image description image description

LATEST CONVERSATIONS: Consciousness and its objects

I’ve been watching some interviews with Rupert Spira lately, where he argues that consciousness exists of itself and by itself, without the need for any material forms through which to manifest. Apparently this way of seeing consciousness is somewhat at odds with other traditional (Buddhist?) views, where consciousness is seen as having no independent existence outside of the forms through which it manifests.

My purpose here is to suggest that neither of the above positions can be verified, and that neither has any relevance. As an argument for his position, Rupert points out that when we allow our thoughts to sink back into the silence of pure being, and when from this position someone asks us, “Are you aware?”, our answer would always be “Yes”. In other words, in this situation there is no “me” answering the question “Are you aware?” – the immediate answer “Yes” comes not from a manifest self, not from consciousness as form, but directly from consciousness itself.

My issue with that argument is that I don’t believe we can truly dissolve our manifest selves into pure consciousness, devoid of form, because we are all still, in a very real sense, in this body. No matter how much we might like to think that the sense of being a separate self is dissolved, I believe it will always be there, to some extent, just as the body is there, and therefore the answer “Yes”, is not simply consciousness being conscious of itself – the answer is being distorted, however slightly, by being asked and answered through the medium of bodies.

I’d suggest that we can’t possibly know whether consciousness can exist by and of itself, without the need for forms. Our seeing of consciousness is always filtered to some extent by form, so we can’t really know consciousness purely as consciousness. Perhaps consciousness doesn’t need forms through which to manifest, perhaps it does. It seems to me that this is a non-issue – it really doesn’t matter.

Any thoughts?

Consciousness and its objects

Please select the social network you want to share this page with:

We like you too :)
close

118 Responses to “Consciousness and its objects”

  1. November 25, 2014 at 11:43 pm, RoyDopson said:

    Abiding AS that (this) pure consciousness it is a non-issue, you are correct. There is no way to ‘prove’ any concept beyond all doubt, as all concepts are within the realm of duality. The only way to truly know is to BE that which is being spoken of. Fortunately you ARE pure consciousness, so you know beyond doubt.

    The only thing you can have no doubt about is your own existence. You are Ultimate Reality, and as such require nothing relative to you for you to exist. You ARE EXISTENCE itself.

    • November 26, 2014 at 1:44 am, josham said:

      Amen. That which I Am requires nothing relative to itself to exist, it’s true. But that which I Am, through the medium of this apparent mind/body entity, is obviously geared towards acting as if all these apparent dualities (like the apparent duality between a “me” and a “you”) are real, even though their existence can never be demonstrated. It’s interesting that what I really Am, non-dual Beingness, gives rise to all these apparent dualities. Perhaps I do it because I can only know myself as, shall we say, pure potential, when that potential is realised through the apparent manifestation of forms. Hence it seems, after all, that what I Am cannot know itself as itself, but can only know itself through its apparently dualistic manifestation.

      • November 26, 2014 at 11:38 am, RoyDopson said:

        In knowing, duality appears. Being is singular.

  2. November 27, 2014 at 2:21 am, Mit Jones said:

    Consciousness does not need form to exist, consciousness needs form to experience existence.

    The human is a manifestation in consciousness, it is how consciousness experiences BEING.

    • November 27, 2014 at 8:23 am, josham said:

      I think consciousness is beyond either needing nor not needing anything, and that consciousness and form are two inseparable aspects of the One – thus making it meaningless to discuss any relationship existing between them.

      • November 27, 2014 at 1:36 pm, Mit Jones said:

        Let’s look at meaning and meaningless first. Like beauty, meaning is in the eyes of the beholder. If something has no meaning for you, it does not make it meaningless.It simply means you do not comprehended the meaning. Saying it is meaningless is an easy way out, searching for
        meaning is what life is about.

        Your state in your last reply;
        “I think consciousness is beyond either needing nor not
        needing anything, and that consciousness and form are two inseparable aspects of the One”

        From my point of view, all form arises out of consciousness, forms come and go consciousness remains the same.

        If I sat and starred upon and empty stage I might say “this is meaningless” but then an actor arises and then another, they come and go. As I watch I realize there is a story being told, what that story means depends on your point of view.

        • November 27, 2014 at 9:26 pm, josham said:

          You talk about a “you” watching the stage with its actors coming and going, but the “you” that is watching is one of the actors – the very act of watching creates a subject-object duality. Consciousness alone can’t watch anything – it isn’t in a subject/object relationship. Only the manifest entities arising in consciousness can watch each other. Therefore we can’t know if consciousness either exists or doesn’t exist independent of its objects, because the one pondering the question is always an object.

          • November 28, 2014 at 2:47 pm, Mit Jones said:

            The metaphor pertaining to the stage was to offer a different point of view. I accept that I am an actor upon this stage, as are you. I also accept that all is consciousness and all that appears as form is
            also consciousness. What I don’t accept ”from
            my point of view” is that it has no meaning. If you were to ask me what the meaning is, I surely couldn’t tell you but I do believe it is a blessing to be here.

          • November 28, 2014 at 8:16 pm, josham said:

            I never said that consciousness is meaningless. I said it’s meaningless to discuss a relationship between consciousness and form. As you’ve just said, they’re both consciousness. So, is there a relationship between them, or not? If it’s not meaningless (i.e. pointless, unresolvable) to discuss such a relationship, then go ahead – I’d be interested to hear your take.

          • November 29, 2014 at 12:33 am, Mit Jones said:

            I’ll begin by stating, I write from an understanding which begins with the understanding that I am not in a position to KNOW anything. I do understand what you are saying but if we limit our discussions to only what we can resolve and what we can truly understand there will be no need for language.

            Not to dodge your question “Is there a relationship between
            consciousness and the forms appearing in consciousness”

            I feel form is and expression in consciousness, it is a thought construct. The human sensors, nervous system and memory are a processor which creates the experience we call life. It is through the illusion of form and the process of life that consciousness experiences being. When we are not
            distracted by the human experience we experience the same being.

            I appreciate your point of view and these discussions, it
            allows me to expand and express and understanding I have been developing for a very long time.

          • November 29, 2014 at 2:51 am, josham said:

            “Thought construct” is a good way of putting it, and your summary of how consciousness experiences being seems fair enough to me … I appreciate your point of view as well. Although it’s futile in the end, it’s fun anyway to try to “eff” the ineffable. It’s interesting to push understanding to the limit. And it’s good to discuss such things within the context of our illusory otherness, in order to expand into our Oneness 🙂

          • December 03, 2014 at 9:02 am, runstill said:

            consciousness is not separate from objects and no pondering by a one is required for what is self evident as
            consciousness.

        • December 03, 2014 at 4:42 pm, Marta said:

          The angle of view is only one dimension but when you want to be aware, you have the depth to which the stage and give express .Dais is a state of being and give activity already is, it is forming.To are without actors, so it is quiet and leisure.Consciousness the knowledge it is the mind, soul and I body.Ours is a state of being, it is quiet and peace.When want to form so pick up light.

          • December 04, 2014 at 10:10 am, Marta said:

            The Council will share with you my experience.If it will help you and if
            you are interested to know more of himself and who you are with all
            Consciousness the knowledge of your properties, your thoughts, emotions
            and feling.Depend on and in what kind of society we are educated,
            school, family , all we revenues into your life by birth.Soul is light
            and our self is the true nature of existence, connected to God.Je in
            core.When read and get to know each other, soul, God, it shall take in
            your life for all in to your life and light and darkness. .It Is
            aware.knowledge All experiences left us to track and it is pain, fear,
            and where we failed

            .To the dark ignorance, because
            we did not know was that build and manage sooner we understand what we
            have learned and the recognized.All situation repeated and then we
            tangle..First must clear all the features fears so that he stood
            directly to and go up to a root.Disassemble all respects and the depth
            of their problems and show you the action..All accept and forgive .Recommending
            work who is close to you I mean if creditors God and with them, if you
            believe Buddha as a nim.To already know who is close to you with faith,
            learning by experience .It is the work of Christ consciousness.Example
            as you wrote here on stage and actors action.Stage is our true self is
            the essence .Soul light connected to our selves and read heart.Mind,
            body and ego that is outdoor.Stage screenplay when the free Actors and was empty so it’s quiet and dark
            but it’s there, it’s energy although seen. It is our right and I screenplay
            story takes place, which actors and events on stage light shining on
            hercov.There the movement and the time you get so light, because
            directly afterwards look.When want to work, knowing it similarly, when
            it is at rest is silence darkness when you want to form so involve mind,
            body and soul.I thank my teacher and master of God, he has taught and
            thus lead Were his year but now you can change and now it depends only
            on

          • December 04, 2014 at 2:27 pm, Mit Jones said:

            Assuming a point of view is a restriction I except, in order to have a foundation from which to build and understanding. From my point of view all things are unfolding in consciousness according to a plan, I do not believe we asked or required to change anything and I don’t believe we are in a position to KNOW anything so I except what is.

            Once you clearly see it is all illusion, everything else is just figuring out the trick.

          • December 04, 2014 at 2:49 pm, Marta said:

            Check the truth, everything that is outside of the illusion of you is what role should include and whether you pass the Iluzii

          • December 04, 2014 at 2:53 pm, Marta said:

            Consciousness is the way in which gain experience in fullness, without pain and chaos

          • December 06, 2014 at 7:13 am, Marta said:

            Elements are directing but the main thrust of the energy that opens to God within themselves, judder than going deeper feelings are stronger and your light is clearer.All is in you, this is not about the exterior but your inside.No look it out. the game is exterior but this stage is right substance.Then you connected to the cosmos, God and master.Theory is just to understand it and putting it on your path.Forming is able to work with energy and light underline.Through you work together to form a god. it is therefore important to know their rights I

    • December 06, 2014 at 5:24 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

      Consciousness is an awareness of relativity. Without relativity, there is nothing to be aware of. Everything that has an internal and external relativity has consciousness. But it is often confused with “a certain level” of consciousness.

      A level of consciousness, indicates the level of awareness the entity has relating to its consciousness. Pure consciousness is virtually the same as “existence” or “relativity”. (I would say, “I am, therefore, I think.”)

      Consciousness = Relativity

      The consciousness of an atom is its point of focus. For an atom, it is a point of relativity within an electromagnetic torus.

      The consciousness of a man is its point of focus. For a man, it is a point of relativity within a perceptual torus.

      • December 07, 2014 at 3:03 pm, Mit Jones said:

        Relativity requires at minimum two reference points, each arises in consciousness, what makes these points relevant to each other is a judgment based on a criteria. This is a mind game, mind loves to lable parts.

        From my point of view you have a misconception of both relativity and consciousness.

        • December 07, 2014 at 4:05 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

          From my point of view, you are the one with the misconception. You and many others seem to think that “consciousness” exists independently from relativity. It is like the body-less spirit that is just “there” ready to play “mind games” from a point of zero relativity.

          Get “real” dude! Non-duality does NOT mean that there is ONLY consciousness nor does it mean that there is ONLY reality. It is how the 2 are actually one. And you seem to be dealing with only the consciousness half.

          An atom has internal and external relativity. It has a consciousness (which is its dynamic actions). It does not have a higher consciousness like man. Man also has a consciousness that IS his dynamics of relativity both internal and external.

          Much of these dynamics are going on without any knowledge of their existences to man’s “higher consciousness”, which is his “psychological interpretations” of these dynamics.

        • December 07, 2014 at 7:04 pm, Mit Jones said:

          Sorry you took that personally, I stated from my point of view that you have a misconception. The only reason I replied at all is because you were replying to something I had written.

          From your point of view my concepts are wrong, I can live with that.

          I’d like to point out that nether you or i are in a position to KNOW anything and if you don’t know that, I have the advantage.

  3. December 05, 2014 at 3:23 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

    Here are my thoughts; What exists in the absence of consciousness? Equilibrium. Why does equilibrium not contain consciousness? Because it is a continuum of a zero set. Which means, there is no relativity.

    Relativity = Existence = Consciousness.

    (“Higher consciousness” is a psychological awareness of a portion of one’s relativity.)

