Have They Experienced God or Not?

[fantome profane]

I see now. I was wondering because sometimes people post pics that don't show up in my browser for some reason.

Sometimes I am to subtle for my own good.

 

[Sunstone]

Sometimes I am to subtle for my own good.

Naw, I thought it was funny once I realized it wasn't just my browser acting up again.

 

[Sunstone]

That was an incredibly sucky reply. Very strange. It is completely undeserved, and inaccurate. I was sharing my thoughts, and could care less what you believe. I respected your thoughts, and this completely disappoints me.

My impression is you were coming very close to preaching.

 

[Windwalker]

My impression is you were coming very close to preaching.

I am not. Why do you think this, and why do you not engage in conversation? I really, genuinely respected your post. I could give a rat's *** if you agree with me. I thought you were interested in discussion? What about my points don't you agree with, where you can speak to them without some bizarre need to attack me? I'm truly astounding by your response, and disappointed.

You know, don't bother. I wasted my time and won't any further with you.

 

[Sunstone]

I am not. Why do you think this, and why do you not engage in conversation? I really, genuinely respected your post. I could give a rat's *** if you agree with me. I thought you were interested in discussion? What about my points don't you agree with, where you can speak to them without some bizarre need to attack me? I'm truly astounding by your response, and disappointed.

It's nothing personal: I dislike preaching no matter who does it. But perhaps you didn't intend to come across as preaching. It's hard to tell on the net what someone's tone of voice is. So, you say you weren't intending to come across as preaching, and I'll take your word at it. My apologies for having misunderstood you.

 

[atanu]

I could rephrase the question as "have they encountered a preternatural deity?", if that would help.

We have externalised mind-senses and everything is outside, external, and foe-like to us. The situation, you describe, eventually leads to a mind that is infinite like space but hosts thoughts and objects, like space has embedded objects. This state is unborn and indestructible peace and joy. We can mostly only theorise about this. This non dual mind is the real Lord, in the sense that every one is seeking this fullness and joy only. Yet, this is no Deity, since it is non-dual.

Deities are encountered on the path, on way to the non local mind that is host to the universe from our localised mind that inevitably dies.

This is theoretical too, to a large extent. So be indulgent please.

 

[HexBomb]

I think worldwide there are varied beliefs in the ideas that words, especially names, have power. Romani have names they don't share, some Native American tribes don't choose their name until much later in life, or never share true names with anyone but their spouse, if at all, in Celtic belief, knowing a name gives you power over the fair folk, this even bleeds through in folklore...Rumpelstiltskin, anyone? Even Moses, faced with the burning bush asked for a name.

While I can't answer as to whether people have experienced gods(s) or not, I don't find the post-event identification odd. Sometimes when you experience something you can grasp it dully, and it is only when trying to relate it to others, or even to yourself that words fail to encapsulate experience. In my opinion, it is probably a combination of these that causes the after-effect identification. Does that invalidate the experience? I don't know.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

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've experienced this many times and it has never struck me as something I'd label as "god." If I have, in fact, experienced god through these experiences, then the nature of god is rather arbitrary and hidden, since one can experience it, and it still isn't apparent.

 

[Windwalker]

It's nothing personal: I dislike preaching no matter who does it. But perhaps you didn't intend to come across as preaching. It's hard to tell on the net what someone's tone of voice is. So, you say you weren't intending to come across as preaching, and I'll take your word at it. My apologies for having misunderstood you.

Very well, which goes to show why we shouldn't assume anyone's motives, especially on a forum before accusing them of something. But you did say as well that I "twisted" your words, which likewise I do not believe I did. I made a point to say I was making some clarifications of terms in order to make for a better, clearer discussion. I put some considerable effort into that post, hoping you might find it informative or a good launching point to discuss what I felt you were looking at. Do you intend to respond, or should I consider that you're not interested for whatever reason and unfollow this thread?

 

[Nakosis]

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

It fits what others have described. Like maybe someone describes a very scenic place along a trail but didn't tell you how exactly to get there. You wander into it and decide this must be the place. Everyone describes it in their own words but usually enough similarities to know it when you see it.

