Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Isn't the discussion energy or something?Sorry, there is no closed captioning available for it either.
La la land is still a form of speculation. Go beyond la la land. Hold the mind still so you can be in a state of clarity.
Yes you just described information without having to get into consciousness..The Quantum fluctuations are waves carrying information that creates atomic mass.
Can information exist without consciousness?
Yes you just described information without having to get into consciousness..
True, but not definitive.
Isn't the discussion energy or something?
I mean you described information/data pretty well in materialist form. I might have to use that.What do you mean 'get into' consciousness? We all are already always conscious, even during sleep.
I mean you described information/data pretty well in materialist form. I might have to use that.
Oh, I see what you're saying. But I am suggesting that the Unified Field is Consciousness.
Yes, I forged one which suited my views. It is not classical advaita. I removed all mysticism and worship of Brahman. I do not know if the universe is cyclical or not, or whether it is a single universe or many. I will not commit myself to any particular view.Do you follow some other branch of Advaita that is non-mystical and whose cosmology is non-cyclical?
Yes, I forged one which suited my views. It is not classical advaita. I removed all mysticism and worship of Brahman.
Can you specify what this "Consciousness" is? If it is pure nothingness, then you may as well be saying that the unified field doesn't actually exist.
Yes, I forged one which suited my views. It is not classical advaita. I removed all mysticism and worship of Brahman. I do not know if the universe is cyclical or not, or whether it is a single universe or many. I will not commit myself to any particular view.
Equal is not the correct word to use. "Tat twam asi" means YOU ARE THAT (without any reservation/condition, emphatically). Yes, I accept that. One is 'equal to' the other means that there are two things, while Advaita does not accept the existence of any second thing (Ekomeva Adviteeyam - Verily one, without a second).Does it still include the classical Advaita view that Brahman and atman are equal? IOW, 'Tat tvam asi'?
Equal is not the correct word to use. "Tat twam asi" means YOU ARE THAT (without any reservation/condition, emphatically). Yes, I accept that.
I am not looking at 'that'. A father (Uddalaka Aruni) is instructing his son (Svetaketu) the truth of Brahman. It is a quote from that conversation. Uddalaka said:So you are That, forging a personal view about That. This means you really do not know you are That. IOW, you are not That; you are 'other' than That, looking at That as an object.
I am not looking at 'that'. A father (Uddalaka Aruni) is instructing his son (Svetaketu) to the truth of Brahman. It is a quote from that conversation. Uddalaka said:
"Yathā soumya! ekena mritpinḍena sarvaṃ mṛinmayaṃ vijñātaṃ syāt,
vāchāraṃbhaṇaṃ vikāro nāmadheyaṃ mṛittiketyeva satyaṃ." Chhandogya Upanishad 6.1.4
(O gentle one, just as by a single clod of clay all that is made of clay is known, all modification being corruptions in name, the truth is that all that is clay only.)
I can agree with much of this.How is 'forging my own view' not looking at That? The very moment you forge a view, you have automatically created subject/object; this and that; self and other. You have created the illusory observer. Deepak, whom you say is unqualified, tells us that the spiritual experience is the merging of the observer, the observed, and the entire process of observation into a single reality. This is just another way of saying 'Tat tvam asi'. So Deepak knows his stuff, I am afraid.
The quote is saying that all 'modifications', ie 'personal views' of Brahman are false, whereas Brahman can be known only via a universal view; that is to say: no particular view. Zen calls this 'pointing directly to the human mind and seeing into one's nature'. No personal view has been formulated here.
"You are not just the drop in the ocean; you are the Mighty Ocean itself"
Rumi
The quote in which 'Tat tvam asi' is actually spoken is:
"The effect is nothing but the cause. Hence the body is nothing but food, food is nothing but water, water is nothing but fire, fire is nothing but Sat. Sat alone is true, and That thou art.
When a man sleeps he becomes one with Sat and hence in his case it is said Svapiti, which means he attains his own Self in sleep. This Sat is the real cause of the universe.
When a man dies his speech is dissolved in the mind, the mind is dissolved in the Prana, the Prana is dissolved in fire, fire is dissolved in Sat. This Sat is thy Self - That thou art."
http://sivanandaonline.org/public_html/?cmd=displaysection§ion_id=786
Cosmos.....randomisity !!
Chit happens !!
With or without consciousness !!
~
'mud