immortal Posted December 23, 2012 Author Posted December 23, 2012 You don't have to give up, but you really ought to share those experiments in context. Thus far, all you've given are quotes from people and books that were written by others who already shared your preconceptions. Evidence would be quite welcome, but the evidence must scale with the extraordinary nature of the claim(s) you are making. The point is Quantum entanglement is a fact and at the heart of it lies the quantum correlations and Bell proved an inequality which showed that if the world was local and realistic then his equality should hold but experiments violate Bell's inequality showing that physicists either need to give up locality or realism(the idea that the properties of a system has an independent existence before the measurement). Antony Leggett allowed for non-locality and tested for realism but even when non-local actions are allowed the quantum correlations cannot be explained with non-local realistic models so the assumption that is wrong is realism, that properties have an independent existence in the absence of measurements. The moon doesn't exist when no one is looking at it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ta09WXiUqcQ The experiments have not only been tested for sub-systems but also for indivisible systems and the result is the same quantum mechanics is contextual and there is no sense in assuming that the properties of a system have an independent reality in the absence of measurements. There is no absolute reality out there, it all depends on the choice of the measuring apparatus and what properties we choose to measure leading to a participatory universe or an anthropic universe which puts human observers and gives them a special place in the cosmos. The two sub-systems or photons do not independently possess any properties of its own but instead their information is jointly encoded and no matter how far away separate they are they should be treated a single quantum system and that's the reason many think that there is a reality not embedded in space-time and that this empirical reality is only a state of mind and retrospectively created by the noumenal reality existing independent of us which is not embedded in space-time. "This reality is something that, while not a purely mind-made construct as radical idealism would have it, can be but the picture our mind forces us to form of ... Of what ? The only answer I am able to provide is that underlying this empirical reality is a mysterious, non-conceptualisable "ultimate reality", not embedded in space and (presumably) not in time either." - Bernard D'Espagnat What has this got to do with the Vedas? Its quite simple because we knew about this kind of idealism. Idealism in Ancient philosophy The oldest reference to Idealism in Hindu texts is in Purusha Sukta of the Rig Veda. This sukta espouses panentheism by presenting cosmic being Purusha as both pervading all universe and yet being transcendent to it.[1] Absolute idealism can be seen in Chāndogya Upaniṣad, where things of the objective world like the five elements and the subjective world such as will, hope, memory etc. are seen to be emanations from the Self.[2] These five mystical elements which is earth, water, air, fire and outer-space form our bodies and metaphysical Mind, Intellect and metaphysical sense organs is what constitutes the noumenal world. On the whole this is what Veiled reality is and these five mystical elements and this Mind and Intellect exists in the numinous and their ontology is completely different because these divine rays can take the form of anthropomorphic gods, I mean Mind itself can take the form of an anthropomorphic god and so is the Intellect etc. Therefore the entire cosmos is working based on the pleroma of gods(Neo-platonic Christianity) or Agnisoma Mandala(Eastern religions). They can be put forward as a single theory. It is worth noting that d’Espagnat himself notices that the similarities between his conception of veiled reality and “the great eastern philosophical systems should be considered. . . ” This is the reason why I insist that eastern philosophical systems should be considered and I think we need a new scientific field of esotericism to investigate the gods, if there can be a search for extra-terrestrial intelligence why cannot there be a search for hyper-cosmic intelligence. What's more important is that there are esoteric practical methodologies to testify this view. See - Chandogya Upanishad http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%C4%81ndogya_Upani%E1%B9%A3ad I don't care whether the scientific community will investigate this or not, I think they should have abandoned scientific realism by now.
CarbonCopy Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 An equation for Brahman? Our ancients who discovered these truths neither knew about quantum physics or about any equations so will you stop linking these concepts with modern science, it has nothing to do with either quantum physics or modern science. So you are saying that Quantum Mechanics is wrong ? Then why are you validating stuff that you are saying with Quantum Mechanics ? You are just proving my point which I stated above, i.e., modern science is taking us closer to concepts such as brahman and tao, and good example is quantum entanglement, as you stated above No, the concept of Brahman cannot exist without the concept of Vedic gods. The only thing that the Upanishads and Taoism has to offer science is to show that scientific realism is false. Do you know nothing of the things taught n the Vedas. It says that the only thing in this world in brahman, advaita basically. There are no such thing as gods such as Indra and Shiva, they were created by seers to tell us morals and stories. The only thing is the supreme brahman or tao and we are that. There is no god overseeing us. That's nonsense. . BTW, Can you tell me what it means to be a Hindu? Being hindu is following the morals such as dharma,artha,karma and mosksha and teachings in the vedas. It is certainly not throwind coconuts and poring milk on some idol and blinding believing that god is it. Why should I give up when my beliefs are based on facts established from experiments? Atheists aren't any better than those religious type one's who continue to believe in their fairy tales despite what the evidence is saying, right. You can believe what you want, but, you can make it into fact. Your belief system cannot override facts. If your beliefs and above empirical evidence then, frankly, I will call you bad Scientist.
