A threat to Secularism

[immortal]

What in the World Are Gnostics?

 

The words Gnostic and Gnosticism are not exactly standard features in the vocabulary of contemporary people. In fact, more people are familiar with the antonym of Gnostic, which is agnostic, literally meaning a non-knower or ignoramus, but figuratively describing a person with no faith in religion who still resents being called an atheist. Yet Gnostics were around long before agnostics and for the most part appear to have been a far more exciting category of persons than the latter group. In contradistinction to non-knowers, they considered themselves knowers—gnostikoi in Greek—denoting those who have Gnosis or knowledge. Gnostics were people who lived, for the most part, during the first three or four centuries of the so-called Christian era. Most of them probably would not have called themselves by the name Gnostic but would have considered themselves Christians, or more rarely Jews, or as belonging to the traditions of the ancient cults of Egypt, Babylon, Greece and Rome. They were not sectarians or the members of a specific new religion, as their detractors claimed, but rather people who shared with each other a certain attitude toward life. This attitude may be said to consist of the conviction that direct, personal and absolute knowledge of the authentic truths of existence is accessible to human beings, and, moreover, that the attainment of such knowledge must always constitute the supreme achievement of human life. This knowledge, or Gnosis, they did not envision as a rational knowledge of a scientific kind, or even as philosophical knowledge of truth, but rather a knowing that arises in the heart in an intuitive and mysterious manner and therefore is called in at least one Gnostic writing (the Gospel of Truth) the Gnosis kardias, the knowledge of the heart. This is obviously a religious concept that is at the same time highly psychological, for the meaning and purpose of life thus appears to be neither faith, with its emphasis on blind belief and equally blind repression, nor works with their extraverted do-goodism, but rather an interior insight and transformation, in short, a depth-psychological process.

 

If we come to envision the Gnostics as early depth psychologists, then it immediately becomes apparent why the Gnostic teaching and practice was radically different from the teaching and practice of Jewish and Christian orthodoxy. The knowledge of the heart, for which the Gnostics strove, could not be acquired by striking a bargain with Yahweh, by concluding a treaty or covenant which guaranteed physical and spiritual well being to man in exchange for the slave-like carrying out of a set of rules. Neither could Gnosis be won by merely fervently believing that the sacrificial act of one divine man in history could lift the burden of guilt and frustration from one's shoulders and assure perpetual beatitude beyond the confines of mortal existence The Gnostics did not deny the usefulness of the Torah or the magnificence of the figure of the Christos, the anointed of the most high God. They regarded the Law as necessary for a certain type of personality which requires rules for what today might be called the formation and strengthening of the psychological ego. Neither did they negate the greatness of the mission of the mysterious personage whom in his disguise men knew as the Rabbi Jehoshuah of Nazareth. The Law and the Savior, the two most highly revered concepts of Jew and Christian, became to the Gnostic but means to an end greater than themselves. These became inducements and devices which might, in some fashion, be conducive to personal knowing which, once attained, requires neither law nor faith. To them, as to Carl Jung many centuries later, theology and ethics were but stepping stones on the road to self-knowledge.

 

Some seventeen or eighteen centuries separate us from the Gnostics. During these centuries Gnosticism became a faith not only forgotten (as one of its interpreters, G. R. S. Mead, called it) but also a faith and a truth repressed. It seems that almost no group has been so relentlessly and consistently feared and hated for nearly two millennia as were the unhappy Gnostics. Textbooks of theology still refer to them as the first and most pernicious of all heretics, and the age of ecumenism seems to have extended none of the benefits of Christian love to them. Long before Hitler, the Emperor Constantine and his cruel bishops began the practice of religious genocide against the Gnostics, their first holocausts to be followed by many more through history. The last major persecution concluded with the burning of over 200 latter-day Gnostics in 1244 in the castle of Montsegur in France, an event which Laurence Durell described as the Thermopylae of the Gnostic soul. Still some prominent representatives of the victims of the latest holocaust have not regarded the most persecuted religious minority in history as a companion in misfortune, as the attacks of Martin Buber on Jung and on Gnosticism indicate. Jews and Christians, Catholics, Protestants and the Eastern Orthodox (and, in the case of the Manichaean Gnosis, even Zoroastrians, Moslems and Buddhists) have hated and persecuted the Gnostics with a persistent determination.

 

Why? Was it only because their antinomianism or disregard for moral law scandalized the rabbis, or because their doubts concerning the physical incarnation of Jesus and their reinterpretation of the resurrection angered the priests? Was it because they rejected marriage and procreation, as some of their detractors claim? Were they abhorred because of licentiousness and orgies, as others allege? Or might it be that perhaps the Gnostics truly had some knowledge, and that this knowledge re them supremely dangerous to establishments both secular ecclesiastical?

 

It is not easy to give a reply to this question, but an attempt must be made, nevertheless. We might essay such an answer by saying that the Gnostics differed from the majority of humankind, not only in details of belief and of ethical precept, but in their most essential and fundamental view of existence and its purpose. Their divergence was a radical one in the sense of the word, for it went back to the root (Latin: Radix) of humankind's assumptions and attitudes regarding life. Irrespective of their religious and philosophical beliefs, most people nourish certain unconscious assumptions pertaining human condition which do not spring from the formative, focused agencies of consciousness but which radiate from a deep, unconscious substratum of the mind. This mind is ruled by biology rather than by psychology; it is automatic rather than subject to conscious choices and insights. The most important among these assumptions, which may be said to sum up all others, is the belief that the world is good and that our involvement in it is somehow desirable and ultimately beneficial. This assumption leads to a host of others, all of which are more or less characterized by submissiveness toward external conditions and toward the laws which seem to govern them. In spite countless illogical and malevolent events of our lives, the incredible sequences, by-ways, repetitious insanities of human history, both collective and individual, we will believe it to be incumbent upon us to go along with the world, for it is, after all, God's world, and thus it must have meaning and goodness concealed within its operations, no matter how difficult to discern. Thus we must go on fulfilling our role within the system we can, being obedient children, diligent husbands, dutiful wives, well-behaved butchers, bakers, candlestick-makers, hoping against hope that a revelation of meaning will somehow emerge from this meaningless life of conformity.

