Discussions

The Science of Authority

Posted Jan. 27, 2012 by Fallensoul in Open

Anonymous Icon

commented on Aug. 27, 2012
by dustproduction

Quote

65

What is the transformation that our current modern scientific paradigm has to undertake? If our senses provide a limited picture of reality, how then are we meant to transcend this picture in a rational way? This thread explores the question of authority and how science can evolve and grow to appreciate the knowledge gained from a perfect source of knowledge.

  • 65 Comments  
  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Aug 27, 2012


    Science does not claim to be a "way" to anything. Science is the pursuit of knowledge for its own understanding. It is the methodical unraveling of the material universe. Some might say it is nothing more than reductionism, and it was for a period, but it has moved on.

    Religion, (I have yet to see why Vedic is different from any other belief system that is deem religious, believing in and worshiping a superhuman controlling power or powers in is essence, and a belief in the transmigration of the soul), offers itself as a way to right living and to some sort of salvation for the part of consciousness that some call a soul, and an obedience to an author, which it the authority mentioned.
    Science does not accept the notion of an author. The authority is in what is, and as Complexity Theory would suggest, things that are complex, that resist entropy, like life, self organize.

    We are surrounded by information, information meaning what is conveyed or represented by a particular arrangement or sequence of things, but there is a strong difference between having information and understanding it in such a way as to make it useful. Life requires nothing more than the science of common sense in order to survive, unless one creates a need to answer the overwhelming question.

    Early on in this thread someone wrote, "You can see scientists like Antonio Damasio, a neuroscientist are looking to justify consciousness (awareness) simply by making observations in the brain. However as you can see on this video on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMrzdk_YnYY not only is he scrambling to explain consciousness but also the personal self. "

    I see this happen all the time, where people, who do not read books or research, take small bits of information and dismiss years of research and then mistakenly believe, since they are given to believing, that " Science has just become another corrupt priesthood, with “we’re the guys that know and you the little people have to come to us.”

    Having read Demasio's work I am aware that he addresses the concern that "There are two levels of awareness not one" and this higher awareness is exactly what Demasio and neuroscience seeks to understand. He does address it.

    And yet the writer is correctly observes that knowledge is available to all, and without the need for authority from a Supreme One.

  • Fallensoul Aug 26, 2012

    dusty: Such concepts will seem outdated, primary, vague, odd and doubtful to one whose consciousness is still very limited. Before we can even begin to understand what Supreme consciousness is, we have to become more clear on what our own conscious self is, and try to develop our own powers of perception. Then with expanded perception, we can begin to appreciate these things. This idea that actually by own attempts to exploit, observe, discover, research and understand the world through our current mental and sensory powers will not produce a clear picture of reality, takes a certain amount of humility to admit. We are afterall quite insignificant. But if one is able to acknowledge that, it opens up one's search to other sources of wisdom, not in a challenging way, but in a genuinely inquisitive spirit. With this attitude, one will have more success in developing one's appreciation to empirically perceive these concepts and then realize them.

    Ofcourse this is a large subject matter -- , but the Vedic knowledge offers a realization of God as a Supreme Personality in control of the forces of the universe, rather than simply the impersonal forces. The question of worship is misunderstood. God doesn't need or require any worship, He is self-sufficient -- just as a father doesn't need or desire any worship or assistance from his own son. But if the son, out of natural love, wishes to praise or glorify his kind father who is not only helping him in various ways, but worthy of such praise due to his wonderful and attractive qualities, then the relationship between the father and son is enhanced, and they both enjoy a level of happiness forgotten to the son who has rejected the existence of his father and is trying to independently exploit and enjoy the resources that the father has provided. Such "worship" of the father is not unnatural to a son who acknowledges and out of his own free will chooses to be submissive to the father. A position one could say is natural.

    >So is Bhatak Yoga "The Way,"
    Same answer to the question: Is science "The Way"
    One way to find out is to perform the experiment.

    >or merely a way to open up to a less selfish individualistic, and more universally oriented understanding?
    The Bhakti-yoga process has the same goals as does science.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Aug 26, 2012

    The term "Supreme Being." seems outdate, or at least a convention from a more primary thinking. In language, the word "being" seems odd when used as a noun, even when we refer to humans as human beings. Other animals are busy being as well.
    Where a creator is an element of the story, we insist that we are made in the creator's image, and this is rather vague, leave one to accept that the creator is not unlike a human.

    A friend introduced me to the readings of Gerald Schroeder. He is both a scientist and a believer of the Jewish faith. Some of his talks are on Youtube. He describes the possibility that God is the forces of the universe. This seems to begs the question of why we should worship this "force" we cannot begin to comprehend. Does this God require we worship it? No, not really. We are still a part of the universe whether we do or not, since we could have self organized as part of the universal complexity. Another question, "Do we have a 'soul' that interacts with this God like force." is still in doubt.

    So is Bhatak Yoga "The Way," or merely a way to open up to a less selfish individualistic, and more universally oriented understanding?

  • Fallensoul Aug 25, 2012

    dusty: you ask "How is it that Bhatak Yoga is not considered to be religious, Hindu, as well as philosophical?"

    Science is a process by which one can obtain verifiable consistent facts of reality. If by following this scientific method one obtains observable evidence of a Supreme Being, does acknowledgement or interaction with that Supreme Being mean it is no longer a science but now a religion?

    What is being described in the reference you quote is the result of the experiments of the bhakti-yoga practitioner. Just like the results of the experiments that modern scientists perform have led them to an agnostic or atheistic worldview. It is a question of the evidence. Modern science says they don't have any observable evidence that such a Being or reality exists. The Bhagavad-gita points out however, that such a perception will not occur if one's consciousness remains limited to ordinary sense perception and thought and outlines a path to extend that consciousness in a scientific way that anyone can perform. Therefore with enhanced senses one does gain perception of such a reality. If the result of that perception, leads to one to a development of love for a Supreme Being, does it make it any less scientific?

    It should be noted that science doesn't at all exclude the notion that such a Being exists, therefore for a path like the bhakti-yoga system, to contain all 3 aspects: philosophy, religion and science is not incompatible or mutually exclusive.

    It is worth mentioning that the word "hindu" is not found in the Vedic wisdom or any of the vedic writings Just because the Vedic knowledge or wisdom seems to have its origins in India, doesn't make it Indian or Hindu, just as the sun rising from the east, doesn't make it an eastern sun. The word 'Veda' means science or knowledge and this oldest system of wisdom is applicable to everyone. Ofcourse we generally don't point to the wikipedia to try to come to an clear understanding of the bhakti-yoga process. You'd find far more luck applying the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita as it is which is claimed to be the essential teachings of the Vedic knowledge.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Aug 24, 2012


    How is it that Bhatak Yoga is not considered to be religious, Hindu, as well as philosophical?

    The Bhagavad Gita is the first text to explicitly use the word "bhakti" to designate a religious path, using it as a term for one of three possible religious approaches

    reference: Bhakti yoga (Devanāgarī: भक्ति योग) is a spiritual path described in Hindu philosophy which is supposed to be for fostering love, utter faith and surrender to God.[1] It is a means to realize God,[2] and is the easiest way for the common person because it doesn't involve extensive yogic practices.[1]

    Bhakti (also spelled Bhakthi, Sanskrit: भक्ति[1]) in Hinduism and Buddhism is religious devotion in the form of active involvement of a devotee in worship of the divine. Within monotheistic Hinduism, it is the love felt by the worshipper towards the personal God, a concept expressed in Hindu theology as Iṣṭa-devatā (also as Svayam Bhagavan in Gaudiya Vaishnavism).

  • Fallensoul Aug 24, 2012

    Returning to this discussion after a while, Id like to make a few comments. (over 3 posts)

    The beauty of science is in the fact that its verifiable. You study the world, observe it and you find consistent truths that one can build upon and as the world gets more innovate and discover more, you refine the picture. The problem ofcourse as some have pointed out here that our current senses give us an extremely limited picture of reality which results in our current materialistic outlook of life by our humble scientists. The authority here are the scientists who interprets the data.

    Equally problematic are some religious types who accept a reality simply based on faith and belief. They say its very simple, just accept the word of God, surrender and be saved. The authority here is the scriptures and those who have realised it. Other religious practitioners have stricter procedures and rituals to enlightement. Although the picture of reality offered by these wisdom traditions are spectacular and hopeful, there is little way for the ordinary rational man to verify this picture. And therefore one feels he has to make a leap.

