Have They Experienced God or Not?

[Sunstone]

I think of consciousness as like an optics or lens through which the world is focused and viewed.

More specifically, it seems to be involved in dividing our perception of the world into subject and object. And if that's the case, then it is involved in the creation of the ego, the "I", the psychological self -- however you want to describe the "subject" in subject/object division.

Now, according to accounts from all places and ages of history, it is possible for consciousness to come to an abrupt end while some form of experiencing or awareness remains.

Apparently, when that happens, subject/object perception comes to an end, the "I" comes to an end, and there is a sense or perception of all heretofore seemingly discrete things actually being one. Often enough, along with this new found sense of one or oneness, there are overwhelming feelings of love, acceptance and bliss.

That one or oneness is sometimes identified as deity.

But that identification seems to come later on -- after the experience of it has ended, and not simultaneous with the experience of it. In other words, it might not be so much an actual identification as it is an interpretation after the fact. For during the experience of this one or oneness, it seems normal conscious thinking has ceased. Moreover, not everyone who has this sort of experience of one or oneness comes away from it thinking they have experienced god.

So my question is: Have they experienced god or not? How would they know? How would you know?

And if they have experienced god, what, if anything, does the experience say about the nature of god?

 

[SkylarHunter]

I've had experiences that made me believe God was there, symbolically holding my hand and guiding me. Sometimes I ask for things and I get answers that weren't exactly what I had in mind, but they were the answers I needed at that time.

 

[atanu]

I think of consciousness as like an optics or lens through which the world is focused and viewed.

More specifically, it seems to be involved in dividing our perception of the world into subject and object. And if that's the case, then it is involved in the creation of the ego, the "I", the psychological self -- however you want to describe the "subject" in subject/object division.

Now, according to accounts from all places and ages of history, it is possible for consciousness to come to an abrupt end while some form of experiencing or awareness remains.

Apparently, when that happens, subject/object perception comes to an end, the "I" comes to an end, and there is a sense or perception of all heretofore seemingly discrete things actually being one. Often enough, along with this new found sense of one or oneness, there are overwhelming feelings of love, acceptance and bliss.

That one or oneness is sometimes identified as deity.

But that identification seems to come later on -- after the experience of it has ended, and not simultaneous with the experience of it. In other words, it might not be so much an actual identification as it is an interpretation after the fact. For during the experience of this one or oneness, it seems normal conscious thinking has ceased. Moreover, not everyone who has this sort of experience of one or oneness comes away from it thinking they have experienced god.

So my question is: Have they experienced god or not? How would they know? How would you know?

And if they have experienced god, what, if anything, does the experience say about the nature of god?

God can be thought of at many levels. As per Vedanta, however, the thoughtless consciousness itself is God, characterised as the 'Being/Consciousness/Bliss'.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I think of consciousness as like an optics or lens through which the world is focused and viewed.

More specifically, it seems to be involved in dividing our perception of the world into subject and object. And if that's the case, then it is involved in the creation of the ego, the "I", the psychological self -- however you want to describe the "subject" in subject/object division.

Now, according to accounts from all places and ages of history, it is possible for consciousness to come to an abrupt end while some form of experiencing or awareness remains.

Apparently, when that happens, subject/object perception comes to an end, the "I" comes to an end, and there is a sense or perception of all heretofore seemingly discrete things actually being one. Often enough, along with this new found sense of one or oneness, there are overwhelming feelings of love, acceptance and bliss.

That one or oneness is sometimes identified as deity.

But that identification seems to come later on -- after the experience of it has ended, and not simultaneous with the experience of it. In other words, it might not be so much an actual identification as it is an interpretation after the fact. For during the experience of this one or oneness, it seems normal conscious thinking has ceased. Moreover, not everyone who has this sort of experience of one or oneness comes away from it thinking they have experienced god.

So my question is: Have they experienced god or not? How would they know? How would you know?

And if they have experienced god, what, if anything, does the experience say about the nature of god?

I suppose its impossible to directly tell. However it seems that if everything we will ever experience is within our brains then why not then do we assume that god isn't as well? I've had vivid dreams. I've had nightmares. I've been confused. I've never hallucinated but I hear that is quite a trip.

A surreal sensation may in fact be only a surreal sensation and we haven't been able to gather any evidence independent of our own "experiences" that such a thing exists.

 

[John Doe]

I think of consciousness as like an optics or lens through which the world is focused and viewed.

'''

And if they have experienced god, what, if anything, does the experience say about the nature of god?

The-viewing-and-the-viewer slipslide into inconceivable peace.

Lovely.

Let's not argue.

Regardless of how or why they think they got here, I truly wish that everyone chill so completely, and so satisfactorily, that they just don't care about that any more - at least for a few minutes each day.

