The Secret of the Vedas

[immortal]

If you do accept that there is only brahman and not many gods of hindu mythology, then what are you arguing about ? Please make your self clear ( your posts are becoming too long to read, sorry don't have that much time). What is your basic argument ?

 

Like many others you have misunderstood the concept of Brahman, when I talk of Vedic deities I am not talking of sky gods, I am talking of inner gods, gods which exists with in you, all these gods are emanations of Brahman. Many academic scholars have failed to understand the all very important concept of Ishvara in Advaita Vedanta.

 

Vedic Deities and Yoga

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."

 

It is impossible to separate the Vedic deities from yoga, many people are ignorant of this and they think that the eastern religions are atheistic, that's a serious misunderstanding, the eastern viewpoint is just the opposite and according to it, gods are real and these gods are everywhere in all aspects of human existence and in all aspects of human life - James Hillman.

 

Whether you take Buddhism or Hinduism, the deities in it are very important and without them there is no non-dualism and no Brahman. To better understand this concept read about Adi Buddha which exists in the Vajrayana tradition of Buddhism.

 

 

In Vajrayana Buddhism, the Adi-Buddha, or Adibuddha (Tibetan: Dang-po'i sangs-rgyas), is the "Primordial Buddha." The term refers to a self-emanating, self-originating Buddha, present before anything else existed. Samantabhadra, Vairocana and Vajradhara are the best known names for Adi-Buddha, though there are others. Adi-Buddha is usually depicted as dark blue.

 

The concept of Adi-Buddha is the closest to monotheism of any form of Buddhism. Even then, Adi-Buddha is recognized as the center of an extended array of peaceful and wrathful deities, which are considered reflections of it. All famous sages and Bodhisattvas are said to be reflections of Adi-Buddha, and many are identified as the "personality" of it.

 

Adi-Buddha is better compared to the abstracted forces of Brahman, Ayn Sof or Arche rather than a personal creator God in the mold of Yahweh or Ishvara. Also, Adi-Buddha is not said to be the creator, but the originator of all things. Adi-Buddha is a deity in an emanationist sense.

 

Adi-Buddha is a representation of the interdependence of phenomena, being an entity that can be regarded as a creator in a relative sense. Though phenomena can be symbolically represented in the primordial nature of Adi-Buddha and have in it their collective source, the universe is not regarded as being linearly created, being in a continuous, eternal co-relation with the deity. It also represents the non-duality between the noumenom (the individual's mind), and the phenomena (the cosmos), which are also seen as interrelated.

 

What are the divine light rays that I frequently talk about which is the very basis of Vedas and Vedic Knowledge?

 

To see a sample read this -

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_rays#In_Hindu_scripture

The seven rays is an occult concept that has appeared in several religions and esoteric philosophies, since at least the 6th century BCE, of the Aryan (Indo-European) peoples in both Western culture and in India. In the west, it can be seen in early western mystery traditions such as Gnosticism and the Roman Mithraic Mysteries; and in texts and iconic art of the Catholic Church as early as the Byzantine era.^[1][2][3][4] In India, the concept has been part of Hindu religious philosophy and scripture since at least the Vishnu Purana, dating from the post-Vedic era.^[5][6][7]

 

Agni is a Hindu and Vedic deity depicted in three forms: fire, lightning and the sun. In Hindu art, Agni is depicted with two or seven hands, two heads, and three legs. In each head, he has seven fiery tongues with which he licks sacrificial butter. He rides a ram or a chariot harnessed by fiery horses. His attributes are an axe, a torch, prayer beads and a flaming spear. Agni is represented as red and two-faced, suggesting both his destructive and his beneficent qualities, and with black eyes and hair. Seven rays of light emanate from his body.^[25]

 

In the Gayatri prayer from the Vedas, the seven rays are described as the emanations of the Sun, identified with the creator of life, "Because the being who shines with seven rays, assuming the forms of time and illumines all... naturally shines with seven rays is called light or the effulgent power; the light of the Generator or Sun - the light is the sun, the sun is the light, they are identical."^[5]

 

20th century Hindu scholar, poet and mystic, Sri Aurobindo, described the Vedic seven rays of knowledge, or Agni, as "the seven forms of the Thought-principle" and wrote that "the seven brilliant horses of the sun and their full union constitutes the seven-headed Thought of Ayasya by which the lost sun of Truth is recovered. That thought is again established in the seven rivers, the seven principles of being divine and human, the totality of which founds the perfect spiritual existence."^[7]

