What is Enlightenment?


#181

Surya,

“Do you have to keep telling us the obvious?”

You keep forgetting the obvious.

“Unfortunately, whether you like it or not, we are limited in this world”

One’s limitations are going to depend upon one’s state of consciousness. If you are centered in your true nature, then you are the boundlessness of the whole existence itself.

"If the first humans thought like you, “Oh, knowledge and language is limited, we will never know anything completely”

To be capable of using knowledge effectively requires you to be absolutely aware of it’s limitations. When such an awareness arises, not just intellectually, then you can use knowledge without clinging to knowledge. The fact is that the moment the mind starts clinging to knowledge, whatsoever that body of knowledge may be, one has become dogmatic. And in dogmatism, it only creates more and more barriers for your understanding rather than awakening a clarity which is capable of seeing into the very heart of things.

“I come from a culture where knowledge is worshipped.”

No. You come from a culture where liberation is worshipped.

“Because knowledge takes out of darkness and into the light. It illuminates our mind, clears our misunderstandings and shows us the path forward. Truly, knowledge is great”

That again depends on what you mean by knowledge. If you mean knowledge in the sense of intellectual information - then the more and more knowledge you gather is not the clearer things become. On the contrary, it only brings you closer to recognizing your own ignorance. In that recognition of ignorance, there is a wisdom which opens the possibility of surrender. Out of surrender, there is a possibility of falling into drunken communion with your true nature.

Seeing the things that you have said, you seem to believe that the Truth is something philosophical, or that is something that can be organized by the mind. It is not organized knowledge which the sages have been speaking which has given rise to the experience of Truth, it is the experience of Truth which has given birth to organized knowledge. All organized knowledge that the Buddhas have been speaking are just expressions of their own inner experience, and they are not intended for the sake of knowledge, but for the sake of assisting you towards the same experience. There can be no substitute.


#182

As you can see, the differences between relativistic and Newtonian momentum are incredibly small on normal Earth scales.

Rather, the truth is you do not become aware of the fact there are other variables in the universe until you approach the speed of light or deal with gravitational sources which can bend space. Similarly as Aristotle did not become aware of gravity, otherwise you even using his mechanics do simple calculations like d/t = v, vt = d, d/v = t. However, as soon as you are dealing with the variable of gravity such as the motion of an object thrown in the air, you have to factor in gravity. Aristotle was unaware of that, just as Newton is unaware of variables like space-time, mass-energy and speed of light.

To say something is right on the earthly level means absolutely nothing. All it means is that something is practical to our perception of reality. Newtonian mechanics is practical on our level, but we now know of space-time, speed of light, mass-energy which are not evident to our perception. So we know Newtonian mechanics is not right, and will fail in conditions like high gravity and objects approaching the speed of light. It only seems to work on our everyday level of perception.

In the same way we know that relativity is just serving a practical purpose still on our level of reality but at higher limits. But as soon as we introduce the condition of the subatomic world it fails. We realise that fundamental building blocks of matter are not at all behaving according to any laws, they are random, appearing and disappearing(where do they go?) and becoming particles and turning back into waves and vis versa, existing everywhere at once and everything being entangled. So we know relativity is not right, hence we adopt quantum physics.

Even quantum physics is not right because it fails to account for the fact that there is order and regularity in the universe, but according to what quantum physics tells us it should be absolute chaos. This is why Einstein said, “god does not play dice” and Planck said “We must assume an intelligent field or mind” There is something yet even more fundamental which makes sure that random chaos assums order and complexity.

As an aspiring physicist Neitzsche you should be humble and accept that we don’t really know anything about physics yet, we just have theories and these theories make up paradigms, and some of these theories and models are succesful(like today quantum paradigm is the most succesful) You almost must accept that paradigms have come and gone, and Newtonian mechanics is indeed an example of a paradigm that is now falsified. Relativity was falsified in the 70’s by Bell. It is not scientific to hold onto falsified paradigms.

It is an assumption of a naive person that physics is some monolithic entity which has been growing linearly since 300 years ago, and physicists in every generation have just built upon their predecessors. The reality is in 300 years tons of theories have come and gone, several paradigms have come and gone, and today physics is a highly divisive field one end you have classical physicists, on the other quantum physicists, on the other string theorists and then there are sub-divisions amongst them.

In conclusion: What you can glean from this is the reality of perception and the actual reality of the world are completely: Hence the equation

CONSCIOUSNESS + FIELD = REALITY AS IT APPEARS

Newtonian mechanics, Relativity, Coloumbs laws, Boyles laws, Faradays laws and so on and so forth serve a practical purpose at the level of reality as it appears to us. But do they actually tell us about the actual reality of the FIELD - no, because the field cannot be measured anyway. How can you measure something which is everywhere at once and nowhere at the same time and which is in the past, present and future in the same moment?

If you are following physics you will be aware we admit this FIELD exists now and we admit we cannot know anything about it via physics, because it cannot be measured. Bohr famously said, “we have reached the end of physics” What surprises me is as a Hindu you would not accept this, because it is pretty much ratifying what the Hindus teach.

Neitzsche, are you actually Hindu? I mean do you accept its tenets? Or do you adopt the title Hindu because you were born Hindu?


#183

Some corrections:

You also must accept that paradigms have come and gone, and Newtonian mechanics is indeed an example of a paradigm that is now falsified. Relativity was falsified in the 70’s by Bell. It is not scientific to hold onto falsified paradigms.

