The contributions of the sciences to Religion

[Shad]

You are ignoring the evidence....

I placed your so-called evidence under scrutiny and found it wanting. Seems like you can not tell the difference between the two nor have the skills in comprehension to link my specific points about your experiences as scrutiny.

I will keep it simple and not even go into the details of the prescience so as not to confuse you.......ok, so I plan the fishing trip, rods, bait, etc.....week after week.....month after month.....year after year........and always it is the same......if I dream of catching fish....I catch fish.....if I don't dream of catching fish.....I don't catch any fish....week after week.....month after month.....year after year....there can be no denying that my dream is prescient regarding whether I am going to catch fish or not...get it?

Vague dreams without specifics which you turn into specifics later. Dreams judged by you and you alone using your low standards can be dismissed for that reason alone. Your story is a prime example of why external objective studies are required as you are prone to confirmation bias.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I placed your so-called evidence under scrutiny and found it wanting. Seems like you can not tell the difference between the two nor have the skills in comprehension to link my specific points about your experiences as scrutiny.

Vague dreams without specifics which you turn into specifics later. Dreams judged by you and you alone using your low standards can be dismissed for that reason alone. Your story is a prime example of why external objective studies are required as you are prone to confirmation bias.

Haha...there you have it.....now after all these exchanges that showed all your objections to the obvious prescience of my fish dreams to be flawed...you conclude that my anecdotal evidence can be dismissed because it is flawed.... and that only external objective studies will suffice... Humans can discover never ending real wonders in the world if they but open their mind...

 

[Shad]

Haha...there you have it.....now after all these exchanges that showed all your objections to the obvious prescience of my fish dreams to be flawed...you conclude that my anecdotal evidence can be dismissed because it is flawed.... and that only external objective studies will suffice... Humans can discover never ending real wonders in the world if they but open their mind...

Empty statement backed by nothing. Yes external studies are required otherwise anyone can make whatever claim they want, like yourself, while also claiming it is a fact, like yourself, with zero sources outside the one making the claim in support. Try again son.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Empty statement backed by nothing. Yes external studies are required otherwise anyone can make whatever claim they want, like yourself, while also claiming it is a fact, like yourself, with zero sources outside the one making the claim in support. Try again son.

Ok...I accept and acknowledge you presently believe you have never has an ESP experience, nor that the laws of nature ever allows it.. Fine...I have all the time in the world....I will await for further notice....

 

[Shad]

Ok...I accept and acknowledge you presently believe you have never has an ESP experience, nor that the laws of nature ever allows it.. Fine...I have all the time in the world....I will await for further notice....

Await for what? You and those like you to produce evidence outside of personal and biased interpretations... Well, you better get to work then.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Await for what? You and those like you to produce evidence outside of personal and biased interpretations... Well, you better get to work then.

No....await for your mind to be opened....and we have all the time in the world...

 

[Darkstorn]

Questions to Ben D. Specifically, about reality and the human experience of it.

You make the claim that knowledge comes from within. Fair enough. What makes you, you? I think it's naive to consider that *anything* you've ever experienced comes from within. No: ALL you've ever known or felt, or seen of reality is MERELY your own perception of it; Not reality itself. This is important: Nothing that makes you, your memories, your actions, your thoughts, your body comes truly from within: It comes from the external. This is obvious, self-evident and logical: Your body came from your parents. Your thoughts came from your reactions of the external phenomena and stimuli. Your actions came from making a conscious(or unconscious) choice based on your reaction of the external phenomena and stimuli. Your memories came from your actions, and experience; And nothing of experience can come from within. Experience requires an external event. And you would not have an event if you had nothing to work with: If you had nothingness, then you would have no experience. Truly, without the external, you are *nothing*.

Bear in mind: Even an event of your body external to your consciousness counts as external to your consciousness because it doesn't come from within the consciousness.

You also make the claim that thoughts are mental constructs, and thus illusory. I think you're just trying to sound smart and deep without actually succeeding in either. Everything you ever think you know or experience is a mental construct. Not the event itself; Only your idea of it. How can you ever know what's illusory and what's not if all you know is a mental construct? A truly smart man wouldn't make claims about existence: You cannot know. It's a guess. You're making a guess that mental constructs are illusory. You have no way of *knowing*.

You thinking that ESP is real is a mental construct. You thinking that mental constructs are illusory is a mental construct. I could continue but i think you're getting the point by now.

And as far as semantics go: You keep accusing others of confirmation bias: But confirmation bias requires confirmation of something. ONLY you are confirming anything here: In that your experience was real and self-evident. It's not self-evident. I make no claims of its reality. Because i'm smart. Smart enough to realize that i cannot make claims about things i cannot possibly know. And you cannot possibly know. You can only think that you know. There's a difference. When you make a claim, and others try to refute it: They are not guilty of confirmation bias by definition. You should understand this in order to realize what the *EXTERNAL* thinks of you. Without the external, you would have nothing.

