this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2023
2 points (100.0% liked)

weirdway

70 readers
1 users here now

weird (adj.)

c. 1400,

• "having power to control fate", from wierd (n.), from Old English wyrd "fate, chance, fortune; destiny; the Fates," literally "that which comes,"

• from Proto-Germanic wurthiz (cognates: Old Saxon wurd, Old High German wurt "fate," Old Norse urðr "fate, one of the three Norns"),

• from PIE wert- "to turn, to wind," (cognates: German werden, Old English weorðan "to become"),

• from root wer- (3) "to turn, bend" (see versus).

• For sense development from "turning" to "becoming," compare phrase turn into "become."

OVERVIEW

This is a community dedicated to discussing subjective idealism and its implications. For a more detailed explanation, please take a look at our vision statement.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

First off, for purposes of grokking this, I request you take the perspective, even if only for a moment, that everything in your human dream is 180 degrees off, a little like a reflection in a mirror. Allow for that possibility while you read the following.

When you appear to have been born into humanness, you died to your True Nature, to Truth. You were birthed into this human dream but it was actually a death from the perspective of Truth.

When you appear to die in the human dream, what is really happening is you are being born back into your True nature, Truth. When you are born you die and when you die you are born.

Imagine a night dream... the characters appear within a dream, they are birthed. Later that dream ends and the characters disappear (die). Where did they go? Nowhere, because there never existed. Yes, they appeared to have a variety of experiences within that night dream which might indicate they were 'real' characters.. seeing, hearing, feeling various experiences, but they were not 'real'. From their dream perspective they felt real, but upon awakening the dreaming human realizes they were just illusory.

In a lucid dream, which you have probably experienced, you wake up to your true nature as that of the human character having the night dream. You awaken inside the dream to the reality that the character in the night dream is the creation of a human. Said human is outside the dream. Where does the night dream character go? Nowhere, because he/she wasn't 'real' to start with. You might say he/she died and was absorbed back in the dreaming human. As above, so below.

Contemplate this, you are already dead. You couldn't be deader and some day you will die to this human dream and will become alive to your True Nature. Truth is the dreamer and, in your human format you are a dreamed character.

You might ask why your human character seems so real and believable. Your night dreams appear real while they are happening. If your dream of humanness did not appear real, with the validation of the senses and human drama, you would not stick around for the entertainment.

Could all this human dream be solely for entertainment? You can make up any reason you want for this human dream, I find entertainment works for me.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] syncretik 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not trying to shake your beliefs because we clearly believe the same thing, however what I'm saying is there is the possibility for it to be "any other way" and until we experience it directly, we will not know if we are truly correct.

I actually agree with the first half and disagree with the second half.

So the first half is this: "I'm saying is there is the possibility for it to be 'any other way'" -- yes. The possibility is wide open. To understand this wide open possibility is to understand all-potential. However! Here comes the tricky part:

"until we experience it directly, we will not know if we are truly correct" - nope. Experience is not meaningful on its own. Experience requires interpretation. There are countless ways to take the same experience and arrive at countless different conclusions about the nature and properties and meaning of that experience based on how you want to interpret it. So, no, when we experience anything, be it now or later, that doesn't tell us anything whatsoever about "how it really is."

The only thing we know is that we have a choice. Choice is undeniable. I can believe this or that. I can move this or that way. All knowing and experience is selective and optional, which implies volition. There is no specific experience and no concrete knowing that is obligatory. But that there has to be some experience and some knowing is a constant. That's why capacity differs from some specific exercise of that same capacity. My ability to dance any dance is not the same thing as my skill to shuffle dance. In fact it's possible to be able to dance and yet not consciously know how to dance. To be able to dance only means I can, in principle, learn how to dance. That's all. It means I am dancing-compatible. It doesn't even mean I can imagine dancing today. I might be so confused that I cannot even consciously imagine dancing. But if in principle, with some training, I can later on imagine dancing, and then eventually I can learn to dance, then I am in principle dancing-compatible. That's what capacity means.

Because there is no experience and no knowing without willing (choice), there is no experience that is straightforwardly informative. Of course you can choose to interpret some or all of the suggestive appearances you experience as straightforwardly informative. That's a choice you have. But that's only one of many options you have.

From a subjective idealist POV if I see an appearance that looks like a sun, it doesn't imply "there is a sun." If I see an appearance that suggests a distance it does not mean "there is distance." How I interpret all these suggestive appearances is still, in the final analysis, up to me (or you, from your own perspective).

