The mechanics of time evade me. If all my past personnalities are evolving at the same time and learning from one another then the past is not a static entity. It also makes it very complicated to follow as having learned from present experiences, past one become redondant. It must all ricochet in a strange way.
On the other hand, reality appears stable.
As a matter of fact, I wonder what we are still doing here now since it has been resolved somewhere in time.
I just lost my (time) marbles on this. How does it all mesh together?
But great stuff for a novel!
On the other hand, reality appears stable.
As a matter of fact, I wonder what we are still doing here now since it has been resolved somewhere in time.
I just lost my (time) marbles on this. How does it all mesh together?
But great stuff for a novel!
posted by:
|
Montreal
|
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Sun, February 11, 2007 - 10:23 AMI think you left out one big complication to the whole time equation. And that is probability. For every you there is an infinite you that still has to exist to stabilize the equation somehow.
Sure, there is the perfect you that does not belong here or even exist here, but what about all those probable you's that didn't quite make the grade or see the signs or step out of the way of that passing car.
I think it all meshes together in the present and that is why reality seems stable. We are probability surfing our lives every moment. Imagine how much time you spend on the computer surfing the web. Now translate that to another level and imagine your inner self at some mechanism surfing reality itself. I guess it takes time to make time. -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Wed, February 14, 2007 - 11:26 AMAre we the ones that did not cut the grades?
Still there is motion and bouncing around as the various characters resolve parts of the equation. The system is stable - and then - but we do some shifting that I am aware of.
Are we constantly surfing parallel worlds then.
What about the roads not taken? -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Sat, February 17, 2007 - 11:02 AMThe roads not taken still exist in non-temporal reality.
Yes, we are constantly surfing probability.
-
-
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Tue, May 27, 2008 - 4:26 AMI am not suggesting that what I am about to say is correct but it is how I have come to understand these sorts of issues with the seth outlook.
Think of reality as a 2 dimensional plane like say a blanket. Any point on that blanket represents a personal state or configuration of reality. So in one point I am here typing on the computer, I remember my past as going to school etc and my future has certain possibilities. But in another spot I am living on another planet got 3 arms etc. On another spot everything is identical to my official existence except I went to a different school. All possibilities exist on this blanket.
Because most people 'believe' that the past is fixed they restrict themselves to only parts of the blanket where the past is the same as they remember. We all believe in gravity so only those parts of the blanket are possible for us. Theoretically you could jump all over the blanket, not only changing the past but also the present. The whole blanket exists whether we jump all over it or not. Our beliefs restrict what we can do on the blanket.
I personally have a belief system that struggles to change my past but it does allow a leak from other realities. Lets say that something really bad happened to you in the past, imagining that it didn't may not stop the memory but it may allow things to leak through from the reality where it didn't happen. So people and events may start to responding to you as if it didn't happen even though you can still remember it did. So its not quite jumping all over the blanket but slightly drifting from your current position. Its a start.
So how can there be growth or evolution without time. This is possible because the blanket is not static. The blanket is constantly growing, more configurations being experimented with etc...
-
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Tue, May 27, 2008 - 9:09 AMAssume the following hypothetical situation: you and I are standing in a room we are both in each others past and present. Now, you step out of the room to an adjacent room and close the door. While in the other room you manage to acquire strong mental abilities to detach from the past and remove your belief that gravity was part of it - you manage to connect to a spot in the blanket where you can float in air - now you open the door and get back to the room where I stand, yet I have not made the transition, I am still in the old spot where I still hold my belief in gravity - but as you open the door you are floating in air shattering my reality. Now, how can this be possible ? -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Tue, May 27, 2008 - 4:49 PMThis is a very good question. A question that I have grappled with a long time. I am not that happy with my answer but as time goes on I am beginning to accepting it.
The answer is that it is not possible for us to want different things because at a deeper level there isn't me and you there is only us (or god, or the universe or whatever you want to call it).
I don't put forward this answer lightly, I have thought about this question for many years. And my answer has changed a lot but I have reluctantly settled on the above.
The real problem with this answer for me is that this means that we now live in a universe where 'I' cannot do anything 'I' like. 'I' am restricted. But if you accept that 'I' is an illusion everything falls into place. There is only one 'I' and it is 'us'.
So in the context of the no gravity room question it depends what 'we' want. Either 'we' want to experience no gravity of 'we' don't.
Note that there are many other solutions to this problem, classically the 'many universes' model but for what it is worth I like the 'unified consciousness' solution.
I would be really keen to hear any other solutions.