 

Not so, said the Gnostics. Money, power, governments, the raising of families, paying of taxes, the endless chain of entrapment in circumstances and obligations—none of these were ever rejected as totally and unequivocally in human history as they were by the Gnostics. The Gnostics never hoped that any political or economic revolution could, or even should, do away with all the iniquitous elements within the system wherein the human soul is entrapped. Their rejection was not of one government or form of ownership in favor of another; rather it concerned the entire prevailing systematization of life and experience. Thus the Gnostics were, in fact, knowers of a secret so deadly and terrible that the rulers of this world—i.e., the powers, secular and religious, who always profited from the established systems of society—could not afford to have this secret known and, even less, to have it publicly proclaimed in their domain. Indeed the Gnostics knew something, and it was this: that human life does not fulfill its promise within the structures and establishments of society, for all of these are at best but shadowy projections of another and more fundamental reality. No one comes to his true selfhood by being what society wants him to be nor by doing what it wants him to do. Family, society, church, trade and profession, political and patriotic allegiances, as well as moral and ethical rules and commandments are, in reality, not in the least conducive to the true spiritual welfare of the human soul. On the contrary, they are more often than not the very shackles which keep us from our true spiritual destiny.

 

This feature of Gnosticism was regarded as heretical in olden days, and even today is often called "world denying" and "anti-life," but it is, of course, merely good psychology as well as good spiritual theology because it is good sense. The politician and the social philosopher may look upon the world as a problem to be solved, but the Gnostic, with his psychological discernment, recognizes it as a predicament from which we need to extricate ourselves by insight. For Gnostics, like psychologists, do not aim at the transformation of the world but at the transformation of the mind, with its natural consequence—a changed attitude toward the world. Most religions also tend to affirm a familiar attitude of internalism in theory, but, as the result of their presence within the establishments of society, they always deny it in practice. Religions usually begin as movements of radical liberation along spiritual lines but inevitably end up as pillars of the very societies which are the jailers of our souls.

 

If we wish to obtain Gnosis, the knowledge of the heart that renders human beings free, we must disentangle ourselves from the false cosmos created by our conditioned minds. The Greek word kosmos, as well as the Hebrew word olam, while frequently mistranslated as world, really denote more the concept of systems. When the Gnostics said that the system around them was evil and that one had to get away from it in order to know truth and discover meaning, they acted, not only as the forerunners of innumerable alienated drop-outs from St. Francis to the beatniks and hippies, but they also stated a psychological fact since rediscovered by modern depth psychology. Jung restated an old Gnostic insight when he said that the extraverted human ego must first become thoroughly aware of its own alienation from the greater Self before it can begin to return to a state of closer union with the unconscious. Until we become thoroughly aware of the inadequacy of our extraverted state and of its insufficiency in regard to our deeper spiritual needs, we shall not achieve even a measure of individuation, through which a wider and more mature personality emerges. The alienated ego is the precursor and an inevitable precondition of the individuated ego. Like Jung, the Gnostics did not necessarily reject the actual earth itself, which they recognized as a screen upon which the Demiurge of the mind projects his deceptive system. To the extent that we find a condemnation of the world in Gnostic writings, the term used is inevitably kosmos, or this aeon, and never the word ge (earth), which they regarded as neutral if not as outright good.

 

It was on this knowledge, the knowledge one has in one's heart concerning the spiritual barrenness and utter insufficiency of the establishments and established values of the outer world, that the Gnostics relied in order to construct both an image of universal being and a system of coherent inferences to be drawn from that image. (As one might expect, they accomplished this less in terms of philosophy and theology than in myth, ritual, and cultivation of the mythopoetic and imaginative qualities of their souls.) Like so many sensitive and thoughtful persons before and after their time, they felt themselves to be strangers in a strange country, a forlorn seed of the distant worlds of boundless light. Some, like the alienated youth of the 1960's withdrew into communes and hermitages, marginal communities on the edge of civilization. Others, more numerous perhaps, remained in the midst of the great metropolitan culture of the large cities like Alexandria and Rome, outwardly fulfilling their roles in society while inwardly serving a different master—in the world but not of the world. Most of them possessed learning, culture and wealth, yet they were aware of the undeniable fact that all such attainments and treasures pale before the Gnosis of the heart, the knowledge of the things that are. Little wonder that the wizard of Küstnacht who, since his early childhood, sought and found his own Gnosis, felt close to these strange and lonely people, these pilgrims of eternity, homeward bound among the stars.

 

http://gnosis.org/gnostic-jung/The-Gnostic-Jung.html

 

I have been ridiculed, mocked, banned and called delusional here and in other forums every time I bring up this issue and other orthodox religions have demonized us and treated like devil worshippers even though there is no concept of devil in our religion. I guess I'm counting my days here.

 

What's ironic is that in this part of the world this religion is the orthodoxy but the rest of the world sees us as heretics, I wonder who is delusional, therefore the suppression of this religion seems to be a cultural one rather than having any basis on theology. Don't tell me how I need to interpret my own religion - Christianity, Hinduism and Buddhism. Its silly and pointless to suppress this minority religion in this 21st century world where comparative studies on different religions are easily available and truth and evidence are openly accessible. There is no excuse for such ignorance especially by people who consider themselves to be scientific minded.

 

It is this religion which gives true equality to humanity by asserting that the world is Non-dual and by saying that everything and everyone is made of the same essence and it is not secularism which promises us to give equality because the truth doesn't exist in it.

 

Prove it.

Show us that you can really access a real noumenon.

Prove that it isn't just imagined stuff.

