Tag: Philosophy

Posted on

What is imagination?

child-imagination

What is ‘Imagination’?
Could I say it is ‘Creative capacity’, ‘Creative potential’, ‘Power to create’?
Could we also call it ‘Spirit’?
So, ‘Imagination’ = ‘Spirit’ = ‘Creative Force’ = ‘God’?
Spirit = atma?, Matter = anatma?
But then who created ‘anatma’ would be the question.
So, there is ATMA (notice the caps) which creates the seeming play between atma and anatma.
ATMA {atma, anatma}
GOD {god, non-god}
SPIRIT{spirit(formless), form}

In a way, what we call ‘THE WORLD’ is our conception of it or our interpretation of it.
It is a ‘Mental Representation’.
So reality APPEARS in a field of consciousness, and I am that field.
So I can say, reality appears in my imagination.

It is not that you possess the faculty/capacity of imagination, rather YOU are an appearance of your imagination.
You are your imagination’s possession.
Your imagination transcends what you call as ‘you’.
Paradoxical as it sounds, your imagination is beyond you, and what you call you is one of your imaginations.

Imagination is not a figment within space-time, rather, imagination is beyond and creates strings of space-time itself.
Imagination is the broadest context, the ground of all that exists.

Here is brilliant article on imagination:
http://www.awakeninthedream.com/god-the-imagination/
Excerpt:
“Being the “only immediate reality,” the divine, creative imagination is the primordial ground of “reality” itself. Paradoxically, at the same time that the philosophers’ stone revealed itself as a product of the alchemists’ imagination, the alchemists realized that they themselves — and everyone for that matter — were the imagination of the philosophers’ stone!”
Posted on

The dark night of the soul and chakras

7-Chakras-7-Worlds

There is the world -> then the world of worlds -> then the world of world of worlds, and so on -> Creating the higher and higher context realities.
So, it in the “world of world of worlds”, the mega-context, the far and distant background/context, where the dark night of soul occurs.
For instance in physical terms, if the earth were to go out of orbit – wouldn’t that MEGA-CONTEXT shift affect EVERY SINGLE thing?
The Dark night of soul(dnos) is something like that.
It is a change in the MEGA-CONTEXT layer, which is why it is called dark night of “SOUL”, because the soul is this mega-context/background.

The DNOS is also a 6C(6th chakra) journey.
It is the penance of Shiva to realize his essence.
One could also say that among the 6C realms of ISIS, APOPHIS, and OSIRIS, the dnos represents the realm of APOPHIS.

The egos in society operating to gain:
Security(1C)
Relationships and pleasure(2C)
Status/worldly-knowledge(3C)
and are operating in the 1C, 2C, 3C worlds.
For them anything beyond 3C is far out.
Whereas the dark nighter is operating in the 6C(other-worldly/visionary knowledge) world.

When 6C journeying happens, all the lower chakras get instantly disempowered which is the feeling of getting disconnected from God.
Because here God is Shiva = Third-eye = residing in the 6C or the 6th dimension.
Literally, Shiva loses interest in the lower chakras.

When the 6C loses interest in the lower chakras, the 6C starts journeying to its source(which is ITS ORIGINAL WISDOM aligned to 7C = DIVINE), and now the 6C starts alchemizing all the lower chakras as it moves to ALIGNMENT with its source.
Alchemizing/Purification/Alignment is a ROSY WORD for the harsh climate created for all the other chakras by the 6C return journey.
Each chakra is like a person you know – Our physical person, Our emotional person, Our ego person, Our interests/love person, and so on.
So those people i.e. the lower chakra people go through the DARK NIGHT process of alignment.

