Jump to content
The Corroboree

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Why is there something, rather than nothing? 
 

an old question.. my thoughts below:

 

the possibilities of a reality have existed always in the (Platonic philosophy) realm of forms.

numbers.. are.. infinite. Then bring in how many different ways you can divide them and then how many decimals and their individual values.. DMT level there lets get into pure philosophy.

 

numbers are mental in nature. To comprehend a number as pure consciousness you have to enter the luminous mind/invisible consciousness! In this state all you have is silence and the void which is.. pure (literally) clear sight with nothing behind.. yet only the clarity of seeing nothingness itself. In this state you see no boundary for your vision (hence the concept of infinity being possible!) because.. there is nothing to see relative to. Look beyond your visions boundary in any direction.. Thats what its like but from the nonexistent centre (which is you!... but you probably exist) hahaha. Clarity of void, clarity of silence (potential of sound). But they are of an alike essence. Total inactivity. Yet the potential for a type of expansion into an ‘altered state’ which would be consciousness beyond your sense of “I AM” to “I perceive this” such as sound. I say altered state because mind can operate with consciousness to develop many different ways of thinking and perceiving.

 

now, because of the realm of forms, the potential for the (keep in mind quantum physicist now say the old philosophers saying all is mental are wrong, all is consciousness) unconscious birth of reality might have spontaneously been touched by the simplest platonic solid. The tetrahedron! Fire! Light! 
 

 

 

 

 

 

heres a rather magical thought...

 

nothingness... and pure consciousness... the consciousness slowly merges with the nothingness.. the nothingness gains something, a substance of light (consciousness) and the consciousness gains nothing.. ness.. anyone know how to do math cuz this sounds almost quanta-fiable HAH! Anyone get that pun xD?

 

i sound like a crack head. Anyone else have any insights or theories o_O?

 

edit: in Zen its called luminous mind, and in yoga its called Sa asmita samadhi. Not trying to brag, but it is very cool to enter the void.

Edited by Meditator
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

god is electricity in the brain. we are hardwired like that.

what interests me a lot as an atheist, is what replaces this in the atheists mind in some form of non-religious spirituality. 

 

also, do theists and not theists 'light up' the same parts of the brain with the same intensity, when for example they are having a fantastic time dancing to their favourite artists live gig?  

Do different style of music light up different parts of the brain, like psychedelic music, hardcore rap music, extreme metal music, jazz, classical... that's some questions I have which I find interesting. 

 

God? god is only one name. spirituality, esoterism, transcedence are all neurochemistry..  Clearly, in my mind, the study of "god" should be the study of the  trancedent experience in humans while doing electro scans of the brain. 

 

But most people dont like the idea, neither atheists, nor theists. oh well. 

Edited by sagiXsagi
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Bro i said metaphysics not theology lol

 

the science of God must be taken into account nonetheless. And i whole heartedly believe true atheists will have a different mode of perception from those inclined to believe there is more. 
 

like a psychotic atheist wont have visions of angelic realms, and certainly wont have enough psychotic energy to reach the realm of mystical consciousness..... they would probably just hallucinate paranoid concepts such as doctors conspiring against them.... dont get me wrong that shit happens! Take it from me!!.... jk lol

<.<

Edited by Meditator
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/05/2020 at 7:34 PM, Meditator said:

Bro i said metaphysics not theology lol

 

 

Bro its the same thing and the same discussion from the atheist perspective.  Metaphysics are the same kind of stuff as religions and gods, you know,  the same as psychedelic theism (f.e. cosmic entities etc).  Largest difference is one of scope, metaphysics refer to beliefs not as powerful and as organised like a true organised religion. One could say that metaphysics is all the same mumbo jumbo without the political power that true religion has.  But you said it yourself, a discussion on metaphysics needs mention of god.

 

I admit, shamanic-inspired/derived neo-religions (meta-religions?)  are a lot different in terms of quality in that the believer talks and experiences his 'god' directly, unlike the majority of the believers of established large religions.  And then you have all kinds of hybrids, like for example a psychedelic theist which is also a christian. The possibilities are virtually endless. 

