Some people believe time is speeding up. For instance, time seems to be flying by faster than ever, or what used to take several years to accomplish now seems to be taking place in just a couple. You may have changed more in the past two years than you did in the five years before that. When more personal growth is crammed into a shorter amount of time, it appears that things have picked up pace and more ground is being covered more quickly. In the 2012 paradigm, this idea serves to correlate the prophesied dissolution of time, or a change in our perception of time. Yes, there's more to it and the bottom line is the Mayan calendar is tracking the evolution of consciousness through nine sequentially ordered cycles of creation. The nine steps aren't linear which means you wouldn't lay them out end-to-end in a linear fashion. They are instead holographic in nature. All nine levels are nested into each other like a set of mixing bowls. That's how this calendar actually works. Each step up the nine leveled pyramid expands and develops the previous level with a 20 times faster frequency that continually drives evolution forward.
In his book The Mayan Calendar and the Transformation of Consciousness, Carl Johan Calleman offers this idea: "The liberation of human beings from the negative effects of the frequency increase, such as stress, is a matter of entering the natural, nonphysical, divine flow of creation leading toward enlightenment. Today more than ever before, people are becoming aware of the stressful effects of subordinating their lives to physical time." What do YOU think?
Posts
34 comments:
Look to upcoming nanotechnology.artificial general intelligence, and genetic engineering for "mirarcles" of consiousness, not the Mayan calender.
ps: expanded consciousness and immortality is coming through science...you don't need myths and religions anymore.
Yes, that's exactly what I think.
The challenge, however, lies in interfacing between the physical and non - physical, and in being with the " flow " both in the physical and the non - physical realms. Without these required knowledge and skills, what is one talking about ( rather, dishing out ) ? More ' feel - good ' prescriptions ? !
i believe individuals proceed from gross-ness to subtle-ness grossest is the dead matter and subtlest is god
the journey from gross to subtle is the natural path evolution takes
I go with Scott here. In support of Molly, I do like a certain mystic element and believe we have to find willingness, and I doubt the will is intellectual. Current scientific thinking on time is to try to split it into two dimensions, or to measure it as temperature in relation to an event horizon. "Have you got a thermometer? I'd like to know what time it is". Time may be an ilusion or a 'shadow experience' of a 6 dimensional reality. Years ago, there was something called the Bremmermann limit on how fast information could be processed in matter - this had something to do with calculating the coarseness of space-time through relativity. The answer here seems very quick, but in fact is too slow to account for consciousness. Time is certainly one possibility for whatever helps us put one foot in front of another. One thing for sure Molly, we don't know how to really define, let alone measure time. It certainly changes its 'beat' in the Hopi ideologies.
I think that people in general experience time passing more quickly as they age. There is a simple reason for this though- every year you experience is a smaller percentage of the amount of time that you've lived. For example, when I was 10 years old, one year was 10% of my life and my experiences. When I was 30, one year was only 3.3% of my life.
It is interesting to look at cultural ideas about time, and how they differ. But I don't think we need to choose between internal and external impulses to understand time or anything else. Both internal and external information are important. Technology and faith, engineering and intuition - all of the information coming to us is merely signposts along the way so that we can choose direction and formulate viewpoint. Burke has a very good point about the relationship between age and the experience of time, although I would say that a child's perception of time is more holographic and less linear. Children are very much in the moment, and I think, able to have a deeper experience of time. We impose our timetables on them and as they grow, insist that they be "on time" as we structure our day with one event following the other.
I see more and more people surrendering to a time more in tune with their internal rhythms beginning their days at 3 AM instead of tossing and turning until 6 because that is when they always wake up and so do their other family members. I think that our rhythm in time changes as we experience time differently - simultaneous time, no time, all time, time vortex, time warp. If we try to stick to our day to day linear time schedule, always checking our watches so that we can be on time, it creates a stress - a conflict between our internal systems and external organization. And I think that it comes from inside out. As we develop a deeper understanding of time, our life changes to accommodate a change in frequency or rhythm if we can recognize and surrender to it.
