Richard Dawkins Facepalms at Deepak Chopra

[godnotgod]

At least science provides the facts and the evidence without all the self-contradicting riddles. It points the way to humankind's greater understanding of our place in the universe. I'm done with the riddles and the mystical connotations. Pure Consciousness is an interesting concept, but it is pure speculation.

Sorry you have missed the experience entirely, and still have not yet transcended the rational mind. You still think PC is a concept. Way, way off the mark. Go with your science and see where it gets you: more and more facts and data without a true understanding of yourself or the universe you live in.

 

[Runewolf1973]

Sorry you have missed the experience entirely, and still have not yet transcended the rational mind. You still think PC is a concept. Way, way off the mark. Go with your science and see where it gets you: more and more facts and data without a true understanding of yourself or the universe you live in.

I prefer the rational approach and yes, PC is a concept.

 

[godnotgod]

I prefer the rational approach and yes, PC is a concept.

it is only from the POV of the thinking mind, but that is inaccurate, as it's experience will show you otherwise.

 

[Runewolf1973]

it is only from the POV of the thinking mind, but that is inaccurate, as it's experience will show you otherwise.

There can be no experience without interaction.

 

[godnotgod]

There can be no experience without interaction.

The experience can be that of perfect stillness. In perfect stillness, there is no longer mental activity; no longer becoming. Everything is complete and as it should be. There is nothing to do. This is the state of Being, or Pure Consciousness.

 

[Runewolf1973]

The experience can be that of perfect stillness. In perfect stillness, there is no longer mental activity; no longer becoming. Everything is complete and as it should be. There is nothing to do.

How do illusions arise if everything is perfect stillness to begin with? Something must be causing, creating, or generating those illusions. How is the universe constantly expanding, creating new stars and galaxies if there is nothing but stillness? I can undersrand "stillness of mind", but on a universal level there is nothing but interaction.

 

[Shad]

Your foolishness and ignorance multipliy. What you posted and what I posted both support the same argument: that Reason must be set aside in order for a spiritual transformation of consciousness to take place. The transformation is neither Hindu, Christian, Buddhist or otherwise; it is spiritual in nature. You seem to favor minutiae in place of content. Cusa was a mystical Christian, not an orthodox Christian. I guess I failed to provide a link to the site I quoted Cusa from. Here, 3rd sentence down:

http://www.headless.org/tradition/paradox.htm

Wrong again, son. Nicholas was talking about faith in Jesus which is nothing like what you are talking about. The Wall is above everything, rational and intelligence, it is beyond human comprehension due to the Tree of Knowledge, the eating of the apple. In order to pass the wall one must conform to the teachings of Jesus in relation to God and abandon reason, as it is from the Tree of Knowledge. Jesus creates the union between Man and God thus is the only way to overcome this wall. The only similarity is the abandonment of reason, everything else is nothing like HC. Remember you dismissed Christianity thus you are dismissing Nicholas. Read his book rather than reading a quote from a site then assuming you understand his meaning from a single quote.

Try again, son.

 

[godnotgod]

Wrong again, son. Nicholas was talking about faith in Jesus which is nothing like what you are talking about. The Wall is above everything, rational and intelligence, it is beyond human comprehension due to the Tree of Knowledge, the eating of the apple. In order to pass the wall one must conform to the teachings of Jesus in relation to God and abandon reason, as it is from the Tree of Knowledge. Jesus creates the union between Man and God thus is the only way to overcome this wall. The only similarity is the abandonment of reason, everything else is nothing like HC. Remember you dismissed Christianity thus you are dismissing Nicholas. Read his book rather than reading a quote from a site then assuming you understand his meaning from a single quote.

Try again, son.

The abandonment of Reason is key to the experience of transformation and divine union. HC is divine union. So is yoga. My point is that Reason must be put aside for this transformation and union to occur.

The orthodox story of The Fall is corrupt. The 'Forbidden Fruit' is actually a symbol for Higher Consciousness, the unconditional gift from God to man. The taboo was merely a device God used to ensure that man does partake of the gift of God consciousness, acting as a piece de resistance. The serpent is actually God reappearing to man to get him to eat of the 'Fruit'. Here, divine union is achieved, while in the corrupt version separation occurs, to the advantage of the priests who exploit this for profit.

Again, Reason is overcome in the story of the Fall so that transformation (ie; 'your eyes will be opened') and divine union can occur.

 

[Shad]

The abandonment of Reason is key to the experience of transformation and divine union. HC is divine union. So is yoga. My point is that Reason must be put aside for this transformation and union to occur.

I understand your point. However I was pointing out you quote-mine Nicholas but didn't bother to read the rest of his work which is completely different from your view.

The orthodox story of The Fall is corrupt. The 'Forbidden Fruit' is actually a symbol for Higher Consciousness, the unconditional gift from God to man. The taboo was merely a device God used to ensure that man does partake of the gift of God consciousness, acting as a piece de resistance. The serpent is actually God reappearing to man to get him to eat of the 'Fruit'. Here, divine union is achieved, while in the corrupt version separation occurs, to the advantage of the priests who exploit this for profit.

No, in Nicholas' work it is knowledge which creates a barrier between Man and God. Knowledge includes reason and intellect. So faith must be used to come close to God via Jesus. Union between Man and God is by Jesus only. You didn't read his work.

Again, Reason is overcome in the story of the Fall so that transformation (ie; 'your eyes will be opened') and divine union can occur.

You didn't read his work. You commentary on it is irrelevant.

 

[godnotgod]

No, in Nicholas' work it is knowledge which creates a barrier between Man and God. Knowledge includes reason and intellect.