immortal Posted December 23, 2012 Author Posted December 23, 2012 So you are saying that Quantum Mechanics is wrong ? Then why are you validating stuff that you are saying with Quantum Mechanics ? You are just proving my point which I stated above, i.e., modern science is taking us closer to concepts such as brahman and tao, and good example is quantum entanglement, as you stated above. I didn't used quantum mechanics to validate my stuff, I used Bell's theorem to validate my stuff because any further theory that will be developed by physicists will be contextual whether you change QM or bring up a all new theory, Bell theorem would still hold for our cosmos. Modern science and the concepts of Brahman and tao are incompatible epistemologically, these two are based on a completely different epistemology. I am only saying the conclusions of Advaita and Modern Science about the nature of the empirical universe is the same but I am not linking the concepts of QM with the concepts of AV like you're doing without differentiating their epistemology which is totally incorrect. Did you got the difference? As Richard H. Jones notices, it is incorrect to equate the unified field with Brahman, which is not an extended and structured field embedded in the spacetime continuum (as the unified field) but pure consciousness “beyond” space, time and even mind. The philosophers working on it knows this very well than you do. There cannot be an equation for brahman, that's silly. Do you know nothing of the things taught n the Vedas. It says that the only thing in this world in brahman, advaita basically. There are no such thing as gods such as Indra and Shiva, they were created by seers to tell us morals and stories. The only thing is the supreme brahman or tao and we are that. There is no god overseeing us. That's nonsense. . Its the same Vedas and the Upanishads which teach us about the gods. BTW, who said there are two things in this world? The only thing that exists is Brahman, the Self and these gods are emanations from the Self. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty-three_gods The Thirty-three gods is a pantheon of Hindu deities, some of Vedic origin and some developed later. It generally includes a set of 31 deities consisting of 12 Ādityas, 11 Rudras, and 8 Vasus; the identity of the other two deities that fill out the 33 varies, though their roles are generally a creator deity, presiding over procreation and protector of life and the 33rd is an all powerful supreme ruler. The 31 are: Twelve Ādityas (personified deities) – Mitra, Aryaman, Bhaga, Varuṇa, Dakṣa, Aṃśa, Tvāṣṭṛ, Pūṣan, Vivasvat, Savitṛ, Śakra, Viṣṇu. This list sometimes varies in particulars. Eleven Rudras, consisting of: Five abstractions – Ānanda "bliss", Vijñāna "knowledge", Manas "thought", Prāṇa "breath" or "life", Vāc "speech", Five names of Śiva – Īśāna "ruler", Tatpuruṣa "that person", Aghora "not terrible", Vāmadeva "pleasant god", Sadyojāta "born at once" Ātmā "self" Eight Vasus (deities of material elements) – Pṛthivī "Earth", Agni "Fire", Antarikṣa "Atmosphere", Vāyu "Wind", Dyauṣ "Sky", Sūrya "Sun", Nakṣatra "Stars", Soma "Moon" Other sources similar to the Vedas include the two Aśvins (or Nāsatyas), twin solar deities. Indra also called Śakra, lord of the gods, is the First of the 33 followed by Agni Prajāpati "Master of creatures", a creator deity. The generic title, though not the particular names of the deities, was borrowed in Buddhist sources as a name for the heaven "of the Thirty-three gods" (Trāyastriṃśa). These are the true gods of Hinduism and they are emanations of the Self(Brahman). Being hindu is following the morals such as dharma,artha,karma and mosksha and teachings in the vedas. It is certainly not throwind coconuts and poring milk on some idol and blinding believing that god is it. Do you really know what are the teachings of the Vedas? Vedas are based on Kathenotheism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathenotheism Kathenotheism is a term coined by the philologist Max Müller to mean the worship of one god at a time. It is closely related to henotheism. Müller coined the term in reference to the Vedas; where he explained each deity is treated as supreme in turn. So why are you not worshipping the Vedic gods? So when you're not following the teachings of the vedas then why do you call yourself a Hindu? You're not a true hindu, in my opinion. Either say we are not following the Vedas and we have excluded it from our religion or follow the Vedas as it is without misrepresenting it. You can believe what you want, but, you can make it into fact. Your belief system cannot override facts. If your beliefs and above empirical evidence then, frankly, I will call you bad Scientist. I don't believe in whatever I want like you without investigating what the evidence is saying and without knowing what the Vedas and the Upanishads are saying. Sure you can ignore facts and believe in whatever damn things you want, that's quite evident in your posts. Next time you say that to someone look at yourself on the mirror.
iNow Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 Yeah. Still not seeing that extraordinary evidence I mentioned. Do you want to try again, or are you content to keep repeating yourself regarding stuff that is not convincing in the slightest?
