Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2015 - 02:13pm PT
|
One might never be able to travel faster than the speed of light - that is a position supported by evidence.
Your evidence is completely defective.
The living entity can travel instantaneously anywhere with the correct consciousness.
The gross materialists are crude caveman snails ......
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2015 - 02:18pm PT
|
Do you get points?
|
|
Bushman
Social climber
Elk Grove, California
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2015 - 04:27pm PT
|
Let's say we take and use your brain. Transfer all of the information and function from each of your neurons one by one onto a circuit board with microchips duplicating neural function contained within a duplicate robot brain that you might find attractive, thereby duplicating your human brain. We then activate your robot brain and integrate it into your consciousness. When your brain dies your consciousness lives on within the duplicate robot brain. We've been over all this before.
But then we download the consciousness of your robot brain into a mathematical formula and transmit your consciousness formula by radio signal or some other frequency across the solar system to another robot brain on let's say Mars and voilà, you have traveled at the speed of light across the solar system and now occupy the concsiousnesss of two robots on two different planets nearly simultaneously! Isn't that great?
Add to that your robot twin self on another planet would be continually witnessing information that is transmitted from you on an ongoing basis and visa versa thereby you will be continually swapping consciousness with yourself across the solar system at the speed of light. Talk about the witness witnessing the witness who witnesses the witness ad infinitum. Isn't science great?
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2015 - 04:53pm PT
|
Consciousness does not travel at the speed of light.
It's instantaneous just as the speed of the mind is.
The presentation of the soul within the body is proved by consciousness .....
|
|
Bushman
Social climber
Elk Grove, California
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2015 - 05:40pm PT
|
'So Long, Soul Jerk'
At hour of my birth,
The soul presented itself to my body that night,
My consciousness perused it,
And rejected it outright,
With boot to ass the soul did depart,
At almost nearly the speed of light,
The soul felt dejected,
And it started to cry,
I felt slightly sorry for it,
I won't lie,
Then it sauntered back my way,
It tapped on my thigh,
I told it to scram,
For the hour was nigh,
With its baggage in tow,
It left none too soon,
And last time I saw it,
On fifth street and Main,
It was boarding the midnight express to the moon,
And it gave me the stink eye,
Just to show its disdain.
-bushman
03/11/2015
|
|
cintune
climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2015 - 07:22pm PT
|
Love how it always boils down to "You can't." You can't experience your own experiencing; you can't ever be in the "now" because it's always just gone (but it was here a second ago). And of course you can't step in the same river twice. Unless, of course, you Do The Work™. And even then you still can't, but you can at least drone on and on about how that's just the coolest non-thing ever. Paradox fetishism: it's not for everybody.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Mar 12, 2015 - 05:00pm PT
|
That's why wisdom traditions from way back refer to as the "mind" being totally "ungraspable." . . . It is completely "empty."(JL)
And that's a shame. It could do so much if it applied itself.
John, you and I are at opposite ends of an existential spectrum. For you and millions of Zen practitioners the "I" is illusory and can be put aside during meditation. A person's true nature is without "I."
Whereas, forty years ago when I practiced the Art of Dreaming my "I-consciousness" seemed to separate from my physical body. Looking back at "me" lying in bed was looking at a meat and bone automaton, while my "I" soared away, free of bodily restrictions though keeping the senses. It was an ecstatic experience and made me appreciate that part of my being that relished its role of "doing" in a marvelous physical universe.
When the "I-consciousness" is gone nothing remains . . . there we probably agree.
|
|
PSP also PP
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Mar 12, 2015 - 05:43pm PT
|
JG said "When the "I-consciousness" is gone nothing remains . . . there we probably agree. "
My experience is it works more like this; When You are not attached to "I" consciousness" then everything becomes clear . Clear as in there is no separation between "you " and anything else.
Your statement is what your ego speculates would be the case but it is not.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Mar 12, 2015 - 07:45pm PT
|
When You are not attached to "I" consciousness" then everything becomes clear . Clear as in there is no separation between "you " and anything else.
I am sure you are telling us something, but the language is not clear to me.
When you say "everything" do you mean everything about I-consciousness, or more generally, everything? Would it be ok to say one thing becomes clear; that there is no separation between "you" and everything else? Even then, it would seem you can tell us what the space mission to Pluto will find, if there is no separation between you and everything else. We may mean different things by "separation."
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Mar 12, 2015 - 08:41pm PT
|
Every time this happens, our attachment to that bit of ourselves become less rigidly bound to our illusory "I" that lives and dies.