 

[Sunstone]

I've never hallucinated but I hear that is quite a trip.

These experiences people report of one or oneness are not hallucinations in scientific terms. Among other ways, they differ from hallucinations in that people who have experienced an hallucination typically "wake up from it" -- that is, become aware of it as an hallucination -- shortly after it ceases. So, for instance, if you were to hallucinate a palm tree in a desert, you would most likely realize it was a mere hallucination moments after it went away.

In contrast to that, people who have experienced this sense of one or oneness often enough maintain that it was real twenty years or more afterwards.

So, in psychological terms -- that is, in scientific terms -- these things do not share many of the characteristics of true hallucinations.

 

[John Doe]

These experiences people report of one or oneness are not hallucinations in scientific terms. Among other ways, they differ from hallucinations in that people who have experienced an hallucination typically "wake up from it" -- that is, become aware of it as an hallucination -- shortly after it ceases. So, for instance, if you were to hallucinate a palm tree in a desert, you would most likely realize it was a mere hallucination moments after it went away.

In contrast to that, people who have experienced this sense of one or oneness often enough maintain that it was real twenty years or more afterwards.

So, in psychological terms -- that is, in scientific terms -- these things do not share many of the characteristics of true hallucinations.

Good observation.

I also observe that this kind of experience is more likely to cause relinquishing a sense of conceptual certainty than reinforcing it.

Perhaps this is what W.B.Yeats meant when he wrote -

"The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity"

- W.B.Yeats 'The Second Coming'

 

[Monk Of Reason]

These experiences people report of one or oneness are not hallucinations in scientific terms. Among other ways, they differ from hallucinations in that people who have experienced an hallucination typically "wake up from it" -- that is, become aware of it as an hallucination -- shortly after it ceases. So, for instance, if you were to hallucinate a palm tree in a desert, you would most likely realize it was a mere hallucination moments after it went away.

In contrast to that, people who have experienced this sense of one or oneness often enough maintain that it was real twenty years or more afterwards.

So, in psychological terms -- that is, in scientific terms -- these things do not share many of the characteristics of true hallucinations.

I didn't necessarily say that they were hallucinations. I was merely saying that far more unbelievable things have occurred in our brains in comparison.

 

[Sees]

I wouldn't call such God but also wouldn't argue with those who do.

 

[Sir Doom]

So my question is: Have they experienced god or not?

I have my doubts. But who can really say? I don't know what they felt.

How would they know?

I don't know that they would, honestly. I agree with you that I think its creativity after the fact. It doesn't mean its necessarily wrong, but obviously not necessarily so either.

How would you know?

I'm special, I guess. I'd just know!

I don't know. I'm sure I could explain away anything I felt no matter what it was. It would have to be pretty obviously divine (and I have no idea what that means, btw) for me to count it as that.

And if they have experienced god, what, if anything, does the experience say about the nature of god?

That God likes other people more than me.

 

[fantome profane]

I think of consciousness as like an optics or lens through which the world is focused and viewed.

More specifically, it seems to be involved in dividing our perception of the world into subject and object. And if that's the case, then it is involved in the creation of the ego, the "I", the psychological self -- however you want to describe the "subject" in subject/object division.

Now, according to accounts from all places and ages of history, it is possible for consciousness to come to an abrupt end while some form of experiencing or awareness remains.

Apparently, when that happens, subject/object perception comes to an end, the "I" comes to an end, and there is a sense or perception of all heretofore seemingly discrete things actually being one. Often enough, along with this new found sense of one or oneness, there are overwhelming feelings of love, acceptance and bliss.

That one or oneness is sometimes identified as deity.

But that identification seems to come later on -- after the experience of it has ended, and not simultaneous with the experience of it. In other words, it might not be so much an actual identification as it is an interpretation after the fact. For during the experience of this one or oneness, it seems normal conscious thinking has ceased. Moreover, not everyone who has this sort of experience of one or oneness comes away from it thinking they have experienced god.

So my question is: Have they experienced god or not? How would they know? How would you know?

And if they have experienced god, what, if anything, does the experience say about the nature of god?

I think you are trying to put a label on an experience that transcends language. The more you try to pin it down in words the more it slips away from you. I am not sure using the word "God" really helps us to understand this experience.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

These experiences people report of one or oneness are not hallucinations in scientific terms. Among other ways, they differ from hallucinations in that people who have experienced an hallucination typically "wake up from it" -- that is, become aware of it as an hallucination -- shortly after it ceases. So, for instance, if you were to hallucinate a palm tree in a desert, you would most likely realize it was a mere hallucination moments after it went away.

In contrast to that, people who have experienced this sense of one or oneness often enough maintain that it was real twenty years or more afterwards.

