« God-o-Meter rates presidential candidates’ religiosity | Main | Faith or falsehood? “I can’t wait to die” »

October 10, 2007

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

from my point of view if anyone looks to atheists or religion for enlightenment they will have a long wait.

two sides of the same coin.

Dear William,

Just been catching up on some recent posts here, and thought I'd ask a few questions.

Firstly, you claim anecdotal stories from from mediums and 'past-life' experiences 'prove' life after death is a reality?

Well, I've studied intensely since I was a child these subjects. For the first 20 years of my life, I believed without a shadow of a doubt these things were true. For the last 9 years, I know from first hand experience they are not.

The question is, why should 'these advaitic' types take seriously the books you offered as evidence? There is plenty of fiction out there masquerading as 'truth'. Actually, I think I read the past lives book you recommended many years ago (I think). Anecdotal stories are essentially meaningless, because the teller of these tales may be deluded/lying/a fraud/unaware of various factors that explain in more mundane terms the phenomena that occurs (the last is the most likely to occur and most subtle and difficult to comprehend).

Mediums? Come on, this is a joke isn't it? Absolute nonsense! Mediums can only work their wares on unsophisticated intellects. They may be able to pick up information from people in non-verbal ways, but there is less than nothing to suggest they are actually communicating with the 'spirits' of the deceased.

In fact, the best 'mediums' around are the ones who are *consciously aware* of how they are picking up this info, ie. mentalist magicians! Darren Browne has convinced some of the most respected mediums in the world that he is exceptionally talented at communicating with the dead. He though admits this is all subtle psychological manipulation. Brother, I'm not too bad at this myself. When you know how a thing works, it no longer mystifies you. I've studied and experimented with ALL aspects/levels of this phenomena for years. Sorry, dead souls are not involved.

A nice link:

http://badpsychics.com/thefraudfiles/modules/news/

Lastly, I notice you have still not clearly and unambiguously stated what 'journey' you are on about, the mechanics of this journey, and how you know it is true? You claim Nisargadatta had an ego because he shouted (imo, this is an indication you know not of what you speak!). Can you please cite an example of somebody living who is not plagued by this ego, and who embodies the heights of the journey you discuss?

Lastly, 'Pure Awareness' is 'God'? Are you sure? Have you personally experienced this Pure Awareness or is this mere theory?

Pure Awareness is nice & blissful, indeed, but don't conceptualise it as something it isn't.

You keep accusing 'these adavitists' of conceptualising (when, in fact, that is the anti-thesis of advaita), when you imo appear to be doing just that?


Thanks,

Manjit

Sorry, better link. Pick your fav psychic, and see them lie & cheat!

http://badpsychics.com/thefraudfiles/modules/sections/index.php?op=listarticles&secid=3

William wrote above: "from my point of view if anyone looks to atheists or religion for enlightenment they will have a long wait..two sides of the same coin."

William wrote earlier: "...the advaita types and even the atheists have turned their beliefs into a religion."

Tao replied: "Here again we see just how turned around backwards William's thinking really is. Why? Simply because athesists do not believe in God at all. Their non-belief is no a belief. Non-belief is definitely not a belief, regardless of how skewed William's views and interpretations are. And advaita is quite another matter. First of all, advaita is NOT athesism. Advaita simply means "non-duality". Advaita philosophy as a philosophy, can only be said to be a "belief" insofar as advaita philosophy regards the true nature of existence as being non-dual. However, beyond the philosophy of advaita, is the realization of Self-knowedge (atma-jnana), which is a direct realization of non-duality, and it has nothing to do with any intellectual ideas or beliefs or philosophy."


Tucson Bob,

Within your comment above, I noticed;

"However, beyond the philosophy of advaita, is the realization of Self-knowedge (atma-jnana), which is a direct realization of non-duality, and it has nothing to do with any intellectual ideas or beliefs or philosophy."


Could you write a comment that explains in further detail what, "a direct realization of non-duality" means?