Once you realize that the true nature of the person is the watching itself, sans content, and that this watcher is somehow, inexplicably non-local (though our psychological, provisional survival "I" IS local), whole worlds start tumbling down.
I asked up thread (there were no takers):
this monk continues to inform our narrative.
Why?
I thought it was a particularly good question, I had just returned from my yoga class where my instructor that night had taught us some techniques to get our selves into meditation mode, hovering the hands in front of the belly was one of them... "while it might not seem like it, you can actually keep your hands that way with relatively little effort" he said.
When I look at the image I see the monk doing just that...
But my answer to that question (and it was not intended to be a koan) is the simple fact that the remains of the monk are physical, they are a thing, and they are recognizable to us. I feel a connection to the monk, his meditation practice apparently involved a technique that I had just been taught. When his body stopped functioning and his physical presence stopped, he was in a meditation pose. I can imagine many things about his last moments, and about his teaching.
I probably couldn't feel such an affinity without the physicalness of his corpse.
And while I don't know what happened to him (if anything) I know that he is dead by any definition that we have. While the presence of his remains still has the power to inform our narrative, it is because they are an object, the subject we can only speculate on, it has left with the death of the body.
so while I meditate and am instructed to find that place where the "I" ceases to dominate, when my awareness "expands" beyond the normal boundaries, I come back to that "I" at the end of my practice, every time.
The monk did not that last time... at least we can speculate that he did not.
We wonder what happened.
But only because we see this last physical manifestation.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Mar 12, 2015 - 09:08pm PT
|
"I" never ever ceases to exist ever.
The false identification of the "I" with gross material body is what falls away.
The "I" will remain eternally with individuality and personality.
The ultimate truth is NOT and never ever impersonal .....
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Mar 12, 2015 - 09:11pm PT
|
When You are not attached to "I" consciousness" then everything becomes clear . Clear as in there is no separation between "you " and anything else
I found that when my I-consciousness "separated" from my body and instead of casting it aside I stayed with it everything became amazingly clear. And although there was still a separation between "I" and what appeared to be physical objects, I could manipulate these objects in the most surprising way.
It would have been easy for me to assume that I was on an "astral plane" or some such thing - and many who have this experience state with religious fervor this is the case - but it was simply the marvelous tricks played by the mind under various regimens. Much has to do with what we are conditioned (by teachers, reading, etc.) to expect as we practice whatever mental discipline we choose.
That's all it is. You are still separate from other things. Form is not emptiness and emptiness is not form.
And now you see, I have stated with the greatest confidence my opinions on the subject. And these opinions are absolutely correct. So don't be tellin' me I'm mistaken. If you do here's what I will say: Do The Work!
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Mar 12, 2015 - 09:36pm PT
|
But only because we see this last physical manifestation.
he kinda reminds me of werner..,quack:)
doesn't the body become extremely limp after the very last breathe?
could he have been mummified? or somehow strung up in that position before righmortis "sits" in?
the largest image's that come to my mind are that of ol'time John Wayne, and Clint Eastwood cowboy movies. Where the quicker draw would drop a man's body to a flat "puuff" in the dust.
are there any instances when the body gets stuck(or stays) in the same position after the heart stops pumping??
|
|
PSP also PP
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Mar 12, 2015 - 09:51pm PT
|
MH said "I am sure you are telling us something, but the language is not clear to me.
When you say "everything" do you mean everything about I-consciousness, or more generally, everything? Would it be ok to say one thing becomes clear; that there is no separation between "you" and everything else? Even then, it would seem you can tell us what the space mission to Pluto will find, if there is no separation between you and everything else. We may mean different things by "separation." "
Good point . The more I participate on this thread the more I appreciate linguistics.
Everything as in what you are encountering at the moment; it is about relationship. When the attachment to "I" is dominant then what ever you are encountering is responded to as how does "I" feel about that. Does 'I" like it or not. If I like's it then the next typical reaction is how can I keep it . If I doesn't like it how can I get away from it.
When I gets less dominant then the relationship changes where you don't have an a vested interest in your likes and dislikes but you just engage in the relationship (without labeling things as I like this or don't like this ) or you will notice that there is a habit to label a sensation as something I likes or dislikes. You become more of a witness.
It is a really interesting experience and it gets more subtle as you get less attached to "I".
My intuition is the whole "I" attachment is based on survival instinct as has been already discussed here. This survival instinct is obviously very strong and there is no need to fear that if you get less attached from "I" that you won't remove your hand from the stove top burner. it's innate ; but it can make my views very narrow. Hence I meditate to enhance my ability to open my view.