    Then there is the man in middle. He recognizes that science isnt the ultimate truth, because he has some realisation of a reality outside the current scientific picture. Nor is he attracted to accepting religious scripture based on faith. Therefore this type tries to pick and mix from their own internal experiences, understanding of various wisdom traditions and what science is claiming to be facts. In this way they piece together a picture of reality. Its a significant point to note that the authority here is one's own intelligence.

  • Fallensoul Aug 24, 2012

    While each of these having unique advantages, they also have fundamental problems. The advantage of science is in its verifiability, but they lack the larger picture of reality. The advantage of the wisdom traditions is that they accept a much higher reality and they ascribe certainty to it, but they lack the verifiability. The third type -- the man in the middle, has the advantage of the freedom of accepting reality based on one's power of thought and one's own rationality of experiences and realisations without being shackled by the evils of religious and scientific dogma, but he too has a problem. Even though he accepts parts of both the spiritual and scientific paths, his picture is also grossly limited by his intelligence and he lacks certainty.

    It should be noted that a true science, philosophy or religion is one in which provides a method to obtain the most accurate and consistent picture of reality. So in trying to establish a unification of the above, one could consider what needs to occur. Somehow if science could either expand its limitation on its empiric ability to perceive, or become more open to accepting evidence outside its empiric world-view. Somehow if religion could a delineate a path that is verifiable . And if philosophy could be more certain in his claims of the truth, we could achieve a truer picture of reality.

    Now at this point I would like to discuss the bhakti-yoga tradition based on the Bhagavad Gita. There it expains that our current consciousness is limited to this material body, however this limitation is an abnormal position.Through the process of bhakti-yoga one can overcome this limitation and thereby access our higher natural cognitive abilities. This will allow us to expand our perception of reality through enhanced senses.

  • Fallensoul Aug 24, 2012

    Now what's important to note is that this process is scientific in the sense that it is verifiable. Just as psi phenomena are establishing the validity of the existence of enhanced senses. But the process is simple -- you perform a set of steps just as you would an experiment and you gain results in a similar way as one would in the scientific laboratory. These results can be verified by others who have performed the same experiment and gained results. One can gain consistent and replicated results by performing the bhakti-yoga experiment. However note that the information to perform the experiment is not arising from our own hypotheses or intelligence, rather its being described in a book of wisdom claimed to be from a Supreme source. The authority here is claimed to be the Supreme Being. The advantage of this is that the knowledge is not imperfect in the sense that our concocted ideas and subsequent experients to verify those ideas have the risk of leading us down the wrong rabbit hole. A hole some may call scientism. Neither is there a claim to make a leap of faith, because the certainty of the knowledge presented is verified through the experience and results of the experiment, just as a scientist would place his faith in his ideas before performing the experiment.

    In this way the practitioner of the bhakti-yoga system gains gradual faith in the certainty of the truths and gains positive realisation of the truth through this science of authority. Something which all three categories above continue to still struggle.

  • Fallensoul Apr 28, 2012

    Here's an absolutely brilliant must-see video to highlight the problem of using our senses to try to understand reality. Watch till the end, as he says it beautifully in the final few minutes.

    You also get to see scientific preaching at its best, courtesy of Rev. Brian Greene: http://www.ted.com/talks/brian_greene_why_is_our_universe_fine_tuned_for_life.html

  • Fallensoul Apr 25, 2012

    @parker

    Here's an analogy: We're fallen in a very dark well and we are trying to be happy. But real life/happiness exists outside the well, but we've forgotten that. In trying to discover the reality of our situation we're using our senses. But because its so dark, the well is so deep, and we've been stuck here for so long, our current senses are too limited to perceive the reality outside the well. The only practical way to get out of the well is for someone whose already out the well to provide information to the effect that: "Theres a rope on the far left side of the well, if you walk this way then that way then take the 3rd left you'll see it and be able to climb out." Now this knowledge is beyond our current sense perception but if you follow the knowledge given by the person above, you'll be able to perceive the rope with the very same senses and climb out. But simply by our sense perception and experimentation you won't find the rope quick enough in this lifetime, or in several lifetimes. One has to take the help of some outside information, follow the direction, and then perceive for oneself the truth of the information.

    Now one might object, well there are so many people "shouting from above" where the rope is and they may be cheating us. And this is a valid concern, but that doesnt rule out a genuine informer, just that theres many cheaters. Besides that one still has to admit that by using only our sense perception or mental speculation one remains stuck in the well because there is no access to the perception of anything higher by these methods. You can try to gain all the evidence you like, it wont be able to give you an accurate picture of reality, because in the dark, what can we truly see?

    So thats comes down to a question of finding the right authority.

    And sad to say our current modern science acts as an authority based on experimentation and information gained from the senses, which by nature is so limited and imperfect. Or our many mental speculators (here and in general) who think their own limited minds should be accepted. If both are able to expand their idea, as you well said, to appreciate knowledge gained from an authority -- like the Bhagavad Gita As It Is etc, which gives a practical picture of reality, beyond our senses -- thats tangible to perceive through practical realization then following and gaining faith in that direction becomes a sublime and quick form of accessing the truth. And that in a nutshell is the Science of Authority.

  • parker Apr 17, 2012

    @ Fallensoul:

    It seems you accept the notion that a perfect source of knowledge exists, which is something I also agree with. It would seem therefore that science would benefit from adopting a more accepting attitude of what is observable, as opposed to trying so desperately to explain why or how things are as they are.

    I'm not sure it is possible for us (or for science) to transcend our limited temporal perception of "reality", until we (and science also), at least first accept that our perception of reality is extremely limited, while our ability to accept whatever reality may be, remains virtually unlimited so long as we stop demanding to know why and how the things we observe, are as we observe them. Science may need to evolve from being its own best stumbling block in this regard.

    I'm wondering if you can help me better understand what aspect of "authority" you are questioning in relation to these things.

  • KYRANI Apr 13, 2012

    @ Slowlygetnthar cont.
    So in both areas, ie disease and defense I have seen loud and clear the connection, indeed the intimate unity between the material and the spiritual. I would say much more than not relenting that science may someday converge with spirituality~~especially with regard to quantum physics, that it can’t go any other way. The fundamentals of science, especially in the field of quantum physics (which if we are honest about it also takes in what is at present called parapsychology) is spiritual in nature. The duality is no duality really, matter and spirit are two side of one coin but even more than that they are indistinguishably the coin that is really one.

  • KYRANI Apr 13, 2012

    HI Slowlygetnthar,
    Yes, you are right to call them curmudgeons and narrow minded, they are in my opinion too!
    What happened some centuries ago, essentially between the Catholic Church and science was they agreed to carve up the roast and you take this while I take that, namely the nature of material and the nature of the spiritual. And things stood in this way for many years. In the time being however, and more so in the last 50-100 years corruption in both camps has been gaining a lot of influence.
    So science has become dominated by big money, eg Big Pharma and they don't want to loose their profits for the sake of the truth and people's lives. Religion has become dominated by people who are inherently evil. Their agenda is to maintain power. And the two compliment one another.

    I discovered this when, in my naivety some years ago, I wrote to 1000 doctors both in Australia and overseas to alert them to my finding, which were meagre at that time. I had figured out how panic and anxiety attacks came about and I had some sketchy knowlege about heart disease, diabetes and cancer. And I mean sketchy knowledge, it would not have held up to too much scrutiny although anyone who knew what it was about could have taken it and ran with it.

    What happened then is that while some doctors joined the fray.. the evil underworld people that were against me (trying to kill me to shut me up), but also a whole lot of others that I never expected got involved.. all corrupt people.. corrupt state and federal police, corrupt politicians and now I suspect there are also corrupt people from the armed forces. This doesn't happen by people who have no worldly power. This is the medical industry and I am on the ball where disease is concerned because there is no other reason why they would get involved. I threaten their industry severely.

    They have all failed in their efforts and they have failed because ironically enough you cannot separate the material from the spiritual! And I say this on two counts. By attacking me they have helped me gain enormous knowledge about disease, so where there was lack there is now plenty! People somatically react to ideas and hence become diseased. Equally, when understanding the situation, they can use counter ideas to overcome all of their problems.. doctors and drugs become largely obsolete.

