I think the 'what if's' being the most profound in that it describes the limitless possibilities of our creative consciousness. Both individually and collectively we create this reality that we see before us as we think and believe, adaptations of aquired knowledge. The only limits are the ones imposed on us by ourselves. As RP has pointed out, we are from the same 'ocean' but not necessarily the same 'bubbles'. In effect we ARE universe and are part of universe thus we are invidual and collective universes creating a much greater whole. The movie MIB II makes a wondeful illustration of the possibilities of multiple universes greater and smaller in proportion. For all we know we could be the charm on a cat's collar!
On Jul 12, 1:50 am, Ash <[email protected]> wrote: > To say that the fragment is separable from the source is shining the > light on a square centimeter of one plane of influence, isn't it but > variation of the same? The bubble would seem ill suited to assert more > than the dictates of mechanical phenomena, but being an expression of > that ocean the dictates are pure actualized expressions of whatever > forces or will nature has. There is no need to struggle with existential > questions or enlightenment, a bubble is what it is, very zen. > > That might lead us to a critical assessment of mankind, where we say how > pitiful in comparison to potential is his state. Without going further, > and I assume this is the unguided ego manifesting, we might become stuck > in judgement, self-loathing and self-righteousness as a result. In that > state of antagonism against all the world, and oneself, lacking the > awareness of unity a subject of craving and unquenchable thirsts. There > beyond the idealizations and dogmas, form, reason and subjective truths > lies a Living Truth that we can find but not be told. The awareness when > elevated to that level of truth understands how we too are phenomenal > expressions, with variation, and great potential. That understanding > leads to knowing others as ourselves, and what we are in relation to > Truth can restructure and boost all subordinate oganistic structures > within the human being, especially the ego. > > Then RP it seems the supreme resides within one, or at least the > doorway. I've been known to kick into the door from time to time in an > unorganized fashion, for lack of a mentor. I seem to be tiptoeing around > now perhaps peering in carefully, giving pieces time to fall into place. > MacDonald-Baynes' work is proving a beneficial study, and had I read > Beyond The Himalayas as a youth I would have propelled in many studies > and apostasy would have been mostly unnecessary. I trust no-one or thing > at face value, but my recent studies are bringing together many pieces > of truth that I've collected. As of today I am 27 (just to get out of > the closet with the rest) and feel gratitude to you all contributing so > many valuable experiences and thoughts, no horror is like the mind > alone, but companionship... > > Back on topic- Is it necessary that a multiverse be populated either > tandem or parallel? It seems that there might be a causal asymmetry > involved, whereas the laws operating within local space/time must apply > to the superordinate macrocosm also. Just a fictional analogy, say our > universe is a bubble in a boiling ocean where the expression of a bubble > is brought by an allowable vacancy within the compressible medium of an > area. The disintegration of a bubble allows and brings forth new bubbles > (tandem succession), each one containing variant influence by the other > bubbles (parallel). Estrangement from the one local event growing with > distance and time from that event (bubble/universe). Of course there are > no clean boundaries, but lets assume these are extreme circumstances > like the creation/destruction of an atom and the relatively massive > distance between them. There are a lot of holes and duct-tape to the > idea but there is much room for 'what if's I think. > > Please do critique! All IMO, it's good to be back. > > On 7/10/2010 12:17 PM, RP Singh wrote: > > > > > It is very easy for the ray to say that it is the Sun ,for after all > > it has emanated from it. But for the Sun it is just a fragment which > > it has sent out. You can think anything you like, there is no tax on > > it. How wonderful it is when a bubble thinks it is the ocean, for > > after all it is just momentary and returns to its source ,the ocean , > > as if it had never been. > > > On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 7:41 AM, Molly <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > Mine is: I AM that. As thoughts go, it is often all that is > > necessary. > > > On Jul 10, 3:52 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > My favorite thought is....."I'm not there"....... > > > > On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 12:29 AM, DarkwaterBlight > > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>wrote: > > > > > In the words of Porky Porcupine (Pogo Comics) > > > > �Thar�s only two possibilities: Thar is life out there in the > > > > universe which is smarter than we are, or we�re the most > > intelligent > > > > life in the universe. Either way, it�s a mighty sobering > > thought.