    Whichever term you care to apply to it, Existence requires Time.

    Our system of reality is a CONTINUUM! The “apparent universe” exists because it IS the continuum. “We” exist within the “apparent universe” because we are a continuum within the continuum.

    Without that connection to the continuum, there is no isolated consciousness. It is the consciousness OF the continuum.

    http://i326.photobucket.com/albums/k434/RideNazi/Lightexamples/3a55c6cb-f371-493e-a172-5e38b7d0a3cf_zps20cec19d.png

    • December 06, 2014 at 12:57 am, RoyDopson said:

      Existence does not require time. Time is a cognitive measurement of two seemingly separate events ‘plucked out’ from the continuum.

      YOU are the continuum. You create time. Time has no existence apart from your mind.

      Spend a few hours without focus on any thoughts or any things and you will experience timelessness directly.

      • December 06, 2014 at 7:45 am, Marta said:

        Truth hush ideas without intention within themselves at the heart of our I, there is silence, peace, darkness and emptiness.

        • December 06, 2014 at 8:01 am, Marta said:

          Activity is movement, engages the mind, body and mind, and you can transform and begin to form.

          • December 06, 2014 at 5:10 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            Exactly! The first 3 dimensions: charge (potential), spin (range of potential over area), MOTION (a wave must move to exist!).

          • December 11, 2014 at 3:51 pm, Meg said:

            it exists as potential as you say – but it still exists? Form is not existence – form does not exist.

          • December 11, 2014 at 5:34 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            “it exists as potential as you say – but it still exists?”

            Let’s specify the “it” for clarification;

            Charge-a linear relativity, the difference between two points of contrast. This is a one-dimensional existence. One dimensional existence is a concept. It can arise from and be carried by a continuum of reality. But it can not offset equilibrium (which is the primary force of nature), so it can never develop into a continuum on its one dimension. In other words, no matter how long it gets, it really never exists.

            Range-a planar relativity, the rotation of a line, from its center, within a plane. This is a two-dimensional existence. Another concept within reality but without its ties to reality it does not exist. No matter how long a non-existent orbit lasts, it is still non-existent.

            Existence-a three dimensional relativity, the linear motion of a rotating orbit creates a spiral continuum. A spiral continuum actually has dimension. It can actually exist relative to itself. It is a self-referential time wave. This is the true proton form, the building block of both matter and consciousness, the fractal component of the universe.

            The reality of expansion is built by the quantum expansion of these consciousness units. The flow of time is the expansion of consciousness.

            But maybe I have digressed too far off the original idea of “intent”. Intent is what overcomes the force of equilibrium.

            As we discussed before, continuity is needed to support consciousness. This first level of continuity is the consciousness fractal. If I was this unit, I would be just chasing my own tail. Nothing external to be relative to. Just, “I exist as yin, I exist as yang, I exist as yin, I exist as yang”…..continuum of internal existence. no outside relativity.
            But the key factor is the intent. It is a self-referential intent that creates the offsetting force against the return of equiibrium.

            But equilibrium is truly timeless and incessant so any offset will likely be overcome, sooner or later.

            BUT-what if the force of equilibrium could be tricked? Tricked into supplying energy for a “perpetual motion system”. By widely expanding relativity components, Equilibrium must “push all the pieces back uniformly” it order to regain its dominance. This, it turns out, is not so easy. Equilibrium tries to reconnect the separation of expansion but ends up powering a recurring cycle because of the expanded complexity.

            😉

            Form is not existence – form does not exist.

          • December 12, 2014 at 11:53 am, RoyDopson said:

            All conceptualization is analogy. You could well be talking about trees, apples and snakes.

            The next, and possibly final step, is to transmit theory into practice. How to BE the continuum/the Absolute. Indeed this is our true nature, our Self, but what is it that prevents us from being free of vexation and abiding in perfect contentment?

            It is the thought process itself. It may appear as though the thought process is bringing one closer to Realization, but in fact it IS EXACTLY the delusion.

            The fundamental reason why we think is because we know we exist while we are thinking. We use thoughts as a relative form of existence. A dog chasing it’s tail indeed.

            You are existence itself. Transcend the need for relative existence. SIT AND BE.

            Or not. Whatever.

          • December 12, 2014 at 12:18 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            Many people interested in consciousness are right-brain thinkers. They approach things from a spiritual/emotional/sensual perspective. They have little use for left-brain approaches of science and mathematical relationships.

            Left-brain folks are just the opposite. Without logic it just will never make proper sense. They want to see what is “real”.

            I believe that some people integrate both sides of the brain better than others. Those people can use conceptual thought in application to an integrated Big Picture.

            For me, there is no need to SIT AND BE, although it is one of my quantum possibilities.

            I can connect to “existence itself” in a strictly controlled meditation environment. But I have actually had more and better experiences when I was doing mind/body separation activities.

            For example, cross country skiing or hiking (often with music playing in my earphones), I push my body to its limits while disengaging my brain from the muscle-memory activity.

            I receive streams of consciousness, which might be described, by someone with a more religious ilk, as, talking to God.

          • December 12, 2014 at 4:30 pm, Meg said:

            Isn’t this flow? Mind and body one or none? Your ‘real’ self flowing with no resistance?

          • December 12, 2014 at 5:18 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            YES. My body is on auto-pilot synchronized by the music. My brain is not directing me. It is instinctual. I see the root and step over it but I am never really conscious of it. Of course, every so often it becomes, Hmmmm…how did I get here?

          • December 12, 2014 at 4:58 pm, RoyDopson said:

            When you are engaging in physicality you are using the senses as a relative form of existence, ie: you know you exist through physical sensations. Add some music blaring away and it’s a heavy dose of sensory input. You have stopped thinking, but have substituted one form of relativity for another.

            Don’t get me wrong, it is entirely possible to “do things” and engage in the physical realm, but to do so while unwaveringly abiding in/as Self… well that is Enlightenment.

            Consciousness that seeks reaffirmation of it’s existence via ‘outward’ focus is engaged in the creation of the illusion; the game of samsara. Consciousness that abides as Self/the Absolute remains ‘in’ Reality/Source. Abiding as such, perspective shifts and the thought process stops while the physical realm recedes to the background. This existence is perfect contentment/bliss. It naturally manifests as desireless Being. I find myself just sitting, revelling in the bliss of my own existence. Nothing to do, nowhere to go. Completion.

            Yeah, I sit around a lot. Maybe it’s just me.
            ; )

          • December 12, 2014 at 5:12 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            If you have the goal of not thinking but “tuning in”, then what you are saying sounds logical. And for most people, it is probably true that the least amount of outside interference the better.

            I also will meditate stationary in a quiet (preferably natural) setting.

            But the reality (at least for me) is the more quiet a place is, the more a smaller and smaller noise can be distracting you.

            What we are really after here, is a mind-body disconnect. I feel this is easier to accomplish by absorbing the body in an alternating physical continuum that is automatically synchronized to a pleasant background of vibrational sounds.

            I could not do this until I reached a level of physical ability to allow my mind to “go along for the ride”.

            My body & brain are like my designated driver. I am just along for the ride & free to look out the windows, not at the road.

          • December 12, 2014 at 5:32 pm, RoyDopson said:

            I only have one more thing to say to you Andrew. If you are interested in Self-Realization and the peace that is such, read and DO what Ramana Maharshi taught.

          • December 12, 2014 at 5:47 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            That is exactly what I do!!! I am ALL. I move my perspective and see through many different views. I become an atom. I become the sun. I see the cycle of the universe.

            The very first experience that I can remember as such, was existing as the “Cosmic Spiral”, the birth of consciousness.

            For me, this is the primal perspective and I am convinced that everyone (and everything) has this aspect as their personal point of focus. Most people do not realize that it is the Cosmic Spiral. They just come to think it is their I/Me and fill it with their “imagined qualities of self”.

          • December 12, 2014 at 12:01 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            CORRECTION; This last line was part of a copy/paste from Meg’s earlier reply. It is out of context and should not have been included in my posting.

            “Form is not existence – form does not exist.”

        • December 06, 2014 at 5:08 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

          A.K.A. “equilibrium”

          • December 06, 2014 at 6:58 pm, Marta said:

            Our true self is fixed, there is only is.Nothing else.When want something done so first you have to have in even.All balance.There inside the nucleus seek out room but the answer when you want something done, then engages in energy and light, it is movable.Preferably the Ask God or master, it depends who is close to you and what do you believe that he has directed and will be the lead, teach

          • December 06, 2014 at 7:10 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            Sorry. I think that looses something in translation. “Our true self is fixed,” I don’t know what that could mean? I do know that everything is reduce-able to waves and waves do not exist without motion. What are we “fixed” to?

            And when we “want something done” we “seek out room in the nucleus”? What the heck does that mean?

            I can tell you the truth for when you want something done. You fail at continuing the action that is keeping you from what you want.

            Successfully recreating yourself over a continuum is existing. When you want to move, fail to recreate yourself in the old position. Start recreating yourself towards your goal.

          • December 06, 2014 at 7:28 pm, Marta said:

            Truth is just a word, everyone has their right of their experience and according to the development soul.Ours true self is the core ist in depth as you should coalesce with his inside.Speed is activity.Waves such as vibrations depends current intensity and how is open the energy and goodness

          • December 06, 2014 at 7:35 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            Now I understand. You are speaking from a perception of the hierarchy of spiritual connections.

          • December 06, 2014 at 7:46 pm, Marta said:

            Yes, and I feel, to feel God’s love, master, who has taught science and through me work.Ich power of love, a strong vibration and color but everything is within me, and that’s the whole universe

      • December 06, 2014 at 3:55 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

        Please show me that “existence does not require time”. There are different aspects of time. Relative time is the elapsed time that occurs as a duration for some relative interaction. But relative time is not extant. Extant is a measure of the continuum, not relative time but the “quality” of Time. This quality of time extant is the continuum. I am a continuum within the continuum. A special point of focus. A specific perspective, from which I view the whole of my interconnectedness with the one-ness that I am.

        You claim that, “time has no existence apart from your mind”. I think you are confused. How well do you think your mind would work if light did not expand into the future? Your mind “sees” a make-believe present. This make-believe present is a collection of signals that arrive simultaneously at your locale from MANY different past times.

        • December 06, 2014 at 6:43 pm, RoyDopson said:

          I cannot show you the time-free state; you must experience it. It is bringing the sleep state into the waking state. While one sleeps they do not experience the ‘flow’ of time; Awareness is drawn ‘in’ Self; not ‘out’ on thoughts/senses. When one brings awareness onto Self/Being while in the waking state, the same peace and timelessness experienced while in sleep is experienced while awake.

          • December 06, 2014 at 6:57 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            I am very familiar with meditation and being connected to the timeless oneness. I am also very aware of how time flows through the oneness of timelessness. But you probably do not know what I am talking about. And I certainly can make no sense out of your poetic thoughts.

            You are talking about a conscious interpretation of existence. Fine. I understand that everything external is just an internal construct to organize your perception.

            But your “perception” is of “a relativity”. If you do not understand the correct perspective, you will think the world is flat and the center of the revolving sky.

          • December 06, 2014 at 7:14 pm, RoyDopson said:

            I think nothing. That is my perspective. How could such perspective be incorrect?

          • December 07, 2014 at 4:18 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            One example of your confusion can be seen in this quote. You wrote, “Spend a few hours without focus on any thoughts or any things and you will experience timelessness directly.”

            Spend “hours” to experience “timelessness”. In my perspective that is an inconsistent statement.

            You wrote, “I think nothing”. But you keep making transcriptions of your thinking. Yet another inconsistency.

            Just because the external is experienced internally, does not mean that only the internal exists. To believe that is inconsistent.

            (Which is prob’ly why you seem to believe that, eh?)

          • December 07, 2014 at 4:37 pm, RoyDopson said:

            Yes, paradox arises when attempting to point to the absolute while using relative terms.

            And yes, confusion also arises when one believes… well, anything.

