Let's not talk about the Big Bang

[Zwing]

In the classical BB model there is no space-time before, so your claim "there was an intensification of quantum energy in a small region of space" is meaningless for three reasons

1. No space, so no "small region of space".
2. No time, so an "intensification" couldn't happen.
3. Even in the presence of space-time "an intensification of quantum energy in a small region of space" is basically word salad.

That is faulty, as it equates space with our universe. Rather, our universe was born, exists, and will die within space, which is infinite. As for “time”, it exists only in the human mind.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Which leads to inconsistent results - point 2. All you get is a personal opinion/belief that will differ markedly from, and contradict, the conclusions of other people who have 'just done it'. That is to say, it doesn't actually work.

You have no idea, anyone who claims they have experienced pure awareness is in error, the ego self must cease to exist temporarily during the pure awareness state of union, and when it is over, and the ego self arises again, it is in serious error if it believes it had an experience of pure awareness state of union.

It is not obtuse to not understand what has been explained at first, it will probably only make sense after the fact of Self realization.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Every tree is an expression of the forest, but not all trees are aware of the forest, just sayin!

And this also applies, awareness of the forest is only present when the tree self has temporarily ceased to self identify with the tree and united with the forest Self.

Now please, no word salad accusations or demands for objective evidence.

No, what you say makes sense to me, but I can also make sense of it differently. That is all.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So I take that as evidence that you've never had a spiritual experience, sad.

Ow no.. like all humans, off course I've had brainfart experiences in the past and certainly will have them in the future also.

The difference is that I don't confuse subjective experiences, which occur between my ears, with objective manifestations in the external real world.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yes!

Okay.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Haha, if I do not provide evidence that I exist, how do you know that my claim to exist is just an unsupported belief.

There is plenty objective evidence that you exist.
The post I'm replying to is one of them.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You think you are making points, but you are gibbering. Do some yoga or some other efficacious religious practice and you will have your evidence. Until then, please stop your gibbering.

IOW: practice some self-delusion / self-brainwashing and / or confuse subjective experience with objective reality.

 

[ratiocinator]

That is faulty, as it equates space with our universe. Rather, our universe was born, exists, and will die within space, which is infinite. As for “time”, it exists only in the human mind.

Your evidence for all these bare assertions is......... missing.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Just do it, religious practice and more practice, you will eventually have a realization.

You're not answering his very valid questions.


I understand why though.... it's because the answers are a bit too devastating to your case.
It's because you would have to admit that there is no way to distinguish between them.
And all of you can't all be correct.

However, all of you can be wrong.
And considering you all make the same type of extra-ordinary unfalsifiable (yet mutually exclusive) claims, chances are rather enormous that all of you ARE wrong.

 

[ratiocinator]

You have no idea, anyone who claims they have experienced pure awareness is in error, the ego self must cease to exist temporarily during the pure awareness state of union, and when it is over, and the ego self arises again, it is in serious error if it believes it had an experience of pure awareness state of union.

No idea what you think all this waffle has to do with the basic problem I pointed out. You still seem to be running away from addressing the obvious problems with your claims.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

That is faulty, as it equates space with our universe.

Eum....
Do you know why the universe is also called the space-time continuum?

I'll give you a hint: because the universe IS space and time.
No universe = no space, no time.

Rather, our universe was born, exists, and will die within space, which is infinite.

Nope.

As for “time”, it exists only in the human mind.

Nope.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You have no idea, anyone who claims they have experienced pure awareness is in error, the ego self must cease to exist temporarily during the pure awareness state of union, and when it is over, and the ego self arises again, it is in serious error if it believes it had an experience of pure awareness state of union.

It is not obtuse to not understand what has been explained at first, it will probably only make sense after the fact of Self realization.

Translation: all those other people's "revelations" or "realizations" or "<insert other meaningless terms>" that don't agree with mine are not correct.
Why? Because they don't agree with mine.

Blatant no true scottsman.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Ow no.. like all humans, off course I've had brainfart experiences in the past and certainly will have them in the future also.

The difference is that I don't confuse subjective experiences, which occur between my ears, with objective manifestations in the external real world.

Yes, you are astute to not confuse the subjective with the objective, impressive. Btw, do you think it possible to have a subjective experience without an objective manifestation, say like a dream experience?

 

[Polymath257]

So I take that as evidence that you've never had a spiritual experience, sad.

I have had one and found it to be self delusion. It is sad that so many people are deceived by their 'religious experiences'.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Yes, you are astute to not confuse the subjective with the objective, impressive. Btw, do you think it possible to have a subjective experience without an objective manifestation, say like a dream experience?

No, that is ex nihilo in a sense. Or claiming a cause that can't be explain other then claiming it is there, because you say so.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Translation: all those other people's "revelations" or "realizations" or "<insert other meaningless terms>" that don't agree with mine are not correct.
Why? Because they don't agree with mine.

Blatant no true scottsman.

When I said it is not obtuse to not understand, I underestimated the extent of obtuseness possible.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

When I said it is not obtuse to not understand, I underestimated the extent of obtuseness possible.

Stop using subjective evaluations and then demand that we can't do that in reverse. If you want to play really meaningless, that game works in both directions.

 

[Polymath257]

Yes, you are astute to not confuse the subjective with the objective, impressive. Btw, do you think it possible to have a subjective experience without an objective manifestation, say like a dream experience?

Depends on what you mean by an objective manifestation. For example, dream states usually show rapid eye movements and altered brain scans. Those are objective manifestations of the dream state.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I have had one and found it to be self delusion. It is sad that so many people are deceived by their 'religious experiences'.

No you have never had one, nor has any mortal self. The mortal 'I' can not be present in a spiritual experience, oneness must prevail in the state of pure awareness.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Depends on what you mean by an objective manifestation. For example, dream states usually show rapid eye movements and altered brain scans. Those are objective manifestations of the dream state.

Yeah, but that ends in that the universe is real, orderly and knowable.
But then you still have to explain how people in this universe can have opinions, unless you claim that doesn't happen in the universe.