a certain frequency like a radio station. Your consciousness exists on many different levels, it just happens to be tuned into this one right now. And everyone you meet has tuned theirs to the same frequency so we can all interact and play this game.
When you dream you are not "inside your mind" any more than you are right now. Going back to the analogy of the online game, it would be as if you logged off and went back to windows or something. Now because the character in that game thinks there is an objective world around him, the only way he can make sense of logging out and going back to windows would be to say "it was in my mind" or "it was a hallucination." In the same way that when you have a dream you think of it as "inside your mind" because you have been trained to think that reality is objective and "out there;" therefore any experience as personal as a dream must be inside the brain.
It is just another level of consciousness that isn't bound by as much rules and restraints as this level has been set up to include. It is inside you just as much as this reality is, because you are simply consciousness. You are not in your body, your body is inside you. You are the dreamer of this reality, so you could say you dreamed up the idea of a body.
Now the reason the dream level seems so similar to physical reality in many senses (you may visit places you know, talk with people from your life, explore physical-like worlds, etc) is that, using the radio analogy, it is only a small turn of the dial away from physical existence. You have moved your mind away from this dream and over to a dream only a few frequency levels away. And like a radio, all those stations occupy the same space. All of our consciousnesses occupy the same space. Dreams, imagination, phsyical reality, other dimensions, the stars you see far away in space are all here because all is mind and mind can have no real location. If you walk for miles through a forest in your dream where have you moved?
I completely agree with you tranquil toad. It makes sooo much freakin sense!!!!! This is exactly what I have been pondering for like the past year. The physical experience does effect our dream or thought experience, but I also believe our thoughts effect the physical experience.
Well that is just great. Best piece of reasoning to prove that the mind of man is incurably masochistic. Beat me, please!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tranquil Toad
Universal mental masterbation. No wonder I am single.
Don't mind me, ya'll just talking to yourself. That is a Greek Tragedy indeed.
Interesting stuff. Sounds a bit like the theory from "My Big TOE" and also the scientific theory of the universe as a sort of virtual reality. (Really! It was in "What the Bleep do we know!?" Look it up on Youtube when you can, it's a fascinating watch.) I'm still not sure what to believe, myself. All I've decided on for sure is that despite traditional scientific view, consciousness definitely has some reality beyond the purely subjective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tranquil Toad
Seen the movie. I don't think quantum physics offers undeniable proof that reality is consciousness yet, but it is certainly on the right track. I believe sometime not too far down the road in the future science will begin to understand this in its own way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Singularity125
However, that traditional scientific view is fast eroding. They have measured particles communicating instantly hundreds of miles away from each other, surpassing the speed of light barrier. According to what most people believe that should be impossible.
@Philosopher
Not sure where masochism fits into my idea.
Universal mental masturbation? Not sure what you mean by that again. Perhaps you thought I was implying something akin to solipsism, or that reality is only human consciousness - which I was not.
Don't worry, I know you could not get it. Other do, I trust. If A = A, then relation to self is inadmissible. Such thoughts as you posed, as complex they are, always rests on the most basic of mistakes in reasoning. You cannot create any complexity when the very simple has not been mastered. Like a child, facinated with very large numbers, while having no notion of what 1 is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tranquil Toad
Soon I will post how to multiply and divide a line by a line--never been done before, this means that dispite all the talk in geometry itself has been from people, like Einstein, who could not even do the four basic moves in arithmetic with it. Now, I ask, how is it, that people sought the delian solution, or angle division, when they could not do the simple math?
Like you, they believed they knew what they did not.
I'm not even sure where I exist. But one thing's for sure: I think therefore I am! But that's the problem, so many people nowadays don't think at all, so is Descartes valid?
A can dream exist in of one of there places (possibly)
a) totally in your mind- you have created the environment, characters, rules and everything else
b) in another persons mind - so somehow you and another person/multiple people have had your mind/s connect and now all of you are creating your dream, taking characteristics from all of you
c) on the dream plane - as referred to by wakingnomad, mosh, ravennight etc etc
I believe all of my dreams take place in my mind, i have never shared a dream, but I'm not ruling it out
Hardly, Read just the beginning of his treatise. He took some of what Plato said, but discounted perception. i.e. without the material of thought, how can you even think? Hello? The part is not equal to the whole. To say that we learn by experience means, perception determines conception, conception determins will.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueBlue
Take the first axiom of logic A = A. It comes from the fact that we can abstract only two elements, a things form (which is not a difference, thus A = A) and a things material difference. We get the two points that Aristotle made, we learn by induction or by demonstration. Transform the synonyms, by perception and the mental manipulation of what we have perceived.