 

On 04/05/2020 at 7:34 PM, Meditator said:

the science of God

well its only science if we are measuring and monitoring with an EEG. Which would make it neurobiology and not theology. Lets hope in the future theologists will be more open minded (I doubt it) and will collaborate with neurobiologists, so that theology becomes a true science. That kind of ideal theology would examine meditation, psychosis, psychedelic experiences, mystical experiences etc the same way and would compare them. That would be awesome! 

 

********

 

 I like it that you brought the psychotic mind in the discussion. It's interesting what you say, that the psychotic atheist would have different types of hallucinations than a believers. You didnt state this clearly, but you seem to imply that a believers psychosis is more valid, more credible, more powerful and truer than an atheists. This is really interesting to think about.  Makes you wonder if the tendency to be a rationalist is hard-wired in your brian and not coming from conditioning. 

 

Its also interesting that all states of mind like psychotic episodes, deep meditative states, apocalyptic experiences and psychedelic experiences  all share the same neurobiology, they 'light up'  the same passages in the brain. 

 

Could religiousness (belief in any form of metaphysics) be a direct or indirect product of different degrees of phychosis in the history of humanoids? Could this be a more complex phenomenon led by the evolutionary need of the species to believe in otherworlds?  Is psychosis (and related pathology) the way of nature and evolution to create spiritual ideas and spiritual leaders?  I have long wondered with this 'dangerous' question, what is psychosis "use" from an evolutionary perspective?  What's the point of it?  Is religion a milestone invention of humanity towards creating societies?? an inevitable step of apes that grow conscious brains? 

 

On 04/05/2020 at 7:34 PM, Meditator said:

like a psychotic atheist wont have visions of angelic realms, and certainly wont have enough psychotic energy to reach the realm of mystical consciousness..... 

 

So, according to your thinking (correct me if I am wrong), psychosis and psychedelic drugs can have similar results, but the non-religious people cannot reach the same 'heights' as believers.

 

Do 'metaphysics' , or any form of religious spirituality, or  "mystical consciousness"  REQUIRE  that one is either a psychotic or consume psychedelic drugs?  And if yeah, how does the rationalist / atheist fit if he is excluded from the "club" of the 'mystical'?  If my train of thought about your assumptions is right, that would mean that his (the psychotic atheist's) lack of belief in the 'other' would be the only thing that prevents him from 'seeing'. Is believing a conscious choice?

 

And also, are there REALLY psychotic atheists?  

 

So, leaving the psychosis arguement aside, what's the difference between a non-psychotic believers "mystical consciousness"  and non psychotic atheists "spiritual trancendence" ?   Is it only the metaphysical element?? And why would the metaphysical experience is superior to the non metaphysical one?? Can't an atheist have a 'mystical' experience, and btw what's 'mystical' ??  Why is the "wow" experience more worthy when its about cosmic entities than when its about another "type of wow"?  

 

Then again, if metaphysics / mystical consciousness require either you be a psychotic or the use of powerful hallucinations, or both, then how is any of it reliable? how do we know its not an illusion??  Do we even care?  How do we tell the true OG shaman from a random bloke with illusions and hallucinations? 

 

**********

 

I also find it very interesting when I see how physics of the microcosmos fascinates people, notably religious people. With the popularisation of quantum physics and the large publicity of science's expensive attempts to find particles, we have seen the rise of a new school of meta-religious narrations. Clearly this whole new world of a microcosmos ruled by propabilities, a completely different kind of physics, fascinates people who believe in metaphysics.  

The same thing is propably happening and will happen more in the future with lots of cosmology's theories and concepts, like dark matter, dark energy, and more interestingly, different types of multi-verse's (various theories on multiple universes existing).  

 

Maybe its a matter of personal aesthetics, or maybe its my atheism, but I dont find the study of the structure of matter (microcosmos) that interesting. I dont feel it has so great existential power. 

Instead, I find it immensly interesting in the chemical level how a planet in a suns habitable zone can be like a huge machine that produces new elements and new minerals from the same building blocks. And how, like some poetically say, we are made from 'cosmic dust' , literally. 

 

Maybe I instictively stick to what McKenna had said because I am a realist: we need tangible ideas, not ideas as tiny that will go through the nets (microcosmos) or so big that we cannot process (the "cosmic whole").  Medium ideas/fish  to take ashore and discuss/eat  with the other folks. 

