SR and Responsibility

[InJoy]

I am really trying to wrap my head around the SR concept, and I thought I had it until Steve wrote that he is responsible for the VT shootings. The way that it sounded to me was that he created this experience for his own growth and development.

Now, I see that I bring experiences into my life by allowing them in through my eyes, ears, mouth, etc. I see that I have a choice whether to watch the news, and can thereby affect how much of the world's experience will become mine. I can further see that having an experience such as the VT shootings enter my consciousness is my responsibility because of choices I've made about not closing myself off entirely to the world of information. I see that it is my responsibility to choose how I feel about a given thing as well. The part I don't get is how, from an SR standpoint, and from Steve's perspective:

1. The shooting did not actually happen until Steve was made aware of it.
2. The actual shooting itself was Steve's responsibility.

(Of course, if you are an SR believer, you will freely replace Steve's name with your own.)

Number two brings me the strongest emotional response and some questions.

Steve, (and anyone else with a firm grasp of SR) let's say for the sake of discussion, that I am the parent of one of the kids that was killed that day. You have taken responsibility for that killing. Keeping in mind that this forum may very likely be read sometime by a person in this actual position, can you please answer me this:

1. What gives you the right to kill my child for your own personal growth?
2. How can you call yourself a Lightworker if you go around killing people for your own personal gain?

Finally, am I taking what Steve (and other SR believers) has written too literally? Am I mistaken in my understanding that he is taking responsibility for the actual deaths? Or is he perhaps taking responsibility for his experience of those deaths and I am misunderstanding?

Your thoughtful answers will be truly appreciated. I have a strong desire to understand this. Thank you for taking the time to read.

[machine]

InJoy, I think you are confusing the perspective that is taken in SR.

The Subjective Reality Model is one that subscribes to reality being made up of one consciousness. You can call that consciousness whatever you want - God, Consciousness, One, etc...

When Steve says he takes full responsibility of the shootings he is not talking from the body person Steve Pavlina point of view. He is speaking from the One Consciousness point of view.

Look at it like this: the SR model would be like you dying, then when you died you woke up somewhere else and said, "Wow, I had this dream - I was on a planet called earth and there were all these other people there." etc..

The SR model is similar to what you experience when you are asleep at night and you dream. You see other people, yourself, an environment and it all interacts. When you wake up you understand all of that was only a dream - you aren't concerned if someone dies in your dream. The same holds true for Subjective Reality. If there is only ONE consciousness, and it is seemingly appearing in all of these forms (people, worlds, nature, animals, etc..), from that point of view, why would it matter how many 'people' died.

The problem is the ego won't allow most people to actually follow this line of thought far enough. We all want to be individual and hold out the hope that some part of our individuality will survive 'death'.

The SR model holds there is no real death - all things have arisen in the One Consciousness, therefore it will return to that consciousness. Nothing dies, nothing is born. This all just appears to happen.

Some will argue that our 'real' life is much more realistic than our 'dreams' but I have dreams that seemed pretty darn real when I was having them.

Hope this helps.

[Dive Bomb]

That kind of explains why when we die in our dreams, we wake up! I too have experienced dreams that seem so real. It's amazing how the mind can recreate reality within the dreams, espeically the people.

It's almost like having a lucid dream in real life, only we haven't found a way to defy the laws of physics and what not in this reality strictly using thought power. Or at least I haven't haha.

[InJoy]

Originally Posted by machine

Look at it like this: the SR model would be like you dying, then when you died you woke up somewhere else and said, "Wow, I had this dream - I was on a planet called earth and there were all these other people there." etc..

The SR model is similar to what you experience when you are asleep at night and you dream. You see other people, yourself, an environment and it all interacts. When you wake up you understand all of that was only a dream - you aren't concerned if someone dies in your dream. The same holds true for Subjective Reality. If there is only ONE consciousness, and it is seemingly appearing in all of these forms (people, worlds, nature, animals, etc..), from that point of view, why would it matter how many 'people' died.

Thank you for taking the time to explain some things, Machine.