The 6C is where the IGNORANCE and DISCONNECTION from God lies.
It is also the chakra where ‘depression’; occurs.
A normal person who believes he is a mortal body/ego lives in 6C estrangement and their 6C channels god energy from afar, like a moon reflecting the sun(moonlight).
That is why they believe, they are this personality/ego, they are mortal, they are the body, they will die etc.
Whereas for a person who has gone through the entire alchemy, his 6C is no longer estranged from the infinite source, and therefore it lives close to the sun and basks in its glory.
Posted on

Every chakra is a context

chakra-mirrors

Each chakra is a context and each higher chakra is a higher context.
Each chakra is a dimension and each higher chakra is a higher dimension.
Each lower chakra context is SUBSUMED and a SUBSET of the higher chakra context.
The higher chakras can journey into realms native to its dimension.

Reality is multidimensional and dimensions are layered.
Lower dimensions are instances of the higher ones.
So when a change happens in the higher dimensions, they AFFECT ALL of the lower dimensions.
Shifts in the higher chakras can challenge all of the lower chakras in different ways.

Each chakra has an inner dimension and outer dimension.
Outer dimension of chakras:
Like all physical experiences = root chakra
All sexual, relational, and pleasurable experiences = sacral chakra
All doing, acquisition of status/position in the world = solar chakra
All that you love(interests/passion) in the world = heart chakra
All the true power/understanding you command in the world = throat chakra
All that you can see in the outer world = third eye chakra
Your universe-view(like world view), knowing faculty = crown chakra
Shifts in each chakra will shifts contexts.
Higher the chakra, deeper and vaster is the shift of context.

That is why, since psychedelics hit the sixth chakra, they journey you through the sixth dimensional realms.
So they can create totally novel and unpredictable experiences in all of the lower chakras.

It is like say, I suddenly teleport you to a war zone in Israel.
Imagine the gigantic change in context.
Suddenly all your behavior would have to change right?
All that you see, hear, and sense is different.
Supposing there, you could meet a person of the opp-sex who is also trying to escape the war, and let’s say you both form a kind of relationship.
And lets imagine you both have are sexually attracted to each other and have sex.
That sex would be a 2C phenomenon happening under the umbrella of the 6C context of being in a war zone in Israel.
Similarly the kind of food you eat = physical 1C experience.
The kind of relationships you make there = 2C experience.
The kind of community you find yourself in = 3C experience
The broad vibes of that place = 4C experience
The kind of understanding you have of that situation = 5C Experience
And all of this is under the UMBRELLA of the 6C context which is being in a war zone in Israel”.
Now what if I teleport you to an alien plant = That would be a 7C shift of context to a whole new realm.
Posted on

Linear causation is only an appearance

television

Structures emerging like an organic process (Implying linear causation), are only streams or channels coming from the uncaused.
There is no linear-causation at all in the larger context.
It all exists at once.
Causation is an APPEARANCE stream coming from the uncaused.

So in the higher truth,
There is no static measurable discrete force in me that is working against chaos to build order nor is there is a me making steady progress in understanding the world.
Those linear appearances are snippets happening in the vaster context of non-linearity and multi-dimensionality.
Everything is only an appearance/a certain unfolding of possibility in a context channel and when the context channel shifts, 100% of reality can shift.

I think full structures/worlds/dreams are already present and all we do is tune into them which then creates our linear reality like selecting a TV channel.
It is like that the cymatics experiment -> the pattern just instantly emerges when the frequency resonance is right.
Or it is like a dream where the whole dream just instantly comes in.

Like take the television set example.
You turn it on and BAAM a channel is running, say with a TV show.
It instantly appears -> and appears to have a situation, some characters, and some movement.
Now say you change the channel, then that linearity and that scene and all the characters just vanish, and are replaced with an entirely new context.
So that is what I meant by saying that linearity is just an appearance.

Like have you had the experience of dreams fading in and out?
In my lucid dreams, after getting lucid in one dream -> I would pursue that dream thread and situation, however soon-after the dream would start to fade to black.
If I stay relaxed in that black space -> then a new dream would SPAWN from there. And the context would just materialize. Like suddenly I would find myself in a beach, or a strange apartment which would be completely different from the former dream -> and then even this would fade to black and again return to dreaming, but each of these returns would be dramatically different with no overlap.