            The short version of what I’m trying to relate is that only when awareness is pulled from thought and sensations and placed upon the thinker/sensor will the contentment/bliss of one’s true nature be Realized.

            It’s Nirvana.

          • December 07, 2014 at 4:48 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            Roy, I am happy that you have found your path to Nirvana. But there are many paths.

            Each human consciousness seems to contains 2 perspectives, I & All. Non-duality is seeing I/ALL as an entangled unity.

          • December 07, 2014 at 5:12 pm, RoyDopson said:

            Yes, there are many paths, but only one Nirvana/Absolute.

            Non-duality is not adopting any perspective, but rather simply Being. You ARE the Absolute. Being this, no duality arises.

            Being what you are, it is realized that even the Path was an illusion, for what could bring one to where they are? What can be done or known in order for one to be what they are? All such actions/thoughts are delusion.

            Not thinking. Not doing. Just Being.

            Completion.

          • December 07, 2014 at 5:52 pm, Marta said:

            Nirvana is Enlightenment, and it is to merge with God and to be in unity with all

          • December 07, 2014 at 5:53 pm, Marta said:

            congratulations

          • December 11, 2014 at 3:54 pm, Meg said:

            I couldn’t find where to reply to your post 🙂 so I thought I would continue the non-continuum 🙂

            Thanks Andrew – I enjoyed contemplating your story.

            I hate to be repetitive but I have some questions unanswered. If I am not understanding – or you can answer directly my unanswered questions it would be helpful. I love metaphor and story but also want to understand the missing pieces if you think I am still missing the point.

            You say….

            ‘Eventually it pays off, once they learn to elevate themselves far enough above the flow of TIME, then they finally get a panorama of their relativity to the LAND BEYOND the SHORE.’

            So to use your analogy if I may – The ICE-MAN sees he is “ONE” – sees beyond the shore – but then he sees that his body is not real but just vibrating atoms – the shore is not real and only an illusion – he sees himself empty of substance
            and matter. With this knowledge he gains an even higher perspective from his relativity of ‘LAND BEYOND THE SHORE’ and that he is the experiencer of the air, the water, the land and beyond.

            The ICE-MAN then disappears. His new perspective has shown he is pure existence. His old identity has been discovered fraudulent and dissolves upon discovery. He takes a further step back from this knowledge and back into ‘ONENESS’
            and now cannot see any shore – beyond – before – or after.

            ICE-MAN now has no opposite – no reflection – no relativity. ICE-MAN is all that is – so no separation or overview can occur. There is now no observer.
            Iceman lives in a state of ‘bliss’ that is his nature – unobservable – non-reflective and un-nameable. There is no motion to be measured – no change to measure time. ICE-MAN is the only constant but he cannot even see this himself – and he has no variables.

            ICEMAN can only experience but cannot reflect ‘in time’ to KNOW what he is experiencing. There can be no conversation about the sunset.

            1.
            If all time needs relativity how can ONENESS with no reflection be in time when there is no observer? You cannot say
            time exists without an observer as time is the measurement. Otherwise you are just calling eternity ‘time’ – and that is not correct, as time has measurements even in a continuum. It is not everywhere at once but just goes back and forth.

            2.
            If the ICE-MAN is all that is – then what is there to be relative to?

            thanks Andrew 🙂

    • December 09, 2014 at 12:53 pm, Meg said:

      Hi Andrew – I disagree that existence requires time – and I also think there is a difference to consciousness/God/all that is – and awareness. Awareness needs some sort of perspective doesnt it. But consciousness exists eternally and neither needs time. So relativity would relate more to awareness.

      • December 09, 2014 at 2:30 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

        Hi Meg-I think that you are confused.

        #1. I do not think that you understand time. I would like you to explain something that exists without time.

        #2. You say, “consciousness/God/All” is not the same as awareness. I agree. You have misunderstood me somehow if you think that is what I said, here is the except from above original post:

        Relativity = Existence = Consciousness.

        (“Higher consciousness” is a psychological awareness of a portion of one’s relativity.)

        Whichever term you care to apply to it, Existence requires Time.

        #3. Awareness does need some sort of perspective. I agree. It needs the perspective of continuity.

        #4. This is the point that you state, “consciousness exists externally so neither consciousness nor existence needs time”. This is a ridiculous idea. In effect, you are saying that, consciousness and existence do not need to exist, to exist.

        I believe that your point of confusion is the statement, “consciousness exists eternally “. Consciousness exists as a continuum, which IS the factor of time.

        #5. Finally you write, “relativity would relate more to awareness”.

        Relativity = Existence = Consciousness

        Awareness, as previously described, is a psychological aspect of higher consciousness. It is a mental construct, an internal interpretation of the existing relativity.

        • December 09, 2014 at 3:32 pm, Meg said:

          Thank you Andrew for your reply – I am very much enjoying your discussion.
          If I can ask you a question then reply tomorrow as I would like to give some thought to my reply – and too late here now 🙂 My question – do you mean existence of the body? Or existence of the true self?

          • December 09, 2014 at 4:14 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            Hello again, Meg. I find the format of this site a bit confusing. But I have answered this question below, in a response to another of your earlier responses. But I will re-print the relevant part again;

            I do not say, “we reside in a body”. I say that we are part of the whole. There is no disconnect from the whole, yet we have 2 perspectives from which to view the whole. As a specific “perspective of focus” within the whole or from an elevated “God-like perspective”.

          • December 09, 2014 at 5:08 pm, Marta said:

            I understood that you’re right, I was part of our celku.All forms entirety.Each perceive God as he is close but it’s certainly

          • December 09, 2014 at 6:08 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            Exactly. When we fail to see ourselves as ONE, we are LESS for it.

          • December 10, 2014 at 4:40 am, Meg said:

            Thanks Andrew. I agree everything exists in time and space as a physical experience – only. However, consciousness resides out of this matrix of time/space and I also believe our experience of time is becoming less dense.

            I understand that you would argue some concept of time is still in place. Any concept of time requires perception.

            The illusion of life is played out in the mind of
            consciousness and does not really exist. It is an idea only.Consciousness however, is not really watching, nor cares what happens in ‘life’ to require time.

            You may say eternity is a type of time but this
            would require a perceiver and the perceived, which only happens in experience. It is one step away from the absolute – which exists – purely just exists.

            It is not perceiving – just being. No concepts. In
            this state no time is required as no reflection is there in which this perception can take place.

            All is one – cannot be 2 – therefore, cannot be
            seen in time.

            This idea of God the parent who watches over us is obsolete. Time is then just a perception so we can experience and not have all happen at once.

            The Universe in non-local and non- causal at the quantum scale, which does not require time – and superposition would also prove the theory of the speed of light, a time-based theory, is now superseded so actions happen
            out of time

            I realise you may argue non-locality is a
            property of the Universe – but my experience tells me differently.

            This experience of ‘life’ is not consciousness/God– although we can bring the God perspective into this experience.

            This experience is made of empty space vibrating at various speeds to assume form by its interactions. Form dissolves as soon as you look from the God perspective (what you may call higher perspective) Then you are everywhere at once. Time includes space and travel of some sort. I don’t think you can separate them. Once you can be everywhere, omnipresent, omniscient etc… – it takes time out of the equation.

            All language is dual and I am not sure I am doing too well here. My best example would be…
            One particle manifests as multiple people,
            objects, places and moves at infinite speed. So therefore, movement is just a change of perspective – a different point of view – experienced in time for the purpose of having different perspectives. But this perspective is happening all at once – and our perception only is what moves in time.

            Time must begin and end – existence but precede relativity and time. How can you have relativity without existence? What would
            be the reference point?

            Time is relative to the past and future – and even the present moment as a concept. When you are one with existence – time
            just disappears.
            Existence has no beginning and no ending – therefore – no time.

            The small-mind is a barrier/cage which traps us in concepts of time.

            Thanks for the discussion. It pushes me to seek to explain. Not sure I am doing so good with the explanation but I do trust my
            experience. Thanks and look forward to further discussions either here or elsewhere.

          • December 10, 2014 at 12:04 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            Meg said, “I agree everything exists in time and space as a physical experience – only. However, consciousness resides out of this matrix of time/space and I also believe our experience of time is becoming less dense.”

            I reply, Yes & no. Consciousnesses resides out of “real time & space” (which is an actual position within our 4 dimensional reality). BUT it must be tied to it through the continuum of continuity.

            Here is a diagram to explain;

            http://i326.photobucket.com/albums/k434/RideNazi/Lightexamples/54699f4a-f079-4901-9d28-c69ca6192568_zps70e1e9c8.png

            This is an over simplification of the process, showing a meme (idea within consciousness) being passed on through its connection with the continuum.

            Meg asked, “Time must begin and end – existence but precede relativity and time. How can you have relativity without existence? What would be the reference point?”

            I have already explained this is what I believe;

            Relativity = Existence = Consciousness

            So why do you ask me how to have one without the other?

            You do not understand time as a continuum or you would not say, that it must begin and end.

            I am going to make a new post @ the top of this page that I hope you will read. The ICE-WORLD model of the reality system.

            Because of the format on this site, I suggest that we try to keep our discussions focused on one point of concern at a time.

            I can not respond to your entire post here in this ever limiting space but I understand (and mostly agree with) your perspective and you are really saying much of the same things that I am. But you are just lacking some logical inter-connectivity in your perspective.

          • December 11, 2014 at 5:22 am, Meg said:

            Hi Andrew – have you posted your ICE-WORLD model yet? I have contemplated well your words – but even a continuum has a pathway to travel. If you are saying the continuum is infinite then it is only infinite in a finite Universe. God does not reside in space therefore does not reside in time. (I have used God instead of consciousness – as that word is questionable) Space exists in the mind of God and not the
            other way around. If we all exist as ONE – then time and space is only an illusion of separation. Something to compare.
            When you are in the flow of exercise the concept of time disappears – you cannot say that time exists out of the concept.
            We link events that are not really linkable and
            make a story to provide continuity.
            God is timeless and does not have any properties such as time/space
            Time is a mind concept. Existence just is existing. We then piece things together and make this construct that limits our movement in
            time/space.
            Because we split life into ‘fragments’ we assume that things have a cause instead of being ‘one’ and that one moment leads to another. If you become very present – time is not there. You are present – no contemplation – no narrative – just experience. You
            cannot say time exists anyway – as that is just mind telling you so. Without mind naming it – it just is.

            Time is perception. Changing perspective. We segregate, bring forward, delete and focus – and call this a single event. This is how we
            create our narrative of ‘life’. Relativity has to be relative to something – nothing is relative in God as God exists everywhere so there is nothing to be relative to – or nowhere to travel in time to. We are ignoring all the bits in
            between.

            Past present and future exist as one. Linking events and calling it a name creates time.

            My main argument (because I can definitely see your point) is that time requires observation and pure existence is unobservable – therefore – it just exists in eternity unmeasured.

            I understand it is a bit repetitive and maybe not in the format you like. However, I look forward to seeing your new post as well.

          • December 11, 2014 at 10:38 am, Andrew Brodis said:

            Meg, I am seeing the irony in this discussion! The very topic we are discussing has affected the present! Lack of continuity!

            This site is NOT organized in a continuum. It has all the information but it is not in a temporal order.

            Please scroll down and click “see more posts” and continue to scroll down until you will find my ICE-WORLD post from yesterday.

            I would like you to read it first and then let’s talk more about time.

            Time is duration (at close range).
            example-hrs/min/sec

            Time is extant (at long range).
            example-millennia

            Time is a radial distance (relative to the system).
            example-feet/miles/light-years

            .

        • December 09, 2014 at 5:51 pm, RoyDopson said:

          Existence requires nothing relative. Time is obviously dualistic, requiring a past or a future relative to the present. Existence is the present/presence.

          What is this continuum you are referring to? Your existence is undeniable; it need not be substantiated by any conceptual formulation. Why not simply abide as that which cannot be denied rather than dwell in the realm of conceptualization, which is inherently incomplete?

          Conceptualization is duality. This is complete understanding.

