You are hereForums / Non-Duality / Everyone lives in a separate mental world !!!

Everyone lives in a separate mental world !!!


11 replies [Last post]
gachchy's picture
User offline. Last seen 5 days 12 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 06/18/2014
Posts:

Everyone lives in a separate mental world !!!

I have verified this fact in my house, office and outside world, and write this. Even though we live in a common shared physical world, every individual lives in a separate mental world of perceptions. Wherever there is a Mind, PERCEPTIONS are inevitable. Perceptions are a sort of illusions and imaginations. This is the reason behind difference of opinions behind one's notion of RIGHT and WRONG. This is the reason behind every conflict. This is the reason the whole world is in a mess. It is also surprising to note majority of people live in a cohesive way inspite of differences in perceptions. This proves that evolution is working.

Where there is a Human there will be a Mind
Where there is a Mind there will be Perceptions
Where there are Perceptions, there will be Differences
Where there are Differences, there will be Conflicts
Where there are Conflicts there won't be Peace
Where there is no Peace, there will be Problems, Ambiguities, Chaos and Confusion
Where there are Problems, Ambiguities, Chaos and Confusion, we will always seek Solutions
When we seek Solutions, we automatically Evolve

Now-a-days, I am accustomed to accept everyone as they are. I would only suggest my opinions, discuss a little and leave it at that point for the other to decide their views. Everyone lives in one's own mental world and it may take time for them to climb the ladder of evolution. Alternatively, they may be higher up in the ladder and it may take some time for me to climb to their level of evolution also. I am ready to accept everyone as they are. I don't want to be harsh towards anybody, including my own self.

I am sure only about one thing - when perceptions vary, there is no meaning in beating our chest, lamenting and expecting others to dance to our tunes. It may be even our spouse or children. At one point of time, we have to simply smile and become silent. We have to only surrender to the supreme/unknown. This world is really funny !!! Take it Easy !!!

0
Your rating: None
melanie's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 year 26 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 05/19/2014
Posts:
Hi gachchy

I agree we each live in our own mental world.Human worth is subjective and rests, like beauty, in the eye of the beholder.Layers of human mind are derived from nothing more than subjective feelings - they are imagined. We cannot understand these feelings to be the true nature of consciousness in an objective, factual way, only as fiction. Electrified neurons and synapses can fire in an infinite number of sequences. No two humans have exactly the same brain structure.We are just the sum total of the activity of neurons.

Every other conscious creature alive lives from this same subjective consciousness - consciousness being the activity of neurons which are infinitely everywhere. Your utilization of thought is what gives continuity to your assumed separate self and is why we live in our own separate world because the separate self albeit illusory is generated by thought which we all share as one consciousness.Our own thoughts are different to those of another's thoughts - and can never be seen or known by another because there is no other except as imagined via thought.

From belief to clarity.

melanie's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 year 26 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 05/19/2014
Posts:
separate mental worlds

Continuing on - this is how separate mental worlds exist.

They exist because mind automatically separates what is already wholeness/ oneness -unavoidably so.

We all use this one mind, it's like an ink well that we all draw from to paint our own unique world. Therefore from the perspective of melanie's mind there is nothing else happening in the world except what is in melanie's mind.

From the perspective of gachchy's mind there is absolutely nothing else going on except what's in gachchy's mind.

How do I know this?

Try it yourself... think about the contents of your own mind? there is nothing going on outside of that mind arena therefore it's all your own world that you are creating, you cannot see, hear, or read other peoples minds - so that is the proof that you have your own separate mind distinct from other minds.

Smile!:)

From belief to clarity.

Mukti Da's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 year 26 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 01/19/2011
Posts:
no boundaries

I have a different take on the idea of having our own separate perceptions.

