Could Nothingness Be Another Dimension In And Of Itself?

[Runewolf1973]

On the route to understanding, religion takes the elevator while science takes the stairs. Many people get stuck in elevators and many more fall down stairs. At least if you fall down the stairs you can pick yourself back up and keep going. When you're stuck in an elevator, all you can do is wait for help.

 

[YmirGF]

On the route to understanding, religion takes the elevator while science takes the stairs. Many people get stuck in elevators and many more fall down stairs. At least if you fall down the stairs you can pick yourself back up and keep going. When you're stuck in an elevator, all you can do is wait for help.

Then again, some of us just sprout wings and fly to the top only to see there is no top and so we must continue our flights elsewhere.

 

[Runewolf1973]

Then again, some of us just sprout wings and fly to the top only to see there is no top and so we must continue our flights elsewhere.

Or head back down those flights of stairs...

 

[Runewolf1973]

I've been there. I too have experienced that "top", but I can't prove any of it either. Now I'm just more interested to see how science gets there.

 

[Unification]

Yes, it is quite amazing what science has discovered already using only a very small portion of its real potential. I also find it interesting that mystics try to "prove" or validate their experiences utilizing new scientific discoveries (especially quantum physics)...because they are unable to validate them in any other way.

It's a double standard...."We refer to quantum physics (science) all the time because it helps to prove our view of reality is correct, but we don't accept the scientific method as correct."

The scientific method is more focused on the exoteric cosmos by humans.

Some are more focused on the QM going on within them and understanding themselves. The same internal metaphysical processes occur with or without science. Ones life and experience is not dependent on science.

See, you're being misleading. The scientific method is correct and fine as is... And explains the physical to a great extent, some just know and understand that it isn't all there is and is not needed to experience.

That's what makes it hard to even reason with, minds that create something that isn't even there and assuming it on others.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

On the route to understanding, religion takes the elevator while science takes the stairs. Many people get stuck in elevators and many more fall down stairs. At least if you fall down the stairs you can pick yourself back up and keep going. When you're stuck in an elevator, all you can do is wait for help.

In Theosophy it is taught....the religious path produces architects....science the builders...they are not in competition but are complementary....but more builders are needed than architects....

 

[godnotgod]

....but if on the whole it has utility in this world...fine..

...and that is all it will have, as getting to the heart of the matter requires a very different kind of approach.

Nature presents us with simple and complex arrangements. There is no problem with and nothing unnatural about seeing it as such.

No, but my point is that simplicity is the key to the complex.

 

[godnotgod]

Anyone who thinks their viewpoint, or religion, or methodology has all the answers is full of s**t. No one has all the answers.

Depends on how you're looking at things. If you want just one key that unlocks all the doors to provide you with what the true nature of things is, no matter the form, then that key is Higher Consciousness. HC is not a religion or methodology or doctrine. It just means to see things as they are. Once you understand the underlying nature of things, (including yourself), then that understanding extrapolates to everything. If you want to know more about the appearances and behavior of phenomena, then science is the tool you need. However, as both ben and I implicate, the understanding puts the science into context. You don't get real understanding with science; you get factual knowledge.

 

[Runewolf1973]

See, you're being misleading. The scientific method is correct and fine as is... And explains the physical to a great extent, some just know and understand that it isn't all there is and is not needed to experience.

Complete bulls**t. I was never being misleading and I never once said that science was "all there is" or that it was needed to experience. Stop putting words in my mouth.

 

[Runewolf1973]

Depends on how you're looking at things. If you want just one key that unlocks all the doors to provide you with what the true nature of things is, no matter the form, then that key is Higher Consciousness. HC is not a religion or methodology or doctrine. It just means to see things as they are. Once you understand the underlying nature of things, (including yourself), then that understanding extrapolates to everything. If you want to know more about the appearances and behavior of phenomena, then science is the tool you need. However, as both ben and I implicate, the understanding puts the science into context. You don't get real understanding with science; you get factual knowledge.

Rather than completely abandoning science or completely abandoning personal experience, I have combined both to draw upon my own understanding of the universe. I have always believed that there is some truth in everything. I never looked up to gurus. I became my own guru.

 

[Runewolf1973]

No, but my point is that simplicity is the key to the complex.

That is absolutely true.

 

[Unification]

Complete bulls**t. I was never being misleading and I never once said that science was "all there is" or that it was needed to experience. Stop putting words in my mouth.

Please read again. More carefully. You're reading things that aren't there.

Please show where anyone said that science is not accepted as correct. That was misleading. Words that you have put in others mouth.

I said that OTHERS, NOT YOU... accept science but don't see science as all that there is. That was the difference referred to as opposed to "not accepting science as correct."

There was no reference to YOU as seeing science as all that there is.

 

[Runewolf1973]

In Theosophy it is taught....the religious path produces architects....science the builders...they are not in competition but are complementary....but more builders are needed than architects....

Yes. That I why I do not think your view is wrong. I like your achitecture, I like your design, but I want to see the actual stones being put in place as well.

