Home | Community | Message Board


RVF Garden Supply
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
OfflineSource
Remainder of anUnbalancedEquation
Male

Registered: 07/28/03
Posts: 667
Loc: Outer Darkness
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
Mysticism - The Ultimate Science
    #2539341 - 04/08/04 03:19 PM (13 years, 19 days ago)

Using the word 'mysticism' in the sense of the following definition:

Immediate consciousness of the transcendent or ultimate reality or God.

A number of scientists have claimed (sometimes overtly, sometimes not) to have found ultimate reality or God - Buddha, Alan Watts, Krishnamurti, Ramana Maharishi, Jesus, Ram Dass, Ken Wilber, D.T. Suzuki, Eckhart Tolle, Krishna... Rather than only give you a description of what they have found, they have outlined the experiment for you to follow so that you can make this same discovery. The result is the most authentic experience possible - 'immediate consciousness of the transcendent'. This experience is more true than any onther kind of scientific experiment because it does not rely on language, concepts, or senses as translating devices. In fact, much of (if not all) the experiment itself is the act of removing the filters of language, concepts, and senses which keep us from this direct experience.

The falacy of purely objective science searching for absolute truth is that it refuses to put down the filters. It belives that absolute truth must be subject to measurement (conceptualization) when in fact, by definition 'absolute truth' is non-relative and therefore un-measurable.

We should be skeptical. But shouldn't our skepticism also call into question the very filters we use to understand our world? Shouldn't we question the validity of our own senses, language, beliefs and concepts? Isn't this the ultimate act of skepticism and is not the mystic the ultimate scientist?


--------------------
What you're searching for is what's searching.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: Source]
    #2539527 - 04/08/04 04:06 PM (13 years, 19 days ago)

A number of scientists have claimed (sometimes overtly, sometimes not) to have found ultimate reality or God - Buddha, Alan Watts, Krishnamurti, Ramana Maharishi, Jesus, Ram Dass, Ken Wilber, D.T. Suzuki, Eckhart Tolle, Krishna...
Those are all acclaimed scientitsts? *Fallacy alert!* A scientist's personal religious beliefs have NOTHING to do with the scientific method. Nice conflation though.  :rolleyes:

they have outlined the experiment for you to follow so that you can make this same discovery
Please post this so that we can all experince the divine and forever end this discussion, have world peace and utopia. Thank you. If you are talking about Christian and Buddhist doctrines, they have totally failed to change the world in a positive direction. Its practitioners exhibit the same pettiness and human foibles as non-practioners.

The falacy of purely objective science searching for absolute truth
This statement is a "falacy". Science examines small pieces of the puzzle and does so remarkably well. We are communicating because of the success of science, not from ANY other method.

...is that it refuses to put down the filters. It belives that absolute truth must be subject to measurement (conceptualization) when in fact, by definition 'absolute truth' is non-relative and therefore un-measurable.
It does or you are just making this up as you go?

...and is not the mystic the ultimate scientist?
And what tangible contribution has the mystic made? I can list a million (sans time and carpal tunnel syndrome)  that the scientist has made.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,851
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 2 days, 6 hours
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: Swami]
    #2539699 - 04/08/04 04:48 PM (13 years, 19 days ago)

Quote:

Swami said:
Please post this so that we can all experince the divine and forever end this discussion, have world peace and utopia. Thank you. If you are talking about Christian and Buddhist doctrines, they have totally failed to change the world in a positive direction. Its practitioners exhibit the same pettiness and human foibles as non-practioners.




All of its practitioners? That is quite the generality there Swami, and I'm afraid it goes much deeper into it than that.

I think you would have to look at each individual, and how they integrated said beliefs into their life.... what they actually thought, how they looked at things.... Most spiritual paths are a way to bring someone to a point of understanding, and I don't know of a lot of people that take an honest approach to developing that understanding, or are capable of "putting it all together"....

It takes quite a long time for someone to piece together the master state of mind, so to speak... and only so many people ever end up in the position to be able to go about it. But I don't see how such pathways can be "disproven" because 99% of the people are never even aware of it or can't begin to know how to get further.

