Nondualism vs Dualism

[Lemon Curry]

I might be wrong and usually I am, but I think most particles in the universe are dualistic.
(Particle : Anti-particle)

Matter : Anti-matter

In that dual, it appears that matter won.

At present I have no reason to believe that I am like a cell in a much larger body.

I am trying to think how a cell in my own body could communicate with me, if it had the capability.

Cell -"Good job on the diet. We are still having cake tonight right ? Ok just checking."

What we refer to as 'Matter' won because the rate of conversion of what we refer to as 'Anti-matter' to what we refer to as 'Matter' was greater than the rate of conversion of 'Matter' to 'Anti-Matter'.  Although the conversion rates differed by only 3 parts in 1,000, it was sufficient such that when the temperature of the then new universe fell and the matter and anti-matter combined to annihilate each other, an excess of what we call 'Matter' remained.  It was this excess of 'Matter' that formed out universe.

[Simon Moon]

After opening my consciousness with Ayahuasca and other psychedelics, I realized why there are so many paradoxes in science and the spiritual. I don't mean "supernatural" when I say spiritual. I'm more talking about a general personal experience held by each individual that constitutes their own personal truth. Each individual has their own universal reality where the unseen and the seen weave themselves together. We're all pretty much the same creature with the same basic needs, yet we all have something about ourselves that makes us a unique person.

This is where I see the opening to the why the paradoxes exist. Its because we are one nondualistic  cosmic creature. There is one divine all and we are a piece of it the same as a liver cell is a piece of a human. But we are also built by little bits and pieces of bits of pieces of bits and pieces. So of course we experience a feeling of separation from our divine union with the universe, or what I call God.

I believe that in our pre-existence (pre-bigbang) we existed as 1 solid entity built upon two perfectly symbiotic states of matter. I believe this entity held consciousness and consciously killed itself in order for more creation to spring forth. I also believe that we have the history of our making from the big bang until present written in our DNA.

Even if you think I'm full of shit, I'm curious what y'all believe concerning dualism vs nondualism. I say both

I have taken Ayahuasca (long before it became a 'shamanistic tourist' thing), 'heroic' doses of mushrooms, LSD when it still had some strength and purity, San Pedro cactus (same chemical makeup as Peyote, grows wildly all over Los Angeles), and DMT.

I had similar experiences as you had, 'one with the universe' perceptions, part of a cosmic whole, a divine all, etc. On DMT, I had experiences that we were part of a single organism before the big bang, etc. I even met the DMT entities and elves, that communicated this to me.

These were all incredibly important and profound experiences for me, and probably changed my life for the better. But here's the thing, why should I believe they actually pointed to some underlying reality (as that clown, Jordan Peterson would say, the metaphysical substrate)? Just because they felt real at the time? Because other people report similar experiences? They were powerful and positive? They were life changing? They have a shamanistic history, with archeological rock carvings and 1000's of year old rituals?

Please support your contention that your experiences, not matter how powerful they were, actually reflect some underlying reality?

Why would you trust your drastically altered perceptions while on Ayahuasca, more than when when in your normal brain state? Alcoholics, heroin addicts, meth addicts, crack addicts all hallucinate. They all have experiences that feel real at the time. How are am I able to discern that your Ayahuasca experiences reflect some existing 'metaphysical substrate', but those with hallucinatory experiences from these other drugs, do not?

For that matter, how am I able to differentiate my powerful and positive Ayahuasca experiences, that I understand are most likely caused by my altered brain state, but don't reflect and underlying reality, from your positive and powerful experiences that you claim do point to some underlying reality? Which one of us is most likely adding unsupported claims to our experiences?

own personal truth

This short phrase, as far as I can tell, is absolute nonsense.

We don't all have our own 'personal truth', if by "truth", you mean, that which best reflects reality. Truth, using this definition, can be demonstrated. Can you demonstrate your 'personal truth'? If you can't demonstrate it, how are you able to differentiate it from the 'personal truth' of a schizophrenic?

If you are using a different definition, please tell me.

[brewer]

We are stardust, we are golden
We are billion year old carbon
And we got to get ourselves back to the garden

[Won2blv]

I believe that in our pre-existence (pre-bigbang) we existed as 1 solid entity built upon two perfectly symbiotic states of matter. I believe this entity held consciousness and consciously killed itself in order for more creation to spring forth. I also believe that we have the history of our making from the big bang until present written in our DNA.

