Does the universe need intelligence to order it?

[godnotgod]

So have you seen without discrimination? And if so what was it actually like?

See, you want a black and white 'explanation' for something that is inexplicable. And so, rather than dilute the experience with mere explanation, I hand over the berry to you so you can have a taste.

 

[godnotgod]

Because the term "illusion" here is actually inaccurate. We think of "illusion" and we think of something that appears one way while in reality is another. Something purposeful. It would be like looking at a rope and thinking it to be a snake as an illusion.

However this is difficult to take over to our subjective view of reality because in the idea of the rope and the snake we already have foreknowledge of the snake and the rope. We can clearly imagine the rope and we can clearly see how it may be an illusion which clouds and otherwise unclouded judgement.

Now our current sentient consciousness is derived from sensory knowledge from our surroundings. The sensory knowledge is founded in material affects of the surrounding areas on certain sensitive cells and pattern recognition within the brain. But this is the extent in which we can conjure the world.

Its like being in a box and only able to see the outside with cameras and microphones but never being able to step outside and experience it first-hand. Now we assume that what we have obtained from our senses is at least to some degree accurate. If not then we probably wouldn't have survived. So this "illusion" isn't actually a false image but simply an imperfect one. For example there are several things that our senses can't pick up on. Gravitational waves, feeling the expansion of the universe, feel radiation except from heat transfer. We can't even see one millionth of the known electromagnetic spectrum. Our ears can only hear a tiny sliver of the auditory range. Ect.

So from there we are able to make deductions. We are able to problem solve. We can infer from this knowledge that we have gained from this camera view picture of the universe and understand that what we "see" with our senses is only a tiny bit of the universe that can be perceived.

So the conclusion of an imperfect image implies the existence of a perfect one.


Can you keep the unquiet physical-soul from straying,
Hold fast to the Unity, and never quit it?
Can you, when concentrating your breath,
Make it soft like that of a little child?
Can you wipe and cleanse your vision of the Mystery till all is without blur?

excerpted from: Tao Te Ching: Chapter 10
translated by Arthur Waley (1934)

 

[godnotgod]

Well, some of us do and have been doing our regular practice for many decades. It is so incredibly amusing to hear that my personal insights are little more than blips of the infinite.
Thank you, oh Perfect Adept of the Master Game. Now, if you actually knew what you were talking about, I might be inclined to meet you part way, but there is so much disinformation and distortion in your above comment that I, quite seriously, don't know quite where to begin. For example, little quibbles like saying, "the nature of Reality is the same everywhere". Um, how could you possibly know?

Because, its the nature of Reality.

Let's pretend for a moment that what you are saying is correct. Taking into account that you accept that I have had "glimpses into the infiinite" would you not expect that I should sense some deep meaning in your words? [/QUOTE]

No, because in spite of your experience, you still retain vision via your filters.

Instead, I outright reject your preconceived notions as being somewhat ossified and often outright primitive. Again, I should, in theory, be one of your warmest supporters -- waiting breathlessly for your latest pronouncements from on high -- but I'm not. The reason for that is what you are saying doesn't actually make a lot of sense to anyone who is steeped in this alternate view of reality. It's like listening to a three year old's summation on Market trends.

I'm not concerned with nurturing a fan club or entertaining you.

What you don't know (because I don't recall ever talking about it on RF) is that I have written extensively on that very topic, exploring many reasons and probably outcomes. I'd suggest it is a game-changer for everyone and that human animals simply deal with it in a host of different ways.

Some see it; some don't.

 

[godnotgod]

You see, Robert. It's thinking like this that lends itself to comments about arrogance. Like, you think the point has been made very well, and yet the target audience is still sitting here saying, "What the heck?" To blame the audience and not the message (or the messenger) is not very reasonable. Again, you would think that human animals who had extended their experiences into these subtle realms would be far more capable of handling routine questions and would have infinite patience until their message had begun to trickle through. So far, I see godnotgod et al as batting zero, whilst thinking the game is won. OK, I'll be generous, he's made a couple of line drives, but zilch in the way of home runs with the bases loaded.