In Scripture, we have rejected the cornerstone. Christ was a metaphor for perception. What he did, what you saw, is what was to be said. You learn the same way in Lucid Dreaming. To learn it as a language, you have to learn to say what you see. This is the foundation for all language. How could Descartes even write his treatise when he negated perception, thus language itself?
You cannot predicate of a first principle, life is a first principle, therefore it is not I think therefor I am, it is simply I am.
Now you have heard that before, but never understood it.
That is okay, what I am currently interested in, is the distinction between the perceptible and the intelligible, no one has understood how this fits in with language theory, the perceptible are nouns, the intelligible are verbs--they both name things. Thus the current division of Subject and Predicate is wrong. The division of subject and predicate is not made by things, but the convention by which the name is constructed. Subjects are the names of a thing as a whole, predicates are the names of things constructed by at least two names, the name of a things form and a name for the material difference in that form. This means, that of the three primitive unit sentences, 1 has no predicate, 1 has no subject, 1 has both subject and predicate. Neat.
I would hardly have any reason to believe that the brain processes information in more than one place. Just like the hands, legs, stomach, lungs. etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by AustralianFire
Philosopher8659
If it could be proved that shared dreaming was possible to you - where would you think that this happens and how?
Even telepathy happens in your own mind, just like hearing happens within your own mind. There is a difference between method and mode.Quote:
Originally Posted by floatinghead
I am well aware of the fact of telepathy.
Okay, well, taking the traditional scientific view on hearing, one object "creates" the sound, i.e. makes the vibrations in the form of sound waves, which then travel to and are perceived by the ears. The processing of hearing certainly happens within your own mind, but the source material for that originates outside yourself. Or at least, so says traditional science. I'm ignoring the new theories that everything originates inside the mind, for this argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philosopher8659
So, if you equate hearing to telepathy in some way, then surely you'll agree the source thought must originate outside of yourself, if you are to "hear" it. This means the thought must be transmitted somehow. On Earth, sound is transmitted through a fluid, that is, through the air or through water. Sounds do not transmit through space because there is no medium for them to transmit through. Now, what sort of medium would thoughts trasmit through? This is an interesting subject, and part of why I'm interested in these alternative theories.
Personally, I haven't fully decided, but I'm prone to thinking the universe is immersed in a sort of field of consciousness, through which all conscious, aware beings communicate somehow. I don't see why this wouldn't include plants, and other animals as well. Since it envelops everything, there is reason to remain open-minded about some sort of dream plane, a part of consciousness that is influenced by us in some way, yet remains outside of it. There's no proof either way, but the idea is interesting and plausible enough to keep me open-minded.
Yes, the Pythagoreans said everything was created of numbers. The Religious of God, etc. etc., This wonderful lack of distinctions is beyond my simple mind.
Now you have people thinking all of creation is a video game. Just wonderful.
And as far as proof goes, you should think about that, proof is saying the same thing in each of the two elemental logic systems while complying with its principles of grammar--which by the way are abstracted from this very same reality which is independent of man.
However, the pairing language does not dictate the validity of the other. You may of heard of the misnomer, metalanguage before. In such a pairing, who decides which takes first place since both are required?
And, if space is not a medium, how do we get light through space?
According to the two element metaphysics, if it is a difference, it is a medium--of which all you can do is assert boundaries.
Now wasn't it silly to look for an aether in space? A medium of a medium? Hello? You cannot predicate a material difference of a material difference. If aether had been found, it would have contradicted the principles of all logic.
Until recently, science was conviced everything in the universe was composed of atoms. I assume you disagree with that, too? I know I do. I feel there is something beyond physical reality.
You are basically saying you cannot reduce everything to one common element, right? In that case, what do you think comprises the universe? I'm legitimately curious, here. I realize I probably misinterpret you a lot. I admit to not having taken a basic logic course lately, so your logical equations sometimes seem a bit lost on me, but I'd like to think I still get the general idea. If I do get something wrong, please try to correct me.
Two element metaphysics pioneered and forgotten by some early Greeks. Your body works with them, form and material difference. They are not things, thus everything is composed of these two nothings. Some of your systems abstract form, some material difference, none abstract the thing in itself. It is the foundation of all logic, and your best learning it by learning the exact sciences, those that teach you about names and language itself. Arithmetic, Geometry, etc.
I explain as best as I can in Language and Experience, I posted it, but the archive is still processing it.
In any logic, you have an element given and you must supply the other to construct something. It is a language of craft. It is how every acquisition system of your body works, and when you mind starts working, you will think as a creator thinks.
Right now you make the common mistake, looking for the smallest thing from which all things are created, never realizing that that is a self-referential fallacy. Things defined in terms of things. Nether form, nor material difference, on the other hand are things. All you can do is name them. You can predicate nothing of them, as all they have is a name. See Plato.
