Belief Buster Regarding The External World

[Gopackgo]

This is a realization that had been kicked around in my mind for a long time. I have a scientific mind. What this means is that I allowed my beliefs to dictate my experience despite assumptions I took as given. I felt superior because ... it's science. One thing I had a lot of trouble with was the idea of no separate world from my awareness i.e. there is a tree over there that is separate from me, and I am over here. I was recently reviewing my sensation and perception notes from undergrad, and I had a realization that is big for me:

Lets look at vision. A scientific perspective says that light hits the retinal rod and cone cells, a chemical excitation takes place which is transferred into a chemical and electric signal that travels up the optic nerve to the occipital lobe in the brain where it is rendered into a visual experience. So I realized that even though I never saw this for what it was (a model) I accepted it for truth. But even this model requires the brain to generate my experience. The brain projects reality into a hologram that I was taking for granted. There absolutely cannot be any separation from any image in awareness, because the image perceived is a result of the awareness perceiving it. Everything I see is completely dependent on this projection under a scientific model, but this isn't the experience as it is. This is a belief that keeps me in separation from objects in my awareness and was based on the assumption inherent to the model I accepted.  Every sensation including thought works this way. The mind projects all things, and the mind is an object in awareness. Awareness contains it all. If I am awareness, I am the container in which all experience takes place. None of the experiences occurring can be the subject that is containing it (see neti-neti). I have been reminding myself of the inherent limitation of models in every moment. I am not separate from that which I see, I am creating it. This is the only thing that makes sense. It seems obvious. The experience that triggered this for me was noticing the depth of the darkness when I close my eyes and meditate. It is almost like a holodeck with nothing being projected. It is pure unadulterated potential to form experience.

Now consider whether or not light is vital in this projection. When we dream, is there any light, or further, any sensation that provides the stimulus for the experiences in the dream? No. Of course not. Therefore, we are fully aware that our brain projects these things even in absence of stimulus. Generally dreams aren't mere memories, they are new experiences. Further, time is distorted in a dream. So time cant be a constant external dimension. It is a sensation like any other. Many psychologists believe that everyone in a dream is a projection of yourself (it would have to be because the awareness of other can only be supplied by your own individual awareness.) So, the question becomes, Is waking reality any different? Can it possible be any different than that? Could we all be a piece of the same awareness, creating a container that is a consensus reality that provides a void for experience to flow through? Is matter required in a dream to make a physical reality? I know my current answer to all of these based on my experience, but I write to show how deceptive models can be. Science = Models, not reality. It is only a working representation that seems to make the most sense, until it is supplanted by a new model. The assumptions we rely on are powerful and arrogant. I am trying to search and destroy via direct experience. A lot of this is vision based, but it extends to everything. If anyone has any thing to add, or any corrections, I am excited to learn them. I would say that this was a pretty big non-dual experience for me, and I am just in wonder that I ever thought differently. The walls continue to fall away as I see what really is and it is awesome.

[Mohammad]

I used to have(and I think still have) a scientific mind too.I am a master student of physiology.and lots of similiar expriences to yours made me realize that my models were just made up and non existent.the brain is creating my expriences?brain is just made up of matter.even signals in the brain are being created by movement of Ions(matter).these are what science says.but then,what is matter?! nowadays its so obvious to me that all of this is just a model.feeling,seeing,hearing... these are not movement of ions!

The questions that you ask are very good questions and deserve time for contemplation.

[Gopackgo]

@Mohammad  The more I contemplate, the more I see all the holes in my models. One thing that i just experienced, is I realized that many times, my memories occur in the third person, like I can feel what was felt (if intense) as well as the presence of awareness but I see the scene as though I am watching it. I like to look at an old picture and ask myself what has been unchanging between then and now.  When I relax my focus in meditation, physical objects begin to lose form and my mind becomes clear. If my mind is becoming more clear in meditation, why have I assumed that the"altered consciousness" I experience is some kind of trance that fucks with my vision? If I am more clear, it seems to make sense that I am having a more clear experience of reality. The body must be the same. It is a focused attention of awareness. In the same way, over focus on any one sensation or tension, and my attention becomes even more focused on the sensation's form, at the expense of others. The rising and falling of sensations creates the illusion of time. Maybe this is why anesthesia and drugs alter my experience of time, because they cut off or dull sensation. So I still exist, but I have no frame of reference for time. Maybe when my body dies, I will be in complete relax, and will be formless again.

