Science can say nothing about existence of God

[Rick O'Shez]

-- to imagine something is real simply because you wish it were.

Concepts of "God" and "the divine" and "cosmic consciousness" fall neatly into that category.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Now all you can do as an agnostic is to believe I and others who explain what non-duality is and is not....could or could not correct...and to remain skeptical until you realize it yourself....

Right, so altered states of mind need to be experienced personally. But what has that got to do with your claims of "God"?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Science cannot say anything about the unicorn, but that doesn't mean the unicorn exist lol.

And the same applies to Santa Claus, fairies, God, cosmic consciousness, space-aliens and so on.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I am tired of you pretending that Buddhist enlightenment is anything to do with "God". It most definitely isn't.

Believe what you like, but don't try to drag everyone else into your fantasy. It just looks arrogant and patronising.

I don't doubt you are tired...so the sooner you give a straight forward answer to my straight forward and question to you Dr Evil, the sooner it will be over for you... Question being... how do you, an unapologetic atheist, know what the reality represented by the concept of God is, in order to know it is not the same as Nirvana...what is the reality represented by the concept of God? And secondly...when did you realize the reality represented by the concept of Nirvana and how would you describe it?

Context....Dr Evil said..."The experience of non-conceptual mind is nothing to do with "God", except in your imagination. The experience of non-duality is nothing to do with "God", except in your imagination. Nirvana and God are not the same. Buddhism is not theism."

 

[Rick O'Shez]

And as one goes down into the rabbit hole of inner reality the term quickly becomes meaningless, much like other terms like "absolute reality", "ultimate reality", "cosmic consciousness" et al. It's all just residual mental fluff regurgitated by the pretentious.

Indeed. People rabbit on about "non-conceptual mind" and then fill their heads with a load of concepts.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I don't doubt you are tired..

Don't take my word for it, go on to any Buddhist forum and ask the question: "Is Nirvana the same as God?". Try telling them they are really theists but haven't realised it.

Believe what you like but stop trying to drag everybody else into your fantasy.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Right, so altered states of mind need to be experienced personally. But what has that got to do with your claims of "God"?

Just that anything experienced personally involves duality and thus is not...non-dual..not nirvana...no god....not union..etc..

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Just that anything experienced personally involves duality and thus is not...non-dual..not nirvana...no god....not union..etc..

There is only experience, it's just the nature of experience which changes.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Don't take my word for it, go on to any Buddhist forum and ask the question: "Is Nirvana the same as God?"

Believe what you like but stop trying to drag everybody else into your fantasy.

Hold on buster....you are not going to get off so easily....you are making the claim that the experience of non-conceptual mind is nothing to do with "God", and that the experience of non-duality is nothing to do with "God" and that Nirvana and God are not the same.....So the sooner you give a straight forward answer to my straight forward question to you Dr Evil, the sooner it will be over for you... Question being... how do you, an unapologetic atheist, know what the reality represented by the concept of God i s, in order to know it is not the same as Nirvana...what is the reality represented by the concept of God? And secondly...when did you realize the reality represented by the concept of Nirvana and how would you describe it?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

There is only experience, it's just the nature of experience which changes.

Wow...atheists rock...you elsewhere made the claim that the experience of non-conceptual mind has nothing to do with "God", and that the experience of non-duality is nothing to do with "God" and that Nirvana and God are not the same..... So how do you as an atheist know what the reality represented by the concept of God is, in order to know it is not the same as Nirvana...and what exactly in your own words is the reality represented by the concept of God? And secondly...when did you realize the reality represented by the concept of Nirvana and how would you describe compared to God?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Wow...atheists rock...you elsewhere made the claim that the experience of non-conceptual mind has nothing to do with "God", and that the experience of non-duality is nothing to do with "God" and that Nirvana and God are not the same.....

Lots of non-theist meditators like Buddhists have experiences of non-conceptual mind, non-duality, whatever. This clearly demonstrates that "God" is not necessary, or even relevant to the discussion.

Buddhist enlightenment is not the same as "God". Go to any Buddhist forum and I'm sure they will confirm what I am saying. In any case it's very arrogant of a theist like yourself to claim you understand what the goal of Buddhist practice is. It's very arrogant of you to impose your theist concepts on a non-theist tradition.

 

[Thief]

Impossible to plan for. How about crossing that bridge if you ever come to it?

not impossible.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Then, when your place in the afterlife is dealt....
you will be alongside others that do as you do.

How else to be happy?
How else to be fair?

 

[Thief]

There is only experience, it's just the nature of experience which changes.

oh no you don't.....if this post of yours were true.....
you would not consider any experience.

You would only continue one experience to another.
the very word ...concept....would never cross your mind.

nature doesn't change....you do.

 

[leibowde84]

Don't you read, or don't you comprehend as Dr Evil apparently is not capable...opinions and beliefs are held by the personality..the 'I', the ego....you in other words...in the state of mind free from thought...the non-conceptual state...there is no 'I' present...in it non-dual...now I nor any one else who has realized this state can describe it...for we were no present during the non-conceptual period.. Now the I was present as it 'merged' with the oneness, and 'reemerged' after...and this state can be described...such as awesome, blissful, fearful, etc... But these are conceptual descriptions experienced by the 'I', and this is far from non-duality... Now all you can do as an agnostic is to believe I and others who explain what non-duality is and is not....could or could not correct...and to remain skeptical until you realize it yourself...for you will never in all eternity realize it with the ego mind, or receive it as a gift from another more evolved soul...there is no other way...

I respect your opinion on the matter.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You would only continue one experience to another.

I have no idea what you are you trying to say, or how it relates to what I said.

 

[Thief]

I have no idea what you are you trying to say, or how it relates to what I said.

you said....there is only experience.....
that reduces life to grazing in a meadow.

not bad....if you are cattle....

 

[leibowde84]

you said....there is only experience.....
that reduces life to grazing in a meadow.

not bad....if you are cattle....

I mean, personal experience can be validated by the experience of others. But, beyond experience in general, what else do we have to go on?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

But, beyond experience in general, what else do we have to go on?

Indeed. People can have experiences and then add on all kinds of meaning, much of which is purely speculative. That may be unavoidable, the problems begin when people assume their subjective speculations must correspond to some ultimate truth "out there". It isn't necessarily so, particularly when people have a strong need to believe in something. Lots of wishful thinking and confirmation bias can be involved.
Like "I believe in God, then I had a powerful experience in meditation, so that must be an experience of God." Well no, actually, it was really just a powerful experience in meditation!

 

[Ouroboros]

Science cannot say anything about the unicorn, but that doesn't mean the unicorn exist lol.

There are one-horned animals, and horse-like horned (granted two horns) animals exist, and genetically, there's nothing that would scientifically stop nature to have produced a one-horned horse that we haven't found yet. So science can say something about unicorns, but even if it couldn't and we don't have any unicorns alive or evidence of, we can't just dismiss the possibility of their existence in the past. (I doubt they existed, but still, there's no 100% guarantee either way for past existence.)

 

[Ouroboros]

No mind, only brain.

No brain, only cells.

No cells, only organic matter.

No organic matter, only basic particles and energies.

No particles or energy, only quarks, bosons, strings, and interactions in 11 dimensions.

No quarks, bosons...