    Secondly they caused me to find other ways of defending myself because the crooks I am up against are in some cases police and in other cases, where they are other than police, they are aided and abetted by police. I found that I can and now exclusively do use ideas that are directed with will and belief and hold them at bay. It is possible to kill someone in this way so if I am really pushed I can "take some of them out" to use their language, and I don't need to leave my home.. I don't need to have even met them.. transcending time and space!

  • slowlygetnthar Apr 12, 2012


    Kyrani, Thanks for the explanation. It brings a lot of clarity to what you mean.

    I just got back from a conference where there was a discussion about the authority of science. One of the people presenting was the head of one of the more progressively/holistically thinking churches (if that is not an oxymoron~sorry). Anyway, the thing that was interesting is that the scientists and the minister were very narrow about how they define sciences and the purposes of science. They were saying that science is to measure, replicate, observe, verify and validate material reality, explaining how things work. They were also saying that the purpose of religion is to explain why material reality was created the way it was, and the other things science cannot explain~souls, spiritual experience, etc.,...

    They all also poo-pooed that science and religion might intersect, and were very disrespectful towards the work of Capra, Zukav and others who have found connections between quantum physics and spiritual and paranormal realms.

    Frankly, I think the curmudgeons were very narrow-minded and already fossilized in their respective fields. But it did make me think that maybe some of us are expecting this convergence of fields when really, science and religion do have different functions and purpose in society.

    I am not ready to relent that science may someday converge with spirituality~~especially with regard to quantum physics.

  • KYRANI Apr 04, 2012

    It is very difficult to even say what I mean by God other than to say It is the Ultimate Reality. On the one side it is Void or Emptiness but that is nothing more than saying we can't know what It is. On the other side It is Being but even here it is not possible other than an experience of "where ever I look there is the face of God", an identification of within everything or threaded through everything is the Ultimate, Transcendental Reality. The Buddhists differ in their views. Zen Buddhists accept that everyone is already enlightened and that they are all perfect just as they are. I don't accept this view and for this reason and others I left them. The created forms/aspects/souls are of an illusory nature. They can attain eternal life if they become one with God, thus the illusory nature is let go of and what I would call the Divine Spark within is adhered to, either through worship or wisdom, really in the end these are the same. I agree with the Gita where Krishna say: "To love is to know Me, the inner most wisdom, the truth.. that I am! (the I here being the Divinity or Universal, Impersonal, Transcendental Self.. God).

  • slowlygetnthar Apr 01, 2012


    KYRANI, what do you mean by God? You throw this term out there ever-so-loosely. But, explain what you mean by God.

  • KYRANI Apr 01, 2012

    @dustproduction
    Science created? What fiddle sticks! With no understanding, and there is no shame in that, but there is the notion that perhaps there are many gods. When you are graced with understanding then the unshakeable certainty is There is only One, call It God, call it That or whatever. We can’t name the Nameless. And in answer to your question NO everything is not God. This is the problem that people don’t understand. There is a Hindu illustration of the snake and the rope. You see the snake but it is an illusion and you realize it is an illusion when you see the rope. Some say yes, but there is still the rope. True, but the illusion is not the rope.

    No, I am not talking about personal experience. You can have enlightenment too. Many people from all different religions have had enlightenment and they all report the same thing. So you can have confidence that Reality is One and not many. It is not a case of which religion you belong to. The different religions only reflect the many different forms of worship and nothing more. You do not have to accept anyone else’s faith. You only need to meditate earnestly and discover for yourself. You can on the other hand take down the personal self and personal views roads and end up lost. The choice is yours.

    Creation is not deterministic. True the seeds of our reality were planted at the beginning of time but the tree that grows is no “stock standard”. You can plant a million mustard seeds and the trees will all be similar but each one will be unique. The plot is character and character develop the plot!

    @Parker
    To make it a bit clearer for you I will say this. Where there is an observer there is the observing and also the object, the thing observed. But there is also no observer and nothing observed, there is only the observing, the knowing. Another way of saying this is that Being and Non-Being are inseparable. So it is not either being or non-being and it is not neither being nor non-being. It is to take the position between the two. So it is not being but at the same time not non-being and neither of these two! Does that help?

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Apr 01, 2012

    @ Kyrani

    Re: Obviously the One God that created everything. Everything?
    I was hoping you would say science helped to create it but......
    But if "the One God" (and we have no evidence which that 'one' is) creates everything then the world is deterministic. You argument is that everything is god the good, the bad, and the in-between. Your suggesting that this is merely your personal experience and therefore cannot be shared. Nor should it. I accept that you see the things in this way and will not try to convince you otherwise.
    Does this mean I am entitled to my personal views as well or must I accept your view on faith? Is all a single coherence or a multi-coherence?

  • parker Mar 27, 2012

    KYRANI:
    There exists more than void. Void merely attempts to poorly describe what exists between, amidst and among variations and forms of energy. "All" is energy, even the void. "All" does not exclude the void, rather it includes it as merely a yet unknown, or indescribable form of energy that also exists within the all.

    Nothing is, yet all things are of the void. So yes, I am not, nor are you, yet we also are of the void. All things visible are made of that energy and void which is invisible, and all things are indeed explainable as temporal illusions, only being perceived by us as a temporal aspect of the energy that is all.

    Since your thoughts and my thoughts also spring from this eternal void of all things, then meditation in temporal timelines is a subjective waste of the limited temporal time experience. It is akin to a mystical excuse, admittedly a nice one, that may be used to justify our fear of proceeding into the void.

    You already know where truth lies, by your definition it must derive from the eternal energy of that void which is all. Whether you know it or not, I also know this. Thus I will not meditate in temporal time, rather I will simply go into the eternal void that welcomes me, and allow it to share whatever more it desires me to know. Since it is known that all is known within the all, then I am not limited to knowing any less than all there is, because I also, am of the all.

    If there exists any limit to my learning any more of what is to be known within the eternal all, then it is my temporal self already within that all, that limits me, not the all itself. If then I were to so limit myself, it would no longer be by accident, or be by my being dull of understanding, rather it could only be by my active choice. Having dispensed with all fear, the choice to enter the void of the eternal all, and to learn from it, has become simple, and easy, and eternally rewarding.

  • KYRANI Mar 27, 2012

    @ Parker
    I like what you write but listen you need to meditate and meditate and meditate and then you will know that not simply that “you/we” don’t know but more importantly that “you” and "I" are not! I mean this with loving kindness you understand.

    @ Slowlygetnthar
    The Proof uh! I cannot give you proof. You have to find the proof. Well not “you” actually. This is not even possible to describe because language is not of any use but I’ll try. Arrive at the Great Enlightenment and realize the Void or Emptiness. Thou art That! There is the realization that this Ultimate Reality is not expressed by anything, it is not an expression of anything, it is beyond mind, beyond awareness, beyond everything. That is!
    The proof of the pudding.. it's in the eating, as they say.
    It's the only proof and that proof is no proof that can be shared for there is only One Alone.

  • slowlygetnthar Mar 27, 2012


    Kyrani,
    Where is the proof to support this: The world cannot exist without the Ultimate Reality but the latter does not depend on the existence of the world/ manifest reality. The manifest/material reality is not an/ or the expression of the Ultimate Reality.

    Also, it doesn't disprove that material reality is an expression of Ultimate Reality.

  • parker Mar 23, 2012

    Modern science is a myth, as have the sciences of all ages been. The transformation required, is not of science per se, rather it is the minds of men that must be transformed.

    The limited perceptions of science, are merely that which our external senses are designed to seek. So long as we erroneously continue in the blind faith that answers are "out there" somewhere to be discovered by science or men of religion, or cultist gurus of some other type, we will miss the most remarkable and comprehensive truths that already reside within each of us, and are eager to teach us.

    We first need to know ourselves, before presuming to know the universe. At this very primal level we continue to fail. We divide and conquer ourselves by following this or that group of perceived gurus who are looking anywhere but within. We cannot see beyond simple questions, like whether the chicken or the egg came first, because we forget the basic prerequisite of hatching an egg, which is both a hen AND a rooster.

    So we ponder useless sciences of external things, and some little about the physical or even psychological internals, but only if "science" can quantify it. We dream of past lives and imagine multiple universes, yet we do not comprehend because we refuse to accept our own internal eternal nature.

    Our eternal resonance is not mythical, it is factual science. There is sufficient intelligence comprised within each single living human tissue cell to create an entire human being. The intelligence therein is also sufficient to replicate itself within that human being, and perhaps even more remarkably, and it should be obvious, that if sufficient intelligence resides within each cell to replicate the entire human being, intelligence and all, then surely sufficient intelligence resides within that entire construct to do many such minor things as for example, to maintain perfect health. Or to comprehend the origins of intelligence at this sub-conscious level.