I would like to know how it is even possible to get acrossed the essence of a state of mind to someone else, let alone "test" it. :grin:

At any rate, ja, a generality that has no place in this. :wink:

Quote:


This statement is a "falacy". Science examines small pieces of the puzzle and does so remarkably well. We are communicating because of the success of science, not from ANY other method.




For all science is worth, and it is worth a hell of a lot, I think that the fact that it examines small pieces of the puzzle and does so remarkably well is also its weakness. Sometimes said scientists and similar thinkers do so well in setting up a boundary and examining what is in it, that they have trouble thinking outside of those boundaries.

Scientists do such a good job at seperating themselves from the bigger box in order to learn from the smaller box, that they sometimes forget how it is all just one big box, and how the illusion of the smaller boxes are connected.  :smirk:

It is a necessity of increasing knowledge but these boundaries are not set and the fact that it is such a powerful tool does not give it ultimateness. :grin: I also don't like saying "oh, look at all that science has done" and using that to prove some sort of point, because it isn't about that. Science is an investigation tool for hard knowledge, while said mysticism, religion (whose downfall would be taking it out of its mystical content, or something), seeking, whatever, would be more of an investigative tool for the experience side, "the state of being" knowledge....

I definitely feel as if mysticism can bring you to some understanding of life, "God", whatever. The more you increase and understanding of the nature of experience and being, the more your awareness of higher level stuff will increase. Experience and state of being are not shared and communication can only gesture vaugely. This is why mysticism would be so vauge and appear utterly useless and devoid of content to someone looking through the wrong eyes....

Quote:


And what tangible contribution has the mystic made? I can list a million (sans time and carpal tunnel syndrome)  that the scientist has made.




Well, we could ask Buddha, Jesus, etc. about their outlook on the world and how they experienced life while they were here. What contribution mysticism had for them would be apparent to them on reflection of how their understanding had progressed over time. And if just one person used their expressions of this to increase their own understanding and were able to get just a little more, than there is even more contribution. Tangible? Not to an objective viewpoint, as the illusion of an objective viewpoint that would be established has no sense of experience of being.

However, I guess it would be possible to test it in a way, when said people interacted with the world differently after increasing their understanding with mysticism? :lol:

This isn't really Swami proof, but I am just exploring thoughts and it needs to be posted anyways.  :grin:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: fireworks_god]
    #2539946 - 04/08/04 05:41 PM (13 years, 19 days ago)

I think you would have to look at each individual, and how they integrated said beliefs into their life.... what they actually thought, how they looked at things....

This has been covered (seems everything is a repeat). If there was something to it on the personal level, the macro level would show some postive deviation. Child abuse, alcoholism, suicide, divorce, adultery, murder; etc. are no different between Christians and non-Christians.

Now compare joggers to non-joggers. The joggers as a group are much healthier physically than non-joggers. No excuses or spin is necessary. The results are there for ALL to see. The macro must reflect the micro.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,851
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 2 days, 6 hours
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: Swami]
    #2540149 - 04/08/04 06:26 PM (13 years, 19 days ago)

Quote:

Swami said:
This has been covered (seems everything is a repeat). If there was something to it on the personal level, the macro level would show some postive deviation. Child abuse, alcoholism, suicide, divorce, adultery, murder; etc. are no different between Christians and non-Christians.




Well, I would think that there is some positive deviation. For instance, churches can produce positive effects such as a sense of community and support. It is a nexus where people collect and share the fact that they are together... it is a community. And of course their is a list of negatives that effectively balance out the positives...

We also have to consider how the people honestly seeking mysticisim and spiritual growth and "getting" most of the key messages aren't exactly going to make up a considerable group that could produce measureable change from the macro level... although if you take those people out of the equation I suspect things WOULD crumble.... they are an unnoticeable bunch that are keeping the positiveness flowing through the system. :grin:

If everything keeps repeating, maybe it is an important collection of thoughts, just that it isn't totally in the right form and needs to keep being debated and formed out.  :laugh:

Quote:


Now compare joggers to non-joggers. The joggers as a group are much healthier physically than non-joggers. No excuses or spin is necessary. The results are there for ALL to see. The macro must reflect the micro.