I really feel change accelerating, not only in my life, but in the world around. Each age of humanity carries with it a degree of accelerated change. The agricultural era had a VERY different feel to it as my great grandmother explained it, than did the industrial era as my father explained it. Can you imagine a life with no phone, computer, car, airplane - this is how my great grandmother lived. Life at a much slower pace. A letter took weeks to arrive. A world apart.
The answer depends on how you define time. I view time as a man made unit of measurement. An instrument to help us understand the world and this perception of reality.
From a philosophic point of view time is part of a fundamental intellectual structure (together with space and number) within which humans sequence and compare events. The philosopher Kant has said: that time is not itself some thing and therefore is not to be measured.
In contrast Isaac Newton believed time and space form a container for events, which is as real as the objects it contains. Time then relies on physical changes in this reality.
In a world that becomes more capitalistic each day we have a popular quote to reflect this: time is money
We must take it upon ourselves to use out time in a healthy manner and not run ourselves ragged. Instead of passing the blame humanity needs to stand up and take responsibility for our actions.
So yes, because of an increasing capitalistic society where money is more valuable than life I can see how it seems the pace of life has increased. People are expected to accomplish more in a shorter amount of time. Capitalism and prosperity would slow down if humans slowed down and took time to sit down and reflect.
What would life be like if children were taught to be more thoughtful about their actions instead of jumping up to do what they are told?
And to address nature, humanity has now reached a point where we are determining the future of evolution with our actions. For example our actions now determine what species will become extinct or survive on this planet. We manipulate the food chain and now partially manipulate the weather. The day has come where evolution is now in our hands.
This topic is of great interest to me. One of my goals in life is to be able to essentially slow time - or the way we think of time - in order to enjoy more life. I found that by trying new things, taking more risks, and essentially expanding my consciousness time is beginning to take new form and the pace of my life is natural. Do any of you have any suggestions on "slowing time" ???
I feel exactly the same way time has sped up although I knew of no science that collaborated my suspicion, it is like the rotation of the planet sped up but we cannot detect it. it isnt a matter of just getting older their are days I do nothing yet it is gone in an instant. I have insomnia so the doctors wanted to change by biology clock and had me do the circadian rhythms it didnt work I just went a week without sleep. It feels like the opposite of a spinning top where the slowing down was the beginning and the speed at which it was let go is the now the last bit. I do not know scientific words to put across my thoughts and you have done so eloquently so that even I can understand perhaps some of the reason we are spinning faster into oblivion so to speak....
I frequently hear the same comment by people that time seems to pass more quickly for them now than when they were young. Human perception of time is unreliable in the sense that one can't count on it to know precisely how much time has passed. Some events seem to take no time at all, others seem to take forever.
Nature has provided humans with some internal devices to measure time, since these measures are important to set certain rhythms in the body. It surprises me, for instance, that I can wake up usually at the same time in the morning after having set that time as a habit for waking up. But my perception of time varies according to the circumstances.
Sometime ago I received a text that presented an explanation why people have this sensation of time passing more quickly when they get older. It was said that when one is experiencing something new, time seems to pass more slowly, since the person pays attention to details while having this experience, and these details are recorded in memory. When, on the other hand, one is experiencing something usual, repetitive, the same effort is not necessary, and one has a sensation of time passing more quickly. So, when one is very young, almost everything is new and interesting and so time seem to pass more slowly. In that text it was even suggested that we try and do things new, different, to improve the experiences we have in our lives.
If it is so, it is nothing new but something older generations might have experienced as well. As for things changing so quickly in our times..... we can focus on the technological transformations that we are seen in our era. In relation to this I think that it is a result of new ideas that have being widely spread in our times: such as the idea of the need of constant change, constantly making it better, even different.