    • December 10, 2014 at 12:27 pm, Meg said:

      Thanks Andrew. I will contemplate your response as well as your next one and consider well before I reply. I realise I am more conversational and you seem quite orderly so I will try and remain on topic and be succinct. Apologies for misinterpreting your R=E=C as meaning preceding in order as well as equalling. I understand you now mean them to be linked as one. I look forward to your new post.

  4. December 09, 2014 at 11:46 am, Meg said:

    I cannot speak physics well enough to explain this in that way well – but can only relate my experience. I have resided in no-time/eternity – lost to the bliss of pure rapture – and the only way I knew was because I came in and out of the experience to get a perspective – like a memory. It was awesome! You can argue that there is some perspective here to know or rememember – and I cannot prove contrary. But my body also disappeared to reveal my indentity – and this was when awareness was fully present. There was no 2 – there was no time as all questions and answers were given as one. You are mistaken with your identity to say we reside in a body. This is where you are getting stuck in this question. When you see your true identity you will see clearly the body does not even exist at all. This is not a joke – the joke is what we play on ourselves. Consciousness is the only thing that really exists. Everything else is just smoke and mirrors – something to play in.

    Awaken as One
    https://www.facebook.com/awakenasone

    • December 09, 2014 at 4:10 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

      You are “relating” your experience. What experience was it? It was a view from the “elevated perspective” That I described in the Time River analogy, above.

      I do not say, “we reside in a body”. I say that we are part of the whole. There is no disconnect from the whole, yet we have 2 perspectives from which to view the whole. As a specific “perspective of focus” within the whole or from an elevated “God-like perspective”.

      I am very much in total agreement with your closing thought, “Consciousness is the only thing that really exists.”

  5. December 09, 2014 at 2:48 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

    Regarding “timelessness”. In several responses, I have picked up on this idea of “timelessness”. I think time, as a concept is very confusing to most folks. Time has more than the one aspect that we are familiar with as “duration”. There is also the aspect of “extant”. Time is very misunderstood as a one-way arrow. The one-way-ness of time is because our reality is within an expanding current of time.

    I would like to suggest an analogy to make this more understandable. Think of our reality as life upon a large raft. Our raft is in the current of the Time River. Our “present” position in the Time River never stops. But there is a world beyond our Raft World. But to relate to that whole which is beyond the river we must gain a perspective of it from a elevated view. We build a tower to escape the immediate perspective of flowing with the river. From this elevated position we see a perspective of the whole, somewhat removed from the flow of the river. That is, “experiencing timelessness”.

    • December 11, 2014 at 1:52 pm, Meg said:

      Hi Andrew. Thank you – I love it – I don’t understand it totally – YET! – and I am excited to contemplate it further. I am grateful to be able to read it and be challenged to understand something. I am totally open so no doubt I will learn something here. I look forward to having a response. However, just reading above, which is another post I have not seen before – where you say ‘From this elevated position we see a perspective of the whole, somewhat removed from the flow of the river. That is ‘experiencing timelessness’ – oh don’t worry – I just got your point! – will return later 🙂

  6. December 10, 2014 at 12:11 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

    ICE-WORLD rides on TIME RIVER.

    TIME RIVER always flows DOWNWARDS (building entropy) to the SEA of
    TRANSFORMATION.

    At the SEA of TRANSFORMATION, ICE-WORLD changes state
    (melts/sublimates/evaporates) and defies the force of DOWNWARDS
    (building potential).

    UPWARDS {time} is a “transition” between the SEA of TRANSFORMATION and
    the SOURCE of the TIME RIVER (which all run on DOWNWARDS {time}).

    {Notice that these seemingly 3 different time directions produce no
    time paradox, such as the imagined, “reversing the flow of the
    current, so it flows uphill”}

    This is a cycle, with segregated paths for;
    DOWNWARDS-TRANSITION-UPWARDS-and repeat…THE CONTINUUM.

    Alrighty then, so now we have a general overview of what is going on.
    Now we will change to the perspective of someone the lives on
    ICE-WORLD.

    ICE-MAN is born from the ICE-PEOPLE that live on the ice. At first he
    was just a part of the ice, he had no identity. But as ICE-WORLD
    flowed on the TIME’s current, an event occurred that made him a
    distinct feature.

    Now he had a distinct relativity and he started to become aware of his
    existence as “me” vs. “outside me”.

    Soon he became familiar with the nearby “outside me” features (and
    other ICE-PEOPLE, of course…).

    As he became more mobile via events occurring along the rivers course,
    he interacted more and more with ICE-WORLD and all the ICE-PEOPLE
    until he knew everything about ICE-WORLD.

    And here is what he knew:
    #1. All the goings on of ICE-WORLD & its people.
    #2. ICE-WORLD is an island surrounded by water.

    ICE-MAN was not content. he wanted to know if the water that
    surrounded them went on forever or if there was something else out
    there. He wondered if there were other ice islands or ice people.

    ICE-MAN convinced the ICE-PEOPLE to work together and try to find
    answers. First, some brave volunteers attempted to cross the water
    but none of them ever returned. Then they discovered that they could
    create an ice lens to magnify light and observe clearly at greater
    distances. They also learned that the higher they could put their
    lenses, the farther their range could become. So they started to
    build a tower.

    They built ever higher and kept refining their lens technology and
    finally the day of the great discovery!

    And here is what he now knew:
    #1. All the goings on of ICE-WORLD & its people.
    #2. ICE-WORLD is an island surrounded by water.
    #3. No end can be found to the water in 2 directions.
    #4. In the other 2 directions, there is something but it is just a
    blurred image.

    This seems very puzzling to ICE-MAN. They have the technology to see
    that distance. The tower is tall enough to give them range. But
    alas, only a freakin’ blur!?

    Since ICE-WORLD has always existed on TIME RIVER since before there
    were any ICE-PEOPLE, they never knew they were moving in a river.

    When they focused on a distant spot on the shore, all they could see
    was a magnified blur.

    This confusion made ICE-MAN and his friends even more curious and they
    kept elevating their observation tower.

    Eventually it pays off, once they learn to elevate themselves far
    enough above the flow of TIME, then they finally get a panorama of
    their relativity to the LAND BEYOND the SHORE.

    • December 12, 2014 at 9:15 am, Meg said:

      Hi Andrew

      Thanks – what is great about this conversation for me is that it is stretching me to be more precise with my definitions.

      What we seem to agree about…

      Consciousness is relative (I no longer will
      use this word for ‘all that is’ but for the link between me and all that is – example (‘The Holy Spirit’ as a metaphor)

      Time is relative – agree (I think that is what you are saying)

      Where we disagree

      Existence = time

      You state

      ‘Each human consciousness seems to contain 2 perspectives, I & All. Non-duality is seeing I/ALL as an entangled unity.’

      I would suggest you are forgetting the 3rd
      perspective – the trinity and the God or equilibrium state.

      1. The ‘I’ perspective (duality)

      2. The ‘All’ perspective (consciousness – non duality)

      3. The ‘God’ equilibrium state (non-reflective and exists eternally not ‘knowing’ itself but intelligent and in rhythmic motion and always creative – the equilibrium is dynamic and immutable)

      How does intent arise if not from existence? How does it arise?

      I see you have copied my ‘form is not existence – form does not exist’ but not sure the point?

      I exist – my body does not. (only as an experience)

      You say…Non-duality does NOT mean that there is ONLY consciousness nor does it mean that there is ONLY reality. It is how the 2 are actually one.

      Yes – in ‘life’ experience – however there is no duality in God. There are no opposites – there is no darkness. Darkness
      is the absence of the light when we look through a narrow filter. For ‘God’ to know itself it pretends to split into 2 – then many aspects of the 2 throughout a time perception. It needs to see what it is not to see what it is or there is no reference point.

      You say….

      “I exist as yin, I exist as yang, I exist as yin, I exist as
      yang”…..continuum of internal existence. no outside relativity. (I agree)

      But the key factor is the intent. It is a self-referential intent that creates the offsetting force against the return of equilibrium. (is this just an idea playing out?)

      But equilibrium is truly timeless and incessant so any offset
      will likely be overcome, sooner or later. (Are you saying that the equilibrium changes form and then tries to change back??)

      If we look at the etymology of the word – it may be we are arguing definitions. You may be looking at existence as ‘coming into being’ where I am looking at existence as ‘reality’.

      Is this our problem?

      Is it your belief that ‘God’ just is? Existence is a word only used in relation to becoming?

      Non – existent means – not real or present? This is not correct either. So – ‘God’ cannot be non-existent.

      I think it would be hard to believe that you think things just spring from nowhere as your concepts are quite well developed. Can you elaborate here?

      My experience tells me ‘God’ exists – yet is not reflective or self-aware but is definitely intelligent and knowing.

      If you are saying the equilibrium is disturbed – who disturbs it? How is it disturbed? It cannot be random.

      Are you meaning equilibrium is like an equal and opposing force which means no movement? Instead of dynamic equilibrium.

      I can say my experience of ‘all that is’ (I yes was the observer of something that showed me was not interested to observe me) – it demonstrated it was not motionless but in an ebb and flow – rhythmic with no reflection. We exist out of this equilibrium – as do not really exist.

      It would be great if you could answer in relation to the questions so I can understand your point of view better.

      • December 12, 2014 at 11:48 am, Andrew Brodis said:

        “Consciousness is relative (I no longer will
        use this word for ‘all that is’ but for the link between me and all that is.”

        I look at consciousness as; all that has relativity. I look at something as real, if it has connectivity to a continuum of consciousness.

        “Time is relative – agree (I think that is what you are saying)”

        Yes. Time has several aspects, depending on which relativity you apply it to.

        Duration of local events. (time units only)

        Extant of existence (interchangeable between time and distance units when @ constant speed)

        Fixed time positions from source of expansion (these would be like position markers posted along the banks of Time River). These are measured in distance units. (BTW!!!-these can also be understood as QUANTUM POSITIONS.)

        And do mot forget the directions of time; Expansion/Transition/Contraction

        “Where we disagree—Existence = time”

        NO. I wrote: Existence = Consciousness = Relativity

        I am not sure how I confused you but I do not think Existence = Time.

        I think that the TIME FACTOR concerned with Existence is Extant.

        “‘Each human consciousness seems to contain 2 perspectives, I & All. Non-duality is seeing I/ALL as an entangled unity.’

        I would suggest you are forgetting the 3rd

        perspective – the trinity and the God or equilibrium state.”

        NO. For me the trinity and equilibrium are entangled in ALL.

        The “trinity” is the three time directions of the cycle:

        Contraction/Creation

        Expansion/Maintenance (and evolution)

        Transition/Destruction (actually a change of state)

        God is just another word for ALL-INCLUSIVE.

        God is ALWAYS equilibrium. It is just a matter of whether it is in a state of rest OR it is in a expanded state (a cycle of continuum.)

        “How does intent arise if not from existence? How does it arise?”

        Again, this must be a confusion because intent DOES arise from existence. It arises by the creation of a looped energy cycle (a continuum.)

        “…equilibrium. (is this just an idea playing out?)

        But equilibrium is truly timeless and incessant so any offset

        will likely be overcome, sooner or later. (Are you saying that the equilibrium changes form and then tries to change back??)”

        I am saying that all FORCE (examples; electromagnetic/strong & weak nuclear/gravity) ultimately comes from equilibrium.

        Equilibrium can be temporarily offset by intent but a cycle can last indefinitely when it is powered by the force, instead of being destroyed by it. In a way it tricks equilibrium into doing something rather than nothing.

        You keep going on about existence. I think that this was some misunderstanding and I have already explained this above but I will try to reply to a few more key points that you bring up;

        “You may be looking at existence as ‘coming into being’ where I am looking at existence as ‘reality’.

        Is this our problem?”

        What problem? Do we still have a problem here or was the misunderstanding now corrected?

        Existence = Consciousness = Relativity

        “I think it would be hard to believe that you think things just spring from nowhere as your concepts are quite well developed. Can you elaborate here?”

        Equilibrium has and always will exist. It is capable of being in many expanded forms of symmetry.

