Science can say nothing about existence of God

[Ouroboros]

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?

Only experience is real.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

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.

We are not talking about anecdotes from other Buddhists...but even so....the same common sense logic applies....unless they have experienced the reality represented by the concept of God...they have no credibility to make such claims. Are you so bereft of logic that you do not understand this..? I accept all religious traditions as true...and have practiced Buddhist meditation for decades...as well as Christian contemplation, Islamic surrender, Hindu yoga, Taoist contemplation...there is only one absolute reality and the conceptual name used to represent it is not important....realizing it is!!!

 

[Rick O'Shez]

...the reality represented by the concept of God.

I still don't see how the concept of God is relevant or necessary to the kind of meditative experiences we have been talking about. It's an add-on, a belief, and one that is not held by many meditators and mystics.

And what's this "absolute reality" you keep talking about? It sounds like another belief you have, but maybe you could explain what you think it looks like.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I respect your opinion on the matter.

And with respect I thank you...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I still don't see how the concept of God is relevant to meditative experiences. It's an add-on, a belief.

And what's this "absolute reality" you keep talking about?

How different would a rose smell when called a rhosvn as it is in Welsh?
How different would the cosmic oneness be when called God or Nirvana?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

How different would a rose smell when called a rhosvn as it is in Welsh?

How about you giving some straightforward answers to the questions I just posed:

How is the concept of God is relevant or necessary to the kind of meditative experiences we have been talking about. It's an add-on, a belief, and one that is not held by many meditators and mystics.

What's this "absolute reality" you keep talking about? It sounds like another belief you have, but maybe you could explain what you think it looks like.

And arising from your latest post, what exactly is "cosmic oneness"? Don't just say the experience of non-duality because you clearly mean something more than that.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

And what's this "absolute reality" you keep talking about? It sounds like another belief you have, but maybe you could explain what you think it looks like.

The concept of absolute reality in the way I am using it represents the same reality as God, Oneness, Nirvana, Brahman, etc...

 

[Rick O'Shez]

The concept of absolute reality in the way I am using it represents the same reality as God, Oneness, Nirvana, Brahman, etc...

I hate to sound like a broken record but Buddhist enlightenment is not the same as God or Brahman. And I still don't see how is the concept of God is relevant or necessary to the kind of meditative experiences we have been talking about, given that they are experienced by many non-theists.

God and Brahman are roughly equivalent, so presumably by "absolute reality" you actually mean "God"? The problem here is that "God" is a belief, and calling a belief "absolute reality" doesn't make any sense at all.

You believing in something doesn't make it a reality, let alone an absolute one.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

How about you giving some straightforward answers to the questions I just posed:

How is the concept of God is relevant or necessary to the kind of meditative experiences we have been talking about. It's an add-on, a belief, and one that is not held by many meditators and mystics.

What's this "absolute reality" you keep talking about? It sounds like another belief you have, but maybe you could explain what you think it looks like.

And arising from your latest post, what exactly is "cosmic oneness"? Don't just say the experience of non-duality because you clearly mean something more than that.

Look you are an atheist.....the concept of God appears to frighten you and distorts your belief system...mucks up your brain functioning... So much so that over the course of this thread....you have asked me the same questions about God, cosmic consciousness, absolute reality, non-conceptual reality, over and over and keep on asking...Before you ask another question on the meaning of these terms...go back over the thread and check...the answer will be there...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I hate to sound like a broken record but Buddhist enlightenment is not the same as God or Brahman. "Oneness" is too vague to be helpful

God and Brahman are roughly equivalent, so presumably by "absolute reality" you actually mean "God"? The problem here is that "God" is a belief, and calling a belief "absolute reality" doesn't make any sense at all.

You believing in something doesn't make it a reality, let alone an absolute one.

Haha....so now you claim you have realized Brahman as well....when were practicing the Hindu religion...I thought you were an atheist? An atheist explaining what God is or is not is just so funny....

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Haha....so now you claim you have realized Brahman as well...

Cut the childish sarcasm and respond to the points I have raised.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

..the concept of God appears to frighten you and distorts your belief system...

It doesn't frighten me in the least, I just think it's a primitive belief which people like you cling to for comfort.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Cut the childish sarcasm and respond to the points I have raised.

I beg your pardon...I am serious...have you as an atheist realized union with Brahman...if not...you know nothing about Brahman and should admit it!

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It doesn't frighten me in the least, I just think it's a primitive belief which people like you cling to for comfort.

You just think...you think...ha ha...very credible evidence from an atheist...buga buga boo...

 

[Unification]

I hate to sound like a broken record but Buddhist enlightenment is not the same as God or Brahman. And I still don't see how is the concept of God is relevant or necessary to the kind of meditative experiences we have been talking about, given that they are experienced by many non-theists.

God and Brahman are roughly equivalent, so presumably by "absolute reality" you actually mean "God"? The problem here is that "God" is a belief, and calling a belief "absolute reality" doesn't make any sense at all.

You believing in something doesn't make it a reality, let alone an absolute one.

What is "Buddhist enlightenment?"

What is the source that allows for enlightenment?

What is the source that allows for experience?

If that same source is in all human beings... would that source be "absolute?"

Perhaps "God" is another word for that source or absolute.

I like to think of "God" as the primordial organic light source that en-light-ens. Or primordial consciousness.

Whether someone uses the word "God" specifically doesn't really matter. It's just a word.

What is the difference between a Buddhist being enlightened and another human being, being enlightened? Is the light that's used within different or of the same source? Would it matter what that absolute source is coined as?

That's the reality of it, the same source that allows me to experience is the same source that allows you to experience. Why allow different words to divide?

Then it goes deeper when one experiences a ton of that primordial light source or primordial conscious source.

 

[Unification]

Haha....so now you claim you have realized Brahman as well....when were practicing the Hindu religion...I thought you were an atheist? An atheist explaining what God is or is not is just so funny....

Great point.

 

[Sapiens]

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...

Yes brain, yes cells, yes organic matter, etc. No mind, just brain, no need for a pretend division just so you can be ever-so-special. Seems you and "unification" prefer false dichotomy ... ever so strange.

 

[Unification]

What is "Buddhist enlightenment?"

What is the source that allows for enlightenment?

What is the source that allows for experience?

If that same source is in all human beings... would that source be "absolute?"

Perhaps "God" is another word for that source or absolute.

I like to think of "God" as the primordial organic light source that en-light-ens. Or primordial consciousness.

Whether someone uses the word "God" specifically doesn't really matter. It's just a word.

What is the difference between a Buddhist being enlightened and another human being, being enlightened? Is the light that's used within different or of the same source? Would it matter what that absolute source is coined as?

That's the reality of it, the same source that allows me to experience is the same source that allows you to experience. Why allow different words to divide?

Then it goes deeper when one experiences a ton of that primordial light source or primordial conscious source.

http://www.universetoday.com/10220/where-does-visible-light-come-from/

 

[Sapiens]

Only experience is real.

Experience is real when memory is so flawed? How do you square that circle?

 

[Unification]

Yes brain, yes cells, yes organic matter, etc. No mind, just brain, no need for a pretend division just so you can be ever-so-special. Seems you and "unification" prefer false dichotomy ... ever so strange.

You're naturally special.

Why worry about what you consider "false dichotomy"...... does this make you more ever-so-special because you feel you have "true dichotomy?" Ever so strange, creating a pretend division yet being against it.