The Psychedelic Being

[Shee-un]

Nobody really knows the rhyme or reason of why there is something instead of nothing.

Very simple: nothing comes from nothing, i.e. nothing cannot produce something, let alone everything. But we have everything, we have stuff, therefore existence is the default state of being. In other words, there was never a time when there were nothing. Something always existed, eternally. I would say more, that something is us. The funny thing being eternal is that you forget eventually...

 

[webbykevin]

Very simple: nothing comes from nothing, i.e. nothing cannot produce something, let alone everything. But we have everything, we have stuff, therefore existence is the default state of being. In other words, there was never a time when there were nothing. Something always existed, eternally. I would say more, that something is us. The funny thing being eternal is that you forget eventually...

How can you have the concept of something unless it is balanced by the concept of nothing, you cant have a background without a foreground, it's the very nature of dualism that allows anything to exist in form at all, if everything was white you couldn't see it, there has to be a contrast.

if there wasn't off how would you know something was on ? you cant have a wave without there being a crest and a trough.

 

[lastest]

Very simple: nothing comes from nothing, i.e. nothing cannot produce something, let alone everything. But we have everything, we have stuff, therefore existence is the default state of being. In other words, there was never a time when there were nothing. Something always existed, eternally. I would say more, that something is us. The funny thing being eternal is that you forget eventually...

That doesn't explain why there is something rather than nothing, it just observes the fact that there is something rather than nothing. The idea that there has always been something (which isn't something that can be proven) doesn't help either, it just states how long there has been something, not why there is something. "Existence is the default state of being" - care to define the distinction between existence and being? Can non-existence be a state of being, or would that be a state of not-being?

webbykevin is right, something and nothing exist in a dialectical relationship. Something does come from nothing through the process of becoming. So what's the answer? I have no idea. But I know it's not "very simple."

 

[somaeye]

I think we all agree (at least, those of us who are religious) that Jesus is not the only way to get to the Father... there are many other ways to receive the same knowledge and grace from God. What about a guy stranded in the jungle for all his life? Surely he doesn't go to hell just because he hasn't heard of Jesus.

Christ is the only Way because Christ is not just one person. Christ is Buddha, Moses, Mohammed, Shiva, the Serpent, Quetzalcoatl......

That is why Christ said:

Your father Abraham rejoiced to think that he would see my Day; he saw it and was glad."
The Jews then said, "You are not fifty yet, and you have seen Abraham!" Jesus replied:
"I tell you most solemnly, before Abraham ever was, I am."
At this they picked up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself and left the Temple.

--Saint John, 8, 56

 

[somaeye]

My beef with people like somaeye is that they claim to have a final, definite answer and that everyone that argues with them is either an idiot or a troll.

No - your beef is that you have too much arrogance to admit that "colors and patterns" are Light. And so, talking to you, a person who is not interested in truth, but only in winning an argument, is a waste of time. I do it, not expecting anything positive to come from you by it.

 

[webbykevin]

That is why Christ said:

Your father Abraham rejoiced to think that he would see my Day; he saw it and was glad."
The Jews then said, "You are not fifty yet, and you have seen Abraham!" Jesus replied:
"I tell you most solemnly, before Abraham ever was, I am."
At this they picked up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself and left the Temple.

Where exactly were you standing when he allegedly said that ?

I think you will find that is is actually what someone writing a book in the middle ages said that jesus said, and they weren't present at the actual event (if it ever happened) either.

It's just someones rap, and you have bought it, why can't you see that ?

 

[lastest]

No - your beef is that you have too much arrogance to admit that "colors and patterns" are Light. And so, talking to you, a person who is not interested in truth, but only in winning an argument, is a waste of time. I do it, not expecting anything positive to come from you by it.

Ah yes, Light with a capital L. You introduced this concept a while ago and when asked to define it you said it was "made of photons." I enquired as to how it was different, therefore, from plain old light with a small L, which is... made of photons. Answer came there none. It was around then that you started accusing me of pretending not to know what you were talking about in order to win an argument. Well guess what, I really don't know what the hell you're on about, and I don't believe what you believe.

It's not that I won't admit that you're right, it's that I genuinely think you're wrong. Why is it so hard for you to accept that?

 

[Folley]

Good for you Paulo. Do me a favour and lay off the enter key. I don't know why you think your posts need to take up more space than other people's, but you only need one line between each paragraph.