 

^{These divine light rays emanate from the body of Deities which is the very basis of all Vedic knowledge, even Shankara knew about this, its quite silly to say Advaita is atheistic, no without these deities there is no Advaita, no non-dualism and no Brahman. It existed from the very beginning of the Vedic era.}

 

^{No one is arguing for a God who is looking us from above, I am arguing for a personal God, the inner God which resides in you and the one who is stimulating your mind and Intellect to do noble deeds, this is what I'm arguing for.}

[CarbonCopy]

Like many others you have misunderstood the concept of Brahman, when I talk of Vedic deities I am not talking of sky gods, I am talking of inner gods, gods which exists with in you, all these gods are emanations of Brahman. Many academic scholars have failed to understand the all very important concept of Ishvara in Advaita Vedanta.

 

Even I am talking of inner gods, if I had not made myself clear enough.

 

No one is arguing for a God who is looking us from above, I am arguing for a personal God, the inner God which resides in you and the one who is stimulating your mind and Intellect to do noble deeds, this is what I'm arguing for.

 

Well even I'm saying that. It's just that your arguing in the wrong. The brahman can be proven by science, and it should not be confined to the just written texts and quotes.

[immortal]

 

Even I am talking of inner gods, if I had not made myself clear enough.

 

Well even I'm saying that.

 

Well you were the one who claimed Indra, Agni, Soma etc and other gods are just mythological stories and that they do not exist, in the very beginning of our discussion. Isn't it? That was the cause of this confusion, have you changed your mind now? The concept of Vedic deities are as important as the concept of Brahman.

 

It's just that your arguing in the wrong. The brahman can be proven by science, and it should not be confined to the just written texts and quotes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occult#Science_and_the_occult

 

Science and the occult

 

To the occultist, occultism is conceived of as the study of the inner nature of things, as opposed to the outer characteristics that are studied by science. The German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer designates this "inner nature" with the term Will, and suggests that science and mathematics are unable to penetrate beyond the relationship between one thing and another in order to explain the "inner nature" of the thing itself, independent of any external causal relationships with other "things". Schopenhauer also points towards this inherently relativistic nature of mathematics and conventional science in his formulation of the 'World as Will'. By defining a thing solely in terms of its external relationships or effects we only find its external, or explicit nature. Occultism, on the other hand, is concerned with the nature of the "thing-in-itself". This is often accomplished through direct perceptual awareness, known as mysticism.

 

From the scientific perspective, occultism is regarded as unscientific as it does not make use of the standard scientific method to obtain facts.

 

---

 

I honestly don't think Brahman has anything to do with science or with quantum mechanics or even with metaphysics. This is not science for we use different methods like intuitive reasoning and rely on psychological observation i.e by directly accessing the numinous or the noumenal and more importantly we are not studying the empirical world at all and hence this is mysticism or esotercism and this is not science.

 

As Schopenhauer and Bernard D'Espagnat say science cannot get beyond mere appearances of phenomena and study the things which exists in itself, the noumenon. I strongly suggest to abandon this approach of linking these esoteric concepts with either science or with metaphysics, these things are not what you think they are. There cannot be an equation for Brahman and nor can science study it, its quite silly and based on a very serious misunderstanding of Religion.

 

My goal is not to prove these things using science because science can never dwell into those things but to show scientists why it is so compelling to invest their time in esotericism rather than seeing it with contempt eyes and rejecting it al together from the academia as a whole, I am arguing for a scientific field of esotericism and not for the exact sciences like physics or chemistry.

 

---

I think this makes it very clear.

 

The deep understanding that we have no access to ultimate reality in the “new physics” but only to “shadows on the wall,” had a significant impact on the great physicists of the last century: it led the most sensitive among them to look “outside the cave,” i.e., beyond physics, to know more about this reality. Their interest for the doctrines, ideas and concepts of Eastern philosophies corroborates this. It is not, as many authors believe, that there are particular affinities between the world views of physics and mysticism. As Wilber rightly points out, it was the “radical failure of physics, and not its supposed similarities to mysticism, that paradoxically led so many physicists to a mystical view of the world.”

- Jonathon Duqette, philosopher of religion.