 

 

This isn't science, this is esotericism and I don't like to use science to prove this.

 

An ancient method to test this worldview

 

The Aryans extensively relied on the yoga school of philosophical thought in order to access the numinous world. It can be argued that this practical knowledge is an inherent part of their tradition along with other schools of thought and not separate from it.

 

It’s the foundational basis for all forms of their knowledge, even though Patanjali is well known as the founder of the yoga school of philosophy different forms of yoga existed prior to him and all such knowledge including the yoga school of Patanjali can be traced back to Hiranyagarbha himself who was the god of the Aryans, whom the founders of Rig Veda worshiped him as the first-born.

 

 

 

As said earlier there are two ways to look at the Veda where one can study the individual lustrous rays of the Hiranyagarbha as separate gods of his pantheon i.e. Agni, Soma, Prana etc. or else one can study the whole pantheon of Hiranyabarbha as himself in his Samasthi swaroopa (total or whole form).

 

It was Vishwamithra who discovered a way to worship this mass of lustre of Savithru or Hiranyagarbha but that method is not addressed here as no one outside the tradition should perform it without first going through a series of rituals in the traditional way. However there are other ways to study his rays as a whole and one such method is given below which is called as Sun Salutations.

 

 

 

The scholar Devudu who hails from this tradition revealed us the secrets of the Isopanishad which were passed in a traditional way through his works. According to tradition Savithru, the supreme god of the Vedas, himself had said to Yajnavalkya, the author of the Isopanishad that, “Those who read the Isopanishad as well as the Yajnavalkya Upanishad which deals with the life story of Yajnavalkya and clearly understand the deep meaning behind it, I will reveal myself to them without fail.”

 

 

Therefore the following verse of the Isopanishad is uttered before performing the method for those who only want to live the righteous path, as this was the sole purpose of their doctrine, different people perform this method for different reasons,

 

Hiranmayena patrena satyasyapihitam mukham

 

 

tat tvam pushannya apavrino satya-dharmaya drishtaye

(Isopanishad, Verse 15)

 

 

It means that the truth is hidden inside a golden egg from which the first-born Hiranygarbha originated and his light rays are preventing us from seeing the ultimate truth clearly therefore we should plead him to decrease the intensity of his impeding light rays so that we can clearly see him and attain the path of righteousness by understanding the truth behind it.

 

"People cannot see anything in the real realm unless they become it...if you have seen the spirit, you have become the spirit; if you have seen Christ, you have become Christ; if you have seen the Father, you will become the Father" (Gospel of Philip 61:20-32 cf. 67:26-27)

 

Though the ancient Aryans used to perform rituals in a holistic way for the good of the whole world irrespective of the nation, creed, race or the culture they belonged to, the rituals were also performed in a multitudinous way to fulfill personal desires. However they highly recommend us to perform in a holistic way which was the sole doctrine of the Aryans that the light of God exists in everyone irrespective of their race or their background. It is advisable to practice it to test the efficacy of this method under the guidance of a master and the verses after the asterisk (*) should be silently uttered in the mind when performing each step.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conclusion

 

 

According to these esoteric religions it is very unlikely that God had used the Big Bang or the DNA to create the universe or the Humans in it and these religions enforce upon us to abandon such form of thinking at least when one is arguing based on these esoteric religions. It should be emphasized that there can be only one reality in the external physical world and if the objects of modern science like quarks, protons, electrons exist independent of the mind i.e. if scientific realism turns out to be true then the metaphysical world of the esotericists will be falsified. As one of the necessary postulates required for the existence of the metaphysical worlds of the above mentioned esoteric religions is that scientific realism must be false and such a test will guide us whether to abandon this form of esoteric thinking and move an alternative way forward or to move in the direction of our ancients.

 

Also, you have talked a few times about "revealed truth".

What truths have been revealed?

 

Truths as to how the universe is working and who is in control of it.

 

There were revealed truths.

 

This summarizes very satisfactorily the role that Julian has chosen for the Sun Gud , a deity to whom his devotion was very real. There is heartfelt testimony to this at the beginning of the hymn (130C):

 

" For I am a follower of King Helios. And of this fact I possess within me, known to myself alone, proofs more certain than I can give. But this at least I am permitted to say without sacrilege, that from my childhood an extraordinary longing for the rays of the god penetrated deep into my soul; and from my earliest years my mind was so completely swayed by the light that illumines the heavens that not only did I desire to gaze intently at the sun, but whenever I walked abroad at night, when the sky was clear and cloudless, I abandoned all else without exception and gave myself up to the beauties of the heavens; nor did I understand what anyone might say to me, nor heed what I was doing myself"

 

But this visible disc also, third[21] in rank, is clearly, for the objects of sense-perception the cause of preservation, and this visible Helios[22] is the cause for the visible gods[23] of just as many blessings as we said mighty Helios bestows on the intellectual gods. And of this there are clear proofs for one who studies the unseen world in the light of things seen.[24] For in the first place, is not light itself a sort of incorporeal and divine form of the transparent in a state of activity? And as for the transparent itself, whatever it is, since it is the underlying basis, so to speak, of all the elements, and is a form peculiarly belonging to them, it is not like the corporeal or compounded, nor does it admit qualities peculiar to corporeal substance.[25] You will not therefore say that heat is a property of the transparent,[26] or its opposite cold, nor will you assign to it hardness or softness or any other of the various, attributes connected with touch or taste or smell; [134] but a nature of this sort is obvious to sight alone, since it is brought into activity by light. And light is a form of this substance, so to speak, which is the substratum of and coextensive with the heavenly bodies. And of light, itself incorporeal, the culmination and flower, so to speak, is the sun's rays. Now the doctrine of the Phoenicians, who were wise and learned in sacred lore, declared that the rays of light everywhere diffused are the undefiled incarnation of pure mind. And in harmony with this is our theory, seeing that light itself is incorporeal, if one should regard its fountainhead, not as corporeal, but as the undefiled activity of mind[27] pouring light into its own abode: and this is assigned to the middle of the whole firmament, whence it sheds its rays and fills the heavenly spheres with vigour of every kind and illumines all things with light divine and undefiled. Now the activities proceeding from it and exercised among the gods have been, in some measure at least, described by me a little earlier[28] and will shortly be further spoken of.

