Could Nothingness Be Another Dimension In And Of Itself?

[outhouse]

How do you know how 'close' it is?

Because science is 100% supported. Spirituality is based on ancient mythology we see man defining at will.

, you have factual knowledge, but that is still just nibbling around the edges, as far as the mystical experience is concerned

Mythical experience lies in the same category as imagination and faith.

. Factual knowledge is not understanding.

Actually it is understanding at its fullest experience.

Dismantling the piano to get to the music does not give us the music. To get to the music you have to listen. IOW, it is an experience, not a fact that can be proven via science.

False analogy.

A human creates music, exactly the same way a human creates mythology. Both are art forms.

You are confusing mythology with the mystical experience.

They are to date one in the same. Every aspect has its origins in mythology.

 

[outhouse]

No, it is an experience, not a belief, so you're just plain wrong.

The experience you talk about is also exactly the same as imaginative and emotional experiences. Factually based on belief.

 

[godnotgod]

We have a profound disagreement about this one. Again you insert something more into what I am saying, as it fits your narrative. Not unexpected. You are not your world view and you enjoy existence separate from that world view.

What one's experiences and beliefs are determine one's world view. Inseparable. Change your level of experience and beliefs, and world view changes. However, once all worldviews are dropped, there remains only Universal View, which never changes. That is why it can be called 'The Changeless'.

I'm quite aware of the fact that you do not see your own thinking as a worldview as that would assassinate your own narrative. If anything, you are consistent, somewhat like a broken record.

Consistent yes, broken no. There is your view; there is my view; then there is The View beyond personal view. We call that Universal View. What is the difference? Unlike personal view, Universal View is unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned.

And I am saying that that is a very dangerous assumption to make as it automatically repels any idea that would cast an iota of doubt on the claim - sort of like what you do - endlessly.

Either you see Reality as it is, or as it is not. That is all.

I know you are not used to reexamining your ideas but you really should spend a moment and rethink this little nugget. Making worldview synonymous with self is your first problem.

How you see the world depends on how you see yourself. One and the same.

And yet we have a sense of self and we have our little world views. Go figure.

I have. Conclusion: We have a worldview because we have a sense of self. No self; no worldview; only seeing things as they are, without a conceptual formulation called 'worldview'.

and.... so..... I have to take it on FAITH that you have the foggiest idea of what you are talking about.

Because that is how your conceptual mind works. I have never asked anyone to take on faith what I say, but have always insisted they go see for themselves, something you choose to ignore.

You know, blaming the audience for the short-comings of the messenger and his message gets pretty old, pretty fast.

Yet another example of your personal view that is emotionally attached to itself, so you read it as 'blame', when I am just making an observation. You see worldview and self as dual; I see them as one and the same. Where is the separation?

 

[godnotgod]

The experience you talk about is also exactly the same as imaginative and emotional experiences. Factually based on belief.

No, that is YOUR experience, which in turn colors your view of what the mystical experience is, never having had one yourself. FACT is, you just don't know. Period.

 

[godnotgod]

Dismantling the piano to get to the music does not give us the music. To get to the music you have to listen. IOW, it is an experience, not a fact that can be proven via science.

False analogy.
A human creates music, exactly the same way a human creates mythology. Both are art forms.

Are you deaf and blind? MYSTICAL is not MYTHOS. I have already defined what 'mystical ' actually means, which is not your distorted view of it.

The analogy of music to the mystical experience is that neither is understood via dissection or analysis. Music must be listened to in order to understand it, just as Reality must be experienced. You cannot understand Reality via dissection and analysis. All you get is factual information, just as dismantling the piano only yields factual information. Reality is not a mechanism that can be dismantled and understood via scientific analysis. The very method of scientific analysis is dissection, which is already the wrong step forward. Reality can only be understood via direct experience.

 

[godnotgod]

The experience you talk about is also exactly the same as imaginative and emotional experiences. Factually based on belief.

You have had my experience?

 

[godnotgod]

They are to date one in the same. Every aspect has its origins in mythology.

Once again: there are no mythological elements in the mystical experience. The mystical experience is, once again: 'the merging of observer, the observed, and the entire process of observation into a single Reality'. Do you see any mythological elements in that statement?

Mythology has roots in Space and Time. The mystical experience is outside Space and Time. Here there is no history; no memory, and hence, no trace. You cannot even conceive as to how this can be, as you are still operating with limited conceptual mind.