Not sure about home runs, but all I can do is point to the moon. The choices are: attack my pointing finger, or look at what it is pointing to. You can stop to partake of a cool mountain spring or simply travel on. It makes no difference to the spring, which just continues to bubble forth. It is not concerned with convincing you of anything or winning anything. Its empty.

Your posts seem to be filled with a desire for satiation of sensation and entertainment. I am not the person you want.

So, have you peeled your potatoes today?

wash your bowl

A monk told Joshu, “I have just entered the monastery. Please teach me.”
Joshu asked, “Have you eaten your rice porridge?
The monk replied, “I have eaten.”
Joshu said, “Then you had better wash your bowl.”

 

[YmirGF]

Not sure about home runs, but all I can do is point to the moon. The choices are: attack my pointing finger, or look at what it is pointing to. You can stop to partake of a cool mountain spring or simply travel on. It makes no difference to the spring, which just continues to bubble forth. It is not concerned with convincing you of anything or winning anything. Its empty.

Your posts seem to be filled with a desire for satiation of sensation and entertainment. I am not the person you want.

If you cannot convince me, even an iota, it is unlikely that you will attract much of an audience to your esteemed babbling brook's view of reality. Drop the pretense and maybe we can move forward. All you have so far is a wagging finger controlled by an extremely healthy ego.

 

[godnotgod]

How GNG enlightened the entire REF community by having them peel the potatoes.

'Alright, gentlemen. Potato peelers, at the ready!'

 

[godnotgod]

If you cannot convince me, even an iota, it is unlikely that you will attract much of an audience to your esteemed babbling brook's view of reality. Drop the pretense and maybe we can move forward. All you have so far is a wagging finger controlled by an extremely healthy ego.

Well, it appears that there is quite an audience present, unintentionally on my part, however.

What you perceive as a wagging finger may only be your own moving mind. But whatever the case may be, your focus on the finger will not get you even a glimpse of the lovely moon.

There is no babbling brook view of reality; the bubbling brook is itself Reality.

...and thats bubbling, not babbling, babbling being only in your head.

Move forward? To where? Your fake Bodhisattva view of reality, addicted to sensation, power, and security?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

So the conclusion of an imperfect image implies the existence of a perfect one.


Can you keep the unquiet physical-soul from straying,
Hold fast to the Unity, and never quit it?
Can you, when concentrating your breath,
Make it soft like that of a little child?
Can you wipe and cleanse your vision of the Mystery till all is without blur?

excerpted from: Tao Te Ching: Chapter 10
translated by Arthur Waley (1934)

Not that we have ever attained. And it doesn't imply any higher form of consciousness. Simply that we are blind and our blurry vision is the best we have.

 

[YmirGF]

Well, it appears that there is quite an audience present, unintentionally on my part, however.

What you perceive as a wagging finger may only be your own moving mind. But whatever the case may be, your focus on the finger will not get you even a glimpse of the lovely moon.

There is no babbling brook view of reality; the bubbling brook is itself Reality.

...and thats bubbling, not babbling, babbling being only in your head.

Move forward? To where? Your fake Bodhisattva view of reality, addicted to sensation, power, and security?

Ah, the passive-aggressiveness shines brightly in you, my friend. What is amusing is that you hold to the idea that you comprehend reality with a capital "R", no less, whereas others are merely pond-skimmers. What you don't understand is that moon you pretend to be pointing at is my natural environment. I should know what I am talking about as, like you, I need only relate what I am seeing, metaphorically speaking, of course, so I don't really need anyone to "correct" my thinking. Thanks all the same.

Like your misunderstanding of Zen and pretty much every other discipline, it would seem that you don't know much about the roles played by the bodhisattva. I suppose if I echoed your thinking and praised your every utterance, your position would be dramatically different. To anyone who actually knows me I think they would giggle in laughter at the thought of me being addicted to sensation, power and security. Thanks for the laugh though. Maybe I'll put you up for a humor award for the endless hours of delight you have given me and others.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Can peeling the potatoes be a meditative practice which involves a non conceptual insight?

Yes, of course, provided it is done mindfully. Anyway, we seem to have strayed far from the original topic which I would be interested in discussing further.