It is the business of physics to give true descriptions of objectively existing objects such as the moon. Philosophers refer to this sort of claim as "scientific realism".

According to Einstein, the whole purpose of science is to get behind the phenomena of experimental data and their mathematical description to the real world that underlies them. As he put it, "Reality is the business of physics". He believed, to the end, that the goal of science was to discover the way the world really is as opposed to our perceptions and conceptions of it, and that orthodox quantum theory had not only failed to achieve such a goal but had prematurely abandoned any such quest.

- DOES THE MOON EXIST ONLY WHEN SOMEONE IS LOOKING AT IT? Raymond D. Bradley

 

It was not the similarities between quantum mechanics and Vedanta that attracted physicists of the past century into it rather it was the failure of quantum mechanics to give a complete objective account of reality was what led physicists to look for alternative philosophical models of reality. Quantum mechanics and Advaita have no similarities between each other whatsoever.

Edited December 30, 2012 by immortal

[CarbonCopy]

Well you were the one who claimed Indra, Agni, Soma etc and other gods are just mythological stories and that they do not exist, in the very beginning of our discussion. Isn't it? That was the cause of this confusion, have you changed your mind now? The concept of Vedic deities are as important as the concept of Brahman.

 

yes, these gods are used the invention of the vedic seers to convey morals to the common people and because they find it difficult to imagine something as abstract as brahman. But, of course they are not real. Don't tell me that you actually think that there is a person like Indra in the sky somewhere and he is fighting with Asuras, and when he has a problem he runs to Vishnu help. Those are just stories with deep inner meaning.

 

I honestly don't think Brahman has anything to do with science or with quantum mechanics or even with metaphysics. This is not science for we use different methods like intuitive reasoning and rely on psychological observation i.e by directly accessing the numinous or the noumenal and more importantly we are not studying the empirical world at all and hence this is mysticism or esotercism and this is not science.

 

We might not be able to observe things like brahman with our eyes using the scientific method because these things breakdown at such a low level. It could be, as you pointed out, that our very conciseness and the act of observing things hides braman away from us. Or maybe with better tech ( an LHC on steroids ) we might be able to observe the very fabric of spacetime which might lead us to brahman. Either way, I still think it can be expressed mathematically in a big and beautiful theory . Maybe the mathemical concept of brahan might be able to unify all forces for a theory of everything.

[immortal]

 

yes, these gods are used the invention of the vedic seers to convey morals to the common people and because they find it difficult to imagine something as abstract as brahman. But, of course they are not real. Don't tell me that you actually think that there is a person like Indra in the sky somewhere and he is fighting with Asuras, and when he has a problem he runs to Vishnu help. Those are just stories with deep inner meaning.

 

Nope, Indra, Soma, Agni, Prana etc are anthropomorphic gods with whom you can have a dialogue with.

 

 

We might not be able to observe things like brahman with our eyes using the scientific method because these things breakdown at such a low level. It could be, as you pointed out, that our very conciseness and the act of observing things hides braman away from us. Or maybe with better tech ( an LHC on steroids ) we might be able to observe the very fabric of spacetime which might lead us to brahman. Either way, I still think it can be expressed mathematically in a big and beautiful theory . Maybe the mathemical concept of brahan might be able to unify all forces for a theory of everything.

 

The sooner you realize the epistemology of modern science is different from that of eastern religions and that they are epistemologically incompatible the better is for you.

[Semjase]

 

Well you were the one who claimed Indra, Agni, Soma etc and other gods are just mythological stories and that they do not exist, in the very beginning of our discussion. Isn't it? That was the cause of this confusion, have you changed your mind now? The concept of Vedic deities are as important as the concept of Brahman.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occult#Science_and_the_occult

 

Science and the occult

 

To the occultist, occultism is conceived of as the study of the inner nature of things, as opposed to the outer characteristics that are studied by science. The German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer designates this "inner nature" with the term Will, and suggests that science and mathematics are unable to penetrate beyond the relationship between one thing and another in order to explain the "inner nature" of the thing itself, independent of any external causal relationships with other "things". Schopenhauer also points towards this inherently relativistic nature of mathematics and conventional science in his formulation of the 'World as Will'. By defining a thing solely in terms of its external relationships or effects we only find its external, or explicit nature. Occultism, on the other hand, is concerned with the nature of the "thing-in-itself". This is often accomplished through direct perceptual awareness, known as mysticism.