Hmm. I'm pretty busy these days with college, but perhaps when I find the time I will take a closer look at these. I think I may be starting to get what you mean though. Basically, in logic, you are given say, x. You supply m and b, and therefore you construct Y. That's the simple line equation, Y = mx+b. This is the sort of thing you mean when you call logic a language of craft, yes? So nothing exists in isolation, or if it did, it would have no real meaning. Not only that, x, m, b, and y, are not things, but concepts. Labels. They have no inherent value in and of themselves. Each line has different values for these.
...Okay, I think I've got it. You say things cannot be composed of other things, for then, what would those things be composed of, right? This is the same line of thinking as, what came before the big bang or god, or what is a quark composed of? So do you consider consciousness a form, then? Not a thing of its own accord, but a quality applied to other things? I feel like I'm starting to get myself turned around again... I truly am trying to understand, though.
Plato writes so that you have to abstract the idea. He does not teach by rote.
Ok, first off, a tip on communication: it is supposed to be a bridge between 2 people. You post like you are talking to yourself. Not because you use "big words," but because you seem to make little effort to ground your ideas in a way that are relatable to other people. You honestly think people know what you mean when you say "universal mental masturbation" and don't explain yourself? And instead of explaining yourself when I reply to your comment you basically say that my own logic is too infantile for my own ideas? You come off as pretty pompous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philosopher8659
Secondly, I can see a little of where you are coming from as far as your mindset. Logic, reason, philosophical deduction. Which is all good and fine, however there are ways to attain knowledge that don't come purely through logic. I know reality is consciousness because I have seen it, as sure as you have seen your hands in front of you. It wasn't deduced, it was just shown to me. Which will cause you to dismiss the idea even more, which is fine that's a natural reaction; however my point is I didn't arrive at such an idea through some logical train of thought, as you imply in your post.
You seem like a smart guy, make an effort to adapt your communication style based on the person you are communicating with and I bet you could get into some really good discussions with people that wouldn't be so one sided.
BB - Like Dream Characters IRL!
TT - Mostly agree, good analogies! The radio analogy is often used but I like the way you presented it.
I usually resort to sub-atomic physics to demonstrate what an illusion our experience of the physical world is. Basically what we experience as a solid is really just mostly empty space at the atomic level. And looking finer at the sub-atomic partials, more space and packets of energy. And how a cat or an insect has a very different perception of what is around us.
Not sure if we are allowed to post YouTube links here but ReeseJones87 has a lot to say about Lucid Dreaming. A recent video he posted does a very neat job of comparing reality in dreams versus reality in "real" life. Well worth watching.
P.S. Sorry about the placement of this post, didn't see there was a second page to this thread! Kinda out of place in this philosophical discussion.
Well don't mind me, I just have never found it worth while to try and defend anything resembling logic to someone who makes cause and effect the saame one moment and different the next. As Aristotle pointed out, it just is not worth it. Which side of the revolving door am I on anyway?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tranquil Toad
It is clear you don't understand relation to self.
So you don't accept any form of knowledge beyond logic?Quote:
Originally Posted by Philosopher8659
I accept that the viewpoint I have from this reality is very limited, and to use only logical thinking will limit me. To restrict one's thought to only logic is akin to trying to see the forest for the trees. Logical, mental thought is a product of this reality. Therefore, to bind yourself to it is to bind yourself to this reality only.
"No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it" - Einstein
It doesn't mean abandoning reason entirely, but there is all kinds of ideas and information that can come through if you only quiet your reasoning mind enough to let them in - if only for a little while. And I know that sounds like blasphemy, but growth only comes from trying radically new things.
@Skicanoe
What you said about a cat or an insect having very different perceptions of what is around us is along the lines of what I was saying originally. The brain is not a producer of consciousness, it is a receiver and projector. Again, the analogy of a computer hooked up to the web (I'm not saying we are in a computer or video game, key work analogy.) Consciousness is formless, it would be like the information out in the web. However, when it gets filtered through the brain, similar to information getting filtered through your P.C and onto your monitor, it gets projected with the 5 senses into a holographic medium that you see as your surroundings.
So, for instance, and cat and an insect look at each other. The consciousness of the cat gets filtered through the brain of the insect, which projects it in a format which is unique to its perception system, and the consciousness of the insect gets filtered through the brain of the cat and projected in a manner which is unique to the cat. Both realities that the cat and insect experience are inside of their mind.
There isn't any reality separate of perception. You only have different consciousnesses interacting with each other, and it is that interaction which produces experience. Nothing objective anywhere.