I base that belief [on] personal conscious experience

Um, I base the rejection of your belief on my personal conscious experience.  

So where do you plan to go from here?

Thats fine with me. Its just a narrative of creation that I know some humans crave to know. Its hard to share spiritual experiences with heavily skeptical thinkers. Sometimes those militant skeptics forget that personal experience and perspective are relative to the individual user. Just because I saw these things with my eyes closed doesn't mean I didn't really see them. In fact they have just given me more faith that consciousness has existed since the beginning of time.

---

I believe that in our pre-existence (pre-bigbang) we existed as 1 solid entity built upon two perfectly symbiotic states of matter. I believe this entity held consciousness and consciously killed itself in order for more creation to spring forth. I also believe that we have the history of our making from the big bang until present written in our DNA.

Even if you think I'm full of shit, I'm curious what y'all believe concerning dualism vs nondualism. I say both

Big bang, AFAIK, covers the expansion of the Universe from a singularity through to its large-scale evolution.

Strictly speaking, time only began at the formation of the singularity.  Therefore, to use the term 'pre-big bang' is invalid and has no meaning.

In addition, before time began, space did not exist.  Therefore, the pre-big bang matter of which you speak cannot have existed because the space required to contain the matter didn't exist. 

Penrose, relatively recently, argued that time, pre-big bang, did indeed exist since the mathematics allows for this.  However, he also argues that time differences, pre-big bang, didn't exist.  Just when I had all my ducks in a line too.

Man, that was some trip you went on.

I ask this in earnest, if matter cannot be created or destroyed, then was all matter created in one single event post-big bang?

[The Grand Nudger]

What wouldn't give you more faith in whatever you already had faith in?

IDK man, one of the strongest currents in the whole psychedelics thing is an opportunity for deep introspection, and often enough..attempts to buttress one's previously held beliefs don't do much more than get in the way of that.

[Won2blv]

After opening my consciousness with Ayahuasca and other psychedelics, I realized why there are so many paradoxes in science and the spiritual. I don't mean "supernatural" when I say spiritual. I'm more talking about a general personal experience held by each individual that constitutes their own personal truth. Each individual has their own universal reality where the unseen and the seen weave themselves together. We're all pretty much the same creature with the same basic needs, yet we all have something about ourselves that makes us a unique person.

This is where I see the opening to the why the paradoxes exist. Its because we are one nondualistic  cosmic creature. There is one divine all and we are a piece of it the same as a liver cell is a piece of a human. But we are also built by little bits and pieces of bits of pieces of bits and pieces. So of course we experience a feeling of separation from our divine union with the universe, or what I call God.

I believe that in our pre-existence (pre-bigbang) we existed as 1 solid entity built upon two perfectly symbiotic states of matter. I believe this entity held consciousness and consciously killed itself in order for more creation to spring forth. I also believe that we have the history of our making from the big bang until present written in our DNA.

Even if you think I'm full of shit, I'm curious what y'all believe concerning dualism vs nondualism. I say both

I have taken Ayahuasca (long before it became a 'shamanistic tourist' thing), 'heroic' doses of mushrooms, LSD when it still had some strength and purity, San Pedro cactus (same chemical makeup as Peyote, grows wildly all over Los Angeles), and DMT.

I had similar experiences as you had, 'one with the universe' perceptions, part of a cosmic whole, a divine all, etc. On DMT, I had experiences that we were part of a single organism before the big bang, etc. I even met the DMT entities and elves, that communicated this to me.  

These were all incredibly important and profound experiences for me, and probably changed my life for the better. But here's the thing, why should I believe they actually pointed to some underlying reality (as that clown, Jordan Peterson would say, the metaphysical substrate)? Just because they felt real at the time? Because other people report similar experiences? They were powerful and positive? They were life changing? They have a shamanistic history, with archeological rock carvings and 1000's of year old rituals?

Please support your contention that your experiences, not matter how powerful they were, actually reflect some underlying reality?

Why would you trust your drastically altered perceptions while on Ayahuasca, more than when when in your normal brain state? Alcoholics, heroin addicts, meth addicts, crack addicts all hallucinate. They all have experiences that feel real at the time. How are am I able to discern that your Ayahuasca experiences reflect some existing 'metaphysical substrate', but those with hallucinatory experiences from these other drugs, do not?

For that matter, how am I able to differentiate my powerful and positive Ayahuasca experiences, that I understand are most likely caused by my altered brain state, but don't reflect and underlying reality, from your positive and powerful experiences that you claim do point to some underlying reality? Which one of us is most likely adding unsupported claims to our experiences?

own personal truth

This short phrase, as far as I can tell, is absolute nonsense.