There are no boundaries in consciousness, even in mind. I am speaking from experience. Who is actually thinking? If a thought is shared between two people who is the one responsible for thinking it? I have daily experiences of sharing thoughts with other people. I often experience thoughts that seem to be happening (only) within another person, but that can't be true if I am also hearing them. So the idea of everyone living in their own world of perceptions is false to me.

I know these thoughts Jared experiences are happening in another mind as well because the person either says the thought 'out loud' or they perform the action that appeared in the mind. I can't actually tell where one mind begins and ends. There are no boundaries that prevent one from seeing beyond the individual body/mind.

Who or what is responsible for thinking? If two or more people share the same thought simultaneously who is the one thinking?

This is why I can't accept >>>

gatchchy: "Everyone lives in a separate mental world !!!

I have verified this fact in my house, office and outside world, and write this. Even though we live in a common shared physical world, every individual lives in a separate mental world of perceptions. "

So, this seems to say there is a contradiction, and only one of us can be 'right'. Either we are boxed out of another's mind experience or we are not, there are no grey areas. If we are not boxed out, then WHO's mind is it? Where does one mind start and another end?

Just something to consider from my experience.

- Jared

- Jared

You Are Tacit.

HeartRealization.com

gachchy's picture
User offline. Last seen 5 days 12 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 06/18/2014
Posts:
Hi Jared,

You have made some revolutionary statements !!! Let me think over !!!! Let us wait and see !!!

Could you please elaborate how a common shared mind functions? Is it a single thinking mind? Are there compartments in the universal mind, like partitions in hard disk, directories, sub directories, folders, files etc? Does individual jiva evolve according to its own will and choice? Is evolution automatic and individual jiva has no role in it? Is evolution individuated or just mass action? What is the role of karma on jiva if there is no individual evolution? Is Brain and Mind same or different? Is Mind outside of brain, brain being merely a transmitter and receiver? Does Mind survive one's death?

Mukti Da's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 year 26 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 01/19/2011
Posts:
Got a cup of coffee?

Long reading ahead...

Pick up a cup of coffee then take a moment to read this. XD {edit} Hope it all came out clear, I took my time.

Gatchchy: "Could you please elaborate how a common shared mind functions? Is it a single thinking mind?"

In a way it is both a single thinking and collective. Example: imagine 2 scientists working on the same problem but one is on the opposite side of the world as the other. These 2 scientists end up discovering something new about the universe and publish their papers almost at the same time. However, these 2 scientists never knew each other, but somehow come to the same discovery. Who is the 1st to discover and who was 2nd? This example shows both individual and collective mind.

Another way to understand that the mind is not bound in a box comes to the archetypes of the unconscious mind. Carl Jung noticed that throughout history certain archetypes were appearing in difference places across the world. There was no communication between civilizations, yet the same archetypes appeared in both. He began to formulate various perennial archetypes and came up with quite a few. {edit} I use these examples to show that the mind appears the same across many people, yet there is no connection in the general idea of civilized communication. These archetypes are present in mind and appear in all of us. {edit} Here are a few>

.........................

The Self
The self is an archetype that represents the unification of the unconsciousness and consciousness of an individual. The creation of the self occurs through a process known as individuation, in which the various aspects of personality are integrated. Jung often represented the self as a circle, square, or mandala.

The Shadow
The shadow is an archetype that consists of the sex and life instincts. The shadow exists as part of the unconscious mind and is composed of repressed ideas, weaknesses, desires, instincts, and shortcomings.

This archetype is often described as the darker side of the psyche, representing wildness, chaos, and the unknown. These latent dispositions are present in all of us, Jung believed, although people sometimes deny this element of their own psyche and instead project it onto others.

Jung suggested that the shadow can appear in dreams or visions and may take a variety of forms. It might appear as a snake, a monster, a demon, a dragon, or some other dark, wild, or exotic figure.

The Anima or Animus
The anima is a feminine image in the male psyche and the animus is a male image in the female psyche. The anima/animus represents the "true self" rather than the image we present to others and serves as the primary source of communication with the collective unconscious.