In conclusion: What you can glean from this is the reality of perception and the actual reality of the world are completely [B]different[/B]:


#184

Rather, the truth is you do not become aware of the fact there are other variables in the universe until you approach the speed of light or deal with gravitational sources which can bend space. Similarly as Aristotle did not become aware of gravity, otherwise you even using his mechanics do simple calculations like d/t = v, vt = d, d/v = t. However, as soon as you are dealing with the variable of gravity such as the motion of an object thrown in the air, you have to factor in gravity. Aristotle was unaware of that, just as Newton is unaware of variables like space-time, mass-energy and speed of light.

Did you read my post? I said Einstein was totally right but Newton is not necessarily wrong.

I even gave calculations showing how Newtonian mechanics is useful on Earth/solar-system scales. Who wants to deal with the (1 - v^2/c^2)^(1/2) correction factor the entire time?

To say something is right on the earthly level means absolutely nothing. All it means is that something is practical to our perception of reality. Newtonian mechanics is practical on our level, but we now know of space-time, speed of light, mass-energy which are not evident to our perception. So we know Newtonian mechanics is not right, and will fail in conditions like high gravity and objects approaching the speed of light. It only seems to work on our everyday level of perception.

Right. So its useful on the Earthly level. That’s why we still use it. Once again, would you, as a physicist, want to deal with the difference between 12 and 12/(1 - 1.78 * 10^-16)? To say that there is a significant difference between these two is silly.

I understand where you are coming from, since you ARE an objectivist.

In the same way we know that relativity is just serving a practical purpose still on our level of reality but at higher limits. But as soon as we introduce the condition of the subatomic world it fails. We realise that fundamental building blocks of matter are not at all behaving according to any laws, they are random, appearing and disappearing(where do they go?) and becoming particles and turning back into waves and vis versa, existing everywhere at once and everything being entangled. So we know relativity is not right, hence we adopt quantum physics.

No we don’t. We still keep Relativity and Newtonian Mechanics because quantum mechanics ONLY applies to a subatomic scale. In fact, quantum deviations average out and cease to appear on a macroscopic scale. Then, we use relativity.

Quantum mechanics gives meaningless results in real life. h/mv is horrendously high on a atomic scale but laughably low on a macroscopic scale.

Even quantum physics is not right because it fails to account for the fact that there is order and regularity in the universe, but according to what quantum physics tells us it should be absolute chaos. This is why Einstein said, “god does not play dice” and Planck said “We must assume an intelligent field or mind” There is something yet even more fundamental which makes sure that random chaos assums order and complexity.

No, it does not say that. Once again, it is common knowledge that quantum irregularities smooth/average out the further you go OUT of the microscopic scale.

Nice try.

As an aspiring physicist Neitzsche you should be humble and accept that we don’t really know anything about physics yet, we just have theories and these theories make up paradigms, and some of these theories and models are succesful(like today quantum paradigm is the most succesful) You almost must accept that paradigms have come and gone, and Newtonian mechanics is indeed an example of a paradigm that is now falsified. Relativity was falsified in the 70’s by Bell. It is not scientific to hold onto falsified paradigms.

Aerospace engineer, actually.

No, it is very logical to hold onto paradigms that apply in their domains. What you are suggesting is akin to telling the Chinese to start learning Buddhism over Confucianism because Confucianism is supposedly a falsified paradigm. They will simply laugh their asses off.

It is even more scientific to endeavor to look for the theory that unifies all these theories.

As of now, [B]String theory[/B] is the closest contender.

It is an assumption of a naive person that physics is some monolithic entity which has been growing linearly since 300 years ago, and physicists in every generation have just built upon their predecessors. The reality is in 300 years tons of theories have come and gone, several paradigms have come and gone, and today physics is a highly divisive field one end you have classical physicists, on the other quantum physicists, on the other string theorists and then there are sub-divisions amongst them.

I never suggested the contrary. This applies to all fields of knowledge. As our knowledge grows, it is almost a necessity to specialize in certain fields.

In conclusion: What you can glean from this is the reality of perception and the actual reality of the world are completely: Hence the equation

CONSCIOUSNESS + FIELD = REALITY AS IT APPEARS

Indeed.

Newtonian mechanics, Relativity, Coloumbs laws, Boyles laws, Faradays laws and so on and so forth serve a practical purpose at the level of reality as it appears to us. But do they actually tell us about the actual reality of the FIELD - no, because the field cannot be measured anyway. How can you measure something which is everywhere at once and nowhere at the same time and which is in the past, present and future in the same moment?

Yeah. Thats why we USE them. If everyone was dabbling at symbolic realities outside our perception or comprehension, no material progress would be made.

If you are following physics you will be aware we admit this FIELD exists now and we admit we cannot know anything about it via physics, because it cannot be measured. Bohr famously said, “we have reached the end of physics” What surprises me is as a Hindu you would not accept this, because it is pretty much ratifying what the Hindus teach.

Neitzsche, are you actually Hindu? I mean do you accept its tenets? Or do you adopt the title Hindu because you were born Hindu?

Bohr was wrong. We have not reached the end of physics. Several advances in physics have been made after Quantum Mechanics, including QED, Super-symmetry, String theory, realization that description of volume of space can be attained by considering the surface alone, and so on. We will not reach the end of physics as long as two problems remain:

  1. Unity
  2. More fundamental understanding

Unlike most physicists, I acknowledge that it is impossible to progressively express the universe in terms of more fundamental and unifying concepts without accepting your equation.