� > > > > > On Jul 8, 11:25 am, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > Yes, I agree on both counts, in an an anthropic sense. > > Unfourtunately > > > > > we are not completely aware of what other awarenesses are > > out there! > > > > > It is pretty high minded to think that we are the most > > intelligent > > > > > life forms in this universe not to mention that of other > > universes. In > > > > > any case this was meant to describe the levels of awareness > > and to > > > > > provide a working definition of the term. This is not to say > > that the > > > > > mechanics of such process is not as you say! The assignment > > of meaning > > > > > is where it becomes challenging. Consider this (just to get > > back on > > > > > track) in the context of multiple universes; > > > > > > "If one lived in only 2-dimensions (aka as �Flatland�), then > > > > > something in the third dimension passing through our plane would > > > > > appear suddenly, and just as quickly disappear. From the three > > > > > dimensional point of view, not much has happened, but from > > the two > > > > > dimensional point of view, it�s a real eye opener. Thus why > > not an > > > > > object normally residing in four or five dimensions casually > > wandering > > > > > through our three dimensions, and thus the �hiccup�. Or > > perhaps an > > > > > ever grander event, the kind that gives rise to new > > religions?"-Dan > > > > > Sewell Ward > > > > >http://www.halexandria.org/dward408.htm > > > > > > On Jul 8, 10:34 am, RP Singh <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > > If there is Self-awareness or enlightenment or God-state > > then that > > > > awareness > > > > > > would open a new meaning to life. > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 6:30 AM, <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > > In my experience awareness is the beginning of a process > > not an end > > > > in > > > > > > > itself. Awareness leads to selection among raw data of > > experience > > > > which is > > > > > > > then imputed with meaning. No? > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: RP Singh <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > > > > > > > To: [email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]> > > > > > > > Sent: Thu, Jul 8, 2010 6:51 am > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Mind's Eye] Re: Parallel Universes > > > > > > > > The state of enlightenment or self-realisation is called > > > > Turiya-avastha by > > > > > > > yogis. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 9:16 AM, RP Singh > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > > >> The so-called state of enlightenment or > > self-realisation is simply a > > > > state > > > > > > >> of awareness of the organism like deep-sleep state, > > dream-state, > > > > awaken > > > > > > >> state. Equating the individual self or ahamkara to the > > Self or > > > > Truth, God , > > > > > > >> Atma is just human egoism and a desire of man to be > > supreme or God. > > > > > > > >> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 7:44 AM, <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > > >>> So I would be interested in how you shifted your > > attitude from a > > > > > > >>> relativistic subjective position like mine to what I > > imagined you > > > > believe is > > > > > > >>> an objective enlightened one? I am truly interested in > > the steps > > > > you took to > > > > > > >>> get there. I also appreciate the fact that beyond a > > certain point > > > > you will > > > > > > >>> probably say that words are inadequate to describe the > > process. > > > > However some > > > > > > >>> of the process is probably describable. No? > > > > > > > >>> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > >>> From: ashok tewari <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > > > > > >>> To: [email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]> > > > > > > >>> Sent: Wed, Jul 7, 2010 9:25 am > > > > > > >>> Subject: Re: [Mind's Eye] Re: Parallel Universes > > > > > > > >>> Cannot say much about your chain of thoughts, though > > commonplace ( > > > > for > > > > > > >>> they're the very same that held sway over me not so > > long ago ), > > > > because they > > > > > > >>> have roots and causes within you. > > > > > > > >>> The self is not negated but known. Which isn't being > > superior - > > > > inferior > > > > > > >>> but being true, without the least psychology we are > > all caught up > > > > in. > > > > > > > >>> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 6:45 PM, <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > > >>>> You are apparently saying that awareness can be pure > > (free from > > > > > > >>>> contaminating subjectivity hence by passing > > interpretation). > > > > Further that > > > > > > >>>> the experience of 'pure' awareness enables the > > experiencer to > > > > obtain an > > > > > > >>>> assumed pre existing knowledge of everything. In that > > case I am > > > > doomed to > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
