What came before the Big Bang?

[`mud]

hey GNG,
The switch still in the on position, and has there for an awfully long "time".
It will probably stay there into infinity, what about you ?
I bet you will become a memory in someone's mind, The "I" of someone's thoughts.
I feel sorry for those persons though, you wish them not that even that.
~
'mud

 

[godnotgod]

go ahead

No, you go ahead. You are the one using the word 'Self' to define 'I', so I assume you know what you're talking about.

 

[godnotgod]

hey GNG,
The switch still in the on position, and has there for an awfully long "time".
It will probably stay there into infinity, what about you ?
~
'mud

What 'switch' are you talking about? I was merely using the light bulb as a metaphor.

There is no such switch, nor flipper of any switch.

There is no rainer of the rain.

There is no 'I'; no doer of deeds.

There is only pure consciousness, which is The Absolute, and....

"The universe is the Absolute as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation"
Vivekenanda

 

[Thief]

everything is about the Self, the 'I'. There is nothing else.

There 'you' go.....flip flopping again....
Claim to have self......for 'you'rself...... and then deny you exist.

'you' aren't convincing anyone of 'your' word play.
Try using fresh lettuce (us) for your salad.

 

[godnotgod]

There 'you' go.....flip flopping again....
Claim to have self......for 'you'rself...... and then deny you exist.

'you' aren't convincing anyone of 'your' word play.
Try using fresh lettuce (us) for your salad.

Don't need any. What is true is always fresh, because it is not subject to Time and decay. But what is true appears as word play and word salad to those who are still asleep, such as yourself. You still dwell in the world of belief inside your head, where "I", the afterlife, and heaven are all real, but only because you believe them to be. You have no real knowledge of any of it being true. The reason these beliefs have a firm hold on your mind is because of fear. Once you see that there is nothing to fear, you won't need to cling to such beliefs out of your need for emotional and psychological security any longer. But currently, the more you are afraid, the more you cling; and the more you cling, the more you are afraid. The belief in an afterlife provides a temporary, but superficial relief from your Anxiety over your Fate. But freedom from Anxiety can only come when you are able to see the reality of your condition, which you cannot see due to your beliefs having precedence over Reality.

There is the self called "I", that is an illusion, otherwise known as the state of Identification.

Then there is the True Self, which is the Universal Self, the Awakened One that sees the illusory nature of the "I" self of Identification. But prior to the Awakening, the "I" self of Identification firmly believes itself to be the True Self.

When you are asleep, dreaming, the dream and the character in the dream are very real to you. It is only upon your awakening from your dream sleep that you see clearly the illusory nature of the dream. But this first stage of awakening is still a kind of dream sleep, or Waking Sleep, as it is called, from which still a higher state of Awakening shows you to see clearly the illusory nature of Waking Sleep. Until this occurs, this "I" firmly sees itself as real, when, in fact, it is pure fiction.

 

[godnotgod]

hey GNG,
The switch still in the on position, and has there for an awfully long "time".
It will probably stay there into infinity, what about you ?
I bet you will become a memory in someone's mind, The "I" of someone's thoughts.
I feel sorry for those persons though, you wish them not that even that.
~
'mud

I wish no such thing. Memories are fine, as long as one knows that that is all they are. The self of memory is temporal: it is subject to Birth and Death. But the True Self is Unborn, and therefore, Deathless and Eternal. We can never lose anyone to death if we only can understand the true nature of things. All of us are making a temporary appearance here on this Earthly plane, but it is the True Self that is manifesting it. We come out of the True Self, and return to it, but the True Self itself is not subject to coming or going. Nothing is ever lost or destroyed. But when we cling to the traces of the temporal, manifested self, we suffer because we think we have lost our loved ones to death. Not so. We should turn our attention completely around and focus on the True Self, which manifests all beings and all forms. Then we can be free of our suffering, because nothing is Born; nothing Dies. There is only the True Self that dwells in Absolute Joy, outside of Time and Space. And so it is just as Deepak Chopra tells us:

"We return to where we always are"

IOW, we awaken to Reality, which is this Timeless Present Moment, where there is no history; where there is no memory, and therefore, there is no suffering.