Ed , the hands touching in front of the lower stomach is a mudra ( you probably know this) it helps bring the attention down from the thinking to the belly or body; you get out of concepts and into the body. Some crazy big energy can develop by concentrating your awareness to the lower belly with some diaphramatic breathing.
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Mar 12, 2015 - 09:55pm PT
|
If you do here's what I will say: Do The Work!
Best line Ever:D ahahahaha!
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 12, 2015 - 10:06pm PT
|
We are told that 'experience' provides the evidence for the spiritualism that is the 'non local watcher'. But all experience must come from memory, and memory, as it turns out, is an extremely fallible, malleable, and changeable thing.
Tvash, you come up with some remarkable claims. Who married "spiritualism" with a non-local watcher? I have no idea even what spiritualism is? Is there a spirit involved? Who's spirit? Does it speak "the English?" What does it tell you?
What's more, memory is required for for the mind to register things and events and to formulate a history that our discursive minds can reflect on as say, "This is 'my' experience. This is happening to 'me.'"
What do you suspect happens when - as PSP has been pointing out - you let go of "you," and reflecting on the past, and even abandon experience of all things and stuff and thoughts and perspectives? You are insisting that the mind simply MUST work this way and only this way, according to your absolutes - in this case, "all" and "must" betrays your hand.
The mudra, a certain way of holding your hands in your lap that has been around since about 200 BC, is a sure way to shift your attention from being fused to memory, and to start getting clear.
JL
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2015 - 05:36am PT
|
your reports of no memory and the non i watcher hail from your memory. there really is no escaping the I, only sn illusion of escape, remembered.
im sure it fells as real as jesus, but its de ja vu all over again.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2015 - 08:05am PT
|
Everything as in what you are encountering at the moment
Aha. A good clear answer.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2015 - 09:33am PT
|
Some crazy big energy can develop by concentrating your awareness to the lower belly with some diaphramatic breathing.
of course, this is a subjective experience, no energy is produced and the energy used is not far beyond the nominal metabolic activity.
Observing what sensations the body experiences is a part of a mediation practice where we intentionally "quiet" the "loudest" ones. This competition for our attention by many different alerting mechanisms, and the practice of taking over the usually automatic prioritization of those alerts, certainly provides a phenomenological basis for many physical models of "mind."
I had the occasion last year to lead a visiting friend up After Six, a climb I've done most frequently as a solo, having not lead it for a long time. The solo is a form of moving meditation, where the attention is narrowly placed on the act of climbing, the way the fingers and hands grip a hold, the quality of the foot placements, the dynamics of the center of gravity moving between stances. The climbing goes quickly and often the details are not remembered.
When I lead the climb I found my attention was largely on pro placement and my partner's likely response to encountering the pitches. It seemed so labored, and much more difficult, the act of climbing was secondary. In some ways, however, that afforded me time to pay attention to things happening on the climb that I would not have noticed in my normal routine solo.
At one point I found a beautiful, small snake on one of the ledges, a wriggling, mostly very light gray with black specks and diamonds, and the characteristic head shape of a pit viper, all about 8 inches long with a single rattle on the tip of its tail.
Undoubtedly this individual was the progeny of a long line of snakes who inhabit that niche, a niche I'd explored in detail up and down the cliff, not just on that route, but on most of the various ways onto that ledge and off.
However, in my usual climbing I'd not been very "open" to it's existence, I had never seen a snake up there, ever. While my meditative state opened me up to the "flow state" of a solo, it closed me off to other things happening around me.
This observation is contrary to the conventional characterization of mediation being a "mind expanding" exercise. What is a probably more accurate depiction, at least in my experience, it is an exercise in directing and managing the priorities of the various alerts we sense. It is not a unique state of mind, just a unique set of priorities of what the mind is paying attention to (including paying attention to nothing).
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2015 - 12:58pm PT
|
I have brought up moving meditations before and asked the meditators here to comment, but haven't seen any replies. It seems to me that sitting and moving meditations share "being in the moment" without internal discourse initiated by "I", but then they may go different directions with one focused on "flow" and the other intent on descending into "no-thingness", etc.
But I am probably wrong and would appreciate illumination.
PSP's comments bring clarity. It makes perfect sense that someone in the corporate world, the military, government, etc. would need to make critical decisions for the betterment of all concerned with a "clear head", that is without the ego exerting its protective self - CYA. I assume that decision-making at all levels is not hindered by a partially absent "I" and may well be improved. Again, correct me if I am wrong.
But these comments also bring to mind HFCS's description of a person being a "biological robot", lacking traditional "free will". How does "free will" fare in the meditative world? If we simply "watch" ourselves, withdrawing "I", then who or what makes decisions?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!