The idea that I am simply a part of your dream is solipsism. I read Steve's article about why SR is not solipsism and I still don't completely get the difference. There is a glimmer, though. He does say that within the SR belief we all exist (as opposed to the solipsism paradigm in which only one person does.) That would make us all people. Not "people". Wouldn't it?

From a solipsism POV, the answer to my first question (about what gives you the right) would be easily answerable and the answer to the second question would be wholly irrelevant. What I'm hoping, by asking those questions, is that their answers within the SR paradigm will illuminate the SR lens for people like me who are really trying to grasp this, but so far have not.

[SecretSeven]

It seems that Steve's SR is very similiar to solipsism.

[absvan]

Is this the nth thread open for this discussion?????????

InJoy, Machine has explained clearly what SR is. If you still dont get it, then you need to read more. Just by reading a couple of articles written by Steve on SR wont help you understand it. This is a very ancient philosophy that comes from India where its called Advaita Vedanta.

SR is a different reality. If you keep looking at it from your current reality you will never understand it no matter how many answers you get. You have to drop your current model of reality and then look through the new model.

I would recommend the books "I am that", which is a collection of converstions with Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj, and "Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi".

[InJoy]

Thank you for the references, Absvan. I'll check them out.

[machine]

Originally Posted by InJoy

The idea that I am simply a part of your dream is solipsism. I read Steve's article about why SR is not solipsism and I still don't completely get the difference. There is a glimmer, though.

In this statement you will find your sticking point. I am not saying you are part or MY dream. I am saying you are part of the Universal Consciousness' projection. There is no me, or you, or anyone else. We are merely a construct of the One Consciousness (or Awareness).

When you make the statement above, you are still in the mindset of a 'person' in this world having a dream. You need to move up much higher in your perspective in order to imagine what SR is. The dreamer is dreaming the whole thing - all the people, the world, the universe, etc... The 'dreamer' is only one consciousness creating all of this in itself, in a way where each 'apparently' seperate point of awareness (ie: each individual person) believe they are an individual point and not connected to all the other points.

In other words, we seem to be seperate points of consciousness, when in reality, it is the one consciousness pretending to be seperate points. Take a glass of water from the ocean, it appears seperate, now throw it back in. Where did that cup of water go? When we die, we are like the cup of water getting thrown back into the ocean. The individual ego dissolves and you see you are the one consciousness. And when you see that, you don't care that the ego doesn't survive....you are all the egos, and everything else! Nothing actually dies. We just appear to die.

Just because you can understand every word of what is written doesn't mean you understand the concept that is being talked about. I fall into this trap often. I see the words and the sentence structure and I run past the actual message.

Just keep re-reading the stuff and you will get that ah-hah moment.

Hope this helps. And remember, it's just a perspective. It doesn't mean SR is actual reality, or even that you have to adopt it as your own. Analyze it until you grasp it, then decide.

And keep asking your questions. That is the only way you will be able to drill down and get the understanding you are searching for. For each individual this is a unique journey with unique questions. Don't ever stop asking them.

[InJoy]

Originally Posted by machine

There is no me, or you, or anyone else. We are merely a construct of the One Consciousness (or Awareness).
...

Take a glass of water from the ocean, it appears seperate, now throw it back in. Where did that cup of water go?
...

Just keep re-reading the stuff and you will get that ah-hah moment.

That's it! I get it! Thank you so much! Or should I say, thank Us so much! (It was the word "we" used in this context that took all these flying particles of seemingly chaotic thought and zapped them into one fine point for me.)

So, to answer my own questions: (please do correct me if I'm off base, Machine)

1. We killed no one. The change of consciousness your loved one (We) experienced was and is the choice and the responsibility of Us All.

2. The part of Us who calls himself Steve Pavlina is a Lightworker. We are both Light and Darkworker... and neither and all.

Do I have it??

[keysersoze311]

OK some people seem to be talking about a ridiculous subjective reality, but i think this is down to language, confusion between "I" ego and consciousness. Let's make it simple. Subjective Reality model says "I am the only thinker in the world", obviously that's not provable in any way, i'll never know if other people think or exist.
Here's a question for believers in SR, that hopefully makes it more matter-of-fact. When I look at a friend, I see a picture of him through my eyes. When that friend looks at me, does he see a picture of me through his eyes? Or is my experience really the only experience in the world? if you say that he sees nothing when he looks at me, hes just a hollow projection in my dream, then i'll think ur crazy. in fact i dunno what i'll think, cos if u r real, then u wouldnt say to someone else "ur the only real one" - very confusing!