Nothing can come from itself. You always need the building blocks. And you were given those blocks by the external.

 

[Shad]

No....await for your mind to be opened....and we have all the time in the world...

Evidence would go a long way. You want an open mind in which any claim made by anyone should be treated as fact without cause. This leads to gullibility.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Questions to Ben D. Specifically, about reality and the human experience of it.

You make the claim that knowledge comes from within. Fair enough. What makes you, you? I think it's naive to consider that *anything* you've ever experienced comes from within. No: ALL you've ever known or felt, or seen of reality is MERELY your own perception of it; Not reality itself. This is important: Nothing that makes you, your memories, your actions, your thoughts, your body comes truly from within: It comes from the external. This is obvious, self-evident and logical: Your body came from your parents. Your thoughts came from your reactions of the external phenomena and stimuli. Your actions came from making a conscious(or unconscious) choice based on your reaction of the external phenomena and stimuli. Your memories came from your actions, and experience; And nothing of experience can come from within. Experience requires an external event. And you would not have an event if you had nothing to work with: If you had nothingness, then you would have no experience. Truly, without the external, you are *nothing*.

Bear in mind: Even an event of your body external to your consciousness counts as external to your consciousness because it doesn't come from within the consciousness.

You also make the claim that thoughts are mental constructs, and thus illusory. I think you're just trying to sound smart and deep without actually succeeding in either. Everything you ever think you know or experience is a mental construct. Not the event itself; Only your idea of it. How can you ever know what's illusory and what's not if all you know is a mental construct? A truly smart man wouldn't make claims about existence: You cannot know. It's a guess. You're making a guess that mental constructs are illusory. You have no way of *knowing*.

You thinking that ESP is real is a mental construct. You thinking that mental constructs are illusory is a mental construct. I could continue but i think you're getting the point by now.

And as far as semantics go: You keep accusing others of confirmation bias: But confirmation bias requires confirmation of something. ONLY you are confirming anything here: In that your experience was real and self-evident. It's not self-evident. I make no claims of its reality. Because i'm smart. Smart enough to realize that i cannot make claims about things i cannot possibly know. And you cannot possibly know. You can only think that you know. There's a difference. When you make a claim, and others try to refute it: They are not guilty of confirmation bias by definition. You should understand this in order to realize what the *EXTERNAL* thinks of you. Without the external, you would have nothing.

Nothing can come from itself. You always need the building blocks. And you were given those blocks by the external.

It is going to be difficult for you to understand what I will try an convey to you as your mind is presently stuck in one gear...that of perceiving reality is dualistic... By that I mean you see yourself as you and all else as not you..yes? Now every soul goes through this stage but it is not the ultimate state of mind...the goal of religion is to realize ultimate reality which is not divided into two things....but is an indivisible oneness... So long as you understand reality the way you do....you do not understand and thus will not understand what I am saying to you......you will need to learn to apprehend reality non-conceptually...non-dualistically.. How does one learn to be at one with all that is? You need to learn to still the mind...dhyan..still mind meditation.. I do not mean that you need to cease thinking permanently....in fact you will find it impossible to even do it for a second to begin with....it may take years of meditation practice but eventually your mind will cease to interpret the reality indirectly through thought....but apprehend it directly through a mind that is still and free from any thought... Then your mind will be not being aware of you and the rest of the universe being not you....there will only be being...non-dual being...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Evidence would go a long way. You want an open mind in which any claim made by anyone should be treated as fact without cause. This leads to gullibility.

By an open mind I mean one that apprehends reality non-conceptually as I explained to Darkstorm in the post above...

 

[Darkstorn]

It is going to be difficult for you to understand what I will try an convey to you as your mind is presently stuck in one gear...that of perceiving reality is dualistic... By that I mean you see yourself as you and all else as not you..yes? Now every soul goes through this stage but it is not the ultimate state of mind...the goal of religion is to realize ultimate reality which is not divided into two things....but is an indivisible oneness... So long as you understand reality the way you do....you do not understand and thus will not understand what I am saying to you......you will need to learn to apprehend reality non-conceptually...non-dualistically.. How does one learn to be at one with all that is? You need to learn to still the mind...dhyan..still mind meditation.. I do not mean that you need to cease thinking permanently....in fact you will find it impossible to even do it for a second to begin with....it may take years of meditation practice but eventually your mind will cease to interpret the reality indirectly through thought....but apprehend it directly through a mind that is still and free from any thought... Then your mind will be not being aware of you and the rest of the universe being not you....there will only be being...non-dual being...

