« Religious arguments I respect, and those I don't | Main | How atheists comfort children about death »

December 20, 2012

Comments

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

How about seeing what is immediately present like trees, rocks, birds, freeways, bums and commuters in such a way that they are seen as self?

I am not talking about some otherworldly or heavenly vision, just a simple perception of homogeneity, unity or oneness where there is no "other".

Yes, this too could be a hallucination as far as "others" are concerned. You can only know what you know and even then you may not really know it and may be being deceived. Even if 10 of you have the same experience together and confirm it. Or a million.

Nothing is real. Or is it? We'll never know.

Yes, I agree that many 'visions' can be our own mental projections - although this blog interested me in a slightly other way. You spoke of your hate of brown ground squirrels, favouring the gray. Here in the UK our native squirrel is the brown or Red squirrel whereas the larger Grey squirrel (brought over from America) has become a pest by passing on disease to the the brown, killing trees and taking over 'Red' habitats. There are Grey squirrel 'control' programmes and schemes to introduce Reds' back. The argument is that Greys' are here 'unnaturally' having been introduced by man. The inference is that we are above nature perhaps having 'dominion' over 'lesser' species (an old but still active mind-set). Okay, so we need to protect our woodlands but my point is, if we are unable to look at things like squirrels without automatically bringing in the ego/mind with its concepts of good and bad or how things should be, how is 'this mind' ever capable of discerning illusion from reality?

Thanks for the good words, Brian. Next up in the film projects: SPOOKY PHYSICS.... why Einstein doesn't gamble.

I would like to know if a group of people that see an image/god is a hallucination/mind projection or is it real?
Faqir Chand stories only involve his disciples seeing him, but there was one disciple at the time.

"And, let's be fair, Beas' version of history is so limited and so edited that it wouldn't be inaccurate to say that they have butchered (or even lied?) about the early days."
quote David Lane 210422

That is a gross understatement. Beas people are
so uninformed they don't even know
who their founder was, even though he only
died recently in 1898.

I believe Beas history to have been written by very sick people.

Criminals with no ethics.

http://radhasoamis.freeyellow.com/index.html

The Beas history has been edited by angry ex satsangis,simple, I like the fact that Brian doesn't incorporate the Beas history on here.

You have to be very fragile, and willing to believe anything against RS to believe secret history. I recall J Barrish, a very narrow minded person tried to get me to believe the history.

I can't tell you what happened in the early days of Beas, no one can. The secret history has some correct facts, but most are just merely assumptions/fabricated.
My point is everyone is so critical of RS miracles, they want evidence, which is fair enough, but I wish the critical people would be like this towards false secret history.

If an author of something always remains anonymous, doesn't give their true name/location and doesn't have a picture then it shows something isn't right.

At least with Brian and Dr Lane, they give their real names and pictures. Although me and Brian won't see eye to eye on everything, I still have respect for him same goes for Dr Lane.

DAVID LANE states:

".... I think Maheshwari (despite whatever axe he may have grinded) deserves tremendous credit for opening up the lost and hidden chapters of early R.S. history.

Quite frankly, without Maheshwari unleashing the treasure trove of materials he
did there simply wouldn't be Radhasoami history as we know it.

In point of fact, his criticisms are probably what prompted a slew of materials
coming out of both Beas and Ruhani related sangats.

And, let's be fair, Beas' version of history is so limited and so edited that it wouldn't be inaccurate to say that they have butchered (or even lied?) about the early days.

Jaimal Singh's editing out of huqqa is just one example and there is no doubt that Bachan 250 comes from a written source and is not simply invented out of cloth..... which is, ironically, what Beas did when they juxtaposed their own version which has no written basis except that it is a theological view (rightly or wrongly) that Jaimal held onto...... and I am not saying I disagree with Jaimal's interpretation but only pointing out that his version is made up from him and doesn't relate to a historical written document.

Beas has been much less open than Agra to air some dirty laundry......

Agra via Maheshwari has unleashed things that do not reflect well on them.....
and that tells me that they are much more confident in their position than Beas
is....

In other words, Beas doesn't want to go toe to toe with Agra on early
history.....

I know this because I saw how they react to such matters."


------------------------------------------------------

Science, religion and Spirituality unite in
NEUROPLASTICITY & NEUROGENESIS, the new scientific revolution in neurology and religion. The Dalai Lama, the religious leader of the Tibetan Buddhists, and his colleague, Neuroscientist Richard Davidson of the University of Wisconsin, Madison, at The Mind and Life Institute, explain how consciousness can alter the brain's structure, change our minds and bodies, and influence the physical world. This is documented in the book 'Train Your Mind, Change Your Brain' by Sharon Begley.

Here is the book on the brain and religion by the Dalai Lama himself: read it! do it!
'The Universe In A Single Atom: How science and spirituality can serve our world' by His Holiness The Dalai Lama

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.