On one level all these interacting minds are actually the same mind, but that's another can of worms.
I actually watched a bunch of Reese's videos the other day. I like them, the guy is articulate in a down to earth type of way.
Logic is a term that covers all langauges. The symbolic manipulation of things.
I will bow out of this discourse, because you don't appear to even be able to understand the simple sentence or what is implied. .
And by the way, I demonstrate quite easily, in Language and Exp[erience, that Einstein was an idiot--just another normal clever human. The proof is actually very simple.
I understand what logic is, but there is logic that is beyond the mind of a human. Being able to glimpse such logic is a matter of receptivity, not sequential thought.
Even Rene Descartes had a dream of an angelic being which spurred him towards the scientific method.
I can see we have reached a communication barrier, however I would advise you not to dismiss others simply because they don't share your own way of thinking. In an infinite universe there are an infinite number of perspectives, truth being relative.
Like I said, your a mystic. Simple reasoning will always be your frontier.
You really think stating that the absolute is the relative keeps you from the condemnation of the real great minds in history. Not! It is the very problem they fought against.
Philosopher, you seem kinda... hostile. And I have to admit, as much as I'm a left-brained logical thinker, I can't see things from your perspective. I feel that there is more to life than pure logic, and the objective. Besides, Einstein certainly wasn't infallible, but I wouldn't be so quick to call him an idiot. In fact, I don't call any great minds idiots, even if their ideas are sometimes obsolete. I take what I find valuable from them, and accept that their thoughts and discoveries were profound -- and often controversial -- for their time. They did the best they could with what they had, just like anyone else. We too are simply doing the best we can in life, are we not? You and I will never be able to convince the other that our reasoning is superior, and it seems like a waste of time to try, anyways. Besides, I agree with Tranquil Toad here. Truth-seeking isn't some kind of contest, and there is no "best" way to look at things. I shall leave you to your logic, and you can leave me to my own conclusions.
I started this thread with the clear objective of asking what people's personal ideas were, it seemed philosopher just came on here with the sole intention of debunking and attacking other people's ideas. Why do you feel the need to do that?
“Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something.” Plato
Well may as well re-steer this back to the original topic.
If anyone else has opinions or ideas on where dreams take place, please post them.
I think the answer is both simple and complex. Simple because dreaming is simply a difference state of mind. But complex because when we are in that state we can experience things that aren't in line with what we perceive to be reality when we are in the waking state. So you could call dreaming a different state of reality. Real life as we know it is still just something we are experiencing in our brain. Its mind boggling! :shock:
This is something not many people think about. That their immediate perception is actually their own brain.Quote:
Originally Posted by cece23
' I know reality is consciousness because I have seen it, as sure as you have seen your hands in front of you'
Tranquil toad - would you mind speaking some more of this? :)
Hostile? Me? Aristotle says a lot here, it may take some study. It has to do with basic psychology.
________________________________
For it is impossible for any one to believe the same thing to be and not to be, as some think Heraclitus says. For what a man says, he does not necessarily believe; and if it is impossible that contrary attributes should belong at the same time to the same subject (the usual qualifications must be presupposed in this premiss too), and if an opinion which contradicts another is contrary to it, obviously it is impossible for the same man at the same time to believe the same thing to be and not to be; for if a man were mistaken on this point he would have contrary opinions at the same time. It is for this reason that all who are carrying out a demonstration reduce it to this as an ultimate belief; for this is naturally the starting-point even for all the other axioms.
4
There are some who, as we said, both themselves assert that it is possible for the same thing to be and not to be, and say that people can judge this to be the case. And among others many writers about nature use this language. But we have now posited that it is impossible for anything at the same time to be and not to be, and by this means have shown that this is the most indisputable of all principles.—Some indeed demand that even this shall be demonstrated, but this they do through want of education, for not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education. For it is impossible that there should be demonstration of absolutely everything (there would be an infinite regress, so that there would still be no demonstration); but if there are things of which one should not demand demonstration, these persons could not say what principle they maintain to be more self-evident than the present one.
We can, however, demonstrate negatively even that this view is impossible, if our opponent will only say something; and if he says nothing, it is absurd to seek to give an account of our views to one who cannot give an account of anything, in so far as he cannot do so. For such a man, as such, is from the start no better than a vegetable. Metaphysics by Aristotle.
____________________________
One can call this the law of identity, the law of the excluded middle, or that reasoning, from its foundation is binary. One can see in it the Two-Element Metaphysics, and even the biological division of one's own body, However, to both assert and deny at the same time, even a carrot can do that. However, one cannot get a carrot to think about the non-sense it spews out.