 

From the scientific perspective, occultism is regarded as unscientific as it does not make use of the standard scientific method to obtain facts.

 

---

 

I honestly don't think Brahman has anything to do with science or with quantum mechanics or even with metaphysics. This is not science for we use different methods like intuitive reasoning and rely on psychological observation i.e by directly accessing the numinous or the noumenal and more importantly we are not studying the empirical world at all and hence this is mysticism or esotercism and this is not science.

 

As Schopenhauer and Bernard D'Espagnat say science cannot get beyond mere appearances of phenomena and study the things which exists in itself, the noumenon. I strongly suggest to abandon this approach of linking these esoteric concepts with either science or with metaphysics, these things are not what you think they are. There cannot be an equation for Brahman and nor can science study it, its quite silly and based on a very serious misunderstanding of Religion.

 

My goal is not to prove these things using science because science can never dwell into those things but to show scientists why it is so compelling to invest their time in esotericism rather than seeing it with contempt eyes and rejecting it al together from the academia as a whole, I am arguing for a scientific field of esotericism and not for the exact sciences like physics or chemistry.

 

---

I think this makes it very clear.

 

The deep understanding that we have no access to ultimate reality in the “new physics” but only to “shadows on the wall,” had a significant impact on the great physicists of the last century: it led the most sensitive among them to look “outside the cave,” i.e., beyond physics, to know more about this reality. Their interest for the doctrines, ideas and concepts of Eastern philosophies corroborates this. It is not, as many authors believe, that there are particular affinities between the world views of physics and mysticism. As Wilber rightly points out, it was the “radical failure of physics, and not its supposed similarities to mysticism, that paradoxically led so many physicists to a mystical view of the world.”

- Jonathon Duqette, philosopher of religion.

It is the business of physics to give true descriptions of objectively existing objects such as the moon. Philosophers refer to this sort of claim as "scientific realism".

According to Einstein, the whole purpose of science is to get behind the phenomena of experimental data and their mathematical description to the real world that underlies them. As he put it, "Reality is the business of physics". He believed, to the end, that the goal of science was to discover the way the world really is as opposed to our perceptions and conceptions of it, and that orthodox quantum theory had not only failed to achieve such a goal but had prematurely abandoned any such quest.

- DOES THE MOON EXIST ONLY WHEN SOMEONE IS LOOKING AT IT? Raymond D. Bradley

 

It was not the similarities between quantum mechanics and Vedanta that attracted physicists of the past century into it rather it was the failure of quantum mechanics to give a complete objective account of reality was what led physicists to look for alternative philosophical models of reality. Quantum mechanics and Advaita have no similarities between each other whatsoever.

 

 

I'll prove you wrong on this, if the power of prophecy is scientifically proven to exist, which it has been,

then in order to accurately predict the future every aspect of the future has to theoretically exist

as a projection of the present, this includes every aspect of the physical make-up of a human

including the scientific make-up of consciousness its self, this is required to accurately determine the future,

and without this it would become impossible to predict the future.

 

The consciousness doesn't actually exist as a real experience in the future,

only as a theoretical possibility yet to be experienced.

[Moontanman]

 

 

I'll prove you wrong on this, if the power of prophecy is scientifically proven to exist, which it has been

 

 

Evidence please, your assertion has not been shown to be true...

[Semjase]

The psychic twins have made have made remarkable predictions that defy

the law of chance by 100%.

 

These are documented and listed below

 

The Psychic Twins were the only psychics who predicted the World Trade Center terrorist attacks and the attack on The Pentagon.
- Predicted on Art Bell “Coast to Coast A.M.” Premier Radio 11/99.

The Psychic Twins did predict the simultaneous terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center Towers and on Washington, D.C. by Bin Laden.

Terry and Linda Jamison made this prediction to 20 million listeners on the Art Bell Radio Show, Coast to Coast AM, on November 2, 1999, in an interview with the renowned radio host (the tape of this interview is available from the archives of Premier Radio Network). There have been many documentary films made about The Psychic Twins’ famous prediction, including ABC Nightline Prime special “Beyond Belief,” which aired June 2011, and the hit A&E film “Psychic Children” made by CBS News.

