tvaeli

My intellectual pursuit is about a theory, which would hold not regarding on whether there is reincarnation or heaven or not, or whether we could have advanced psychic abilities or not. If the theory of life, karma and ethics, also the logic is not becoming inefficient with some combinations of variables, and you can always use more or less the same language, it's kind of scientific. Especially, it's communicative - science is shared -, and it allows people with different abilities and perceptions of truth to understand each others based on the same model. I do have a strong personal opinion and experience about whether I believe one or another of such claims, but for me a more important point is understanding and safe feelings with diverse world views, also the ability to point out the same mistakes. I have the most important points: Psychic Powers: Spiritual views do not specifically address that psychic powers, or deep consciousness about things like love and compassion (which have a taste of a miracle, when you experience them, even when they are basically quite simple to scientifically explain up to certain degree), would somehow require attributes of physics, which are not easy to find out or link with humans. More easy theory is that whether you have those abilities or not, your brain is still probable to develop a model of perception, which feels like real telepathy or magic power; our brain is multitasked, and when it reacts to all kinds of things, it finally creates our "virtual reality". It can be mixed - I have perceptions, which I call telepathy, but those are much more detailed and clear when I am also in material contacts with people; those can be very strong, but rather chaotic perceptions, but I can create models of brain functioning, which could reach similar occurrences without any radio contact or non-locality. I am very sure that telepathy utilizes such processes, and gains advantage of conscious and subconscious material inflow of information and processing of facts. Spiritually, this is philosophical case - it's not very important in terms of how we help the humankind and our friends, whether the psychic power is somehow "unnatural" or hard to explain; it's rather the spiritual, practical case, that it either works or does not. I would say we have many perceptions of other people, even perceptions of their emotions in more or less the same time when they are happening in the distance, and this skill can be developed further - in terms of spiritual growth, we want this human contribution and it's a side-effect if we can provide some new interesting details to science about the functioning or possibilities of humans, or about specific genes or strengths of soul, or phases of development. Enlightenment: As explained by Buddha, we do not need any mystery at all to explain why good karma, and cultivation of virtues of Buddhism and other religions, would eventually help to get to more meaningful and deeper stages of life. Indeed, clear consciousness of certain truths with a strength of a theorem, which is told to be a prerequisite to be a non-returner, leads us to best consequence. Attributes, which are similar to described psychic powers, would also appear in natural world by people simply supporting us in ways, which resemble those powers; for example we get more information as we handle it more carefully and responsibly, and our emotions affect other people more, when we are emotionally more beneficial. We could mean very material things by those terms about the powers, and this could possibly benefit the people, who understand the theorems in enlightenment, but do not have any prerequisites of psychic powers, if such are possible, or who do not want to break the philosophy of materialism - they would fulfill those ideals with material or scientific means and bring the same karmic consequence with people, who are capable of something harder to explain. To be neutral, we need to be very social with those people, who are atheists, but ethical, and create technologies or techniques equivalent to good magic. For example, by becoming more sensitive without becoming sensitives. Ethics: Equivalent models appear, whether the ethics is applied to our interactions with people and physical matter, or any kind of entities with higher consciousness or other powers; karmic or ethical principles of energy, doing good and bad, rewards and punishments - they happen all around, follow the same patterns, and eventually lead to same decisions. We can see a vision in a dream, but we cannot find out, how the brain or mind creates this - are we aware of every psychological, physical and biological factor or not. In religion, for example Buddhism, I think this is completely irrelevant; it's questionable, whether this is very important in terms of efficiency, whether we have explained it all or not. Eventually, as we measure it, we explain it and our spiritual theories would not have such exceptions or anomalies for long time - theories of magic, about how to apply will by creating a subconscious intent, is simply a psychology; those things could have been unresearched centuries ago, but today it's only a question, how many forces of nature are involved - theoretically, the magic works anyway, i.e. you can create a subconscious intent somehow and it would seem to create small meaningful random events in your life, with butterfly effects of some kind etc. Logic: Also, very similar attributes of logic, like lack of resources, management of time etc., are there in all those potential spheres. To be scientifically neutral, we have to consider the following: Not claim that something must break the physics, and atheists or skeptics should also not be so sure in this; I mean something we really experience. Alternative theories exist, which are not too demanding and imply the effects of some kind. The mind, it alters the matter anyway, even if it does use our bodies and all kinds of signals between people or people and the nature. We should not be sensational or give people very high, unrealistic promises, as we experience deeper, more subtle things. There are also a probability that some people are, for example, as sensitive as we are, but in a way which can be more or less *completely* explained; for them, they use the standard terms to talk about those topics. Having a common language, so that all those different people, who have built different models in their brains, can use the same language about things, which have a real impact. For example, someone might have hypersensory perception, but it's not so easy to verify this - it's much more easy to see, if they have any benefit in communication with people, finding objects, creating something etc. These real effects, which affect our lives, should be expressed in same terms as we use when we are sure someone could do the same with only the known attributes of human body and mind. For example, a telepathic experience might be unreliable to verify or very vague, but we can measure the people on basis of their effective communication, and the benefit from this communication. If they are able to benefit from their abilities, it would naturally affect their score, but also you can create more effective communication based on more introspection about the language and it's possibilities. It's rather philosophical, how you do it, and practical, what you are doing - so, the philosophy of others is not so much disturbing us, but the practical sides should be measured and standardized between models, like approaches of psychology, which explain certain factors with something hypersensory, or approaches, which explain them materialistically. Those are useful models and we need a common language, which would not confuse people about what you are actually able to do with all what you are. But still, there are differences ..I think we still need freedom of religion. It's currently assumed that all companies follow the same laws and thus hire people with all religious backgrounds - but rather, we should bring this freedom to another level, where companies can be different, valuating traits coming from religions or atheism, but the ecosystem is diverse, so that it's assured that all the different companies exist (in different areas of life); also that we do not check the spirituality, but the exact strengths coming from it, and appreciate when atheists have same kind of ethics, and materialist solutions to same problems.