Moontanman Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 Immortal is using apologetics in the time honored way, twisting science so it supports his own belief system. All he has done so far is quote authority figures and shoe horn what they say into the space he wants.... very sad...
immortal Posted December 23, 2012 Author Posted December 23, 2012 Yeah. Still not seeing that extraordinary evidence I mentioned. Do you want to try again, or are you content to keep repeating yourself regarding stuff that is not convincing in the slightest? The point is all evidence is pointing towards a theistic view of our existence, there is no place for atheism. I didn't simply accused you of being dishonest, I knew you were dishonest for you say one thing and do another. You said you want to minimize ignorance and you are misunderstood to think that religious thinking is a form of ignorance and based on that you want to eradicate religious thinking just because you think it is irrational but actually by minimizing religious thinking you're not minimizing ignorance, you're just doing the opposite i.e maximizing ignorance by driving people away from basic facts of nature and you show the same double standards when evidence is shown against your views. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoga-nidra#Scientific_evaluation Experimental evidence of the existence of a fourth state of unified, transcendental consciousness, which lies in the yoga-nidra state at the transition between sensory and sleep consciousness, was first recorded at the Menninger Foundation in Kansas, USA in 1971.[6] Under the direction of Dr. Elmer Green, researchers used an electroencephalograph to record the brainwave activity of an Indian yogi, Swami Rama, while he progressively relaxed his entire physical, mental and emotional structure through the practice of Yoga Nidra. What they recorded was a revelation to the scientific community. The swami demonstrated the capacity to enter the various states of consciousness at will, as evidenced by remarkable changes in the electrical activity of his brain. Upon relaxing himself in the laboratory, he first entered the yoga nidra state, producing 70% alpha wave discharge for a predetermined 5 minute period, simply by imagining an empty blue sky with occasional drifting clouds. Next, Swami Rama entered a state of dreaming sleep which was accompanied by slower theta waves for 75% of the subsequent 5 minute test period. This state, which he later described as being 'noisy and unpleasant', was attained by 'stilling the conscious mind and bringing forth the subconscious'. In this state he had the internal experience of desires, ambitions, memories and past images in archetypal form rising sequentially from the subconscious and unconscious with a rush, each archetype occupying his whole awareness. Finally, the swami entered the state of (unconscious) deep sleep, as verified by the emergence of the characteristic pattern of slow rhythm delta waves. However, he remained perfectly aware throughout the entire experimental period. He later recalled the various events which had occurred in the laboratory during the experiment, including all the questions that one of the scientists had asked him during the period of deep delta wave sleep, while his body lay snoring quietly. Such remarkable mastery over the fluctuating patterns of consciousness had not previously been demonstrated under strict laboratory conditions. The capacity to remain consciously aware while producing delta waves and experiencing deep sleep is one of the indications of the superconscious state (turiya). This is the ultimate state of yoga nidra in which the conventional barriers between waking, dreaming and deep sleep are lifted, revealing the simultaneous operation of the conscious, subconscious and unconscious mind. The result is a single, enlightened state of consciousness and a perfectly integrated and relaxed personality. Dr. Kamakhya Kumar in 2006 awarded by Ph. D. degree by Dr. A. P J Abdul Kalam (President of India) for his work "Psycho-physiological Changes as Related to Yoga Nidra". He observed six months effects of yoga nidra on some Physiological, hematological and some Psychological parameters on the practitioners and he found a significant change on above mentioned parameters. One of the research published entitled "A study on the impact on stress and anxiety through Yoga nidra; Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, Vol. 7 No 3".(Published through NISCAIR) Indian clinical psychologist Sachin Kumar Dwivedi (2009) found in his research that Yoga Nidra decreases levels of anxiety. Dwivedi, S., Awasthi, S.& Pandey,B.B.(2011) found in " Yoga Nidra increased the α-eeg on α-eeg biofeedback. That is open scrate [secret?] that Yoga Nidra is a type of deep meditation. Nikhra,M & Dwivedi,S.K.(2010) found in a study "Yoga nidra reduces the level of Stress." What we call empirical reality is only a state of mind(this is a fact claim) and this mind is the product of a divine God. -3
Moontanman Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 The point is all evidence is pointing towards a theistic view of our existence, there is no place for atheism. I didn't simply accused you of being dishonest, I knew you were dishonest for you say one thing and do another. You said you want to minimize ignorance and you are misunderstood to think that religious thinking is a form of ignorance and based on that you want to eradicate religious thinking just because you think it is irrational but actually by minimizing religious thinking you're not minimizing ignorance, you're just doing the opposite i.e maximizing ignorance by driving people away from basic facts of nature and you show the same double standards when evidence is shown against your views. No, all evidence does not point toward a theistic view, in fact no evidence points toward a theistic view. The evidence you have provided shows no such thing... What we call empirical reality is only a state of mind(this is a fact claim) and this mind is the product of a divine God. If it does you have failed at showing any evidence for it... either show some empirical evidence or admit it's your belief and nothing more... 1
iNow Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 The point is all evidence is pointing towards a theistic view of our existence, there is no place for atheism. I didn't simply accused you of being dishonest, I knew you were dishonest. Please stop calling me a liar. You will not convince me of the validity of your position by telling me I'm dishonest for finding the belief in god(s) position uncompelling.