-
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Tue, May 27, 2008 - 5:30 PMThat's a good answer. To me this too is one of greatest mysteries of "reality creation". A far as i see it, the parallel universes idea does not solve this particular problem. The reason being that you entering the room has physical implications to me, in particular say, if you would approach and hit me - therefore you need to be present in my perception, by doing so you seem to change my location on the blanket to yours.
I therefore support your answer of the unified consciousness. As you pointed out, the problem with the answer is that it does not really allow arbitrary jumps through the blanket. That is our ability to create our reality is restricted within some mutually determined framework. My current approach is that we share a collective dream, and within the dream certain moves may be allowed at certain times (and others may not).
I too would be interested to learn if other have different ideas on this issue. -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Tue, May 27, 2008 - 7:38 PMI do think the multiple universes model can solve this problem. Basically 2 realities are created.
Lets say i tell you I can walk on water, you say I cannot. We wander down to the river and off I go into the water. If I really really believe this to be possible I wander out onto the water. If you really really believe that it isn't possible to see me walk into the water. Now here is where it gets tricky: In my reality I am standing in the middle of the river, on the water. I turn around and wave. Who am I waving at, in your reality I am underwater?
I am waving at a version of you that sees me walking on water. But the you that you choose to be is not the same you. Hard to explain but it can work. The problem I have with this model is not so much a logical problem but rather a philosophical problem. It advocates a universe where we are all separate whereas I prefer a model where we are all connected. So it is really my beliefs that push me towards the unified model. I think both models are equally valid.
Another very rough solution sort of between the 2 is that it would be possible for me to walk on water as long as there is some loop hole that you would be comfortable with. So lets say I really do walk on the water, and you see me, you are initially shocked but latter on you find a boat on the shore. Now you can convince yourself I was really on the boat, you just didn't see it because of the waves. So we have one reality that technically conflicts but we feel it wasn't violated, basically you think I am a fraud and I think you are in denial and don't want to know the truth. I think this sort of thing happens to everybody on a daily basis and as such is real but I don't think it solves the larger problem we are discussing just small everyday issues.
I also think the unified model does allow jumping all over the blanket, it just doesn't allow a blanket each.
It is so good to get some of this stuff out of my head. I hope it is making sense!
You have obviously read the Seth stuff pretty extensively. I find it the single most accurate spiritual body of knowledge out there. I cannot understand why it isn't more widely read. -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Tue, May 27, 2008 - 8:49 PMI really appreciate this discussion as this in my mind is one of the most puzzling mysteries of existence.
I agree that philosophically speaking the solution of multiple universes is valid, however I see a major problem with it: First, when taken to extreme it seems that every decision we make that may affect others (which means almost any decision) should split reality. That means there's an infinite number of universes simultaneously mainfesting every possible occurance and my higer self experiences all of them simultaneously. This does not make sense to me as it makes free choice become meaningless. The other option (it seems the one you considered) is that there are multiple separate universes, one for each of us, and I experience only my own. This makes no sense to me because then the version of you in "my" universe is really just fiction in my mind. Again, while this is valid philosophcally, it does not make sense to me because if I somehow know that this is true it seems to lower the value of others in my universe, since they are fictional. Perhaps this is another way to describe what's bothering you about it.
The second option that you describe seems right, but I would say it does not replace the "unified consciousness" explanation but works within it. Let me explain how I see it and hopefully this would explain also why I think "arbitrary jumps" may not be allowed. If you wish to reprogram your universe so you can walk on water, it must be approved by our higher selves (all of us), the reason being that your walking on water affects everyone else on earth. If you would start walking on water again and again everntually more and more people will get exposed to it and either will start believing too or they would go mad, in any case it is likely to cause a dramatic reaction (the option that they will just find a way to dismiss it can work for a few cases but not as this keeps happening). Therefore for such an event to occur it should be agreed by all of us (higher selves) that this is the right thing for our collective experience at this point in time. Once such a state was reached - only then such a move would be allowed. Still, as you described I may not be aware of this (although my higher self is) and be shocked when this indeed happens. -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Tue, May 27, 2008 - 9:30 PMThe infinite universes creating infinitely more does seem pretty overwhelming but is it any more crazy than having a universe in the first place? I think logically there should be no universes. That would get rid of all these problems. Once you have one universe from nothing as far as I am concerned it is no more crazy to have many. And I don't think it really makes free choice meaningless because you are still choosing which one you want to experience. Basically your awareness is surfing the blanket and by that I mean that part of the blanket is aware of a little bit of the blanket. Keep in mind that I am arguing here for a model that I don't believe is correct.
