Colors belong to our way of being conscious of the material world. Consciousness and the material world are both very real, and so is time, because we exist by having successive experiences of the material world. If there is a real world in which all dreams are dreamt, then all those basic elements mentioned above must be included in it. We cannot imagine a world where we would not be conscious of the material world in a flow of experiences. Or I cannot. Because I cannot imagine a world or reality that is truly transcendent.Don Schneider wrote:I agree that they are very real, that they exist. But so does a dream. Illusions are real, they too exist as real perceptions, albeit lacking a fundamental existence of and in themselves. The same is true, for example, of color.
Philosophical proof of a creator (of some kind)
-
- Posts: 1347
- Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm
Re: Philosophical proof of a creator (of some kind)
-
- Posts: 64
- Joined: April 13th, 2016, 5:24 pm
Re: Philosophical proof of a creator (of some kind)
In my view, they both exist (and are in that sense ‘real”), though only consciousness has an independent existence as with my dream analogy. However, I grasp your point.Tamminen wrote:Colors belong to our way of being conscious of the material world. Consciousness and the material world are both very real, and so is time, because we exist by having successive experiences of the material world. If there is a real world in which all dreams are dreamt, then all those basic elements mentioned above must be included in it. We cannot imagine a world where we would not be conscious of the material world in a flow of experiences. Or I cannot. Because I cannot imagine a world or reality that is truly transcendent.Don Schneider wrote:I agree that they are very real, that they exist. But so does a dream. Illusions are real, they too exist as real perceptions, albeit lacking a fundamental existence of and in themselves. The same is true, for example, of color.
Let’s leave the discussion there as these things can become too intense at times and we've gone over the same ground many times already. I was testy to Londoner in a bad moment which I deeply regret and to whom I apologize.
Thanks for the interesting discussion. It’s been, er,…enlightening!
-
- Posts: 5161
- Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various
Re: Philosophical proof of a creator (of some kind)
Yes, the experiences are the same albeit from different methods [illness, drugs, meditation]. I am not saying they are bogus. The experience is real as felt but it is a subjective experience conditioned by the mind.Don Schneider wrote:I listened to the video and that, combined with your remarks within your post, leaves me uncertain as to you point. What I think you are saying is that although you once seriously entertained the truthfulness of the ontological paradigm espoused by the Upanishads, you now reject such and maintain such claimed experiences of enlightenment, the realization that all is universal consciousness and that all else, including ourselves, are illusory epiphenomena of Consciousness, are the result of brain abnormalities caused by inherent mental illness, insults (such as strokes), hallucinogenic narcotics or a self-induced states caused by intense meditation and are therefore bogus. Is that correct? If so, you’re hardly the first to claim such.
Such experiences of oneness are recognized as normal in genuine spiritual endeavors but a good guru will teach his disciples not to cling to them or just ignore them.
I understand Jnana Yoga, the way of the intellect within Advaita Vedanta. I am still adopting the way of the intellect as in Jnana Yoga.My philosophical leanings towards this paradigm of idealism are not at all emotional, and I have no idea why you would attribute such to me; certainly not from anything I’ve written here. On the contrary, it comes from intellectualism, years of readings and reflection. It is strictly intellectual. I have never experienced anything akin to the reported experience of enlightenment. My physical and emotional conditions precludes me from intense periods of meditation or the required physical stamina of Hatha Yoga. Instead, I am inclined towards Jnana Yoga, the way of the intellect within Advaita Vedanta. If this paradigm is true, then that is the only viable chance I personally could ever have.
However from the Buddhist perspective, I treat this path of the intellect as the raft that took me to the other shore. Once the other shore is reached one must let go of the raft.
Even when one has reached the other shore, one must also let go of the destination.
As the Tibetan Buddhist would say, it is the duty of the intellect [reason] to kill itself at the ultimate level.
There is a subtle difference between the Buddhist and the Advaita principles of the ultimate.
You may think you are using pure intellect to realise the Absolute, but you are not aware there as subtle traces of emotions and psychological elements that compel you to cling to the Absolute.
There are lots of studies on the activities of subliminal play of emotions and psychology. One may think one is making an very objective and intellectual decision but actually one could be compel by some deep underlying emotional and psychological biasness. Note the work of Antonio Damasio and others.
Btw, the advaita principles of the Absolute is good enough for any one but if one need to dig deeper there is the Buddhist alternative of emptiness.
As I had mentioned above all reported enlightenment experiences are real but personal subjective experiences.I don’t believe that all reported enlightenment experiences throughout history were hallucinations resulting from the physical reasons listed above. On the contrary, I believe such are yet more inferences or “clues” (indeed, "bread crumbs") inherent within the illusion of material realism to help us “find our way back” to truth, so to speak. The illusion of materialism became so convincing that we forgot our true nature thus giving rise to existential anxiety. (“And they saw that they were naked [defenseless against ultimate death] and were sore afraid.”) I believe this woman experienced something akin to the experience of enlightenment and not enlightenment itself.
The various types of experiences are used as milestone indicator of spiritual advancement but the critical point here is one should not be attached to such fruits of actions.
