Richard Dawkins Facepalms at Deepak Chopra

[godnotgod]

Is that what "enlightened" people are like? Oh dear!

'Beautiful words are not truthful;
truthful words are not beautiful'
Tao te Ching

Oh dear!

 

[godnotgod]

Now, now, godnotgod, do try to remain calm. There is no need to be rude and petulant.

You don't get it because you've filled with your own opinions and ideas, like the one about the 'changeless being' you read into what I was saying.

A Cup of Tea
Nan-in, a Japanese master during the Meiji era (1868-1912), received a university professor who came to inquire about Zen.
Nan-in served tea. He poured his visitor’s cup full, and then kept on pouring.
The professor watched the overflow until he no longer could restrain himself. “It is overfull. No more will go in!”
“Like this cup,” Nan-in said, “you are full of your own opinions and speculations. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup?”

 

[godnotgod]

'Beautiful words are not truthful;
truthful words are not beautiful'
Tao te Ching

Oh dear!

Anyway, the point of my posting the piece about Brahman and the changeless was to show you that the source of 'The Changeless' was not 'New Age', along with the dim hope that you might learn something after all.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You are the type that carries a load of preconceived notions of how reality should be, wandering from teaching to teaching in search of confirmation of those preconceptions, but never finds it, because you are not living in reality, but in some sort of fictionalized account of reality.

Again, pure projection. That is exactly what you are doing.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Anyway, the point of my posting the piece about Brahman and the changeless was to show you that the source of 'The Changeless' was not 'New Age', along with the dim hope that you might learn something after all.

What's new-age is your attempt to cobble together ideas from here and there, continually trying to force square pegs into round holes. You're clearly very attached to your "creation", I think that's why you get so defensive whenever somebody questions it.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

The opposite of change is that which does not change. That is their relationship, and the one cannot exist without the other.

Nonsense, the nature of the universe is perpetual change at all scales. It's scary, so people grasp at religious ideas like "God" and "The Changeless", an illusion of stability.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

So are you intelligent enough to bypass the personal crap and get to the meat of the subject or not?

Clearly that isn't something you are able to do, despite claiming to be enlightened. Every time that somebody disagrees with you you lash out and attack them personally.

 

[godnotgod]

Nonsense, the nature of the universe is perpetual change at all scales. It's scary, so people grasp at religious ideas like "God" and "The Changeless", an illusion of stability.

That may be, but the changing universe must be changing against a background of something, and that something is not changing. That is how we know the universe is changing. That something is passive, and is your consciousness, which you don't notice is the background because your attention is captured by what you only perceive as a changing universe.

"If we don't see the Absolute as what it is, we'll see it as something else. If we don't see it as changeless, infinite, and undivided, we'll see it as changing, finite, and divided, since in this case there is no other else. There is no other way to mistake the changeless except as changing. So we see a Universe which is changing all the time, made of minuscule particles, and divided into atoms."

http://quanta-gaia.org/dobson/EquationsOfMaya.html

 

[godnotgod]

 

[godnotgod]

What's new-age is your attempt to cobble together ideas from here and there, continually trying to force square pegs into round holes. You're clearly very attached to your "creation", I think that's why you get so defensive whenever somebody questions it.

I see truth in many different areas. These ideas can indeed be linked together simply because Reality itself is seamless and singular. The realization and experience of that singular Reality is expressed via differing names and definitions, but they all point to the same Reality. Once Reality is seen that way, the seemingly different views all make sense one to the other. It's not 'my' creation. It is not a personal view. It is a universal view, and while it may seem that I become defensive, what I am doing is to not allow people like you and Ymgirf poo poo it just because you fail to understand it.

 

[godnotgod]

Again, pure projection. That is exactly what you are doing.

My view has not changed since the day I became a member of this forum, because the true nature of Reality does not change. It only seems to change, which is only an appearance you and some of the others are taken in by, as your attention is held captive by it, and you have lost touch with that which is the source of the change in the first place. That source is The Changeless, a term which I have now proven to you is not coming from some New Age source, but from an ancient source.

 

[godnotgod]

Clearly that isn't something you are able to do, despite claiming to be enlightened. Every time that somebody disagrees with you you lash out and attack them personally.