Exactly:

My reference says:

'The place wherein Thou art found unveiled is girt round with the coincidence of contradictions, and this is the wall of Paradise wherein Thou dost abide. The door whereof is guarded by the most proud spirit of Reason, and, unless he be vanquished, the way in will not lie open.'

Your reference says:

"Thus have I found the place at which Thou canst be found unconcealed. It is surrounded by the coincidence of opposites. It is the wall of paradise, within which Thou dost dwell. Its gates are guarded by the supreme spirit of Reason (rationis). If this is not conquered, the way will not be open."

My point is that Reason must be conquered in order for divine union to occur. That is all. How it gets conquered is besides the point.

 

[Shad]

Exactly:

My reference says:

'The place wherein Thou art found unveiled is girt round with the coincidence of contradictions, and this is the wall of Paradise wherein Thou dost abide. The door whereof is guarded by the most proud spirit of Reason, and, unless he be vanquished, the way in will not lie open.'

Your reference says:

"Thus have I found the place at which Thou canst be found unconcealed. It is surrounded by the coincidence of opposites. It is the wall of paradise, within which Thou dost dwell. Its gates are guarded by the supreme spirit of Reason (rationis). If this is not conquered, the way will not be open."

My point is that Reason must be conquered in order for divine union to occur. That is all. How it gets conquered is besides the point.

You are quote mining since you ignore the purpose for the statement which is about Christianity which is the largest part of all the arguments within the book, about 5 chapters worth. So the quote is irrelevant as support since you ignore the context

Try again, son.

 

[Runewolf1973]

There is no need for divine union with higher consciousness because ultimately there was never a separation to begin with. There is nothing "divine" nor is there a "higher" consciousness because IT (the universe) is already in all of us. We ARE the universe and that IS the highest. All these spiritual beliefs or mystical paths do is create an imaginary riff or separation where one never existed. Then they try to renunite man with this imaginary thing he was supposedly separate from, as though achieving this union were some kind of great reward...Heaven or "enlightenment". It is all complete and utter nonsense and a form of control. Union with the cosmos is not a reward, it is an inescapable reality.

 

[godnotgod]

You are quote mining since you ignore the purpose for the statement which is about Christianity which is the largest part of all the arguments within the book, about 5 chapters worth. So the quote is irrelevant as support since you ignore the context

Try again, son.

No, the statement is about Reason, and the fact that it must be vanquished if divine union is to be achieved.

 

[godnotgod]

There is no need for divine union with higher consciousness because ultimately there was never a separation to begin with. There is nothing "divine" nor is there a "higher" consciousness because IT (the universe) is already in all of us. We ARE the universe and that IS the highest. All these spiritual beliefs or mystical paths do is create an imaginary riff or separation where one never existed. Then they try to renunite man with this imaginary thing he was supposedly separate from, as though achieving this union were some kind of great reward...Heaven or "enlightenment". It is all complete and utter nonsense and a form of control. Union with the cosmos is not a reward, it is an inescapable reality.

Most of mankind operates under the influence of maya, firmly believing a rift exists, and that re-union must be sought. A good teaching will get itself out of the way for one to do that. That is why Zen is just a finger pointing to the moon, and not the moon itself.

 

[Shad]

No, the statement is about Reason, and the fact that it must be vanquished if divine union is to be achieved.

No it is quoting mining and ignoring the reasons for the statement in order to add an appearance of credibility to your point of view. However since the reasons for this view are completely different then your own, and explained differently your point is irrelevant. You are quoting out of context, nothing more.

 

[Runewolf1973]

Most of mankind operates under the influence of maya, firmly believing a rift exists, and that re-union must be sought. A good teaching will get itself out of the way for one to do that. That is why Zen is just a finger pointing to the moon, and not the moon itself.

What you consider "maya" was never a problem for me since I always knew that despite the illusion of separateness there was always oneness in the universe. We were never separate from the universe.

 

[godnotgod]

No it is quoting mining and ignoring the reasons for the statement in order to add an appearance of credibility to your point of view. However since the reasons for this view are completely different then your own, and explained differently your point is irrelevant. You are quoting out of context, nothing more.

Nah, the obvious fact is that both versions clearly support my point, whose central message is divine union via the vanquishing of Reason. Nothing could be clearer. You not only don't know how to read, you don't understand what you're reading. Your problem continues to be the same: you cling tenaciously to the machinations of the thinking mind with the false notion that what comes forth is somehow superior to all other views, a fatal flaw if there ever was one, ala King's new clothes.

 

[godnotgod]

What you consider "maya" was never a problem for me since I always knew that despite the illusion of separateness there was always oneness in the universe. We were never separate from the universe.

And yet you fail to understand the value of the teachings, dismissing them as irrelevant and unnecessary.

So you were born an enlightened Buddha, were you?

 

[Shad]

Nah, the obvious fact is that both versions clearly support my point, whose central message is divine union via the vanquishing of Reason. Nothing could be clearer. You not only don't know how to read, you don't understand what you're reading. Your problem continues to be the same: you cling tenaciously to the machinations of the thinking mind with the false notion that what comes forth is somehow superior to all other views, a fatal flaw if there ever was one, ala King's new clothes.

Nope as the method and reasons are completely different. You quote-mined, nothing more. Do you have faith in Jesus? If not then your methods are different. Are you a Christian? If not then the reasons for abandoning reason and logic are different. The only way Nicholas' views and your own would be the same is if you admit HC is a faith position.

 

[Runewolf1973]

And yet you fail to understand the value of the teachings, dismissing them as irrelevant and unnecessary.

So you were born an enlightened Buddha, were you?

Who taught the Buddha? I shed all beliefs and rejected all teachings as false until I found my own truth. Buddha nature is in all of us. We are all born enlightened Buddhas, we are only made to think otherwise.