I keep getting confused on that topic. What is "direct realization?"

Thanks,
Roger

Roger,

Ask Tao. I quoted him.

He probably means immediate, spontaneous, intuitive perception, rather than an intellectual concept. Since language and thought are dualistic by nature, non-duality cannot be described or thought.

"Since language and thought are dualistic by nature, non-duality cannot be described or thought."


That surely makes the monks from the Rinzai tradition who, after 15, or 20 years of Koan practice, undertake the endless practice of capping phrases complete suckers ...
http://www.zenonderdedom.nl/pdf/Rohatsu2005_gen.pdf

I wonder how they never figured Master Tuckson's fine piece of standard logic out. After all if the 'dual' mind says something as logical as "[s]ince language and thought are dualistic by nature, non-duality cannot be described or thought" That conceptual and logical INFERENCE must surely be true! Oh foolish of them!

Or, pitiful Dogen who said "thinking no-thinking ..."

What a bunch of deluded patsies ...


majit

if I have learned nothing else from my paranormal research it is that once a person believes that they have found truth no amount of evidence will convince them otherwise.

no such thing as a dead soul. read the book again there is more to the stories than one persons tale. Most mediums have very low mediumistic skills and some granted are frauds.

common theme disregard something without ever reading it. majit you have turned your beliefs into a religion and when we do then the mind shuts down.

no soul has experienced pure awareness has to be a theory. Too difficult for me to explain why I think this is so in this blog. mystics may get a glimpse of it.

“Mediums can only work their wares on unsophisticated intellects.”

Better check out your facts on this. Been some pretty high-powered intellects that have come out in support of spirits communicating through mediums. This is a common statement atheists use “the we have a superior intellect theme” and only dummies believe such things. I absolutely predicted that people would respond on here without reading the book.

This is not about intellect in fact intellect can be a hindrance it is about something called paradigm paralysis. The mind is a remarkable instrument how it can filter data that does not agree with its cherished belief. It appears that this is because it causes mental pain to even read about something not part of our cherished beliefs. This blog is living proof of this phenomenon as many of the comments are attacks not discussions.

When my truth becomes thee truth the intellect shuts down. See it everywhere: religion, science, Darwinism, politics, etc.

"That surely makes the monks from the Rinzai tradition who, after 15, or 20 years of Koan practice, undertake the endless practice of capping phrases complete suckers ..."

--Well, it does because there has never been a phenomenal subject to do it.

'"[s]ince language and thought are dualistic by nature, non-duality cannot be described or thought" That conceptual and logical INFERENCE must surely be true! Oh foolish of them!'

--Whatever is imagined to be infered by this is imagined and not what is infered.

"What a bunch of deluded patsies ..."

--again..WHO could ever be such a THING? !


Hello William,

I may well have turned by 'beliefs' into a 'religion', but I am concerned at the lack of revenue I'm generating? I need to get that aspect honed and then I'll be sorted.

However, I notice you again ignored my simple questions:

Lastly, I notice you have still not clearly and unambiguously stated what 'journey' you are on about, the mechanics of this journey, and how you know it is true? You claim Nisargadatta had an ego because he shouted (imo, this is an indication you know not of what you speak!). Can you please cite an example of somebody living who is not plagued by this ego, and who embodies the heights of the journey you discuss?

Thanks.

"Can you please cite an example of somebody living who is not plagued by this ego,"

it matters not what I say as you have already made up your mind that is the power of the paradigm effect.

Plagued by the ego. humm without the ego their is no journey no progression. The ego is a necessary “perceived entity” for the world to exist, as we know it. The very fact that you believe your intellect or ego is more advanced than mine suggests that not all egos are the same. Hence soul or ego progression.

Without ego oneness cannot become twoness. When we understand that the origin of our suffering is ignorance then we can ask the origin of our ignorance. If we are fortunate enough to see that the origin of our ignorance is necessary for oneness to become twoness then we can see this advancement of the soul.