 

Peace

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hold up im on my phone. Starting my laptop.

 

theology is more of a field swayed and lead by religious beliefs. For example in Kabbalah God is androgynous. This has many implications. Theology is more of the nature of God. Metaphysics is the science of things. So to understand a religions beliefs is different from the branch of metaphysics im talking about. I forget the name of it.

 

 

But im talking about how the creation (God included if you wanna call God the creative force) may have started. 
bits of metaphysical theory. Not theology. Ok my laptops nearly open.

 

edit: lol btw im with you on the true shaman vs just some guy who trips on ayahuasca or something. They dont have the icaros or a trained lineage teacher. Shamans can guide a person to certain levels of awareness for healing through the icaros and i would bet they understand the levels of mind better than some guy who, even as honest in his approach to understanding, is learning by themselves.

Edited by Meditator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, sagiXsagi said:

 

 

So, leaving the psychosis arguement aside, what's the difference between a non-psychotic believers "mystical consciousness"  and non psychotic atheists "spiritual trancendence" ?   Is it only the metaphysical element?? And why would the metaphysical experience is superior to the non metaphysical one?? Can't an atheist have a 'mystical' experience, and btw what's 'mystical' ??  Why is the "wow" experience more worthy when its about cosmic entities than when its about another "type of wow"?  

 

 

Well i never said my metaphysical experience which was a form of transcendence (could be called mystical) of the void (which i have heard people on ketamine can experience quite easily with meditation) was superior. Infact i believe the average psychedelic trip would be slightly more interesting. CERTAINLY more euphoric. So youve blatantly put words in my mouth there.
An atheist certainly could have a mystical experience. Holotropic breathwork can indeed bring about states such as turiya (pure consciousness) and more. But when we talk of mystical dimensions.. Theyre usually linked to archetypal things such as God, so a concrete atheist is probably not gonna get there. I said certainly but now that i think of it, psychosis can cause a very rapid change in perceptions and beliefs. Mystical consciousness is a broad term though. But if the archetypal forms of God and angels dont sway the mind they probably wont catch the psychotic into a state of delusion that theyre seeing God. 
Also i never even brought up "cosmic entities". Youve come into this as if its an argument against something..? Dude im agnostic lol.

edit: also a religious person has probably read many more books on spiritual topics than an atheist. So take you have to take that into account.

 

However you do bring to the table some interesting thoughts.

But the metaphysical theories i put forward are not at all about God. If you ever enter Sa asmita samadhi through meditation you will understand what the hell im saying. 

 

But yeah man, psychosis can bring on states of consciousness drugs cannot. They have shown that stress and psychosis raise endogenous DMT through the roof. 
 

Edited by Meditator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Metaphysics by definition are a branch of speculative theory. There's no definitive proof to show that any of the topics exist anywhere except in people's imaginations. So... all religion and self belief, universe belief, and to a large extent quantum theory fall into this broad topic.

 

Being an Flying Spaghetti Monster acolyte I'm fairly well versed in why my pitiful beliefs are just as valid as anyone else's. Through meditation, psychosis, fasting, plant medicines and being simply quiet I've dived deep into complex dreamlike states that include massive complex and somewhat meaningful geometry, temples, guardians, light tunnels, space and time itself. All these things have shown me is that I know absolutely nothing.

 

I could claim that my visions hold some sort of validity, but I don't really know that. I do know that monotheistic beliefs are clearly nonsense. Nowhere in my travels in the mind have I encountered and all knowing, all powerful, omnipresent, single point of creation. Everything appears as duality always. The only time I have encountered entities that appear God-like I've finally come to the realisation that these things are just me. They are a product of my consciousness. As difficult as it is when these states of mind go sideways and and the experiences become difficult the inverse applies as well. Everything went so swimmingly well, I was left with a sense of peace and awe, wonder and perhaps even contentment. But, am I willing to accept these givings on face value? Am I willing to lie to myself about the fabric of existence just because it makes me happy? Unfortunately not.

