Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@newbuddhist.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take up to 48 hours. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

Perception of Time

Tony_A_SimienTony_A_Simien Veteran
edited July 2015 in Meditation

Perception of Time

All appearances must enter the five gates to be known. When the sixth gate arises, the world is born. That which we call existence is inherently simplistic. Only when the differentiating mind is born, it becomes complicated. To know clearly, is to have known, from that non differentiating space where mind is no longer. That is the realm prior to perception or experiencing.

Time is the perception of change. Everything ages. Everything decays. All things erode from moment to moment. Our bodies are renewed every second. We define these changes as 'Moments in Time'. Within non differentiating awareness, there is no perception of change. Therefore there is no perception of time. Things simply are as they are. Appearances continue to change, to shift, relatively speaking, from moment to moment. However the mind is no longer. So there is no recognition of any change occurring. There is no differentiation at all. This is inherently simplistic. And it is accepted without question or curiosity. What is there to question when awareness is like this? Only when the 'thinking mind' is reborn does this world of curiosities reappear.

I have heard during my journey, that time is an illusion. I would say that it's more accurately described as a delusion. Time cannot be an illusion because our perception of time is based on changing moments. And all phenomenon change, relatively speaking. We call these changes 'moments in time' Time is Not the cause of change. Change creates the perception of time'. In other words the concept of time is how we define our observation of a changing universe. If the universe and every aspect within it,  did not change, we would not perceive time.

All things would remain exactly as they are for all of eternity. Nothing would age; nothing would decay and there would be no movement. Movement would not be possible because all things would be permanently fixed. Movement is contrary to permanency. If it is permanent, it is eternally fixed.  Think about this. We define the observation of changing events, circumstances and phenomenon as a progression of 'time'. If there is no change then there cannot be movement. If there is no movement, there is no perception of time. This can be seen very clearly from that non differentiating unstructured awareness prior to mind. Because it does not perceive change nor does it perceive movement (in the relative sense) therefore there is no perception of time.

I would also like to say that I write these articles, so that we may engage in sharing, learning and comparing our personal experiences if any wish to do so. So please when possible, if at all possible, minimize the quoting of scripture. I can easily search the net myself for scriptures. I want to hear what you know. In your own words. From your experiences. It's not necessary to be a virtuoso with words. Just do the best you can. Thank you

In an attempt to reduce the possible misinterpretation of certain terms, in the context in which I've used them here. I have provided explanations below along with links to some of their sources.

Delusion is the misinterpretation of physical reality and mental formations as it applies to spirituality.

Illusion (in this discussion) refers to a figment of the imagination; a mental construct which has no existence. Its only physical form is as energy in the brain (thoughtform).

"Perception (from the Latin perceptio, percipio) is the organization, identification, and interpretation of sensory information in order to represent and understand the environment."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perception

Note: From within unstructured non differentiating awareness there is no organizing, identifying or interpreting of appearances. Even to say, an appearance, is differentiation. Nothing can be said or known. We use the word 'to know' for communication however in order to know there must be a subject there to know and objects which are known by a subject. Which in this case, there is no identification or recognition of a subject or objects from within this unstructured awareness

"Experiencing is the observing, encountering, or undergoing of things generally as they occur in the course of time:"

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/experiencing

Note: In Unstructured awareness there is no observing in the relative sense. Because to observe is to observe 'some  thing'. And there is 'no thing' there to be observed. No thing to encounter; no 'individual' there to undergo or observe some occurrence (there is also no occurrence; an occurrence requires subject, object and time);  and no referencing of time during those moments of unstructured awareness. The perception of Time is based on a subject object relation. Which is absent here

DavidShoshinEarthninjapegembara

Comments

  • DavidDavid some guy Veteran
    edited July 2015

    Very interesting read, thank you for sharing.

    A lot resonated with my understanding but there are a few things that I'm not sure whether they are minor or fundamental differences.