I don't think it is right to compare jogging to mysticism. The difference in complexity and where the change is taking place is totally different. Jogging is an easy game to learn how to play and its effects are easy to measure, as it deals with something physical (its effects on ones mental state wouldn't be as easy to measure, for example).

Mysticism, on the other hand, has to do with the complex workings of the mind, conscious and subconscious stuff, how we experience life as it presents itself, our sense of being and the meaning we take on. Not exactly as easy to measure from outside of that mind. To really develop a true understanding of the effects mysticism would be having on that person, you would basically have to be observing all of their thoughts. As far as I know, it isn't possible for one person to observe anothers thoughts.... we can only observe the way they interact with the world.... and measuring the effects mysticism had on that person from those external actions isn't going to be exactly easy.

So ja, a WORLD of difference in complexity between jogging and mysticism and the workings of ones mind... :lol:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: fireworks_god]
    #2540223 - 04/08/04 06:43 PM (13 years, 19 days ago)

Well, I would think that there is some positive deviation. For instance, churches can produce positive effects such as a sense of community and support.
This is true, but is due to social rather than mystical factors. Old people that go to a secular Senior Center or kids that join the Boy's/Girl's Club are better adjusted and happier.

I don't think it is right to compare jogging to mysticism.
Come on FG, I am comparing external change to a practice; not jogging to mysticism. ANY practice that produces no external results is somewhat lacking wouldn't you say?

To really develop a true understanding of the effects mysticism would be having on that person, you would basically have to be observing all of their thoughts.
Ah, so those that murder and molest children and abuse alcohol and cheat on their spouse; will be doing the EXACT SAME ACTS, but with a kinder/gentler motive and deeper understanding? That is so incredibly weak! Here is the thing: something efficacious doesn't require apologists like yourself to explain why the results are immeasurable and unseen.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,851
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 2 days, 6 hours
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: Swami]
    #2540370 - 04/08/04 07:24 PM (13 years, 19 days ago)

Quote:

Swami said:
This is true, but is due to social rather than mystical factors. Old people that go to a  secular Senior Center or kids that join the Boy's/Girl's Club are better adjusted and happier.




And pursuing mysticism can definitely make someone better adjusted and happier. For the old people and the kids going to their clubs, it is a special experience and it is treasured (generally, of course  :grin:), and it tunes them into the experience more, which produces the better adjustments and the happiness.... mysticism could be seen as the pathway for people to open this up on their own, consciously....

Quote:


Come on FG, I am comparing external change to a practice; not jogging to mysticism. ANY practice that produces no external results is somewhat lacking wouldn't you say?




It wouldn't be lacking if the intent was to produce internal results. :lol:

Quote:


To really develop a true understanding of the effects mysticism would be having on that person, you would basically have to be observing all of their thoughts.
Ah, so those that murder and molest children and abuse alcohol and cheat on their spouse; will be doing the EXACT SAME ACTS, but with a kinder/gentler motive and deeper understanding? That is so incredibly weak!




I don't understand how you are connecting what I said to that, really. How many people that murder, molest children, abuse alcohol and cheat on their spouse are involved with seeking on a spiritual, mysticial path?

And how does that have to do with "To really develop a true understanding of the effects mysticism would be having on that person, you would basically have to be observing all of their thoughts. " anyways? What I was expressing was that the only way to measure change in someone's mind produced by introducing new collections of thoughts, you would have to be able to experience their every thought. Makes sense, ja?

Quote:


Here is the thing: something efficacious doesn't require apologists like yourself to explain why the results are immeasurable and unseen.