The Psychic Twins are the most documented psychics in history. Their amazing world predictions include terrorist attacks, medical breakthroughs, national and natural disasters, the U.S. economy, stock market crashes, et al. Because they keep files on all predictions they write, The Psychic Twins were able to locate at least five different documents of their channeled writing which specifically foretold these events of 9/11 for the year 2001.

 

 

 

The Psychic Twins predicted that Michael Phelps would win more medals than anyone in Olympic history in the 2012 London games.

Written by The Psychic Twins

Celebrity, Predictions, What's New, World

(August 1, 2012 | Yahoo News) LONDON – Michael Phelps Becomes Most Decorated Olympian in History after 19 Medals
Nineteen times now, Michael Phelps has bowed his head on an Olympic medals podium and had precious hardware slipped around his neck. That eclipses the decades-old record of 18 medals set by Russian gymnast Larissa Latynina. Fifteen of the medals have been gold (another record), two have been silver, and two have been bronze. With three events left, there should be more to come this week.

When viewed from a wide angle, it is a staggering achievement. Just making the United States Olympic team puts a swimmer in rare and elite company. Advancing to win a single medal further thins the ranks of the exceptional. Winning multiple medals or appearing in multiple Olympics establishes the greatest of the great.

- Predicted on ‘Journey to Center’ (Empower Radio) with Dr. Tammi Baliszewski, July 25, 2012 (Click here: podcast

 

 

 

The Psychic Twins predicted “a major lone wolf terror attack in Denver Colorado in 2012.”

Written by The Psychic Twins

Predictions, Terrorism, What's New, World

(July 20, 2012 | USA Today) Aurora, CO. 12 dead, 59 wounded in ‘Dark Knight’ Denver Colorado theater shooting – A gunman wearing a gas mask, helmet and full body armor opened fire early Friday in a crowded suburban Denver theater at the opening of the Batman movie The Dark Knight Rises, killing 12 people and injuring at least 59.

Federal law enforcement officials identified the suspect as James Holmes, 24, who lives about 4 miles away from the theater in Aurora. He is in custody.

At the suspect’s home, Oates said investigators from the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives were attempting to disarm what appeared to be sophisticated incendiary devices. Officials said the suspect purchased a ticket for the show and once inside the theater propped open an emergency exit door, which he later entered after retrieving four weapons and a tear gas canister. Dressed in dark clothing, he stood at the front of the theater and hurled the canister as he fired into the crowd at around 12:30 a.m. MT at the multiplex theater in a mall in Aurora, police said. “There were bullet (casings) just falling on my head. They were burning my forehead,” Jennifer Seeger said, adding that the gunman, dressed like a SWAT team member, fired steadily except when he stopped to reload.He said the suspect was armed with one AR-15, a Remington 870 shotgun and two 40-caliber Glock handguns.

- Predicted on Wings of Love, 5/16/12 (podcast available online)

 

 

 

 

The Psychic Twins predicted on national TV in 2007: “Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes will divorce in 5 years.” Exactly five years later, it happened.

Written by The Psychic Twins

Celebrity, Predictions, What's New, World

After five years of marriage, TomCruise and KatieHolmes are getting a divorce, PEOPLE has learned exclusively. The Rock of Ages star, 49, wed actress Holmes, 33, in an Italian castle in November 2006. They have daughter Suri, 6.

- Predicted on The Dr. Keith Ablow Show, January 15, 2007

 

 

 

The Psychic Twins predicted “There will be a major stock correction in June of 2012.”

Written by The Psychic Twins

Economic, General Interest, Predictions, What's New, World

Predicted on 2 shows—see end of paragraph for exact shows

(June 1, 2012 | CNNMoney) NEW YORK — Wall Street suffered its bloodiest day of the year Friday as U.S. stocks sank more than 2% following an ugly jobs report. The Dow erased all its gains for the year, and the S&P 500 and Nasdaq moved into correction territory, down more than 10% from the year’s highs. The sell-off was broad, with all 30 Dow components ending in the red, and 97% of the S&P 500 closing lower. As jittery investors fled stocks, they plowed into the safety of U.S. government debt, pushing the yields on the 10-year Treasury note and the 30-year Treasury bond to fresh record lows. The Dow Jones industrial average (INDU) plunged 275 points, or 2.2%, the biggest one-day drop since November. The blue-chip index gave up all its gains for the year, and is now 99 points below where it finished 2011. The S&P 500 (SPX) lost 32 points, or 2.5%, and the Nasdaq (COMP) dropped 80 points, or 2.8%. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq are now down more than 10% from their highs of the year, which means they are officially in what investors call a correction.