        “My experience tells me ‘God’ exists – yet is not reflective or self-aware but is definitely intelligent and knowing.”

        Your experience has served you well! God is a bottom-up construct, not the top-down construct of westernized religious belief.

        “equilibrium is disturbed – who disturbs it? How is it disturbed? It cannot be random.”

        Hmmmm, I am extremely interested in why you feel that, it can not be random? I look at equilibrium as dynamic not static. In a dynamic system there is potential, in a static situation, there is no chance (zero probability) of change. A dynamic equilibrium is a balance of symmetry that yields no apparent motion. But there is always virtual motion. This is wave interaction, example: an equal water wave crest & trough traveling in synchronous fashion, yield nothing apparent on the surface.

        “I can say my experience of ‘all that is’ (I yes was the observer of something that showed me was not interested to observe me) – it demonstrated it was not motionless but in an ebb and flow – rhythmic with no reflection. We exist out of this equilibrium – as do not really exist.”

        First of all, I would love to hear more of this experience and any others that you have experienced.

        My opinion is that you connected with your I/ALL perspective and looked beyond the relativity of our reality experience (which is within the expansion aspect of the trilogy cycle). The “ebb & flow” of the dynamic equilibrium, perfect!

        Our continuity is within the continuum. This is the grounding of our perspective. We must have this to be part of the continuum, part of existence, part of consciousness but we are not limited in our ability to look beyond (remember the Land Beyond the Shore).

        • December 12, 2014 at 3:58 pm, Meg said:

          Thank you Andrew

          I think you stated – how does existence not require time? In another
          post somewhere

          So then would it not
          be that you believe Existence = Consciousness = Relativity = Time?

          So I guess we agree
          about Consciousness and Time being relative yet I think we are still having
          trouble with agreeing that existence = all those other properties.

          ‘The time factor
          concerned with existence is extant’ (I am not sure I understand what you mean
          by extant here? – this seems to mean to me that time is inherent and
          continuing and has motion – is this because it is ebbing and flowing? Is extant time measurable?

          How can it be
          relative?

          Ok so you are saying
          the trinity an d God are entangled in all…. hmmm…

          Ok – so I would say
          they are not.

          I would say that the ‘God’
          aspect is as it is and is not entangled otherwise it would alter with our responses –
          yes?

          (please understand I
          do not know physics as you are aware and am only relating from my experience
          and attempting to explain in theory so feel free to correct my terminologies
          if they are inaccurate)

          I would see that all
          else is entangled but the ‘God’ aspect stands apart. Now this is an
          explanation in duality and language. As
          really there is only the God aspect.

          So – the way I saw it
          in experience is….

          ·
          God IS and remains in
          a constant HARMONIC FLOW. Rising and subsiding. Colours and constant CREATIVE
          SPARKS. The creative energy was apparent and did not provide me with the full
          meaning apart from – creative beyond what I could imagine in each moment.

          ·
          Life is an idea
          OUTSIDE of God and God is undisturbed by this idea. (This was a question I had
          that how could anything exist outside of God. And the answer was only God can
          have an experience outside of God – it
          made sense at the time)

          ·
          ‘God’ is intelligent
          and all questions and answers are one

          ·
          We always choose to
          be experiencing and at any time can choose to be with ‘God’ (the I that
          chooses is not the ‘me’ but is the consciousness ‘I’.)

          ·
          Flow was a word
          provided many times and had profoundly different meanings at the time which I
          cannot remember now

          Your description of the trinity is how the atom
          functions? Yes? But does an atom function in ‘God’ or is this the fabric of
          the hologram/illusion? (not rhetorical)

          The force you explain would only then happen in
          the illusion – yes? But not the God state?

          Then you say equilibrium/God is timeless. (this is
          the point I think we agree – but I am not sure of the rest of your argument
          then? Unless you are saying equilibrium/God does not exist?)

          You say… ‘God is a bottom up approach’ – do you
          mean that ‘form’ manipulates the ‘God’ state or equilibrium?

          As I do not think they are entangled I would not
          agree but I am not sure I understand the bottom up approach correctly.

          Your analogy of the dynamic equilibrium is how I ‘saw’
          the ‘God’ state. But randomness does not resonate with this for me. Although I
          saw ‘sparks’ of creativity I would not equate it to randomness.

          I agree about potential but these are ideas which
          are played out only in the ‘mind’ and not altering the equilibrium state.

          So yes looking to the land beyond the shore – but then
          there is one more perspective which is ‘Oneness’ with the beyond the shore –
          no ability to look.

          I still feel I am fumbling – but it seems there
          are some things still that I am not understanding.

          My experiences consisted of (in a quick summary)

          ·
          Understanding the
          energy of a young boy who died was everywhere – (through a light which shone
          off the tip of a birds wing – telepathic communication from this! )

          ·
          Overwhelming elation –
          the boy communicating but at the same time also telling me it was not the boy
          but my gateway to consciousness – he was all of us (yes consciousness here)

          ·
          ‘The boy’ telling me
          that a discussion of whether we are inherently compassionate or selfish is a flawed
          premise as we are all one so makes no sense

          ·
          Seeing myself as
          blobs of energy creating form like a bit like a spotted Dalmatian dog.

          ·
          Seeing a picture I
          drew moving

          ·
          Seeing myself as pure
          space and no body (having no interest in the body as it was just like a chair
          – something to use but nothing in essence)

          ·
          Seeing trees and
          buildings like wave energy and not form

          ·
          Seeing that we are
          always attracting ‘positive’ energy towards us like beautiful loving waves
          (this is constant)

          ·
          Disappearing entirely
          and knowing by memory – and missing time – slipping in and out of the state
          (this is the one I say is timeless and has no reflection)

          ·
          Feeling elation like
          no feeling here ever felt before – seeing waves rising and subsiding
          (coincided with the ecstasy/rapture far beyond any feeling here – an overwhelming
          sense of beauty but beauty meant more than our usual beauty)

          ·
          Telepathic communication

          ·
          Telepathic communication
          from clouds and sea and insects (insects spoke about polarity only being a
          reference point in experience and how things escalate when resisted )

          ·
          Being moved in space
          and feeling weightless – moves like tai chi

          ·
          Seeing a geometric
          cylinder shape (I cannot describe it apart from saying it was like fine
          crystal and perfect lines) I think it
          was telling me it was the fabric in which this illusion was supported

          Can you tell me more
          about yourself? Where your theories come from? Experience or study or both. I
          apologise that I am still not clear on some things

          • December 12, 2014 at 4:54 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            Existence = Consciousness = Relativity

            This is generally known as, “the Primacy of Consciousness”.

            If you are not familiar with that topic, you may want to check it out a bit. Do you understand the term Biocentrism? It is a similar view. But the problem with science is that they do not have a cohesive model. They have a micro-level, an everyday level and a special level for light. Now add the right-brain thinkers, such as yourself, who look at thing from an emotional/spiritual way. Everyone keeps saying “All is one” but the right brain people won’t consider any of the scientific stuff important. And the left brain scientific types are totally confused about there own 3 “disconnected perspectives”, let alone to think that any of the spirituality gobbly-gook has any validity.

            I think with both sides of my brain at once. I see connections.
            I catalog observations, my own and of others through educating myself on what and how people have observed things. Then my universal-mind connection starts to show me the connections.

            It is all about perspective. There is a scientific explanation if the perspective is correct.

            Right brain people never worry about it though. As long as they can get their desired results, they are satisfied.

            But to truly legitimatize the ideas of non-duality, they must be compatible with both sides of the brain.

            Back to Time.

            ICE-MAN started out only seeing duration of local activity. That is the common view of time. Something that passes, in units of time, whilst I live.

            The extant of ICE-WORLD is the time that it existed. From the point, where it fell into the water, to the point that it melts.
            You can measure this in time units or distance units.

            The time units would be duration of ICE-WORLD’s existence.
            Distance units would be relative to points along the shore.
            Example: The length from 2 miles downstream (of source) continuing for 24 miles further downstream.

            Why do we want to know about the difference? To see (visualize) the correct perspective. We look around us and see people in different positions. Some of them are farther into the future or past than us, some are next to us in Time.

            Think of the ICE-PEOPLE. The people on the most downstream part of the island are farther into extant than those at the trailing edge towards upstream.

            The point is IT DOES NOT MATTER! We see time as space and space as time, depending on situation. What it really is, of course is space-time. Space-time does not flow. Space-time is the Land Beyond the Shore. It does change. The TIME RIVER erodes its banks, changing it. The transformed River rains down upon the land as it recycles to the source, causing changes on the land at great distances from the shore….

            God (for me) is translated TIMELESS TOTALITY.

            Trinity (for me) is the cycle of our reality. There can be other realities from God. The Trinity is our universe.
            Expansion (maintain & evolve), Transition (recycle), Creation (of new expansion). As I see this, it is continuous not successive.

            This is a fractal universe. It is built from a small “building block” of relativity/consciousness/existence. But not only are the large forms expanded from the starting form so are the dynamics of the cycle.

            Within the cycle of the Trinity is Expansion and within expansion, we will see more cycles that mimic the underlying one of universal creation. Example; a life cycle of birth, maintenance/evolution, death…

            I will stop here for now. I will give you a chance to see what is still unclear.

            Meanwhile, I may respond separately to your experiences, once I can absorb them a bit more.

          • December 12, 2014 at 9:57 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            “God IS and remains in a constant HARMONIC FLOW. Rising and subsiding. Colours and constant CREATIVE SPARKS. The creative energy was apparent and did not provide me with the full meaning apart from – creative beyond what I could imagine in each moment.”

            I interpret this as a right brain person watching the wave interactions of some basic process. You see the symmetry and appreciate the beauty but the functional component and what it relates to is not in your area of interest.

            “Life is an idea OUTSIDE of God and God is undisturbed by this idea. (This was a question I had that how could anything exist outside of God. And the answer was only God can
            have an experience outside of God – it made sense at the time)”

            To me, this means God as eternal equilibrium. Nothing can exist there but the equilibrium. All life is expanded from a point within equilibrium.

            “‘God’ is intelligent and all questions and answers are one”

            God is not intelligent in a way that he has ‘learned things’. He IS what He IS. He is aware of all of his relativity.

            “We always choose to be experiencing and at any time can choose to be with ‘God’ (the I that chooses is not the ‘me’ but is the consciousness ‘I’.) ”

            I have used the expression 2 sets of “eyes”. Human eyes & God eyes but “I” works just as well.

            “Flow was a word provided many times and had profoundly different meanings at the time which I cannot remember now”

            Wave-flow.

            “Your description of the trinity is how the atom functions? Yes? But does an atom function in ‘God’ or is this the fabric of the hologram/illusion? (not rhetorical)”

            No. Trinity is the cycle of protons that flow through the universe (not the atom). How the universe FLOWS through contraction/expansion/transition. What flows through the universe are consciousness units (protons). If you follow the path of the protons you will find many answers. The proton path is the continuum.

            Protons are building blocks for atoms. The holographic image is a real electromagnetic expansion that`is part of the expansion cycle.

            Electromagnetic energy fills the space between proton paths, just like a lake is filled with water. As protons flow through time, they leave a holographic wake. Just like a boat leaves a wake in a lake.

            So what we really see is the light wake, never the actual source of the light wake.

            “The force you explain would only then happen in the illusion – yes? But not the God state?”

            Force of equilibrium is always present. How it is applied can vary. It can maintain equilibrium or it can try to reintroduce equilibrium.

            “Then you say equilibrium/God is timeless. (this is the point I think we agree – but I am not sure of the rest of your argument then? Unless you are saying equilibrium/God does not exist?)”

            Equilibrium/God always exists but in many forms of symmetry. Non-expanded equilibrium is what lacks the continuity of a cycle. A cycle is an expanded equilibrium (a symmetry). A cycle is a continuum (cycles time). Pure peace of non-expanded equilibrium is timeless. I think this would be less confusing if the word God was removed and we just thought of it as equilibrium or expanded equilibrium.

            “You say… ‘God is a bottom up approach’ – do you mean that ‘form’ manipulates the ‘God’ state or equilibrium?”