We don't all have our own 'personal truth', if by "truth", you mean, that which best reflects reality. Truth, using this definition, can be demonstrated. Can you demonstrate your 'personal truth'? If you can't demonstrate it, how are you able to differentiate it from the 'personal truth' of a schizophrenic?

If you are using a different definition, please tell me.

I would say that the schizophrenic is experiencing something real and based in reality, but it is being relayed and translated incorrectly. That's why the schizophrenic distrusts most people, because they do not understand the reality of the schizophrenics experience.

I believe the opening of consciousness through psychedelics would benefit mankind. I hear your experience and feel like we came to many of the same conclusions with different words used to explain how. I believe this history of creation lies insides our DNA and it gives us real comfort to know that history as far back as possible. And IMHO, I believe that if an atheist were to cut off the ego that disallows even a shred of faith in God, they could experience the divine in a way that will give them comfort that a higher consciousness is watching over us, even if it isn't able stop wicked humans from being wicked

[The Grand Nudger]

Well, I guess it's a good thing that the drugs didn't tell you to murder anyone.

How would adding an audience to rape and pillage be comforting? Think of the worst moment of your life, just some terrible thing. Now imagine me sitting there, eating popcorn, watching you while it happened. It's starting to look like your "experience" was pretext for launching some of the more tired arguments the faithful have ever devised.

You don't understand the first law of thermodynamics, you don't know what dna is, atheists are ego blinded, and impotent voyeurism makes everything feel better. Just go back to church, lol?

[Succubus]

I ask this in earnest, if matter cannot be created or destroyed, then was all matter created in one single event post-big bang?

Did you just shot yourself in the foot?
There was no matter immediately post big bang there was only energy. Matter did not form until the universe cooled down.

[Alan V]

Um, I base the rejection of your belief on my personal conscious experience.  

So where do you plan to go from here?

Thats fine with me. Its just a narrative of creation that I know some humans crave to know. Its hard to share spiritual experiences with heavily skeptical thinkers. Sometimes those militant skeptics forget that personal experience and perspective are relative to the individual user. Just because I saw these things with my eyes closed doesn't mean I didn't really see them. In fact they have just given me more faith that consciousness has existed since the beginning of time.

Actually, my specific experiences with lucid dreaming which led me to become a skeptic occurred when I was still a believer in a pantheistic God.  What I found out with a bit of experimentation within my lucid dreams was that my dream content was highly influenced by my expectations for that content.  Extrapolating that to "mystical visions" in general, which occur in similar altered states, you can't assume such visions are veridical of anything.  In other words, my experiences with lucid dreaming ended up completely undercutting my interest in mysticism. When I read accounts from dreaming and consciousness science which made better sense of my experiences than mysticism did, I gave up mysticism.

[Won2blv]

I ask this in earnest, if matter cannot be created or destroyed, then was all matter created in one single event post-big bang?

Did you just shot yourself in the foot?
There was no matter immediately post big bang there was only energy. Matter did not form until the universe cooled down.

So matter was some other form before it was formed in the universe post-big bang. That means its possible consciousness existed in a pre-matter form?

---

Thats fine with me. Its just a narrative of creation that I know some humans crave to know. Its hard to share spiritual experiences with heavily skeptical thinkers. Sometimes those militant skeptics forget that personal experience and perspective are relative to the individual user. Just because I saw these things with my eyes closed doesn't mean I didn't really see them. In fact they have just given me more faith that consciousness has existed since the beginning of time.

Actually, my specific experiences with lucid dreaming which led me to become a skeptic occurred when I was still a believer in a pantheistic God.  What I found out with a bit of experimentation within my lucid dreams was that my dream content was highly influenced by my expectations for that content.  Extrapolating that to "mystical visions" in general, which occur in similar altered states, you can't assume such visions are veridical of anything.  In other words, my experiences with lucid dreaming ended up completely undercutting my interest in mysticism.  When I read accounts from dreaming and consciousness science which made better sense of my experiences than mysticism did, I gave up mysticism.

My experience with ayahuasca has lead me to believe that there is a higher power out there and it is possible to learn from that high power however we choose to open our mind to it. There is some kind of living consciousness that is living in the soul of the ayahuasca plant, and it somehow speaks to the human soul in any way that the human is open to perceiving the message. But it can only be backed up by personal experience