Yes. I am a Hindu by birth, have read the Puranas, but reject the rituals and the Bhakti/devotional form of it. I accept the doctrine of Karma, Dharma, and Reincarnation.

That isn’t enough for me though. I acknowledge that I am missing out on a large part of Santana Dharma by not reading our philosophical texts. When I have time in the summer, I want to begin doing so.

This does not mean that I will ever favor religion over science.


#185

You keep forgetting the obvious.

It would seem you do not know anything beyond the obvious. I remember when a member posted inquiring about how we can know ourselves, you said pretty much “The fact you are asking this question is because you are not enlightened” Then everybody else just went “duh”

You remind me of those moments when you wake up in the morning thinking you have come to a very profound truth, quickly fumble for a notepad so that you do not forget and then write, “2+2 = 4” :lol:

One’s limitations are going to depend upon one’s state of consciousness. If you are centered in your true nature, then you are the boundlessness of the whole existence itself.

You assume you are centered in your true nature. You assume you are without assumptions. You assume everything you and say and do is natural. This is why barely anybody responds to you anymore - you assume everything you say and do is perfect and you think you are beyond being tested. Yet to me you are a chomp who lacks even the common sense to know that if you post a massive picture in a forum it will distort the frames.

You pretend like you are perfect - but you are not. You have 2 eyes, a mouth, nose, ears, tongue like us all. You have to use language like we all do, and you have to eat, drink, sleep and take a shit like us all.

This is why you come across as such a joke that you do all this and yet you claim to be a perfect being.

To be capable of using knowledge effectively requires you to be absolutely aware of it’s limitations. When such an awareness arises, not just intellectually, then you can use knowledge without clinging to knowledge. The fact is that the moment the mind starts clinging to knowledge, whatsoever that body of knowledge may be, one has become dogmatic. And in dogmatism, it only creates more and more barriers for your understanding rather than awakening a clarity which is capable of seeing into the very heart of things.

Yeah, duh, it’s obvious knowledge has its limitations. Who doesn’t know that? Everbody says “I don’t know” every now and again.

No. You come from a culture where liberation is worshipped.

No, I come from a culture where knowlege is worshipped because it is a means to liberation. This is why we worship ALL knowledge. Notice what Krishna says in the Gita “Know both the field and the knower of the field” We do not consider any knowledge not worthy. All knowledge is liberating.

That again depends on what you mean by knowledge. If you mean knowledge in the sense of intellectual information - then the more and more knowledge you gather is not the clearer things become. On the contrary, it only brings you closer to recognizing your own ignorance. In that recognition of ignorance, there is a wisdom which opens the possibility of surrender. Out of surrender, there is a possibility of falling into drunken communion with your true nature.

Knowledge is the opposite of ignorance. We know more about the world today than we did in caveman days.

You can revel in your ignorance all you want. I certainly ain’t ignorant - I know a lot :wink:

Seeing the things that you have said, you seem to believe that the Truth is something philosophical, or that is something that can be organized by the mind.

Hey, some us of are smart enough to do it :wink:


#186

Right. So its useful on the Earthly level.

No, it is very logical to hold onto paradigms that apply in their domains.

No we don’t. We still keep Relativity and Newtonian Mechanics because quantum mechanics ONLY applies to a subatomic scale. In fact, quantum deviations average out and cease to appear on a macroscopic scale.

No, it does not say that. Once again, it is common knowledge that quantum irregularities smooth/average out the further you go OUT of the microscopic scale.

I have collected all these quotes together in order to address your fundamental assumption of “levels” A microscopic level, a macroscopic level, earthly levels, atomic levels and quantum levels. I quoted the Zeno paradox earlier to illustrate the point that distinctions are language constructions. There is no real reason to distinguish a few grains of rice from a heap of rice, it is just agreed on by convention.

There is no such thing as many realities, reality is only ONE. This is declared in Vedanta: all is name and form. Is a gold necklace, a gold statue, and a gold ring different realities and substances? No, they are forms of the same fundamental substance: gold.

Similarly is it right to say the microcosm and the macrocosm are different realities? No, they are exactly the same reality, but just different forms of the same fundamental substance. Now how can you possibly maintain that the physical world has mass, substance, space and time, when the quantum world has no mass, no substance, and no space and time - no physicality whatsorever?

Imagine a building where the foundation does not exist? :wink:

The only conclusion one can derive from this is that the world of mass, substance, space and time are absolutely illusory - just an appearance. It is not as if we don’t have empirical evidence for it either, we have had it since the 70’s. You have failed to address Bell’s experiment and Legett’s experiment, which I referenced in this thread twice. The conclusion is that mass-energy, space and time do really NOT EXIST, and even the macroscopic scale exhibits quantum behaviour and be quantamized.

If you really do understand this equation: CONSCIOUSNESS + FIELD = REALITY AS IT APPEARS, then we should not even be debating. Then you will know that what we are discovering now in hard empirical science is that the empirical world of mass-energy, space and time is not real, but only an apperance corresponding to our waking state of consciousness. If you change the state of consciousness then you get a different appearance of reality.

Now it so happens we have discovered that consciousness is more fundamental than matter because consciousness is required itself for there to be any matter. This means in order to explore level of matter we must explore different states of consciousness from conscious to unconscious.

If you understand this you will understand what Bohr means by “end of physics” When he says end of physics he means that we can no longer physically measure reality because when we come to the quantum barrier nothing is measurable anymore. Do you contend this fact?