When the Gita stated "avoid attraction to the fruits", it should extent it to the Absolute as well. This is reflected in Brahman as Neti - Neti.Bhagavad Gita 2.47-50
Lord Krishna: Be intent on action, not on the fruits of action; avoid attraction to the fruits and attachment to inaction! Perform actions, firm in discipline, relinquishing attachment; be impartial to failure and success—this equanimity is called discipline. Arjuna, action is far inferior to the discipline of understanding; to seek refuge in understanding—pitiful are men drawn by fruits of action. Disciplined by understanding, one abandons both good and evil deeds; so arm yourself for discipline—discipline is skill in actions.
Your eagerness to obtain 'proof' of God is a sign to attachment to the fruits of action which is driven by emotions and psychological drives at the subliminal levels you are not conscious of.
-
- Posts: 64
- Joined: April 13th, 2016, 5:24 pm
Re: Philosophical proof of a creator (of some kind)
Spectrum wrote:Yes, the experiences are the same albeit from different methods [illness, drugs, meditation]. I am not saying they are bogus. The experience is real as felt but it is a subjective experience conditioned by the mind.Don Schneider wrote:I listened to the video and that, combined with your remarks within your post, leaves me uncertain as to you point. What I think you are saying is that although you once seriously entertained the truthfulness of the ontological paradigm espoused by the Upanishads, you now reject such and maintain such claimed experiences of enlightenment, the realization that all is universal consciousness and that all else, including ourselves, are illusory epiphenomena of Consciousness, are the result of brain abnormalities caused by inherent mental illness, insults (such as strokes), hallucinogenic narcotics or a self-induced states caused by intense meditation and are therefore bogus. Is that correct? If so, you’re hardly the first to claim such.
Such experiences of oneness are recognized as normal in genuine spiritual endeavors but a good guru will teach his disciples not to cling to them or just ignore them.
I understand Jnana Yoga, the way of the intellect within Advaita Vedanta. I am still adopting the way of the intellect as in Jnana Yoga.My philosophical leanings towards this paradigm of idealism are not at all emotional, and I have no idea why you would attribute such to me; certainly not from anything I’ve written here. On the contrary, it comes from intellectualism, years of readings and reflection. It is strictly intellectual. I have never experienced anything akin to the reported experience of enlightenment. My physical and emotional conditions precludes me from intense periods of meditation or the required physical stamina of Hatha Yoga. Instead, I am inclined towards Jnana Yoga, the way of the intellect within Advaita Vedanta. If this paradigm is true, then that is the only viable chance I personally could ever have.
However from the Buddhist perspective, I treat this path of the intellect as the raft that took me to the other shore. Once the other shore is reached one must let go of the raft.
Even when one has reached the other shore, one must also let go of the destination.
As the Tibetan Buddhist would say, it is the duty of the intellect [reason] to kill itself at the ultimate level.
There is a subtle difference between the Buddhist and the Advaita principles of the ultimate.
You may think you are using pure intellect to realise the Absolute, but you are not aware there as subtle traces of emotions and psychological elements that compel you to cling to the Absolute.
There are lots of studies on the activities of subliminal play of emotions and psychology. One may think one is making an very objective and intellectual decision but actually one could be compel by some deep underlying emotional and psychological biasness. Note the work of Antonio Damasio and others.
Btw, the advaita principles of the Absolute is good enough for any one but if one need to dig deeper there is the Buddhist alternative of emptiness.
As I had mentioned above all reported enlightenment experiences are real but personal subjective experiences.I don’t believe that all reported enlightenment experiences throughout history were hallucinations resulting from the physical reasons listed above. On the contrary, I believe such are yet more inferences or “clues” (indeed, "bread crumbs") inherent within the illusion of material realism to help us “find our way back” to truth, so to speak. The illusion of materialism became so convincing that we forgot our true nature thus giving rise to existential anxiety. (“And they saw that they were naked [defenseless against ultimate death] and were sore afraid.”) I believe this woman experienced something akin to the experience of enlightenment and not enlightenment itself.
The various types of experiences are used as milestone indicator of spiritual advancement but the critical point here is one should not be attached to such fruits of actions.
When the Gita stated "avoid attraction to the fruits", it should extent it to the Absolute as well. This is reflected in Brahman as Neti - Neti.Bhagavad Gita 2.47-50
Lord Krishna: Be intent on action, not on the fruits of action; avoid attraction to the fruits and attachment to inaction! Perform actions, firm in discipline, relinquishing attachment; be impartial to failure and success—this equanimity is called discipline. Arjuna, action is far inferior to the discipline of understanding; to seek refuge in understanding—pitiful are men drawn by fruits of action. Disciplined by understanding, one abandons both good and evil deeds; so arm yourself for discipline—discipline is skill in actions.
Your eagerness to obtain 'proof' of God is a sign to attachment to the fruits of action which is driven by emotions and psychological drives at the subliminal levels you are not conscious of.
You wrote:
"However from the Buddhist perspective, I treat this path of the intellect as the raft that took me to the other shore. Once the other shore is reached one must let go of the raft.
Even when one has reached the other shore, one must also let go of the destination.
As the Tibetan Buddhist would say, it is the duty of the intellect [reason] to kill itself at the ultimate level."
I agree completely and thank you for the other interesting observations.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023