I did state that souls do not die. Well not quite correct souls transform not die. As consciousness of a soul becomes more aware it reaches higher and higher levels of consciousness until suspect it returns to pure awareness. That is the journey back to oneness realizing of course the soul never left oneness. How could it there is only infinite isness.

Better to use unawareness than ignorance the ego hates the word ignorance. Consciousness lacks pure awareness and that is the journey of the soul back to this pure awareness. Maybe from a blade of grass to a god with a small g. in Japan it is called kaizen i.e. on going gradual continual improvement. We see it all round us even in the material world.

Nisargadatta did a superb job of explaining the difference between pure awareness and consciousness. Do you have that link?

"and who embodies the heights of the journey you discuss?" not sure I understand your question on this one. Jesus, Buddha and others I think have risen to higher levels of soul development. Surely you don’t think they managed this level of understanding in one lifetime on earth.

--again..WHO could ever be such a THING? !

Who is asking, denying, etc ...

"Can you please cite an example of somebody living who is not plagued by this ego,"

it matters not what I say as you have already made up your mind that is the power of the paradigm effect.


~~~Awww, c'mon now. It's hard to make up your mind without even knowing who you are referring to isn't it?

Honestly, I think your evasion of the simple question belies another motive, another feature of YOUR mental paradigm! :-)

I'll let any sagacious reader determine all possible motives for your refusal to answer this simple question....~~~~~~~~


Plagued by the ego. humm without the ego their is no journey no progression. The ego is a necessary “perceived entity” for the world to exist, as we know it. The very fact that you believe your intellect or ego is more advanced than mine suggests that not all egos are the same. Hence soul or ego progression.

~~~~I believe my intellect or ego is more 'advanced' than yours? Are you certain of this? Are you certain that the concept of 'advanced' is not meaningless, irrelevant and a rather arrogant way of looking at things in my 'mental paradigm'?

You are wiser than I if you are:-)~~~~~~~

Without ego oneness cannot become twoness. When we understand that the origin of our suffering is ignorance then we can ask the origin of our ignorance. If we are fortunate enough to see that the origin of our ignorance is necessary for oneness to become twoness then we can see this advancement of the soul.