This can be observed even in your normal dreams.
Like say you hear the alarm in the morning (you are jarred awake out of your dream) and you snooze it and go back to bed.
Now again you start dreaming and once again the alarm rings after a while -> again you are awake, but just compare the 2 dreams you had. Weren’t they radically different qualitatively? Were you even the same person in them?
Posted on

All of us are channelers

channeling

Where does everything in existence come from?
Where does all of our consciousness come from?
Where does all our knowledge come from?
Where do all our thoughts and actions come from?

Isn’t is all ultimately from God?
From the formless, uncaused, divine?
Ultimately doesn’t all inspiration come from above?
Aren’t we all channeling God?
Posted on

Postmodernist vs. Traditionalist

PricklesAndGoo

* The postmodernist is in denial of limitations…….The traditionalist is in denial of potential
* The postmodernist is in love with the idea of all is nurture…..The traditionalist is in love with the idea that all is nature
* The postmodernist sees truth as entirely subjective…..The traditionalist sees truth as entirely objective
* The postmodernist is mystical/abstract…..The traditionalist is literal/practical
* The postmodernist thinks in metaphysical terms……The traditionalist thinks in physical terms
* The postmodernist is coming from top -> bottom…….The traditionalist is coming from bottom -> top
* The postmodernist believes lower instincts come from the higher…..The traditionalist believes the higher functions are only to serve lower instincts
* The postmodernist is coming from the heaven standpoint…..The traditionalist is coming from the earth standpoint
* The postmodernist is a rebel/renegade/systems-transformer…..The traditionalist is a systems-maintainer/protector/supporter
* The postmodernist ego is tilted to superego service…..The traditionalist ego is tilted to id service
* The postmodernist is relativist…..The traditionalist is absolutist

I could also call these poles by other names such as:
Liberals vs. Conservatives
It reminds me of Alan Watts and his classification of people into 2 broad types:
Prickly(Traditionalist) and Goo(Postmodernist).
Now how do we marry these 2 poles :)?
Posted on

What are we really responsible for?

butterflyeffect

On Facebook, nowadays I see a bunch of posts that show an emotion provoking video of some injustice done, and then people would be reacting to that with either anger, crying, or sadness emoticons. Like there was a video of male chicks being got rid of because they were not useful by allowing them to drown in water. I mean I did feel quite sad seeing that graphic video. But the recommendation and strong messages were: Every-time you eat meat, this is what you are condoning.

So I thought through that more deeply.
My every action enables every kind of abuse too, like every product in the supermarket contains the labor of the whole universe that went into making that.
The degree and proximity varies, but you know, I could have this reasoning for everything, like I could say the clothes you are wearing is from the exploitation of workers in Bangladesh and then show a really sad video about their toil and thereby recommend that you stop wearing clothes?
If that is true for every single thing, then not taking the action of eating chicken isn’t helping anything in the larger picture, right?
A reactionary action like that is not coming from a seeing of the whole.
This is the same issues with SJWs too. That just looks like tribalism to me.

I could do a DNA test on you, and then prove you are a descendant of Genghis Khan and thereby declare that you have his blood and sins on your hands.
Isn’t that same reasoning also applied for Jesus? That his blood is on your hands?
Where does this end?
What are we really responsible for?
Taking this thought all the way, I am responsible for every single evil and injustice and enabling that in some way.
This can always be proved by some intelligent person, who picks up a theme and ties the thread of connection so that it lands on your lap.
It is like the butterfly effect principle, and if all the connections are shown to someone, they would be bewildered by the responsibility that is revealed.
“Wholeness is a kind of attitude” – said by David Bohm, and I really agree with him on that, and that it is actions taken from that attitude that would really help.
Posted on

Every heartbreak is a disillusionment

Broken-Heart

Every heartbreak is a disillusionment.
Essentially every break up is a break up with a certain alive context in our experience.
Our life consists of multi-layered hierarchical contexts.
For instance, it could range from a context as small as losing your favorite wallet to as large as losing all frame of reference/your ego/your beliefs/your religion/how to live etc.