    When we transform our minds - when we accept the inherent internal call to seek truth from the inherent and known intelligence within each of us (even within each of our cells), as opposed to the myths, whether of scientific, religious, or other man-made origin, we will appreciate that what had seemed unknown or miraculous, is merely one of many greater things we are all capable of knowing or doing.

    This is the rational way to expand our awareness of knowledge. We must stop this foolish belief that we can create or discover knowledge, and simply learn to accept it, as it is, and where it is, because it already, all is. Science will not be transformed, with any luck at all, it will be relegated to a few short chapters of our dark and impeding history, while men of renewed minds will renew progress.

  • KYRANI Mar 22, 2012

    @ Slowlygetnthar said "Maybe material reality is the expression of Ultimate Reality?"
    No from my understanding. The precise relationship between the Ultimate Reality and the manifest reality is not expressible, that is why I gave the illustration of the snake and the rope. The snake does not exist without the rope but it is an illusion. The world cannot exist without the Ultimate Reality but the latter does not depend on the existence of the world/ manifest reality. The manifest/material reality is not an/ or the expression of the Ultimate Reality.

  • slowlygetnthar Mar 21, 2012

    Parker, I do agree that people are split along the lines/camps you describe. For some, science is a type of belief, like a religion. I even know scientists who are deeply religious, and thus, rationalize things in some pretty bizarre ways!!!

    I wonder if this split between camps is more of a reflection of the human need for structure (a la left brain) and some attempt to hold onto the one that is most apparent or immediately discernible. If folks hang onto a structure and dogma, they don't have to spend a whole lot of time thinking beyond it. It is easier to push aside and reject whatever doesn't fit the framework than it is to think.

    I do have hope that, somewhere, the two worldviews intersect. The work of people like Fritjof Capra and Gary Zukav would indicate so...

  • jmatt4lifehoe Mar 21, 2012

    Parker, I agree with your commentary, thus far. You've expressed thoughts I've been unable to express, far more eloquently. Kudos to you!

  • parker Mar 21, 2012

    In this forum, science and religion seem to operate in classical divide and conquer style, or at least divide to prevent progress. There are no doubt many idiots in this world disguised as religious fanatics, just like there are many idiots disguised as scientists. Sadly, there seem to be few people of a mind to be open to trying to actually comprehend what they believe and why they believe it. Religion for example, is replete with comments offered by those that have faith simply because their "Bible" and or their spiritual leader/priest/pastor/yoga instructor says they should. Scientists likewise, hold dear to what their tiny minds can see, touch, weigh, or quantify in some tangibly definable manner, simply because that is the approach sponsored by the established scientific community.

    Expressions of multiple universes or past lives or unknown gods, as if they are a tangible reality is evidence of neither scientific, nor religious thinking, and it certainly is not the manner of expression to bring a union of thoughts between two such disoriented factions. If there is even a slight hope for people to be united in thoughts, or in purpose, or in goals and aspirations, or to at least get along, or try to agree, then first we must stop expressing ourselves as scientists, or as religionists, or titled opinionists.

    Surely we are not all such idiots that we cannot express ourselves without attempting to appeal to one titled group over another.

  • slowlygetnthar Mar 20, 2012


    Maybe material reality is the expression of Ultimate Reality?

  • KYRANI Mar 20, 2012

    @dustproduction
    Obviously the One God that created everything.
    I answered about the many gods in another thread see here http://noetic.org/discussions/open/303/. It is a matter of everybody’s firsthand experience. It is not enough to read scriptures. That experience is ultimately the same.

    Where is the soul? Is it the Self? There is a physical and a non-physical reality that together make up the mind. Then there is the Ultimate Reality that is behind the mind. I am not talking here in spatial terms or some order of things. Where is not an answer that we can give.

    The individual soul and the material world are like God with attributes, and Brahman is possessed of them both, BUT though everything is contained within Brahman or the Ultimate Reality, the Ultimate Reality is not dependent on the individual soul/self and the world. Where? How? it is inexpressible. It is rather like the idea that is presented in explaining Brahman and the appearances/world with the snake and the rope. The snake that is seen is an illusion but there is still a rope there to give the illusion of the snake. So while ever the rope is mistaken for the snake, there is the appearance of the snake and it seems real. Once you grasp the view of the rope, then the snake is no longer seen or at least if still can be seen, it is known to be an illusion. Whatever you might think to do to the snake doesn’t really affect the rope. This is not intellectually grasped very easily because logic gets in the way. So for instance if you say you throw the snake away then the logical argument becomes if you throw the snake away then you have thrown the rope away and that is not applicable here. The illustration is just trying to say that there is an inexpressible position.

  • slowlygetnthar Mar 20, 2012


    You keep asserting that consciousness is primary and matter is secondary, but you never address why would we would have the manifestation of material. Does it teach us spiritual lessons?

    I actually think that we need to understand where the two domains intersect. We need to comprehend why we have the illusion of materialism. We can do that through scientific methods. Science has never stopped evolving. Quantum mechanics is exactly what gives you the information about the boundaries of assumptions made about material reality. You do sound like you reject science and anything it might offer, yet, sort of in the spirit of critical theorists, you do not offer something to replace the sceinces of which you are so critical. How would you go about exploring consciousness without methodology to do so?

  • KYRANI Mar 20, 2012

    @ Slowlygetnthar
    I am not saying reject everything and I am not saying reject science in total. I am saying that the old ways of thinking need to be addressed and scientists should be prepared to allow all scientific endeavour instead of saying we believe that materialism is all that there is and we reject everything else. And most particularly when it is done for profit. And for another thing, once we accept that consciousness is primary and matter is secondary then the whole of the scientific method comes under review and people are resisting that too. These are my objections.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Mar 19, 2012

    @ Kyrani,
    So which god provided you with this instrument by which your text appears hear?

    When it comes to gods all believers are atheist in some way, accepting one god while dismissing others. This concept has been going on since the beginning of man, since we have a propensity to define the unknown. Your beliefs are just the latest incarnation.

    But you also side step the question, "Where is the soul?" Is it the "Self", the mind in the brain? The book by Paul Brok's, ""Into the Silent Land" recites numerous examples of the tenuous nature of the self. The grow of a small tumor or a bump on the head can irrevocably alter us, leaving us with what?

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Mar 19, 2012

    @ Kyrani,
    So which god provided you with this instrument by which your text appears hear?

    When it comes to gods all believes are atheist in some way, accepting one god while dismissing others. This concept has been going on since the beginning of man, since we have a propensity to define the unknown. Your beliefs are just the latest incarnation.

    But you also side step the question, "Where is the soul?" Is it the "Self", the mind in the brain? The book by Paul Brok's, ""Into the Silent Land" recites numerous examples of the tenuous nature of the self. The grow of a small tumor or a bump on the head can irrevocably alter us, leaving us with what?

  • slowlygetnthar Mar 19, 2012


    I have long contemplated the idea that this is all an illusion, but what I find annoying is that people don't seem to want to know how the illusion works. I am impatient with the dogmatic attitudes (not yours, Jim) expressed that because of the immaterial-reality of reality, that we, therefore, must reject everything except consciousness and attack the sciences for trying to figure out how this "reality" is maintained.

    So, if there is nothing to transact in the "spiritual" realm, and we reject everything in the material realm, including figuring out how the illusion is perpetuated, then, what is our purpose? It would be nice if we could all go to Nirvana simultaneously, but how is that supposed to happen?

  • Anonymous Icon

    Jim Centi Mar 19, 2012

    Slowlyetnthair,

    I would really like to avoid getting tangled in tangential matters, as is often the case in these discussions.

    My purpose in posting here was to respond to your question “How are you going to prove that consciousness trumps matter????”

    As a matter of courtesy, I will speculate by saying there is nothing to transact in the spiritual realm in the manner that we do in the material world. I will also speculate that it is sufficient that we be aware that the material world is one of illusion and that beyond it is the spiritual domain. I will also speculate that in this interaction between us, there is an influence of the spiritual realm.

    The video being referred to was intended primarily for scientists and I don’t believe that the term “spiritual” was used. To use that term when addressing scientists would likely cause them to turn away with something resembling contempt.