I don't quite know how to address this, but I will take the moment to say that I myself have sought out spiritual and mental growth and have seen and measured the changes brought about by doing so. I suspect that the day an invention is created that can allow other people to experience someone else's thoughts for study, then the results could be objectively seen and measured. :grin:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: fireworks_god]
    #2540520 - 04/08/04 08:02 PM (13 years, 19 days ago)

I suspect that the day an invention is created that can allow other people to experience someone else's thoughts for study, then the results could be objectively seen and measured

Ok, polls and statistics and social studies have yet to be invented. You wore me down. You win. I'm going to crank up some tunes and have a beer.

Cheers! :beer:


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblepsyka
Praetorian
 User Gallery

Registered: 06/09/03
Posts: 1,652
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: Swami]
    #2540542 - 04/08/04 08:10 PM (13 years, 19 days ago)

Ha ha hahaha yoooou loooose :P


--------------------
As the life of a candle,
my wick will burn out.
But, the fire of my mind
shall beam into infinite.



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineSource
Remainder of anUnbalancedEquation
Male

Registered: 07/28/03
Posts: 667
Loc: Outer Darkness
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: Swami]
    #2540585 - 04/08/04 08:21 PM (13 years, 19 days ago)

Swami,

I categorized the mystics as 'scientists' in order to illustrate my point that mysticism is the absolute science.

"A scientist's personal religious beliefs have NOTHING to do with the scientific method."

I didn't say anything about belief, or religion for that matter. I'm discussing mysticism according to the definition I listed earlier. The mysticism I'm talking about here has no place for belief. It is a purely experiential process - not a stagnant religion.

"Please post this so that we can all experince the divine and forever end this discussion, have world peace and utopia."

Check out Buddha's eight-fold path, or Patanjali's yoga system, or Ramana Maharishi's self-inquiry experiment...

"Science examines small pieces of the puzzle and does so remarkably well."

I agree. But what I said was that objective science searching for absolute truth is a falacy. Small pieces do not add up to absolute truth.

"It does or you are just making this up as you go?"

In general science denies the existence of anything that cannot be measured. Does it not?

The words and methods of the mystics become dogma and religion over time. Because of the sacrafice involved, the vast majority of people are not willing to perform the experiment on thier lives that Buddha, Jesus, Ramana, Krishna and others have laid out. They don't want to change, they just want something to believe in and with people such as these it should not be surprising that there is not much change.

So, again, my claim is that mysticism is the ultimate science. Mysticism is the opposite of belief. It is an experiment performed in order to directly experience absolute reality. It is repeatable in the sense that others who perform the same experiment get the same results. And it is "ultimate" because it transcends the normal barriers of experience whereas purely objective science maintains the seperation between observer and object.

So, what standard of science does mysticism fail to accomplish?


--------------------
What you're searching for is what's searching.


Edited by Source (04/08/04 08:25 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibletekramrepus
Female User Gallery
Registered: 02/20/02
Posts: 2,229
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: Source]
    #2540863 - 04/08/04 09:36 PM (13 years, 19 days ago)

Swami said:

"ANY practice that produces no external results is somewhat lacking wouldn't you say?"



No, and I think many will disagree with that statement.

True changes occur on the inside, because thats the only "real" world we live in. The outside can be considered important by some, but definately not more important than our inside world.


Some of the greatest, most peaceful men on earth do very little in the external world.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,851
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 2 days, 6 hours
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: Swami]
    #2542277 - 04/09/04 04:51 AM (13 years, 19 days ago)

Quote:

Swami said:
Ok, polls and statistics and social studies have yet to be invented. You wore me down. You win. I'm going to crank up some tunes and have a beer.




I'm sure polls, statistics, and social studies are the perfect method of examining the subtle, over time changes that a small minority of people in the world experience when they truly seek a pathway of "Enligthenment".  :rolleyes:

:grin:

I'm not saying that those tools could be used in some degree to try to find some change brought about by people following such a path, I am just questioning their effectiveness on this particular subject. It isn't exactly "How do you feel about the progress made by our president?" :grin:

Any progress made by someone following some sort of mysticisism has to be examined on a case-by-case basis. It is far too much a subjective thing, considering that it deals with one's mind, their thoughts and feelings and introducing new ways of thinking, and changing the way one experiences life. No poll is going to be able to be able to get to the heart of that.... one would have to experience those thoughts and that mind to be able to see any change.