Yeah. Thats why we USE them. If everyone was dabbling at symbolic realities outside our perception or comprehension, no material progress would be made.

Right, so you are admitting what I am saying classical physics is USEFUL to us, but it is not real - what is real is what you deridingly just called “symbolic reality” There is nothing symbolic about the quantum - it is a fact of physics today. This is where particles are going when they disappear. This where we get the casimir force from. This is where we transmit q-bits into. The existence of this quantum field is an absolute fact in physics today.

Now why am I saying that Hindu science is more advanced? Well because we have known about this quantum field since yonks(akasha) and we know that the only way to enter it and go beyond physical and sensory reality is only through the mind. Thus we created the highest science of them all: yoga. I have already proven above that you can access deeper levels of the FIELD if you alter your consciousness states. You can get past the quantum barrier and into every other dimension of reality ONLY through the mind. This is why Western science is backwards - it has not yet understood the role the mind has to play in the world.


#187

Surya,

“Knowledge is the opposite of ignorance”

It appears that way. But because you are ignorant, only then is there a possibility of gathering knowledge. As knowledge is never absolute, one’s ignorance always surpasses one’s knowledge. Even if you were to collect all of the knowledge that has ever come into the awareness of the human mind, or will ever come into the awareness of the human mind, it remains just a grain of sand in the vast desert.


#188

“You have 2 eyes, a mouth, nose, ears, tongue like us all”

Yes.

“You have to use language like we all do, and you have to eat, drink, sleep and take a shit like us all.”

Yes.


#189

[QUOTE=AmirMourad;58380]Surya,

“Knowledge is the opposite of ignorance”

It appears that way. But because you are ignorant, only then is there a possibility of gathering knowledge. [/quote]

Thank you mr-state-the-obvious :smiley:

If I did not know I was ignorant, I would not try to gain knowledge. Is this what you teach your disciples? If I was one, I would feel very shortchanged :smiley:


#190

OK. I am going to have to start using Amir’s excellent sound bites as a source of twitter material. And I mean that sincerely. The lightning one is first.


#191

Surya,

“If I did not know I was ignorant, I would not try to gain knowledge”

As knowledge is always limited, the gathering of knowledge does not dispel ignorance. I can appreciate your desire for knowledge, but perhaps one should consider that knowledge is a means rather than an end.

Neither has ignorance in itself ever been a problem - it is to remain unaware of one’s ignorance which has been manufacturing all kinds of delusions.


#192

As knowledge is always limited, the gathering of knowledge does not dispel ignorance

This is like saying because the pieces of a puzzle are limited, they will not eventually come together to form the whole picture.


#193

@Amir…So having no knowledge of anything is best? in which case you am I to assume you are accomplished in this then?


#194

Hi High Wolf,

When it comes to modern scientific method, there is no such a thing as “false knowledge,” per se, but false information.
false information that you believe to be correct is false knowledge then. Like you believe to know that there is teleportation of matter going on in labs. It false knowledge. You spread it. Don’t.

What becomes false information is usually happens after the application of a particular theory has been tested and the findings have been peer-reviewed, and finally “not recommended”. This is the academic tradition. And what I am giving you is a mere intrepretation, which is yet to be tested, just what you gave above is also an intepretation. I have explained my rationale to you, and cited several sources, and you have explained your rationale to you, uncited. So whose information is more reliable here?
I had already told you: Your sources are fine, but your interpretation is wrong. I use your sources as well. And my interpretation is correct. You think that quantum teleportation means teleporting matter. It’s not the case.

Matter can be teleported from point A to B. They are already doing this in laboratories, as I have shown to you, in subatomic realm dominated by quantum mechanics.
You have shown me quantum teleportation. Understand what quantum teleportation is, will ya.

By the way. I’m not saying teleporting matter is impossible. I have to repeat this always in any post when I discuss with a believer. I think it probably works somehow. Probably it will one day be possible. Teleportation of matter like quantum teleportation makes no sense, though, but there might sometime a way and method be invented.

And since this is happening on microcosmic level, its only logical to think that this could happen on macrocosmic level too.
Well. No matter has been teleported so far, so there is no logic in what you say at all. The following is not so logical too, but what the heck! :lol:

Quantum teleportation only works with entangled quantums. You have to entangle the particles first. Connect them, somehow. You know? Ever understood that, remotely? No…? Well… :wink:

And then you take them apart, particle A, room A, particle B, room B. And then you manipulate the characteristics of particle A in room A which is mirrored in particle B. In room B. They call it quantum teleportation. :wink:

How would you do that with for example a person? That consists, I don’t know of how many bazillion quantums? Here:

http://education.jlab.org/qa/mathatom_04.html

7,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms. I wouldn’t know with what figure you’d have to multiply that to get the number of actual particles that have to be entangled; hydrogen for example has at least 2 particles, a proton and an electron.

How and with which other quantums would you entangle the quantums a person consists of? Would you have to have a box of the elements a person consists of and then entangle the matter? Here’s what the human body consists of:

Oxygen 65 25.6
Carbon 18 9.5
Hydrogen 10 63
Nitrogen 3 1.3
Calcium 1.5 0.24
Phosphorus 1.2 0.24
Potassium 0.2 0.03
Sulfur 0.2 0.04
Chlorine 0.2 0.04
Sodium 0.1 0.03
Magnesium 0.05 0.01
Iron 3.8g in men, 2.3g in women
Cobalt, Copper, Zinc, Iodine < 0.05 each
Selenium, Fluorine < 0.01 each

So you have human and a box with all these elements in the correct quantity, then you entangle the single quantums (how??) and then you take the matter-box into room B and then… What? Actually you can only affect some characteristics of entangled particles, like the spin. What’s that good for, when teleporting matter? I wouldn’t know. How do you picture the process? A person rises from the matter-box? How would a body be constructed? Any idea? And where would the person in room A go? Would it have to be destroyed? Why?

