Could Nothingness Be Another Dimension In And Of Itself?

[Rick O'Shez]

Without space-time, there is no change. Consciousness is not dependent upon space or time. Space-Time is only a conceptual overlay onto Reality. It is not real itself. So without space or time, there is only The Changeless Consciousness, which is No-thing-ness, and out of which Every-thing emerged.

New-age creation myth and unsubstantiated religious belief.

This is the dogma of your DIY religion, inspired by the charlatan Chopra.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You do not experience time...you experience change...and the measurement of change is named 'time'... Birds experience change...they know nothing of the concept of time...no clocks.

If time wasn't integral to the fabric of the cosmos ( space-time ) neither we or birds would experience change. If time wasn't integral to the fabric of the cosmos we wouldn't even exist.

 

[gnostic]

If everything is illusion, including that of spacetime, then why are you two wasting your times here, godnotgod and ben_q arguing against illusions.

I think you two are being hypocrites.

If nothing are real to you, then why aren't you both taking your consciousness elsewhere to this so-called "ultimate reality". Maybe you should follow the well-dressed rabbit down the rabbit hole or find the tinman,scarecrow and the cowardly lion, and followed the yellow-brick road.

 

[`mud]

Searching for the nirvana in the 'hole',
look out for the 'bigly' witch !
hey Gnos, good point !
~
'mud

 

[Ben Dhyan]

If time wasn't integral to the fabric of the cosmos ( space-time ) neither we or birds would experience change. If time wasn't integral to the fabric of the cosmos we wouldn't even exist.

You do not see because you do no look.....I am not referring to the subjective perception/experience of change in existence....but what exactly is the direct objective reality represented by the concept of time?

 

[Willamena]

If everything is illusion, including that of spacetime, then why are you two wasting your times here, godnotgod and ben_q arguing against illusions.

I think you two are being hypocrites.

If nothing are real to you, then why aren't you both taking your consciousness elsewhere to this so-called "ultimate reality". Maybe you should follow the well-dressed rabbit down the rabbit hole or find the tinman,scarecrow and the cowardly lion, and followed the yellow-brick road.

One of them isn't arguing illusion.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

If everything is illusion, including that of spacetime, then why are you two wasting your times here, godnotgod and ben_q arguing against illusions.

I think you two are being hypocrites.

If nothing are real to you, then why aren't you both taking your consciousness elsewhere to this so-called "ultimate reality". Maybe you should follow the well-dressed rabbit down the rabbit hole or find the tinman,scarecrow and the cowardly lion, and followed the yellow-brick road.

Please quote my exact words where you think I am saying everything is an illusion, so I know what are my offending words and the context?

 

[gnostic]

Please quote my exact words where you think I am saying everything is an illusion, so I know what are my offending words and the context?

If you don't belong in the same school of thoughts as godnotgod that the physical world or physical reality is māyā, or "illusion", then I do apologise mixing your position with that of godnotgod's.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Please quote my exact words where you think I am saying everything is an illusion, so I know what are my offending words and the context?

You often mention "maya", isn't that referring to illusion?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You do not see because you do no look.....I am not referring to the subjective perception/experience of change in existence....but what exactly is the direct objective reality represented by the concept of time?

I have been practising satipatthana for some years, so I assure you that I DO look, and more closely than many do. Forget concepts and just look at what you experience.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

If you don't belong in the same school of thoughts as godnotgod that the physical world or physical reality is māyā, or "illusion", then I do apologise mixing your position with that of godnotgod's.

Maya can mean relative illusion, but on a sound scientific basis......the limited sensory perception of a human being only allows him to 'see' a tiny fraction of reality.....here...http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/essays/maya.asp
Godnotgod, like myself, uses the word illusion in that context...maya....not that the physical world does not exist, but since we can not see the whole, one will be thus deceived if they take it for the all....

 

[Ben Dhyan]

You often mention "maya", isn't that referring to illusion?

See my response to gnostic above..

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I have been practising satipatthana for some years, so I assure you that I DO look, and more closely than many do. Forget concepts and just look at what you experience.

So what is the direct objective reality represented by the concept of time?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Maya can mean relative illusion, but on a sound scientific basis......the limited sensory perception of a human being only allows him to 'see' a tiny fraction of reality.....here...http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/essays/maya.asp
Godnotgod, like myself, uses the word illusion in that context...maya....not that the physical world does not exist, but since we can not see the whole, one will be thus deceived if they take it for the all....

You are twisting "maya" out of all recognition here. Misleading and rather slippery. This is one of the problems with DIY religions, the "redefining" of traditional terms.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

You are twisting "maya" out of all recognition here. Misleading and rather slippery. This is one of the problems with DIY religions, the "redefining" of traditional terms.

So please explain where I have done this?