A Tripolation Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 The point is all evidence is pointing towards a theistic view of our existence, there is no place for atheism. What proof do you have for this? What we call empirical reality is only a state of mind(this is a fact claim) and this mind is the product of a divine God. Bold claim. What proof do you have of this? As a fellow theist, you're really not making us look good by calling everyone liars and saying that we have proof that we do not. It's called faith for a reason. 1
immortal Posted December 23, 2012 Author Posted December 23, 2012 There are lots of empirical evidences, I will not be surprised if this Vedic education system is introduced into schools because it improves memory compared to modern education systems and the reason behind such improvements is simply because our model of the mind indeed works and so does the Vedic mantras. One cannot take away its religious elements from such models of the mind.saṁyogo yoga ityukto jīvātma-paramātmanoḥ॥Union of the self (jivātma) with the Divine (paramātma) is said to be yoga.—Yoga Yajnavalkya I.43Effect of yogic education system and modern education system on memory. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2934577/ What proof do you have for this? That was a fair conclusion, for the first time in human history religion has got something right about our cosmos.http://henry.pha.jhu.edu/aspect.html Bold claim. What proof do you have of this?As a fellow theist, you're really not making us look good by calling everyone liars and saying that we have proof that we do not. It's called faith for a reason. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2009/mar/17/templeton-quantum-entanglement I don't call it faith if it is based on facts established from experiments.
Moontanman Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) There are lots of empirical evidences, I will not be surprised if this Vedic education system is introduced into schools because it improves memory compared to modern education systems and the reason behind such improvements is simply because our model of the mind indeed works and so does the Vedic mantras. One cannot take away its religious elements from such models of the mind. saṁyogo yoga ityukto jīvātma-paramātmanoḥ॥ Union of the self (jivātma) with the Divine (paramātma) is said to be yoga. —Yoga Yajnavalkya I.43 Effect of yogic education system and modern education system on memory. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2934577/ That was a fair conclusion, for the first time in human history religion has got something right about our cosmos. http://henry.pha.jhu.edu/aspect.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2009/mar/17/templeton-quantum-entanglement I don't call it faith if it is based on facts established from experiments. Immortal, why the hell don't you show us some empirical evidence instead of some ones opinion about a vague interpretation of science twisted to fit your preconceived notions about god? It's time to put up or shut up immortal, stop with the twisted interpretations and show us some solid science that proves the existence of the supernatural... or admit you simply don't have any.... you need to take off your supernatural "glasses" when you read the stuff you link to... if you are reading them at all... Edited December 23, 2012 by Moontanman
iNow Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 Immortal, why the hell don't you show us some empirical evidence instead of some ones opinion about a vague interpretation of science twisted to fit your preconceived notions about god? It's time to put up or shut up immortal, stop with the twisted interpretations and show us some solid science that proves the existence of the supernatural. Want to place any money on the bet that he'll choose instead to insult you or share further opinion-based quotes instead of responding directly to your request?
Moontanman Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 Want to place any money on the bet that he'll choose instead to insult you or share further opinion-based quotes instead of responding directly to your request? only if i get to bet he will do just that....
tar Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) Immortal, Quote The Thirty-three gods is a pantheon of Hindu deities, some of Vedic origin and some developed later. It generally includes a set of 31 deities consisting of 12 Ādityas, 11 Rudras, and 8 Vasus; the identity of the other two deities that fill out the 33 varies, though their roles are generally a creator deity, presiding over procreation and protector of life and the 33rd is an all powerful supreme ruler.The 31 are: Twelve Ādityas (personified deities) – Mitra, Aryaman, Bhaga, Varuṇa, Dakṣa, Aṃśa, Tvāṣṭṛ, Pūṣan, Vivasvat, Savitṛ, Śakra, Viṣṇu. This list sometimes varies in particulars. Eleven Rudras, consisting of: Five abstractions – Ānanda "bliss", Vijñāna "knowledge", Manas "thought", Prāṇa "breath" or "life", Vāc "speech", Five names of Śiva – Īśāna "ruler", Tatpuruṣa "that person", Aghora "not terrible", Vāmadeva "pleasant god", Sadyojāta "born at once" Ātmā "self" Eight Vasus (deities of material elements) – Pṛthivī "Earth", Agni "Fire", Antarikṣa "Atmosphere", Vāyu "Wind", Dyauṣ "Sky", Sūrya "Sun", Nakṣatra "Stars", Soma "Moon" Other sources similar to the Vedas include the two Aśvins (or Nāsatyas), twin solar deities. Indra also called Śakra, lord of the gods, is the First of the 33 followed by Agni Prajāpati "Master of creatures", a creator deity. The generic title, though not the particular names of the deities, was borrowed in Buddhist sources as a name for the heaven "of the Thirty-three gods" ( Trāyastriṃśa). These things, like bliss and thought, and life and speech are things we all are familiar with. Citing them is not