Or how do you think this all works? More sense it’d make if you had a technology that would create some sort of wormhole where the body then goes through itself. That would be totally different to teleportation, though.

Etc. etc. :wink:

Maybe it’s possible. But it’s not instantly logical that if you COULD actually teleport matter, a single particle, that you could as well teleport a complex system like a person or a grain of sand. But again, if teleportation of particles was possible, it would most probably work somehow else than quantum teleportation works.

Again: Overall, my explanation makes no sense. Which is the point.

Found this video on quantum teleportation:

Gives a basic insight and notes how it is related to teleporting a person. Here is another one about quantum entanglement:

Points out that quantum teleportation is about transferring information only.

Found this too, but didn’t watch it; too advanced for me:

Yes I believe in my own perception, and you think this is wrong?
What perception? Your misunderstanding of articles…? Many authors of such articles misunderstand the issue. You perception misleads you and you’re too stubborn to smarten up.

Then how do you think all those physicists carved off their own stuff? By sheer information obtained through having well-read all those theories? No, kind sir. Through belief, through insight, through inspiration. Einstein said that not even one second he stopped believing in his theory before its acclaim. When her secretary asked “what if your theory is wrong” he replied “then God must be wrong, because my theory is right.” Now, this sort of thing is very unique to human being, the “believing,” for we are not robots programmed to masturbate on information.
Belief is great. You can believe whatever you want. I don’t mind and it’s not the point. It’s fine to say “I believe teleportation of matter is possible”. It’s fine to say that all the Siddhis described in the Yoga Sutra can be achieved. Absolutely. I’m not even say it’s not gonna work, it’s impossible. Yet, it’s not proven. Not demonstrated. If there are Yogis who have achieved Siddhis, they obviously decided not to show them to the world. I had asked Surya Deva that question already, he ignored it, what about you: If there are Yogis with Siddhis, why do they not step forward and show their powers to the world? Why do they remain hidden? Please respond. :lol:

I told you that you think within the box of scientific givens.
No, I told you already that you wanna see me that way. I’m a dreamer too, but I’m capable of telling fact from fantasy. And besides, isn’t it you who says that teleportation of matter is withiin the box of scientific givens?

:roll:

Thats why you don’t attune to my grasp on the matter. Which is fine. Yet I shall no longer discuss with you on this stuff, unless you bring me some sources of your own.
As long as you quote valid scientific information, which so far you did, that’s already fine. There are even sources that claim that matter has been teleported, check it out:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,482264,00.html
"Scientist Teleport Matter More Than Three Feet"
It even has an image of teleportation from Star Trek! :lol: Can you believe? I guess. I can’t. And in the article then it says:

Teleportation is one of nature’s most mysterious forms of transport: Quantum information, such as the spin of a particle or the polarization of a photon, is transferred from one place to another, without traveling through any physical medium.
Exactly what I told you. Characteristics of a particle. Here is an interesting reader comment:

http://boingboing.net/2006/10/04/scientists-teleport-.html

And you can continue to call me “stupid,” whatever; do you even think I will care a bit? :rolleyes:
Well, I hope so. Then you might consider to remove your false knowledge and abstain from spreading false information.


#195

Hi Surya Deva,

[quote]Since that is so, there is no point in condemning one and glorifying the other culture, because they’re both nothing but the product of said circumstances. It was impossible for the culture you call “demons” to develop differently. There is no choice involved, and therefore no guilt. A culture that lives in a much harsher climate, and has a lot of problems to only feed itself, will have no time to meditate, do philosophy, practice science, invent mathematics. Such a culture is busy with finding food, stocking it and building shelter for the winter. What such culture thinks about is how to improve their lives, how to survive.

Every criminal justifies their crimes by blaming outside factors. A serial killer says, “I had a poor upbringing, I got abused, I struggled etc” but this is no justification.

Your culture has been like a serial killer on this planet exterminating entire races, raping, enslaving, corrupting, destroying with impunity. You can blame your circumstances all you want, but it does not excuse the fact you are barbarians. Although I admit today you are more civilised now after having looted every other culture on the planet and becoming prosperous of their backs, you are still part of the same foundation that was set in Sumer and barbarism still is very much running your cultural stream. Hence why despite being the richest nations on Earth today, you are still going around the planet exploiting other cultures and invading them.[/quote]boring. Paroles. An oh-so-“you-gotta-write-a-book,-man”-fiery speech, like you were the next Adolf-Hitler-uhm-I-mean-saviour-of-the-world. From my perspective, you’re just an angry kid.

You say every criminal says circumstance made them criminal? And then what? Is that not true? You think someone woke up one morning and made that decisions for themselves? Of course do circumstance make the criminal. And circumstances make the saint. Your conclusion of this fact is faulty, that’s why you reject the conclusion. Because the conclusion does not lead to an acceptance of the crime or makes the crime even just. Of course not. But it alters how one deals with the criminal.