            Consciousness is born via intent within equilibrium. Remember when we say equilibrium exists, what that really means is there is no relativity. Once relativity develops intent we have the birth of consciousness. The building block of God consciusness, if you will. It is what everything in the proton path of the cycle is made from. It is true to say that it is expanded consciousness…but it is also the basis of physicality (which is the connection to the continuum).

            “As I do not think they are entangled I would not agree but I am not sure I understand the bottom up approach correctly.”

            I think this has been covered.

            “Your analogy of the dynamic equilibrium is how I ‘saw’ the ‘God’ state. But randomness does not resonate with this for me. Although I saw ‘sparks’ of creativity I would not equate it to randomness.”

            I believe this is not the non-expanded equilibrium, that you are describing. You are seeing the so-called “Akasic record”. When you see behind the illusion, all the relativity that occurs in one second, is spread out over about 186,000 miles. (Because the flow of expansion time is at the speed of light.) With our unconscious mind, we are able to see this not unlike our conscious mind takes in billboard images, whilst we drive down the highway.

            Running out of time so I am skipping a few…

            “Seeing a geometric cylinder shape (I cannot describe it apart from saying it was like fine crystal and perfect lines) I think it
            was telling me it was the fabric in which this illusion was supported”

            I see the Cosmic Spiral as a cylindrical wave!

            “Can you tell me more about yourself? Where your theories come from? Experience or study or both. I apologise that I am still not clear on some things”

            I had psychology training but never worked in that field. I am a retired dentist with a hobby interest in cosmology and related physics. My theories have been evolving over the course of my 65 years but in the past 10 years have taken unplanned directions from my universal consciousness experiences. It is like being infused with the entire play at one instant. After I get this type of message, I have to replay it over and over and it is like taking each scene of the play and trying to see the details.

      • December 13, 2014 at 4:05 am, Meg said:

        I also would like you to comment on ‘choice’ if you could add that to my preivious list of questions 🙂 Funny you say about 2 eyes as I am writing something called – through the Eyes of God. My point is w either look through the small iii’s or God’s. I believe I saw something greater than you suggest in the wave experience but if it is a fractal Universe then maybe it relates to ‘all’ in this way. I realise now with your clarification why the word ‘God’ may have been given (given not meaning by someone) – and that is because truly consciousness must have relativity or some perspective and so this was the word I used which I think you have clearly demonstrated is not correct – yes? Where I am stuck now is – how is choice made? It was very apparent there is no body (and contrary to the initial post above of John I disagree we cannot dissolve back into consciousness – as we are always there and so it is a matter of changing perspective. I saw from consiousness without my body. I understand a word may arise out of this place – but this is from consciousness perspective and not from God or equilibrium perspective which would not ask or hear) – so this is clear to me. No body – but a body being experienced. So – I keep getting stuck on who chooses? how we choose – why do we attract the thoughts we have if we cannot create them? Are you able to also comment on this as well as my question of polarity etc…and in the meantime I will also study the other information you have given me – but this will take a bit of time. Thanks

        • December 13, 2014 at 6:09 am, Andrew Brodis said:

          Wow. This is strange. It is 1 a.m. now. Just got woken up by the dog, requesting to go out. I am waiting for him to return and I try to find our current string of thought. I wanted to thak you for making me realize something. Anyway, I am scrolling on my phone (not the computer) and can’t locate the “continuum” 😉 so I click on your name, to see if it will bring up a recent post list…..AND it brought me staraight to here. And that is funny because you address the comment to yourself…..anyway, I am half asleep. But you made me realize that my “universal mind” connectivity started after my heart surgery, 10 years ago. I had an out of body memory from the surgery and a very strange first view of reality once I came out of anesthesia.

        • December 13, 2014 at 6:19 am, Andrew Brodis said:

          Choice? As in free-will? Or right/wrong? Or ? Specify and I’ll check back later.

          • December 13, 2014 at 7:33 am, Meg said:

            As in free will. Wow so glad you remembered your incident. I would love to hear more. I look forward to your responses. And glad you saw my post seeing I was talking to mysel! It’s hard being a left brain person sometimes haha!

          • December 13, 2014 at 11:18 am, Andrew Brodis said:

            First, you had mentioned a tie to the equilibrium and I did not feel your image of the equilibrium fit. So I understood it as another aspect that you were watching. But I don’t think I gave you a description of what the equilibrium would appear like…so I wanted to mention that this is often described as “the VOID”.

            As for free-will, The Destruction and Creation aspects of the cycle, in my opinion (which has changed with time) are predetermined outcomes.

            Maintenance/evolution is predetermined in its outcome but the pathways have some built in lateral freedom. This is where free-will/choice enters the picture. You have no choice in the final destination but it is the way of the journey, that matters.

            It is amusing to me that I independently came up with a theory that is very parallel to Buddhist thought. (I found this out after the fact, did not have prior knowledge of Buddhism.)

            They call this aspect of the cycle Maintenance but I always add Evolution. Evolution is the true architect, It is the bottom-up process of building complexity. No religious person-like god can preplan for a changing world. The only way is to make a world that is in the process of continual recreation/adaptation.

            In my scientific view, I look at this phase of the cycle as quantum expansion. It is the Extant that lies between the source of quantum expansion (contraction/creation) and the end of expansion (transition/destruction). You understand Extant now, eh?

            Expansion from a common source, is a phenomenon called Entanglement. If all the stuff is leaving the same spot at the same time and going the same speed, then they will all be doing the same thing at the same time but in different directions. Expansion creates space because the radii, no matter how close they are when they first left the source, separate as they expand away in all directions (in their synchronized fashion.)

            This space between the radials, is the space of free-will. We choose pathways because we are quantum entangled stuff. We have no choice in the speed that we flow through this Extant. We have no choice to affect the beginning or end of this Extant. Our freedom of choice is directional (the path).

            As for my out-of-body experience. I have always been aware of this incident but for some reason never connected its timing with the onset of my expanded connectivity.

            While I was having open heart surgery and fully under general anesthesia, my subconscious was awake. I was watching them fiddle inside of my chest, which was cranked open with spreaders. The was no me or other but I was having a causal conversation with ? my dad (who had already passed), God, anyone, no one, not really sure. But it was like mental telepathy but I understood every word. It was something to this effect; Well, you know you are always welcome to come over and this looks like it’s gonna hurt…What do you think? Do you have unfinished business? Yes, I think I do. Then put up with a little discomfort and go back and finish what you can. You are already here and already in line to do some helpful guidance for the self-creating world…It certainly needs YOU. ME? YES, YOU!

            When I finally came out of anesthesia, I opened my eyes and all the inanimate objects, chairs, tables, counters, clocks, walls ,ceilings, light fixtures,etc all looked normal. But every person was a double. There was like a spiritual self and a physical self. They had somehow become separate. At first this was sort of amusing. I thought, seeing double, ok, that is a side effect of the drugs. But why wasn’t everything double?! I tried to focus, to blink, to shut and open my eyes. But there was still 2 parts to every person. I could not understand this and still do not but I closed my eyes and would not reopen them for another hour. After that, I sneaked a peak and people were one again, and have remained so since.

            That’s my story.

          • December 13, 2014 at 11:48 am, Meg said:

            I love your rexperience. Thank you so much for sharing this. There is much to contemplate here and in your other posts. I will re-read them all again – and keep reading the things you suggested. I also had an experience with the void. I was trying to contact the akashic records and then I saw a double vault (like a bank vault) – behind was dark open space with sparks. I asked to see the Akashic records and ‘it’ responded – what story do you want to see in this library? Harry Potter – Alexander – what story – as all live here. And there was laughter from deep within – which made me laugh as well. I could see the joke we play on ourselves here. I pulled myself out of this situation because I was with my sister and I felt bad she was not with me in the experience. So I suppose I see the void and the waves I saw as showing me something different. Maybe after I have looked through your posts again I might be able to understand it in your terms. I am guessing you mean pre-determined due to all possibilities being available all at once and living out in our time but which journey is not predestined? And in time it seems linear. I suppose the things I stil do not understand are – existence requiring time in relation to the equilibrium – And although I understand the way you describe the choice in the journey I am still not understanding ‘how’ we choose – because there is no person to even choose the journey. I am wondering the how this illusion occurs of choice too – perhaps you have already answered this and I will contemplate further.I also had the experience that creativity was happening now so I guess I am still contemplating how this relates to a predetermined outcome although it seems plausible but I like to have the answer of what it meant. Feel free to send me any other information as I am interested. Thank you very much.

          • December 13, 2014 at 2:55 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            OK. I see that the next logical step needed in your understanding the relativity and organizing your perspective. You need the “point of focus” that is the “you” when you are not ALL.

            What are you? What makes you distinct while still a part of the whole? It is your perspective.

            I have spoken about the cycle of the universe. To see this cycle, you must follow the pathways of the protons (remember, protons are the basic existence/consciousness unit).

            Let’s look at these pathways, since it is a cycle where we start is arbitrary. Let’s start from the common source of quantum expansion (where the protons have been concentrated by contraction/creation, after they transitioned out of previous expansion). From here they are spreading out in all directions at the same speed. But the place they are expanding into contains the flow of contraction, as well.

            Think of this like a current in a river. Protons are flowing downstream but there is a canoe paddling upstream.
            what happens to the water aft of its stern? The waters that were passing the sides of the canoe merge together.

            This, of course, is an oversimplification but the concept is that divergent radials begin to merge. In physics, this is known as, recombination. It is the scientific description of how subatomic particles combine into atomic particles, which combine to form atoms, which combine to form matter, which combine to form stars, which form solar systems, which form galaxies, which create the so-called large structure of the universal system.

            So we start out with radials going all possible directions but as they merge, there is a loss of alternative directions because they have merged their trajectories.

            Example: Think of an analog clock. A radial at 11 o’clock trajectory merges with a radial of equal mass that has a 1 o’clock trajectory and now they are both co-moving in unison at the 12 o’clock trajectory.

            By the time we get to the level of complexity that supports human life, we are far down the path of recombination. So our freedom is never an absolute freedom.

            We are quantum positions of a quantum reality and these positions are classified as POSSIBLE or IMPOSSIBLE.

            In other words, the recombination at our current level has defined some thing as possible and others not.

            From here we get to PROBABILITY. Each possible quantum position has a probability. It may be much more likely for you to make one choice over another but there is NOTHING TO STOP YOU from choosing a very unlikely path!

            I have digressed a bit from my original intent. Which was to show you how I look at a perspective withing this expansion but let me try and tie it all together now.

            At our level of complexity, most proton flows are in parallel, or near parallel trajectories.

            Think of the timelines of these flowing proton streams as strings. Here is the imagery. Joe holds one end of a dozen strings in a parallel arrangement. Bob holds the other end of these 10 foot long strings, again in parallel.

            You are going to walk by them along the parallel path to the strings.

            Once you pass Bob encircle the strings inside a loop made by your thumb and index finger. This is the “birth” of a perspective (“birth of the loop”). As you continue walking, you feel the spread of the strings condense into your loop as they continually enter one side and leave the other (the “life of the loop”). Once you remove your fingers (or you get to the other end-depending on circumstances) the “loop life” has ended.

            You are a transient point of focus within the expansion within the cycle.

            They way in which you orient this point of focus will affect what is or is not logical to your interpretations of the moving strings that you sense as life.

          • December 13, 2014 at 3:06 pm, Meg said:

            Wow – awesome. Thank you so much. I am not going to preternd I totally understand it yet – and was just reading your other posts on other topics – at the same time as googling the terns you use 🙂 But I have to ask – because of the probability factor – this would mean that cause and effect would not be possible then? or am I not correct in this understanding of the probabilities? Thanks and I will keep reading.

          • December 13, 2014 at 4:10 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            There is always a cause. In a reality that is undergoing a transference through time, each moment in time, creates the next moment.

            What is not possible, is to “predict the future”, when the future depends on PROBABILITY.