evidence that they exist in personified forms in reality. Abstractions for sure, but you are providing us no reason to take them as existing persons. And you don't even claim them to be existing persons, they are to you, and to me, abstractions. Things we do as humans. Giving each a name, and an identity, separate from what we do, is not factual. You cannot have breath without a breather, or thought without a thinker, except in the "ideal" abstract sense. That the abstract exists is no proof that each abstraction requires a separate God to instill it in us. Where is some empirical evidence that would suggest that there is only one, or exactly 31 separate identities, responsible for various aspects of existence. Or that there are only five abstractions, and each must have a God associated with it? If I say my cousin Eddie built my house, and you ask me to prove it, me, showing you my house, does not prove my claim. (And little did you know, I don't have a cousin Eddie) Regards, TAR2 Why is there not a God of enclosed spaces, to whom I am indebted for my home? And if I were to claim such a god's existence, and say the name of the God was Eddie, would it be any more true if I said it again? You must be a liar, if you sit in your home, protected from the wind and the rain and the cold, and at the same time be so idiotic as to suggest there is not, Eddie. What's more, if I find an old scroll, that names Eddie as the god of enclosed spaces, and reveal this secret to you. Would things then be clear to you that Eddie must exist? Is this any evidence that you would accept? Evidence of what, exactly.? Ah poop...there IS a goddess of enclosed spaces. Gaia, ruler of the cave and the womb. Darn, the secret is out, and it turns out it really wasn't Eddie. Edited December 23, 2012 by tar 1
immortal Posted December 24, 2012 Author Posted December 24, 2012 Immortal, Quote These things, like bliss and thought, and life and speech are things we all are familiar with. Citing them is not evidence that they exist in personified forms in reality. Abstractions for sure, but you are providing us no reason to take them as existing persons. And you don't even claim them to be existing persons, they are to you, and to me, abstractions. Things we do as humans. Giving each a name, and an identity, separate from what we do, is not factual. You cannot have breath without a breather, or thought without a thinker, except in the "ideal" abstract sense. That the abstract exists is no proof that each abstraction requires a separate God to instill it in us. Where is some empirical evidence that would suggest that there is only one, or exactly 31 separate identities, responsible for various aspects of existence. Or that there are only five abstractions, and each must have a God associated with it? If I say my cousin Eddie built my house, and you ask me to prove it, me, showing you my house, does not prove my claim. (And little did you know, I don't have a cousin Eddie) Regards, TAR2 Why is there not a God of enclosed spaces, to whom I am indebted for my home? And if I were to claim such a god's existence, and say the name of the God was Eddie, would it be any more true if I said it again? You must be a liar, if you sit in your home, protected from the wind and the rain and the cold, and at the same time be so idiotic as to suggest there is not, Eddie. What's more, if I find an old scroll, that names Eddie as the god of enclosed spaces, and reveal this secret to you. Would things then be clear to you that Eddie must exist? Is this any evidence that you would accept? Evidence of what, exactly.? Ah poop...there IS a goddess of enclosed spaces. Gaia, ruler of the cave and the womb. Darn, the secret is out, and it turns out it really wasn't Eddie. "Brahma generated the gods, Brahma (generated) this entire world. Within him are all these worlds. Within him is this entire universe. It is Brahma who is the greatest of beings. Who can vie with him? In Brahma, the thirty-three gods; in Brahma, Indra and Prajapati; in Brahma all things are contained as in a ship." - Taittiriya Brahmana These gods are not abstractions, they have a local existence and they have their own functions. "The fact that we have come forth within the Father does not imply that we are acquainted with him. According to Valentinus, God is ultimately responsible for the creation of all things "It is he who created the entirety and the entirety is in him" (Gospel of Truth 19:8-9) However, the "entirety" i.e. those within the Father "were unacquainted with the Father since it was he whom they did not see"(Gospel of Truth 28:32-29:1). Being only a small part of reality, they are unable to perceive it completely on their own. In vain, "the entirety searched for the one from whom they had emanated" (Gospel of Truth 17:4-6). It is something of a paradox that we are within God, yet we do not recognize or know him. As Valentinus says, "It was quite amazing that they were in the Father without being acquainted with him and that they alone were able to emanate, inasmuch as they were not able perceive and recognize the one in whom they were" (Gospel of Truth 22:27-32). Due to our ignorance of God we can fall into an erroneous or false understanding of reality ("error" or "deficiency")." - Valentinian monism, David brons, Gnostic society library. Of course you don't know the One, the Holy Father for you know only the house but not the being who built your house and in whom you're contained. Colossians 2:9 - "In Christ dwells all the pleroma of deity in bodily form". Pleroma means the totality of divine powers and it forms the body of Christ and this has a local existence, a locality and it is not just an abstraction, our ancients didn't saw them as abstractions, they literally claimed they exists in personified forms. That's how we traditional people view it.