Of course, external actions will be effected by change, subtly, but I don't see an effective way of measuring that. :smirk:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineSource
Remainder of anUnbalancedEquation
Male

Registered: 07/28/03
Posts: 667
Loc: Outer Darkness
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: Source]
    #2545184 - 04/09/04 11:11 PM (13 years, 18 days ago)

I would like to hear from anybody that can show why mysticism is not science.

It requires no belief (apart from the faith that the experiment will yield results). It is based in experiement. The results are experienced directly, and others performing the same experiment experience the same results.

Again, what characteristic of science does mysticism fail to exhibit?


--------------------
What you're searching for is what's searching.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: Source]
    #2545243 - 04/09/04 11:28 PM (13 years, 18 days ago)

Let's forget the word play for a moment. I could give you an easily replicable scientific experiment that EVERYONE (100%) here could verify.

Instead of posting your argument; why not post one of these repeatable mystical experiments and then we can all report back on our results - or is that just much too straight-forward?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineCleverName
the cloudsshould know meby now...

Registered: 08/26/02
Posts: 1,121
Loc: red earth painted with mi...
Last seen: 11 years, 5 months
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: Source]
    #2545374 - 04/10/04 12:31 AM (13 years, 18 days ago)

a mystic experiences do vary a bit from person to person. the perennial philosophy, sumed up, says that when one has a mystical experience we must share certain universal experiences, despite of our circumstantial differences. the perennial philo provides too simplistic a view of mysticism. the perennial philo cannot possibly account for mystical experiences in all their strangeness, diversity, and darkness.

thus it is not a science, its not even provable...the whole of science is the ability to reproduce results.

throughout all of history, mystics have made divergent, inconsistent, and even contradictory claims about the nature of utimate reality, which reflect mystics' prior conditioning. we have no way to tell which claims, if any, are valid. the LOGICAL conclusion would be that all mystical visions are illusions.

the logical conclusion isnt always the correct one, though. descriptions of hunger and thirst and sexual desire may vary from persom to person and culture to culture, but does that mean these basic biological drives are products of our socail conditioning? certain aspects of the external world, too, trancend context.

if aristotles description of the moon differ from those of carl sagan, does that mean they didnt see the same thing?

so, all mystical visions may be unprovvable in an absolute sense, but surely some are more demonstrably false-and potentilly harmful-than others.
the question is, how do we interpret a mystical vision? all throughout history,and even in fact right now, many extremists are borne out of the idea that god plays favorites...there mystical experience is the only right one; the conviction of certain individuals and peoples that they are divinly chosen leads to religious self-righteousness, fanaticism, intolerance.

in short, mysticism can NEVER be a science. mystical experiences are enormously diverse, and they invariably reflect each mystics particular culture and personality.


--------------------
if you can't find the truth right where you are, where else do you expect to find it?

this is the purpose


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePHARMAKOS
addict
Registered: 09/13/02
Posts: 573
Last seen: 12 years, 9 months
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: CleverName]
    #2545406 - 04/10/04 12:39 AM (13 years, 18 days ago)

once again swami shows that the true basis of all the arguments we have here is the issue of perceptual or consensus awarness. People like me, who having an experience, accept it as a part of life, disagree with people like swami, who (as far as i can reason it) needs a scientific experiment that everyone on earth can agree on to simply prove when hes scratching his ass, as it were

Fireworks god: glad to see you gettin involved, i consider you my spokesman on this thread.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineViaggio
ChemicalConsumer

Registered: 07/05/03
Posts: 1,296
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: PHARMAKOS]
    #2545439 - 04/10/04 12:53 AM (13 years, 18 days ago)

I don't know if science and spirituality will ever be good friends.  What's the use in forcing the two to play together?  To each his own.

That is all  :headbang:


--------------------
"...yet another in a long series of diversions an attempt to avoid responsibility."


