“You see, one thing is, I can live with doubt and uncertainty and not knowing. I think it’s much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong. I have approximate answers and possible beliefs and different degrees of certainty about different things, but I’m not absolutely sure of anything and there are many things I don’t know anything about, such as whether it means anything to ask why we’re here, and what the question might mean. I might think about it a little bit and if I can’t figure it out, then I go on to something else, but I don’t have to know an answer, I don’t feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without having any purpose, which is the way it really is so far as I can tell. It doesn’t frighten me.” ~ Richard Feynman
Though we know it not to be true, when looking at the stars we tend to see them as sitting on a single plane, as though they were all equidistant from us. Instead, try pretending the brighter stars are closer to you, and the dimmer ones are further away. When sufficient concentration is applied, the stars will all at once shift out of your imagined plane as some jump forwards and others rush back. When viewing the night sky this way, our cosmic situation becomes a bit more tangible.
A similar approach can be taken to get a sense of the moon’s spherical nature, as opposed to seeing it as a circle and only really knowing in theory it’s not the case. I find this most achievable when the moon’s near three quarters full.
How difficult it is to reconcile that the bizarre experiences of entheogens are of the same reality that appears so familiar, manageable, and ‘normal’, otherwise. That the magnitude of variation in perspectives of the same reality can be so unimaginably vast is surely one of nature’s most remarkable phenomena.
When dreaming, the entities we encounter feel separate from us at the time, but given the context of waking life we realise they were all projected within and by us, that our mind had duped itself into believing it was divided. Given a yet greater context or vantage point, we would likely find that waking life is of precisely the same nature; that wherever there is a sense of separateness, dreaming is taking place. As one universe and reality there has never really been “us” or “we”, there has only ever been, and eternally will be, me.
“So then, here’s the drama. My metaphysics, let me be perfectly frank with you, are that there is the central Self, you could call it God, you could call it anything you like. And it’s all of us. It’s playing all the parts of all beings whatsoever, everywhere and anywhere. And it’s playing the game of hide and seek with itself. It gets lost, it gets involved in the farthest out adventures, but in the end it always wakes up, and comes back to itself. And when you’re ready to wake up, you’re gonna wake up. And if you’re not ready, you’re gonna stay pretending that you’re just a poor little me.” ~ Alan Watts
“How very paltry and limited the normal human intellect is, and how little lucidity there is in the human consciousness, may be judged from the fact that, despite the ephemeral brevity of human life, the uncertainty of our existence and the countless enigmas which press upon us from all sides, everyone does not continually and ceaselessly philosophise, but that only the rarest of exceptions do so. The rest live their lives away in this dream not very differently from the animals, from which they are in the end distinguished only by their ability to provide for a few years ahead. If they should ever feel any metaphysical need, it is taken care of from above and in advance by the various religions; and these, whatever they may be like, suffice.” ~ Arthur Schopenhauer
An unforgiving analysis of the average person. What I find very curious is the suspicion, and even reproach, which people often hold towards the questions worthwhile asking, and those who bother to ask them.
A version of reality built on sensory information interpreted by a mind devised purely to perceive in a manner conducive to its own survival, is not necessarily likely to be a model of lavish insight into the true nature of things. However prior to interpretation sensory perception is itself in direct communication with the fulcrum of our consciousness, with the “The Observer”, and it is this spectrum of experience which is our most objective.
Given our understanding of perception is limited to that which is associated with our survival, the question then arises as to what other forms of experience reality could potentially produce through manipulation of consciousness through processes and forces other than evolution by natural selection.
Most frequencies of light served us no use in the past, and so we now see only a portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, red through violet, and so it stands to reason that our other senses are very likely also blind to the vast majority of their respective spectrums. Say for example if the love through hate experienced within the mind, or in this case the ‘heart’, was not unlike the red through violet experienced by the eyes; it would represent a mere fraction of perceptual possibility, only in this case perception of internally generated emotion rather than externally generated light. And furthermore, what of the experience of spectrums of senses we don’t possess to any degree at all?
Our sensory experiences while pure in nature, are also constitutionally limited. As a universe impervious to decisive critique through observation, all that can be reliably inferred is through virtue of the fact that observation itself is happening; that something is experiencing itself.
“There is a pleasure in recognising old things from a new viewpoint.” – Richard Feynman