[Nathan]

That kind of explains why when we die in our dreams, we wake up!

One time I didnt, it was weird!!

[munish]

Originally Posted by absvan

Is this the nth thread open for this discussion?????????

This is a very ancient philosophy that comes from India where its called Advaita Vedanta.

I would recommend the books "I am that", which is a collection of converstions with Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj, and "Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi".

Is Advaita Vedanta = Solipsism?

The philosophy of Vedanta which says "Aham Brahmasmi", roughly translated as "I am the Absolute Truth", indicates solipsism in one of its primitive senses.

Source Solipsism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

------

Whereas Steve says -

Is subjective reality the same thing as solipsism (aka egoism)?

No. In fact, from a certain perspective it’s almost the opposite of solipsism.


So ,how can we compare Vedanta with SR ?

[SecretSeven]

I don't think advaita is the same as solipsism. Solipsism states you are all there is. Advaita states that we are all the same.

[munish]

Originally Posted by SecretSeven

I don't think advaita is the same as solipsism. Solipsism states you are all there is. Advaita states that we are all the same.

May be wikipedia is wrong.:-)

Steve has explained SR so brilliantly that we don't need anything else.Even Vedanta.

[Mr.Mustache]

Originally Posted by InJoy

I am really trying to wrap my head around the SR concept, and I thought I had it until Steve wrote that he is responsible for the VT shootings. The way that it sounded to me was that he created this experience for his own growth and development.

Now, I see that I bring experiences into my life by allowing them in through my eyes, ears, mouth, etc. I see that I have a choice whether to watch the news, and can thereby affect how much of the world's experience will become mine. I can further see that having an experience such as the VT shootings enter my consciousness is my responsibility because of choices I've made about not closing myself off entirely to the world of information. I see that it is my responsibility to choose how I feel about a given thing as well. The part I don't get is how, from an SR standpoint, and from Steve's perspective:

1. The shooting did not actually happen until Steve was made aware of it.
2. The actual shooting itself was Steve's responsibility.

(Of course, if you are an SR believer, you will freely replace Steve's name with your own.)

Number two brings me the strongest emotional response and some questions.

Steve, (and anyone else with a firm grasp of SR) let's say for the sake of discussion, that I am the parent of one of the kids that was killed that day. You have taken responsibility for that killing. Keeping in mind that this forum may very likely be read sometime by a person in this actual position, can you please answer me this:

1. What gives you the right to kill my child for your own personal growth?
2. How can you call yourself a Lightworker if you go around killing people for your own personal gain?

Finally, am I taking what Steve (and other SR believers) has written too literally? Am I mistaken in my understanding that he is taking responsibility for the actual deaths? Or is he perhaps taking responsibility for his experience of those deaths and I am misunderstanding?

Your thoughtful answers will be truly appreciated. I have a strong desire to understand this. Thank you for taking the time to read.

I think steve's explaination of SR is too vague. That is probably why so many people whine about the concept.

What I think Steve meant when you said he had to take responsibility for the VA shooting was that we are all responsible for what happened. Our personal realities are always intersecting and we all help create our reality, therefore we all collectivley made the massacre a reality and so we are collectivley responsible.

You must be the change you wish to see in the world. If you see violence you must respond with peace (not outrage) otherwise we will keep creating violence.

Is that so hard to understand? It doesn't matter if you think the idea of SR is crazy, SR can still be consistent even if it is explained poorly.

I would also like to say that your individuality is not an illusion, this is the biggest misconception of non-duality ( even Steve I think believes this). Your personality is interconnected with all others, this is true, but that doesn't mean that someday you will "wake up" your individuality will dissolve.

[InJoy]

Let's see if I have this right.

Under the label of Subjective Reality...

