RE: Reality Check: Is What We See The Extent of Reality?
I think our collective concern with "reality" is rooted mostly in the unknown that is consciousness and, more specifically, our curiosity about and, in most cases, fear of, death.
I know that it's hard for me at times to wander about anything but death. Perhaps I'm a bit unusual in this way, I don't know, but I can't fathom why someone wouldn't have curiosity about it, as it's something that literally can't be avoided - we all eventually die.
The question of what exists for the living after death, if anything, by necessity, IMO, should be of primary concern to uncover, if, for no other reason, than it pointing out one aspect about reality that is relevant to the living - does consciousness, or "experience", extend beyond the life of the organism?
Science does a fantastic job of uncovering the reality of the physical, objective, world, but what of the subjective, spiritual world's that effect us all, at least equally? Do we trust the dogmas of religion to answer our questions on this plane? If so, which one to trust? Many of them seem to contradict the others - they can't all be right,... right?
Similarly, the words of philosophers from past and present don't align 100% with one another, so which one(s) to trust, there?
I think the answer lies in learning to listen to oneself - one's own body and the innate "intelligence" that lies therewithin. Religion has a certain appeal in that it appeases the intellect with its promises of life eternal; thus, quelling one's fear of death to some extent. Philosophy has more of an appeal to intellectuals, particularly the extremely rational minded individuals, whom derive pleasure from pondering over possibilities and elaborating on concepts, even if some of those concepts happen to have less appeal to the more "feeling types" (e.g. nihilism and atheism).
While the general concept of what is "truth" may differ between the religious and philosophical worlds, they overlap in that they, in most cases, only satisfy the mind (intellect) and do very little for the senses (intuition). They're more like somewhat effective psychological weapons against the fear of death (quelling fear), than they are sources of "hit you at the core", absolute, undeniable, certitude-level of conviction.
IMO, if one desires the latter, then one must "dive into one's own senses" and learn for his/her self what this "consciousness" is and what it isn't. This approach involves none of the "hand-holding" that we get from following religious dogma, nor the intellectual satisfaction that some will receive from reaching into their imaginations and/or solving the question "what is reality?" or "what is consciousness?" by reason, alone. Rather, this approach hits us directly whence our convictions arise from, right in the gut of our own existence (at the source of our own consciousness). There's no way to know precisely what we will discover or how, or even if, we can handle it when we get there. We don't know where "there" is, when/if we will get there, what it will look like should we "arrive", or if "I" will still exist (as I currently know myself to exist) when that happens. Who knows? We might even face our death "there"?
AND/OR,
We might finally discover who we are and, perhaps, in the moment that our identity is revealed, we will also come to understand what the rest of this "objective world" is. Maybe "death" and "understanding" are synonymous?
Great Share. I so agree with your point about death, its just fascinating... I don't see it as a morbid subject in the least - quite the opposite, it must be (next to birth 'totally forgot that one') the most profound experience! and one that should inspire undivided attention and best efforts for a healthy approach... I personally hope (and humbly strive) to be as awake / conscious as possible when the moment strikes, away from the flashing sirens and pain killers - and there with it.
In my "pondering"... I've learned our most profound wisdoms are discovered in the thoughts and acts of compassion and the effects of generosity -and- that there is space between all things, from atom to atom, including between our mind ~ and concepts and understandings it is taught to hold (gods or humans). This "space" between, actually IS the birth of profound, in it we nurture our attitudes and either empower, degrade or ignore the qualities we perceive an enlightened being should hold, and the trust/belief in our will/ability to liberate ourselves to achieve them.
Thanks for your compliment and for sharing your interesting thoughts on this topic.
I'm with you on being present for death. In fact, I want to be as present as possible to everything, at all times, as I'm learning in my mostly "two steps forward, and one step back" progress towards seeing myself for what/who I really am that, whether seen as "good" or "bad" in my labeling mind, being wholly present to ________ (my own senses, another person, something, etc.) is always an enriching experience; the more I "stay present" the more growth I notice within myself, especially when it comes to reaching a more neutral (less judgmental) perspective and becoming more self-aware.
As far as the "space" goes, I'm convinced that it's the key to making spiritual progress. If we're too attached to our own minds (thoughts, memories, emotions, etc.) and/or identities (social roles, self-image, outward appearance, etc), then we really don't stand much of a chance to see through/past them, into the depths of our own souls; into the core of our being.
At the core, below the level of conscious thoughts, we find "mental silence", which is the source of the space that we can observe between thoughts and also the underlying sense of extreme peace and joy, which is the result of the compassion/ non-judgment that emanates from that level of consciousness. Resting within this silence is the goal of spiritually-based (enlightenment-seeking) meditation, as it's here, in this "empty space", that insights into one's own nature flow without resistance(s).
The problem that many face, myself included, is that the silence represents a vast, possibly infinite, unknown for the conscious mind (the unconscious), which evokes some level of fear, including the fear of dying (entirely losing one's sense of self - ego), so we have a tendency to hold back and create some resistance from fully surrendering all control. In doings so, we don't have full access to consciousness and, therefore, lack some insight into our true-nature.
I've heard it put by people whom have been widely accepted by the masses as authentic spiritually enlightened individuals, such as Jiddu Krishnamurti, that one whom "dies before [physical/ organic] death" is a liberated soul. This, to me, says that one must enter the "void" (vast, empty, unknown, space within one's own consciousness), without any resistances, essentially "killing" one's own sense of personality and individuality (ego) in order to achieve full enlightenment (self-knowledge). My own experiences of "getting close", but failing to go all the way, out of fear of losing myself, supports that conclusion.