I think the most puzzling mystery is existence. Whatever your view of reality be it very limited or massively expansive where the hell did it come from.
I know what you are saying about the jumping around the blanket problem but I would argue that you are looking at it from a reduced perspective. If you concede that somewhere on the blanket there is a place where our higher selves agree to something different, this opens the possibility that a 'higher' higher self can experience both possibilities, and effectively jump between the 2 at any point. But at our level yes we have to all agree at some higher level what can and cannot happen.
This highlights a problem that I always come up against with this sort of stuff. There is the theoretical extremely high level of the reality and then there is here where we live. I think it is very very difficult to reach upwards without taking your beliefs with you and in doing that you restrict the view of reality you can get. All we can do is try to glimpse this higher level and even if we cannot act at that level we can think about its implications at our level and how we may be able to do some tweaking. -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Wed, May 28, 2008 - 12:10 AMConcerning multiple universes, I did not mean to say that it is crazy, it is certainly a valid option. I agree that considering you as navigating between them gives free choice. Perhaps what makes this weird is that while this provides explanation how different choices can be made by me and you there is still a version of you that makes the same choice as me and is stepping with me to the universe I chose, that is the version of you I am experiences must again have "unified consiousness" with mine and so this solution does not really get away from that, it just seems a but more complex (but I agree there is no reason to think such complexity does not exist).
You have actually highlighted an importance issue about our discussion and that is the true nature of existence which is what seth is mostly communicating to us versus the nature of our current experience, which is mostly what I was referring to. I think this may indeed explain why we do not completely agree. When I think about the true nature of existence I feel I know little of this but I believe that ultimately our higher selves have full creative power in higher dimensions. That is they can make huge leaps in that blanket, perhaps more like jumping from one high dimensional blanket to another. Yet, where we are is more like being somewhere in that one blanket. This is what I meant when I said we are experience a collective dream. Perhaps the way to think about it is that our higher selves have agreed to experience together this dream, together with some predermined rules of how the dream will unfold. They have made the creation that we are now living in, as part of the dream we forget who we are and within time we grow into our higher potential but all this still unforld within certain logic of the dream which was agreed upon. It's just my theory, but I think it matches our experience of life.
"I think the most puzzling mystery is existence. Whatever your view of reality be it very limited or massively expansive where the hell did it come from. "
I cannot agree more. The only difference between this mystery and the others we are discussing is that I don't think this is one you can ever understand or even theorize about. It basically like asking how did God came to exist. I don't think there's an answer to that , or more accurately it did not come exist, it just is. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Wed, May 28, 2008 - 1:23 AM"It just is" doesn't really satisfy though does it. But in the end its all we have got.
I hope you understand that everything I have put forward are just my current positions. If history has anything to say about it my position will change radically as time progresses. But hey I love the journey. Sometimes I wonder if I like the journey so much I would avoid the answers just to keep going.
Sounds like you have spent way too much time thinking about this stuff too! Good to see I am not the only one wasting time on stuff like this. -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Wed, May 28, 2008 - 8:25 AM>"It just is" doesn't really satisfy though does it.
This is why we're here my friend - to learn that we can't figure that one out...
>Sounds like you have spent way too much time thinking about this stuff too!
Like all my life ?... My views also change constantly but I feel that we're getting closer, at least when it comes to our current experience.
It's all good as long as you don't forget to live and smile :) -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Wed, May 28, 2008 - 8:49 AMI'll say just one more thing about the "It just is" question. Perhaps the best way to think about it is like the solution for a great mathematical equation. If you ever seen that kind of magic happen - it feels like it just has to be the way it is so that everything will fall into place, but most of the time we can't really explain why it is the way it is. It's the magic that's beyond the mind. -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Wed, May 28, 2008 - 2:14 PMI have started to realise that the 'real' answers are beyond the mind and I wonder whether the seth material is just an intellectual distraction that makes you feel you are on the path but sitting in the room right next to you is the big white elephant of truth.
All I know is anybody who talks about enlightenment always talks of connection, love and unity. I have come to believe that to understand and experience these things at a deep level is what it is all about. Whether you get there by reading seth, helping others or by growing your own vegetables the destination is the same!