In the area of inventions, I have read about the slow progress one was used to see in centuries past. Some inventions that were in use for a century or more before someone came with a better idea for substitution. Today there is the firm idea planted in the mind of every industrial manager in the modern world that in order to survive the competition one has to make constant improvement, finding ways of making things better, faster, in different ways. The faster one get to these ways, more the chance of profit, better the chances of survival. But that is not the only reason one can perceive for this. In which era of our history there was so many technically educated people oriented in getting new ideas, new inventions, better ways of doing things? None that I know. It is the result of rapidly growing population, and education being available to a much larger number of people in human history.
I close my eyes, only for a moment, and the moment's gone-kansas
Many times I have fallen into 'flow' while writing and lost all track of the world around me. I have found it easy enough to loose time, but I have never had that much luck slowing it down. Like gravity it is one of things we all live with and none of us fully understand.
There are more things demanding out attention and less time to pursue our ever growing interests. Our perception of time as a finite resource can interfere with our desire to be in the moment.
One of my favorite movies is Scrooge and one my favorite bits of advice comes from the Ghost of Christmas Present-There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have.
I think that you have made some astute observations and intuitions of
consciousness on a global level.
Fast changes in technoculture and the evolution of consciousness can
seem like time itself accelerating.
You mentioned the Mayan calender and its portrayal of consciousness in
nested levels of exponential expansion, and this parallels our world
of technoculture, information, and global intelligence.
Some project that the technoConsciousness change over the next 15
years will have the same global impact as that of the last 100 years,
due to the exponential rates of information acceleration, doubling
itself every year or so.
As a species we are at a time unprecedented in history, and, yes, it
is stressful, and you have discovered its effects in your own way,
from external to the internal, as you say.
I believe that through stress comes resolution and growth, and the
evolution of enriched capacities, or, on the other hand, through
stress comes chaos and destruction.
The exponential acceleration of technoConsciousness will peak in the
Singularity (www.kurzweilai.net)and it will be the most transformative
event in history, and I think this is kind of time acceleration that
you are sensing, that is building up, to burst, to evolve us into the
next level of global consciousness.
I hope you can find the same kind of peace that your grandmother must
have enjoyed in a much simpler past, but with the expanded
consciousness of the present and future.
I have noticed we use terms like 'time seeming to' very easily, even though we know clocks speed up and slow down outside our general frame of reference.
Now that is almost the exact reason I stoppped being Pagan, far too much 'fluffy bunnyisgness' aboutth whole thing.
Having said that though, we humans seem quite enamoured with the number three in our mystical and supernatural outlooks to life. So I can't help holding a quiet appreciation for this system of nine; it being the most bestest of numbers being 3x3 and all.
Time though, well I'll go all scientific on that one and agree with Albert, it is relative, and in some cases very relative!
Avoid fads and complicated philosophies that give your mind more to think about. Meditation is a step beyond the thought process. No philosophy can adequately describe man's place in the universe. Concentrate on meditation in this moment and not on ancient scriptures. Many old scriptures were written by madmen and fools and have gained respect from society simply because they are so old and dusty.
"Stupidity is repetition, repeating others. It is cheap, cheap because you need not learn. Learning is arduous. It needs guts to learn. Learning means one has to be humble. Learning means one has to be ready to drop the old, one has to be constantly ready to accept the new."
I think we have to be careful about our terminology. There is time and there is change and, in some senses, change is an expression of time. If there were no change, could we talk about time at all? But change is a constant for us in our experience, even if the change is only the ticking of a clock or the whizzing of electrons. There is no doubt that, in many senses - as Molly points out - change is accelerating in our contemporary orld, at least in the sense of technological development and the consequences this has on our daily lives. It is another question, of course, as to how much of this change is particularly important or meaningful.
We often use the expression, "I haven't got the time." This is, in fact, very often an abjugation of responsiblity and (unconsciously perhaps) dishonest. We all have the same amount of time (objectively, linearly speaking), twenty four hours every day. Time is, in fact, something that we cannot possess anyway, it is absolutely free and completely egalitarian. A more honest expression would be; "The activity in question was not high enough on my list of priorities for me to deal with it up to this point."