No offence but you do realize that you're talking to a buddhist, and not an idiot? I think you've read too much about different religions, yet not enough about each of them. You seem to throw buddhist ideas around on one hand and then brush them aside with the other. And you're being condescending about it?! Your tone is downright offensive.

I'll give you a hint: I don't look at a wall and see "not i"...

Also as a buddhist i'll tell you that you don't understand half of the things you say. You only think that you do.

Talk about a big ego...

it may take years of meditation practice but eventually your mind will cease to interpret the reality indirectly through thought....but apprehend it directly through a mind that is still and free from any thought... Then your mind will be not being aware of you and the rest of the universe being not you....there will only be being...non-dual being...

... You are misinterpreting the last Jhana stage as being the ultimate truth... You're being misled. That's a mental construct. The "being" you feel. It is still a construct. You haven't been to where you think you have. I'll give you a hint: "being" is conceptual. That's right. And without concepts, nothing is left...

You'd understand that truly: nothing exists independently and of itself; all things are mutually interdependent.

Meditation is not enough for any truth searching. You also need experience. And insight. And you need to discern falsehoods from truths, however difficult / impossible that might be. Even those of your own mind, the very same mental constructs you seem to be on so much about. When you think you are at peace: It's both a mental construct and impermanent. Nothing is permanent.

It was you yourself who said that mental constructs are illusory. I think that's not strictly true. Very few things are that black and white. But you made the mistake, and are now mistaking your own mental constructs as NOT illusory. Well done.

By an open mind I mean one that apprehends reality non-conceptually as I explained to Darkstorm in the post above...

You don't know what you're talking about. I'm serious.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

No offence but you do realize that you're talking to a buddhist, and not an idiot? I think you've read too much about different religions, yet not enough about each of them. You seem to throw buddhist ideas around on one hand and then brush them aside with the other. And you're being condescending about it?! Your tone is downright offensive.

I'll give you a hint: I don't look at a wall and see "not i"...

Also as a buddhist i'll tell you that you don't understand half of the things you say. You only think that you do.

Talk about a big ego...


... You are misinterpreting the last Jhana stage as being the ultimate truth... You're being misled. That's a mental construct. The "being" you feel. It is still a construct. You haven't been to where you think you have. I'll give you a hint: "being" is conceptual. That's right. And without concepts, nothing is left...

You'd understand that truly: nothing exists independently and of itself; all things are mutually interdependent.

Meditation is not enough for any truth searching. You also need experience. And insight. And you need to discern falsehoods from truths, however difficult / impossible that might be. Even those of your own mind, the very same mental constructs you seem to be on so much about. When you think you are at peace: It's both a mental construct and impermanent. Nothing is permanent.

It was you yourself who said that mental constructs are illusory. I think that's not strictly true. Very few things are that black and white. But you made the mistake, and are now mistaking your own mental constructs as NOT illusory. Well done.

You don't know what you're talking about. I'm serious.

First of all it is obvious you are angry with me....you see me as a separate being and for some reason a threat to you personally....this is how ego is.....there is such self identification with your body in time and space, that you presume that I do the same... Buddhism is not meant to have dogma....the practice is meant to transcend attachments to conceptualized teaching as reality is always on the other side... The true teaching is to realize one's true nature and dispense with the conceptual teaching about one's true nature...

 

[Darkstorn]

Don't talk about true teachings if you think that the end result of deep meditation is the end result of knowledge seeking... You already brushed ALL mental constructs aside as illusions, yet you are clinging to a mental construct of being... Or oneness. Both are conceptions... Which you are attached to...

You claim that i'm a victim of conceptual thinking. I make the claim that you don't know what conceptual truly means. Let's start with: Everything that has a word for it. Without concepts, human discourse is impossible, and buddhism doesn't seek to erase the conventions of language. Why? Because the objective is to make sense to everybody: Yes, even people who are "victims to conceptual thinking". If people couldn't understand what you were talking about, what is the point?

In order to function within _this_ world, you must function within at least the framework of someone elses' conceptions. That's just how it is.

It is naive to think that you've found your "true nature" if you hold onto anything that is impermanent still...

In a true existence without conceptions: There would be nothing left. Nothing. You think you have something more... That's not how it works. Let me ask you this:

Do you think that you are englightened? Have you experienced nirvana?

And for the record: The practice of buddhism isn't mean to transcend attachments to conceptualized teaching any less than its practicioners try to transcend attachments to *everything*: The teachings and practice are in THIS world. There are no other kinds of teaching. Nothing comes from within.