These concepts of enlightenment are where I try to direct my attention these days. But of course intellectually understanding enlightenment and actually experiencing it is like comparing reading a cake recipe with actually eating the cake. I am not even sure I have the right recipe! -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Wed, May 28, 2008 - 3:16 PMI'm right with you on this one, it's all about experiencing not about understanding. The trying to figure out part is also part of the experience if you like. As it comes to enlightment, I find that ancient spiritual teaching as Budhism, Kabbalah, or their new age versions (e.g. Eckhart Tolle) are good guides. Indeed, "The Greatest Thing You Will Ever Learn, Is Just to love, and Be Loved in Return", perhaps it is also the only thing that we really need to know. -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Thu, May 29, 2008 - 12:42 AMI really struggle with Tolle, I am actually half way through one of his at the moment (can't remember the name) but I cannot bring myself to finish it. The message is good but I find him a little arrogant and incongruent with his message. I know that I am alone in this. Many people seem to get a lot out of his books.
In fact a number of years ago I read the power of now and thought it was great then read it again after about 3 years and just couldn't see what I had liked about it. Strange. -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Thu, May 29, 2008 - 7:13 PMWow,
So much to comment on and I missed out on the whole thing.
Some of my initial thoughts about this blanket scenario are that you seem to have left out the simultaneous nature of time to the innerself. In this sense, there is no need to jump from one place to another because you are already at all places in all times and all probabilies. And by "jump" I assume you are referring to the egocentric perception of the event. I would say, logically, your ego is holding on to fear that is why you can't decide if you are on the water or in the water. "The intellect is perched high with a fine view while looking through the ego's eyes but what will the world think of me?"
".
SYSTEM ERROR - Once again I am foiled by the primitive nature of Tribe's comment box. I cannot actually see the rest of the post to comment anymore. (Hmmm...I could have sworn there used to be a "See All" button).
I'll have to end it here and comment again soon. -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Thu, May 29, 2008 - 9:06 PMThere definitely is a physical you (you call ego) that percieves one specific point on the blanket. I guess one can rephrase the question as what is the mecahnism through which different individuals create different reality (as perceived by in physical form) without conflict ?
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Fri, May 30, 2008 - 1:01 AMEach point on the blanket isn't a time it is an entire configuration of reality with its past, present and future all in that point. So one point will have a given timeline and another point has a different one. So the simulataneous nature of time is contained in each point. Each point is an alternate reality. -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Thu, June 5, 2008 - 5:31 AMYou are focusing too much on divisions. You are at all points and all times in all probabilities at the same time.
The Seth Material tells us that there are no divisions between the various parts of ourselves.
It seems to me that you are still suck with some "scientific" beliefs that you can not let go of. As if there were some master equation that, if only you could solve, would offer some revelation about the nature of your own self.
Is an ant happy?
Why is the sky big?
Where is the device that measures the degree of a broken heart? -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Thu, June 5, 2008 - 9:19 AMRandy, let me ask you a very simple question: as you are writing your answer to this - are experiencing multiple realities simultaneously ? -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Thu, June 5, 2008 - 3:43 PMGood point Yair, it gets back to what is the 'truth' compared to what do we actually experience. Yes we are the whole blanket and there is no we, only the 'I' that is God (or the universe or whatever) BUT I feel like a me, I experience one time and space. And Yes this is due to my limitations. So due to my limitations I exist on 1 point on the blanket.
I am not sure what you mean by can you measure this and that. To be able to measure something or not really doesn't come into it. Does it?. If you experience it then it is part of reality and hence the blanket. But there is a lot on the blanket that 'you' dont experience. -
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Fri, June 6, 2008 - 4:45 AMHave you read "The Way To Health"?
Seth states this from the chapter "You, you, you..."
"The more extensive your knowledge, the more aware you are of probable actions, and of the conglomeration of choices that then become available. There are people, then, with an intense thirst for knowledge who believe that knowledge is indeed good and beneficial, while on the other hand they believe just as fervently that knowledge is forbidden and dangerous.
All of these instances lead, of course, to severe dilemmas, and often pull an individual in two directions at once. They are the cause, also, of many spiritual, emotional and physical difficulties.
It must seem obvious that behind all such beliefs lies the distrust of nature, man and life itself." -
-
This post was deleted by Randy
-
-
Re: Technical problem with time and evolution
Thu, June 26, 2008 - 7:27 AMWell, I have been caroussing all over town but I finally made it back here, my starting place.
I came to tribe for the Seth material and I find that it is still the best - and more complex- around. I have been growing in leaps and bounds.
Some problems and questions are worked out in time, through an intuitive process that is hard to put in words.
...but I will probably find a way to ask more questions as I hit more paradoxes to surf.
Thanks for answering this one - though we are probably working on it multidimensionally.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
