It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
reply to post by EviLCHiMP
Absolute proof isn't what you or I consider to be good enough. Absolute proof is proof that proves the concept without a shadow of a doubt. Seeing god in a flower is silly and anyone who says that is lying to themselves or mislabeling beauty. Do those same people see god in a plague victim? Both are supposed to be products of god, so if you are able to see god in something of beauty, you should be able to see god in the ugly and depressing as well.
Also hallucination isn't man made. People have been tripping off of mushrooms for a LONG time before scientists came around able to extract the psilocybin in it. Heck there are some theories that Moses and co were tripping while a pretty crazy storm was happening around them when he talked to god on Mt. Sinai and was handed the ten commandments, since a particularly hallucinogenic mushroom grows at the base of the mountain.
A number of ethnomycologists, including Terence McKenna, have suggested that most characteristics of manna are similar to that of Psilocybe cubensis mushrooms, notorious breeding grounds for insects, which decompose rapidly. These peculiar fungi naturally produce a number of molecules that resemble human neurochemicals, and first appear as small fibres (mycelia) that resemble hoarfrost. Psilocybin, the primary psychoactive molecule in the "Psilocybe cubensis" mushroom, has shown to produce spiritual experiences, with "personal meaning and spiritual significance" when test subjects were evaluated 14 months later. In a psilocybin study from 2006 one-third of the participants reported that the experience was the single most spiritually significant moment of their lives and more than two-thirds reported it was among the top five most spiritually significant experiences. A side-effect from psilocybin consumption is the loss of appetite. The speculation that manna was an entheogen, also paralleled in Philip K. Dick's posthumously published The Transmigration of Timothy Archer, is supported in a wider cultural context when compared with the praise of soma in the Rigveda, Mexican praise of teonanácatl, the peyote sacrament of the Native American Church, and the holy ayahuasca used in the ritual of the União do Vegetal and Santo Daime churches.edit on 4-3-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)
reply to post by EviLCHiMP
I can't say for sure what it is
Then it goes to show that we are unable to speak about its nature. Unless, of course, its just another word for the human being.
reply to post by Krazysh0t
Well, would you deny that you currently exist and are experiencing reality? I'm assuming you wouldn't deny it. So similarly in a sense its sort of impossible to deny the God experience, except its nothing like meeting some guy on cloud with harps in the sky. More so like you are an individual drop of water, and finally meet the ocean from where you came from. Its something that is existentially undeniable and something that you remember you had access to, prior to even being born here.....
It is an "other being that just happens to be vastly more powerful than we are, so much so that it becomes very hard to comprehend it." Yet we are directly linked to and come from that Being, like a drop of water emerging from and returning to an infinite ocean.
This Being has the sense of being the foundational building block of all of existence, prior to all things and yet within all things. Instead of a resident of the Universe, more so all Universes are residents within this Being.
Because the experience and access is prior to the mind, prior to thought, prior to illusion, opinion, tricks, images, etc. Direct experience itself is prior to thought. IF you are experiencing thought itself as a direct experience, there is still the division of the experiencer, and the thought which is being experienced. That experiencer can be detached from all experiences and plunged into its Source of existence.
Or in another example, various meditators can stop thinking. So you can think, and not think. When you are not thinking, you are still experiencing hearing, seeing, feeling, breathing all without the filters of thought. And so the "God Experience" is also prior to all filters and opinions, senses, etc
Yes, just like you can create hunger in the stomach by elevated levels of physical activity, swimming, exercise. Does that mean hunger isn't real? In many cases of NDE's, the experiencer of this is seeing things in other rooms, or serial numbers on lights just inches from the ceiling, or a tennis shoe on the roof of a hospital, all of which later is confirmed by a third party to be so. The consciousness leaves the body and is non-local, (Something that even some scientists are starting to propose, see Or-Orch theory)
Im saying the divine is real, and science will one day acknowledge this and prove the points of access within, to the divine. Science has yet to figure out what consciousness is, once they do, that will open the doors to the spiritual, though not without fighting, arguments, anger, and a desperation of upholding the status quo that's currently in place in Academia since this will mean completely new books will have to be written, and the old ones tossed out. Let's not forget the Genius Einstein did something similar, as Quantum Physics began to develop (spooky actions at a distance), Einstein wanted no part of it and denied acknowledgement of it because it completely destroyed the rules and confines of how he thought things worked. OF course things work just like he thought, but on a deeper more fundamental level, everything is much more crazier and seemingly illogical/paradoxical, i.e. 2 strings being everywhere & nowhere simultaneously..
Of course, you can access all sorts of things in all sorts of ways.
Well if you look at the "universe is a simulation" theory then yes I can deny that I currently exist and reality is just numbers in a computer.
Plus, reality is subjective. What I am experiencing isn't the same thing as what you are currently experiencing. We may not even see colors or hear sounds the same way. One can argue that since reality is subjective, then reality doesn't really exist. Kind of out there, but just trying to show that even the idea of reality being definite isn't 100% known.
I'm going to take your example and present to you the idea of a sea (ex: Black Sea of Mediterranean Sea). A sea can be viewed as a small part of a larger ocean encircled on most sides by land. What if your ocean in your example is really in fact a sea (or even a river or lake)? This sea is still vast in comparison to the drop of water that helps make it, but is still considerably small in comparison to the ocean that it is a part of as well.
How do you know? Did it tell you? How do you know it isn't lying? Is it a feeling you get by interacting with it? How do you know that isn't a natural byproduct of a lesser being interacting with a greater being?