Moontanman Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 "Brahma generated the gods, Brahma (generated) this entire world. Within him are all these worlds. Within him is this entire universe. It is Brahma who is the greatest of beings. Who can vie with him? In Brahma, the thirty-three gods; in Brahma, Indra and Prajapati; in Brahma all things are contained as in a ship." - Taittiriya Brahmana These gods are not abstractions, they have a local existence and they have their own functions. "The fact that we have come forth within the Father does not imply that we are acquainted with him. According to Valentinus, God is ultimately responsible for the creation of all things "It is he who created the entirety and the entirety is in him" (Gospel of Truth 19:8-9) However, the "entirety" i.e. those within the Father "were unacquainted with the Father since it was he whom they did not see"(Gospel of Truth 28:32-29:1). Being only a small part of reality, they are unable to perceive it completely on their own. In vain, "the entirety searched for the one from whom they had emanated" (Gospel of Truth 17:4-6). It is something of a paradox that we are within God, yet we do not recognize or know him. As Valentinus says, "It was quite amazing that they were in the Father without being acquainted with him and that they alone were able to emanate, inasmuch as they were not able perceive and recognize the one in whom they were" (Gospel of Truth 22:27-32). Due to our ignorance of God we can fall into an erroneous or false understanding of reality ("error" or "deficiency")." - Valentinian monism, David brons, Gnostic society library. Of course you don't know the One, the Holy Father for you know only the house but not the being who built your house and in whom you're contained. Colossians 2:9 - "In Christ dwells all the pleroma of deity in bodily form". Pleroma means the totality of divine powers and it forms the body of Christ and this has a local existence, a locality and it is not just an abstraction, our ancients didn't saw them as abstractions, they literally claimed they exists in personified forms. That's how we traditional people view it. How is any of this supposed to add credence to the existence or even non existence of your god? It's has no more meaning than Zeus god of thunder or Xenu? You provide no evidence of anything supernatural or of any god or gods...
immortal Posted December 24, 2012 Author Posted December 24, 2012 Immortal, why the hell don't you show us some empirical evidence instead of some ones opinion about a vague interpretation of science twisted to fit your preconceived notions about god? The time has come to show intolerance towards atheism. http://www.metanexus.net/archive/ultimate_reality/zeilinger.pdf "In conclusion it may very well be said that information is the irreducible kernel from which everything else flows. Then the question why nature appears quantized is simply a consequence of the fact that information itself is quantized by necessity. It might even be fair to observe that the concept that information is fundamental is very old knowledge of humanity, witness for example the beginning of gospel according to John: "In the beginning was the Word"." Anton Zeilinger Professor of Physics It's time to put up or shut up immortal, stop with the twisted interpretations and show us some solid science that proves the existence of the supernatural... or admit you simply don't have any.... Why should I shut up when the time has come to make atheists shut up, Yes science has proved that this world is a mere shadow of the ultimate reality that exists beyond space-time, that's a solid evidence based on cogent scientific explanations. you need to take off your supernatural "glasses" when you read the stuff you link to... if you are reading them at all... I don't wear glasses and I don't need to act like inexcusably ignorant atheists who somehow can't understand the stuff when evidence is shown against their views. How is any of this supposed to add credence to the existence or even non existence of your god? It's has no more meaning than Zeus god of thunder or Xenu? You provide no evidence of anything supernatural or of any god or gods... That was cited as evidence for near enemies(secular Buddhists, ignorant Hindus and conservative Christians) and not for far enemies(atheists). I know atheists won't be convinced with such stuff. The point is the traditions of Vajrayana, Smarta and Valentinian should be taken seriously because there is scientific evidence to back up this single theory, that's why even atheists can't get away from this.
iNow Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 I see you have, indeed, chosen to go with personal attack again instead of reasonable support of your position with evidence that scales with the extraordinary claims you are making. Do you also believe in santa claus due to the traditions and writings of learned scholars? 1
tar Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 (edited) Immortal, I talked to Brahma/God/Allah when I was 13, I know him still. He has no near enemies nor far ones. If there is anything, it is Brahma, according to your own knowledge and your own words. There is no possibility that your everything is anything other than my everything. Under the circumstances you cannot call me, or any other person an enemy of Brahma. Neither are you in a position to say that you know what cannot be known, and I do not know what cannot be known. If you make a distinction between yourself and TAR2, you are in error, by your own logic. How could either of us be anything but Brahma? So give up the pretense. You and your ledgends have arbitrarily divided Brahma up into 31 distinct, persons, evil and fair, and you endeavor to invite some of these persons in, and fight off some of the others. You endeavor to relieve yourself of you, so you can claim you know Brahma, and claim that therefor I do not. Bull doodoo. If I am your enemy near or far, you are you, and not selfless. What if I already know my job, and my employer...without your help...without your secrets...what if I happen to know that no special key is required to reach nirvana, and we are all already there? How could you possibly deny that every piece and part of creation is not Brahma...already. I do not fear the wrath of any god, named by others. It makes no sense to call all of the universe other than me, unless there is a me, to make the call. And since there is a me, it must be my call to make. I am already in, you are already in. Neither of us are separate from Brahma, except in that we are currently alive and able to make the call, that we are other than each other, and other than Brahma at the moment. Why, under the circumstances, would you label me a liar, and you, a teller of truth? And why could I not know the eternal, and be TAR2, knowing it? You claim you know it, and you are Immortal? Right? Regards, TAR2 Edited December 24, 2012 by tar
Moontanman Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 The time has come to show intolerance towards atheism. http://www.metanexus.net/archive/ultimate_reality/zeilinger.pdf "In conclusion it may very well be said that information is the irreducible kernel from which everything else flows. Then the question why nature appears quantized is simply a consequence of the fact that information itself is quantized by necessity. It might even be fair to observe that the concept that information is fundamental is very old knowledge of humanity, witness for example the beginning of gospel according to John: "In the beginning was the Word"." Anton Zeilinger Professor of Physics Why should I shut up when the time has come to make atheists shut up, Yes science has proved that this world is a mere shadow of the ultimate reality that exists beyond space-time, that's a solid evidence based on cogent scientific explanations. I don't wear glasses and I don't need to act like inexcusably ignorant atheists who somehow can't understand the stuff when evidence is shown against their views. That was cited as evidence for near enemies(secular Buddhists, ignorant Hindus and conservative Christians) and not for far enemies(atheists). I know atheists won't be convinced with such stuff. The point is the traditions of Vajrayana, Smarta and Valentinian should be taken seriously because there is scientific evidence to back up this single theory, that's why even atheists can't get away from this. Yet again you do nothing but insult our intelligence, you provide nothing even resembling evidence of your position... A disappointment immortal, your argument is no different than any other huckster trying to game a rube...