The combination of the anima and animus is known as the syzygy, or the divine couple. The syzygy represents completion, unification and wholeness.

The Persona
The persona is how we present ourselves to the world. The word "persona" is derived from a Latin word that literally means "mask." It is not a literal mask, however. The persona represents all of the different social masks that we wear among different groups and situations. It acts to shield the ego from negative images. According to Jung, the persona may appear in dreams and take a number of different forms.

Here are a few more> "Jung suggested that the number of existing archetypes is not static or fixed. Instead, many different archetypes may overlap or combine at any given time. The following are just a few of the various archetypes that Jung described:

The father: Authority figure; stern; powerful.
The mother: Nurturing; comforting.
The child: Longing for innocence; rebirth; salvation.
The wise old man: Guidance; knowledge; wisdom.
The hero: Champion; defender; rescuer.
The maiden: Innocence; desire; purity.
The trickster: Deceiver; liar; trouble-maker."

http://psychology.about.com/od/personalitydevelopment/tp/archetypes.htm
.......................................

It is how the individual handles thoughts. It is how a person relates to thoughts. Thoughts are a tool, like the rest of mind's functions, so it does not matter which thoughts are shared or not shared, one has the choice of what to do with them (depending on that person's discipline and awareness of thought).

For example, if you were to be around when a fight was about to break out, and you may 'hear/feel' another person wanting to punch the other in the nose. That does not mean you want to, or you are now bound to live out that action. But you may turn to the person attracted to those thoughts and try to walk that person away or focus your effort on keeping that person from following through with that punch. You don't need to tell that person you are reading their mind, just respond with love, compassion, and kindness, use your clarity of mind to 'infect' that person with a change in energy. Mind is both singular and plural in this example as well.

Gatchchy: "Are there compartments in the universal mind, like partitions in hard disk, directories, sub directories, folders, files etc?"

It will seem as if there are layers unpon layers. With strong meditation this can be easily noticed. However, there are no boundaries, maybe like many waves all moving through each other. If there were boundaries how would one layer of mind interact with the other layers. What would be the thing or substance that separates them?

There can't be any real separation in the layers, more like temperature changes as one sinks into an ocean. So, these layers intersect with each other, but as one quiets the mind, the layers of mind 'below' the most gross become apparent and the upper layers of the mind no longer play a dominant role (during meditation for example) in that person's thinking or not thinking. What is important to understand is that the unconditional eternal steady-state of existence in present equally throughout all 'layers' of mind. It is also important to remember the body is made of consciousness. The body is a mind of sorts, but basically another layer that all the other layers are weaved into.

Gatchchy: " Is Brain and Mind same or different? Is Mind outside of brain, brain being merely a transmitter and receiver?"

Brain is made of mind, which is made of consciousness, the eternal consciousness. All mind is transmission, and transmutation. When two waves come together in a body of water the waves actually create a single wave breifly and that wave is a sum total of both waves (often called rogue waves). Both waves combined to create one wave, while both waves also remained as an individual wave.

Gatchchy: "Does individual jiva evolve according to its own will and choice? Is evolution automatic and individual jiva has no role in it? Is evolution individuated or just mass action? What is the role of karma on jiva if there is no individual evolution?"

The individual is a combination of many influences (the masses), including free choice (the individual). You don't need an ego there to play the role of the thing that choses, instead, one already has an individual body mind (individual enough) and that is what choses, ego does not even do that. Furthermore, there is no eternal individuality that is unchanging. God Only Exists.

Jiva to me can be nothing more than a bodily form, and all bodily forms exist within universes (space/time), and thus, impermanent. Moreover, karma is solely related to a bodily form (which is action/change), and the role is as mysterious as it always has been, what is good karma for one may be bad for another.