Please read my link on Manna and how a study found that 2/3rds of the participants of a psilocybin study thought they were having a religious experience, yet we know for a fact that it was a chemical reaction in their brain that altered the way they processed information.
Actually hunger is just a chemical reaction in your stomach that makes you aware that you need to eat. Remove that reaction and we'd starve to death without even knowing it. I've actually researched NDE's quite a bit since they are fascinating and largely unexplained. I also have withheld judgment on what they truly are since we (humans) do not understand them enough to posit theories on what they are. Heck our hypotheses are still pretty shaky on what they are.
Who knows? Maybe you are right, I, however, am not arrogant enough to assume that I know for a fact one way or the other.
But when a mysterious experience turns out to be able to be caused by a mundane thing like drugs, can it truly be considered a divine experience or just chemistry doing its thing?
reply to post by EviLCHiMP
Hey, you responded to me first. Also this is the philosophy and metaphysics forums. I thought we were supposed to challenge our accepted ways of thinking and debating these things?
reply to post by Krazysh0t
But then you can't deny the numbers & the computer, and if its numbers & a computer, it means you can access the source code and the coder in one way or another.
Reality is both objective & subjective. Where there is no subjectivity, there is objectivity.
Subjectivity is a universality. With subjectivity, I can go experience a sunrise on an Australian sea shore, tell you about how magnificent it was, and then you can also go on this advice and travel there yourself to experience this sunrise directly. You may not say its as magnificent as I said it was, but the fact is, you directly experienced the sunrise from the same shore that I did.
Furthermore, if there is something prior to our own subjectivity, that can be experienced, in a way in which the subject completely collapses and disappears into this "prior" state........then you can assume that people have accessed this. Yes I agree in retrospect the report of it as an experience is still subjective, but it is similar to the sunrise in Australia.
Even if it was a river, that river will have a source from which it flows, a source that can be traversed & accessed.
It has those flavors or characteristics.
Those who sit in the sun will say: bright, hot, skin got tan, summer, etc.
Those who swim will say: wet, fun, refreshing, etc.
At the same time it could be asked of you how do you know that you are, that your current views are true, that your current existence/reality isn't lying, that your subjectivity is a feeling from interaction, etc. If there is an underlying objectively absolute reality, then it can be accessed and experienced. If not, then everything is game to chaos and who knows what.
I can say about the Sun, its warm & bright, but that doesn't mean I understand the quantum mechanical intricacies that create warmth & light.
I guess I can see that Being is simultaneously everywhere all at once with no possibility of an end or border insight, because then simultaneous "everywhereness" would loss its value.
Yea, I'll check out. I can send you a link of enlightened masters who have tried a variety of these substances and mentioned that they don't hold a candle to that which I am referring to as the Absolute foundation of Being.
When you access and solidify this Being as a permanent experience, it is seen to always be there prior to everything. The experiences from the "manna" had a start, arose, and eventually fell away bringing each of the experiencers back to their baseline subjective realities. There is a big difference between something that is always there and something that comes and goes superimposed over that something that is always there.
we can thank a biased academic status quo for labeling certain things as pseudo-science, creating an atmosphere where anyone who dares begin to touch the pseudo, is a heretic outsider at risk of losing funding. ANd yet alot of which was once labeled pseudo in the past, is now part of mainstream science.:
17 Crackpots WHo Were Right
I don't care to be right or wrong, and if being right, to bathe in the arrogance of celebration. All I wanted to know, is if I could recreate or access this God experience that many different paths and philosophers called the experiential absolute Truth. And I did find such a thing, which coincidentally has this very foundational & absolute feel to it, seemingly more real and substantial than our subjectivities and the current world we live in.....but hey, just another label on what many say is an ineffable expression.
could be either or.
When you go into various practices/paths/blueprints, they have volumes of books discussing what is and isn't illusion. Many things are chemistry based illusions, but not all things.
That depends. Do you consider a graphic depiction of a cat inside a computer a real cat or just a bunch of 1's and 0's?
Everything about how you experience the universe is subjective. Light takes time to travel from its source to whatever it is reflected off of to your eye to your brain. Therefore you are living in the past while your brain fills in the blanks.
Can a drop a water ever know that it is a smaller part of a larger entity that it could never possibly witness in totality?
In other words it feels like god.
Actually the sun, in comparison to other bodies in the universe, is rather dim and cold, not to mention small.
I just don't like saying that anything is 100% true.
Unless reality is an illusion. ETA: sorry about the quick responses, I have a bus to catch.
searching and sanity are a tough thing to balance.
reply to post by Rtardx
Oh man this sounds so familiar. I totally hear you. The search ... knowing that there is something from personal experiences with the metaphysical .... searching more ... accepting different religions/philosophies but then after a while finding out they were wrong as well. It's maddening, isn't it? I can only tell you what I've figured out ....
- Nothing is what 'they' say.
- God isn't Who 'they' say he is.
- I"m tired of guilt and the maddening search ... so I gave up.
- I'm tired of not being able to figure it all out.
- No one on Earth has the truth and it's impossible to find out.
A few months back I finally gave up the search. The answer can't be found here.
I no longer believe any of the people who claim they know the truth about the answers to life.
None of them really do know. They think they do. But they do not.
You asked for advice ... here's mine. For the sake of your sanity don't look anymore.
Just live in the moment and try to get the best out of it.
It's not what we want to do ... but we have no other choice.
Like I said ... it's maddening to think about. So don't think about it.
edit on 3/4/2014 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)