What came before the Big Bang?

[godnotgod]

But your 'different view' is based on a conditioning itself. Just a different conditioning and, perhaps, a different type of conditioning. And you are conditioned whether you like it or not and in many different ways. 'Higher Consciousness' does not make you free from conditioning.

I should have expanded the discussion more, I suppose.

By 'different view' I meant 'no particular view', or 'unconditioned view'.

Yes, we are all conditioned, but some of us know we are conditioned, and we know we are conditioned via unconditioned consciousness, which is always present. It's when we attach ourselves to the conditioning as 'my' view and "I", that a problem ensues.


[youtube]PtLbwVaDRwg[/youtube]
Adyashanti on Awareness of Consciousness and Awakening - YouTube

 

[gnostic]

Misinterpretations of energy or using woo-soaked contexts of the word "vibration" are two of my biggest pet peeves as a physics student and a skeptic. I'd certainly contribute to a thread on the matter (see what I did there?)

Are you saying that there's already a thread at RF?

 

[Mycroft]

I should have expanded the discussion more, I suppose.

By 'different view' I meant 'no particular view', or 'unconditioned view'.

I find no evidence for an 'unconditioned view' because whatever view you may hold is the result of some sort of conditioning no matter how large or small.

I think when you think of 'conditioning' you think too much of indoctrination. And while that is 'conditioning' it's part of a gradient. There are many types of conditioning across a vast gradient from the simple.

Examples:

• Staying away from places of danger.
• Staying away from places of reported danger.
• Staying away from things that previously have caused your nervous system distress. (ie: a stinging plant)
• Having a 'liberal' view of politics.
• Having 'no particular view'
• Believing in higher consciousness.

All of these are the result of some form of conditioning.

 

[godnotgod]

You are so back peddling.

I just refuse to allow you to put words in my mouth. I've answered your questions, but you insist on banging your head on the keyboard. Be my guest.

 

[godnotgod]

I find no evidence for an 'unconditioned view' because whatever view you may hold is the result of some sort of conditioning no matter how large or small.

I think when you think of 'conditioning' you think too much of indoctrination. And while that is 'conditioning' it's part of a gradient. There are many types of conditioning across a vast gradient from the simple.

Examples:

[/COLOR]

• Staying away from places of danger.
• Staying away from places of reported danger.
• Staying away from things that previously have caused your nervous system distress. (ie: a stinging plant)
• Having a 'liberal' view of politics.
• Having 'no particular view'
• Believing in higher consciousness.

All of these are the result of some form of conditioning.

The very fact that you acknowledge the existence of conditioned views implies the existence of an unconditioned view. The former cannot exist as a reality without the reality of the latter.

Higher Consciousness is not a belief.

No particular view is no particular view. It is just to see things as they are. If you don't see things as they are, you will see them as they are not.

There's no evidence for an unconditioned view because it is pure and clear; it leaves no trace, just as a mirror reflects perfectly what it sees, but retains no image.

 

[Slapstick]

I just refuse to allow you to put words in my mouth. I've answered your questions, but you insist on banging your head on the keyboard. Be my guest.

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. I'm just trying to expand your noggin.
Think of it as a gift from the higher conscious.

 

[Mycroft]

The very fact that you acknowledge the existence of conditioned views implies the existence of an unconditioned view. The former cannot exist as a reality without the reality of the latter.

I disagree. The very fact I disagree is a conditioned view.

Higher Consciousness is not a belief.

Well it certainly is not a fact. I have yet to see any higher consciousness measured and quantified. Or even 'consciousness' for that matter.

No particular view is no particular view. It is just to see things as they are. If you don't see things as they are, you will see them as they are not.

I disagree. Nobody can 'see things as they are' when observe a cow you are only perceiving a very fractional part of it which is detectable to your senses. But you cannot see electrons, microbes, atoms, particles, EM fields and so on. So you can only see things of a certain size and of a certain makeup detectable to your senses.

There's no evidence for an unconditioned view because it is pure and clear.

There is no evidence for an unconditioned view because there is no such thing.

 

[godnotgod]

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. I'm just trying to expand your noggin.
Think of it as a gift from the higher conscious.

I don't see that you've contributed anything to the discussion.

 

[Slapstick]

I don't see that you've contributed anything to the discussion.

You must be joking.

 

[godnotgod]

I disagree. The very fact I disagree is a conditioned view.

You can only say that because of something that is unconditioned. Otherwise, you would'nt know what conditioned meant. You are, at this moment, using an unconditioned view to describe the conditioned view, without realizing it, and that is because you are focusing on the foreground without seeing the background against which the conditioned view exists.

Well it certainly is not a fact. I have yet to see any higher consciousness measured and quantified. Or even 'consciousness' for that matter.

Facts and reality are not identical. You will never prove the existence of higher consciousness via factual investigation, because it is beyond measurement and quantification. It is limitless, and so cannot be encapsulated by any rational system of thought.

I disagree. Nobody can 'see things as they are' when observe a cow you are only perceiving a very fractional part of it which is detectable to your senses. But you cannot see electrons, microbes, atoms, particles, EM fields and so on. So you can only see things of a certain size and of a certain makeup detectable to your senses.