    The one possible reference to spirituality is in Comment #8, ”Quantum physics has revealed what ancient masters will with certainty that matter does not exist.” The transcript posted omits one or two words and does not contain that precise statement. The same speech or statement appears in a related video where the audio is clearer. Best wishes……Jim

  • slowlygetnthar Mar 19, 2012


    My point, Jim, is that no one actually operates in entirely consciousness/non-material realms. We are still in these material forms. How do you propose to get people into purely consciousness realms and transact something there?

  • Anonymous Icon

    Jim Centi Mar 19, 2012

    Slowlyetnthair

    WFT your comment, “How are you going to prove that consciousness trumps matter????”

    A common theme, perhaps the dominant theme in the video posted under “An Interesting Overview” is that matter is an illusion, a mirage. As difficult as it may be to accept, quantum physics proves that matter does not exist.

    If we can get beyond the illusory nature of our sensory experience and accept, or perhaps experience, that there is a domain beyond our sensory experience…..refer to it as the spiritual domain or the domain of consciousness……we will be tainted by the influence of materialism.

  • slowlygetnthar Mar 19, 2012

    I think it may be a logical fallacy to equate the observer's role in the observation = we are making it up as we go along. That's quite a leap with a lot of air and no substance underneath it.

    It's also a leap to say: We can only use logic if we are truly observing something objectively and we can never do that.
    It invalidates all experience. What many scientists are actually doing is qualifying their observations and conclusions by explaining what the limitations of studies are, based on their biases (places where they know they are not objective) boundaries to their understanding, and raising questions about what they perceive in the observations they make. That seems pretty rational to me, even LOGICAL! So, just because a person understands that his observing can influence the phenomena observed, it does not invalidate what is observed, as is being asserted by Kyrani. It means there are limitations to how far information/outcomes can be generalized, based on the observed phenomena.

    How are you going to prove that consciousness trumps matter???? Are we all going to sit around contemplating the fuzz in our belly buttons til we grok it, or are you going do something in the world that proves it? a scientific experiment perhaps?

  • KYRANI Mar 19, 2012

    @dustproduction.
    you say "Science looks for evidence and proof". Science is a body of knowledge and nothing more. Scientists, who are all observers, by way of their bias, ie the ego self, look for evidence and proof. The bias? Materialism is all that there is! To be a "good scientists" you must not stray outside this box.
    One of the big problemas, quite apart from the scientist's bias, is that the observer influences the very outcome of every experiment. So indeed we are making it up as we go along. How's that for evidence and proof? And if that is not enough we are also looking to use logic. We can only use logic if we are truly observing something objectively and we can never do that. We need to start accepting the reality that consciousness is primary and matter is secondary and then we have a chance to examine questions of what is the soul.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Mar 18, 2012

    RE: "Why then is it so hard for science to accept the Supreme teacher or God"

    Which gods, whose gods? Science looks for evidence and proof. Where is the souls or spirit?

  • slowlygetnthar Mar 15, 2012


    Fallensoul, just because you need to follow someone or something doesn't mean others also have to do so. That view is as dogmatic as the scientific paradigm you are attacking. What I see in these assumptions is a complete disregard and lack of respect for others' processes. I try to respect others' processes and not proselytize as if my way is the only way. The thing I have learned from all the different texts is that there are many roads to Nirvana.

  • Fallensoul Mar 15, 2012

    Regarding "which scientific paradigm?". Its this current modern scientific paradigm that is being religiously propagated as stated in the Science Delusion thread. Perhaps you should read Ruperts book.

  • Fallensoul Mar 15, 2012

    slowlygetinthar: To summarize, there is a standard way to gain knowledge both materially and spiritually. If you wish to learn a subject, we go to a teacher who we trust and have faith in and who we believe is authoritative in the subject. If i wish to learn violin, I go to a violin teacher. I don't just speculate my own way on how to play it. I could but that's not the best science. I could even say I'm self taught, but actually I'm using a book which is really a teacher. In a similar way in order to learn the spiritual science, one needs some teacher and the best teacher, the perfect teacher is the person who set everything up -- God. So if theres some textbook of God's, its would be valuable to try to understand it in a serious way with the help of someone whose realized this knowledge. So its nice that you love all the spiritual texts are cool, but can you live the spiritual texts? If you try to do so, then you'll realize they congegate on many things, but also there are differences that make it hard to act clearly, so again a proper guide is required.

  • Fallensoul Mar 15, 2012

    slowlygetnthar: i think you underestimate the value of the teacher. we're born into ignorance and mum/dad has been our teachers for the first so many years of our lives. Imagine trying to grow up without any teachers? Similarly for spiritual life, we are still babies, but our guru is our father and the spiritual texts are like the mother, so we gain knowledge from these teachers and then experiences goes hand in hand with knowledge gained from an authoritative teacher. The application of that knowledge through practice and experience leads to realization of that knowledge. Both are required. Theory and practical. This is the science. It's simple, easy and saves alot of time getting this information directly from a teacher whose gained their knowledge from their teacher, all the way up to the supreme authority or God. In this way knowledge is being passed down.

    The other method you recommend of trying to gain knowledge from within is also following the teacher principle. Who are you gaining knowledge from within? One has to be humble enough to recognize, that the knowledge from within is not coming from me, but actually from the supreme teacher/authority who is also within you. So by accessing that teacher you can also gain knowledge. When one is sufficiently sincerely desirous of gaining spiritual knowledge, the internal guru manifests externally as your physical guru to guide you on a practical level. It's not so easy to gain knowledge from the internal guru, because one can easily confuse the internal guru's teachings with one's own desires from the dirty mind and thus bewilder oneself into thinking he/she is receiving direction from higher authority, but actually fooling oneself into following the dictations of the lusty or greedy mind. Therefore an external guru who is able to assess your sincere attempt to obtain spiritual knowledge or self-realisation and can guide you on a practical level is best. Now one may have reservations to do that or to find out such a guru in the ocean of false-gurus and false knowledge, but the point is as i usually state -- there are genuine gurus, so one really has to search for the gold and see the result. But on the other hand if you say, well you know, "I'll just figure it out myself. meditate, do my own speculation etc." Its akin to trying to pass your university exams, without actually reading a textbook or going for lessons with a teacher --

    Good luck kid, you'll need it!

  • slowlygetnthar Mar 11, 2012


    When I look at the original question raised, I keep wondering "which scientific paradigm?" Are they all stuck or are some evolving and not others? Are there scientists from various disciplines (on these discussion boards) who can speak to where their paradigms are stuck and where there is a dynamic struggle to push out the edges of the current thought envelope?

  • frequencytuner Mar 11, 2012

    Science needs only to be understood by the outside world. Science is Knowledge. Knowledge is the "Footprint of God".

    "A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty - it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man." (Albert Einstein)

    "A human being is part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. A kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from the prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. The true value of a human being is determined by the measure and the sense in which they have obtained liberation from the self. We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if humanity is to survive." (Albert Einstein, 1954)

    "The most beautiful and most profound experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead. To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their primitive forms - this knowledge, this feeling is at the center of true religiousness."
    ( Albert Einstein - The Merging of Spirit and Science)

  • KYRANI Mar 10, 2012

    @ DyckDyck, I also agree with Slowlygetnthar. One learns a great deal from the many different gurus along the way. They don't replace direct experience.. never, but they are important to help point one's feet in the right direction. My guru used to say that the guru was there to walk along side holding up the lantern for the disciple, to show them the way. But the disciple has to walk The Path themselves. No amount from the guru is enough. Only enlightenment is enough.

  • slowlygetnthar Mar 09, 2012


    fallensoul,
    I don't think we all need teachers. Experience can be an education in itself. There are some folks who innately seek someone to follow, but I do believe that the "kingdom of G*d is within" and that is where we should be seeking direction. If others need to follow gurus, so be it. Whatever works is what folks should pursue.

    DyckDyck, I disagree. I do think that folks can learn where there is authority, but not if it is oppressive or threatening. I think what is daunting is obsession with one thing/text/guru/religion as authority. I like the idea of learning from multiple authorities, since most will teach the same lessons, but slightly different facets of them--thus, broadening the knowledge base available. Very cool. Love all the spiritual texts.

  • DyckDyck Mar 07, 2012

    Where there is authority learning is not.

  • KYRANI Feb 23, 2012

    @ Fallensoul
    Sorry about “screendumps” and I’ll try to be concise. You talk from a Christian perspective ie personal god. It is okay for worship but it is not the Reality. Jesus did not call himself god and did not condemn as inaccurate the Hebrew religion wrt God. And I believe all that Paul has to say, ie The Acts and letter to.. is all incorrect and worse! Peter the apostle saw something wrong but couldn’t put his finger on it!