So, in psychological terms -- that is, in scientific terms -- these things do not share many of the characteristics of true hallucinations.

But they're still a matter of brain function... or malfunction.

Our sense of self, i.e the sense that tells me that my hand is "me" but the thing I'm holding is not "me", is created by higher order brain functions. When these brain functions are disrupted, this sense of demarcation between "the self" and "the rest of the world" can disappear. This is the phenomenon you're describing.

I realize that the people who experience it often feel that it's very profound, but the same is true when the sensation is deliberately induced.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think you are trying to put a label on an experience that transcends language. The more you try to pin it down in words the more it slips away from you. I am not sure using the word "God" really helps us to understand this experience.

I agree. Calling the experience "God" is really making a claim about the source of the experience... and I can't see any rational basis to justify the claim.

 

[Windwalker]

I think of consciousness as like an optics or lens through which the world is focused and viewed.

More specifically, it seems to be involved in dividing our perception of the world into subject and object. And if that's the case, then it is involved in the creation of the ego, the "I", the psychological self -- however you want to describe the "subject" in subject/object division.

Now, according to accounts from all places and ages of history, it is possible for consciousness to come to an abrupt end while some form of experiencing or awareness remains.

Apparently, when that happens, subject/object perception comes to an end, the "I" comes to an end, and there is a sense or perception of all heretofore seemingly discrete things actually being one. Often enough, along with this new found sense of one or oneness, there are overwhelming feelings of love, acceptance and bliss.

I love your entire OP. It is right into the arena of my thoughts and asks very valid good questions.

First to lay some distinctions may help focus this more. Consciousness is what underlies all perceptions, all awareness. It is awareness itself, and the rest are simply forms of awareness. Subject/object dualities are a feature of the 'normal' perceptual awareness of mind. The mind 'thinks' in terms of created mental objects. One begins with the raw experience that simply hits you, and then immediately the mind attempts to interpret that experience in terms of subject/object distinctions; "What was that? (objective), and "What does that mean? (subjective).

It happens so instantly, so invisibly to us that it for all intents and purposes creates the flavor of what the world is. Reality is duality to us. Reality is our thoughts, the lens or set of eyes we perceive the world with. And then something can happen, where for a moment of time we cease all such mind activities, these processing patterns and simply "see". That activity ceases and the world comes flooding in, raw, and pure and unfiltered into awareness. These experiences can happen spontaneously, or deliberately through the practice and discipline of meditation.

When we let the world come in in such a way, what we see and experience initially may cause great joy! We may weep as we let ourselves go into this bliss. This is the ego in a way saying, "Thank you! Oh, thank you, thank you!", to us as we allow ourselves to be freed from this contraction of mind into Simple Being. And what is experienced can so overwhelm us, that later as we try to understand the magnitude of this with that thinking mind we rely on day to day, it find no adequate word sign to call it, and so it applies a symbol, "The Absolute", "The Infinite", "God", and so forth.

In time, as through a disciplined practice of meditation when encounters this state of consciousness liberated from mental processing in dualitist terms, that joy, that sense of unbounded release become normalized. It is joy, but the tears have ceases, and there is nothing but pure awareness and sense of being connected and true. It can be called the divine mind. One can rest in this emptiness, and then move from that emptiness into the world of form, the world of subject/object dualities and experience those as they are, and see and experience in all of these that Infinite Emptiness. This is the nondual reality. It sees that "all is One", but also sees that "One is many", simultaneously.

That one or oneness is sometimes identified as deity.

Yes, and no. I myself use the term God to point to this, but God itself is a dualistic term. I call it the Face we put upon the Infinite. To someone that does not encounter this Infinite, God does not exist, except maybe in some metaphysical model of speculative theologies which they interact with, or reject because there's "no evidence" to support these speculations. That is entirely different than speaking about God from a place of encountering this Depth in personal experience.

But God itself is not adequate to describe this, except initially as the mind encounters this back on itself, and as the mind reaches to move beyond itself into this Absolute. God is a symbol of our transcendent Self, our own true Infinite Nature existent in the body, and in all that is. At a point of connection with this, God gives way to That which is beyond that Face, into Godhead, the Ground, the Source, and so forth.

But that identification seems to come later on -- after the experience of it has ended, and not simultaneous with the experience of it.

It may very well be simultaneous with the experience of it. Or it may not.

In other words, it might not be so much an actual identification as it is an interpretation after the fact.

