Retrocausality

[ButterflyWoman]

I already put this in my blog, but I thought a few folks here might be interested (and I'm not under any such delusion as thinking that everyone here reads my blog ). The dream does not require interpretation. I understood and understand it perfectly. It was one of the "special message" dreams that I occasionally get, and the meaning is always crystal clear to me (though maybe not to anyone else ).

In the dream, I was clearly seeing how events or manifestations or whatever you want to call them happen more or less independently of the story that leads up to them. The story, in fact, came after, to explain the event.

An example (this is from my waking mind, not the dream) would be something like this. Let's say that a book I write is on the New York Times Bestsellers List. In order for that to happen, there has to be a story that goes with it, leads up to it. If I were to wake up tomorrow morning as a bestselling author when I haven't written a book, had it published, gone through the motions of the story that comes between "now" and "then", it would be pretty weird. Might freak me out rather a lot, like waking up in a completely different reality to which my ego-self had no anchoring information (reminds me a little of the television shows "Quantum Leap" or "Sliders", where the protagonist(s) would routinely find themselves in a totally unknown situation, and would have to act on clues and minimal information to figure out what was going on and why they were there and what they were supposed to do, etc.). I suppose if I could get used to the idea of a totally disjointed reality and timeline that changed frequently, it would be okay, but the human mind/ego-self doesn't seem to be really designed to do that (I'm speculating; perhaps there are people who live like that, and the rest of us just never know about it... Maybe I watch too much science fiction...).

Anyway, the purpose of the story is to join all the events. That was very clear in the dream, and it resonates with me still.

Interestingly, and maybe related, according to physics (at least, theoretical and philosophical physics) there is actually no reason at all why "reaction" necessarily must follow "action". It can go backward in time (this is known as retrocausality; you can read up on it yourself, if you like).

What I saw in the dream (and which I rather expect I'll start to see and experience in my reality soon, because it was That Kind of Dreamâ„¢) was pretty much a form of retrocausality. Just because it looks like a series of events happening in succession, one of them logically following another, doesn't mean that's what's really happening.

[Palehorse Redivivus]

Just out of interest, I've been intrigued by and studying / playing with retrocausality and temporal dynamics for a while, but worried about that very thing -- finding myself in an unknown situation with no info or context. FWIW I have found that it's possible to show up somewhere, have context fill in backward, and also retain where you came from, as a layered effect of sorts.

[ButterflyWoman]

I have found that it's possible to show up somewhere, have context fill in backward, and also retain where you came from, as a layered effect of sorts.

Interesting. The backward context fill would be... well, it's like a dream, isn't it? You just know things in a dream, you don't have to be told. You just understand whatever situation it is.

That's very encouraging, actually. I may experiment with this a bit, and see what I can manage. Cool.

[Korpo]

I had once this vision during a train ride - this was during a psychic high in 2007. It seemed like my future self was picking out what it would like to experience and give me hints about what to do "now." The future talking to the past.

What the future self did was symbolised like this - the strands of events were running through the hands of my future self, who had kind of formed them into a cup. They looked woollen strings. What the future self did is monitor the strands it was aware of, pick the ones it preferred and then it would give me signals as how to get there, how to chose causes that will result in these effects.

Cheers,
Oliver

PS - the self builds a lot on stories. It will chose a story based on what seems least threatening and edit out events that are not, and later on it is remembered as a coherent whole as if it happened. Maybe only somewhat related, but memory is fluid.

[farewell2arms]

I have found that it's possible to show up somewhere, have context fill in backward, and also retain where you came from, as a layered effect of sorts.

Interesting. The backward context fill would be... well, it's like a dream, isn't it? You just know things in a dream, you don't have to be told. You just understand whatever situation it is.

That's very encouraging, actually. I may experiment with this a bit, and see what I can manage. Cool.

Wow!

Perhaps that's how we are pulled and driven to continue on our search. We know it's not futile, after all. Even if the answer is beyond answering.

[ButterflyWoman]

Perhaps that's how we are pulled and driven to continue on our search.

For me, it's not even voluntary. It just unfolds and I go along with it.

I don't really paddle any more, I just let the river take me along and I watch the scenery and know that I was never really in charge any way, no matter how much paddling I did to make me think I was really doing something.

And, no, it's not futile, but it depends on what you mean by "futile". That seems like one of those value judgment things, like "good" or "evil" or "fair" or "rational". It's kind of in the eye of the beholder.

[farewell2arms]

Perhaps that's how we are pulled and driven to continue on our search.

For me, it's not even voluntary. It just unfolds and I go along with it.

I don't really paddle any more, I just let the river take me along and I watch the scenery and know that I was never really in charge any way, no matter how much paddling I did to make me think I was really doing something.

Cool! Perhaps that's something for me too. But I am unsure if this is a good approach before the realization of no identity.

As of now, for me, there is the undertanding that thoughts are the scaffholding that holds the ego in place. As long as there are thoughts, there will be identification with this approach. And besides, there has to be at least the illusion of effort of stilling the mind.

And, no, it's not futile, but it depends on what you mean by "futile". That seems like one of those value judgment things, like "good" or "evil" or "fair" or "rational". It's kind of in the eye of the beholder.

Yep, I was in that kind of groove at the time.

What about viewing life as a game? Wouldn't that be a judgement, too? In like, judging everything as positive?

[ButterflyWoman]

there is the undertanding that thoughts are the scaffholding that holds the ego in place.

Yes. But it's not really the thoughts. It's the belief that 1) the thoughts are yours (rather than things that arise in consciousness with which your particular filters are in tune) and 2) that they're important. Get past those ideas and you'll go a long way to putting thoughts in their place. (I say this as a former chronic overthinker. I still occasionally get wound up in following the paths my thoughts take me on. It's like a maze inside a soap opera. )

Thoughts happen. So do clouds, and farts, and itches, and flying insects that buzz in your ear. You can pay attention to them, or not. (I love that, by the way. Being able to just tune out my chattering thoughts. Well, most of the time.)

What about viewing life as a game?

Works for some.

Wouldn't that be a judgement, too? In like, judging everything as positive?

Only if you think of games in that way. Some games are dangerous. Some have no clear "win" or "strategy". Some are just kind of pointless. And so on.

[farewell2arms]

there is the undertanding that thoughts are the scaffholding that holds the ego in place.

Yes. But it's not really the thoughts. It's the belief that 1) the thoughts are yours (rather than things that arise in consciousness with which your particular filters are in tune) and 2) that they're important.

My god, Woman! That's the most brilliant thing I've ever read!

Thanks a lot.

[ButterflyWoman]

My god, Woman! That's the most brilliant thing I've ever read!

I keep telling my husband how brilliant I am, but he doesn't let me get away with it. I'll make his read this.

And you're welcome. (I'm glad to be communicating something useful rather than the static-noise I sometimes seem to end up sending out.)