 

I'm not convinced there is such a thing as a true shaman. Is there a shaman certificate you get for taking loads of plant medicines and then sitting with the spirits and finally getting more than 70% of the test right? I think not. Same as there are no true mystics nor true prophets. I get that the more you look at the nature of reality without reservation the more inclined you are to accept it's infinite realities, but that is a working of self forgiveness, release of fear, empathy, serenity and compassion. The more you understand your own nature the better you are able to understand others as well. But this isn't a form of mysticism or shamanism. It's just plain old logic applied to the topic where you learn about yourself, by listening to yourself.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cool replies. 

 

Hey Meditator, dont take this personally dude, my arguments might seem agressive at times, but it's just an attempt to compile the human experience under a single umbrella and then discuss. Part of what I was asking was coming from trying to compare the shaman way and the rational (atheist) way.  Does it matter what colour transcendence has? 

 

I guess I might be wondering "how many different types of trance/exctacy/epiphany  are there, and how do they compare?"   . And since you mention euphoria, that's an interesting note (northerner says something relevant too) ,  what role does euphoria or dysphoria play in the way we perceive transcedent / mystical  states of mind ?? 

 

Sorry if I took it too much into the atheist realm.  But I think its cool even for such a topic to have an atheist perspective.  Sorry if I came out as disrespectful to your thinking and beliefs. 

 

Keep it up, I will return to this thread..  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I am not offended lol. Youre just telling me your view. But fair enough, to compile this huge topic needs an energy to describe ones own point of view. 
 

I believe euphoria/ecstasy has an integral part to play in mysticism and what not. All yogis and mystics describe bliss upon transcendental experiences.

 

there is the path of suffering though..... but upon transcendence there would of course be bliss. 
 

they say the “source” Recharges you from inside. Daoist masters charge up with chi from their lower dan tien and use that energy to do internal alchemy (nei gong). Its like plugging into the matrix of energy.
 

Northerner, there are true shamans. Definitely. There are true yogi masters. I dont understand why youre saying there arent.. could you tell us why?  Like sure there are no certificates.. but thats like saying someone whos been meditating in the mountains for years isnt a meditator. A true meditator you could call them.

 

 

 

Edited by Meditator
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess somewhere still there exists a true Shaman in the traditional sense. There aren't 1000s of self deluded druggies claiming to be Yogis in the west like there are Shamans though. Every self proclaimed shaman I ever met was just a self deluded tripper, bought into their own illusions. Even shamanism in South America is a dying religion, it's dying with tribalism and capitalist globalism. I would challenge that very few so called shamans that practice capitalist drug industry for western visitors are little more than plant cooks and narcotic bartenders. It doesn't take great skill to trip sit and guide people on psychedelic journeys, I know that from experience. Call me cynical if you wish though. The study of yoga on the other hand is an ancient religious practice. It does take a hell of a lot of study, practice, practise and determination to achieve the elevated states of mind that can be found within. But be aware these practices are dogmatic in nature as well, so absolutely not comparable to shamanistic practices which are more a discovery of self and "reality" through altered states that don't have defined theism. 

 

I find that much of our lives and society is based around illusion. These illusions can be self created or forced into us by others. But there is a point where we as individuals choose to accept them or not. In that act as create these things as tangible realities, yet they are in reality fantasies. We even deem some of these fantasies as integral parts of our psyche whilst others are labelled as illness. I've been looking deeply again at these perceptions and illusions that make our society what it is and how I relate to them. I'm less convinced than ever, but more aware of what it is that I'm less convinced of now. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Lol this thread went no where fast..

 

If God is actually our collective mind then this thread was doomed from the beginning. We/you/I/? may have planned this thread to end up as a fail.

 

But i shall still add a metaphysical thought just for effect ;)

 

Reality.. its a concept.. comprehendable to mind. Same with consciousness.. the light.

I believe mind is a form of empty substance. It isnt made of anything. Its made of what is within it! The thought itself.. unless there is a thinker...

 

With that said, we must beg the question.. can we turn that emptiness inside out so to say.. Is consciousness made of mind? The Buddhist masters say the mind is “pure white light”... and as i said.. physicists now believe everything in this physical universe is actually consciousness ;) white is the colour of purity................ 

Edited by Meditator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×