The Debate of God.

[confused453]

godnotgod, have you experienced all of that stuff that you wrote about?

 

[Prophet]

The entire controversy hinges upon the term ‘Self’. To act selflessly is said to be where one considers not the self but others, first or entirely. But it is impossible, logically and practically, to consider others before considering oneself. I won’t patronise you with a whole list of examples (unless you ask for such) for I’m sure you can see the truth in that.

And it would seem you agree where you speak of attachment. “When a selfish being speaks, acts, or thinks, it is done in attachment to selfish desires. These attachments are the cause of all anxiety. If one does work in attachment, in his mind, his wages are owed him, excusing him of all the joy of being thankful for every dollar earned.”

You then go on to prove the point with another passage: “It is through selfishness that we create a prison of anxiety for ourselves inside our minds. Peace, joy, and wisdom await those who would venture to escape their cell.”

So we shake off our worldly attachments to…gain rewards and satisfaction! Sounds like worldly attachment to selfish desires to me!

We throw off our attachment to worldly things, which cause us anxiety, and thereby achieve a perfect state of [put whatever you like in here].

1) So by transcendent means (or whatever) we’ve escaped the cause of our suffering. But (2) we leave the rest of our fellow human souls behind to suffer in attachment, in order for the self to achieve 1).

The aforementioned self is demonstrable prior in every respect.

I think you have a misunderstanding of where the urge to be selfless (morality) comes from and I'm clued into this by how you characterize fully selfless behavior as an impossible ideal. The urge to be selfless comes from the Truth that all sentient lifeforms are part of the same person. It is in this spirit of oneness with the whole that selfish desires should be put aside, and not the spirit you seem to advertise as selfless, which seems to me to be a sense of self worthlessness that would cause one to give away even that which one needs. Since we are all part of the One we are all equally important. I am not telling everyone to give everything away. I am saying to act and speak without expectation of recompense in any way, because this displays the very nature of good. Good can only be for its own sake, without attachment, given freely as an offering to the Force which continually inspires us to be as One.

Is worthlessness a fair assessment for the attitudes brought upon people by performing charitable works without thought of receiving anything in return (without attachment)? Do people who volunteer their time at a local humane society likely suffer feelings of intense worthlessness for their time wasted upon caring for dogs and cats that could have been spent gaining for themselves? The alternative view I present says these people experience Oneness.

 

[Prophet]

The aforementioned self is demonstrable prior in every respect.

I honestly have very little idea of what you are trying to say, but since you are intent on repeating this, I would ask you to explain what this means so that I understand it well enough to supply my own view.

 

[godnotgod]

godnotgod, have you experienced all of that stuff that you wrote about?

There is little use in answering such a question. What is most important is that, when you listen to what anyone says, no matter their authority or credentials, is whether you can verify it via your own experience and insight. Even the most humble-looking of us can have the most profound insights to impart to another. The important thing is to develop your attentiveness so that when something from the world of Enlightenment comes your way, however subtle, you do not miss it.

It is said in Guru Stotra, one of the Indian Scriptures: "Even one moment in the company of a saint can be your raft over the ocean of delusion."

My guru was my deceased brother, a yogi, who wordlessly banged pots together in sych with my thoughts to awaken me.

 

[godnotgod]

Aren't we supposed to debate god?
What exactly are you going to do when you're enlightened? How long will it be before you're going to get bored to death or lose your mind?

If you are debating god, then you have either lost your mind or are bored to death already. :banghead3

 

[godnotgod]

And what, exactly is meant by 'love'?

You may find this of immense interest:

The Light of Zen in the West: Incorporating The Supreme Doctrine and The ... - Hubert Benoît, Graham Rooth - Google Books

 

[confused453]

I didn't ask you how useful is the question. I asked if you experienced the stuff.

 

[godnotgod]

I didn't ask you how useful is the question. I asked if you experienced the stuff.

Think about your question, and why you are asking it. Of what use is any answer to you? Even if I answered 'yes', you would have to form a belief that what I am saying is true, and beliefs, as we all know, are filled with doubt. As I said, what is important is your own verification of any information that comes your way. Nothing will make any sense to you until you go and see for yourself if what you are being told is authentic or not.

 

[confused453]

If you are debating god, then you have either lost your mind or are bored to death already. :banghead3

Can you try to argue using reason that we, or at least I can understand? Maybe that will convince me, you never know. But so far it doesn't. Our debate is not going anywhere, and it is getting boring.

 

[godnotgod]

Can you try to argue using reason that we, or at least I can understand? Maybe that will convince me, you never know. But so far it doesn't. Our debate is not going anywhere, and it is getting boring.

Would you like some candy to make you feel better?

Is any talk about God within the realm of Reason? What do you want? A nice, predictable God that fits all your concepts? One that you can sink your teeth of Logic into? That you can put in a box and store for future use, as the occasion demands? That God is dead.

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.
Nicholas of Cusa

God is not seen except by blindness, nor known except by ignorance, nor understood except by fools.
Meister Eckhart

 

[confused453]

Think about your question, and why you are asking it. Of what use is any answer to you? Even if I answered 'yes', you would have to form a belief that what I am saying is true, and beliefs, as we all know, are filled with doubt. As I said, what is important is your own verification of any information that comes your way. Nothing will make any sense to you until you go and see for yourself if what you are being told is authentic or not.

The definition of belief is to have a trust with not real evidence. Imaginary evidence doesn't work. When you go to a dentist you believe that your dentist will do a good job. You believe that your teacher will provide you a good education. Your parents may believe that they'll raise you well. But there's no real evidence that any of those events will turn out to be true. So no, I don't believe in god, or your claims, because you fail to provide the real evidence.