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

Referring to the Phoenicians, Julian cites their teaching that "the rays of light everywhere diffused are the undefiled incarnation [imbodiment] of pure mind." Modern scientists are within an ace of confirming some of these more recondite facts for themselves.

 

 

How can you be sure that they are the "truth", rather than religious propaganda?

The various holy books may say some things which are true, but they also say many things which are false so it's impossible to tell whether something is true or not, just based on whether it turns up in one of those books. They simply are not reliable.

As far as I can tell, there are no revealed truths.

 

That's why we don't just rely on Holy books alone.

 

 

As one teacher says, "The scriptures are ambiguous and the truth cannot be extracted from them by those who are ignorant of tradition." (Irenaeus Against Heresies3:2:1).

The oral traditions are as much important as the holy scriptures.

 

 

Also, would anyone like to explain why I should have any more respect for someone's belief in God than I would do if they professed a belief in the tooth fairy or Santa Claus?

 

I am not pleading for any respect, I don't need it, all I'm saying that what you have got here is a false analogy.

[John Cuthber]

Congratulations! you got this far

"The words Gnostic and Gnosticism are not exactly standard features in the vocabulary of contemporary people. In fact, more people are familiar with the antonym of Gnostic, which is agnostic, literally meaning a non-knower or ignoramus, but figuratively describing a person with no faith in religion who still resents being called an atheist."

before citing a statement which is not just inaccurate, but potentially insulting to a group of people ( the agnostics ) and , as such, may be a breach of the forum rules.

 

 

"This isn't science, this is esotericism and I don't like to use science to prove this."

How else could you prove it?

Incidentally, I didn't ask you to use science: I just asked you to explain how you "knew" it was true.

Re "Also, you have talked a few times about "revealed truth".

What truths have been revealed?

Truths as to how the universe is working and who is in control of it.

There were revealed truths."

Why do you believe that these are "true".

Do you have any actual evidence beyond "it says it in an old book" or " a long tradition of people say it"

Both of those are an appeal to authority.

Do you realise that an appeal to authority is not a valid reason for me to believe it?

"That's why we don't just rely on Holy books alone."

"The oral traditions are as much important as the holy scriptures."

But those are just made-up stories too.

So you are basing things on essentially a lot of old stories.

 

Also this "Though the ancient Aryans used to perform rituals in a holistic way for the good of the whole world" is begging the question.

It's assuming that some good is done.

There is no reason to believe that: no evidence and no established causal path.

 

"It is advisable to practice it to test the efficacy of this method under the guidance of a master and the verses after the asterisk (*) should be silently uttered in the mind when performing each step."

Why?

What evidence is that that such an action achieves anything beyond a psychosomatic reaction in the person concerned (and the same sort of well documented exercise induced euphoria that a lot of joggers etc get)

 

You don't, or won't, understand that there is no more factual basis to your faith than there is to a belief in the tooth fairy.

 

It is not sufficient to say that it is a poor analogy, you need to explain why it fails.

 

Don't show me pictures of a man doing old exercises. Show me that they achieve something:

Show me the evidence.

[immortal]

"This isn't science, this is esotericism and I don't like to use science to prove this."

How else could you prove it?

Incidentally, I didn't ask you to use science: I just asked you to explain how you "knew" it was true.

 

How Effective Is Sun Salutation in Improving Muscle Strength, General Body Endurance and Body Composition?

 

"These individual asanas have their own physical benefits ^[3] e.g. Step 0 and 10 in Fig. 1 induces a state of introversion; Step 1 stretches thoracic, abdominal and intestinal muscles and lifts prana upwards in the body. Step 2 and 9 massages the abdominal organs, tones the spinal nerves and moves prana in lower body parts. Step 4 and 5 tone abdomen, muscles of thighs and legs. Step 6 exercises the spine and strengthens muscles of arms and legs."

 

Do you realize that the bold part of the sentence which says step 1 lifts prana(the elan vital) upwards in the body and step 2 and 9 moves prana to the lower body parts is in contradictory with what science says and teaches? According to science there is no such thing as elan vital or the life air.

 

Not only the methodology has an efficacy the explanations of the authors as to how the efficacy works are also true which means the scientific community need to abandon their objectivity and accept that this world is a mere shadow of a far more real world which exists in the intelligible realm or else in the noumenon. I don't need any equipment to prove it.

 

This distinction between the empirical world and the real physical world as it really exists out there is albeit necessary.

 

 

 

Re "Also, you have talked a few times about "revealed truth".[/size]

What truths have been revealed?

 

Truths as to how the universe is working and who is in control of it.

 

There were revealed truths."

Why do you believe that these are "true".

Do you have any actual evidence beyond "it says it in an old book" or " a long tradition of people say it"

Both of those are an appeal to authority.

Do you realise that an appeal to authority is not a valid reason for me to believe it?

 

I am citing both empirical results as well as scholarly traditional sources showing that this is a genuine religion and also to show that this is not an appeal to authority.

 

"That's why we don't just rely on Holy books alone."

"The oral traditions are as much important as the holy scriptures."

But those are just made-up stories too.

So you are basing things on essentially a lot of old stories.

 

If it was all made up then why people of different cultures and religions at different timelines have come up with same theories about the origin of the cosmos? I think there were all able to access a reality which we have not yet made an effort to access.

 

Also this "Though the ancient Aryans used to perform rituals in a holistic way for the good of the whole world" is begging the question.

It's assuming that some good is done.