    Your analogy of God being like the king is not right, IMHO. People who have attained a very high awareness (prophets/avatars) can speak “with authority” but limitedly because “what is” cannot be described. When Jesus said “I am the way, the truth and the life everlasting” he was not referring to himself nor speaking as himself. The prophet is not like a messenger because they don’t come from god nor relay anything. They speak from the position of “no self” and that is “no ego self”.

    The atman, Paramathma and Brahman are called Self, Higher Self and Supreme Self but these have no semblance to ego self of any description whatsoever. They are ways of talking about identity or Being Itself, with and without differentiation but here again are concepts.. ideas.

    Ego is ideas and associated bodily processes (emotions mainly) that together give rise to a seeming self or ego, one that is subject to death. There is no one acting out the ego! There’s a road block here without mystical experience. You need to realize you are pure awareness. Your essential nature is emptiness. Mystical experience is no desires and no dead.. beyond all harm. Dead happens to the body. Essential nature is deathless, indestructible, immutable, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, bliss, Absolute. Enlightenment is altogether different from your ordinary experience of self. You need to realize that and then you understand who you are.. “authority and all”. All I can tell you is that it is like nothing you have ever thought of, but at the same time you will recognize that you have experienced it moment by moment all of your life and not realized it!

    Caitanya school is a better understanding than the duality and non-duality schools. The problem is that there is emptiness and there is form but the two are not separate but two aspects of oneness. Remember these schools are all philosophical and that means they are trying to describe Reality using the intellect and reasoning and logic and that is a fun game but that is all that it is. No amount of knowledge and intellectual understanding is going to help you really.

    What parts of the Gita did you want me to respond to specifically? I got a copy of the version you refer to but at present I haven’t time to read it all. I sense your questions are if good go to heaven what happens to evil people? Aren’t we all one? Is there not just one substance? Am I right?

  • Fallensoul Feb 23, 2012

    slowlygetnthar: By perfect knowledge (See the Perfect Knowledge in an Imperfect World thread for more on this subject.) But briefly, I mean valid or true knowledge. We live in an objective reality. e.g. Just like if a father points to a table and tells the child that this is a table. That's what it is. The child could intepret it through his/her experience and belief thinking its a chair, but thats his imperfect vision/lack of consciousness/understanding. The reality is its a table. So its this kind of basic valid objective facts. All of us are subject to the death of the body. etc. etc. So a body of knowledge that provides this kind of information detailing how things are in reality, we would consider to be a perfect source of knowledge. And the argument here is that perfect knowledge originates from a perfect person. The person who set up everything. The manufactor manual is the perfect source of knowledge of the machine. So this manual provided by the manufacturer of this cosmic machine would be the best means of obtaining valid perfect knowledge of reality. Now that doesn't mean one has to blindly accept the manual. But in the manual you would expect it to say, "If you press button A, the machine does B." So you can test that. You try it out and see the result and then you gain faith in the manual. This is the basic idea behind the science of authority; because for us to try to figure out the workings of a machine that we did not ourselves create, a machine that is in many ways larger than what modern scientists are hoping to discover through empiric endeavors.

    According to Vedic knowledge, The polarities in this world have little to do with the brain. Reincarnation and Near death experiences are good evidence for persons being independent of their physical bodies and brain (read some of the accounts at www.nderf.org). The Vedas also say that these bodies are like machines or vehicles and the conscious person is distinct but operating the machine. Our gross body highly limits our experience because our nature is essentially non-material, but we're conditioned to this material realm which is inferior. But the way to transcend it, as we're suggesting here is that you gain information from someone who has transcended it and learn the science from them. It is not exactly some mystical process, but a question of education and practice from the right source/teacher.

  • Fallensoul Feb 23, 2012

    @KYRANI: We agree that the greatest authority is the Supreme Absolute Truth. The next thing then is that God can have a representative who provides the same knowledge as God does, just like a king's messenger delivers the same message sent from the king. The king may do it personally, or he may use a messenger - the message is the same. The messenger himself may not be perfect, but the message is perfect because its coming from the perfect person or authority. Yes there are cheaters, but that doesnt mean there arern't genuine ones also, so one has to be careful.

    Perhaps you are not aware of the Caitanya school that synthesizes both duality and nonduality schools, in saying we are both equal to and different from the Absolute Truth. Thats described in the Simulatenous duality and non-duality thread. Yes we are accepting a false sense of ego connected to this body, but that doesnt mean that theres no real ego. Just like an actor plays a certain role on a stage, the role is temporary but that doesnt mean he doesnt have a personality outside of his role. So there may be a false ego, but theres also real spiritual eternal individual ego which is part and parcel of the Supreme ego. This is all described in detail in the Bhagavad Gita As It Is, please read that version Kyrani, i think it may clarify all these things for you because there's alot of misinterpretation out there. And even if we accept the misinterpretation of going beyond subject and object, if there are no desires, its as good as being dead.

    p.s Could you summarize your future posts in as little words as possible AND if its not too much to ask, some ENTER/PARAGRAPHS here and there would be easier to read, i dont know if i'll be able to respond to these screendumps!

  • slowlygetnthar Feb 21, 2012

    I think the paradigm is actually S*L*O*W*L*Y shifting with the work of people like those Lynne McTaggart's research examines in The Intention Experiment and The Field.

    I concur with everything you state in your second paragraph.

    Also, I wonder if we are inordinately fixated, perhaps incorrect, in our assumption that the observer and the observed are entirely separate entities...???

  • KYRANI Feb 21, 2012

    @ slowlygetnthar We have perception of two types, one is sensory aided perception and the other is direct mental perception or ESP (psi). The problem, as Deepak Chopra points out, is that science has, in many cases, left out the observer. The observed is given all the attention. The only case that this is not true is in quantum physics where the only way to make sense of the results is to tie them back to the observer. So here we have the observer becoming a part of the equation. Furthermore in modern physics it is widely accepted now that consciousness must somehow also be considered. I don’t think it is possible to get a scientific paradigm shift from the “static quagmire of pretending science” because in this state of affairs ESP is strongly denied.

    A lot of the problem has to do with careers that have been built up over years, that would come crumbling down, although not entirely. Another problem is that people seem to think that the scientific method would have to be disposed of. I don’t think this is true. It is not perfect and it great imperfection is that there is no independent observer, which is a fundamental premise of the scientific method. So it has to change.

  • slowlygetnthar Feb 17, 2012


    Fallensoul asked: "If our senses provide a limited picture of reality, how then are we meant to transcend this picture in a rational way?"

    I have really wondered about how our physical structure may dictate what/how we percieve reality. For example, we have these somewhat polarized spheres of the physical right/left brain. Is this partially what is responsible for the polarities we often perceive in our world?

    It does seem that our senses limit our experience and comprehension of the universe. Maybe the only way to transcend this is via the various consciousness states advocated in mystical/yogic/tantric/TM/shamanistic practices.

    Still, I think that the scientific paradigm shift needs to be from this static quagmire of pretending science has apprehended our reality to expanding exploration into all the "paranormal" realms where science has thus far failed to arrive at investigative methodologies and so denies its existence.

  • KYRANI Feb 12, 2012

    And appreciate that the desire is also driven by the body owing to the associated bodily reactivity that is attached to the idea through reinforcement of neural pathways in the brain. As you maintain concentration you overcome the neural pathways, the ego dissolves but still there is subject and object and you have to go beyond that. That is the next step but that step is not “spiritual desire”. You can also overcome desire by the use of a prop or mantra or anchor for the awareness. When there are no desires there is no fuel that leads to activity and hence personality, so the “participator self” or the jiva-atman having detached from the activities of mind now rests in the Supreme self or soul or the Paramatma. In the next part, as you hold /sustained full, unbroken awareness without an anchor, the Paramatma-jiva-atma identify with Brahman the Absolute but that is not explainable in words or intellectually. And to further answer you on “can you choose not to die”, realize that you are the All-encompassing. Attachment to the body at this stage is gone. The body is just another garment that you have chosen to wear and then discard. How can I give you a comparison? It is kind of like you think you are one cell and then suddenly you realize you are the whole body, only the body here is Reality.. Transcendental Reality.. the highest goal of “all-knowledge”. This realization is the “something mystical” that we need to do. Science can only go forward from here with the “greater attainment”, i.e., not just one person here and another over there attaining enlightenment or mystical experience, but all humane people on the earth.
    Fallensoul is a bad avatar name, me thinks. You sound more like TruthSeeker to me. Be careful! If you state that “you’re limited”, you will be limited. We live in a universe of choice and the universe makes no qualms, it takes you at your word! If you are humane as you sound to be, know that you are limitless and heir apparent to the knowledge you seek. Indeed you have it already only you don’t realize it. To desire this knowledge of Authority is not desire for your every step is on the Path of Perfection. Just realize that what you really are is perfect. I do quote the Gita and other holy texts because they point to Authority and in that sense they are an authority, but when you realize the source then you found the Authority. I will respond to Duality and non-duality thread too.