 

[Unification]

Rather than completely abandoning science or completely abandoning personal experience, I have combined both to draw upon my own understanding of the universe. I have always believed that there is some truth in everything. I never looked up to gurus. I became my own.

That is great and the way to be, in my opinion.

 

[Runewolf1973]

Please read again. More carefully. You're reading things that aren't there.

Please show where anyone said that science is not accepted as correct. That was misleading. Words that you have put in others mouth.

I said that OTHERS, NOT YOU... accept science but don't see science as all that there is. That was the difference referred to as opposed to "not accepting science as correct."

There was no reference to YOU as seeing science as all that there is.

I was not trying to be misleading, I was making an observation. Many here seem to imply that science is an incorrect view because it is a "dualist" approach. It is still an approach to the same thing. It doesn't matter how you get there or how long it takes. All that matters is you get there.

 

[Unification]

I was not trying to be misleading, I was making an observation. Many here seem to imply that science is an incorrect view because it is a "dualist" approach. It is still an approach to the same thing. It doesn't matter how you get there or how long it takes. All that matters is you get there.

It is the physical approach of knowledge, and generally sought as the external environment to someone.

I don't see it accounting for the metaphysical approach or knowing/direct inner experience of ones inner environment.

We don't see science telling us to meditate, or providing us answers for our own unique aware mind, or suffering and peace, etc. That type of experience is worked out within the individual.

So while the human beings experience is both the metaphysical and physical, combining the two seems to be where it's worked out. It can account for ones physical nature but one has a metaphysical nature also.

The most important "duality" in science is the wave-particle duality.

 

[Runewolf1973]

It is the physical approach of knowledge, and generally sought as the external environment to someone.

I don't see it accounting for the metaphysical approach or knowing/direct inner experience of ones inner environment.

We don't see science telling us to meditate, or providing us answers for our own unique aware mind, or suffering and peace, etc. That type of experience is worked out within the individual.

So while the human beings experience is both the metaphysical and physical, combining the two seems to be where it's worked out. It can account for ones physical nature but one has a metaphysical nature also.

The most important "duality" in science is the wave-particle duality.

I see union where others see division. The physical and the non-physical are not opposing, they are complimentary, they merge, they are One. That is also why I don't believe interaction is a duality.

 

[godnotgod]

Rather than completely abandoning science or completely abandoning personal experience, I have combined both to draw upon my own understanding of the universe. I have always believed that there is some truth in everything. I never looked up to gurus. I became my own guru.

A true guru only mirrors what you are, and points to the moon..

No one is saying that science should be abandoned, but only that it needs to be placed into the correct context of Reality itself. I hope I haven't misled you when I have repeatedly stated that Higher Consciousness is beyond Reason. That is not saying to abandon anything, but only that the spiritual experience is not based on Reason, that it is what reflects nature more closely than Reason, and therefore that Reason must be placed into the context of nature, and not the other way around. Reason formulates a conceptual framework about nature, and then attempts to see if nature will conform to that concept. Higher Consciousness is a direct experience of nature, without doctrine, conceptualization, or anything that can act as an obstacle to that experience. In fact, it is SO direct, that Deepak Chopra says of it:

"The spiritual experience is the merging of observer, the observed, and the entire process of observation into a single Reality"

 

[godnotgod]

I see union where others see division. The physical and the non-physical are not opposing, they are complimentary, they merge, they are One. That is also why I don't believe interaction is a duality.

Do you think it reasonable to say that there is only interaction, with yet more interaction as the background against which interaction is understood? You are aware, are you not, that the opposite of action is inaction?

If, as you claim, interaction is not a (relative) duality, then, by default, it can only be an absolute, if not The Absolute. Is that the case?

 

[godnotgod]

I was not trying to be misleading, I was making an observation. Many here seem to imply that science is an incorrect view because it is a "dualist" approach. It is still an approach to the same thing. It doesn't matter how you get there or how long it takes. All that matters is you get there.

It is not an incorrect view, but it's view is a conditioned view. It focuses only in a particular way for particular results. It fails to take into account the observer, who is totally immersed into that which is being observed. Science is fine if you want to extract data and facts from reality so that you can make predictions, such as weather, or space travel. That is factual knowledge. But it's very methodology prevents it from a true understanding of the nature of Reality. For that, another kind of approach outside the thinking mind must be taken. This other approach encompasses what science finds as well. It is far more comprehensive than science. That is not to say that the mystic must still live in the practical world, and finds himself relying on science and technology all the time, but that is no problem for the mystic, who doesn't see things as his view vs the scientific view. In fact, when I was at the Zen temple in San Francisco, we were encouraged to cultivate both the intellect AND the intuitive mind, as a means of gaining a balanced view. However, the spiritual experience is first and foremost in all Zen student's minds, and that means putting the thinking mind aside for awhile. It's not something you abandon, but use in a different way with your new vision of Reality, now transformed by the spiritual experience. Clear?