By that i mean there is "nothingness" within you, not information. Whatever information you have, is not of you. You just have mental constructs.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Don't talk about true teachings if you think that the end result of deep meditation is the end result of knowledge seeking... You already brushed ALL mental constructs aside as illusions, yet you are clinging to a mental construct of being... Or oneness. Both are conceptions... Which you are attached to...

You claim that i'm a victim of conceptual thinking. I make the claim that you don't know what conceptual truly means. Let's start with: Everything that has a word for it. Without concepts, human discourse is impossible, and buddhism doesn't seek to erase the conventions of language. Why? Because the objective is to make sense to everybody: Yes, even people who are "victims to conceptual thinking". If people couldn't understand what you were talking about, what is the point?

In order to function within _this_ world, you must function within at least the framework of someone elses' conceptions. That's just how it is.

It is naive to think that you've found your "true nature" if you hold onto anything that is impermanent still...

In a true existence without conceptions: There would be nothing left. Nothing. You think you have something more... That's not how it works. Let me ask you this:

Do you think that you are englightened? Have you experienced nirvana?

And for the record: The practice of buddhism isn't mean to transcend attachments to conceptualized teaching any less than its practicioners try to transcend attachments to *everything*: The teachings and practice are in THIS world. There are no other kinds of teaching. Nothing comes from within.

By that i mean there is "nothingness" within you, not information. Whatever information you have, is not of you. You just have mental constructs.

In order that we can understand each other....perhaps we need to have some sort of protocols... Here is where I am coming from.....the real is not the concept of the real...concepts are a just symbols to represent the real...

I could go further but there would be no point if you do not understand this...yes?

 

[Darkstorn]

You don't know what you're talking about: What you talk about, shows this. YOU do not understand. That's how it is. Whatever in your mind: Is a mental construct. All of it. If you don't understand this, then you understand *nothing*. And you have nothing. Yet you are acting here as if you had gotten something "more"? That's not buddhism.

The point is NEVER to "gain something more". The point is to DROP the act that you know everything: The thing telling you that you know everything is a mental construct.

That's you wanting to belong together in oneness with the universe. THAT is not buddhism. That's being a new age hippie. Everything that ever comes through your head, and ends up on this forum, is nothing but a mental construct you constructed. It didn't come from itself. You are naive if you believe that.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

You don't know what you're talking about: What you talk about, shows this. YOU do not understand. That's how it is. Whatever in your mind: Is a mental construct. All of it. If you don't understand this, then you understand *nothing*. And you have nothing. Yet you are acting here as if you had gotten something "more"? That's not buddhism.

The point is NEVER to "gain something more". The point is to DROP the act that you know everything: The thing telling you that you know everything is a mental construct.

That's you wanting to belong together in oneness with the universe. THAT is not buddhism. That's being a new age hippie. Everything that ever comes through your head, and ends up on this forum, is nothing but a mental construct you constructed. It didn't come from itself. You are naive if you believe that.

So what exactly is this mental construct you claim is telling me I know everything?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I think you've read too much about different religions, yet not enough about each of them.

This can also lead to attempts at woolly syncretism, which invariably involve misrepresentation and false equivalences.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

This can also lead to attempts at woolly syncretism, which invariably involve misrepresentation and false equivalences.

How could the act of conveying the teaching that the real is forever on the other side of any representation be a misrepresentation?

 

[mystic64]

Oh, mine.

You seriously believe in sci-fi conspiracy theory. You have been watching one too many sci-fi movies. You really should wake up in the real world, instead of preaching this paranoia craps.

I had experience first-hand in the 70s and 80s, racist bullies in Melbourne neighborhood, and the last thing I would do is hunt people down, just because they are different to me.

This is straw man attack and paranoia.

I believe, that's as far I know, that everyone or most members here, are non-violent people, including you and ben. The difference between Shad and ben is that one preferred more evidences and the later rely on faith in what he believe in.

To say that just because Shad, I or other skeptics would resort to violence, hunting people down, because of this nonexistent "psychic mutant" problem, is downright absurd.

We are here to learn from others from whatever religious background we may have, and we are here to agree or disagree views, in this safe environment, where we can discuss or debate.

So don't accuse anyone of being violent, when you are merely spinning speculations of "what-if". You cannot know how Shad react, especially when nothing of the sort have happen, except in movies.

I am glad to know gnostic that you are open minded . And yes, I have now been thoroughly chastised!

Yea, I got a posting credit ! May Gnostic be blessed and prosper !

 

[paarsurrey]

In order that we can understand each other....perhaps we need to have some sort of protocols... Here is where I am coming from.....the real is not the concept of the real...concepts are a just symbols to represent the real...
I could go further but there would be no point if you do not understand this...yes?

I agree with your above point, colored in magenta. Please
Regards