Karma means action, when you judge karma is takes on good and bad qualities. However, there is more to it than that. Karma in relation to an individual engaged in sadhana means that such a person seeks to do good for others. That person takes on the qualities of love, compassion, and kindness in relationship to all living beings and non-living things. When you do for another you do for yourself. What you do for the least among the people you do for yourself.

So, karma serves the jiva by giving that person a moral direction and ability to practice (sadhana) a spiritual life by being there for others, which is ultimately oneSelf. You can catalyze (I like that word here) change in another bodily form by simply doing positive or negative actions.

When you relate to others As yourSelf you will find heart-fire there burning freely. Karma is action, and with Realization karma is simply karma, just action, and the Realized one lives a life of action that serves the Divine in all of us.

- Jared

- Jared

You Are Tacit.

HeartRealization.com

RichardMiller's picture
User offline. Last seen 5 days 19 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 09/20/2009
Posts:
Saying fascinating things

1. Most people want to live good so they look for what improves life. This group investigates those fields where they perceive their needs lie.  They look for better housing, better food, better employment, better education for their kids, better entertainment, hobbies or occupations.  We could measure a great percentage of their time focused in these fields. Or they might also give up if they feel like failures, and get used to feeling bad about it.

Perhaps some people don’t necessarily want to live good.  In a sense this group has a great freedom, because they don’t have to confine themselves to any one field (of practicalities). They can spend time in research and conjecture about any random field of inquiry, regardless if real or imagined, experienced or dreamed about, or related at all to the daily life of self, family or world.  If they stray too far from their life, they have no way to test their premise, because it doesn’t relate to anything measurable.

2. Humanity is endowed with certain tools to function in daily life and in society.  These tools are thoughts, words (language) and emotions.  Notice I did not say a mind, because while I can perceive T. W. & E. mind is an added layer.  Perhaps mind is just a collective noun to group TWE?  We also possess a body that can move itself and move things.   We have heard of people alive in a coma, but otherwise we have never had a report of anyone living without these four basic tools.  We are also always dependant on other people that possess these tools, so if one or more of our tools break down, we can still move along.  There are farmers, merchants, governments etc. etc into a huge list.

When group one wants to find some improvement, the most fruitful places they look are in how to gain mastery (or improvement) in their four basic tools.  The thoughts, words and emotions are related, because thoughts are refined with more clarity in using the words, and emotions are created through real or imagined fearful thoughts.  If someone from group two, or even ourselves define some of these tools or the contexts of life as either primary or somehow only secondary, is matters not one whit.  They might have a hierarchical mindset or are looking in their own way to find what would give them a "shortcut".  For most of us it is where we spend most of our time and how we life live.  Clarity in using words (language) could be the one key, and it is the one I find preferable, and have settled on as the most immediate and most empowering.

When group two seeks their understandings, clarity in words is not necessary. Results cannot be tested in their world anyway because they are most often not talking about what happens in their life.  They may develop a hypothesis that life happenings are random, or outside of their agency.  They claim they have a hands-off policy.  Their only test is their subjective feeling, which may be very satisfactory.  Others argue that their understandings don't necessarily translate to living or feeling good.  In any case they are carried by others, the farmers, merchants et.al. and can still remain on their trajectory.

3. The point of this introduction is that when we investigate, we most often find what is there in the fields that we search.  If we are looking into ephemeral concepts of how humanity is put together, we could find anything because there is no benchmark to hold up and visualise what’s here.  This is a field where everybody is apt to have a different mindset, or a separate mental world.  If we look into the fields of daily life we are most apt to find common shared precepts, at least within our own society.  If we focus on the differences, we find difference.  If we focus on the similarities, well, I believe they vastly outnumber the differences.

This is a demonstration of a basic premise that “Something Is Here”, and I interpret it through my sense organs according to my habit.  In some fields that something that is here, proves very familiar.  The "interpretation / something here" mix percentage is never going to be surely known.  It might be 50-50, or more likely 10-90, we can never know.