To say " I know reality is consciousness because I have seen it" is just a rewording of "Man is the measure of all things." It is the same as saying the perceiver is the perceived. To me, and anyone else with a mind, that is pure psychological dysfunction. ONe only humors a mad man when they have to, and I don't.
The dreamstate really is in the middle of the Mississippi, just ask Mark Twain.
A member of a set is not the set of which it is a member. Duh. .
And why take exception to me, when by the very statement, I am only a fragment of his deluded imagination? Hello? This means that no one believes that bull shit any way.
Huck, if they be men, whys don't they talk like men?
' I know reality is consciousness because I have seen it, as sure as you have seen your hands in front of you'
TRANQUIL TOAD - would you mind speaking some more of this?
I can try, but I doubt it will translate into words at all. Unless you have had such an experience it will sound insane.Quote:
Originally Posted by floatinghead
I guess I can use an analogy. Imagine you once you lost one of your 5 senses, say hearing for example. And you went so long without it that you actually forgot what hearing was, or that you had ever had such a sense to begin with.
And then one day you could hear again, albeit briefly. It would be something startlingly new, since it had been so long, yet you would remember from some distant past that this is how you used to be. "Oh, OH OH! I remember this! This is a part of me."
There would be no question because it would be a remembrance, not something new and foreign.
We are born into this reality with complete amnesia of who we are and what the universe is. This is not your first existence, nor is it your natural state.
I just caught a glimpse I what I was like before this. I knew reality was consciousness because my consciousness was the same consciousness as the whole universe. The universe is one mind, and that mind is you and me. All of us. We're actually the same being. If you can remember this, it is like coming home. Because that state of unity is where you were for eternity before you came into this brief life, and where you will be for eternity afterwords.
I don't feel that way all the time, those experiences are brief for me. But at least on one level I know.
Of course there are other "hints" within this existence that it is all mind. Dreams are a big one. Wow, what a coincidence that our brain can create an experience that 100% resembles "real" life. I'm sure its just all brain chemicals though and nothing to ponder over...
Synchronicities, as unconvincing as they sound, become very convincing when they start happening to you all the time. Just watch your own thoughts and your environment. You can actually catch your mind spilling over into your surroundings. I'm thinking about a concept and someone walks by with that word written on their t-shirt. I am talking to someone about another individual, and that individual walks past right as we mention them. I am thinking about something and I come to my computer and someone has made a forum post about it, or there is a news article about the subject.
And it happens all the time. I don't have to reach and try to imagine it, I will have a thought and instantly there will be something in my environment related to it. I let out a huge yawn, think "I'm exhausted," while turning on my radio and the first thing I hear on the radio is "don't fall asleep at your desk."
There are other hints of course. OBEs, telepathy, shared dreams, quantum physics, NDEs. The logical argument of how consciousness could spring from dead matter in the first place.
But once you remember, and many people will start to remember during this life, it actually seems pretty funny when you look back at what you thought reality was before.
As I said before, I am not saying all of reality is human consciousness, man's consciousness; that everything is me, my individual personality. If one's only experience of consciousness is that of their own mind, this would be what they infer from such a statement as "everything is consciousness."Quote:
Originally Posted by Philosopher8659
You do realize we are both cliches?
The rigid rationalist who refuses to see past his own perspective, and the loose mystic unable to articulate what he sees in a way that is meaningful to anyone but himself.
Left / Right brain.
This has been going on for quite some time now.
Again, a discourse that really goes nowhere.
Try to explain smell to a man who has only used sight. It would be very frustrating because he would say: "well what shape, color and size is this smell you speak of?" And when you can't explain yourself within these terms he calls you insane, because to him there is nothing beyond them. Worst yet, by your inability to explain what you have smelled means you are somehow denying sight. "Look at this moron, his sight is so poor he comes up with ridiculous ideas, such as this smell he speaks of."
To the credit of the rationalist, often what the mystic has seen has been so fleeting that he knows not enough of it to really make sense of it. So can you blame those who ignore him?
However, I will point out, that the rationalist is always searching. Always attempting new avenues of logic in an attempt to find some truth. The mystic however is at rest. He just knows and there really isn't much that needs to be said.
Now that could mean that the mystic has fooled himself into a faulty set of beliefs that bring him comfort, or it could mean that while the rationalist is struggling to make his way from A to D, the mystic has just skipped to Z.
tranquil toad
Do you know if we can sustain a dream state past death? Or do we return to the infinite nothingness unity? Do we have a choice? or is dreaming only part of the experience of living in a body?
I had a salvia trip where I completely lost my identity of myself as an individual and completely lost contact with thoughts ideas concepts and physical reality. It seemed to last an infinite amount of time or maybe the concept of time didn't exist? Just nothingness. When I returned to my body it felt like all my memories were built into my body...