If reincarnation is real, and all or most souls are having many reincarnations, whereas others might have only one life or go to heaven or hell (personal insights are so different, as different people might have real insights and inner knowledge, maybe the different theories hold for different karmic consequence); then would the existence of something like star seeds follow? In quite infinity of the Universe, there must be a lots of life somewhere out there - beyond the barriers we can even see. This brings the probability that star seeds would directly follow from reincarnation theory? So if you see "light in the end of tunnel", or you simply remember or verify something from the past lives, you have an account of experience, which leads to probability of aliens reincarnating to Earth, which is almost as big as the plausibility of these experiences. A person, who believes in reincarnation, would think that reincarnated aliens are quite natural consequence. Another thing - if there is real telepathy, would the psychic alien contact be very probable? If it's not limited by distance, I think it would almost be as probable as existence of aliens themselves. Then, with some telepathic experience, which seems to be unbound by distance, one would be inclined to think that alien contacts exist. If telepathy is somehow a perception of facts from natural world, which one perceives as strong feeling of something happening at distance, then would the evidence visible on Earth lead to perceptions of telepathic guts, which are complex brain calculations about the most probable alien cases, or would this "brain-emulated" telepathy not create probabilities of so different things?

Money is very easy thing to calculate. It's sure that with modern technology, we depend less on the money, but I'm not sure whether I want an AI to give me karmic points - and I think with material things, and operations with them, it's quite hard to avoid the appearance of single number. Not sure whether I want so complex theory, especially when an AI is judging every detail in my life. But good point anyway, with AI we can have more complex measures than a single number.

It's not a karmic view. The AI, which wins the battle, is not biased for anything - ethics cannot survive without logic. AI must have absolutely valid theorems to coexist with humans; it's the natural law of the world that everybody must do what it takes to exist - it's usually an ethical thing, but you can not avoid that what is really useless, will get extinct. Maybe the human simply feels they are useless, worthless being, and loses the motivation to live fully or kills themselves. To be human, you need very real logic about being useful, not something an AI has faked.

The world, where only karma matters, is too creative - you have to be creative about it every single moment. Money is a machine, it runs on it's own. You don't have to be a karma genius to understand it. It's an intellectual, rational thing, which is driven by community force.

Computers with AI can turn us all jobless by doing all the job. Then, we might not survive. So we need to develop NI, natural intelligence of humans, to the level, where it can express the unique abilities of humans. I think the unique ability is to understand, whether something is true or not - computers do not have the most innate sense of knowing; if the information given to them is biased, they would also be biased. I have thought a lot about AI, but I have never solved, how it could have the innate sense of pure knowledge. I also think the human creativity is higher. I think the superhuman intelligence able to live together with AI's would also cooperate with AI's the fullest: if you create maximum cooperation with artificial intelligence, and you utilize the strengths, which are unique to humans, and exercise the normal human traits, you can turn yourself into something, which could survive in the world of Artificial Intelligence.

I think it's an useful statement that bad people exist; also it's useful to state that they do not exist. I think there are many useful opinions or truths, but there are no last words. For example you can find out bad people are good in terms of more primitive life they are trying to live. Also you can find out the good and bad do not exist. But then they exist even more.