I think the basic question is: "Could our universe have evolved purely by chance?"

 

[Rick O'Shez]

'From brilliancy I came;
To brilliancy I return;
What, then, is all this?'
a Zen monk

Please reference Buddhist quotes properly. If you don't then I will assume you are just making them up to sound clever.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

See, you want a black and white 'explanation' for something that is inexplicable.

No, just a description. But why don't you start a new thread to talk about your ideas, this stuff is really off topic here. Maybe in the Buddhist DIR, it would be interesting to hear what other Zen practitioners think about your approach.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I think the basic question is: "Could our universe have evolved purely by chance?"

There is no 'other way'.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

There is no 'other way'.

I tend to agree, but others have argued differently.

 

[godnotgod]

Ah, the passive-aggressiveness shines brightly in you, my friend. What is amusing is that you hold to the idea that you comprehend reality with a capital "R", no less, whereas others are merely pond-skimmers. What you don't understand is that moon you pretend to be pointing at is my natural environment. I should know what I am talking about as, like you, I need only relate what I am seeing, metaphorically speaking, of course, so I don't really need anyone to "correct" my thinking. Thanks all the same.

Like your misunderstanding of Zen and pretty much every other discipline, it would seem that you don't know much about the roles played by the bodhisattva. I suppose if I echoed your thinking and praised your every utterance, your position would be dramatically different. To anyone who actually knows me I think they would giggle in laughter at the thought of me being addicted to sensation, power and security. Thanks for the laugh though. Maybe I'll put you up for a humor award for the endless hours of delight you have given me and others.

I assure you that the fact of your being entertained is completely unintentional. And as for your being thrilled at the prospect of me hitting a home run, I am afraid you may have a long wait. My approach is almost imperceptible inch step foot gem, and as such, am not interested in nurturing your feelings of sensation.

Of course you don't see any need for correction. The ego thinks itself supreme, even imagining itself a Bodhisattva, yet lacking as in a gaping hole. I can tell you one thing: a true Bodhisattva would never even consider advertising himself as such. Reminds me of what is called Inka Zen: 'Zen Masters' who have been officially credentialed as such, hanging their diploma on the wall behind their desk. Pure hogwash! This is dead Zen, people who have forgotten how to peel the potatoes.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

This is dead Zen, people who have forgotten how to peel the potatoes.

That would make an interesting topic in the Buddhism DIR, I'd be interested to see if other Zen practitioners regard themselves as practising "dead Zen". Go on, I dare you!

 

[godnotgod]

Not that we have ever attained. And it doesn't imply any higher form of consciousness. Simply that we are blind and our blurry vision is the best we have.

Only because of the limitations of perception. This is exactly the takeoff point of the mystic, having realized this limitation of sensory perception. Of course, being a student of Plato, you remember that a more perfect view was available just outside the cave of perceptual reality, the metaphor being that another kind of view is required. The old cave wall shadow paradigm just won't do any longer.

In the world of Higher Consciousness, even biology is seen as an obstacle, along with social conditioning.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I think the basic question is: "Could our universe have evolved purely by chance?"

I think a problem with this discussion is that the human perspective is inherently limited, and we tend to project our limited human ideas about purpose and creation out on the universe. But the universe is unimaginably large and mysterious. Who can begin to imagine something over 90 billions light years in diameter, with billions of galaxies and trillions of stars? It is literally mind-boggling, and it's not surprising we struggle to make sense of it.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Higher Consciousness,

Definition please. Please don't use new-age jargon unless you willing to define it clearly. That might be OK in the New-age DIR but is entirely inappropriate in a general religious forum.

And again, starting words with capital letters doesn't make them look any more valid, it just makes them look more pretentious.

 

[godnotgod]

Yes, of course, provided it is done mindfully.

And mindfulness, as we know, can lead to the spiritual experience, which you and I both know is not the same as that of the conditioned mind. The former sees the universe one way, the latter another, which leads to the topic at hand.

I think the basic question is: "Could our universe have evolved purely by chance?"

I don't see that as the question. It evolved neither by chance, nor not-chance.