Are you the big bang?

[Aturban]

 

Edited January 12, 2021 by Aturban

[VeganAwake]

Who wants to know?

[Aturban]

No one .)

[James123]

@Aturban yes, if “you” “think” big bang happens, if you dont think big bag never happens or nothing never happens, because you are already what you are, which is whatever was before big bang. 

[LastThursday]

@Aturban you are the Big Bang and you are at the centre of it. Everything is because of you.

[Aturban]

@James123 I don't know if the big bang happened, but if it did, then I am it, and so are you.

[BipolarGrowth]

I’d argue that no, you aren’t the Big Bang in a certain sense at least. You are no more the Big Bang than you are Christian Heaven with pearly gates and an anthropomorphized caricature of God. Both of these things are 100% given to you by and based upon the speculation and beliefs of others. Do you really think any scientist has direct experience of the Big Bang? Do you really think any Christian has direct experience of the Heaven they believe in? Furthermore, both of these things are completely irrelevant to what you are in the most fundamental or real sense because you have not directly experienced either of the two even if others have. 
 

You ARE the Big Bang in the sense that the Big Bang exists within your imagination, thoughts, and beliefs. You are consciousness, of course, as has been explicated around here and the Actualized.org YouTube channel ad nauseam, but if we extend the word consciousness to follow the one hour+ long definition exhibited in Leo’s latest YouTube video about directly experiencing yourself as God, you are everything in your perceptual bubble. My extension of this that Leo does not cover is that beliefs, thoughts, your ego, and anything spiritual teachers or traditions tell you is illusion, Maya, not ultimately real, or false in some way is actually you just as much as any other “aspect“ of consciousness.
 

Your beliefs, thoughts, ego, etc. that everyone around here lately seems to be saying aren’t you are just as much you as anything you’ve ever experienced on the level of your hand in front of your face. Of course, you likely won’t come to truly grasp this if you do not first have that direct experience of your hand as consciousness, God, colors and shapes alone. After you have that experience, it’s necessary, if your goal is progress, to move to the conclusion that “mental” things like thoughts or the ego are merely phenomena all the same as your hand or a red ball on your floor is. The distinction between the grouping of ego, thoughts, and “purely mental” (not physical) imagination and the grouping of the perception of “physical” objects, your body, “purely physical” imagination and other such things is 100% and absolutely arbitrary. It’s god damned infinitely arbitrary lol. 
 

On a mini but relevant side note, even the individual’s direct experience of something leads to only speculation and beliefs if the individual makes any attempt to extrapolate that direct experience into words, explanations, or intellectual understanding. Yes, this applies to our resident God-teacher Leo Gura and any other being making such an attempt including me and what I’m doing right now as I’m writing this. Pleasant sounding spiritual realizations such as “the fabric of the universe is love” or plausible seeming statements like “consciousness is the fabric of the universe” are ultimately useless in the final step of realization. This is because using the word love or consciousness immediately divorces you from what your awareness experiences by bringing that experience to the level of abstraction. The level of abstraction is precisely where that experience did not occur. Every single word in any language is an abstraction. As soon as a word is used, you get lost in infinite permutations of definition. To understand how lost you get with any word, I’ll use a simple word as an example that is very directly experienced to every non-colorblind person. Define to me the word red in your own words. You’ll quickly see when trying this that you are no closer to capturing the directly experienced “essence” of red in language. You might say “it’s not blue.” Then you have to define blue. Then you have to define color. Then you have to define perception. You can go on forever using different combinations of English words or even eventually all words from all other languages that have even been made or ever could be made to try to capture what red is, but you’ll never describe the experience adequately with words. 
 

Luckily, we can finally come full circle by realizing that words are reality just as much as what is directly experienced by your senses as the intellectual mind is just another avenue for a different sense than the 5 ones typically thought of as perceptual. You also perceive thought, mental images, definitions, etc. 

 

Where did we get with all of this explanation? Pretty much nowhere. That’s where your Big Bang is as far as anyone can truly verify not to mention it’s a past event and only the present moment exists according to Eckhart Tolle who people call enlightened. What a joke. Fin. 

Edited January 12, 2021 by BipolarGrowth

[Aturban]

@LastThursday True that!

[Aturban]

@BipolarGrowth Have you actually listened to what's being said? or You just read the title and made your assumptions about what's being said?  Saying the big bang happened was only for the sake of argument, for those scientifically minded people who are sure that the big bang happened.   

[seeking_brilliance]

There, now I am. ?

[BipolarGrowth]

@Aturban did you make that video? It’s probably the most entertaining video I’ve ever seen put on top of an Alan Watts audio track, and I’ve seen and listened to about all of the common/popular ones out there. If you did make the video, I’d say what you’re doing is a good way to get people to listen to Alan Watts who typically don’t lol. It’s got to be an effective way to create further interest in Alan Watts considering how the average person still isn’t likely to listen to a basically audio-only track of him. 

 

At first I just read the text in your post. After you asked me about listening to what was said, I went back and watched the video. To be honest, the 3 ish minutes of Alan Watts talking didn’t add much more to the essence of what was being said compared to the text you quoted from the video that I read initially. I don’t see anything worth adding or removing from my initial response after watching the video. So yes, you were right that I didn’t listen before my post, but I’m unsure of how you correctly guessed that since watching the video didn’t give me anything of substance that I didn’t address in some way with the initial post. 
 

Do you have any response to what I said? 

[James123]

46 minutes ago, Aturban said:

@James123 I don't know if the big bang happened, but if it did, then I am it, and so are you.

No. Nothing never happened or existed. Only so called “thoughts or words “. We are already what we are, identical and never began. 

[Aturban]

@BipolarGrowth Thank you for the feedback, and yes I made the video. I just started this thing, but I have many other videos like that with other topics, you can check my channel.

I actually like most what you said, and how you said it, but I realized from what you said that you haven't heard the whole thing.

 

 

 

[LastThursday]

@BipolarGrowth you are right. The Big Bang is a metaphorical phrase fronting a complicated coherent scientific story (I can type it, but I can't say it quickly).  Naturally, it's coherent because scientists threw out all the incoherent bits. 

But why throw out the baby with the bathwater? It's obvious that whatever consciousness is (I don't really like the word), it is full of structure and meaning, it's not just some random mess. That immediately begs the question: why all that structure? So we need a good story to tell. The story for better or worse is still in consciousness, it becomes part of the structure.

My own out-there opinion is that the scientific Big Bang is simply the reflection of the Big Bang that is us. It's like this: why are we here, because of XYZ. So in essence we are the seed on which the crystal of existence grows out from. We (consciousness) in the present moment are the ultimate effect of all those causes. If we follow the chain in reverse effect, cause, effect then scientists conclude one cause. This doesn't seem surprising to me, one effect (consciousness) from one cause. 

All this cause and effect duality is in fact false however. You could say it's all just one effect or one cause or a causeeffect. That means nothing ever started and nothing ever ended: ergo, we ARE the Big Bang itself. The Big Bang is right here and now.

 

[Aturban]

@seeking_brilliance There you go. Have you watched the video? 

[Aturban]

@James123 Watch the video and listen please

[Aturban]

@LastThursday Well said  have you watched the video though?

[Aturban]

@BipolarGrowth you might find this one more interesting 

 

 

[LastThursday]

@Aturban I have. The juxtaposition of Alan Watts and food is irresistible. But Alan Watts is wrong in saying that the human form is the outliers from the splotch of ink.  We are the ink itself, the source.

Edited January 12, 2021 by LastThursday

[Aturban]

@LastThursday Well, he said, it's LIKE you took a bottle of ink, so he meant that metaphorically