There is no reason to believe that: no evidence and no established causal path.

 

The intent is to do good for all of mankind and the rituals indeed work.

 

Brahmins must feel repentant if they fail to perform the rites they are duty-bound to perform. They must devote the years of their retirement to the pursuit of their dharma instead of feeling sorry for not going out to work. There are rare cases ---perhaps one in a lakh---of people who have learned the Vedas during their retirement and lived the rest of their life according to the tenets of the sastras.

 

The rites of our religion go back to a time when no other faith was prevalent. We must make every effort to ensure that they do not cease to be performed. They are not meant for our sake alone [as individuals] but for the welfare of all mankind.

 

A day in the life a Brahmin

 

http://www.ndtv.com/article/south/the-17-crore-prayer-in-karnataka-for-rain-248142

 

"It could perhaps be a mere coincidence, but there is some good news for the farmers after these prayers - the Meteorological Department has predicted more rains in the driest parts of north and south Karnataka in the coming week."

 

"It is advisable to practice it to test the efficacy of this method under the guidance of a master and the verses after the asterisk (*) should be silently uttered in the mind when performing each step."

Why?

What evidence is that that such an action achieves anything beyond a psychosomatic reaction in the person concerned (and the same sort of well documented exercise induced euphoria that a lot of joggers etc get)

 

Its because I have never heard that just by jogging you can self-induce high amplitude gamma synchrony, increase memory and cure traumatic brain injury but these methodologies do that and controlled studies show that one gets different results when the methodology is performed without uttering the verses and when it is performed along with the silent utterances of the verses in the mind. I am convinced there is a hidden science or mechanism behind it and its the correct way to study and understand consciousness and the human mind.

 

Long-term meditators self-induce high-amplitude gamma synchrony during mental practice.

 

Effect of yogic education system and modern education system on memory.

 

The Benefits of Sun Salutations on Traumatic Brain Injury: A case study.

 

 

You don't, or won't, understand that there is no more factual basis to your faith than there is to a belief in the tooth fairy.

 

It is not sufficient to say that it is a poor analogy, you need to explain why it fails.

 

I think God has more evidence and a higher probability of existence than extra-terrestrial life so don't go so far as to equating him with a tooth fairy which is a false analogy. By this time the scientific community should have been seriously in search for a hypercosmic god because all evidence in science is in favour of such a god. Bernard won the templeton prize for the concept of a hypercosmic god and not for the concept of a tooth fairy and it is the concept of veiled reality and the great eastern philosophical systems which are being discussed in journals of science and religion and hence God meets with reality more than your tooth fairy which is the invention of a fictional writer.

 

Therefore what you have got is a false analogy, God has more supported evidence than your tooth fairy.

 

 

Don't show me pictures of a man doing old exercises. Show me that they achieve something:

Show me the evidence.

 

You should better know that our ancients used those same old exercises to obtain all their knowledge and philosophical insights. They didn't do anything magical apart from that.

[John Cuthber]

"Do you realize that the bold part of the sentence which says step 1 lifts prana(the elan vital) upwards in the body and step 2 and 9 moves prana to the lower body parts is in contradictory with what science says and teaches? According to science there is no such thing as elan vital or the life air."

 

Yes, I realise that, like fairies at the bottom of the garden, science says there is no such thing as prana.

 

Unless and until you can prove that Prana exists, you just wasted a couple of pages talking about it.

 

BTW, the paper you cited shouldn't have been published in a reputable journal. There was no "reference intervention" to compare the yoga with so the testing was not scientifically valid.

Nobody is surprised that gentle exercise (such as yoga) improves muscle tone so it's a meaningless study

And much the same thing also works if you don't believe in it (My mother found that Tai Chi helped her arthritis, but she didn't believe it was due to anything mystical- just a bit of exercise).

 

"You should better know that our ancients used those same old exercises to obtain all their knowledge and philosophical insights."

(There is no evidence that they gained anything, apart from the benefits of gentle exercise and, of course, the benefits of having the locals believe that you have the "hot line" to God)

 

"I think God has more evidence"
(then cite some)

"and a higher probability of existence than extra-terrestrial life"

(irrelevant)

"so don't go so far as to equating him with a tooth fairy which is a false analogy."

(What, just because you say so twice?)

"By this time the scientific community should have been seriously in search for a hypercosmic god because all evidence in science is in favour of such a god.

(Nope, none is. and you have failed to produce any such support even though yo have been repeatedly asked. Most of what you have produced are logical fallacies- specifically appeals to authority in the form of quotes from people)

"Bernard won the templeton prize for the concept of a hypercosmic god and not for the concept of a tooth fairy "

(The Templeton foundation has a tacit policy of thinking that there is a difference. They too have no evidence for that distinction. This is an appeal to an authority which is known to be biassed so that's two logical faults for the price of one)

"and it is the concept of veiled reality"

(for which there is no evidence)

"and the great eastern philosophical systems"

Which offer no real benefits and therefore are not particularly "great", except in the eyes of their believers. That's too biassed to be valid evidence)

"which are being discussed in journals of science and religion"

(As I said, at least one of those journals should do a better job of science)

"and hence God meets with reality more than your tooth fairy which is the invention of a fictional writer."

(Nope, the tooth fairy is part of oral tradition and so, according to your earlier postings, it is as important as the scriptures.)

 

 

"Therefore what you have got is a false analogy, God has more supported evidence than your tooth fairy."

Nope, you can't say that. It's another logical fallacy- you can not presume the truth of your assertion in order to prove it: that's begging the question.

Edited March 10, 2013 by John Cuthber

[PeterJ]

Hmm. Buddhists persecuting Gnostics? Not something I've ever come across. It would be quite difficult to tell them apart.

 

Evidence for Gnosticism, or the knowledge that comes with gnosis? There's loads of it.