That again, though, is highly influenced by circumstances as well. You for example so far have not experienced the circumstances to enable you to understand all this, I’d guess because you see yourself and your people as the eternal victims. It’s too hard for you to find a place for wrong-doers in your heart. I come from a nation that has done a lot wrong. I had and have to deal with that, which opens my heart for both sides, the victim and the offender.

You’re wound up in your simple world of right and wrong and black and white and Deva and Asura. You think it’s so simple. Who does something bad is evil, who doesn’t, good. That’s the way it is, right? :lol: Well, with one exception of course: When shit goes on in your precious India, it’s all caused by circumstances. If the politicians are corrupt, the people are divided, the poor hungry, it’s not the fault of Indian people. It’s the circumstances. And Indian people of course are still what they ever were: Devas.

How come? Care to explain? Is it in the blood? Please: Respond. :roll:

Finally:

Your civilisational foundation is wrong itself. It needs to be removed and replaced with a dharmic foundation before you can develop a deva culture.
How will that work? How do you think you or anybody could remove a people’s foundation from them? Whatever bad, for example, my ancestors did, there is no way I’d want to have that removed or destroyed. It’s a great teaching for me. What would you do about it? Will you come with guns and kill us all? The righteous anger of the Devas?

If you have that in mind, make sure to come with enough guns, cuz you’re dealing with a civilisation that well knows how to fight. We’ve learned that over millenia. Your corresponding history: Well. You know more about it.


#196

kareng,

It is not a question of having no knowledge - to live without knowledge is an impossibility. Because knowledge need not necessarily mean information which is gathered through books and learning. Any information which is gathered through the senses is knowledge. The question is whether one is capable of having knowledge, and yet remaining liberated from knowledge, whether one is capable of being in the mind but not of the mind, in the world but not of the world. If you can remain a witness from moment to moment without becoming identified with whatsoever may arise in one’s experience, then there arises a certain freedom beyond measure.


#197

Like I said before Q is right quantum teleportation is not the same as a physical teleportation. However, the fact that physical teleportation is possible in quantum physics is not contested, because we already know particles are teleporting all the time. They are called quantum jumps. It is also known as quantum tunneling, when a particle disappears from physical reality enters the quantum, then reappears in another location. The trick is to find a way to make solid matter behave in a quantum manner, and we have achieived this now, but not yet to the extent that we can teleport matter yet. So physical teleportation is scientifically possible, but the technology to accomplish it is not known yet. Q is also right that that when we do find out how do it, it will be nothing like quantum teleportation.

How it is done in Yoga explained by Patanjali is through the collapsing of the body until it becomes pure light disappearing from physical reality and then entering the akasha, and reappearing at another location. In other words exactly as subatomic particles do it - disappear from physical reality, enter the quantum, and reappearing in another location. However, this process can be controlled so that you actually give precise coordinates where you want to reappear. It is a known fact in physics that everything you see has a corresponding wavefunction. If you can quantumize matter you turn it into its wavefunction and then can make it behave like any quantum object.

That again, though, is highly influenced by circumstances as well. You for example so far have not experienced the circumstances to enable you to understand all this, I’d guess because you see yourself and your people as the eternal victims. It’s too hard for you to find a place for wrong-doers in your heart. I come from a nation that has done a lot wrong. I had and have to deal with that, which opens my heart for both sides, the victim and the offender.

Only the weak blame the circumstances for their actions. Circumstances are influences but they are not determinants. You always have your own will to choose from possiblities. This is why two different people in the same circumstances can turn out completely differently.
The reason your civilisation did “bad things” was because of its foundational ethos was barbaric and less to do with your environment. Those bought up in that culture internalize that ethos and become heavily driven by it, but they are human and thus still have a conscience, so they can tell deep down that something is wrong with their ethos. This is why you cannot blame the people of a civiliation, because it is not the people who make the decisions. It is the elites in those society which are perpetuating the ethos.

You’re wound up in your simple world of right and wrong and black and white and Deva and Asura. You think it’s so simple. Who does something bad is evil, who doesn’t, good. That’s the way it is, right? Well, with one exception of course: When shit goes on in your precious India, it’s all caused by circumstances. If the politicians are corrupt, the people are divided, the poor hungry, it’s not the fault of Indian people. It’s the circumstances. And Indian people of course are still what they ever were: Devas.

Nope, Indian people are not Devas. Only cultures are deva or asura. Nor is there such thing as an absolute evil or abolute good, there are grades in between. Your culture just happens to be on the Asura side and mine on the Deva side. But the culture of India today is hardly deva, it has been corrupted by your asura culture.


#198

Hi Surya Deva,

[quote]That again, though, is highly influenced by circumstances as well. You for example so far have not experienced the circumstances to enable you to understand all this, I’d guess because you see yourself and your people as the eternal victims. It’s too hard for you to find a place for wrong-doers in your heart. I come from a nation that has done a lot wrong. I had and have to deal with that, which opens my heart for both sides, the victim and the offender.

Only the weak blame the circumstances for their actions.[/quote]a), how come the weak are weak and the strong are strong, isn’t that due to circumstances as well, b) so what’s up with you blaming anybody but Indians for the shit going on in India like corruption, lousy education, people being poor, India vs Pakistan, c) get your story straight, d) :lol:; next:

Circumstances are influences but they are not determinants. You always have your own will to choose from possiblities. This is why two different people in the same circumstances can turn out completely differently.
What I’m talking about is not how wrong-doers have to behave, should behave, might behave, could behave, but how one could and should be judging them, how one could react to wrong-doings, wether they should wind up in hate and desire retaliation, even hate the kids of wrong doers, the neightbours, someone who randomly happens to be from the same nation or some vague “the West”. That the point, ma friend.