 

[godnotgod]

Because science is 100% supported. Spirituality is based on ancient mythology we see man defining at will.

Reality supports the mystical experience 100%, since the mystical experience is based on it, and not on the dead mythological past. The mystical experience is never, ever preconceived as something defined at will; it is always spontaneous, unexpected, and unwritten, emerging from the Present Moment, whereas the mythological story is concocted and is an artefact of the past.

Mythical experience lies in the same category as imagination and faith.

Do you need reading glasses, or are you just confused? Perhaps the MYTHICAL experience is imagination and faith, but the MYSTICAL experience definitely is NOT.

Actually it is understanding at its fullest experience.

OK. Please provide an example as to how scientific facts yields an understanding of the nature of Reality.

 

[outhouse]

Reality supports the mystical experience 100%, since the mystical experience is based on it

No it doesn't

Or you would have evidence to support your claims
.

As it stands you have nothing to support any of your claims.

and not on the dead mythological past.

NO

the only source of your experiences are from past events that have a mythological core.

Perhaps the MYTHICAL experience is imagination and faith, but the MYSTICAL experience definitely is NOT.

LOL if it was not imagination and faith YOU WOULD HAVE evidence.

BUT YOU DONT.

You have faith only.

 

[outhouse]

Provide evidence, evidence is required to prove something actually exist outside imagination and mythology.

People do not have evidence when something factually does not exist

 

[godnotgod]

No it doesn't

Or you would have evidence to support your claims
.

As it stands you have nothing to support any of your claims.

Not only deaf and ignorant, but recalcitrant as well, you remain. Shall I say it once more?

'THE MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE LEAVES NO TRACE; IT IS OUTSIDE OF TIME AND SPACE; OUTSIDE OF LOGIC, REASON, AND ANALYSIS. IT CANNOT BE PROVEN VIA SUCH MEANS, BUT CAN ONLY BE EXPERIENCED'

OK?

NO

the only source of your experiences are from past events that have a mythological core.

And still you persist in your delusion! Show me the mythological core of the mystical experience. The core of the mystical experience is Empty. There is no story or doctrine here, so leave your baggage at the door. Until you do, you will not enter.

LOL if it was not imagination and faith YOU WOULD HAVE evidence.

BUT YOU DONT.

You have faith only.

I don't need faith; I have experience.

You are also confusing religion with spirituality.

 

[godnotgod]

Provide evidence, evidence is required to prove something actually exist outside imagination and mythology.

People do not have evidence when something factually does not exist

If you want to verify what I am saying to you, you can do so by going to see for yourself. Otherwise, you can remain in Plato's Cave, hypnotized by 'factual evidence' shadows dancing on the cave walls, never catching a glimpse of The Sun.

But you, who touts evidence and facts, have yet to back up your claim that science provides an understanding of the nature of Reality. You can't because it doesn't.

 

[godnotgod]

No it does not.
It makes things up and uses ancient mens mythology often based on their ignorance of nature.

If I tell you that the nature of the wave is water, and that the nature of water is illusory, and you provide scientific analysis of the wave, that does not change the nature of water or the wave. Scientific findings exist within the larger context of the holistic mystical view. There is nothing that science can discover that can change what the true nature of Reality is, and it is the true nature of Reality that the mystical view reveals. Currently, there is great controversy over whether Quantum Physics confirms what the mystics have been saying all along, but the two appear to be converging, to the protests of many in the scientific community, while mystics around the world calmly embrace Quantum Physics.

 

[idea]

True nothingness is not a dimension, takes up no space, has no energy, no matter -
nothingness does not exist. only somethingness exists.

 

[outhouse]

If I tell you that the nature of the wave is water, and that the nature of water is illusory, and you provide scientific analysis of the wave, that does not change the nature of water or the wave.

NOT a word you stated is evidence spirituality exist outside the human conscious mind. PROVIDE EVIDENCE.

Scientific findings exist within the larger context of the holistic mystical view.

No they don't, some people choose to believe in made up stuff and use science as well, that doesn't give it the made up stuff credibility.

and it is the true nature of Reality that the mystical view reveals

That is the problem

FACTUALLY Not one aspect of spirituality reveals NOTHING in nature NOT A THING. Its why you don't have evidence.

There is factually nothing the mystical has ever revealed about anything let alone nature.

PROVIDE EVIDENCE.

