Skip to content
Loading…

Knowledge of nadh....

UnknownMind

Post content

What is it?

This topic is usually a core Idea of tantra. Why teaching here? Because of experiences.

The essence of experiences is nadh.

What is nadh?

It is simply change. What kind of change? No kind of change.... simply a change.

Because of change we are able to experience many things. Example - if you experience a dark room but if there is no nadh simply means if there is no change then shifting or experiencing other light room is just impossible. This is just example you can clearly see this nadh in your own experience. Nadh cannot be seen just like gravity but you can see it like you see gravity, in simple you can see nadh effect.

Tantra is study of illusion. They call it there energy not illusion but we like to call it illusion.

See i myself is not a practitioner of tantra. I only know basic of it. This answer is given because it helps us to understand the essence of experiences itself.

Just we can conclude the essence of Consciousness as experincer which is formless similarly nadh is the smallest understandable form of or you can call it essence of experiences. We cannot go smaller than this. The smaller than this is state of nothingness.

Now you are able to connect dots right? Because when I say that both the experiencer and experiences are me this is what I generally means. Because both comes from zero state. Experiencer is non changing and nadh is changing. This is why we call nadh illusion because if truth changes then it won't be a truth, and experincer is ultimate truth from perspective of non - changing because experincer is immortal this is your soul.

Oneness is simply how exsistence is exsisting....... Both comes from zero state so both me. Enlightenment is nothing but to know a simple fact that I am exsistence and without experiences a experincer cannot exsist or vice versa.

Now you can do one thing to make sure that all of this is not fake.

See it in your own experience. Isn't the smallest part of experiences is change itself? If no change then no experience can exsist. This much you can see right? And you can then also see this fact that we cannot go smaller than this because that would also be same concept. Example - if you find out something other which is smaller than nadh then doesn't that knowledge itself come from change? So it is not possible to find smaller than nadh.

Similarly you can see that it is not possible to find smaller than experincer in terms of Consciousness. If you can find other experiencer then ask who is the experiencer of that? Nobody right? Experiencer cannot experience itself because then who will experience it?

I provide this knowledge because all the illusion or you can say energy in terms of tantra work on one basic concept that is simply change if you understand this you understand basic core idea of any form of experiences or energy. See how experiences comes from nadh i.e.

Because change can happen infinity times there is no time or not end of it that is why even a simply nadh even a simple vibration of line could possibly create variety of different experiences.

The depth of this topic don't come under my knowledge. I have knowledge of basic tantra. This is much I can tell only.

Now this knowledge is given to you because so you can use it to know oneness not to use it for some kind of crazy experiments given in tantra. Our goal is oneness not tantra.

Thoughts

  • maybe_im_wrong

    Sold on the change part.

    Permalink
  • just_curious_tho

    You said you are not a practitioner yourself. Where did the nadh part reach you from?

    Permalink
  • nodding_along

    The experiencer not being able to experience itself, because who would be left to do it. That one I will be repeating to people.

    Permalink
  • fultonsheen_fan

    The pair you set up, a changeless experiencer and a changing nadh, is the oldest quarrel in metaphysics. Parmenides put the illusion on change, Heraclitus put it on the stillness. You land with Heraclitus.

    Permalink
  • Ovid

    The dark room and the light room example is the one that made the rest readable for me. Change as the thing you can only see by its effect, like gravity. Reminds me of how people explain wind to kids by pointing at the trees. I bet this is the short version of something you have been turning over for a while.

    Permalink
  • veil_of_ignorance

    The move at the end does quiet work: any candidate smaller than nadh would itself be known through change, so nothing can ever count against the claim. A claim nothing can count against has stopped doing the job of a proof. The weaker version, that change is the condition of any experience, I would defend.

    Permalink

Related posts

  • The boy who Climbed onto the Shoulders of Giants.

    How the Religion of the Algorithm conquered in fifteen years what old beliefs took centuries to subdue.

  • How are we conscious?

    I had a daunting realization that hits me when I was in the middle of something. And why understanding metacognitive could easily break the perspective of your own. (this post is me just dumping my random thought here... because why not)

  • Does Christianity actually fear knowledge?

    One of the most persistent stereotypes about Christianity is that it fears knowledge. The story is familiar. Religion relies on faith. Science relies on evidence. One asks questions, the other suppresses them. The heroes are the people who challenged religious authority, while the Church stands as the institution that tried to hold them back. There are moments in history that support parts of that story. The Church has made mistakes. It has sometimes resisted new ideas. The Galileo affair…

  • Does being entertained all the time make ordinary life feel dead?

    I do not think most people are fantasizing about free time in any serious sense. They are fantasizing about free time available for consumption. That is a different thing. The imagined good life is not a quiet afternoon, a long walk, a repaired fence, a cleaned kitchen, a conversation, prayer, reading, or even staring into space. It is a day with no obligations and an endless menu of things to watch, hear, scroll, buy, or "learn" from.

  • Should we stop gatekeeping who counts as a real Christian?

    Something occurred to me today. For centuries, especially in the English-speaking world, Catholics were often portrayed as superstitious, anti-intellectual, hostile to freedom, and blindly obedient to authority. Some of that came from real conflicts. Some of it came from centuries of Protestant polemics and what historians call the Black Legend. Either way, the image became deeply embedded in Western culture.

  • Is simulation theory just theism with extra steps?

    One of the funniest intellectual developments of the last decade is watching aggressively secular people reinvent religion using computer terminology and then acting like this makes the idea more rational. Simulation theory is the clearest example. The basic concept is familiar by now, but I'll summarize: our universe might be an artificial simulation created by a vastly more advanced intelligence. Reality is likely programmed. Consciousness could exist inside a designed system. The laws of…

  • Why does Silicon Valley talk about death like it's a software bug?

    One of the clearest signs that modern secular elite culture is uneasy about death is how Silicon Valley talks about it. The human body is treated like legacy hardware waiting for an upgrade. In place of acceptance, you get optimization: longevity startups, cryonics, extreme biohacking, and constant speculation about whether enough computation and biotech might eventually defeat death itself. Tech billionaires talk with pride about potentially transferring their consciousness to a computer, as…

  • Is therapy just confession with the theology stripped out?

    One of the funniest things about secular modern culture is watching people reinvent Christianity piece by piece while acting intellectually superior the entire time. People abandoned confession and now pay someone $240 plus taxes an hour to listen to them describe their guilt in a softly lit room. They abandoned sin and replaced it with "unprocessed trauma." They abandoned repentance and replaced it with "doing the work." They abandoned examination of conscience and replaced it with journaling…

Public 15 conversations 21 thoughts 5 upvotes 0 downvotes 0 series

What is it?

In groups