 

[Robert.Evans]

There is the self called "I", that is an illusion, otherwise known as the state of Identification.

Then there is the True Self, which is the Universal Self, the Awakened One that sees the illusory nature of the "I" self of Identification. But prior to the Awakening, the "I" self of Identification firmly believes itself to be the True Self.

Ok, I can go with that. i would say that there is the egotistical self, and then the divine Self. But the divine Self is what all things are about.

 

[Robert.Evans]

There 'you' go.....flip flopping again....
Claim to have self......for 'you'rself...... and then deny you exist.

'you' aren't convincing anyone of 'your' word play.
Try using fresh lettuce (us) for your salad.

I assume this was meant for GNG as I don't deny i exist

 

[Thief]

I assume this was meant for GNG as I don't deny i exist

yep....new look to the text must have clicked my click.

 

[Dhyana]

There was no "before the Big Bang."

We can't even say "nothing came before," because there was no "before."

This.

According to Einstein both space and time commenced with the Big Bang, hence no before and no what. No-thing can exist unless within space and time. So the question has no meaning. But nothing and void are the best we can say. So that it can be said that existence and being do come from void and non -being. Something did come out of. nothing. But void and form are two sides of one coin. As the Buddha spoke in the Heart Sutra, void is form and form is void. Void is form in the sense that it appears as form. "in itself", Void is not. It
has no "is" except insofar as it appears as form.

Form is void in the sense that it consists of void; it is nothing other than void appearing as form.

Using other terminology, void and form are non dual, not two, Advaita

 

[`mud]

No-one can seem to understand the problem with the big bang fiascle.
The 'void' that is known as 'nothingness', is totally incompatical with the entity that is known as the 'singularity'.
No-one can answer the question as the seperation that must have existed between the two entities that existed at that 'time'.
What was 'time' at that area of existence, no movement anywhere, no distances to traverse, no measurement to make, and no gravity ?
What 'contained' the supposed singularity, why didn't the two mix previously in the 'timeless' infinite foreverness ?
I don't think anyone is really thinking out there....anywhere.
The 'container' is the problem......ask Einstein's ghost...he'll tell you if you are thinking.
The big bang wasn't a single occurrance, there were trillions of them, and they are still inflating.
~
oh well....no-one gets it, waste of 'time'.
nuff stuff
'mud

 

[Thief]

No-one can seem to understand the problem with the big bang fisacle.
The 'void' that is known as 'nothingness', is totally incompatical with the entity that is known as the 'singularity'.

'mud

It was so.....a single item.....
Hence the term...singularity.

 

[`mud]

Like talking to a giant 'void of nothingness' !
~
'mud

 

[Dhyana]

No-one can seem to understand the problem with the big bang fiascle.
The 'void' that is known as 'nothingness', is totally incompatical with the entity that is known as the 'singularity'.

The problem is trying to speak of something which by definition "predates" both time and space. Time and space originated with the Big Bang. No thing can exist outside of time and space. There is no "before" time itself; there is no "place" independent of space itself. So how to explain the original singularity ? Where was it, when was it, how did it get there ? All origin explanations are plagued by ontological presuppositions. Always dancing around the issue of the origin of the origin. Origin presuppositions in essence are rooted in faith. There was an uncaused cause , there was an uncaused singularity. It just is/was.

Which is why the notion of the Void is appealing: that about which nothing can be said without being False. You can't speak about "before " time and space; you can't speak about Void; so don't. You are here, you exist. Move on. Or make **** up and hope it makes sense, is internally consistent, not self-contradictory, and somehow provable.