    @Tony_A_Simien said:
    Perception of Time

    All appearances must enter the five gates to be known. When the sixth gate arises, the world is born. That which we call existence is inherently simplistic. Only when the differentiating mind is born, it becomes complicated. To know clearly, is to have known, from that non differentiating space where mind is no longer. That is the realm prior to perception or experiencing.

    Are you saying that the sixth sense gate is the last to manifest? I'm not sure that could be because for one sense gate to be active means that there is a kind of perception. For there to be perception there must be recognition in the sixth sense, I think.

    We call it the sixth but only because it was the last one made evident. I'm pretty sure it must be the first to manifest.

    Time is the perception of change. Everything ages. Everything decays. All things erode from moment to moment. Our bodies are renewed every second. We define these changes as 'Moments in Time'. Within non differentiating awareness, there is no perception of change. Therefore there is no perception of time. Things simply are as they are. Appearances continue to change, to shift, relatively speaking, from moment to moment. However the mind is no longer. So there is no recognition of any change occurring. There is no differentiation at all. This is inherently simplistic. And it is accepted without question or curiosity. What is there to question when awareness is like this? Only when the 'thinking mind' is reborn does this world of curiosities reappear.

    It seems odd to claim any kind of awareness where mind is not present. I think you are right in that non-discriminating awareness is pure acceptance but I believe mind (even if in the most rudimentary form) must be present for any kind of awareness whatsoever.

    Time isn't only in the perception of change but also distance.

    I have heard during my journey, that time is an illusion. I would say that it's more accurately described as a delusion. Time cannot be an illusion because our perception of time is based on changing moments. And all phenomenon change, relatively speaking. We call these changes 'moments in time' Time is Not the cause of change. Change creates the perception of time'. In other words the concept of time is how we define our observation of a changing universe. If the universe and every aspect within it,  did not change, we would not perceive time.

    I prefer to say time is a tool as it is an aspect of duality. It isn't an illusion because there is distance and change. It could be a delusion going by your definition but I see it more like a convention that makes it easier to explore.

    Your argument here reminds me of my own for why there is no such event as nothing. If change is the constant then there was always the potential for change.

    All things would remain exactly as they are for all of eternity. Nothing would age; nothing would decay and there would be no movement. Movement would not be possible because all things would be permanently fixed. Movement is contrary to permanency. If it is permanent, it is eternally fixed.  Think about this. We define the observation of changing events, circumstances and phenomenon as a progression of 'time'. If there is no change then there cannot be movement. If there is no movement, there is no perception of time. This can be seen very clearly from that non differentiating unstructured awareness prior to mind. Because it does not perceive change nor does it perceive movement (in the relative sense) therefore there is no perception of time.

    This is true if there is also no distance. Where there is distance, there is time.

    I would also like to say that I write these articles, so that we may engage in sharing, learning and comparing our personal experiences if any wish to do so. So please when possible, if at all possible, minimize the quoting of scripture. I can easily search the net myself for scriptures. I want to hear what you know. In your own words. From your experiences. It's not necessary to be a virtuoso with words. Just do the best you can. Thank you

    I only use scripture when relevant and to illustrate a point. If you ever see me use it, it won't be an attempt to argue from authority.

    Note: From within unstructured non differentiating awareness there is no organizing, identifying or interpreting of appearances. Even to say, an appearance, is differentiation. Nothing can be said or known. We use the word 'to know' for communication however in order to know there must be a subject there to know and objects which are known by a subject. Which in this case, there is no identification or recognition of a subject or objects from within this unstructured awareness

    There still needs to be a rudimentary form of the sixth sense gate for there to be any kind of awareness in my honest opinion.

    Note: In Unstructured awareness there is no observing in the relative sense. Because to observe is to observe 'some  thing'. And there is 'no thing' there to be observed. No thing to encounter; no 'individual' there to undergo or observe some occurrence (there is also no occurrence; an occurrence requires subject, object and time);  and no referencing of time during those moments of unstructured awareness. The perception of Time is based on a subject object relation. Which is absent here

    The problem I see here is that an objective awareness must include subjective awareness or else it is not taking in the whole picture.