In terms of our experience of time, I think a key issue is the extent to which we are self-determined, taking responsibility for our own lives and actions. Being grounded in and acting from our own centre. Acting out of our own volition rather than being steered by others. Of course, in many parts of life we are steered by others - the important thing here is that we recognise this and, for ourselves, assent to the situation. If, as is the case for most of us, I have to work to earn the money to make my living, then I am surrendering a portion of my time to the control of someone else - at least partially. Or I spend time doing something for someone that I love, even if it's something I don't particularly like doing. The important thing is to realise that I assent to these actions, that I choose to "spend" my time this way. And then to accept that I am doing that which - at that particular time - is to be done. I've found that trying to cultivate this sort of attitude helps when I'm involved in necessary tedious, boring actions - like ironing, for example - where one often has the sense of time crawling. A bit of a zen-like thing, I suppose.
Seen this way, it's the difference between making time or doing time. After, all, the fundamental concept of prison is to take away someone's freedom - his ability to determine where, and with whom and what he/ she spends his/her time.
Francis isn't right for once on this, though his general intent is good in trying to help us not confuse terms and avoid the agony of ironing! Giving up time to others is a pain, though not always. I think we are missing the point in that we could have 'a lot more time to ourselves' and do what is needed communally quicker and better. In this sense, time is somewhat defined by it being wasted, and that we live in a neurocracy. Time ticks differently in an accelerated frame of reference, so we can vary what it does to us. We now more or less have the technology to rebuild ourselves and be as immortal as amoebas. What joy!
I think I may have expressed myself a little unclearly, Neil. I don't find the fact that I have to work as a wage-slave particularly good and I have no doubt that you're right in your repeated assertion that we have the resources and abilities to organise society in such a way that we could spend a lot less time working, thus allowing us to use this time differently.
One of the positive aspects of living in a religious community (as I did long ago) was that one didn't always make the artificial distinction between working time and free time on which so much in our society is based. Looking for alternative models, I often think of the science (or better sociological) fiction classic by Ursula le Guin, in which she explores what an anarchist society might look like (and its human limits). Hmmm, I've got leave till next Sunday week, so I might even reread it. (Planning to go off to the Dutch coast tomorrow, so I may not be posting much in the next week or so). Having left the Church I spent a couple of years doing some incredibly meaningless work the worst was as a voucher examiner for the financial branch of the US Army in Heidelberg) before deciding to train as a nurse - partly because it seemed to be the kind of work that made some kind of sense. If I have to sell my time in order to live, then at least hopefully doing something useful. The zen stuff is to help get through the parts that are mind-numbing, like night duty, or documenting every fart in three different ways, so that the QM tyrants are satisfied!
Terms like enlightenment seem to fit with what I mean to some extent - the possibility that things really will change - time in this sense is potentially important as is the sense that history is available to the few who will look. Dutch coast eh! Hope you haven't gone to native and have a fleet hiddent here now!
No, Neil, as long as the royal family is prepared to defend the realm in the Hindu Kush, England is safe from me!
There are two points I would like to make in this interesting discussion:
Inspired by Einstein's relativity theories which show that space and time are part of one fabric called space-time, scientists have proven that time slows down the faster one travels and they've verified this by comparing two clocks, one on ground and one traveling on an airplane. By solving Einstein's equations, they've also ascertained that given a black hole, time will approach a standstill at the center of that black hole, also called the "point of singularity". This is due to the massive warpage of space-time around the point of singularity.
During moments of emergency, consciousness also seems to experience a slow down in subjective time and there were some scientists who even conducted an experiment based on this observation. Could it be that consciousness and time are also part of the same fabric, consciousness-time, and that perceiving a state of emergency so warps this fabric that the will to survive becomes a point of singularity, just like a black hole?