“The U.S. employment report was simply terrible,” said Marc Chandler, global head of currency strategy at Brown Brothers Harriman. The CNNMoney Fear and Greed index showed investor confidence sliding even farther into “extreme fear” territory on the news.

- Predicted on Wings of Love 1/4/12 and Colette Baron-Reid Show (CBS New Sky Radio) 5/29/12

 

This confrims that the science of prophecy does exist.

 

 

 

 

[iNow]

This confrims that the science of prophecy does exist.

 

Sorry, but no. It does no such thing. It merely confirms that people are really good at seeing what they want to see.

[Semjase]

They have credibility the pentagon uses them.

[iNow]

Sorry, but no. That doesn't "confirm that the 'science of prophecy' exists" either

[immortal]

 

 

I'll prove you wrong on this, if the power of prophecy is scientifically proven to exist, which it has been,

then in order to accurately predict the future every aspect of the future has to theoretically exist

as a projection of the present, this includes every aspect of the physical make-up of a human

including the scientific make-up of consciousness its self, this is required to accurately determine the future,

and without this it would become impossible to predict the future.

 

The consciousness doesn't actually exist as a real experience in the future,

only as a theoretical possibility yet to be experienced.

 

That's the point I'm making science cannot go beyond mere appearances of phenomena, it is the science of occult which gives us the true nature of things as it exists, you said the future as a whole already exists which is not a bad idea but in what sense, these are the questions which science cannot penetrate and know the true nature of things as it exists, the reality which exists out there might be completely different than the kind of ontology you are using.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJVDeusOfFM

 

The nature of time which is the subject of ontology is beyond the knowable of science and its nature is completely different from the conceptualization of time that we make using mathematical relationships which are only mere appearances of phenomena. I do believe that the future as a whole already exists but the empirical sciences cannot know in what sense it exists, it is the science of the occult which deals with nature of the things.

 

The Science of prophecy is also an another hypothesis which need to be tested.

 

"Do practitioners of yoga attain paranormal abilities? The third book of the Yoga-Sūtras deals in detail with the attainment of supernormal power (e.g., Woods, 1998). Upon mastery of fixed-attention, contemplation and concentration, practitioners of the yoga method can be expected to have many such abilities, among them to be able to see into the future, read the thoughts of other persons, and make their bodies indiscernible (see also Paranjpe, 1982). Again, similar claims are made for Tibetan Buddhists who have attained the state of pure consciousness. Apart from the above, the abilities postulated include various forms of extrasensory perception, recalling one’s previous lifetimes, moving through solid objects, walking on water, or multiplying one’s own forms (Wallace, 1999, p. 185). There seems to be already some preliminary evidence in favor of the general hypothesis (and probably some more against it) from systematic studies, but the empirical basis, at least as systematic research attempts are concerned is still rather scarce (Ramakrishna Rao, 1982; Ramakrishna Rao, Dukhan & Krishna Rao, 1978). Also for the examination of this hypothesis, it would probably be a good idea to review all the available evidence before conducting new studies. "

- Peter Sedlmeier, Indian Psychology and the Scientific method.

The nature of time should not be treated as something objectively existing even time is idealistic and is a manifestation of a Aeon(Gnosticism) of the Pleroma.

 

 

1. ^ Schopenhauer wrote of this Neoplatonist philosopher: "With Plotinus there even appears, probably for the first time in Western philosophy, idealism that had long been current in the East even at that time, for it taught (Enneads, iii, lib. vii, c.10) that the soul has made the world by stepping from eternity into time, with the explanation: 'For there is for this universe no other place than the soul or mind' (neque est alter hujus universi locus quam anima), indeed the ideality of time is expressed in the words: 'We should not accept time outside the soul or mind' (oportet autem nequaquam extra animam tempus accipere)." (Parerga and Paralipomena, Volume I, "Fragments for the History of Philosophy," § 7)
2. ^ Similarly, professor Ludwig Noiré wrote: "For the first time in Western philosophy we find idealism proper in Plotinus (Enneads, iii, 7, 10), where he says, "The only space or place of the world is the soul," and "Time must not be assumed to exist outside the soul."