    The subjective is not being used but it is still there or else there would no recollection of this kind of awareness and nobody would have been able to even attempt the telling of the tale.

    lobsterShoshinTony_A_Simienmmo
  • For things to exist, they need to occupy space and time. From atoms, quarks, bosons to stars, galaxies and universes.

    From the perspective of anatta, existence of things and hence space and time is an illusion. Why is space time an illusion? Because you can never ever be anywhere else other than here and now. The past is memory and the future is just an imagined projection.

    In fact the here and now is also not real because it depends on a there and then (like 2 sides of a coin).

    ShoshinTony_A_SimienmmoEarthninja
  • @ourself

    Are you saying that the sixth sense gate is the last to manifest? I'm not sure that could be because for one sense gate to be active means that there is a kind of perception. For there to be perception there must be recognition in the sixth sense, I think.

    We call it the sixth but only because it was the last one made evident. I'm pretty sure it must be the first to manifest.

    In Buddhism the sixth gate or sense is mind (mental activity)

    If one were born completely devoid of any functioning sense organ. The organs were physically there But no signals could reach the brain. Would it still be possible to have mental formations? Thoughts? To identify with the physical world? Can mind (the sixth gate) be born without any input whatsoever? No it cannot. There would only exist a potential to know. There would still be life in the person. Their brain still functions. But their life is pure.

    One might think that such a person would suffer but actually that's not so. How can they suffer when they have no knowledge of the world? So I suppose we could say their existence is pure. Unconditioned; not contaminated by the relative world.

    In order for there to be mental activity, there must first exist some medium which allows impressions to enter the brain. So before the sixth gate can arise one  or all of the five gates must be active.

    So first there is contact. Light or vibrations for example, contacts the appropriate sense organ. Then recognition and identification from memory. And also whatever emotions we have attached to those formations May also occur. So we see an object; recognize it; identify it as good or bad; pretty or ugly; we like or have aversion towards it. Or maybe we are indifferent. This is our world that is created in our minds. We create our own reality based on the contents of our mind's.

    So if there is no mind, which is created as a result of the sense apparatus. There cannot be a world. There may be physicality but to the person with no functioning senses there is no world. Our world is always created in our mind.

    As long as there is at least one sense organ that functions or has functioned at some point during ones life. There will be birth of the world within that person. Unless one has trained in some meditative discipline this will be so.

    It is for this reason I say:

    When the sixth gate arises, the world is born.

    It seems odd to claim any kind of awareness where mind is not present. I think you are right in that non-discriminating awareness is pure acceptance but I believe mind (even if in the most rudimentary form) must be present for any kind of awareness whatsoever.

    Yes. To be aware of, is always related to some object. We must use language in order to communicate. Awareness is an accepted term in many traditions. The truth is there is no term that can accurately describe this. When I say awareness, in this case, I'm referring to the potential to know without objects. Like in the explanation above. There is no awareness of the world. Everything has been negated. There is only this potential to know. The physical world exists but for you it doesn't. The body continues to function as it normally does. But the pilot is gone. The plane is flying itself with no person at the controls.

    Time isn't only in the perception of change but also distance.

    This is so. However the idea of distance is as conceptual, as the idea of time. This is the result of a differentiating mind. No differentiation means no distance, change or time.

    I prefer to say time is a tool...It isn't an illusion because there is distance and change

    Distance and change is also conceptual. If you were born without senses what is distance? What is change? These words would mean nothing to you. Because they don't exist for you. When the senses contact the physical world all of these concepts are born. They don't inherently exist outside of mind. We, humanity, created this mental world of distance, change and time. If you have no concepts in your mind, distance and change means nothing to you.

    The subjective is not being used but it is still there or else there would no recollection of this kind of awareness and nobody would have been able to even attempt the telling of the tale.

    Right! There is knowledge of this when mind is reborn. When self referencing comes back there is knowledge that moments before the self image and self referencing were completely gone. But as difficult as it may be to believe the body functions as normal.