Please visit my blog for further discussion on this topic:
shiftingshadow.blogspot.com/2007_12_01_archive.html
Secondly, that time appears to possess a holographic nature is, in my opinion, because this is the nature of time in the subconscious and the metaphysical realms. To perceive time as holographic probably means one is dipping into the unconscious realms while awake. Some say the approach of 2012 is lifting the veil between our conscious and unconscious selves, and thus the holographic time effect is becoming more noticeable. Please reference the Ra Material if interested (llresearch.org).
I thought it might help us a bit to look at some simplified stuff from recent physics - in repspect of scientific method and thinking. I cobbled this together. The physics doesn't interest me much to be honest. If you want to have a look, what I'm on about is the relation between creative thinking (here I think the questioning of what time is with some informed physics theory), cosmic observations and the struggle to interpret them and the speculative nature of much science, yet speculative with a view to experiment, proof and peer review. We could od something similar on psychic issues, complementary medicine or capitalism. Here goes:
Despite the observed lumpiness, most cosmologists still think the universe behaves, on average, as though it were uniform. We could not test this idea because there was no way to take an average of space- time geometry using Einstein's equations (Bremmermann's limit was about the graininess of the universe). That changed in 2000, though, when Buchert published a set of equations based on general relativity that allowed cosmologists to average the universe's behaviour while including the effects of an uneven matter distribution. This matter distribution has been seen. This paved the way for physicists to try to explain the observed expansion history of the universe using models based on the lumpy distribution of matter. Part of the inspiration of this work is to contest the existence of dark matter/energy. (Physical Review Letters, vol 99, p 251101). Wiltshire has shown that by combining Buchert's equations with some strange quirks of general relativity he can explain the supernova observations without resorting to dark energy (New Journal of Physics, vol 9, p 377). It was the supernova observations that led to the 'need' for dark energy being out there in space. You should be able to spot in this that observations need explaining and relating to what else is known. The universe is not smooth, so observers need to take into account their own position in order to properly interpret cosmological measurements. This is often forgotten by lay people. In social research we forget to do enough work on our own position. In relativity, distance and time measurements are made in terms of an observer's rods and clocks. Clocks that were in sync in the smooth,early universe become mismatched as the matter distribution grows increasingly lumpy. That's because gravity slows time, a proven relativistic effect clocks at the poles run slower than ones at the equator and all that jazz). So a clock in a galaxy will tick more slowly than a clock in empty space. The time told by a clock in our galaxy and the time told by one floating in a void could differ by as much as 38 per cent. Didn't nature abhor voids once? Anyway, they are out there - one so big it could be the trace of a universe that packed up its bags and left! Comparing a supernova's apparent brightness with its intrinsic brightness reveals its distance. Its red shift - the stretching of the light's wavelength - reveals how much the intervening space has expanded from the time the light left the supernova to the time it reached our telescopes. When the teams looked at distant supernovae, they found that they were much farther away, for their measured red shift, than they would be if the universe's expansion had always been decelerating. This interpretation, however, assumes the standard cosmological model is correct. The standard model, because it is based on a uniform space with no distinct physical structures, describes us observers as floating in a freely expanding space, rather than confined to a galaxy. If our rods measure smaller volumes and our clocks are ticking more slowly than those of an observer in a void, then the simplification can lead to wrong conclusions. I sense, if I was ever to learn relativity physics in any depth, some physicist would turn up, tell me my effort was all in vain, and explain someone screwed with the clocks. The calculated expansion rate of the space between the Earth and the supernovae depends in part on the density of the intervening matter, because gravity slows expansion. Density is the amount of mass in a given volume, but volume depends on the way in which space is curved. In voids, space is negatively curved (why is it so hard to think of a woman with negative curves?), so the volume for a given radius is larger than in the relatively flat space in which we live. Taking the changing volumes into account alters what we calculate to be the universe's expansion history. This change alone is not enough, however, to account for the apparent acceleration. Corrections to clocks is also required. Because we live in a gravitationally bound system - our galaxy - our clocks run more slowly than they would in a void. This means our calculations of how fast space is expanding will be wrong too. The universe's expansion is slowing down, as originally thought. It also follows that the age of the universe from our point of view should be 14.7 billion years, rather than the standard 13.7 billion. For hypothetical observers in voids (places of the negative bra cup), the situation is even more dramatic: for them the universe is 18.6 billion years old. However, the assumption of dense regions and voids, with nothing in between, may be unrealistic. This is only the beginning of a discussion of the problem. Vacuum energy, often referred to as the cosmological constant, is still favourite as being the driver of the universe's expansion, but remains a puzzle because the energy should be much larger than it is. Experiments are under way. SNAP (SuperNova Acceleration Probe), a near-infrared space telescope that will examine supernovae from as far back as 10 billion years, giving us a more detailed history of the universe's expansion is due in seven years.