You say Jesus did not exist ..but I'm very careless about this question: more important question is, whether the man described in Bible is God? This really has to do with human destinies ..whether he existed, it has less. He was a God if his words are in correspondence with the Laws of Nature, the Creation of God - some people, who directly connect with Jesus somehow, can maybe know he existed; I think I once have seen there is so much wisdom that *something* had to exist. Where there is a genuine creation, there must be the creator. One also has to ask, is this material structure - the Church, the priests etc., with all those traditions, bringing people closer to God - for example, to the unified life. Scientific Doubt has this problem - when you are scientifically doubting, you really cannot get many facts out of the things. Then, you have to measure those things without those facts. When you are very, very skeptical, you cannot be sure that you are living in a world with other people. But when you philosophize like that, you have to follow ethics - thus, most scientific people mostly agree the ethics in Bible is fine, and they cannot agree in much more. When you start mistreating people, because they might not exist, it's not a philosophical doubt, but disconnection from life. You can doubt in Christ, in God, in everything - but you must treat the Book of Bible right.

But a scientist - how morally broken they have to be for us to ask, whether they are fake? They are first to attack people based on this - but what's their own actual work? Do we get to know somehow, when a psychologist is morally wrong? Are they taking no responsibility or why we see them "doing no mistakes"? If they do not take responsibility at all, they could be clean, but then - if they only mock others, when they have mocked them all, then who is then doing the work? I think sadhguru is maybe really too easy believer as he would teach all kinds of things, but those things have at least some truth in it. If his students are not "scientifically sure" in what he says, it's also not very scientific to scientifically check him. The people must be sure it's a scientific knowledge, not an inspiring story or useful model - only then you can attack the model by it's not being scientific. Otherwise it's like criticizing poetry about it's scientific facts. There are many different ways to believe.