On another note, I was thinking about the particle collider at cern. I was thinking about how they get sub particles, which was kind of weird to me, because all matter has to be made of awareness. But then I remembered, they are measuring the particles... so of course they appear in physical form. I wonder if they have tried any version of the double slit experiment. The smaller they go with atoms, the more they find empty space. It's interesting, I guess in string theory they now think vibrating strings of energy give mass (maybe not, its been a while since I read about it). Another interesting thought I had was a memory of sixth grade science, when my teacher explained that you never actually touch things, interaction with physical objects is just repulsion of forces if I am remembering correctly. So the experience of touching is also illusory. The importance of dispelling these incongruities with scientific models is beginning to fade though. Just a lot of interesting thoughts keep hitting me. A lot of them get replaced later, like a progression is needed to break through my conditioning.

[PureExp]

4 hours ago, Gopackgo said:

If anyone has any thing to add, or any corrections, I am excited to learn them.

Nothing much to correct, you are advancing very fast.

I'm happy to read things that match my own thinking, it gives me some assurance, that I'm not the only crazy out there.

I'd like to add this. Just as in your example of a dream, just for a moment consider a universal mind dreaming a dream that is this world and us all in it. You will immediately notice similarities, except this dream is more vivid and more stable, it is still impermanent and flowing like a human dream, you can't hold on to anything here.

Now don't personify the universal mind, don't add a body or limbs on it, let it be a non-physical structure in consciousness. Assume minimum needed.

Try it as a hypothesis and see what are the outcomes. Do they match with your own experience? Does it explain reality better? Ponder on it, write about it. Do lets us know.

Edited March 20, 2017 by PureExp

[Nahm]

  @Gopackgo Those pesky laws though. What do you make of them?

[Gopackgo]

@PureExp  We are on the same page. The dream analogy really unlocked a lot of barriers for me. Thank you so much. I will keep you informed.

 

@Nahm Well, My dreams have physical laws until i realize I'm dreaming. I feel like the more formed an object is, the more laws apply to it. Also If my purpose is experience, it seems that a reality with some laws would probably facilitate that. If you are talking about how I should be reading for crim law tomorrow... you're right.

[Mohammad]

@Gopackgo

Just a note on your sixth grade science class.if you look at it closely,when we try to touch an object,with our hands or just walking on ground,there is a thought that "I" am touching something,but in reality the only thing that exist is the sensation.the sensation of my hands touching the keyboard exist,but the fact that "I" am typing,is just a thought! So,science says that atoms push each other away by their magnetic force,they never collide,the things that I call "my" hands never collide with the keyboard,this I can grasp.but the fact of the matter is that I relate the sensations that exist (e.g.hand touching keyboard) to "my hand".There is no "my hand" if we look at it closely.we are observing that atoms never collide.and a sensation exists.that's all.and this does not make any sense!because although I know this intellectually,there is always this thought present in my mind that I am touching stuff.Am I atoms?I dont feel like it.but it looks like that I am.and this does not make any sense!

Sometimes these types of contemplation helps me to break something old in the models.but unfortunately I can see that it becomes replaced by another model very rapidly,even if it seems like that the new model might be more "real".

We are masters of our own deception.I realize that more day by day.

[Gopackgo]

@Mohammad Yes I am struggling with this as well. Replacing models with models. The thing is, I think if its based on actual direct experience, it is superior to a model.  If it is a clear intuition that keeps recurring, then it is alright to carry in some sense.  Also, I have been working on letting myself drop out after an interaction. Like I will talk to someone, and as soon as I walk away, I fall back into awareness.

The way around all the matter stuff for me was just realizing that no matter what anyone tells me, there is no model that can change the fact that my mind is in some capacity generating all my sensations into the reality that I am typing in now. and my concept of mind is an object, and awareness is what gives the objects meaning. Even movement is a sensation. I am always in the same place when I separate that as a sensation, so it is more like everything happens inside me, or that experience in the form of objects are flowing through.

[Mohammad]

@Gopackgo

I agree with you on direct experience.

Sometimes I feel like I always felt,I am moving through the 3 dimensional universe.But sometimes,the other way around,as you say.I am always where I am.objects are coming into awareness and then changing shape and giving their place to some other object.it's kinda like that everything is a formless entity,and each time this entity enters the awareness(which is me) in a different form(reminds me of quantum universe where electrons are supposed to be every where until you observe them.)