So what time is it?
Physicists we ain't. We all live in society though - even my friend Vam admits this as he looks inward! Could we get our arguments into some sort of shape like the above? I sense we waste some good ideas.
Firstly, I wanted to add a bit about curves, that is, positive and negative curves, for those who can't picture the difference. In a positive curve, one measures the radius from the centre and then sees that the curve of the circumference curves towards the centre. This causes the familiar sphere shape. If, however the curve is negative, the curve of the circumference curves AWAY from the central point forming a torus, a doughnut shape, rather than a sphere. So, when thinking about positive and negative curves, it's not like comparing oranges and apples but more like comparing oranges and doughnuts.
Perhaps this universe has realised that, with respect to the time and gravity link, time is less required where there is little or no mass. One might speculate (well, that's the main thing I do when posed with these kinds of problems) that, since consciousness is linked to matter--as we have never discovered awareness in a massless entity--time is relatively less necessary in a relative void than it is where relatively more mass is found.
Perhaps time is joined with mass, as it were, in such a way because massive (that is, objects of mass rather than huge objects) objects lead to the evolution of conscious entities that PERCEIVE the changes IN those massive objects. Of course this is a consciousness- based teleological view. Some might call it anthropic but, as I don't hold that mankind is the only variety of conscious entity that matters, I would, more objectively, call it consciocentric. Look at it this way, what is there to be aware of in a void? With God's omniscience, He knows there is nothing happening or changing in a void, so time passes differently there. Maybe this is a clue that time itself is curved positively with respect to mass (and/or negatively with respect to a void). And, that would provide a bit of evidence that even time abhors a vacuum simply because, in a vacuum, nothing changes. In a perfect void, perhaps time passes infinitely fast, but, as there is nothing to change and nothing noting that nothing changes, it simply doesn't 'matter'.
Further to the above, potency and presence, those qualities associated with matter in that it is matter that acts (is potent) at a given place and time (is present), implies science (that which forms the underlying reason for any given act at any given place and time). So, too, on a grandiose scale, omnipotence and omnipresence are pointless without the grandiose reasoning of omniscience. This is why I only use these three terms to define God.
In a void, there is no potency or presence as there is no reason for them to be (potent) there/present. Time is important to those with awareness teleologically, as conscious entities are the only ones that can comprehend the reasons behind the acts wherever they are.
Pat, thoughtful presentation. Do you agree that humans know the nature of void? Here I mean know directly, not just relative words/concepts.
I was doing research a few months ago and looking up transcripts from some of Einstein's lectures and smaller papers and I came across something very interesting that may indirectly apply. I had become accustomed, in my younger days, of considering space as some abstraction by which we may consider the effects that physical realities have on one another. 'The ether theory had been proved false' I was taught. The lumineferous ether was an impossibility. In one of his lectures I came across his actual opinion of the ether. Einstein believed in a non-lumineferous ether that was extremely difficult to interpret. He said that space must be 'something' and, ever careful not to undermine his position in the scientific community, explained how general relativity did not rule out the existence of an ether of some kind. He removed the possibility of all known physical attributes and what was left was something that had no motion (as particles and waves move) and no physical effect upon light. Since it was 'something' difficult to interpret it was swept under the rug, so to speak. I believe that there is no clear, established understanding of what space actually is... and without that understanding all potential theories concerning expansion and contraction of the universe are grey and inherently incomplete. Your post brings up a very interesting point... there are probably many unconsidered factors that could dramatically sway the argument for or against the accelerated expansion and I do not believe any of the theories are beyond infancy.