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

It's a common human experience. It seems, it feels real. Like any other human experience. So it causes me to question what is real sometimes. So I have to decide to accept what seems apparently real until somehow I find out otherwise. Or accept no real experience I have is trustworthy. Not much choice for me I think except to accept the apparent reality of what I experience for myself.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

I think religious ecstasies, peak experiences or epiphanies are often mistaken for full blown theophanies. Theophanies are very different from those experiences. Religious ecstasies just don't seem to have the lasting effects of a theophany, they seem to be a form of hypnosis whereas an actually theophany while being a form of trance state is more of an awakening from our normal consciousness (which is a semi-hypnotic trance state). Theophanies also tend to permanently change those who experience them while religious ecstasies tend not to.

I just kind of wonder if the theophanies induced by entheogens could rightly be described as God-experiences, I like to think so.

 

[Nakosis]

I think religious ecstasies, peak experiences or epiphanies are often mistaken for full blown theophanies. Theophanies are very different from those experiences. Religious ecstasies just don't seem to have the lasting effects of a theophany, they seem to be a form of hypnosis whereas an actually theophany while being a form of trance state is more of an awakening from our normal consciousness (which is a semi-hypnotic trance state). Theophanies also tend to permanently change those who experience them while religious ecstasies tend not to.

I just kind of wonder if the theophanies induced by entheogens could rightly be described as God-experiences, I like to think so.

Interesting... Is this documented?
I never thought to differentiate the two, but many I have asked about such experiences do seem to fall into the first category.

People use fasting, isolation to try and induce such experiences.

Jesus went out into the wilderness.
Buddha sat under a tree.

 

[roger1440]

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.

The experience is like a sudden burst of insight. It does not come to us by the senses, (sight, smell, feel, hear or taste. It is not an emotion. It is a revelation. ALL has been revealed. If God is defined as One or All, then the experiencer is standing before God or embraced by God. To describe this experience or any experience would fall short. Any experience is personal.

 

[dannerz]

I think religious ecstasies, peak experiences or epiphanies are often mistaken for full blown theophanies. Theophanies are very different from those experiences. Religious ecstasies just don't seem to have the lasting effects of a theophany, they seem to be a form of hypnosis whereas an actually theophany while being a form of trance state is more of an awakening from our normal consciousness (which is a semi-hypnotic trance state). Theophanies also tend to permanently change those who experience them while religious ecstasies tend not to.

I just kind of wonder if the theophanies induced by entheogens could rightly be described as God-experiences, I like to think so.

I've had only a few small time dreams about the godhead and his helpers. One of the dreams was semi lucid. Chemicals can resonate with higher forces. Our body is very much a resonant system, too. I would say a lot of those unique experiences are not God directly, but emanations of him, which permeate even this lower world. I consider peak human highs from substances or meditations are just the tip of the iceburg. There is so much more out there. Just my two cents.

 

[Muffled]

From the OP:
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 believe that both possibilities are valid.

I believe God is known by His word.

I believe I knew because the answers I received were beyond my own understanding.

I believe it shows that God is spiritaully discerned.

 

[Muffled]

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

I do not believe this is the case because the superego (spiritual consciousness of the person) is in that state as well and it is not God.

 

[Muffled]

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.

I believe this is not the case that some things are experienced by our spirit and our brains do not retain memory of it as in dreams that are not remembered.

 

[atanu]

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?

As i understand:

A person who has touched the base or who abides in the unborn, imbibes fully the nature of That and radiates That. It is said (and I have experience) that turbulent-depressed-unhappy minds attain peace just being in presence of such God knowing person.

The nature of the unborn unattached that is base of our existence-mind is of peace.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I believe this is not the case that some things are experienced by our spirit and our brains do not retain memory of it as in dreams that are not remembered.

What reason do you believe this?

Also why use "dream" as your example as dreams are a uniquely "brain only" phenomenon that is becoming more and more understood.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Interesting... Is this documented?
I never thought to differentiate the two, but many I have asked about such experiences do seem to fall into the first category.

People use fasting, isolation to try and induce such experiences.

Jesus went out into the wilderness.
Buddha sat under a tree.

Ever read Terence McKenna?