immortal Posted December 24, 2012 Author Posted December 24, 2012 You claim you know it, and you are Immortal? Right? Regards, TAR2 When I came here I was a young atheist who was obsessed with anti-ageing research, fountain of youth, telomeres at the end of chromosomes and other stuff. Klotho: The next fountain of youth. http://www.anti-aging.org/blog/2007/12/klotho_the_next_fountain_of_yo.html Therefore my nick has nothing to do with religion or my position on religion, if it has any more meaning to it, it is just a coincidence. But people do research a lot and new evidences changes ones perspectives of the world and its time to change your perspective of the world according to the evidence. The emergence of the physical world from information processing. http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1011/1011.3436.pdf Exploring the virtual reality conjecture http://fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/Whitworth_FQXiWhitworthEssa_1.pdf The Physical World as a Virtual Reality http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0801/0801.0337.pdf By Dr. Brain Whitworth, Ph.D., Information Systems, Senior Lecturer, Institute for Information and Mathematical Sciences, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand has written several papers related to Virtual Reality theory. This is not physicalism(the belief that physical objects described by physics exists out there in the external world), not solipsism (where only You and your mind exists), not Dualism (a belief in substance dualism that the brain and mind are two different things), this isn't the Matrix either. This is a philosophical view of its own in my opinion and as Bernard puts it an assumption which is seldom questioned is a welcome Illumination. Based on recent experimental findings my claims are not as extraordinary as it seems, there are well sort out arguments by numerous reputed scientists, physicists and scholars worldwide. -1
tar Posted December 25, 2012 Posted December 25, 2012 Immortal, Perhaps I have already considered those things, Immortal. I can't yet draw you the diagram, but my take is consistent with reality. But I have had my share of experiences, insights, epiphanies and such. There is a philosophy, a world view that I hold, that is dependent on their being other people like me, experiencing a consistent objective reality. No "virtual" stuff required, no mind body dualism. I am not alone, in my views, though I am not a proponent of any "school" of thought. I see a little of my take in PeterJ, peices of my take in you, and oddly perhaps, a similar framework as Inow, in terms of what must be the case. In fact I generally feel that everybody that is participating in Inow's "broken" thread, is "a near friend" and we are actually, together, "understanding" something. The "secret" of the Vedas would be useful to us, if there was some emperical evidence attached, rather than vague imagery, arbitrary claims, and reference to "persons" that do not exist. Light rays that can not be captured or measured and a slew of other intangible assertions. You can not quite call it science, until the scientific method is applicable to it. Don't tell me, its time for me to come to your insights. I am 59 and I may have already had the insights you are referring to...and I am on to learn other stuff, put other stuff together and come up with "meaning" that is accessible to all. We will see. Regards, TAR2 1
immortal Posted December 25, 2012 Author Posted December 25, 2012 Immortal, Perhaps I have already considered those things, Immortal. I can't yet draw you the diagram, but my take is consistent with reality. But I have had my share of experiences, insights, epiphanies and such. There is a philosophy, a world view that I hold, that is dependent on their being other people like me, experiencing a consistent objective reality. No "virtual" stuff required, no mind body dualism. I am not alone, in my views, though I am not a proponent of any "school" of thought. Sorry, your view is not consistent with facts established from experiments. "The doctrine that the world is made up of objects whose existence is independent of human consciousness turns out to be in conflict with quantum mechanics and with facts established by experiment." - Bernard D'Espagnat The "secret" of the Vedas would be useful to us, if there was some emperical evidence attached, rather than vague imagery, arbitrary claims, and reference to "persons" that do not exist. Light rays that can not be captured or measured and a slew of other intangible assertions. You can not quite call it science, until the scientific method is applicable to it. This isn't science, this is Esotericism and the methodologies of Esotericism indeed works supporting the belief for the existence of gods, science is not all there is. Don't tell me, its time for me to come to your insights. I am 59 and I may have already had the insights you are referring to...and I am on to learn other stuff, put other stuff together and come up with "meaning" that is accessible to all. We will see. Regards, TAR2 You don't have to come to my insights, all I want you to do is give respect to what nature is saying and stop showing double standards. Yet again you do nothing but insult our intelligence, you provide nothing even resembling evidence of your position... A disappointment immortal, your argument is no different than any other huckster trying to game a rube... Stop ignoring evidence and accept facts of nature as they are till then the criticism is well intended and I am not selling anything for you to buy. -2