But I think that we need to realize,that what ever form it takes,it is always beautiful.because it is the "beauty".

And even maybe there is no me or awareness,and this entity.maybe we are not separate,but one.but I dont feel this way.

[Nahm]

@Gopackgo if you figure out how to apply all that to the laws seriously let me know. I've been stuck there for pretty much my whole life. Where is that line? I'm always wondering

 

[Gopackgo]

@Mohammad  We really are in the same spot. There are a few Rupert Spira videos that talk about awareness in the following way: You cannot focus on awareness. Awareness is what generates the focus, so you never become awareness as an object, but you relax your focus to know awareness (yourself) fully. He has a meditation about allowing your mind to melt into your heart (awareness, not the body part). It like imagining your self dissolving more than anything else. He often asks people, "If I asked you to take a step toward yourself, what would you do". The point is that you arent separate. The one who is thinking is the self. The one that knows knowing, and knows experience is you. Seriously, watch his videos, his explanations are spot on for me to direct my focus within awareness in many ways, and from our limited interaction, I think you would appreciate his explanations fully. I'm sure you understand what I'm saying, but if you are like me, 1000 explanations combined with looking in helps defining what you know that you know, but cant accept for some reason.

@Nahm The thing about laws is that they are beliefs right? If the experience of awakening teaches you anything, it is that you can only be limited by the beliefs you hold. This is my intuition in relation to laws as well. Every prejudice and belief that I break allows me to know myself more. This has included replacing of tons of things which I considered to be law already. This makes me hesitant to say that there are rules in this reality that can't be broken. I try to be mindful of myself making assumptions, because we make so many that we don't even realize. But see, I think this is the only "path" involved with awakening - breaking assumptions. That's the mindset I attempt to hold.  I mean, objective experimentation is the bedrock of science. That is the great assumption, and scientists go to great lengths to ensure objectivity. Really though, reality is a consensus/subjective reality. This means that science is based on a false assumption. The only objective reality that exists is the overlap between subjective reality, so within that overlap, objective experimentation would be useful for manipulating within that, but not so much within a subjective reality. Super reliance on objectivity is the greatest limitation of science, and also provides it's arrogance. It is the ego of society, which like us has been vital to get to where we are consciously. Paradox.

[PureExp]

8 hours ago, Gopackgo said:

Really though, reality is a consensus/subjective reality. This means that science is based on a false assumption.

You nailed it perfectly there. Great thinking !

Science limits itself by ignoring the vastness of consciousness and focusing on just one of its expressions - structures shared among a specific group of minds. Shared structures = physical universe and specific group of minds = humans.

Ironically, this focusing is what makes science super efficient, and only within a few hundred years it has done wonders. The fallacy of many of us humans is that its awesome success makes them believe that science explains everything there is to explain. In its glare, they don't see that science gives us very useful partial truths only. Once you we those pieces, we need to see the bigger picture and use those pieces to complete it.

So it gives us rules, and we assume everything must follow those rules.

[Mohammad]

@Gopackgo  Thank you for the suggestion,I will surely watch his videos.

And I agree on what you say about science.But the thing is that most of mankind,even some of the most intelligent ones,cant distinguish between the objective and subjective side of reality and they treat reality as fully objective.This is a trap that I still struggle with.But if you look at it closely,and just observe it,reality will show it's true nature to you.

25 minutes ago, PureExp said:

Ironically, this focusing is what makes science super efficient, and only within a few hundred years it has done wonders.

@PureExp It is really ironic.But the question is what is the quality of modern science that makes it so efficient? I mean ancient civilizations had they own scientific thinking too,but they couldnt change their reality so dramatically as modern science has done.What do you think is it that modern science has that makes many people fall into it's trap of "science explains everything"?

[PureExp]

3 minutes ago, Mohammad said:

But the question is what is the quality of modern science that makes it so efficient?

In my opinion, the most important quality would be Scientific method. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Its a continuous process of self refinement. It never stops. Scientists are humans and become dogmatic and fixated on beliefs often. But the new paradigms come up again and again and throw away the stale junk. In short - it feeds on itself, it grows and refines very-very fast.

This did not happen in old civilizations. They fell into static wells of beliefs that lasted for thousands of years. But the new science has grown out of old. Its a process of humans falling many times and then again getting up and jumping a bit higher than before.