I did state that souls do not die. Well not quite correct souls transform not die. As consciousness of a soul becomes more aware it reaches higher and higher levels of consciousness until suspect it returns to pure awareness. That is the journey back to oneness realizing of course the soul never left oneness. How could it there is only infinite isness.

~~~~very nice conceptualisation. The problem with concepts is, not everyone has the same ones~~~~~

Better to use unawareness than ignorance the ego hates the word ignorance. Consciousness lacks pure awareness and that is the journey of the soul back to this pure awareness. Maybe from a blade of grass to a god with a small g. in Japan it is called kaizen i.e. on going gradual continual improvement. We see it all round us even in the material world.

Nisargadatta did a superb job of explaining the difference between pure awareness and consciousness. Do you have that link?

No, not sure what link you mean? Do you mean the Nisarga youtube links Tao posted? Try searching on google vid or you tube, I think there is plenty there under 'Nisargadatta'.

Peace.

Tucson Bob,

Thanks for your reply.

Is there an example, that you can think of, of an "immediate, spontaneous, intuitive perception?" Have you personlly experienced one? If not, thats ok. No big deal.

I am kinda concerned about the concept of, "Self Knowledge." Is it truely real or just another cool sounding gimick.

Thanks,
Roger

Roger asked: "Have you personlly experienced one? If not, thats ok. No big deal."

--Everyone has 'them', but 'they' are usually not recognized for what they are.

"I am kinda concerned about the concept of, "Self Knowledge." Is it truely real or just another cool sounding gimick."

--I think "Self Knowledge" is misleading terminology, but there IS recogniton or awakening to what we really are which isn't any sort of 'thing'.

Elephant wrote: "Who is asking, denying, etc ..."

'Who' is always what is doing, but it can never be seen or known except as its objects. Try to turn around to see the subject of these objects, this 'who' we're speaking of. If you see it, it's another object!

Object is subject. Subject is object. I am that, but I am not.


Tucson Bob,

Thanks again for your reply.

My questions never seem to end. You replied, "there IS recogniton or awakening to what we really are." Would it be fair to say that there is no way to explain that statement?

It is a nice sounding statement, and nothing further.

Oh well, thanks again
Roger

M. d'Holbach walks into a cafe and sees Anton Franz Mesmer, sitting at a table, enjoying his "cafe au lait et petite pain."

"From where does the animal magnetism spring?" d'Holbach asks. Mesmer replies that all power comes from God, "I deal with most derangements, you know."

M. d'Holbach asks how M. Mesmer can promulgate such dangerous falsehood, hadn't the science board disabused Mesmer of his notions?

Suddenly, d'Holbach awakens, seated at a cafe table. He sees there are empty dishes in front of him, and is startled as the waiter shouts, "C'est un canard!" and presents the bill.

Good stuff William...

Hi Roger,

That's right. I can't explain that statement. You asked earlier if I could give an example of immediate, spontaneous, intuitive, perception.

In the 9th grade I was spacing out too much in algebra class and my grade was a D. My mother would have none of that and got me a tutor. He showed me a few things and it was like a catalyst. Suddenly, pop, I got the whole picture and from then on algebra was easy and I got an A for that class. I just 'got it' in the same way you 'get' a joke.

I think perceptions about our true nature are similar. You suddenly just 'get' it.

"good stuff William" thanks Chris it is not often I get kind words on this blog..

I have tried every approach I know how to explain how oneness becomes twoness or at least a perceived twoness.

The gap between infinite oneness, which I believe can best be described at this time as pure awareness. How does pure awareness express itself? Isness has to create or manifest entities that are less than itself in awareness

That process is the unfoldment of less than perfect awareness, which is consciousness. We are self-conscious entities that feel and act like we are separate from this source that most call God.

The gap between a soul and this pure awareness is unawareness. It is a perceived gap but it exists as realty in our minds. Many that post on here believe they have sealed that gap with their intellectual knowledge that all is oneness that is why they cannot see this evolution of consciousness.

This why they can make insane statements like there is no one there to suffer when the world is about much suffering. Many believe it is the variation of suffering and happiness that polishes the soul.

manjit
“Awww, c'mon now. It's hard to make up your mind without even knowing who you are referring to isn't it?”

Thought I answered the question. Plagued by the ego? The ego is not a plague but a necessary factor to oneness becoming twoness. The ego perceives itself as a separate entity (you and I) and this allows interaction or should I say pure awareness to express itself.

Surely you see these egos are alive and well on this blog. From consciousness point of view there is a long journey ahead of us but to pure awareness there is only now. Time, space, and egos exist to create a world of expression.

I suspect most of that expression is on going in other dimensions that the scientists now call dark matter. A better name for this dark matter is unknown matter or maybe even unknown consciousness but their egos will not let them admit to not knowing (i.e. ignorance).

Hello William,

At risk of being overly condescending, I thoroughly understand your conceptual representations of the oneness, twoness, pure awareness etc etc, and all possible convolutions thereof.

There really is nothing here I have not pondered over deeply, and understood experientially and non-conceptually, and now forgotten, thankfully :-)

My question, which you have still not answered, is do you know/believe anyone living who has transcended this 'ego' and attained this oneness you speak of?

I only ask for 2 reasons: 1, you pointedly remarked Nisarga had not done so, because of his shouting, and 2, if you don't know somebody living who has transcended this ego, your viewpoint remains purely theoretical, if you see what I mean.

I can understand you don't wish to answer, because whichever and whatever answer you provide, it will be the undoing of the very concepts you are promoting...:-)

Peace.

First atheist book?

What about "Memoir of the Thoughts and Feelings of Jean Meslier: Clear and Evident Demonstrations of the Vanity and Falsity of All the Religions of the World", 1729?

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Welcome


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.