 

But it takes a little effort to see that it is evidence. If we understand what the knowledge claim actually is then we see that the problem of consiousness is evidence. As is the the problem of scepticism, freewill, ethics and origins. The fact that science cannot find a fundamental theory for anything is evidence if we interpret this to mean that we're not looking at Nature in the correct way.

 

Just passing thro.though - I do not wish to defend Immortal's view.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Tim the plumber]

I (obviously) could not be bothered to read all of the OP. Is his point that if you hypnotise yourself happy you will be happy?

 

Which is presumably true if you do it right but not good for achieving anything in the real world.

[immortal]

I (obviously) could not be bothered to read all of the OP. Is his point that if you hypnotise yourself happy you will be happy?

 

Which is presumably true if you do it right but not good for achieving anything in the real world.

 

 

That's not what I am arguing for.

The origins of Pauline Christianity.

Paul was neither a Jew nor a Gentile, nor was he deluded, he was actually a Gnostic. If Christians want to spread the message of Christ and the gospels then let them spread the correct message that 'Pleroma' has a local existence and forms the body of Christ and that they don't need to wait for the second coming instead they can embrace their angel here and now instead of a misinterpreted version of Christianity. What's in the Vedas is in the esoteric message of St. Paul and hence I need to defend Pauline theology more than the Vedas because the Vedas are difficult to understand for the common man. It will do a world of good to everyone. This is what I'm arguing here and its so important for me.

Elaine Pagels, The Gnostic Paul - Full pdf

The evidence is on my side.

[John Cuthber]

No.

Some old books are on your side.

They are not evidence.

Please stop acting as if they are.

Edited March 11, 2013 by John Cuthber

[immortal]

No.

Some old books are on your side.

They are not evidence.

Please stop acting as if they are.

 

That's a small stepping stone towards the truth, if people need to recognize the importance of the works of Penrose and Bernard and realize why the atheistic position is fundamentally flawed then first they need to understand what the evidence from these old books are saying. That's why this is so important for me, everything what I am arguing here is inter-connected.

 

 

"Sri Aurobindo describes the Overmind as the plane of the great gods and goddesses of Greek, Hindu, Mayan, and other traditions. In his view, the Gods are real beings who exist eternally on the overmental plane, and are not merely creations of a primitive human mentality. The human mind can build forms that the Gods accept, but the Gods exist in their own right and can inspire various forms of manifestation into the human mind. For example, Sri Aurobindo noted that the Greek goddess Pallas Athene and the Indian goddess Maheshwari are not two different beings, but the same being manifested differently in two separate cultures (Aurobindo, 1970a, pp. 383–387, 389). According to this principle, the Egyptian Aman-Re, the Greek Apollo, the Hindu Surya, and the Mayan Sun God are not four separate beings, but one and the same, as it is for the Greek Poseidon, Hindu Varuna, and Mayan Chac. In my experience, the presence of these immortal beings can still be felt at various temples in Greece, Mexico, and India."

Gods are real and these gods are everywhere and our ancients discovered these gods. They did not invented them.

[John Cuthber]

Today's logical fallacy is "begging the question" i.e. assuming the truth of that which you wish to prove.

For examples "first they need to understand what the evidence from these old books are saying." assumes that those old books provide any evidence.

They don't.

[immortal]

"Do you realize that the bold part of the sentence which says step 1 lifts prana(the elan vital) upwards in the body and step 2 and 9 moves prana to the lower body parts is in contradictory with what science says and teaches? According to science there is no such thing as elan vital or the life air."

 

Yes, I realise that, like fairies at the bottom of the garden, science says there is no such thing as prana.

 

Yes, that's what science says but science isn't everything. You got that.

 

Unless and until you can prove that Prana exists, you just wasted a couple of pages talking about it.

 

Nobody is surprised that gentle exercise (such as yoga) improves muscle tone so it's a meaningless study

And much the same thing also works if you don't believe in it (My mother found that Tai Chi helped her arthritis, but she didn't believe it was due to anything mystical- just a bit of exercise).

 

No, no you can't use a medicine and say it works and reject the physiological mechanism behind the way it works in the same way you can't say chi helped your mother and cured her arthritis and reject the physiological mechanism behind the way it works. The entire philosophy of eastern medicine is based on the fact that imbalance of prana leads to various diseases and by balancing the prana in your body it restores your health.

 

There are lots of evidence for Prana and everything what I do here is not a waste it helps me to learn a lot.

 

The theories of Chakras, Hiroshi Motoyama, Bridge to Higher Consciousness.

 

 

Below readings - Chakra Instrument Data, before concentration.

 

Above readings - Chakra Instrument Data, during concentration.

 

 

"This set of data implies quite profoundly that psi energy working in the anahata chakra may just be able to create energy in the physical dimension (light, electricity, etc.).The recordings made with R.B. and M.Y. on the AMI and Chakra Instrument point to the possibility that the psi energy working in the chakras can extinguish or create energy in the physical dimension. These two properties are of great significance and, if they can be further substantiated, would indicate the need for a basic revision of the Law of Conservation of Energy as presently formulated in modern physics."

 

And an another one.

 

BioEnergy fields, Valerie Hunt.

 

As I said the atheistic scientific community is ignorant of many things, why not come out of your labs and explore the world for real.

 

BTW, the paper you cited shouldn't have been published in a reputable journal. There was no "reference intervention" to compare the yoga with so the testing was not scientifically valid.

 

I think there should be a scientific field of esotericism and as long as it is not established the researchers have to publish their studies in reputable science journals because they deserve it. However I personally think it should be separated from science because this isn't science, this is esotericism and esotericism will correct science.

 

"You should better know that our ancients used those same old exercises to obtain all their knowledge and philosophical insights."

(There is no evidence that they gained anything, apart from the benefits of gentle exercise and, of course, the benefits of having the locals believe that you have the "hot line" to God)

 

The locals here know about the nature of reality more than what the scientists at CERN know so as I said build as many big particle accelerators as you want and take as much funding you want but you can't escape the fact that a God resides in you.