4.  Evolution is a concept based on someone’s judgment of what is better.  Yes there may be lots of agreement about that.  I propose to build a theory without the aid of evolution, and if it keeps glaring in on our reasoning or our perceptions, maybe we can consider it later.

A good question is why try to introduce separation, or no-separation?  Why should we start with that if it is what we want to discover? Can’t these things be self evident?  Or do we need some hand holding to see the light?  If we prefer not to hold anyone’s hand, then let’s just go with what is self evident, and throw away all the books.

Let’s also question the word boundary, which most often conjures up a wall.  If there are no walls in the universe what is it that is at the end of my knowing?  It is a vast field of nothing, as my knowing thins and thins until there is nothing left of it, and no way to have a perspective of how far off that is.  So what is between us?  Nothing . . . (and everything).

I think that we can agree that there is great mystery in the universe, and also (reverently) showing up continuously in daily life.  So besides not knowing the limit to my knowing, we most often assume the notion of "knowing it all" is pointless.  Can we say that there is little or no difference between knowing a little and knowing lots?  Perhaps all human evolution is one pixel high on “God’s bar chart".

5.  One interesting consequence of accepting such a vast theory of the universe is that opportunity is always right here right now.  Since people are so often focused on what they consider problems, they don’t see it.  In fact, when one of these opportunities seems to break through, we call it “grace”, as if it is scarce, and delivered only through God smiling upon us.  One that lives in heightened awareness could conceivably just say yes (with little or no thought) and be carried by this river of opportunity.  The trouble with that is there is no continuity between them, so you would become a nomad.  Regardless whether that would be easy or difficult, the human isn’t used to dealing with that many changes, and just a few opportunities mixed with thoughts, language and emotion to develop them seem to be sufficient.

6.  For me the most interesting reflection about archetypes is in the voyage from the Persona to the Anima.  I am not sure of all the usage of Anima, but as “true self” I would avoid the ephemeral and move to the authentic moment to moment expressed “Living Truth” of each of us.  For me, the only way to get a handle on that living truth is to put it into words.  You might visit spaciousness to get that wording to feel right.  There is always a self talk in the human experience, so why not listen to what it is saying, and even craft it?  If you don’t think you have self talk, please take another look.

With a continual clarifying process in language, the mask and the true self are bound to converge.  Again there is no proof that goes along with that statement, but just the invitation to demonstrate it for yourself.

n/a
gachchy's picture
User offline. Last seen 5 days 12 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 06/18/2014
Posts:
Hi Jared,

Thanks for you elaborate reply.

You have made some metaphysical observations which are beyond my capability to ascertain the veracity of its truth.

I speak mostly about verifiable facts. In case, I speak about unverifiable facts, I would always indicate the doubtfulness of the same.

I was only referring to Individual Perceptions and referred the same as Private Mental World. My explanation was generalistic :

You may note that, I was taking mainly about perceptions. I was only telling that each perception is relative to the perceiver. In my opinion perception is purely individual in nature. For example, hallucination due to drugs is purely private in nature. There are plenty of chances that perceptions may be false as in the case of hallucinations. A Dream is a sort of perception. But we are aware that they are dreams. Perceptions may be also fallible. Different individuals perceive the exact same world differently; perception is inside our heads. We live in the same physical world but our perceptions come from inside our head. Two or more persons having the same perception may be merely a coincidence and not necessarily my perceptions are shared with the other person telepathically. Thoughts are perceptions that occur from our past experiences and perceived ideas of the current situation. In such a case many of our thoughts are also sort of perceptions only.

When I see a Full Moon, I may perceive it as a Girls Face, yet another as a foot ball, a third person may look at it as a pumpkin, mirror and so on. This is what I meant as perception which is individualistic. I may perceive my neighbor as a friend, whereas he may perceive me as a foe. We create our own personal reality, with our perceptions. Based on the perceptions, we take decisions and act there by we meet with our life consequences. So, perceptions inevitably leads to consequences and decide our fates. I wanted to highlight the importance of perceptions in my thread. The whole world may be a perception sort of play or drama in our head for the purpose of our evolution.