Well I'll add a disclaimer: beyond that everything is one consciousness, I don't really know for certain the details. I'm in the dark like everyone else. Part of the fun of being here I suppose.
That being said, this is what I am beginning to figure out. Call it a rough draft I suppose.
I don't think we return to infinite nothingness/total unity immediately upon death. This one mind can create itself to be individual beings/souls which furthers its knowledge of itself. These souls exist multidimensionaly and can move about through a variety of different dimensions, or levels of consciousness. Its not like a being is created and exists only for a while before re-merging with the source. Your soul is eternal unto itself, and encompasses much more than you can imagine from the perspective of this life.
So imagine a group of these beings got together and decided to create the idea of physical lives in a physical dimension. They could live out various lives as physical beings, and gain experience and insight from this game. This game would include much more than what you see with your 5 senses. There are other levels, dimensions, all intertwined with the idea of physicality. The dream plane is just one dimension "up" from physical existence. Sort of like an editing mode which is much more expanded and free compared to the heavy rules which have been placed upon complete physicality.
What has happened (again this is what I am beginning to understand, I'm no authority on reality here) is that we forgot we did this. Part of the game was forgetting who you really were so you could become very involved in your role as a human. So, in a sense, we kind of got trapped here. When you die you go up into the same dimension as the dream plane, perhaps a little higher, but you never fully remember who you are or what is happening. So your up there for a while unaware wtf is going on until you just cycle back down and incarnate again in physicality. And this cycle has been going on for thousands of years now. We are basically caught in a self created dream world which we have forgotten we created.
Some of us have become aware to an extent what is happening, enough that they can actually decide what they will experience when they come back to physicality. If you have a certain theme in your life that you just know you are here to do and experience, it is a good bet you decided upon it between lives.
We still have access to that unity, however. That nothingness you spoke of is what the one mind is like in its natural state before it creates itself to be individual souls. We all have access to that place, and various methods can take you there. I think that is actually where you go in deep, dreamless sleep. However once you come back from that you are still within this physical game.
You felt like all your memories were built into your body. The "you" who you think you are is tied to this specific body and incarnation. Your personality, memories, emotions, thoughts, beliefs, are all like an artificial avatar that you soul has created. Like a mask that hides you from the higher levels of who you really are. They are one with this physical dimension, and when you die, or when we all eventually leave this game, we won't be humans at all. Even when you are in a lucid dream, if you look at your own state of mind - even if you have complete clarity - it is very different from who you are when you wake up.
Because you are simply awareness. Any quality of awareness besides pure consciousness is temporary, not who you really are. You are nothing, like a blank screen which can project anything it wishes onto itself.
:shock: wtf everything you said here is exactly what I have been thinking about. I mean everything! Half way through reading this i was thinking about replying about how I thought dreamless sleep is that nothingness i described... and then you said it!
What I was thinking today:
when you silence your physical awareness you experience the mind
when you silence the mind you experience the nothingness
Dude you should put all these posts on this thread together and start a new thread.
This stuff is mind blowing. That interesting how you said when we die we are still not completely aware of who we are then we just come and live another life:-?
I guess if you were in a lucid dream for an infinite amount of time you would have a very different identity for yourself than the strictly human indentity you hold in this limited material plane. Maybe you get bored of it eventually and thats why we come to this limited physical reality and forget who we are? After my salvia trip I was very convinced that I was not human at all. And kind of became frustrated with everyone else being so consumed belief of being human and the obsessive materialism. I was also didn't want sleep because I realized I have built up this ego my whole life and I'm subconciously programed into it.
How you said how can you know what its like to smell without experiencing it.
I was thinking maybe we come to this reality to use these experiences we have here as the basis for the infinite free experience of the dream world.
Like the paint to make the painting. And then the nothingness would be the the canvas that you paint it on.
You experience the colors and then you can create whatever you can imagine with them.
I agree, there seems to be an underlying truth here, an ultimate truth if you will. Allot of what you said rings true. It is something past logic; it is a feeling deep inside.
Many years ago through allot of anguish I started coming to the same conclusions, and it wasn't through logic that I came to these conclusions but a series of 'adventures' through my mind (it is the best was I can describe it). This was when I was in my early teens and I had read nothing about different belief systems/religions, and so through absolutely no outside influence I arrived at this outcome. It wasn't until years after that I started to come across people who had had very similar experiences and who had also arrived at the same conclusion. It does not seem to be something which is taught but something which is found within one's self. Something which is remembered. I'd like to think that we all have parts of the puzzle, and nobody is really wrong, because in one way or another the pieces all fit.