[Semjase]

As with time dilation, time slows, consciousness slows,particles slow

all at the same rate which follows, they all have to be scientifically connected.

[immortal]

As with time dilation, time slows, consciousness slows,particles slow

all at the same rate which follows, they all have to be scientifically connected.

 

That's exactly the kind of connection that Bernard D'Espagnat has put forward in his theory of consciousness.

 

 

It is then interesting to examine what place consciousness has in d’Espagnat’s philosophical considerations. How does it relate to his concept of ontological reality? D’Espagnat develops in several books the idea of a “coemergence” of consciousness and empirical reality from reality-in-itself.94 As far as the origin of consciousness is concerned, he rejects the “identity theory,” which identifies consciousness with some material structure internal to or involving neurons. He also rejects the “efflorescence theory” according to which consciousness is a derived product of neuronal activity.

 

His argument is based on implications of quantum physics: all parts of our bodies, including neurons, are essentially elements of the empirical reality. Since empirical reality, as a representation of reality-in-itself, is a priori relative to consciousness, it is difficult to imagine how it might possibly generate the latter or be identified with it.95 Does it mean that consciousness constitutes some sort of an absolute, as stated in radical versions of idealism?

 

According to d’Espagnat, the answer is no. States of consciousness involved in quantum measurements are also relative in the sense that they refer to “points of view” adopted by different observers in different contexts.96 Neither the things or phenomena observed nor the states of consciousness involved in measurement are absolute. Both seem to exist in relation to each other, or to generate reciprocally one another, and this is why d’Espagnat brings in the notion of a coemergence of consciousness and empirical reality. This coemergence arises — atemporally, because time is part of empirical reality — out of the mind-independent reality that is conceptually prior to both consciousness and empirical reality. What is really “veiled” in d’Espagnat’s conception is not empirical reality but ontological reality, which is identified with Being itself (Fig. 5.1).

 

 

- Jonathon Duqette, philosopher of religion.

[svgrammaton]

Do you whant to know more - watch this interesting facts links removed

[swansont]

Do you whant to know more - watch this interesting facts links removed

 

!

Moderator Note

svgrammaton, if you want to contribute something, it has to be more than just a bunch of links. This is a discussion site.

[tar]

Immortal,

 

Don't know quite how to respond to your recent posts. They were extensive and had multiple links to many different thinkers and such. I did not explore them, and did not know which parts and peices were meant to support your thesis and which were to be taken as evidence against.

 

Bottom line, too many different ideas, each with different background and focus to get a good picture of what you are trying to say.

 

Many of the ideas seem to me to be arguing exactly against the 31 gods being objectively real.

That there is "something" which is real, that we are all a part of, is already evident to everybody here. Getting particular about it, in terms of the 31 gods, is your choice and take, and the "ideas" that your 31 gods embody are not at issue here. They, the ideas, can stand on their own, without any "outside" help or magic. Where is the proof that the 31 gods, themselves, exist anywhere, but in your analogy?

 

Regards TAR2

 

Your underlying argument seems to be...if there is thunder, there must be Thor.

 

I do not think this works out, logically.

Edited January 11, 2013 by tar

[immortal]

Where is the proof that the 31 gods, themselves, exist anywhere, but in your analogy?

 

Regards TAR2

 

Your underlying argument seems to be...if there is thunder, there must be Thor.

 

I do not think this works out, logically.

 

Its not my interpretation, its the orthodox interpretation of the Vedic tradition and that's how our ancients saw their world.

 

 

As Sri Aurobindo would say, "The gods of the Rig Veda are not material Nature powers but great world deities with complex functions material, mental and spiritual. The same Agni who burns here in fire, is master of pure force in the mind and of simple active energy in the universe. The same Surya who rides yonder in the skies, is the master of inspired knowledge and the principle of illumination wherever it is found. The same Varuna who in ether upholds the stars and finds a pathway for the sun, is in the soul the master of majesty, self control, law and calm and by these functions maintains the order of the Universe. The same Usha who dawns rosily on the verge of the material heaven, is the goddess of the soul's expansion and presides over the evolution of what we shall be out of what we are.”

These Gods are not just elements of nature which our ancients deified in fact they actually exist out there in the numinous and they control all aspects of human existence. Its not an analogy, it is the correct orthodox interpretation of the Vedic religion which was preserved by the traditional people.