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineSource
Remainder of anUnbalancedEquation
Male

Registered: 07/28/03
Posts: 667
Loc: Outer Darkness
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: CleverName]
    #2545495 - 04/10/04 01:21 AM (13 years, 18 days ago)

CleverName,

Bravo! I understand now. The reason Mysticism cannot be a science is because the very nature of what is experienced cannot be accurately described with words. Therefore although two or more people may share the mystical experience of absolute reality, they will speak of it in terms colored by thier own cultures. This makes it imposible to verify that they are actually getting the same results. Ergo, mysticism cannot be a science. Thank you!

My own personal feelings on the matter is that there are different levels of mystical experience as the consciousness expands, some levels are dark, some filled with visions, etc., but the ultimate level of consciousness is universally experienced in the same way by all.

Have you heard the story about the three blind men and the elephant (Sorry, no punch line)? One feels only the elephant's trunk, one only his side, and the last only the tail. The first says an elephant is like a tree, the second says it's like a wall and the third says it's like a broomstick.

--------------

Swami,

I think CleverName already showed me what I was missing and set me straight. But just for the heck of it - as an example of an experiment that we can conduct and compare our results, we can use Ramana Maharishi's Self inquiry method. Unless you would rather each of us retire to a cave for ten years of meditation before we post our results.

I've already posted it before, but I don't mind doing it again (sorry to all those that have read this before). The premise of the experiment is that anything seen or experienced cannot be 'YOU', since you are that which see's and experiences everything. So far so good? Any arguments there?

So, start by looking at an object - say a table or a chair. You can see it, touch it, in general you can experience it. Therefore it is not you. You are what is aware of it, you are what sees it, you are the experiencer, the witness.

Move back toward your body. You can feel it move. You feel pain and pleasure. Because you can experience your body, it is not you, you are that which experiences the body.

Now move to your mind. You can hear your thoughts, feel your emotions, see your visual conceptions. Since you can experience them, they are not you. You are that which experiences these things. You are the witness.

For me personally, this exercise brings me to a deeper realization of what I really am - pure consciousness aware of all things inside and outside. From this perspective life is not threatening. Since there is no substantive particular "I" to be found anywhere in the universe, there is nothing to lose, nothing to gain - just an awesome experience to be had. I should note that this is NOT the ultimate level of consciousness since there is still the duality of observer and object (witness and universe).

So there ya have it. Rip it apart Swami, I love it!


--------------------
What you're searching for is what's searching.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Mysticism - The Ultimate Science [Re: Source]
    #2545563 - 04/10/04 01:44 AM (13 years, 18 days ago)

So there ya have it. Rip it apart Swami, I love it!

There is no need. I will just wait for all the others members to report back here with identical results after doing your experiment.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Mysticism vs. Science and Logic (yet again)
( 1 2 3 4 all )
OrgoneConclusion 4,498 67 01/12/08 05:31 AM
by Middleman
* Science phi1618 957 19 11/09/04 03:28 PM
by psyka
* Why Science cannot save us.
( 1 2 all )
Icelander 1,781 29 01/01/08 02:15 PM
by Icelander
* Einstein A Father of Science Believed in GOD...
( 1 2 3 all )
BleedingSickness 3,925 42 10/07/02 04:00 PM
by Zahid
* Mysticism And The Chase
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )
DiploidM 7,331 154 12/30/05 03:49 AM
by Deviate
* Science isn't philosiphy?!?!?!
( 1 2 all )
gluke bastid 2,301 36 10/11/02 10:32 AM
by Anonymous
* Science the ultimate tool?
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
Icelander 4,836 94 08/05/05 02:13 PM
by EquilibriuM
* Suicide Bombers and Other Mystics - A Critique
( 1 2 3 4 all )
DiploidM 4,422 70 06/07/06 07:20 PM
by fireworks_god

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, CosmicJoke, Diploid, DividedQuantum
1,181 topic views. 1 members, 5 guests and 12 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:

Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2017 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.154 seconds spending 0.003 seconds on 14 queries.