Time (what it actually is)

[DrewNows]

@ivankiss ??? ??

“Make time your bitch” love it dude thank you 

[The Lucid Dreamer]

@ivankiss I’m finally responding, haha.

Yeah, I still think it’s all just a kind of semantic issue in most cases.  Like I said, I think when a lot of people say that time or whatever else is “illusory”, they really just mean that it’s not objective(that is in the sense that it is true for all observers), but relative and dependent upon who’s experiencing it.  But I’m sure there are certainly many people who think that there is such a thing as illusion that is completely opposed to and opposite from reality.  I think I agree with you though that it’s probably not the best way of dealing with the notion of time, because it can get people thinking dualistically. 

Anyway, I appreciate your perspective and you got me thinking.  I always like reading your posts; the way you put things is very thought provoking and it gets my brain gears churning.  
 

Cheers! 

 

[ivankiss]

@DrewNows ? I'm in love with time. I think it's absolutely epic. Overlaying two or more time signatures is, musically speaking, quite the orgasm to me  

@The Lucid Dreamer Thank you, that was humbling. I appreciate your input and I enjoyed the debate.

I always share only what I became conscious of. Simply because I enjoy expressing everything. And when someone's able to extract and take away something, that makes things that much sweeter.

Bless you.

[seeking_brilliance]

https://www.iflscience.com/physics/time-crystals-are-now-a-thing/

 

[SoonHei]

On 3/1/2020 at 2:07 PM, ivankiss said:

Time is a side-effect of consciousness shining through billions of frames per second.

 

I think this is wrong.

I read that it was a zillion frames per minute.

[ivankiss]

@SoonHei Have you counted them all? 

@seeking_brilliance Awesome. Thanks! 

[SoonHei]

but ultimately.

any book you may read... ALL OF IT is all available. You don't have to read from page 1, then 2, 3... 100

 

you can flip thru the book, read page 66, then back to 33, and then 99...

that which is outside of time, is by definition existing at all-the-times

 

you are the reader of the book, you've confused yourself with the one who is appearing in the book.

[SoonHei]

@ivankiss HAHA

I tried a few times... but I came up a few short  

[ivankiss]

@SoonHei It is precisely because I'm reading the book that I'm aware of when I turn the page  that's what shifting is. You cannot notice it unless you are one with the moment.

[SoonHei]

@ivankiss amen

you ARE the moment

who is the you that is the moment

moment is you

you is the moment

yin

yang

bing

bang

 

GOOD! now turn to page 394! 

 

[ivankiss]

@SoonHei One page at a time 

[Thewritersunion]

Got an interesting question for y’all, what if time could times and divide itself instead of adding (going into the future) or subtracting (going into the past)?

[SOUL]

@ivankiss  I can appreciate your view of 'time'. I also can appreciate your perspective on the word 'illusion' but you have fallen into the same misconception that befalls very many others here in interpreting the word illusion as 'not real' when 'not as appears' is a more clear description.

You say you are viewing from infinity so are aware of it as 'frames' but this isn't so novel, that's part of the illusion even if it is perceived at an immeasurable rate.  Transcend the unending finite of the infinite and the 'frame rate' is perceived as a whole without separation.

Wait....transcend infinity? Of course. Once one does transcend infinity change is not just the motion of shifting frames no matter how many slices can be fit into 'space' to give the illusion of 'time' but also is seen holistically as one evolving now. It simultaneously exists, it's being aware of them coinciding.

[ivankiss]

@SOUL I feel you, thanks. 

I'm just pointing out why and how does change occur. I'm obviously focused on form here. If you're not experiencing or noticing change - great.

I'm not negating the continuity or fluidity of experience. 

[SOUL]

@ivankiss Haha, I can see what I point out about change and perspective is lost on you. Maybe eventually you will transcend infinity and this will become clear.

Edited March 10, 2020 by SOUL

[ivankiss]

@SOUL Maybe 

[Mo0ngrass]

The concept of non-linear time is fascinating to me as I had an experience where I was shown that time like all things is spherical and it is complete. All possibilities exist within this sphere that we perceive/measure as time.

When I had that experience I couldn't really wrap my mind around it. Though that was over a year ago so the concept of time is no longer something that is a priority for me to understand. 

I resonate with your explanation and I'm happy I've stumbled across another piece to the puzzle. 

[RendHeaven]

@ivankiss Your posts tend to do this curious thing where you carve distinctions in the most subtle and seemingly unfalsifiable ways.

You acknowledge non-duality briefly, state that there are greater depths to plumb, and then proceed with your "distinction."

And I have to put "distinction" in quotes here, since I've seen you state things such as, "difference is not the same as separation" as if to say, "I make this demarcation without distinction!" (which really just sounds like more distinctions! At least from a certain perspective. And from other perspectives it is not a distinction. Or maybe it is and is not a distinction simultaneously, or maybe all of this is an infinitely nonsensical comedy)

I notice that when people judge you for these "distinctions," you retort with a, "you've yet to experience this~" which usually ends in a non-duality dick-measuring contest. (a subtle one, of course. Because in a true non-duality dick-measuring contest, you have to act as if you are sooo detached that it doesn't even occur to you that you are measuring dicks )

Now, I know it sounds like this is a critique already because I'm clearly raising some eyebrows at these trends (the way distinctions are danced around, the way that all retorts are "you've gotta experience it bro, you're just not as advanced as me~") but really I do trust your insights, and I understand that you understand more than anyone how deeply personal your insights are and perhaps that is exactly why you are so inspired to share.

So yes, this is a critique, but not of your insights. Rather, this is a critique of your communication.

I wonder if your communication would be better received if you acknowledged upfront that your insights are deeply personal, deeply inspired, and deeply moving FOR YOU.

For example, in this thread it sounds like you put down the classical non-dual interpretation of time as illusory. And it sounds like you offer your interpretation as somehow better, though of course that is never stated.

This makes it sound like you are making a distinction (the cardinal SIN of this forum!!!) of there being two conclusions with varying degrees of Truthfulness (i.e. that time as illusory, the first conclusion, is semi-truthful. MY conclusion, time as a shining side-effect of consciousness, IS [Truth])

This dynamic, combined with your response from up-top on the pedestal of woke-ness, (i.e. "I've experienced it, you haven't~") it's clear to me why your insights only land on some of our most conscious members such as @Nahm.

I mean, at the end of the day I wonder if there really is any difference between your beautiful write-up and the word "illusory." They are both pointers, are they not? I see that these pointers aim for the Same, albeit from different angles.

All this to say that some of our forum members really need these disclaimers of relativity. It might seem redundant or obvious sometimes, but it's critical for communication because it's so easy for the ego to judge if there's even a hint in your words that "My perspective is THE perspective!"

Bless.

Edited March 12, 2020 by RendHeaven

[ivankiss]

@RendHeaven Thanks.

I agree with your point that my communication skills could be improved. And improvement will surely be. This is just how things are coming through at the moment. 

I might also be "trying too hard". Correct. There's a reason for that. I am clearly going through a process myself and I allow it to play itself out naturally, regardless of how it might look. Never claimed I've "reached the top of the top". I've still got much to "work on". As we know; there is no end to this. There can always be more love and wisdom.

We're all getting there at our own pace. Walking our own paths. 

I'm not here to tell anyone what's true and what not. I'm just sharing my truth.

Edited March 12, 2020 by ivankiss