 

[`mud]

Three prime problems that I see, there wasn't any space(void), time, or singularity.
There was just the Cosmos destroying itself piece by piece and then recreating itself, piece by piece as it is now.
The result of these factors precluding the advent of any big bang,
or any of these factors really existing intact as entities at all, is practically unfathomable.
~
Space was an after effect ??
Time was an after effect ??
Was the void a precursor ??
~
Doesn't anyone want to explain the separation of the 'void' and the 'singularity' that didn't exist.
What was the container around the supposed singularity ?
It's like Genesis in the mystic minds of prophets and magicians, and writers of fantasy.
~
I shall always believe in the total randomicity of the Cosmos, and it's self-imposed infinite boundries.
There doesn't have to be any 'beginning', you can call it God if you will, but don't ask me to worship it.
The only respect I have is for the ferocity of the reality of the Cosmos itself.
~
'mud

 

[Thief]

Three prime problems that I see, there wasn't any space(void), time, or singularity.
There was just the Cosmos destroying itself piece by piece and then recreating itself, piece by piece as it is now.
The result of these factors precluding the advent of any big bang,
or any of these factors really existing intact as entities at all, is practically unfathomable.
~
Space was an after effect ??
Time was an after effect ??
Was the void a precursor ??
~
Doesn't anyone want to explain the separation of the 'void' and the 'singularity' that didn't exist.
What was the container around the supposed singularity ?
It's like Genesis in the mystic minds of prophets and magicians, and writers of fantasy.
~
I shall always believe in the total randomicity of the Cosmos, and it's self-imposed infinite boundries.
There doesn't have to be any 'beginning', you can call it God if you will, but don't ask me to worship it.
The only respect I have is for the ferocity of the reality of the Cosmos itself.
~
'mud

Yeah, well.....I noticed you say the Cosmos would be 'SELF' imposing.....
and I could say yeah.....God is bound to the creation He made.
He will abide the rules He created.

Step off a high ledge, while asking God to prove Himself.....that you not fall.....
ooooops!

 

[`mud]

hey Thief,
Notice the statement that I made more closely please.
"self-imposed infinite boundries.", notice the limit of 'infinite boundry', think about that 'boundry'.
Like I said further in the post: "you can call it God if you will, but don't ask me to worship it."
I don't ever try to assume boundries for the Cosmos, that fury is above any imaginable power,
even your God's, and I feel that the Cosmos created your perception of God, and what it can do.
~
'mud

 

[Dhyana]

Three prime problems that I see, there wasn't any space(void), time, or singularity.
There was just the Cosmos destroying itself piece by piece and then recreating itself, piece by piece as it is now.
The result of these factors precluding the advent of any big bang,
or any of these factors really existing intact as entities at all, is practically unfathomable.
~
Space was an after effect ??
Time was an after effect ??
Was the void a precursor ??
~
Doesn't anyone want to explain the separation of the 'void' and the 'singularity' that didn't exist.
What was the container around the supposed singularity ?
It's like Genesis in the mystic minds of prophets and magicians, and writers of fantasy.
~
I shall always believe in the total randomicity of the Cosmos, and it's self-imposed infinite boundries.
There doesn't have to be any 'beginning', you can call it God if you will, but don't ask me to worship it.
The only respect I have is for the ferocity of the reality of the Cosmos itself.
~
'mud

Void and space are not synonymous. Void is void of all concepts & things, including space and time.

Void is the word used when no other word suffices. As answer to the meaningless question what was the precursor to Big Bang ( & time and space). In that respect, any word, including "void" or " singularity" is inadequate, but is also equivalent.

As far as ontological presuppositions, what caused your Cosmos? Either it just is, or is its own cause. Faith or logical contradiction? Your choice.

 

[Dhyana]

"Causality can only explain later events by earlier events, but it can never explain the beginning."

-Werner Heisenberg

Void has no beginning or end. If void is imagined as pure subjectivity , then universe (form) is its object. That's simply the case, what IS, void and form, each defining the other.

Beginning and end are of concern only to sentient beings which cognize time and space.

 

[`mud]

Doesn't a beginning have to exist at the very origin of something,
to be called a beginning,
isn't the 'cause' the beginning of the resulting aftermat ?
In that case, wouldn't the cause be the true 'beginning' ?
~
You bring the 'void' into the discussion, and the thought comes:
What's the distance from the void to the beginning (singularity).
I don't know where the 'void' starts, but if there was a singularity,
the 'void' ends there, at the container's (beginning's) edge.
Now we only have to ask, what was the 'cause' at the beginning ?
Since the 'void' has no 'time' or 'space', it must have no 'form'.
Sooooo, the universe has no cause, or beginning, or container !
But that's not true, is it ?
~
nuff stuff
'mud