            In my understanding of the cycle, we can make predictions when the outcomes are predetermined. Example; We are 100% sure that if this is a cycle, then expansion will be followed by transition which will be followed by contraction, which will lead back to expansion.

            (I am exaggerating when I use 100% but I did this to simplify. In, truth, I believe in other very unlikely events that could alter or destroy the cycle and return equilibrium or destroy its continuity. But for this understanding of perspective, we are assuming the true situation that we are considering is this ongoing cycle.)

            So this PROBABILITY factor is limited to the freeway space created by separation of radials.

            In other words, we can decide how many and which kind of strings to look for, in the direction of the future. Then we can direct our intent to capturing these strings in our focus loop and this is how we alter our life path.

            There is a high probability that we can capture some of these strings. There is a low possibility of capturing others.

            Simple, isn’t it?

          • December 13, 2014 at 4:16 pm, Meg said:

            haha – glad you think it is simple. If time can go back and forth on the continuum then how does this not interfere with cause? And then if there is a cause then doesn’t it have to be pretermined completely? How does this sit with probability? So – as you can see – not so simple for me 🙂

          • December 13, 2014 at 4:29 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            Remember the lessons of ICE-WORLD. Time is a cycle.

            TIME RIVER flows downhill.

            Evaporation at the Sea of Transformation flows upwards.

            Rain precipitates and falls down to the source of TIME RIVER.

            YES. There is a reverse time. It is upwards evaporation.

            IT IS NOT-TIME RIVER REVERSING ITS COURSE AND FLOWING UPHILL!!! 🙂

            TIME RIVER is the part of the cycle where expansion/evolution occur. The rain expands across the land and the river evolves.

            PROBABILITY can be seen in the path of ICE-WORLD and its inhabitants.

            It will probably take a certain path in the flow of TIME. But what if all the ICE-PEOPLE decide to go to one side of their island?

            They unknowingly have CAUSED an altered course of their world.

          • December 13, 2014 at 4:39 pm, Meg said:

            Thank you . So time does not skip but flows in directions (I will contemplate to see if that is what you are saying as I thought you meant could move in time in directions to points instantly). Therefore if flows it is less random and more in line with cause and effect.
            And so if people can alter the course and become the cause – then the affect from the last cause might be cancelled out? Is this correct? Does this mean the more awareness we have the more we can ’cause’ out of cause and effect? Because we can change our perception. It is now after 12.30 here and sleep is setting. Where do you live? Thank you for your time with this – I really appreciate this information – as you would know making sense of things when only given metaphorical pictures isn’t always easy to explain. I will return to my study tomorrow. 🙂

          • December 13, 2014 at 5:32 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            Yes. “Time flows in directions,” is one way to say it. But think back to the Joe & Bob string experiment. Did time move? NO. Joe & Bob were stationary. It was your focus loop that flowed through time. Reality flows through the fixed extant of time.

            YES. Time does not skip! To skip would end continuity of continuum! That is why it is a continuum…continuous flow of time.

            That is how complexity can evolve.

            I’m on Eastern USA time zone here in NW PA.

            Once you are awake please rephrase the question relating to cause-effect if it is still unclear.

          • December 14, 2014 at 12:39 am, Meg said:

            Thank you Andrew
            I will definitely be rephrasing my question once I have looked at it again
            But I need to address another question now which arose with your last description which needs my attention before I go back to anything else.
            Does this mean there is no movement???!
            So instead of time moving our perception moves and it is like a frozen frame so we are then moving perception into parallel worlds through frames! Time then being a continuum including your multiple descriptions of time? Can you clarify this as I don’t think I am correct but nicely confused 🙂
            I am in Perth Australia- good morning

          • December 14, 2014 at 2:06 am, Andrew Brodis said:

            Think of Time RIVER. Time river is the river, the ice, the ICE-PEOPLE, ICE-WORLD itself…just in different states. In our physical world we have solid, liquid, gas, and other states of matter. The stuff of the continuum flows through the Land of Time (the land beyond the shore).

            IT is an analogy in the Time River story but the “land” for us is really just the total space within the radials of expansion.

            Looking at the earth from space we see rivers,streams,tributaries,lakes,oceans, etc.framed by the land.

            It is analogous but with expansion, it is streams of protons, framed by space.

            Proton streams move at the speed of light but we are all co-moving together at this speed so we can not tell. This is an important point for me because this motion of time should be radial, that is, a straight line. But the little bit of freedom of movement is lateral (which would move it off perfectly straight).

            This little bit of freedom is where all of our choice possibilities come from. This super-fast speed makes it all possible. by stretching one second of time over 186,00 miles of space. This allows the line to be as close to perfect as needed and still allows our relative mobility.

            http://i326.photobucket.com/albums/k434/RideNazi/Lightexamples/3ExtantComplete_zps9236879b.png

            This you should like once I explain…we (our focus point )are a continuum which spirals through the plane of reality and the plane of imagery. The red dots on the plane of reality show your quantum position moving through quantum steps of time in reality. In other words each time you spin through the plane of reality it is like one frame of the movie that you are creating.

            Notice that being in the plane of reality is quite small compared to the rest of each loop. And you do not need to be JUST in the plane of imagery to be in the imaginary zone. Only within the plane of reality or all the rest of the cycle. So we really are mostly imagery all the time. The physicality tricks us, thankfully, it is a survival instinct for the consciousness can not exist without the connectivity to physicality, the link to the continuum.

          • December 13, 2014 at 5:07 pm, Meg said:

            As sleep was just starting to take me away – I had a thought that you were saying….Nothing exists in equilibrium – which seems clearer than equilibrium does not exist. This would mean existence = consciousness = relativity = time? It seemed to make sense so will wake up and see if it still does but wanted to write it so sleep did not take the understanding with it! Not sure if I am on the right track?

          • December 13, 2014 at 5:21 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            You are most definitely on the right track.

            “Nothing exists in equilibrium – which seems clearer than equilibrium does not exist. This would mean existence = consciousness = relativity ”

            Perfect!

            “= time?”

            NO.

            Time is always relative. Example:

            I am farther down TIME RIVER than you.

            This ICE-WORLD’S extant is longer than that ICE-WORLD’S extant.

            Our position of expansion has proceeded to our current level of complexity.

            Therefore:

            existence = consciousness = relativity

            AND time is PART of relativity.

            Good night/Good Morning

          • December 13, 2014 at 7:03 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            [URL=http://i326.photobucket.com/albums/k434/RideNazi/Lightexamples/FOCAL%20POINT_zpsxpcruwb8.mp4][IMG]http://i326.photobucket.com/albums/k434/RideNazi/Lightexamples/FOCAL%20POINT_zpsxpcruwb8.mp4[/IMG][/URL]

          • December 14, 2014 at 1:00 pm, Meg said:

            Hi Andrew – thanks again. I am very excited by all this… I think I need to spend some time on protons and your theories so I understand better and then I will come back and try and summarise in my words to see if I am understanding some of the basic premises. My question on cause and effect if I may still ask is….if time is a continuum that travels in directions and cannot skip – then how does the shift in perception happen to alter the course and make a new cause. I am assuming cause and effect to travel in the same direction. How would one make the decision to interfere with cause and effect. You say perception is what makes us – something must make the percepton shift and how could it be random? unless random was set in some way? Also if the ice people go to the other side of the island and set a new cause – what happens to the last effect which did not occur. Example – they go to one side of the island and bears are there that eat half of them – what happened to the effect of staying on the other side and not being eaten? I am wondering if all things are sitting in some potential within the equilibrium – sparks of creativity fly out to make imagined worlds – the proton (I think you said is us) moves in multiple directions (but this would need to be faster than the speed of light??) I will stop because I am confusing myself haha and I will just leave you with the previous questions relating to my simple idea of cause and effect and read further haha!. Thanks.

          • December 14, 2014 at 1:47 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            I am very excited by this as well because it gives me insight into another perspective. Your willingness to share your view lets me see things from another aspect.

            Let’s refine the directions of time a little better. Time is “mostly” unilateral (straight-line in one-way direction).

            In other words, Expansion and Contraction are both one-way straight-line times but in opposite directions.

            Between expansion and contraction we have Transition. Transition is the exception, it is not straight but curved.

            We can gain an understanding of the cycle by observation of its long time representation.

            [img]https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSlxagGIA2GFU_W2TPHIjF1mc9moEGYkxP0G274l_i14-fX7QOpB4tYNQ[/img]

            Starting at the center junction, expand in straight line away from center, followed by the curve of transition which leads to a straight line of contraction (back towards the center), then continuing through the center, where it becomes expansion in another direction.

            Our reality, the part that is not totally predetermined, is within Expansion. This is straight-line one way time, for us. But there are many others straight line times that are components of different trajectories of expansion.

            Our whole galaxy is moving together in a parallel fashion. All the pieces stay the same relative distance apart as they move through expansion…UNLESS they “push or pull” each other in some way.

            Let’s step back and consider the terms, “move through expansion”. This is not the same as moving in space (moving in space is when you take your finger and move it to touch your nose). Moving through expansion is moving in the time extant (the distance Time River traveled from its source).

            So you could just sit there and not touch your nose or, you could stand up and touch your nose. You have the choice to do either action, while you move along expansion.

            You have no choice in your motion of expansion. That’s why you are sort of stuck in the present. But even this is not totally true because of our freedom of choice we DO move forward and backwards in time, relative to other co-moving objects, to some degree,all the time.

            Just like the ICE-PEOPLE walking around the island, change their relative positions in time. (example, more downstream or upstream) But this really has no observable effect on the ICE-PEOPLE because all that matters is the “relative” positions to each other.

          • December 14, 2014 at 2:56 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            “My question on cause and effect if I may still ask is….if time is a continuum that travels in directions and cannot skip – then how does the shift in perception happen to alter the course and make a new cause?”

            There are several components to this question…

            First let me refine your thinking on the directions of time.

            The ancient symbol for “infinity” is like a figure-8, the symbol of continuity.

            It can be seen as 2 straight lines which cross in an X. The two open ends are then connected with 2 curved lines, ( and (.

            This mimics the continuity of the universal cycle;

            Start at the center of the X (origin of expansion).

            From here proceed in a “straight, one-way time” until you reach the curve of transition.

            Follow the curve of transition around and it leads to another straight, one-way time of contraction.

            Stay on contraction and when you pass the center source point, you continue into new expansion.

            Which leads to the other curve of transition.

            The important things here are; our reality is in expansion.

            Expansion time is one-way and straight.

            That is what allows thing to be chronologically “ordered” in time, the one-way flow of expansion.

            The straightness, is what allows them to continue through time in an “organized” arrangement.

            Now, when I say, continue through time, what I am really saying is, “continue to re-create itself through time”.

            Remember the plane of reality. You exist physically in small intervals, separated by existence in the imaginary plane.

            (better term may be; image-ary plane).

            Each interval is a recreation. You move through time by recreating yourself in a new position of time.

            You have a limited number of possible positions to move at each point along the plane of reality. The journey begins with a single step.

            Each step through time is a recreation.

            Change occurs by failure to recreate yourself exactly the same with each step.

            Cause is related to recreation. If there are no outside or inside influences on an entity between “time steps”, it will continue to recreate in the same size/shape/etc. as before.

            The only thing different, will be position in time. Even though it seems to be the same thing in a new position, it is always a new recreation.

            If there are other influences, then spatial relativities will be altered as well as the time position when it recreates.

            “I am wondering if all things are sitting in some potential within the equilibrium – sparks of creativity fly out to make imagined worlds – the proton (I think you said is us) moves in multiple directions (but this would need to be faster than the speed of light??)”

            It looks like you are starting to see some of the interrelated connectivity. But you have not been oriented completely yet.

            But this last quote brings up some important concerns.

            If it is the VOID, consider equilibrium as the reality. Sparks & creativity, is within the realm of expansion.

            Consider a pond. Throw in a pebble and create and expanding wave. See the way it travels away from the source.

            The distance, at any moment, could be measured, from where the pebble hit the surface, to where the resulting wave has moved. This would be radial distance. If we are talking about the universal expansion this radial distance is time extant,

            The circle wave from the pebble, traveling on the surface, is a two-dimensional analogy to the spherical wave of light that appears to travel through space. Notice this circle wave expands how? By increasing in DIAMETER in all directions.