I’ll focus on breakup in the context of relationship here.
It removes the context of what you thought the person was and what their relationship to you was.
That frame of reference is lost, and to the degree to which that frame of reference was integrated in your whole way of being in the world, to that degree you are now put in chaos.
It is a separation, a kind of ripping apart, and that is painful.

It has disillusioned you, and revealed your previous conception as illusion.
But neither does it totally reveal what that person really is.
It leaves you in a limbo of not-knowing/chaos/grief.
You don’t know if it was your fault or their fault.
You don’t know if this is in their best interest or not in their best interest.
You don’t know if this is in your best interest or not in your best interest.
You don’t know if you should try to get the partner back or let them go.
You don’t know if you should even try another partnership or just abandon that whole path of trying to secure a relationship.
You don’t know if you can trust your perception anymore, because it has just proved itself to be empty.
You stand at the precipice of the unknown with a fallen frame of reference.
It can throw you into an existential crisis too with questions like – how can you trust anyone? How does trust even work? Are we just under the mercy of god, who acts like a chameleon and suddenly changes color casting a cruel joke on us?
Then it just comes down to faith.
In time, the void of this chaos is filled with a new structure, healing happens, and you have grown.
Isn’t this how all growth happens – Isn’t all growth disillusionment in a sense?

Another facet I would like to include here is about success in terms of proven lovability.
And this variable would affect the intensity of your breakup too.
Failure is tolerated only by a person who has succeeded previously.
What if you have never succeeded?
What if nobody has ever loved you, no matter how much efforts you put?
Will you try again? Where would this hope come from?
Would you once again trust your bursts of irrational hope? or just give up?
The most painful wound of this sort can happen when the parents are on the extreme end of conditional love or if they just keep the child alive and barely functional as a duty/obligation and thoroughly neglect the child and kill its spirit.
I very strongly feel, romantic love is a replay of that original bond.
Because that is when we were THAT SENSITIVE to feel it in THAT INTENSITY.
So it is THAT memory that makes us seek partners with a kind of LOVE MAP structure (that has a lot to do with our parental conditioning, unless we overcome that with extraordinary spiritual effort).
Children who were loved by their parents well, have tremendous resilience to rejection, break-ups etc. Like a positive spiral they are quite unlikely to go through a break-up in the first place because they attract the conditions that mirror loving environments and perpetuate that.
Almost seems like a cruelty of nature, where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer – even in the love department.
The only way out that I have seen, is to overcome the ignorance that keeps you repeating the same things and to just constantly keep growing.
Posted on

Talking to new sexual interests often diminishes the fantasy/lust

When talking to a person, you witness their context and their activity within it.
When only seeing a person, you only witness their body.
It leaves a hole of context, because you do not know anything else about them.
Therefore you can substitute this hole in context with your fantasy (fantasy is a context and the object is only the prop in it).
That is why often sexual desire can dissipate after talking to someone.
Because earlier, you would sharply objectify them and tie them to your fantasy context.
Now after talking to them, you witness their real context which displaces the fantasy context and ends the lust a lot of times.
Posted on

The relationship between fear and desire

Fear is a relationship between “Your desire” and the “World’s condition”.
Even your definition of ‘What is a fear/threat’ is relative to ‘Your desire’.
Right now, if your knowledge (whatever you have) gives you enough freedom to pursue your desire, you will have well-being.
Once your desire grows far beyond this world, you will want to transcend (maybe now or later this life or after 100s of lives).
To give an example, say a bird sitting at your window threatens to leave you.
It is not a threat at all, if the bird is not your desire at all.
Only things that are your desire can be threatened.
If you have insulated yourself from all threats and ensured your desires stay confined to only where you have 100% control, then you will have 0 fear.
There is no fear for LOSING something you never desired.
Fear comes only when we desire something that is out of our control.
For instance, desire of human relationships is much more precarious that desire of material objects, because they are not as controllable as the material counterpart. One then is more vulnerable to both fear, and the pain of loss which is the eventuality that the fear guards against.
All fear is a defense from loss.