If you have been paying attention, you will have noticed that I began this discussion with you without any such attack. We exchanged a couple of posts, and then, BANG! You launched the first attack, to which I then responded in kind. And that has been the pattern throughout.

You may also have noticed that I continually steer toward the topic, which you and the others attempt to derail, clearly not interested in having a discussion, but only launching attacks, such as you do, about what you imagine are 'New Age' notions, for example, none of which I entertain. All I can do is to point out the stupidity of your and their positions.

I have never claimed to be enlightened. That is something you are claiming, another example of your erroneous perception, along with that of Ymgirf, who insisted I was inferring a 'changeless being', both of which are a load of crap. Claiming to be enlightened is like claiming to breathe air. All humans breathe air, so to make that claim is pointless. Likewise, everyone is already enlightened, though most are not aware of it.

 

[YmirGF]

Hey, I don't care what you think of me personally. That is your department. All I am saying, to repeat, is that for you to detect change, it must be seen against a reference, and that reference is that which does not change. Really first grade stuff, and if you really don't get it, you need to take a closer look until you do. Never mind the sources; just go see for yourself. I am not looking for a following. I tell it like it is, and they don't want to see it, OK. I'm not here to please anyone in a popularity contest.

Look, if you don't like my argument, then attack the argument, and stop making all this crap up about my person. You are the one accusing me of not wanting to have a discussion, and yet you are the one going off into all these tangents. So are you intelligent enough to bypass the personal crap and get to the meat of the subject or not?

Rubbish. I see change all around me, throughout reality as we know it, even as I am in a state of constant change. The notion that one needs a changeless background to detect change is ludicrous and not supported by the facts.

 

[godnotgod]

Rubbish. I see change all around me, throughout reality as we know it, even as I am in a state of constant change. The notion that one needs a changeless background to detect change is ludicrous and not supported by the facts.

Yes, you see change all around, but it is an illusion. The changeless background is consciousness; the illusory mind is what is moving, and makes you certain that change is occurring. You feel, taste, smell, hear, see, and test it for facts, but all of that is via your perception of reality, which is only a virtual reality.

 

[YmirGF]

Yes, you see change all around, but it is an illusion. The changeless background is consciousness; the illusory mind is what is moving, and makes you certain that change is occurring. You feel, taste, smell, hear, see, and test it for facts, but all of that is via your perception of reality, which is only a virtual reality.

I often will stare through what I am seeing in order to see the underlying fabric. What I detect there, in the underlying fabric is an even more excited state of perpetual change. My guess is it is because of some human animals programming that does not allow them to see this activity and so they sense a changeless static state. I tend to liken it to a spinning top, the child's toy, and the colour of a spinning top, while spinning appear uniform and solid due to its rapid motion, likewise, it is my view that you so-called "changeless" state suffers from the same obscuring effect.

 

[gnostic]

Richard Dawkins Facepalms at Deepak Chopra

Perhaps, Dawkins shouldn't have facepalms in front of Chopra.

Perhaps, Dawkins should have slapped Chopra's face a few time, and tell Chopra to "Snap out of it! You're in la-la land again. Wake up!"

Gee. I wondered what Chopra is smoking?

 

[godnotgod]

I often will stare through what I am seeing in order to see the underlying fabric. What I detect there, in the underlying fabric is an even more excited state of perpetual change. .

How do you know it is change?

 

[godnotgod]

Perhaps, Dawkins shouldn't have facepalms in front of Chopra.

Perhaps, Dawkins should have slapped Chopra's face a few time, and tell Chopra to "Snap out of it! You're in la-la land again. Wake up!"

Gee. I wondered what Chopra is smoking?

The good stuff, of course!

It's called 'The Taste of the Infinite'.

Want some?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Some interesting musings about the nature of consciousness, but he doesn't demonstrate that it is universal, infinite or unlimited. I noticed he managed to sidestep the pivotal observation by an audience member that awareness is limited by the senses.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I often will stare through what I am seeing in order to see the underlying fabric. What I detect there, in the underlying fabric is an even more excited state of perpetual change.

Yes, I have the sense of infinite space and infinite movement. By the way, "Perpetual Change" is also the title of a song by Yes.