Do me a favor and stop being condescending and talking down to people because they have beliefs that you might find a bit "out there". You don't need to be an asshole to get a point across.


At least we actually TRY and better ourselves. You people are stuck in the humdrum of everyday life, forever chasing that American Dream that is held in front of you, tied to a stick.

Me, I'm a part of this, yes... I need to be so I can have a place to sleep and eat! But you see, I don't let this define me. I just am, I no longer need to try to be myself or even someone else... that's what psychedelics have given me, inner peace.



I feel like a wiser being, I probably sound like a douche bag saying that, but honestly I think I understand some of the finer points of life that some people live and die without ever even thinking about these days.... I can NEVER understand it all, but to me, it is enough to be able to have this kind of connection to my God.

It's not that I won't admit that you're right, it's that I genuinely think you're wrong. Why is it so hard for you to accept that?

Do you really need to be insulting to disagree with someone? That's just sad

Good for you Paulo. Do me a favour and lay off the enter key. I don't know why you think your posts need to take up more space than other people's, but you only need one line between each paragraph.

Do me a favor and stop being condescending and talking down to people because they have beliefs that you might find a bit "out there". You don't need to be an asshole to get a point across.


At least we actually TRY and better ourselves. You people are stuck in the humdrum of everyday life, forever chasing that American Dream that is held in front of you, tied to a stick.

Me, I'm a part of this, yes... I need to be so I can have a place to sleep and eat! But you see, I don't let this define me. I just am, I no longer need to try to be myself or even someone else... that's what psychedelics have given me, inner peace.



I feel like a wiser being, I probably sound like a douche bag saying that, but honestly I think I understand some of the finer points of life that some people live and die without ever even thinking about these days.... I can NEVER understand it all, but to me, it is enough to be able to have this kind of connection to my God.

It's not that I won't admit that you're right, it's that I genuinely think you're wrong. Why is it so hard for you to accept that?

Do you really need to be insulting to disagree with someone? That's just sad



[EDIT]

That's in the Gospel of John, not gonna look up the exact passage. I don't take that one too seriously, it's the latest of the canonical gospels, I mean there's good stuff to learn from it, but it's pretty much just direct opposition to the Gospel of Thomas (which was very gnostic-look-within-yourself-y).

Really the gospels all just use Jesus and the characters as tools to express the theology of the writer, so you have to take'm with a grain of salt and do some interpreting. (as you yourself do)

Yup, the most important thing to remember when reading the Bible is that it was written by men. They say it's the "literal word of God" (At least, the Jews believe that the Torah is just that.), but it's really just one dude's interpretation of His word... and that's if he's not lying!

another important thing to remember when reading the Bible is that is was basically rewritten by the Corrupt Catholic Church, among other things. So now it's one dude's interpretation of one dude's interpretation of one dude's interpretation of what they think is God's word.

PLUS the CCC got to chose which books they wanted in the Bible, and they took out a large number of them..


That's why I don't trust the major religions... if you believe there is a God you must also believe there is a devil, and I think that currently the devil controls most major religions, governments, banks, industries, music and the media, oil and much, much more. He uses all of these things to directly or indirectly keep you from enlightenment... whether it's by limiting substances that can open your mind, or by controlling your life with paper currency and putting messages into your head through the music you listen to and the TV that you watch... he's out to get 'cha

 

[lastest]

You people are stuck in the humdrum of everyday life, forever chasing that American Dream that is held in front of you, tied to a stick.

I'm not American. And as I said before, I'm a Marxist. Look it up, it's a neat alternative to both capitalism and crystal-thrumming mumbo jumbo. It's not perfect though, I struggle with it constantly. I may even be wrong about the whole thing, I may have misunderstood everything. I'll readily admit that about my beliefs. Will you? Will somaeye? So who's being intransigent here?

...if you believe there is a God you must also believe there is a devil...

Really, must you? That's something you have to believe is it? You're not allowed to believe in God without believing there's a devil controlling global finance and sending you evil messages through your tv set? I feel like I've really dodged a bullet by choosing atheism.

Currently, I would say I practice almost a mix of Christianity, Buddhism, a little bit agnostic with a side of Taoism.

Currently, I would say I practice almost a mix of believing in god 1, god 2, a little bit of being unsure if there's a god, with a side of god 3.

 

[Shee-un]

if there wasn't off how would you know something was on ?