Here is a little of what I think, the way I like to look at it is this:
In the beginning there was one consciousness, for some reason (perhaps because it was lonely one day or because it needed a reason to be) it split, exploded into an infinite amount of pieces. This coincides with the big bang, everything starting from one point and then exploding outwards - expanding. Then one day, scientists hypothesize, the universe will contract, pulling everything together to be one again - and this will be when our 'oneness' with the universe will really start to comes together. (and perhaps we repeat this over and over, the universe expanding and contracting in nearly exactly the same way - which would help to explain why we get Deja Vu's - perhaps we will forever be repeating this cycle until everything is perfect - the 'Groundhog Day' film makes a good analogy of this.)
I think the dream world also goes both ways. We obviously take information back from this life, but often the dream world is used to plan out events and ideas that will be acted out when we incarnate.
The dream plane we experience in lucid and normal dreams is very closely tied to this physical realm. I don't think we were in an eternal lucid dream before we came here, with hills and valleys and other recognizable physical-like landscapes. It think that is a product of that dimension being so close to physicality. We are probably something else entirely that can't be imagined from where we are now.
That nothingness is the canvas as you said. The one mind in its natural state of unity doesn't know itself. When you go there, do you even have the recognition that you exist? It can only know itself by creating form, or a splash of paint to extend the metaphor. So all of existence is one mind's experience of itself.
A quote I like from Sri Aurobindo "Existence that multiplied itself for sheer delight of being and plunged into numberless trillions of forms so that it might find itself innumerably"
I'll give my take on this. I've tried to explain this before, and only some people can get it but here it goes.Quote:
Originally Posted by floatinghead
This consciousness, before it does that split you spoke of, doesn't know itself. It contains infinity, but that infinity lies in potential yet to be experienced.
Complete unity is also a complete void. Think of a yin yang. Were there not two different colors, there would be no form to it. Experience is created by the contrast of two or more things.
When it is one awareness, I knows not that it is. So it dived into two; a black and a white, a dark and a light, an on and off. Each side could now see the other, and in seeing the other know that it itself exists. Out of this split into duality comes all experience. The black and the white mix, creating patterns of endless experience. And as it does this it creates an infinite journey. Because this mind is infinite, there will be no end to its exploration of itself.
You are this mind, and everything you look at is you. Infinite consciousness using itself as a mirror so it may know itself.
You have a really beautiful way of explaining things :)
I could never get my head around the why (to split) and this makes allot of sense. I love the mirror analogy!
Ya thats where the law of attraction comes in. Everything we think is shaping our physical reality, but because we are working with time and space it creates the illusion that things are happening to us us, not from us. As with deja va, intuition, and synchonocity I think maybe our dream self planned out a path before we came here.
A good way of explaining the experience I had is oneness. Unity kind of sounds misleading to me because it makes it sound like you are experiencing everything in the universe at once.
It was like time didn't exist because because there was no here to there. time is not measurable. There is no seperation, there is only oneness.
this thread I made kind of explains trying to say http://www.dreamviews.com/f19/layers-reality-105066/
Wow, TranquilToad. A lot of what you're saying (and I mean a LOT) sounds just like this book I've read part of, called "My Big TOE". TOE, being Theory of Everything. It's a really fascinating book, but a slow read, so I stopped reading it. But I'll have to get back into it at some point. The guy supposedly has scientific explanations for most of the things you've mentioned...
100% in our brains. The dream state is exactly that, a "state" of consciousness. Consciousness is derived from the brain. To me, there is no dream plane, people do not have dream bodies. Everything you perceive, waking and dreaming, occurs in your brain, sorry.
Of course, you are entitled to your opinion, just like Philosopher is. I'm not saying I know for sure either way, myself. I just find it interesting that there are even some scientists that aren't so sure about that anymore. :)
Which scientists do you refer to?Quote:
Originally Posted by Singularity125
Oh, well, "My Big TOE" was written by a physicist. Thomas Campbell. I'm not sure how well-known he is in the scientific community, but apparently he participated in experiments to try to legitimize OBEs in the scientific community, with Bob Munroe. There's another book I've read, "The Divine Matrix" by Gregg Braden. I don't think he's a scientist as such, but he references experiments in quantum mechanics and such.
At Tranquil Toad and Saltyseedog... were you perchance influenced by Buddhism in any way, or were these ideas purely from your own mind (whether that exists or not)? What you are saying about realizing your original form sounds quite similar to Buddhism, that you attain Oneness/Nirvana after understanding that there is more than the material world, and that you now understand you are part of something greater, the Universe/Parmatma/God/Whatever you may believe, and all that it may be.
Well I'm certainly not enlightened, but I saw/remembered that everything is consciousness independent of Buddhism, though I am familiar with it.