This point is very important in all sorts of ways, not the least of which, in determining whether or not your spells "have worked." You cannot go by appearances. :) If you take appearances as informative, you cannot really become the author of those appearances. Think of this as a cartoon author looking at a blank sheet. If you let a blank sheet of paper inform you, it tells you "there is no cartoon here, it's just a sheet." But as a cartoonist, you then draw, impose a cartoon on the sheet. You ignore the message of the sheet and impose your own message. Before you can impose your message you first have to disrespect and disregard the sheet's assertion that it can only and ever be blank sheet and that's all it can ever be and is. As a cartoonist you say, "even though you look like this, I know better than you what you are. You're a cartoon. Let me show you." So you override appearances by your own inner authority.

If you worship appearances the way scientists do, you cannot magickally control those appearances, but have to instead study them in the manner of science.

I'm summoning /u/therewasguy for extra fun.

Originally commented by u/mindseal on 2017-11-06 00:34:26 (dpdjtny)

[–] syncretik 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"until we experience it directly, we will not know if we are truly correct"

So I meant this in a slightly different way. An experience beyond death is no different than an experience of me waking up tomorrow morning and eating breakfast. They are both simply experiences at their core. What they both also share in common is that they are future tense and they are things I haven't yet experienced.

Waking up and eating breakfast tomorrow is a certainty as far as I know (assuming I don't randomly die tonight lol). This is because the routine and habits have become so entrenched that I am 99.99% certain I will wake up and eat tomorrow morning.

I say 99.99% because there is always a tiny, tiny chance that I will not experience that. As I said, I might accidentally die tonight or experience some other event that prevents me from eating breakfast or in the best case scenario I might end up in an epic 100 year lucid dream or something. And so until I experience tomorrow morning directly, I can never truly be sure if I will wake up and eat breakfast.

It is the same for an experience beyond death. As an example, let's say I think I will end up in a white room upon dying. I could believe that with all my heart, but as with the example above, there is always a tiny, tiny chance that I will not experience a white room and until I directly experience life beyond death, I won't 100% know if I'll end up in the white room.

Experience contains implication. A door implies a room beyond it. A view of a city implies a planet and a whole civilization to go with it. And so death (ending of this experience) implies a host of unknown things beyond this experience. And so ultimately I won't exactly know what the future holds until I experience it directly.

Fortunately though, intuition generally doesn't lie, and if your gut feeling says something, it's probably right. So I most likely will wake up tomorrow and eat breakfast. And my personal idea of life after death is most likely correct as well.

Originally commented by u/Green-Moon on 2017-11-07 00:27:01 (dpf8ytk)

[–] syncretik 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I agree with everything you just said, but don't you realize that what I was pointing out is wildly different and more radical than everything you just said? You're talking about the flow of conventional meanings here. I'm talking about what exists beyond convention. Here I am using convention in two meanings:

a) Convention is what is widely agreed upon in society.

b) Convention is what you yourself adhere to as a matter of course, a habit.

I'm saying there is also something beyond convention. This doesn't contradict anything you just said, btw.

The point is, I experience typing on reddit now. But am I really typing on reddit? If I can doubt this experience, I can doubt any experience. If that's the case, then with regard to specifics death will not clarify anything.

Clarity ultimately doesn't come from appearances. It comes from will. But we don't have to die to understand this.

Originally commented by u/mindseal on 2017-11-07 00:45:28 (dpf9oum)

[–] syncretik 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah I agree with your comment about interpretations of experience but I can't deny that I'm in a conventional world right now. I can attempt to reject convention but habit will instantly contradict that. Old ways will kick in. The way I see it, I'm working within the boundaries of convention in an attempt to eventually skip convention altogether in one fell swoop.

Sure I can reject all appearances as they arrive but after spending a life adhering to convention, it isn't easy to drop it all at once.

Originally commented by u/Green-Moon on 2017-11-07 01:13:13 (dpfaujp)

[–] syncretik 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I can't deny that I'm in a conventional world right now.

You can. You just don't want to. :)

I can attempt to reject convention but habit will instantly contradict that.

Habits are forged by something other than more habits.

I can reject all appearances

It doesn't have to be all or nothing.

Originally commented by u/mindseal on 2017-11-07 01:25:58 (dpfbf28)

[–] syncretik 1 points 1 year ago

You can. You just don't want to. :)

Maybe so. I've experimented and still continue to experiment with adopting different perspectives but it's mostly just that; experiments. It's not my primary go-to method when it comes to deconstructing the dream.

It doesn't have to be all or nothing.

True

Originally commented by u/Green-Moon on 2017-11-07 14:59:33 (dpgk1mv)