  • KYRANI Feb 12, 2012

    ..so how to get Union? "By desirelessness is perfect knowing found." And you said “you have to desire to be desireless” but it is possible. What the Vedas means when they say to become desireless is to become materially desireless, but spiritual desires continue. No! You are right to say “desire is an inherent property of the conscious being”, but you are wrong in concluding “therefore negating all desire is impossible”. To explain this let me address the other question you had about the Atman and Paramathma/Paramatma. Firstly Brahman is the all-pervading Principle or God or the Absolute.. words.. semantics.. what do we call it?. Then you have two schools of philosophy in Hinduism, one dualistic and the other non-dualistic and though they differ they both agree that there is a Supreme soul or Oversoul - the Paramathma/ Paramatma and that is the Absolute Atma. Then there is the jiva-atma which is the individual self, soul. In the Upanishads jiva-atman and Paramatman are compared to two birds sitting together in a tree -the body. The one, the jiva-atman “eats of the fruits” ie is an actor or participator and the other, the Paramatma is only an observer of the other. This is really no different to recognizing that we have awareness, and we are aware that we are aware. The individual soul or personal self (jiva) is aware and the higher self/observer Paramatma is aware that the individual is aware. Let me explain something here that I have seen, which adds a problem if we don’t appreciate it.
    The personal self as we experience ourselves is colored by our experience and hence arises ego self. The ego is and illusion and really nothing more than ideas that were/are impressionable and the associated bodily reactivity. Each of these pairs adds more and more character so the ego is built up. A part of the process of Union is dismantling this ego self. This is really what happens when we say the ego vanishes or becomes extinct. Fana in the Sufi tradition. Meditation is a royal road, though not the only one, because this process is facilitated. If you take the position of the Observing Self, which is really Paramatma and not jiva-atma you will be able to be dispassionate. An exercise I gave to help facilitate this was to picture yourself as being at the top of a skyscraper looking down at the traffic and use this attitude to look at the thoughts that arise in mind. (JimC it seems mistook this for distraction). After a while you will see the “switching” trying to happen as the jiva wants to engage and follow a thought and that causes reactivity in the body and it becomes a resonance.. hard to get out of. The more you stay with and identify with the Observing Self, the more you will see the ego is only pairs of ideas and associated bodily activity. And desire is this wanting to engage the thoughts.

  • KYRANI Feb 12, 2012

    The ONLY cure is a blossoming of your understanding. This is to understand that the Authority is God, that God is where the power is and it has great value in your life. Let me here again give you my experience. The evil under world figures, which include evil doctors, evil police and evil politicians etc., are racking me over the a white hot barbeque grille by a raging fire beneath. I am isolated. People have been scared off, harmed and even killed to “move them away” and at the time I did not know how to help them. I have no human help and my life is severely affected in very many ways but at the same time I am laughing at them. I could not do that without the experience I had in 1993-94 because it gave me the insight to be able to investigate not only my body and what was going on with my organs etc., but in understanding fundamental things about the mind and the universe in order to design and use mental prescriptions and with great success; And not only to heal myself and protect my dogs but also to ward off and fight the enemy. Through this insight, through the certainty of what is, I find the courage to fight and I know that the humane people will unite and together we will win against the evil. If you consider the matter without the Authority, then I am like an ant and they like the empire state building. I know that they have military hardware (eg sniper rifles and rocket grenades loaded and pointed at me day and night 24/7. I can’t prove it at present but the evidence is there to be shown. I know that they could reduce my house, as strong as it is, to matchstick size rubble if they could fire their weapons but they can’t. Surely they want to “take me out” using brutal stress and something that is usually white washed at autopsy.. cancer, strokes etc., but that is not the reason they can’t fire. They can’t do anything because of the Authority, because God is where the power is. The devil/ the evil association has only illusion and deceit and intimidation to go on.. NO AUTHORITY. If you can eyeball them then the state of things is in reverse. I am standing up as the empire state building and look down on them as if they are an ant because I know of (I have the knowledge) and I understand how to employ that knowledge to make use of the power of the Authority. I am being guided every step of the journey.. true. I am never alone because God is with me always. So in answer to your question “a genuine source does exist and is the source of all realities. We can call it God, Brahman, Amoun-Ra but no matter what name we call it, it is the Authority.. the only authority and we find it in Union!

  • KYRANI Feb 12, 2012

    @Fallensoul, you say “..our disease is our ignorance”. Yes! “We require an expert to provide knowledge, because we ourselves are too limited to remove the ignorance.” NO! Ignorance is the root cause of all diseases, both the supposed mental ones and the physical ones and spiritual ones! However you are wrong to think of going to an expert to provide you with knowledge. You compare with disease of the body and doctors. The point you make is flawed AND the example shows up that flaw! Let’s first look at your example and I will also give another too. I can only share with you my experience and from my experience a great number of doctors are toxic and greedy. These guys do not advice people simply with respect to healing/ getting well, but with respect how much profit can they make out of you. Sure they are a mixed bag because I can see that there are good doctors too. But my point is that going to “the expert” is not going to treat the ignorance. I did not make my remarks simply to criticize doctors because I recognize that there are good and bad, but I use this example to make the point that if a person gets a disease they need to heal and in today’s world they are not going to get to heal going to “the experts” - the authority to the extent of their knowledge of course. Take a different example. One would expect that a master /minister of religion is going to give the best advice, as an authority. Here again, from my experience (I studied and interacted with 22 teachers/masters of “spiritual healer of ignorance” over the years) and I found only 2 were genuine. One of the “phony teachers” said to me “when you have an enlightenment experience you got to come to me to get it confirmed” I accepted this because my guru while she was alive had never said anything of the kind and I did not have any other experience at the time. Finally I found this guy to be sus for other reasons so I left and found again a new teacher. This guy kept saying to me you don’t need an enlightenment experience confirmed. I begged him, even just for a favor, to confirm any experiences as I might have but he refused. “Not necessary” he kept saying. I spent more than 20 years searching, studying and practicing after this teacher. Then in the very last days of 1993 and the first few days of 1994 I had a mystical experience that extended over a number of days. Then I came to understand that this latter master was right. It is unmistakable! It was laughable to seek confirmation. And it so widened my understanding that for the first time I really understood what the holy texts were saying. The holy texts that I held in awe became like a cup of water where there was a flood everywhere. Yes, there is value going to someone who is “an expert in a field” but only for some guidance and provided they are ethical and altruistic. The spiritual teacher that told me I needed his confirmation was only seeking power an empire for himself.

  • slowlygetnthar Feb 12, 2012


    How can any knowledge be perfect? Because we filter any information by interpeting it through the lenses of our experiences and beliefs, that knowledge, if we are assuming it to be perfect, will be distorted in the eye of the beholder, when received and processed.

    The scientific/empirically-based current systems of science are out-moded by their own design. "Scientists" refuse to pursue research into fields that are (dis)dained/deemed by their disciplines to be "pseudo-science." If science is saying things don't exist because they cannot be explained via our current models of how things work, then, it needs to develop NEW MODELS.

    Change always happens from the perimeters, and slowly moves towards the center/acceptedness by society. By having dialogues, like the ones at this website, and by continuing to make it okay for people to consider these questions, shift will occur. It is like a tsunami, that starts as a low wave, far in the ocean, then, builds until it inundates society.

    Via dialogue and openess, we create an atmosphere where exploration of new concepts and scientific methodology is eventually invited. In a sense, we are all the authorities, because collectively, we have voice and sway.

  • Fallensoul Feb 10, 2012

    @KYRANI: Thanks for the post.