    I don't know what it's called in Buddhism but in Advaita it's referred to as Para Brahman. Even when mind (labeling, defining, describing, judging, likes, aversions, desires and indifference) is not present, there is still the feeling that I am. A non verbal feeling that there is someone here living life. We May not identify with objects or thoughts but we feel our existence. And This is also still suffering. Because the individual still exists. No matter how subtle his ego may be. There is still a person there.

    Para Brahman is the absence of even the I am. I believe it's referred to as not self in Buddhism. But don't quote me on that. There is no suffering because whatever was remaining of the person is gone. When I say Unstructured awareness this is what I am talking about. Sounds fantastic? It's really not. It's very natural. But impossible to understand from our normal frame of reference. You really must know firsthand.

    Earthninjapegembara
  • DavidDavid some guy Veteran
    edited July 2015

    @Tony_A_Simien;

    I only have time tonight to address the very first bit of your post but will get the rest when am at the computer tomorrow.

    I think it would be possible to have thoughts if born without the senses of sight, sound, touch, taste and smell, yes I do.

    Certainly it happens to people born deaf and blind, right? So... The sixth sense gate only needs to feel or perceive but doesn't need to rely on the other senses for its manifestation. At least not all of them so it isn't like it is the sixth to manifest or anything necessarily.

    Also when you have the feeling of being watched, what sense gate is at work?

    I don't buy the initial premise but I don't have time to digest the rest at the moment.

    Perhaps it will look better in the light of day.

  • @ourself

    I completely understand where you're coming from. And if this weren't my life that I have just explained to you. I wouldn't believe it either.

  • DavidDavid some guy Veteran

    We all have our experiences.

  • PöljäPöljä Veteran
    edited July 2015

    "The distinction between the past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion." Albert Einstein

    I can accept or almost "understand" the concept of Oneness. We are made of stars, so we are inseparable parts of the (probably) endless circle in which every second live forever. Entangled subatomic parts of our bodies may be at the same time in the Moon - and perhaps in other galaxies. And if you can look at this universe from a long distance enough, it's a solid object. We are like water in the sea. And I tend to believe there are not really separable minds in this Oneness.

    EarthninjaTony_A_SimienDavid
  • Tony_A_SimienTony_A_Simien Veteran
    edited July 2015

    @Pöljä said:

    And I tend to believe there are not really separable minds in this Oneness.

    Yes. Identification and recognition of physicality creates the idea and feel of separation. Our labeling, defining and describing of that which inherently has no labels, definitions or descriptions is the cause of this feeling. We label and define all that is perceived as being separate from this body and imaginary I as not being me. It's not part of my body so it must be separate from my imaginary self. There are a group of processes we refer to as my separate body but it's not separate from the whole of reality. The idea of being separate is all in mind.

    Existence includes all of reality. Not just physical form. If the physicality of the universe were destroyed there would still be existence but without form. It would simply be a formless existence. And maybe after some period another might form from the subatomic particles which are never destroyed. We may not commonly define existence this way But that doesn't change the reality of it.

    DavidPöljä
  • DavidDavid some guy Veteran
    edited July 2015

    @Tony_A_Simien;

    My quote function is screwy but that last post in response to @Pöljä is spot on.

    Emptiness is precisely form and form is precisely emptiness. Potential takes up no space but it's still here.

    I absolutely agree with what you are saying here.

    Separation is the illusion.

    The problem with labeling it as oneness is that it has always been in a state of change so no label will really do it justice.

    Not one but not two.

    Tony_A_SimienTraveller
  • DavidDavid some guy Veteran

    Everything exists right here and now. If the conditions are right a process will be revealed and if not it is hidden.

    Tony_A_SimienPöljä
  • Tony_A_SimienTony_A_Simien Veteran
    edited July 2015

    @ourself said:

    Everything exists right here and now. If the conditions are right a process will be revealed and if not it is hidden.

    Correct!

Sign In or Register to comment.