If you don't see things as they are, then your entire argument is bogus.

When I say 'see things as they are', I am not talking about particular kinds of knowledge, but about the nature of reality.

There is no evidence for an unconditioned view because there is no such thing.

There is no such thing as the Sun because the only reality are the dancing shadows in Plato's Cave. How do I know? Because the Bible tells me so, and ooh poo pee doo. I am quite comfortable and cozy inside my nice little delusion and no one is going to come along and make me see what I refuse to see.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVpAuiGgw1k

 

[godnotgod]

You must be joking.

Sorry that it comes as a shock to you. The truth has been known to do things like that.

 

[Mycroft]

You can only say that because of something that is unconditioned. Otherwise, you would'nt know what conditioned meant. You are, at this moment, using an unconditioned view to describe the conditioned view, without realizing it, and that is because you are focusing on the foreground without seeing the background against which the conditioned view exists.

I was using my conditioned view of the sciences.

Facts and reality are not identical. You will never prove the existence of higher consciousness via factual investigation, because it is beyond measurement and quantification. It is limitless, and so cannot be encapsulated by any rational system of thought.

Sounds like you need to change dealers. Something disagreeable is being used to cut whatever non-prescription medication you're using.

If you don't see things as they are, then your entire argument is bogus.

When I say 'see things as they are', I am not talking about particular kinds of knowledge, but about the nature of reality.



There is no such thing as the Sun because the only reality are the dancing shadows in Plato's Cave. How do I know? Because the Bible tells me so, and ooh poo pee doo. I am quite comfortable and cozy inside my nice little delusion and no one is going to come along and make me see what I refuse to see.

[youtube]lVpAuiGgw1k[/youtube]
Transcending the Layers of Consciousness - YouTube

Sorry, but you've launched yourself well into The Land of Oz here and I cannot follow.

 

[godnotgod]

I was using my conditioned view of the sciences

.

...which, in turn, is possible only because of the unconditioned.

Here, try this:

You see the hedge against the background of the hills.
You see the hills against the background of the sky.
But you see the sky against the background of consciousness.

Sounds like you need to change dealers. Something disagreeable is being used to cut whatever non-prescription medication you're using.

Of course, you're right: there is no God but Reason and Science is his profit.

Sorry, but you've launched yourself well into The Land of Oz here and I cannot follow.

That's because your mind is enslaved and surgically attached to those hypnotic dancing cave wall shadows Holy Science has told you represents Reality. You don't see any Sun there so it obviously doesn't exist.

You can remain asleep indefinitely if you like, and you won't awaken until you're ready.

 

[Slapstick]

Sorry that it comes as a shock to you. The truth has been known to do things like that.

Actually nothing comes as a shock to me. Tell me why I haven't done anything to contribute to this discussion (thread). Then you can ask me anything you want. I will not hold your own fallacies against you.
I'm not the type of person that will rub someones face in the dirt for being wrong or wanting to learn more.

 

[godnotgod]

Actually nothing comes as a shock to me. Tell me why I haven't done anything to contribute to this discussion (thread). Then you can ask me anything you want. I will not hold your own fallacies against you.
I'm not the type of person that will rub someones face in the dirt for being wrong or wanting to learn more.

What is this 'gift' of higher consciousness you claim to be offering?

 

[gnostic]

It would seem that I have lost track of this debate.

It is funny how much replies have occurred, when I reappeared a-day-and-a-half later.

 

[godnotgod]

The problem is the whole "higher consciousness" is nothing more than sham like that of snake-oil peddlers.

To think everything we see, hear and touch as nothing more than illusions, like the keyboard that godnotgod banging his head with, that some of these people or even spiritual beings can perceive with higher consciousness as illusions, is nothing more than delusions.

What if everything you see, hear and touch were to pop into existence out of nowhere, and then suddenly pop back out again? Would that be consistent, at least in part, to how an illusion behaves?

Now expand the time in which 'real things' exist. They still never existed to begin with, and will eventually disappear completely. That behavior applies to the entire physical world. Nothing is permanent. So we have the first qualification for the physical world being an illusion.

The second is that an illusion is dependent upon whatever is projecting it, and that the observer sees it as real.

All 'things' in the universe are interconnected to everything else. They are completely dependent upon other 'things' for their 'existence'. This is called the Law of Interdependent Origination. Nothing arises in and of itself. Nothing has an abiding substance of its own, and so we say that all things are 'empty'. What we are actually dealing with are forms, rather than things. There are no such 'things'. And so we say:

Form is emptiness;
emptiness is form.

Ultimately, all forms are dependent upon the formless. You cannot distinguish what is form unless understood against the background of what is the formless.

The thing you call 'cloud', for example, is not independently a 'cloud'. It is the result of sunlight, water, oxygen, evaporation, condensation, etc. It is just a temporal manifestation of the combination of all these other things.