The reason your civilisation did “bad things” was because of its foundational ethos was barbaric and less to do with your environment.
So there were somewhat blank-page-people sittin around and thought up some “foundational ethos” and decided that to be barbaric.

Hilarious.

Those bought up in that culture internalize that ethos and become heavily driven by it, but they are human and thus still have a conscience, so they can tell deep down that something is wrong with their ethos.
Maybe you can, I don’t want to deny that completely, but you need a lot of circumstances to do so, for example intelligence, you need to have access to information, like different philosophies, and when you indeed come to find out that there is something wrong, you also need means to act accordingly, for example must you be brave enough, you should be responsible only for yourself, not have a family that might suffer consequences, etc. etc.

This is why you cannot blame the people of a civiliation, because it is not the people who make the decisions. It is the elites in those society which are perpetuating the ethos.
I agree insofar that the so called elites (those with powers) make the decisions, but they’re not driven by an ethos, but only by greed. Then, they mislead the people, for example their executive forces (police, military) by bribing them with money and some advantages/priviliges, others with ideology or religion, they control the media, the education, etc. etc.

[quote]You’re wound up in your simple world of right and wrong and black and white and Deva and Asura. You think it’s so simple. Who does something bad is evil, who doesn’t, good. That’s the way it is, right? Well, with one exception of course: When shit goes on in your precious India, it’s all caused by circumstances. If the politicians are corrupt, the people are divided, the poor hungry, it’s not the fault of Indian people. It’s the circumstances. And Indian people of course are still what they ever were: Devas.

Nope, Indian people are not Devas. Only cultures are deva or asura. Nor is there such thing as an absolute evil or abolute good, there are grades in between. Your culture just happens to be on the Asura side and mine on the Deva side. But the culture of India today is hardly deva, it has been corrupted by your asura culture.[/quote]Actually my culture is now on the Deva side and yours is on the Asura side. Because we have learned from our mistakes and you have adopted them.

What about

[quote]Your civilisational foundation is wrong itself. It needs to be removed and replaced with a dharmic foundation before you can develop a deva culture.

How will that work? How do you think you or anybody could remove a people’s foundation from them? Whatever bad, for example, my ancestors did, there is no way I’d want to have that removed or destroyed. It’s a great teaching for me. What would you do about it? Will you come with guns and kill us all? The righteous anger of the Devas?

If you have that in mind, make sure to come with enough guns, cuz you’re dealing with a civilisation that well knows how to fight. We’ve learned that over millenia. Your corresponding history: Well. You know more about it. [/quote]Not interested to share some thoughts? How will you remove the evil culture? Drop some nukes? Do some terrorist attacks? Poison our water? I wouldn’t know, seriously. Waffling on teh interwebs: What difference does it make? So far you’re not so impressive, all the evading, all the paroles. Is that all you got?

And what about this notable thought:

You for example so far have not experienced the circumstances to enable you to understand all this, I’d guess because you see yourself and your people as the eternal victims. It’s too hard for you to find a place for wrong-doers in your heart. I come from a nation that has done a lot wrong. I had and have to deal with that, which opens my heart for both sides, the victim and the offender.
Nothing…? Again?! Should you be that short-witted after all? What a disappointment. :roll:


#199

a), how come the weak are weak and the strong are strong, isn’t that due to circumstances as well, b) so what’s up with you blaming anybody but Indians for the shit going on in India like corruption, lousy education, people being poor, India vs Pakistan, c) get your story straight, d) ; next

You do indeed suffer from a narrow mind, can you not conceive of any other possibliites other than the environment being the cause. I can think of another possibility random chance how some cultural practices end up survivng and some do not. However, it need not be just one possibility: it can be several: better climate and resources, certain cultural practices end up surviving. The reason I said “It’s the way it is” is because we cannot possibly know certainly why one culture on the planet ended up developing a scientific culture and another a hunter-gatherer culture - all we can do is speculate. I don’t like speculating - I just deal with facts. The fact is Hindu civilisation was advanced and noble and your civilisation was not. Why that is the case I don’t know certainly - but I do know it has nothing to with race, because such a thing does not really exist.

What I’m talking about is not how wrong-doers have to behave, should behave, might behave, could behave, but how one could and should be judging them, how one could react to wrong-doings, wether they should wind up in hate and desire retaliation, even hate the kids of wrong doers, the neightbours, someone who randomly happens to be from the same nation or some vague “the West”. That the point, ma friend.

Wrong doers should be bought to justice in proportion to their wrong doing. This is common sense, no? You do not execute a thief and you do not sentence a serial killer to 6 months in prison.

Maybe you can, I don’t want to deny that completely, but you need a lot of circumstances to do so, for example intelligence, you need to have access to information, like different philosophies, and when you indeed come to find out that there is something wrong, you also need means to act accordingly, for example must you be brave enough, you should be responsible only for yourself, not have a family that might suffer consequences, etc. etc

No, you do not need any kind of exposure to a philosophical system, a legal system, or a moral code of conduct to know what is right and wrong. You already have an intuition of what is right or wrong - it is called your conscience. The majority of civilisations on this planet know that killing, raping, stealing, cheating and lying are wrong. Most have a golden rule(do unto others as you would them do unto you) Most children know when their parents are arguing or fighting that they do not like it. They don’t need to learn this. Naturally we prefer to be in positive states than negative states, and we find that when the mind is calm and tranquil and less clouded with thought, we are naturally in a positive state and practice positive behaviour. Thus there is no desire for raping, stealing, cheating, lying - these negatives states are simply symptomatic of a troubled mind.