9 minutes ago, Mohammad said:

What do you think is it that modern science has that makes many people fall into it's trap of "science explains everything"?

That depends on what people believe constitutes "everything". Isn't it?

For most that word means anything that our senses can sense. Bodies, objects, space, light, skies, phenomena of all sorts. People have an extroverted mind, and that mind tells them its all out there, and what they perceive is everything there is.

Science investigates exactly that - phenomena. And hence, IMO, people assume that it explains everything. Technology adds to this beliefs. "It works so its the whole truth".

[Nahm]

That's great philosophy, I really like it all.

How's it coming breaking the laws though? (Letting them go since they are merely beliefs)

That's what I'm interested in.

It seems like you guys are saying science is just this or that, as if you've broken the laws of physics. 

 

 

[FirstglimpseOMG]

Wow, sometimes I read a thread here and wonder how was I lucky enough to have found all the teachers, all the teachings, and all the ways our 'awakening' unfolds in a place like this. This, makes the internet bill so worth it lol!

I can't even add to this... it just added a whole lot to me somehow. THANK YOU.

[Salaam]

On 3/20/2017 at 10:55 PM, Gopackgo said:

 

@Nahm Well, My dreams have physical laws until i realize I'm dreaming. I feel like the more formed an object is, the more laws apply to it. Also If my purpose is experience, it seems that a reality with some laws would probably facilitate that. If you are talking about how I should be reading for crim law tomorrow... you're right.

Yup, people call this is a "law" but it's more a balancing action of the universe, once you realize what else it's connected to.

Specificity is connected with limitation.

The more specific something is, the more solid the form of an object, the more specific it's actions can be, but also the more limited in range of scope (less range, more depth).

People might look at that statement and say wait, doesn't that kind of put the universe into a corner? But no, because it still has access to changing back into something less solid, less specific, but with less limitation. The universe is constantly and ever-flowing, shifting dynamic mix of the full spectrum from solid specificity to ephemeral uncertainty/potentiality. It's another way of viewing chaos and order.

That's why I revise the uncertainty principle to be uncertainty/potential counter-balanced by specificity/limitation.

[Nahm]

@Salaam if there is counter balance, then there is not uncertainty. Counter balance is a reaction.

[Salaam]

4 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@Salaam if there is counter balance, then there is not uncertainty. Counter balance is a reaction.

You can still have a range of potential ways a thing can counter-balance and then a further range of how things will potentially move after that initial action. And since the specific flavor of that range of potentiality hasn't yet been realized or made more solid, there is uncertainty.

Men and women are a counter-balance to each other are you saying there is no uncertainty, no potential for difference and range in their dance?

It sounds like your tunnel-visioning on some singular or limited set of things in your conceptualization. A counter-balance limits scope, it does not limit that scope to only 1 direction.

 

[Salaam]

On 3/21/2017 at 1:43 PM, Gopackgo said:

@Mohammad Yes I am struggling with this as well. Replacing models with models. The thing is, I think if its based on actual direct experience, it is superior to a model.  If it is a clear intuition that keeps recurring, then it is alright to carry in some sense.  Also, I have been working on letting myself drop out after an interaction. Like I will talk to someone, and as soon as I walk away, I fall back into awareness.

The way around all the matter stuff for me was just realizing that no matter what anyone tells me, there is no model that can change the fact that my mind is in some capacity generating all my sensations into the reality that I am typing in now. and my concept of mind is an object, and awareness is what gives the objects meaning. Even movement is a sensation. I am always in the same place when I separate that as a sensation, so it is more like everything happens inside me, or that experience in the form of objects are flowing through.

If it helps, you might want to look at models as a desire for a certain part of your mind with a certain specialized function. It's your perspective really and the perspective/conceptualizing area of your mind is still under development and has cravings and indulgences it has to mature with. So the trick is, understand that this is a specific facet of your mind, work with it, so it develops. But, also balance it and keep working on differentiating it from direct experience and the part of your body that deals with direct experience. Involve yourself with both commensurate to the degree of preference you desire, but never leave one idle to the degree that access becomes difficult (which is a problem western society seems to have, getting locked in their head or locked in perspective mode).

Eventually you can hold both in parallel and in harmony so their both activated at the same time with superposition. So your dipping a bit into conceptualization mode when you want to organize yourself or gain perspective and back into direct experience when you want to act and run on instinct/intuition/automated processes or whatever. Shifting the ratio of activation as needed.