The Human Route

Coming empty-handed,
going empty-handed -- that is human.
When you are born, where do you come from?
When you die, where do you go?
Life is like a floating cloud which appears.
Death is like a floating cloud which disappears.
The floating cloud itself originally does not exist.
Life and death, coming and going, are also like that.
But there is one thing which always remains clear.
It is pure and clear, not depending on life and death.
Then what is the one pure and clear thing?

Zen Master Seung

So now I have presented two qualifications for the physical world being illusory.

A third would be that the observer firmly believes the illusion to be something real.

Suddenly, you see a snake moving on the side of the road at dusk. You recoil in horror, only to realize in the next moment that it was only a rope moving in the wind. Consciousness both projected the illusion and revealed its true nature.

Now think of the snake as metaphor for the universe, and the rope as metaphor for Reality, except that the illusion of the universe is such that it conforms to all sensory input as real, and that, unlike the 'snake', it is not so easily revealed as illusory.

Now the 'snake' was never there to begin with. It is actually the rope.
Likewise, the universe was never there to begin with. It is actually the Absolute.
And so...

'The universe is the Absolute as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation'
Vivikenanda

'Time, Space, and Causation' being the distorting filter of the conditioned mind.

 

[godnotgod]

Yeah, the same stuff your keyboard is made out it. Try hitting your head on that.

The reason there is a sense of solidity to the physical world is because of electromagnetic repulsion, and not real solid meeting solid. Matter is mostly empty space, and not solid at all. It's all about the electromagnetic repulsion. Ouch!

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Even if that were true, which it isn't, what is the origin of it's logic?

What determines that it is logical? You. And you are a conscious being who is the universe, though you fancy yourself an independent observer of an 'object' you call 'universe'.

That is very much true.

The Universe exists whether your exist or not, as such the Universe is Logical. It doesn't require you for its existence.

Though I still don't know what you mean by Conscious...so if we all went into a coma right now, are you saying the "universe" would stop existing?

Or are you just arguing semantics? Because you seem to be implying that "since we give things their names, they do not exist without them" But even if what we are seeing is a lie, we are obviously experiencing something that is external to us. Doesn't matter if we are a brain in a vat or the projections of a demon, something exists independently of us.

I personally find these waxing and waning about reality to be rather unfruitful. Especially when people try to combine some greater meaning to consciousness with it...why can't we just exist and have no purpose and enjoy our times here?

 

[gnostic]

What if everything you see, hear and touch were to pop into existence out of nowhere, and then suddenly pop back out again? Would that be consistent, at least in part, to how an illusion behaves?

Now expand the time in which 'real things' exist. They still never existed to begin with, and will eventually disappear completely. That behavior applies to the entire physical world. Nothing is permanent. So we have the first qualification for the physical world being an illusion.

The second is that an illusion is dependent upon whatever is projecting it, and that the observer sees it as real.

All 'things' in the universe are interconnected to everything else. They are completely dependent upon other 'things' for their 'existence'. This is called the Law of Interdependent Origination. Nothing arises in and of itself. Nothing has an abiding substance of its own, and so we say that all things are 'empty'. What we are actually dealing with are forms, rather than things. There are no such 'things'. And so we say:

Form is emptiness;
emptiness is form.

Ultimately, all forms are dependent upon the formless. You cannot distinguish what is form unless understood against the background of what is the formless.

The thing you call 'cloud', for example, is not independently a 'cloud'. It is the result of sunlight, water, oxygen, evaporation, condensation, etc. It is just a temporal manifestation of the combination of all these other things.

The Human Route

Coming empty-handed,
going empty-handed -- that is human.
When you are born, where do you come from?
When you die, where do you go?
Life is like a floating cloud which appears.
Death is like a floating cloud which disappears.
The floating cloud itself originally does not exist.
Life and death, coming and going, are also like that.
But there is one thing which always remains clear.
It is pure and clear, not depending on life and death.
Then what is the one pure and clear thing?

Zen Master Seung

So now I have presented two qualifications for the physical world being illusory.

A third would be that the observer firmly believes the illusion to be something real.

Suddenly, you see a snake moving on the side of the road at dusk. You recoil in horror, only to realize in the next moment that it was only a rope moving in the wind. Consciousness both projected the illusion and revealed its true nature.

Now think of the snake as metaphor for the universe, and the rope as metaphor for Reality, except that the illusion of the universe is such that it conforms to all sensory input as real, and that, unlike the 'snake', it is not so easily revealed as illusory.

Now the 'snake' was never there to begin with. It is actually the rope.
Likewise, the universe was never there to begin with. It is actually the Absolute.
And so...

'The universe is the Absolute as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation'
Vivikenanda

'Time, Space, and Causation' being the distorting filter of the conditioned mind.

This whole post is an example of philosophical delusion.

You talk of "higher consciousness", but do have any evidence that support the existence of "higher consciousness"?

But what if this "higher consciousness" is not just another one of the illusions you were warning us of?

Could you tell if this or that "higher consciousness" is real?

If you can't the differences between reality and illusion, or between "higher consciousness" and "normal consciousness" then this claim of yours - that there be "higher consciousness" become itself - self-defeating.