It would seem to me to be an unknowable thing. If, for example, there were a true void somewhere in inter-galactic space, if someone were to go there to investigate it, the investigator would be the only thing IN the void to know anything about. What can one know about nothing? And, when you get close enough to a void, you end up filling it by being the only thing IN the void. There seems to me to be no reason to go anywhere near a void, as there is nothing that we conscious entities can gain from one that we couldn't equally gain in self-contemplation anywhere more hospitable. So, my advice would naturally be: avoid a void.
So, it appears that Pat and Neil differ slightly when it comes to void. Pat has the view that to know something, one must go out there to find it while Neil, using the term gnostic, seems to suggest that one can know directly that which mind innately knows and merely projects as something external. Yes, these are my words, not yours.
Void is not ' knowable,' in terms what we know. It is the absence of all that we know and do not know.
However, nothingness as an emotion has been well described by existentialists : I am looking for Pierre. Pierre is not there !
However, void is not without potency. The entire universe is projected out of void !
Which means that that particular void was not void of potential. It was void of material--matter, if you will--but not necessarily void of abstractions.
When Shiva closes His eye, there is void and when He opens His eye, He beholds a new Brahman. But, there is only ever Brahman.
The void you understand is not the void as it is. But, since we cannot do any better, we set about understanding the void we can. What we observe is that there are cyclic motions within and without us that compulsorily engage our attention and pervades our awareness.
For instance : the coming and going of breath ; hunger and satisfaction ; global recession and ebullience ; pleasure and misery ; depression and cheer ; friendship and enmity ; birth and death ; appearance and disappearance ; being and nothingness ...
In order to intensify our investigation, we have no way other than to localise and focus on any one of such cycle ; say, the coming and going of breath.
The thought arises about two points in time, being at the junction where there is no coming and going of breath. But it's just a thought, yet. We are not one with that ( extended ) moment when one is one with the void of all ( the coming and going of breath ) that was in our focus. It is when we feel the void and are the void. The lungs reciprocate with a harmony that require the least effort or energy, and sets you free, past the being in superconscious state of deep sleep.
You must lead yourself to that freedom, that yet is, everything. To have that strength, I prayed to God. And I am still speaking of the technique, which proves true. There is truth in the technique. But it is not the Truth !
The above is the path of the Yoga. The man of Knowledge attains the truth, which is then lodged in his vision, in his intellect ( investigation and knowledge ), mind ( emotions and states of doubt ), in his senses ( five ), in his organs of action ( five ), in his acting ( performance ) about one's role in life, in his personality as it appears and affects those about you.
It was very taxing to pen down the above. There were dips of eternity at each step ! It's impossible to reveal one's experience, of which you are the only witness.
So the subtle difference, which may not be so subtle really, is the difference in the implications of the statements:
1) Tell me something I don't know. (filling a void of my knowledge from the pool of yours)
and
2) Tell me something YOU don't know. (asking you to access something you cannot access)
Alternatively, I could still be off-base, but, nonetheless, have noted another difference in what a void can mean.
As a Poet I have written this poem in my book Ponder awhile
TIME
Time actually seems to fly,
How fast has my life gone by,
Trying to make sense of things,
Time was made for order to bring.
The seconds tick, the minutes past.
Even the hour, day, month and year is not meant to last.
In this dimension time cannot be stopped.
In another dimension time is automatically dropped.
The master plan must be perfectly timed,
So the truth by us can be tapped and mined.
http://religiouspoems.blogspot.com/
Post a Comment