            And so it is with LIGHT, in space. It increases by enlarging diameter in all directions.

            Now think back to the protons, where are they? They are radials, traveling straight line from center of expansion.

            Reviewing the components:

            LIGHT-travels by increasing diameter in all directions

            MATTER-travels by increasing radius in one direction

            Matter is going speed of light. YES.

            Light is going 2 times (diameter vs. radius) speed of light. YES.

            Leaving a difference of the “apparent” speed of light.

            2 times speed of light minus 1 time speed of light equals 1 time the speed of light (the resulting appearance of the speed of light is the difference between the two differential expansion methods).

            It is the same expanding sphere but light expands as the circumference rate while matter expands at the radius rate.

            I hope I am being clear but this is tricky to grasp. I will wait for further questions and focus on your points of concern.

            But I wanted to say a little more about the nature of expansion, motivated by your description of this:

            “…sparks of creativity fly out to make imagined worlds – the proton…”

            I have never seen anyone anywhere understand the significance of expansion the way I see it. This, as far as I know, is unknown to current science. But expansion is much more than a spatial separation. That is only a physcal “side-effect” of the underlying truth.

            The way in which this sphere grows is by expanding each point into the future. This is very hard to explain but think of the proton as a parachute-like arrangement. Its internal forces are like the nylon connecting ropes that form its structure. But that structure does not develop until it is moving against the flow of the air which fills its pocket and tensions the ropes.

            The proton has a constant interplay of spatial expansion energy produced within its internal structure that spreads from within and expands into space.

            All the protons are constantly in communication with each other, through these signals moving between them.

          • December 14, 2014 at 3:14 pm, Meg said:

            WONDERFUL! thank you for this explanation. This really assists me to understand more so it is much appreciated. I am very interested to understand your expansion theory. This is really making sense (although it is hard for me to understand so contradicts myself – but it is resonating I should say) I have seen things in pictures and also words – and I want to be able to relate what I have seen to what you are saying. You have given me some really good descriptions here that I can relate to and expands my understanding. Thank you Thank you! I hope I can do it justice by understanding some of it. I will be back – and thank you for your patience with my questions 🙂

          • December 14, 2014 at 3:27 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            Meg, check your Facebook messages

          • December 15, 2014 at 1:07 am, Meg said:

            Hi Andrew – I have checked and there is nothing there. Did you go to my facebook? I wanted to tell you something and ask something about what came to me last night when going to sleep haha! But I will wait to hear back from you first.

          • December 15, 2014 at 1:13 am, Andrew Brodis said:

            I tried to send a message with my email to your facebook. I have a series of diagrams that describe expansion using an analogy but all the pictures would be much easier on email than on here but no worries.

          • December 15, 2014 at 1:16 am, Meg said:

            megan@quantuminvestor.com.au

            and here is my question from my sleeping last night so you can either email me later or reply here – whatever suits you best.
            and thanks I will love to see what you have to send :)!!!

            I was thinking about your re-creating ourselves and I
            remembered when I was young seeing what I thought was the carpet moving.

            This told me the carpet was alive

            Now I am wondering if this moving I thought I saw was the
            carpet recreating itself (or what the carpet is made of – atoms or protons?)

            So if we re-create ourselves does this mean we sort of flicker
            in and out of space?

            So instead of moving or being still frames we flicker on and
            off like a light and when we come back it is a new location?

            What does this say of Vibration then if any truth in this or
            is vibration just a different speed of flickering?

            Don’t atoms vibrate or oscillate?

            What is to stop us from flickering in and out in very
            different locations then?

            This means we are a different person in each moment but we
            recreate ourselves similar due to some memory?

          • December 15, 2014 at 1:33 am, Meg said:

            let me know when you have my email so I can delete it from here – thanks

          • December 15, 2014 at 2:05 am, Andrew Brodis said:

            The carpet moving was most likely your translation system in your brain misinterpreting some pattern.

            When I say we are recreating vs. moving, it is because of how current science explains the very small scale to be discontinuous.

            It can only exist is discrete intervals of tiny time. They don’t really know if that is just as small as can be seen or if it is really discontinuous.

            My theory is that the proton does one internal revolution and produces one ball of “consciousness link” each interval.

            That is why it is only visible at the interception of the little ball of consciousness energy (what we think of as empty space).

            The old model of the atom was a proton nucleus surrounded by and electron shell. Current models are moving towards what I think, which metaphysically, I would describe as protons interacting with “consciousness space”. In other words, instead of thinking of a given set of electrons being part of the atom, the electrons are the cloud of space energy that the proton moves in synch with constantly interchanging energy (passing information) as it goes.

            Theoretically, we flicker, at least relative to the plane of reality.
            Vibration, oscillation, flicker all refer to waves. I see us as a focus of spiral wave.

            We recreate similar because we “are” the memory.

            A different person? The same continuum of focus but constantly changing physical parts.

            There are some that believe that this idea of constant recreation can be someday used in ways to promote health, treat disease or alter the aging process.

          • December 15, 2014 at 6:48 am, Meg said:

            I have just realised I can scroll through the images and as I do not know photo bucket I am guessing these images are yours too – so have copied them to look through. Is there a difference between extant continual time and eternity? I am now seeing eternity as an expression used relating to your extant time – and timelessness/no time used with equilibrium where nothing exists to have eternity – it is timeless. I do not relate to the ‘misinterpreting some pattern’ maybe because I don’t always understand how you term things – but to me it was showing me something out of my normal range of perception – it lasted a while – and it gave me the information that nothing is really solid as each fibre was mad of separate bits! (wish I had a better word). Thank you for correctng me in saying ‘A different person? The same continuum of focus but constantly changing physical parts.’ – this definitley makes sense. I will now go through the images and some of your other posts to understand much better. thanks

          • December 15, 2014 at 9:32 am, Andrew Brodis said:

            You are correct when you say, solid is an illusion. We are made mostly of space, just a sprinkling of proton stream within a lot of space. And, as I understand things, space is really “consciousness transfer space”.

          • December 15, 2014 at 11:42 am, Meg said:

            I have to ask – even though I wish I understood without asking – can you please tell me what you mean by transfer here? Consciousness transfer space? Do you mean that once we are not in space consciousness continues? I agree with this – because I beleive consciousness resides out of space – but then this is contradictory to the previous theory of R = E = C? So I must be incorrect in what you mean about ‘consciousness transfer space” – but you have illuminated that consciousness does not exist in space but may exist in time (extant – when i understand this properly) Or maybe consciousness still occupies a certain space although it is not physical??? I am ok with you saying – go study my theories before you ask 🙂 – but I tend to have questions along the way. I can write them down – try and answer them and come back later if you prefer? thanks – appreciate the stretching of the mind anyay

          • December 15, 2014 at 12:31 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            I used the term “consciousness space” to denote that it is not something to be considered as “empty”. That is an ill-conceived notion of scientific perspective.

            The only thing that can be logically considered empty in a consciousness system, is equilibrium.

            Furthermore, I feel that consciousness space is a proper description of expanding “space”. Even in our “real” world; SPACE IS TOTALLY FILLED WITH ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNALS IN A CONSTANT STATE OF MOTION CREATING COMMUNICATION BETWEEN MATTER COMPONENTS.

            Don’t worry, I am not shouting, just adding emphasis. 😉

          • December 15, 2014 at 12:38 pm, Meg said:

            haha that was funny. I was intent on what you were saying – and then you said about shouting 🙂 That is fine I am not fragile.
            Ok – I understand this well what you have just said here. That makes sense to me – and this reminds me of my void experience (hope this does not contradict this now!) But this was empty black space but was full of – what I saw was electrical flashes – creativity – potential. The empty space was not empty at all. You are saying communicating – so I will ponder this more as to the deeper meaning compared to my potential – and now go back to the rest of your information again. Thanks – this was helpful.

          • December 15, 2014 at 2:32 pm, Meg said:

            Hi Andrew – So is the present just the focus of my surroundings – it is not really a point in moving time – But a point on the continuum of time that is eternal. So I can focus on a future event because it exists already on the continuum because it does not move apart from my perception – and therefore make it my ‘present’ by my focus?? when really it just exists on the continuum eternally already? – although multiple choices due to probabilities – (Joe and Bob stationary)

            If someone then relates to past events does it place you backwards on this continuum? Because the focus goes backwards? I think you said it flows forwards. If the past is still there on the continuum wouldn’t we keep moving into our past? Can we close off our past so our future is open?

            Ok so we ‘flicker relative to the plane of reality’ – so does this mean we don’t really exist as form so our ‘real nature’ is constant – so therefore the flicker can only be relative and not actual?

            I am just wondering if I am making sense of it or in the wrong direction?

          • December 15, 2014 at 3:06 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            As I interpret things, you are the “finger/thumb loop” that focuses the stationary “strings” of Joe and Bob Time, as it flows with the current of your gait, foward towards further expansion of the continuum.

            But you ask hard questions now and pertinent. Can we get off the treadmill of time?

            If have varied in my assumptions regarding this. At this time, I feel we move with our invisible aspects and stay in the same flow in life and in death. I would descibe my current view as pararllel unseen aspects of reality.

            In a self recreating scheme, the future is open, unformed.

            The past has been changed into someone else’s present. Even that which you experienced is existing only as memory. The present is the point of change. The present is everywhere, always but it is continual change. Everything is a constant change…so what we are actually looking for is the patterns. Looking at the continuity. The contrast attached to a subject had a trajectory that brought it to you. That is its past and you must mentally become that trajectory. Give yourself a chance to “feel” how it is to be in that trajectory (perspective).

            Now, when you become that new perspective, you must look forward and see where this trajectory is headed. You are looking at a possible future. There will be multiple paths. Which way is the path os least resistence? That is where this perspective is headed. Do you see a fork that would be worth the extra effort? What would be the reward?

            In this way, we see alternate perspectives or our own, depending on your shift of internal/external exploration.

            Am I starting to sound right-brained?

          • December 15, 2014 at 3:29 pm, Meg said:

            haha yes you are indeed. I think I can work with that… Yes I will get off the treadmill of time 🙂 What you have said here provides more clarity and makes more sense on this point. I will need to go over the ‘I feel we move with our invisible aspects and stay in the same flow in life and in death. I would descibe my current view as pararllel unseen aspects of reality.’ (that needs more of my contemplation – does this just mean we are really not identified with our bodies?? – you don’t have to answer yet) I will go feel my trajectory.
            aha – I just read your next part about the present past future. That resonates. Thanks for that – it really makes much more sense. It is quite logical in a sense! Thanks for summarising in my language 🙂

          • December 15, 2014 at 3:24 pm, Andrew Brodis said:

            The present is more than a focus on the immediate surroundings. The present is the record of continuity. It contains the essence of the past and the trajectory of the current future path.

  7. December 11, 2014 at 4:57 pm, Marta said:

    Open to God and thus the universe, cosmic.Z our teachers and enlightened form one we have here on earth jointly tvorit.Universe connect with mother earth in all the same.Therefore like how now my teachers taught me and jointly with me here on earth creature, run away but up there with them on the ground flat masters.Learning to with them jointly identify these new energy reserves than to work with them and they are very helpful to me and I like them grateful.Now devoted to Christ, but we all like something handed over to.Create one and thus me is easier and faster sliding.

  8. December 15, 2014 at 4:21 am, Meg said:

    Hi Andrew – have you sent the images via email. I would like to contemplate what you have said more and understand so I do it justice. There are things that make sense and some that do not. And instead of just asking I would like to give it some time. I would love to see your pictures and anything else to assist with the understanding as the last few things you have posted has really helped – but also made me think slightly differently about some very deep things. Thanks

  9. June 21, 2015 at 5:11 am, One Iam said:

    It sort of is a non-issue because there are no forms in the first place, only the illusion of forms exist in the Mind.

Leave a Reply

image description image description

Thanks To Our Sponsors