I agree insofar that the so called elites (those with powers) make the decisions, but they’re not driven by an ethos, but only by greed. Then, they mislead the people, for example their executive forces (police, military) by bribing them with money and some advantages/priviliges, others with ideology or religion, they control the media, the education, etc. etc.

The elites are not consciously thinking, “I am going to drive our ethos” but rather the ethos is subconsciously ingrained as a system of cultural practices they have inherited. The elites maintain the cultural practice because the ethos you have inherited allows elites to exist. Like I said you have a society of dichotomies of have and have not, of ruler and ruled, oppressor and oppressed. Throughout your history your elites have always tried to maintain their power because greed is seen as natural in your culture. The story continues today. In your culture killing of one tribe is seen as normal, and its been going on since the beginning of your culture. In our culture such genocide is demonic and not even our worst villians in our history ever commited a genocide.

Actually my culture is now on the Deva side and yours is on the Asura side. Because we have learned from our mistakes and you have adopted them.

I disagree, you are still on the Asura side. As Asura does indeed mean a highly materialistic, debauched and hedonist culture. We, on the other hand have a Deva culture corrupted with an asura culture. We still retain many of values like respect for elders, teachers and parents, it is still normal for us to bow down and touch and feet of our parents and ask for their blessings - you on the other hand call your parents by your name, and even go pubbing and clubbing together. In our culture we still have a highly religious culture were we worship god/s and ask for their blessings, such as invoking the name of Saraswati before taking an exam - in your culture a large percentage of people do not care about god or divine blessings. We still have a respect for many of our paramparas(traditions) and consider as ideal that a woman should be the manager of the house and the man the protecter of the house - still in our culture the woman is called, “Lakshmi” the goddess of wealth. She is given the keys to the safe when she enters and makes decisions in the house on spending money and is the main counsel to her husband. In your culture the gender identities have collapsed, man is becoming woman and woman is becoming man, leading to dysfunctional families, divorce and battle of sexes. In our culture still education is taken very seriously and we respect knowledge, hence why we outperform Western students - in your culture education is seen as an excuse to rock and roll, have sex and do drugs. In our culture ahimsa is still seen as a major value, and because of this we have not invaded any country still - in your culture, you have been invading countries constantly left, right and centre and still have not stopped today. In our culture we value diversity(hence the motto: unity in diversity) and represent every faith and tradition in our country, including Sikhs. We have a Hindu woman president(and an ex-Muslim president), a Christian leader of the ruling party, a Sikh prime minister. Your culture is highly homogenous and ethnic minorities struggle and live in poverty and get represented poorly.
In our culture sex, pornography is still seen as taboo, and we still are very culturally sensitive about showing this in the media - your culture is full of it, and even has porno empires like playboy, playgirl. You have cities famous for porn like Amsterdam. In our films when boy meets girl they fall in love and get married eventually. In your culture when boy meets girl they fcuk.

Of course I know there are loads of flaws in the current Indian society like poverty, casteism, dowry, honour killing, so there is no need to point it out, as I am not claiming it is perfect and I do not consider it Deva at all by Vedic standards. But you are definitely not a Deva culture today. You are materially prosperous and spiritually backwards. We are materially backwards, and though we have lost a lot of spirituality, we are still the spiritual capital of the world.


#200

Not interested to share some thoughts? How will you remove the evil culture? Drop some nukes? Do some terrorist attacks? Poison our water? I wouldn’t know, seriously. Waffling on teh interwebs: What difference does it make? So far you’re not so impressive, all the evading, all the paroles. Is that all you got?

And what about this notable thought:

Here is a test of how narrow that mind of yours is. Can you conceive of any other possibilities than the above.

Nothing…? Again?! Should you be that short-witted after all? What a disappointment.

You forgive only those who show remorse for what they did resolve to become better. As far as I am aware we had no compensation whatsoever for the trillions which were looted from us and the hundreds of millions today living abject poverty which the West are responsible for by bleeding the country dry over 250 years, who have not been lifted out of poverty by the West. The Western history books still retain all the distortions and propoganda that was spread about our civilisation, and it is still going on today with Western academics from ivy league still attacking our civilisation by calling our most reveered spiritual leaders like Ramakrishna and Swami Vivekananda pedophiles; calling our Hindu goddess a goddess of lust, evil and war; calling our lord Krishna a deceitful and murderous man; Calling our Gita, “Not a nice book” calling our Vedas, “Primitive ritual books of no spiritual value”

Inciting separatism in our country by trying to convince the Dalits to leave our religion and become Christian and convincing the Dravidian South Indians to reject Hinduism and accept Christianity. A movement supported by the Vatican, The Southern Baptist Church, the Church authorities in India.

It is you who are warring against us. We are not warring against you. We did not invade you - you invaded us. We did not distort your history and heritage - you distorted ours. We credit your scientists, writers, philosophers, religious leaders - you do not credit ours. We are not trying to incite civil wars in your country through subversion - but you are in ours.

You are still a barbarian culture going around the world plundering it, exploiting the third world, invading soverign countries and forcing your ways on them.

If you want Hindus to play nice with you, then stop your hostilities against us. We will even forget about the compensation - otherwise prepare for the CLASH OF CIVILISATIONS.