We talk about existence here, not the state of something, so it doesn't count.

Can non-existence be a state of being, or would that be a state of not-being?

It can't. Non-existence is a logical impossibility just like square circles.

webbykevin is right, something and nothing exist in a dialectical relationship.

Nope. It's different.

You still assume that at some point in time something begins to exist, right? Yet, you fail to grasp the concept of eternity. In eternity you simply cannot have a beginning by definition! This means, the question of why there is something makes no sense whatsoever, because everything just IS and that's it. No reason, no cause - very special non-dual case here. Semantics have clogged your perception, because in language we have oxymorons, illogic statements and the language itself is always DUAL - not the ultimate reality.

 

[Folley]

It's not perfect though, I struggle with it constantly. I may even be wrong about the whole thing, I may have misunderstood everything. I'll readily admit that about my beliefs. Will you? Will somaeye? So who's being intransigent here?

I'm not here to be right. There is no right in a debate like this, only what I think, and what you think. These two things happen to collide, you take this to mean that one of us is wrong... but you're the one that's wrong there. This thread is about your own personal beliefs, you can disagree with mine, but you can't take them away from me.




You can shut your eyes and pretend that everything is just going to work out perfect for you, but some of us like to shape our own destiny.

I'm not American.

The fact that you would even feel the need to point out something so insignificant in this argument is ample enough evidence that you don't understand what's really being said here..

Just like the Bible, my word isn't law. It's only my interpretation of that law... you choose to believe that there is no law, I don't understand that, but you don't see me trying to make you feel bad about your beliefs.

 

[4acodme2]

Your father Abraham rejoiced to think that he would see my Day; he saw it and was glad."
The Jews then said, "You are not fifty yet, and you have seen Abraham!" Jesus replied:
"I tell you most solemnly, before Abraham ever was, I am."
At this they picked up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself and left the Temple.

--Saint John, 8, 56

I love the juxtaposition of present on the past in that familiar quote. Depicts for me the non reality of time and the reality of now. Although I have never seen a deity while tripping I have had the experience of time standing still, the only thing existing is the eternal now.

 

[webbykevin]

I'm not here to be right. There is no right in a debate like this, only what I think, and what you think. These two things happen to collide, you take this to mean that one of us is wrong... but you're the one that's wrong there. This thread is about your own personal beliefs, you can disagree with mine, but you can't take them away from me.

Awesome, that should be the forum motto. Kudos~

 

[eye_wide_open]

Some of you guys really kick ass. I think you guys know who you are. Others, not so much.
Some really smart people that I honestly respect around here, more than many of the boneheads walking around in my day to day life.

Too bad we can't get all these bright heads together and use them for something really cool.
Maybe that day is still coming..
Be ready for anything.

 

[somaeye]

Ah yes, Light with a capital L. You introduced this concept a while ago and when asked to define it you said it was "made of photons." I enquired as to how it was different, therefore, from plain old light with a small L, which is... made of photons. Answer came there none. It was around then that you started accusing me of pretending not to know what you were talking about in order to win an argument. Well guess what, I really don't know what the hell you're on about, and I don't believe what you believe.

It's not that I won't admit that you're right, it's that I genuinely think you're wrong. Why is it so hard for you to accept that?

The actual exchange was:

I asked you if you had ever ingested a Psychedelic and seen the Inner Light.
You said you had ingested Psychedelics but had never seen the Inner Light.
I said that some people call the Inner Light "colors and patterns" and "those colors and patterns are made of photons: i.e., real Light. Also, you see Them (usually) with your eyes closed: an inner Light. "

You then went on to obfuscate and divert the focus by acting like my whole point was about whether you are actually seeing photons or not. The full discussion can be seen by clicking the blue arrow below.

-

The point was that you have seen the Inner Light and you didn't want to admit it because you were trying to win an argument.

The discussion was about whether or not you had seen the Inner Light -- not the physical mechanisms by which you see that Light.

I should add that your version of the exchange is obviously off from what actually was said.

But to answer the question (which you are now presenting) about how the Inner Light is different than "plain old light" --

It is like the difference between a lump of coal, which is made of carbon, and a human body, which contains alot of the same carbon atoms as coal. Coal is dead and has no consciousness. The human body is (physically) alive and has consciousness. In one instance, you have an atom of carbon sharing existence with something dead -- i.e. coal. In the next instance you have the same carbon atom sharing existence with something alive -- the human body. The atom in coal is (physically) dead. The atom in the body is physically alive.