If you didn't understand anything, please kindly ask.

[John Cuthber]

"These Gods are not just elements of nature which our ancients deified in fact they actually exist out there in the numinous and they control all aspects of human existence."

Some book may say that this is true, but is there any actual evidence?

 

In what way is it different from this?

 

http://www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/170662/napkin/

[Moontanman]

 

 

 

These Gods are not just elements of nature which our ancients deified in fact they actually exist out there in the numinous and they control all aspects of human existence. Its not an analogy, it is the correct orthodox interpretation of the Vedic religion which was preserved by the traditional people.

If you didn't understand anything, please kindly ask.

 

 

Please show some evidence of these beings immortal, show some evidence they control any aspect of human existence. From where I stand you are no better than any other god botherer standing on a street corner preaching some obtuse interpretation of what bronze ages savages believed about god...

[John Cuthber]

They have credibility the pentagon uses them.

LOL

[tar]

Immortal,

 

"Out there, in the numinous?"

 

Perhaps here, in this statement, is the rub.

 

Let us assume that along the lines of Kant's thinking, we, as humans are in possession of the pure conceptions of "time", and of "space". That from this, we might suggest that here and now are two things that TAR and Immortal could agree on.

 

Out there? What could that mean, that is mutual to both our conceptions? Is a thought of mine, "in here" to me, but "out there" to you? I would think so. There is a lot of thinking that goes on during any one moment, here on Earth, and the portion of it, that is "in here" in this TAR brain is miniscule, compared to the whole of human thought currently going on (1 part in 7 or 8 billion or so) and dwarfed again, by the hundreds of thousands of years of human thought that occurred prior our lives.

 

If "in here" in this TAR brain/body/heart group, I was to reach Nirvana, or learn the "Secret of the Vedas", or speak to God and make him a promise...that activity would be "out there" to you. You could view such an event as having some objective characteristics, being as they are occurring outside of your here and now, without your participation, and some subjective charactistics, being as you know the difference between imagination and reality, and would know which parts of my activity you could reproduce for yourself, and experience in your own, here and now.

 

Thusly a clear distinction can be drawn, by any of us, of what ideas and forces, forms and reality, exist "in here" and what of these exists "out there" in the open, in the "greater" reality, in which, and of which, all our separate heres and nows are composed.

 

Moontanman asked you to show us where one can find your 31 gods "out there". We already know where to find them "in here".

 

Regards, TAR2

 

Does Agni have a "human" soul? Is there a place and time that Agni knows as "here and now"? Is there a place and time where Agni can be found, that corresponds with the conceptions of the other 30 gods?

Does this conceptual "greater" world have any "mappings" to this one of ours?

[Moontanman]

31 gods, kinda like Baskin Robbins ice cream? This has gotten silly, immortal you win, your 31 gods beats my rational mind approach, have fun cow towing to 31 gods for an eternity... sounds like hell to me...

[Moontanman]

Immortal, I am going to recommend you watch the following video, it is mostly targeted at creationism but it makes some pretty good points about the Holy nature of various religious writings. You keep saying the Veda's are somehow evidence of God or some sort of god but the first five minutes of this video gives very good logical reasons why this cannot be true. I realize you will not watch this, but I feel the need to at least give you the opportunity to see just how irrational the idea that any writings, much less yours are somehow written by a deity. AronRa gives a very good summation of why this is certainly not the case and what we would expect a god to write...

 

[immortal]

"These Gods are not just elements of nature which our ancients deified in fact they actually exist out there in the numinous and they control all aspects of human existence."

Some book may say that this is true, but is there any actual evidence?

 

There are lots of evidence.

 

"Some scientists (like Wigner) believe that quantum mechanics makes certain dualist ideas about the mind/body problem acceptable again within mainstream science."

 

Roger Penrose contends that the foundations of mathematics can't be understood absent the Platonic view that "mathematical truth is absolute, external and eternal, and not based on man-made criteria ... mathematical objects have a timeless existence of their own..."

 

Science has already confronted with the numinous by recognizing a metaphysical mind and a metaphysical intellect in the platonic realm.

 

 

In what way is it different from this?

 

http://www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/170662/napkin/

 

When you apply negative theology to religion and consider the current available evidence only a few religions survive and this is one of them which is backed up by science.