We are all extensions of Source Energy (God, Universe, Higher Power, All That Is). Each of us has our own, individual consciousness, and each of us also has access to the God Consciousness (replace with your own favorite term) because that consciousness is a vital part of each of us. Indeed, it is the core of who we are.

Collectively, we create the physical world - and all of it circumstances - as it is with our thoughts. In this way, we are all responsible for whatever happens in our world.

Individually, we create our own, individual worlds and all of the circumstances that enter them. For instance, while the VT shootings certainly occurred in our collective world regardless of whether I knew about them or not, had I chosen ignorance to the events of that day, it would not have occurred in my world. (i.e. it would not have had any affect upon me) On the other hand, had I chosen to drive out to Virginia to try and help, it would have become an integral part of my life experience. All of that is my choice.

On a larger scale, if more people chose to not allow these "negative" events into their experiences, fewer and fewer of these events would be created, since it is the collective Consciousness that is creating them.

(Incidentally, I believe MM is spot on when he talks about meeting violence with peace as the only true means to achieving peace. The more "pushing against" we do as a society to these things we don't like - such as VT - the more they will occur again and again.)

[Akashic_Librarian]

How many times are we gonna discuss SR people!

Its seems everytime we come to the same conclusion. those who believe in it, believe it. Those who don't leave feeling stronger and more resitant in their non-belief.

You can't explain SR properly (Althought Steve did a brilliant job) its something you hav eto feel and experience, you have to KNOW it through and through, its not something you can read about.

[infinitethoughts]

Originally Posted by machine

The problem is the ego won't allow most people to actually follow this line of thought far enough. We all want to be individual and hold out the hope that some part of our individuality will survive 'death'.

The SR model holds there is no real death - all things have arisen in the One Consciousness, therefore it will return to that consciousness. Nothing dies, nothing is born. This all just appears to happen.

Everyone is an individual and everyone is an individual forever.

***********************

Heretical ideas, but can be shown;

Quiet your mind, really quiet it and then examine this thought;

Ask yourself how old are you?

(How "old" are You, not your physical body.)

How many years "old" are you ?

When were you born?
When will you cease (DIE) to exist?

These questions, which become nonsensical, will give you the answer.

********************

Then realize, every individual 'I AM' can do the above thought-experiment to themselves.


Exist-ence is far more magical & stranger then we can imagine.

[InJoy]

Originally Posted by Akashic_Librarian

How many times are we gonna discuss SR people!

Its seems everytime we come to the same conclusion. those who believe in it, believe it. Those who don't leave feeling stronger and more resitant in their non-belief.

You've left out a group of people here. There are some of us here (or at least one!) who have not felt that they understood the concept well enough to come to a conclusion. And so they (I) continue to ask questions in order to understand more clearly the ideas that are being put across.

Originally Posted by Akashic_Librarian

You can't explain SR properly (Althought Steve did a brilliant job) its something you hav eto feel and experience, you have to KNOW it through and through, its not something you can read about.

You could say that about nearly anything we talk about on these boards. You can't explain God properly. You can't explain enlightenment properly. And on and on. It's probably true, but that's certainly no reason to stop talking about it.

Even if we may never get to the Truth, there's not a thing wrong with reaching for it.

[absvan]

Originally Posted by munish

So ,how can we compare Vedanta with SR ?

Advaita is the same as SR. I dont know what solipsism is but from what I have read, its not the same as SR.

[absvan]

Originally Posted by InJoy

Let's see if I have this right.

Under the label of Subjective Reality...

We are all extensions of Source Energy (God, Universe, Higher Power, All That Is). Each of us has our own, individual consciousness, and each of us also has access to the God Consciousness (replace with your own favorite term) because that consciousness is a vital part of each of us. Indeed, it is the core of who we are.

Collectively, we create the physical world - and all of it circumstances - as it is with our thoughts. In this way, we are all responsible for whatever happens in our world.

Hope this helps. The Big SR Sticking Point

[Max Power]

Originally Posted by absvan

Advaita is the same as SR. I dont know what solipsism is but from what I have read, its not the same as SR.

Solipisism places self as ego/mind/body, where everything revolves around you and you only and that is not SR a