    "A person who has become diseased needs to heal, not a doctor."
    Well how is he going to heal without going to an expert doctor and getting a prescription. It is the point, our disease is our ignorance. We require an expert to provide knowledge, because we ourselves are too limited to remove the ignorance.

    "A genuine source does exist"
    Okay can you elaborate?

    "by desirelessness is perfect knowing found."
    The problem with disrelessness is that you have to desire to be desireless. It is not possible. What is Vedas means when they say to become desireless is to become materially desireless, but spiritual desires continue. Desire is an inherent property of the conscious being, therefore negating all desire is impossible.

    "It is found through yoga; union of the personal self with the impersonal self.”
    Any references in your genuine source of knowledge for this statement?

    "We do need to do something mystical as well as what we do practically in the laboratory."
    What do you mean by mystical?

    "And this is not something just for scientists, this is what everyone needs to do and arrive at."
    Exactly, everyone has to become a spiritual scientist.

    >In the Gita Krishna advises Arjuna on meditation and says to lift up the jiva (lower or personal self) by means of that Atman (higher or >universal, impersonal self).
    First you say Authoritative knowledge is limited, why then do you quote the Gita. Besides that, it seems the version of the Gita you have is misinterpreted. Where in the gita does it say impersonal self? That is your interpretation. Atman means an individual soul with form. Paramathma is the Supreme Soul. They are two distinct persons. How have they become one? Perhaps you read the Bhagavad-Gita As It Is version before responding.

    >internal are one and the same. It is all created through choice and the wellspring is infinite.
    Can you choose not to die? We cannot even control our suffering, so how can you be one and the same with God?

    Perhaps you can read and respond on the Simultaneous Duality and Non-duality thread.

  • KYRANI Jan 30, 2012

    In the Gita Krishna advises Arjuna on meditation and says to lift up the jiva (lower or personal self) by means of that Atman (higher or universal, impersonal self). This exactly is the way. By means of the higher awareness, which is none other than the Supreme Self or the Supreme God, whatever we are to call the Nameless, the wellspring of what we call reality is realized. In this state there is no more subject and object, just the observing remains. Science is and at the same time isn’t blind to this higher awareness. We hear scientists admit that “we are aware that we are aware” but then atheism and careers and prestige gets in the way. So they water it down. You can see scientists like Antonio Damasio, a neuroscientist are looking to justify consciousness (awareness) simply by making observations in the brain. However as you can see on this video on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMrzdk_YnYY not only is he scrambling to explain consciousness but also the personal self. However what he doesn’t say is this all-important “we are aware that we are aware”. There are two levels of awareness not one and this higher awareness he cannot explain.. like not at all, so he doesn’t even mention it. I don’t want to single him out for criticism. One can see that he is trying to understand with the tools that he has. I only mention him because he voices the very point of view of most, if not all scientists. It tries to retain authority (of the scientists) at the cost of perfect knowing. Science has just become another corrupt priesthood, with “we’re the guys that know and you the little people have to come to us”. It’s garbage. The knowing is open to all. It is our very being. God is not our teacher but Being itself. Once people know all this the average person becomes a scientist. I’m not saying there is no room left for specialization but the phony high priests come down off their pedestals. The old paradigm sees the world out there as objective and diverse. The new paradigm realizes that what looks like objective reality is but a dream. What we experience as “out there” and what we believe as internal are one and the same. It is all created through choice and the wellspring is infinite. Without desires the wellspring is seen, with desires the myriad manifestations are seen. These two are the same. This is the mystery that is discovered. We have a creative ability that will take us far beyond our wildest imagination and the new medium is thought. When we understand on this level then with thought alone we can recreate our bodies, we can fight any and all enemies without the need of anything physical and win. We have the potential to build objects with literally nothing. To achieve our full potential and travel through all space and time at the blink of an eye we need to become one and that means eradicating evil, the force that causes separation. All authorities are for.. I better not say. Oneness is the go!

  • KYRANI Jan 30, 2012

    Firstly Fallensoul I beg to differ with you on the matter of the disease and the doctor and not coincidentally. A person who has become diseased needs to heal, not a doctor. Yes most people go looking for the right doctor but it is not the point. If we are finding science inadequate, then will scientists fix it? In many cases they’re the problem. For me scientific knowledge, specifically medical science but the example applies to whatever branch, was not just limited, but totally inappropriate. Ironically enough, owing to the actions of people, who included the very people whom I now no longer require for the healing of my body, I was driven to ask “could there be another way”? I had to find another way since it was a live or die situation literally; because apart from the diseases, it was made known to me in no uncertain terms that I would be butchered all the way to the trash can. Of course it was only a few doctors but which doctors? So I had to ask myself what am I to do? What experiments? I needed to find these and not academically. I had to find the answer or die! So what authority and what knowledge was there to find and indeed to eat of its fruits and live to give account!
    Authoritative knowledge, be it science, holy scriptures and the ideas cherished in the personal mind are useful but limited. Their limitation is not merely due inevitably to some corruption. The limitation is due to the fact that we are looking at a map and not the territory. A genuine source does exist and by desirelessness is perfect knowing found. It is found through yoga; union of the personal self with the impersonal self.”
    We need not to throw away what we have. We need to see it from another perspective and to do that we need to go beyond the personal self as the sole observing agency. And here I disagree with you again Fallensoul. We do need to do something mystical as well as what we do practically in the laboratory. In the lab we observe that nature is elusive. Heisenberg said something along the lines of we cannot just observe and measure nature, we necessarily interact with nature each and every time we go to observe and/or measure nature. And the reason is that we have an input and that input is not trivial. We choose and we observe what we choose. It is rather like the scientist saying I want to see this particle and the universe/reality says okay let me show you such a particle since that is your desire! Is the particle real outside of our choosing it into existence? We discover the answer here if we do the mystical work first. And this is not something just for scientists, this is what everyone needs to do and arrive at.

  • Fallensoul Jan 27, 2012

    Sorry for the misunderstanding Jim. ET means our EthanT. He's a different kind of Extraterrestrial :).

  • Anonymous Icon

    Jim Centi Jan 27, 2012

    fallensoul,

    I’ve watched the movie ET the Extraterrestrial several times and I don’t recall that it contains the dialogue which you contribute to it. Please explain……Jim

  • Fallensoul Jan 27, 2012

    ET said: "The question of authority is a sticky issue. What authority? What perfect knowledge?

    Firstly it should be said that the question of authority is a necessary one. Only a man who admits that he is diseased can appreciate the fact that he requires a doctor. Finding out which is the best doctor to give the correct medicine is a very essential but secondary thing. It starts with one's admission that the knowledge i have right now is limited, could there be other methods of knowledge? Am I open to try that experiment. Those who do the experiment, don't have any problems with authority.

    It is not very amazing thing to judge which authority or which perfect knowledge -- one judges a tree by its fruits i.e you judge by the result. How does one know that he is getting full when eating? He experiences satisfaction, the sense of wholeness. The result is there.

    Any form of authoritative knowledge be in science, the Bible, the Vedas, your mind -- whatever -- if that knowledge can actually help you elevate your consciousness so that you can clearly perceive reality, and your relationship within it -- that should be accepted. But as we have been arguing our senses and mind has limits. It can't really bring about an accurate picture of reality. We need help. The more we discover, the more we realize we don't know jack. So we have to take help from someone who does know. This is the point science has to appreciate.

    One may deny that there exists any such source or that there are so many bogus sources, but the point is a genuine source exists and anyone who is fortunate enough by his sincere desire to find out the truth is guided to become a humble student of a genuine source of perfect knowledge. He cannot deny the reality of his own successful experiments. This is what yoga is all about.

    It's just like you study any subject. A physics student who wishes to get a degree in physics has to learn under an authorized teacher in an recognized university. Only by doing the course, following the instructions, practicing can he come to gain true knowledge of physics. There may be many bogus unrecognized institutions or bogus teachers, but that doesn't mean there arent genuine ones.

    So one has to judge by actually entering into such knowledge and doing the experiment for oneself. It is not something mystical. It may take a little time to find the right teacher, but that is really fueled by one's own internal desire for the sincerely wanting to know truth. If you want to be cheated, there are sufficient cheaters to help you. Seek and ye shall find.

    The main point though is can one truly learn theoretical physics without a teacher? Can we really learn anything properly without a teacher?

    Why then is it so hard for science to accept the Supreme teacher or God and take research topics from his knowledge, perform the experiment on oneself and replicate the results to others.

  • or Sign Up to Add a Comment

Stay in touch with IONS