Or during, as the mind is still functioning actively in dualistic terms, encountering transcendental illumination which overwhelms the mind. The mind reaches for mental objects to call it as it comes face to face with That its first time(s). And you are in fact right, it is not an "actual identification", as that would assume "it" is an object. In Reality, it is neither subject nor object, so the mind attempts to relate itself to That in those terms. But, this does not mean "God doesn't exist", in the sense an Atheist would say it! Not at all. To one who encounters this, such questions are completely moot. The only question that remains is, "How we talk about it? How do we attempt to describe what cannot be defined by any words?" The Atheist mind points to the world of words and says it doesn't see God within them. They are closer to the Truth of it, but stop at words.

For during the experience of this one or oneness, it seems normal conscious thinking has ceased. Moreover, not everyone who has this sort of experience of one or oneness comes away from it thinking they have experienced god.

So my question is: Have they experienced god or not? How would they know? How would you know?

Yes, they have experience what people call God. Notice I said what people call God, and not God itself, as God is neither the subject nor the object, and yet is both, all at the same time? "God" is simply that which IS, and we experience that in all manner of conscious awareness, from the literal concrete realities of subject/object dualism, to abstract visions of higher reasoning, to states of nonduality. All of it is encountering "That" which IS at all levels and all perceptions, but with different eyes. The nondual awareness is perhaps the highest perceptual awareness of mind we have encountered, seeing Face to Face, as it were.

How do you know? How do you know you are awake right now and not in a dream? Same way. You awaken from 'normal' consciousness awareness into a new awakened conscious reality. It's just like that.

And if they have experienced god, what, if anything, does the experience say about the nature of god?

What does it say about us, is the real question!

 

[LuisDantas]

So my question is: Have they experienced god or not? How would they know? How would you know?

They have, if they feel that they did.

We must keep in mind that god is as arbitrary a concept as they come. If they say that they experienced god, then they did. God is, after all their creation for all practical purposes.

For all anyone can tell, there is no other form of god.

No one else can know whether it happened or not. No one else has to, either. It is a mistake to attempt to extrapolate from god experiences. Even among those who have them, they are not reliably similar.

And if they have experienced god, what, if anything, does the experience say about the nature of god?

That it is a human creation, custom-shaped by one's individual needs, and may well be just a somewhat inadequate label for "realization of the purest goals" or something similar.

Myself, I like to use words such as "sacred" instead of god, because I am convinced that it is a mistake to speak of God as if he were a literal, self-existing entity. He is just a personification of anxieties and hopes.

 

[LuisDantas]

These experiences people report of one or oneness are not hallucinations in scientific terms. Among other ways, they differ from hallucinations in that people who have experienced an hallucination typically "wake up from it" -- that is, become aware of it as an hallucination -- shortly after it ceases. So, for instance, if you were to hallucinate a palm tree in a desert, you would most likely realize it was a mere hallucination moments after it went away.

In contrast to that, people who have experienced this sense of one or oneness often enough maintain that it was real twenty years or more afterwards.

So, in psychological terms -- that is, in scientific terms -- these things do not share many of the characteristics of true hallucinations.

Is there any difference beyond a lasting emotional impact, though? From your description it would seem that there is not.

And in that case, it is not a significant difference for our purposes in this thread.

 

[LuisDantas]

Good observation.

I also observe that this kind of experience is more likely to cause relinquishing a sense of conceptual certainty than reinforcing it.

Perhaps this is what W.B.Yeats meant when he wrote -

Which is in itself an indication that those who interpret their introspective experiences as related to a deity may be those most predisposed to convince themselves of his existence in the first place...

 

[Windwalker]

Is there any difference beyond a lasting emotional impact, though? From your description it would seem that there is not.

And in that case, it is not a significant difference for our purposes in this thread.

His descriptions fit my experience very well. The experience of "God" is not later interpreted or understood as a hallucination, and the lasting impact (not just emotion, but existential, psychological, entire perceptive reality and worldviews), become radically changed. I've had hallucinations through drug use in my youth, and then there was this awakening experience which the mind understands as God. The hallucinations are understood clearly for what they are, but the latter has been the center of my being and impelling force of my entire life for over the last 30 years. There is no comparison on that level.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

His descriptions fit my experience very well. The experience of "God" is not later interpreted or understood as a hallucination, and the lasting impact (not just emotion, but existential, psychological, entire perceptive reality and worldviews), become radically changed. I've had hallucinations through drug use in my youth, and then there was this awakening experience which the mind understands as God. The hallucinations are understood clearly for what they are, but the latter has been the center of my being and impelling force of my entire life for over the last 30 years. There is no comparison on that level.

Actually, what you've said here about "lasting impact" sounds VERY similar to how people describe LSD.

 

[Windwalker]

Actually, what you've said here about "lasting impact" sounds VERY similar to how people describe LSD.

Well, yes that may be true depending. What is real is the experience of expanded consciousness, and what it opens to you. You'll have to read my more in depth explanation of these things in my longer post before the one you quote.