In another thread people started to "attack" me, because I was talking rationally. They somehow concluded, that I must not have spiritual experience. I think spiritual experience is about making our mind more open, feeling the harmony and synchronicity. It's a state of mind, where you have a very deep sense of meaning. It's the "mindfulness" thinking, where your mind puts you into a state of wisdom and synchronicity, which arise from emptyness, and turns you into an egoless being. This is the truth of ethics, truth pointing to the higher. The rational, intellectual mind, which creates a "reason", is another power. It's to arise the logic, which is a negative pole on another end of the truth - when you do positive things, "supertruth", which arose from mindfulness, you still have further the negative truth. There is the truth of logic - it's pointing to the lack of the lower. Meditations have two extremes: meditations of non-concentration, like the Zen, and meditations of concentration or focus. When you concentrate on your thoughts, feelings, a mantra or a candle, then in some forms the concentration takes you to lower states. You do not think in terms of the whole, but in terms of the parts. You see how, the ideal meets the logic somewhere, and the ideals get destroyed. To think in the parts, being intellectual instead of mindful, has also another superpower - you think like a part, you work on tiny bit of something grander. Then, your enlightenment becomes the collective enlightenment - when you think intellectually, you think in union with others, and everybody works on their small part. This is the western superpower, and it has been very successful in enforcing it's power in the world - many eastern countries are also civilized in the western way, even if they work hard to integrate this to their own thinking. There is the whole, and it's reasonable to be mindful about this. Mind is capable to work with the wholes. But there are the parts and it's reasonable to be intellectual about them. The intellect is capable to work with the parts. When the mindfulness, the yang, becomes into extreme, it breaks. Maybe you live in a dream, but your dream starts to eat some kind of resources - for a dream to exist, and to exist in a power of civilization, there has to be a lots of logic. You see a dream, your mind is being a whole, but your brain is working like a machine. The second problem is witchcraft. You can be very enlightened and really able to build your dream. But then, in the end, it break logic - logic of mind, of community, of business, politics or physics. For example, people misunderstand your teachings and make mistakes. In this end, not by how the dream-nature goes, but how the logical reality goes, you get some bad karma, and it's slowly going to break you - you are witch in a sense that your karmic connections do not meet end-to-end, but there is some falsehood, where you cannot achieve your good karmic effect. Then, what you promised by your heightened states, becomes a lie, and people, who believed or synchronized subconsciously, become manipulated - because you are not able to give, what you promised and believed. This is a situation to be scientifically analyzed, because there are logical chains of actions, which do not meet together. It's extremely insulting to suggest people to not think rationally, to not use the power of the reason. It's another aspect of the same thing, when a materialist or an atheist is laughing about spirituality and fighting it down. The whole mind is both yin and yang - yin in looking the parts, yin in rationality and reason, and yang in looking the whole, yang in spirituality and belief. The Christianity and the Scientific Thought is working on the parts, and on the bigger wholes, which can be made up of the parts. People are together, and work for the greater whole, which they create or get from the God - one person is a small part of it. The Buddhism or Hinduism works rather with the small wholes, which start feeling the wholistic axes of the Universe, and synchronizing with this; the wholistic view is very personal. Still they cannot think so easily, how the parts work together. The intellectual thought brings the karmic ends together, until every person gets energy from activities, which are good to the system. By this karmic synchronization, it creates a civilization, a church, or a scientific community around the world. In this system, a person puts very little effort into getting their karma together - by following the direct reward and punishment, their karmic effects are already enlightened. They do not have to waste personal energy on this - they follow the easiest way, and in the system, by this non-doing, they behave like good parts. By this, the system starts operating like a machine - nobody is wasting the energy, but they only receive it, and the system is able to carry on with it's karmic responsibility. This creates the miracles of science, development of countries, other economical, political and intellectual miracles. It's able to win wars with personally enlightened beings - not exactly against the enlightened ones, but towards civilizing their cultures, which do not work like machines. The personal, mindful enlightenment, works on personal effort. The karmic thing to understand to behave well is very big, and then, the creative people try to create the civilization or the unity. It does not work like a machine, but takes the effort every day, and can burn out the participants. In civilization, when there is also a personal level of enlightenment - this is the supercivilization. When intellectual people are also mindful, it's a whole new potential. I think this combination of yin and yang is not possible to be beaten - the enlightened people are able to care about their surroundings and to work out the civilization, so that there is no need to civilize and colonize something for the others. It's very important to see that in Christianity and science, a big whole becomes enlightened and a single person thinks like a little part of the system, they think intellectual thoughts, which are never a whole - those thoughts are little parts of the whole. When this becomes enlightened, by big revolutions, like the scientific revolution and the democratic revolutions, it organized a huge brain, where people are tiny cells - and this brain becomes enlightened somehow, even if this is secret. I have always felt that in the big superpowers, there is some enlightened soul, which understands an enlightened person very well. They speak about alien contacts, psychic powers etc., which are somewhere there in the enlightened communities and act on their own. In those, an enlightened soul can see some extreme clear vision and wisdom, which recognizes the enlightened soul and their role in society, as the superpower itself has the same powers and understandings; it has became to be by enforcing the love, brotherhood and friendship, the collective good karma. On the other hand, Buddhists, Hinduists and others have the personal enlightenment - when a part is seeing the whole, it's like a dot on the hologram; from small number of such dots, the complete hologram can be formed - but there is more noise; from many of such dots, the hologram achieves good quality. When you take a little part of the hologram; every part contains the whole, but the whole has better quality, when the part is bigger. The part feels like a whole, but it cannot say it's the final end - the final end is when many parts feel the whole. The process is then creative and not systematic, and it needs a new effort every day, where, in the collective mind, only a system works and does it's thing kind of automatically - an official does not need to meditate every day for the government to exist, he simply does his little part like a machine. To be complete, we need to work for individual, mindful thinking, to have one projection of the hologram of the whole; but we also need to be intellectual and think in terms of the parts of the system or a machine, to combine our collective effort and build something grander than ourselves. This also has to exist inside ourselves - we have a mindful wisdom, but also the intellectual knowledge about the parts of the algorithms our mind sees as the wholes.

I think there is eastern and western superpower, and western one is based on scientific attitude. This is one-sided to be completely mental, one also needs to be rational - https://www.actualized.org/forum/topic/101247-east-and-west-meaning-of-meditation-enlightenment-and-superpower/. I see the one-sidedness in the science person telling that they have debunked all spirituality and enlightenment is a lie, and I see the same effect on spiritual people, who do not tolerate intellectual knowledge.