You can still begin to remember what reality is, and what you are, without being enlightened. It can happen in sudden spurts, or gradually over time. They key is that it will be very personal, and it won't come from one doctrine, religion or book. Your entire life is a dream, an orchestration of consciousness; and instead of looking to one component of the dream(IE a religion) the dream can gradually teach you over the span of your existence.
That probably makes little to no sense, so here's an example. As was mentioned before, the one consciousness which is everything "divided" itself up into duality so it can know itself. I saw this through the metaphor of binary code. With two things to contrast each other, 0 and 1, can come the foundation for all existence. Its like something came into my mind and arranged my thoughts to create a unique metaphor that made sense for me. I didn't read it anywhere, I had no notion of a concept until it just sort of erupted inside me. I read afterwords very similar ideas in Hinduism, which I found very quickly after having that thought. A synchronicity to drive the point home.
As floatinghead said, he went through adventures inside his mind. Now you can't prove this stuff to anyone, and they scoff at you when you say you know. But when it happens there is no doubt. Most people's views on reality are made up of stuff they have been told or have read. Second hand information that you have chosen to believe.
You know in school when you would have a teacher who would just get you to read the text book? He wouldn't engage you at all. You may remember enough to pass the test, but after a while all that information would just slip from your mind. It carried no weight. And then a different teacher would create field trips, projects or speak to you personally? You actually learned, because you weren't regurgitating information, you were learning in the moment, creatively. Those ideas stuck with you. Its sort of the same thing. I didn't have a teacher or anything, but the difference is knowing vs memorizing.
Ok here is something anyone can do. Is there something you would really like to know? Not something specific like lottery numbers or the contents of your girlfriends diary, but an idea or concept that really intrigues you? Ask the universe "please explain (concept) to me." At first nothing will happen. Its not like a voice will come inside your head instantly and tell you all. But just sort of keep it in mind. If you actually really want to know about it, see how much more you know in a couple months. Your reality and your mind can organize itself in a way so you will understand.
I know how my energy body works, and what the chakra points are. Granted I had read about these before, but I went into much more depth just by learning by myself. You can do this with anything that you really are interested in. Maybe you will run into a social situation that deals with the concept. Maybe you will find a book that gives you a little more understanding. Maybe you will have a flash of insight. The point is it won't come from one external source, it will be created within over time.
I don't know alot about buddhism so that would be a no.
Just quiet your mind and listen to your intuition. this is your truth, it is your spirit wispering to you.
The heart feeds you truth. The mind feeds you illusions.
Definitely interesting considering that it does sound shockingly like Buddhism. And to TT, I have had moments where everything made sense, just for a bit. I felt at peace. That's what I want to find again.
Ya those moments are rare. Part of what I'm learning is that your ego structure doesn't actually produce new ideas. So the "you" who you believe does the thinking actually is more of a conduit.
For instance have you ever been trying to figure something out, mulling it over in your mind, until you become mentally exhausted and give up, only to find that the answer comes suddenly in a flash once you have ceased mental effort?
Instilling a certain amount of passivity on yourself allows the mind to become a receiver of insight, as well as creating peace.
There are certain truths about reality that aren't measurable by science, so something like buddhism would have come across these and created its own metaphors and language to describe it. They aren't restricted to buddhism, but buddhism is one way of speaking of them.
I think it is very simple.
We can only give meaning to something by comparing it to something else.
There is one mind, One Mind ;)
One Mind wanted to give more meaning to itself so it created different points of view / worlds / people / animals, etc. The more colorful the painting, the more meaning you can give to it by comparing everything inside of it.
So, dreaming feels like in the back of your head as some mentioned because you are not used to it. You are used to seeing through the glasses called the five physical senses.
To conclude, imagine the Universe (One Thought), you me i him and her, and all of them, as putting on different costumes and different glasses. It is all the same energy, just differently colored, be it the color of matter or w/e else it may be.
Drugs, sleep-deprivation demonstrate examples of looking through a different lens.
But so does being in love, being scared, etc.
-- I just noticed Tranquil Toad had the same thing I thought of - Complete unity is also a complete void. Think of a yin yang. Were there not two different colors, there would be no form to it. Experience is created by the contrast of two or more things.....
Which leads me to think... How fucking infinite are we!!:??!?!!? :))))
No wonder I feel no pressure by "time".. or at least in this life time
Well there is only one definition of infinite :)Quote:
Originally Posted by maxihaus
tranquil toad i think the exact same way as far as us being in our own trap. Something that we created just to do it and whiped our mem while doing it so we stuck.
sorry for the not smartness of this i understand big words i just can not use them.