tar Posted December 25, 2012 Posted December 25, 2012 Immortal, If human consciousness is important for a human to have, which I have no doubt is the case, there can be no surprise that we do very little as humans, without human consciousness being involved. One of my personal observations, that has become one of my standards in logic, and understanding of the world, is that my "take" on reality, can not be accomplished without me. Correlarily, your "take" on reality, can not be accomplished without you involved. The thing that can be taken from these two facts is that there is a you and there is a me. This firmly establishes an objective reality for me, in the person of you, and an objective reality for you, in the person of me. Furthering this logic, is not difficult, and the greater world, which is object to you and me both, becomes apparent and real for the both of us. Interesting to me, and very important in this discussion is the way visual images enter our body, through the "objective" lens of the eye. Upside down and backward the forms and shapes and frequencies of the outside world, create an analog image of the world at the back of our eye. Not unlike the shadows on the wall of Plato's cave, that you led off with in this thread. Or if you will, consider the Sun shining brightly on a sidewalk, aglow with its light, but not its image. Prick a pin hole in a black piece of paper and hold it between the sidewalk and the Sun, and an image of the Sun, backward, and upside down, will appear on the sidewalk in the middle of the shadow that the paper casts. We are much like the apparatus described above. Our existence, in the here and now, creates a focal point, where an image of the world, appears. And our brains have evolved to store and remember these analog images, and divine our present location within objective reality. So that we can move about and secure food for metabolism, so we can move about and otherwise position ourselves within objective reality in advantageous positions, and with our limbs and tools, otherwise manipulate objective reality to our liking. We only can have this relationship with objective reality, if objective reality exist for us to have this relationship with. Call it physicalism or dualism, or virtual reality, or anything you want to call it, we remain real entities, focusing on real aspects of reality. And TAR2 remains TAR2 and Immortal remains Immortal. True subjectively and true objectively. So we have a little difficulty nailing down the thing as it is, since we only have the image to work with in our heads, and the image of the thing, is not the thing. Does not mean the thing itself does not exist, in and of itself. In fact, in my book, it ensures the thing has a form and presence which is something like the shadow which it casts on the wall of our cave. On the other hand, we cannot even catch the shadows of your 31 gods. They do not register on the wall. The implication is, they are not objectively real. Regards, TAR2
immortal Posted December 25, 2012 Author Posted December 25, 2012 Do you also believe in santa claus due to the traditions and writings of learned scholars? Religious Scholars not only have the power to change history they also have the power to shape our future. Its ironic that Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Jews etc don't know what's there in their own religion. See how Elaine Pagels, a gnostic scholar argues how the gnostic scriptures should be accepted as part of the mystical scriptures of the Christian cannon. Gnostic' Texts vs. the New Testament http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2004/04/Gnostic-Texts-Vs-The-New-Testament.aspx Scholarly Smackdown: Did Paul Distort Christianity? http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2004/04/Scholarly-Smackdowndid-Paul-Distort-Christianity.aspx?p=2 The American Institute of Vedic studies is quite determined in removing the misinterpretations and ignorance about the Vedas and the Upanishads and as I said the views of secular Buddhists, ignorant Hindus and conservative Christians will be corrected by Scholarly evidence. The Myth of Aryan Invasion Debate http://www.vedanet.com/2012/06/myth-of-aryan-invasion-update-2001/ The Original teachings of Yoga: From Patanjali back to Hiranyagarbha, http://www.vedanet.com/2012/06/the-original-teachings-of-yoga-from-patanjali-back-to-hiranyagarbha/ The Vedic Deities and Yoga (quite relevant to the current debate) http://www.vedanet.com/2012/06/vedic-deities-and-yoga/ "From the eastern viewpoint and especially the yoga traditions, it is impossible to separate yoga from the deities as they represent the universal forces of creation and transformation." Someone said India owes its railways to the westerners which is true(the east never sees science as evil, it encourages science and the scientific method which is an another misconception) but should we not clarify the damage, the great loss to the globe and the mistakes the westerners did while interpreting the Vedic texts and its origins. The Myth of the Aryan Invasion of India http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/aryan/aryan_frawley.html "Even though Indian Vedic scholars like Dayananda saraswati, Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Arobindo rejected it, most Hindus today passively accept it." The Aryan Invasion Theory:The Final Nail in its Coffin http://www.stephen-knapp.com/aryan_invasion_theory_the_final_nail_in_its_coffin.htm When more and more academic people start to investigate these religious traditions they will soon realize the truth hidden in them. Who likes to be a prisoner in a cave, obviously everyone wants to be a philosopher-king. The people of these genuine traditions know the truth.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now