Currently, there is great controversy over whether Quantum Physics confirms what the mystics have been saying all along, but the two appear to be converging, to the protests of many in the scientific community, while mystics around the world calmly embrace Quantum Physics

False. Mystics have factually stated nothing credible in any part of QP.


Its why you have NO EVIDENCE.

You don't have anything that shows a positive affect mystical anything , has on our understanding of nature.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You know, blaming the audience for the short-comings of the messenger and his message gets pretty old, pretty fast.

It's a ploy often used by snake-oil sellers. Make a load of unsubstantiated claims then blame the audience for not being taken in by them.

 

[godnotgod]

True nothingness is not a dimension, takes up no space, has no energy, no matter -
nothingness does not exist. only somethingness exists.

Didn't the Christian God create the world from Nothing?

 

[godnotgod]

NOT a word you stated is evidence spirituality exist outside the human conscious mind. PROVIDE EVIDENCE.

That is not what I was stating. I said that the mystical view points to the nature of Reality. All scientific discoveries (ie factual knowledge) are made within the context of Reality, none of which change the nature of Reality. Therefore, science falls within the context of the mystical view, because science is focusing on details about Reality, while the mystical view is a holistic view of the entirety of Reality.

Cease and desist your ridiculous Nazi demands for evidence! 'Your papers please!' 'We donna gotta show you jarhead types no e-stinkin' badges!'

No they don't, some people choose to believe in made up stuff and use science as well, that doesn't give it the made up stuff credibility.

You have it backwards. Mystics don't need validation from science. The mystical experience does not utilize science. It has already arrived at its conclusions, which have not changed for thousands of years, while new mystics confirm what the mystics of the ages have said. Now the new kid on the block comes along and thinks it knows everything, while brandishing its new surgical tools it says are the only way to knowledge. But its newest ideas only point to what the mystics have been saying all along, so validating the mystic's credibility that is already in place. Science is still wet behind the ears and has the cart ahead of the horse. It's slowly and painfully learning that, in spite of it's oversized head.

FACTUALLY Not one aspect of spirituality reveals NOTHING in nature NOT A THING. Its why you don't have evidence.
There is factually nothing the mystical has ever revealed about anything let alone nature.

Spirituality reveals perfectly the nature of things, which are not facts. Facts are about how things work, not about what nature is. Science cannot do this because it is a clinical, dead view of nature. It, like religion, sees the universe as dead, unconsious artefact.

"...science in this century has at last caught up with Kant. Now Heinsenberg, in physics, and Godel, in mathematics, have shown ineluctable limits to human reason. They open up to us a glimpse of nature which is irrational and paradoxical to the very core. Whatsoever we have been saying about nature has all gone wrong. All principles go wrong because nature is not synonymous with reason; nature is bigger than reason. And the mystical view is not a philosophy; it is a mirror, it is a reflection of that which is. As it is, mysticism stays the same. It does not bring any man-made philosophy into it, it has no choice, it does not add, it does not delete. That’s why it is paradoxical — because life is paradoxical. "
[edited]
Osho

False. Mystics have factually stated nothing credible in any part of QP.
Its why you have NO EVIDENCE.
You don't have anything that shows a positive affect mystical anything , has on our understanding of nature.

You don't have an understanding of nature. I now ask you for the third time to show evidence for your claim that science gives you this understanding. You can't because science gives no such understanding. It just gives you tons of data and dead facts which tells us nothing.

The mystical view shows us who and what our true nature actually is, which is not what our society has indoctrinated us to be, ie; a fictional character playing out a drama in a script written by others, which tells us we are a separate ego acting upon the world. Our true nature is the same nature as that of the universe. Our true nature is that we are nothing short of being a total action of the entire universe, just as the wave is a total action of the ocean. It is the spiritual experience that merges our nature with that of the universe as One, closing the gap between observer and observed. This merging is called 'yoga', which is the cessation of the activities of the mind. It is then and only then that illumination takes place, and the illusory ego dissolves away. Any metaphysical anxiety is completely settled as the Self settles naturally upon itself. This is the positive effect of the mystical experience that you ask about.

Any more questions?

 

[godnotgod]

It's a ploy often used by snake-oil sellers. Make a load of unsubstantiated claims then blame the audience for not being taken in by them.

Except that, unlike snake oil, which has no efficacy, the mystical experience is open to all, and can be demonstrated to be authentic by the best possible method: going to see for oneself via direct experience, and not relying on a religious belief or doctrine or a scientific concept which cannot quite provide the answer to the true nature of Reality.

 

[Rick O'Shez]