I just wanted to mean Senses-Thoughts-Perceptions-Decisions- Actions-Consequences-Evolution Loop is a critical aspect in one's evolution. I wanted to infer that I usually trust my perceptions only after a careful analysis.

Mukti Da's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 year 26 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 01/19/2011
Posts:
Understandable

{edit} Remember poerceptions require all sorts of things in order to happen. A whole world is included, including other perspectives within the same environment.

I do understand what you mean. We should always be careful about trying to find something in mind that 'isolates' us from others. I do get it, the 'frame of reference' (from relativity) can give way to unique perspectives - perceptions, Jared can never look at the back of his head, not without 2 mirrors.

I do understand what you mean. However, I would be cautious about saying that perceptions are somehow isolated in each bodily form.

It should also be understood in my comments that I speak with the understanding that words are not it. I just don't stop often to reassure the reader of that, as is often done here. I do understand the limitations of this practice of conversating and discussing these topics. Have a good day brother Gatchchy.

- Jared

- Jared

You Are Tacit.

HeartRealization.com

melanie's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 year 26 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 05/19/2014
Posts:
IT?

Jared: ''It should also be understood in my comments that I speak with the understanding that words are not it.''

__________

Response: If words are not it why are you trying to put whatever it is into words?

All you are doing is using words as symbolic meaning created by you. Even the word you was created by you. Words are thought into existence.

Life is prior to thought, life has no concept of anything thought about. Thoughts are superposition / conceptual overlay over what already is Life without a second.

Humans make many inanimate things but cannot make animate conscious thing, and yet imagines animate conscious things to have been created as well. Some even call this creator ''GOD'' or ''Allah''

Did God create talking human to be it's spokesman? why not a horse or a pig or a goat, or even an ant? Why human, what's so special about a human?

Or is God just a concept. Did the concept make God?

What you think you understand is only possible through human created language via words and the meaning that is given them.

And since words are not it whatever that it is. There is nothing to understand since words are not that it that you are trying to understand.

So let's assume it is you that is it.

How are you it? You are it because you thought it. Except there is no thinker, so did the thought think it? Can thoughts think? did the thought create you or did you create the thought?

You think the thought is coming from you, but you have no idea who you is or what a thought is - where is the actual location of you or the thought of you?

It is the belief in a you that gives life and continuity to it...which is not actually there.

Such is the nature of ego....aka artificial intelligence.

From belief to clarity.

RichardMiller's picture
User offline. Last seen 5 days 19 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 09/20/2009
Posts:
Perfect conclusion

"What you think you understand is only possible through human created language via words and the meaning that is given them."

Let's Discover
Richard Miller

angryidiot's picture
User offline. Last seen 37 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 01/21/2011
Posts:
With new understanding new

With new understanding new words and their meanings have come about.

What makes us all human basically is we are all conscious.

And everything.. period... seems to be inside this consciousness or how else we would be talking about it.

Consciousness also seems to be a great thing to bring us together ...for logically consciousness is consciousness no matter who 'appears' to have it or its content.

but we seldom talk about it. doing it would of course be the end of all guru regimes?

why don't we talk about it ?,..... and think local currency, sending kids to school etc are more relevant topics?

is it because our language falls short or is it the rule of the thumb that all understanding must be ratified by words and meanings which are in our procession...or else such understanding is not worth it?????

regards.

Part of the Action

We remain committed to be on the forefront of what will support life, both in your family and on planet earth. 

 

My interaction with you is an Experiment to further enable this vision to be true, and up to the rhythm that you are a part of the action.  

 

Please contribute to make this vision real.  

With Heart Felt Thanks, Richard Miller.

  

 

Who's online

There are currently 0 users and 3 guests online.