 

[SONN]

if you believe there is a God you must also believe there is a devil

I fundamentally disagree with this. If there is a god who created all that exists why would he ever create a devil? or why even devise a system of rules about how we carry on our short mundane lives?

You still assume that at some point in time something begins to exist, right? Yet, you fail to grasp the concept of eternity. In eternity you simply cannot have a beginning by definition! This means, the question of why there is something makes no sense whatsoever, because everything just IS and that's it. No reason, no cause - very special non-dual case here. Semantics have clogged your perception, because in language we have oxymorons, illogic statements and the language itself is always DUAL - not the ultimate reality.

Idk what would lead you to believe this. What in this universe is infinite? pretty much anything that we can know or understand is finite, the only things that aren't are complex scientific or metaphysical concepts that have yet to be fully understood or proven.

I believe there is possibly a creator, or maybe a life force of a significantly higher complexity.

I think the main reason I believe this is because of our imagination. We as humans have the ability to delve into our minds and retrieve new ideas that quite possibly had never been thought of before. Of course one could argue that we form these ideas based off of things that we previously knew so they may not technically be entirely 'new.' However, Albert Einstein i'm pretty sure would disagree with that.

“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.” - Albert Einstein

 

[Folley]

I fundamentally disagree with this. If there is a god who created all that exists why would he ever create a devil? or why even devise a system of rules about how we carry on our short mundane lives?

Because otherwise, what purpose would we serve? If there was no evil in this world, we would all believe in God with no problems and we would never be able to that we are faithful to him. That's why he "created" the devil (who was once the "head angel" of Heaven, he wanted more power however so he convinced 1/3 of the angels to follow him in his quest for ultimate power. They are now known as "fallen angels" or demons. That's what the Bible says, at least.), so that we can choose him instead.

What sets humans apart from all other animals, is that God gave us free will. He want's us to have the choice, because he wants us to choose him.... that doesn't always happen though, unfortunately. This makes Him sad, but He realizes that it has to be this way, or no one would be able to receive his favor.



It's like when people ask, "There are so many bad things in this world! Why would He allow those to happen!?"

He doesn't. He gives us the free will to do it ourselves..




Your post reminds me of another thread here on Bluelight... it said something along the lines of "The devil's greatest trick was convincing the world he does not exist."

 

[Shee-un]

What in this universe is infinite?

Nothing But that doesn't exclude the concept of potential infinity. You can go spatialy in any durection and never stop - that is what potential infinity is in the context of actually finite system (think of Half-Life 2, for instance, type in the console "noclip" and fly out of the map and you too never reach the end). The same applies to time. Ever heard of Buddhist concept of dependent origination? This is the core concept in Buddhist philosophy.

I believe there is possibly a creator, or maybe a life force of a significantly higher complexity.

Why just a creator, not creators. Do you think one person can build a building, let alone an entire city? I believe we are the creators chasing our own tails in timeless quest to find the originator(s) of existence. Why I believe so? There is no evidence as to the existence of god, but we exist and scientific models can't adequately explain our reality (they fail under close scrutiny - LCDM cosmology, Darwinian evolution and abiogenesis). Religion (theism) and science turns out to be both wrong... And I looked at our ability to imagine (you are right about it) and create. We create entire worlds in our dreams, it is not outlandish to propose that waking reality too is a product of our imagination only very solid and objective. Psychedelics clearly show that (to me at least).

 

[eye_wide_open]

Hmmm, Evil there BE.

See beyond, you must. Try is better than not.

Use the force, Luke(s).

 

[!!4iV4HF9R34g]

To clarify something said earlier about worship; Jesus said that he was the Way, The Word, and the Light. To me, this sounds like he's describing how his mode of perception is the only real truth, because it is just seeing the process of creation. The path to god is a way of being, not an act of worship or tithing. This is also related to the concept of trinity, which relates to this pages discussion about existence. See, I think the trinity is just the abstraction of our thought process' function. Like, there's Observer (aka All aka Existence), there's the Act of Observation (aka One aka Ego), and there's Observed (aka None aka Potential/Non-Existence/Chaos). It's all just an allegory to install and archetype the Process.


Lazy and high, so that's as articulate as I feel at the moment lol. I'll clarify whatever if anyone cares though.