 

[godnotgod]

The definition of belief is to have a trust with not real evidence. Imaginary evidence doesn't work. When you go to a dentist you believe that your dentist will do a good job. You believe that your teacher will provide you a good education. Your parents may believe that they'll raise you well. But there's no real evidence that any of those events will turn out to be true. So no, I don't believe in god, or your claims, because you fail to provide the real evidence.

I never said I had any evidence, nor have I asked you to believe in anything. All I have done is to point to something, but you have failed to go and see. Instead, you want me to do the work for you, and so you are bored. There are no off the shelf answers for what you seek. If you want to know beyond the shadow of a doubt, you will have to take that giant step over the threshold of the unknown yourself. No one can do it for you. No one can see for you.

Stop blaming others for the fact that you do not believe in god. That is your problem. YOU go see, and if there is no god, fine. If there is, fine. Then come back here and show us the evidence that you demand. OK?

It's like the prisoners in Plato's Cave who refuse to listen to the prisoner who escaped and went outside to see the Sun. They refuse to go see for themselves and instead accuse the informer of lying.

 

[confused453]

It's like the prisoners in Plato's Cave who refuse to listen to the prisoner who escaped and went outside to see the Sun. They refuse to go see for themselves and instead accuse the informer of lying.

I refuse to take LSD "follow the escaped prisoner" to experience the world without space and time. :no: :no: :no:
I'm looking for truth, and there's no universal law that forbids asking or debating with others.

 

[godnotgod]

[/COLOR]

I refuse to take LSD "follow the escaped prisoner" to experience the world without space and time. :no: :no: :no:
I'm looking for truth, and there's no universal law that forbids asking or debating with others.

Who is asking you to take drugs? You're obviously delusional without them!

As long as you keep looking for 'Truth' within the conceptual frameworks of Time, Space, and Causation, all you will find is a manufactured Truth. Nice. Neat. Safe, with thumb-sucking security.

My suggestion to you is that, instead of looking for 'Truth', you cease to cherish opinion instead.

Bye.

 

[confused453]

Who is asking you to take drugs? You're obviously delusional without them!

As long as you keep looking for 'Truth' within the conceptual frameworks of Time, Space, and Causation, all you will find is a manufactured Truth. Nice. Neat. Safe, with thumb-sucking security.

My suggestion to you is that, instead of looking for 'Truth', you cease to cherish opinion instead.

Bye.

Without time there's no movement, so all is stuck totally frozen.
Without space there's no location or distance, so existence is impossible.
A universe without gravity, where there's only hydrogen, could be a state with absence of causation.

Explain to me how any of that is possible? That's just unimaginable, and very well could be nothing or pure hell for any being with experience of living.
None of that can be tested or proven, so there's no reason to believe in any of those states.

 

[godnotgod]

Without time there's no movement, so all is stuck totally frozen.
Without space there's no location or distance, so existence is impossible.
A universe without gravity, where there's only hydrogen, could be a state with absence of causation.

Explain to me how any of that is possible? That's just unimaginable, and very well could be nothing or pure hell for any being with experience of living.
None of that can be tested or proven, so there's no reason to believe in any of those states.

It's not unimaginable; Time, Space, and Causation are all just a grand illusion. It's pure hell if you believe the illusion to be real, and that is exactly the lot of man at the moment. You believe the illusion to be real, and so you act upon it, generating waves of cause and effect, and creating more suffering in the world.

 

[confused453]

It's not unimaginable; Time, Space, and Causation are all just a grand illusion. It's pure hell if you believe the illusion to be real, and that is exactly the lot of man at the moment. You believe the illusion to be real, and so you act upon it, generating waves of cause and effect, and creating more suffering in the world.

Forget about what I believe. Explain to me the points I provided in the previous post.

 

[godnotgod]

Forget about what I believe. Explain to me the points I provided in the previous post.

I already did. Time, Space, and Causation are nothing more than concepts. They are not real. They are illusions, but we act upon them as if they were real. Not only that, but we think we are separate egos acting upon the world; that there is a separate 'self' called "I", when, in reality, there is no self or other.

1st observer: 'the flag is moving'
2nd observer: 'the wind is moving'
3rd observer: 'both flag and wind are moving'
passerby: 'your MINDS are moving!'

 

[confused453]

I already did. Time, Space, and Causation are nothing more than concepts. They are not real. They are illusions, but we act upon them as if they were real. Not only that, but we think we are separate egos acting upon the world; that there is a separate 'self' called "I", when, in reality, there is no self or other.

1st observer: 'the flag is moving'
2nd observer: 'the wind is moving'
3rd observer: 'both flag and wind are moving'
passerby: 'your MINDS are moving!'

So how can you explain the animals then? I watched the squirrel fight other squirrels with savage over nuts, when I threw more than enough for many to eat. Surely that squirrel was separate self from others. Or animals don't count?

If the observers are intelligent, they know that the wind is causing the flag to move.
Minds process and grow with knowledge, so they do move.

 

[godnotgod]

So how can you explain the animals then? I watched the squirrel fight other squirrels with savage over nuts, when I threw more than enough for many to eat. Surely that squirrel was separate self from others. Or animals don't count?

There is no "I" to the squirrel that is fighting. There is only fighting, without an agent of fighting.

Maybe it's just a Big Act on the part of the squirrels.

If the observers are intelligent, they know that the wind is causing the flag to move.

And what is 'causing' the wind to move?

Minds process and grow with knowledge, so they do move.

Both mind and movement are illusions. YOUR mind is moving!