 

"I think God has more evidence"

(then cite some)

"and a higher probability of existence than extra-terrestrial life"

(irrelevant)

"so don't go so far as to equating him with a tooth fairy which is a false analogy."

(What, just because you say so twice?)

 

The evidence from both religion and science proves that God has more evidence than a tooth fairy. I really don't have to scratch my head to convince a person who thinks that God is a bastard. Why not first remove your own subjective bias first?

 

"By this time the scientific community should have been seriously in search for a hypercosmic god because all evidence in science is in favour of such a god.

(Nope, none is. and you have failed to produce any such support even though yo have been repeatedly asked. Most of what you have produced are logical fallacies- specifically appeals to authority in the form of quotes from people)

 

Those were not just personal opinions, they were facts established from experiments and anyone can perform those experiments and verify the facts for themselves. The fact that you ignore such facts of nature doesn't mean I have made an appeal to authority. I hope you can read basic English as to what the scientific literature is saying.

 

"Bernard won the templeton prize for the concept of a hypercosmic god and not for the concept of a tooth fairy "[/size]

(The Templeton foundation has a tacit policy of thinking that there is a difference. They too have no evidence for that distinction. This is an appeal to an authority which is known to be biassed so that's two logical faults for the price of one)

"and it is the concept of veiled reality"

(for which there is no evidence)

 

Its time for working scientists to use weak objective statements instead of strong objective statements while publishing their results and write their textbooks. The distinction between the thing in itself, the noumenon and the phenomena need to be made and it should be taught that science only deals with mere appearances of phenomena and not the reality in itself.

 

http://philosophypress.co.uk/?p=283

 

"and the great eastern philosophical systems"

Which offer no real benefits and therefore are not particularly "great", except in the eyes of their believers. That's too biassed to be valid evidence)

 

Its Bernard who said that the great eastern philosophical systems should be considered not any of the believers. If it wasn't great and if there wasn't any truth in it then why more and more evidence from science and scholarly studies are in favour of this religion. Stephen Knapp, David Frawley, Peter Russell were your men and now why are they arguing in favour of this religion, its quite simple anyone who studies it knows that there is truth in it and it gives a methodology to verify the truth for themselves without forcefully converting people into their beliefs.

 

And more over why the 15 million people or so in the U.S and other millions of people worldwide are already worshipping a different image of God if there wasn't any truth in this religion.

 

Take back yoga - Hindu group stirs a debate over Yoga's soul - New York Times.

 

Yoga is owned by the Sun-god and it is no on else Intellectual property.

 

"which are being discussed in journals of science and religion"

(As I said, at least one of those journals should do a better job of science)

 

As I said there should be a separate scientific journal of esotericism, the other esoteric archives are neither getting science right nor they have got the religious interpretations right.

 

"and hence God meets with reality more than your tooth fairy which is the invention of a fictional writer."

(Nope, the tooth fairy is part of oral tradition and so, according to your earlier postings, it is as important as the scriptures.)

 

The followers of tooth fairy need to know that there is an Immortal perfect One, the Holy Father ruling over this cosmos.

 

"Therefore what you have got is a false analogy, God has more supported evidence than your tooth fairy."

Nope, you can't say that. It's another logical fallacy- you can not presume the truth of your assertion in order to prove it: that's begging the question.

 

I am not assuming anything, I am saying all evidence is in favour of a hypercosmic god and that's a fact.

Edited March 12, 2013 by immortal

[Moontanman]

 

Yes, that's what science says but science isn't everything. You got that.

 

 

No, no you can't use a medicine and say it works and reject the physiological mechanism behind the way it works in the same way you can't say chi helped your mother and cured her arthritis and reject the physiological mechanism behind the way it works. The entire philosophy of eastern medicine is based on the fact that imbalance of prana leads to various diseases and by balancing the prana in your body it restores your health.

 

There are lots of evidence for Prana and everything what I do here is not a waste it helps me to learn a lot.

 

The theories of Chakras, Hiroshi Motoyama, Bridge to Higher Consciousness.

 

 

Below readings - Chakra Instrument Data, before concentration.

 

Above readings - Chakra Instrument Data, during concentration.

 

 

"This set of data implies quite profoundly that psi energy working in the anahata chakra may just be able to create energy in the physical dimension (light, electricity, etc.).The recordings made with R.B. and M.Y. on the AMI and Chakra Instrument point to the possibility that the psi energy working in the chakras can extinguish or create energy in the physical dimension. These two properties are of great significance and, if they can be further substantiated, would indicate the need for a basic revision of the Law of Conservation of Energy as presently formulated in modern physics."

 

And an another one.

 

BioEnergy fields, Valerie Hunt.

 

As I said the atheistic scientific community is ignorant of many things, why not come out of your labs and explore the world for real.

 

 

I think there should be a scientific field of esotericism and as long as it is not established the researchers have to publish their studies in reputable science journals because they deserve it. However I personally think it should be separated from science because this isn't science, this is esotericism and esotericism will correct science.

 

 

The locals here know about the nature of reality more than what the scientists at CERN know so as I said build as many big particle accelerators as you want and take as much funding you want but you can't escape the fact that a God resides in you.

 

 

The evidence from both religion and science proves that God has more evidence than a tooth fairy. I really don't have to scratch my head to convince a person who thinks that God is a bastard. Why not first remove your own subjective bias first?

 

 

Those were not just personal opinions, they were facts established from experiments and anyone can perform those experiments and verify the facts for themselves. The fact that you ignore such facts of nature doesn't mean I have made an appeal to authority. I hope you can read basic English as to what the scientific literature is saying.

 

 

 

 

 

Its Bernard who said that the great eastern philosophical systems should be considered not any of the believers. If it wasn't great and if there wasn't any truth in it then why more and more evidence from science and scholarly studies are in favour of this religion. Stephen Knapp, David Frawley, Peter Russell were your men and now why are they arguing in favour of this religion, its quite simple anyone who studies it knows that there is truth in it and it gives a methodology to verify the truth for themselves without forcefully converting people into their beliefs.

 

And more over why the 15 million people or so in the U.S and other millions of people worldwide are already worshipping a different image of God if there wasn't any truth in this religion.

 

Take back yoga - Hindu group stirs a debate over Yoga's soul - New York Times.

 

Yoga is owned by the Sun-god and it is no on else Intellectual property.

 

 

As I said there should be a separate scientific journal of esotericism, the other esoteric archives are neither getting science right nor they have got the religious interpretations right.

 

 

The followers of tooth fairy need to know that there is an Immortal perfect One, the Holy Father ruling over this cosmos.

 

 

I am not assuming anything, I am saying all evidence is in favour of a hypercosmic god and that's a fact.

 

 

Immortal, how about showing us some of that evidence, so far you have failed to do so... I can indeed make the same case for the tooth fairy as your hypercosmic god... all you have is assertions that do not hold up to scrutiny... surely a hypercosmic god has actual empirical evidence of his existence... so show it to us, stop with all the assertions you cannot support with anything other belief and faith, it's tiresome and more than a little dishonest...

[immortal]

Today's logical fallacy is "begging the question" i.e. assuming the truth of that which you wish to prove.

For examples "first they need to understand what the evidence from these old books are saying." assumes that those old books provide any evidence.

They don't.

 

Of course it offers evidence, the down fall of religion for these many years is because people followed pseudo-religious beliefs but no longer any more.

 

If you press the right button at the right time theurgy indeed works and to make it work and press the right button you need to understand the religious scriptures correctly and get the interpretations of the religious scriptures right.

 

Theurgy: Rituals of Unification in the Neoplatonism of Iamblichus.

 

 

Why Christianity has not offered any fruits for these many years, not only Christianity even the other orthodox religions have failed, why?

 

Its because they are not interpreting their religious scriptures correctly and hence you need to understand the scriptures correctly first if religion really has to offer any good useful fruits.

 

Immortal, how about showing us some of that evidence, so far you have failed to do so... I can indeed make the same case for the tooth fairy as your hypercosmic god... all you have is assertions that do not hold up to scrutiny... surely a hypercosmic god has actual empirical evidence of his existence... so show it to us, stop with all the assertions you cannot support with anything other belief and faith, it's tiresome and more than a little dishonest...

 

No, you cannot make the same case for your tooth fairy as I can do for my hypercosmic God.

 

Science and religion are converging and what religion said thousands of years ago is what science is saying in this 21st century world. I can prove it for you.

 

1. Science is saying that there is a Nous separate from the brain and says that this Nous retrospectively creates this empirical reality.

 

2. Either the human mind is more than a machine or mathematics is too big for the human mind - Kurt Gödel.

 

Ergo there is an Intellect separate from the Nous.

 

I have established through science and religion that there is a Nous and an Intellect separate from the brain and what is behind the intellect is my hypercosmic God, the pleroma, the totality of divine powers.

 

It falsifies a thousand other philosophies.

 

Which of your traditions of tooth fairy, Flying Spaghetti Monster, Santa Claus etc had figured it out this 5000 years ago and is going to fill gaps in our knowledge?

[pwagen]

Science and religion are converging and what religion said thousands of years ago is what science is saying in this 21st century world. I can prove it for you.

Then show me a paper about the leprechaun at the end of the rainbow.

 

1. Science is saying that there is a Nous separate from the brain and says that this Nous retrospectively creates this empirical reality.

Citation? If anything, scientists say quite the opposite.

 

Which of your traditions of tooth fairy, Flying Spaghetti Monster, Santa Claus etc had figured it out this 5000 years ago and is going to fill gaps in our knowledge?

Appeal to tradition. Just because it's old doesn't mean it's right, or slavery would still be legal. And just because something fills a gap doesn't mean it's supposed to be there, nor does it mean it's the correct use for it. I can put my car in a big enough, circular hole. But it won't be a good fit, and it doesn't mean I'm using it right.

Edited March 12, 2013 by pwagen

[John Cuthber]

Yes, that's what science says but science isn't everything. You got that.

 

I am not assuming anything, I am saying all evidence is in favour of a hypercosmic god and that's a fact.

Says you, and says you, respectively.

Still no actual evidence ( though a remarkable misuse of the word "theory".)

[immortal]

Hmm. Buddhists persecuting Gnostics? Not something I've ever come across. It would be quite difficult to tell them apart.

 

Just passing thro.though - I do not wish to defend Immortal's view.

 

 

I do not reject such a possibility, a bunch of secular Buddhists in an other forum did not allowed me to post some of the esoteric truths of Buddhism and the mods deleted my posts every time I posted the evidence from their own religion and questioned their distorted secular double standard beliefs, finally they banned me.

 

What secular Buddhists don't understand is that their beliefs are distorted and their position is a fundamentally flawed one.

 

Distorted visions of Buddhism: Agnostic and Atheist. by Alan Wallace.

 

The same is the problem with you when you say that the Advaita of Shankara is atheistic, you just don't realize that your visions of Advaita are distorted and more over the way you don't see the philosophical differences between Advaita and Buddhism.

 

The irony is that you use my religion and preach to me as to how I need to interpret my religion, should I need to follow your distorted ignorance or follow my intellect, wisdom and evidence?

[Ringer]

The irony is that you use my religion and preach to me as to how I need to interpret my religion, should I need to follow your distorted ignorance or follow my intellect, wisdom and evidence?

If only you would show these off you may find people to be more agreeable.

[ydoaPs]

!

Moderator Note

With the amount of soapboxing, speculation, and misrepresentation of math and science in this thread, this thread is beyond saving. It's past time that this thread has died. Thread closed.