I gave a second thought to your post. I have been accused to be more intellectual and think, before. I am a very spiritual and mystical, in a way, but a very rational person. You cannot completely convince me that materialist theories are wrong. I give you some reasons for intelligence - I also discussed this matter in https://www.actualized.org/forum/topic/101247-east-and-west-meaning-of-meditation-enlightenment-and-superpower/#comment-1462178: Intellectual thought is more shared, collective thing. People do not need a special preparation to understand such words. Intellectual thought is hardly wrong. Once you do all the philosophy and remove the parts you are not sure in, you cannot fail with this. By trusting your senses only, you do not verify the fact and you can shift slightly off the reality. I have solved, in me, the contradiction between intellectual and mental. I am both, and fully - I do not easily pretend to break the laws of physics or make the claims of a top scientist false, and I respect also the simpler materialist models as some people can live with them; I also do not see the contradiction with science in spiritual things - rather, I see they sometimes have narrow models, which would have to be developed to fit the scientific thought, but I respect the spiritual people with simple models, and when I sense some sounds of it as kind of nonsense, or I see they would not get the advantage of sciences, I see people can live with such theories and there is some important core of Truth, so I validate this and create more neutral models, which have less contradictions. These are different people and they live in different ways. I think the Intellectual, Collective education of the West has won people in wars, who did not have this kind of reasoning. The reasoning, intellectual thought is a superpower and even intellectual materialist is able to create so strong civilizations that people, who only believe in mystics and karma, would be beaten, because they do the mistake of being irrational and leaving karmic ends, which suddenly turn into bad karma like undeveloped witchcraft. People, who lack intellectual thought, can be manipulative - they do the reactions, which make others to give them something and make moves they want, but then they have not connected the karmic ends of those reactions, which would make others to benefit from this. This is the essence of witchcraft - you learn the reactions, which make people to move, and you use them to "control" the people and the situations, but suddenly it turns out you did not meet their reasons to move in this way, and they must work hard to change their habits; in the end, the witchcraft does not work - the karmic circle will not go together, it will not create a substancial benefit. People need to be more and more deep and intelligent with their behaviors - so that they are "moved" by people, who have really made the ends fit, and who does not see this as control. Psychological theories can be used to create witchcraft, but those things have very serious ends, when it turns out you have used subconscious lies, and people take serious efforts to fix their subconscious mind and make you unable to continue your witchcraft. Scientific thought, the intellectual culture, is somehow so strong to get over witchcraft in yourself and others. It connects the negative reasons, causes and effects, karmic processes in the ends, where people must get their part of the benefit, when they move like your signals would suggest them to move. It raises the level of independence, is suitable for many different people, who do not have some psychic, mental, intellectual superpowers, and replaces the control and manipulate strategies with free cooperation with creativity and synchronicity. These are completely different superpowers, but I must conclude: people on the level of Buddha are really able to connect their karmic ends, and Buddhists tend to be really sane, but they spend enornomous amount of energy to achieve this; for intelligent people, who also practice the reason, avoidance of effects of witchcraft, subconscious manipulation of people and materials, is systematic and automatic. For Buddhist, civilization is built if very aware thought exists, but west adds this intellectual, shared and communicative thought, which builds civilized world more or less automatically - a civilized person is more or less completely safe from witchcraft, even if they are atheist, materialist, and having no "special powers" of similar kind. They can avoid cults, manipulation, people in need of unreasonable control, etc. They do not easily buy fake products or follow fake teachers. All these nightmares start appearing, when you go too pure with your mentality, making your mind very pure dream - the logical ends exist in any dream and they break it. The Buddhism contains many safe thoughts to achieve lifestyle, which is also good for these practical ends, and Christians are also very practical - but when you take the best things you can find in spirituality and religion, and make your mind purely yang, purely positive, it's like going to party every day and forgetting the job - suddenly, you have to pay.

I tried to answer every part of your inquiry. Maybe my answers were too long. You cannot convince me. I think you are looking only at one side of the Truth; and as a Buddhist I also must believe in Cause and Effect, the Law of Karma. I think your position is what is working for a while - it's the complete Yang situation, where you only want to experience the Good. In Taoist teachings, the extreme of Yang will, at some moment, at it's peak, break down. I believe in Positive and Negative. The Positive - this is like what you said, it's creation of our own reality quite freely. The Negative, or the Reason, is very far, but it will eventually break in - in addition to ethics, which is similar to yours, there is logic and deduction. Witches create their own reality, when they are not very advanced. They try to persuade people into fit of their own dream. Finally, they do something like negative witchcraft - they do not make sure that the energy others are spending to their goods would flow back to them. The positive witchcraft is more like what we experience in religion like Buddhism - you bring together the positive cycles of energy, and then, for others it's also useful to create your own dream. Somewhere there is a karmic connection that they, too, need to create positive karma and their dreams out of being your dream. Then it all works together - people co-create. Your theory is prone to the effect, where you create and create your dream, but suddenly the people involved start lacking something. Then, what you would have created as positive energy, so that when people follow the Force they also fulfill your dream, would turn into the manipulation - you give them the karmic ends to do your dream, but suddenly that karma lacks the energy. Energy is very real. In the big picture, we are not only beings of the Heavens, but we need to go to the Hells and help those beings to also achieve higher states; otherwise, one day they come anyway. You can help them if they accept this. This is more like Christianity than Buddhism, or it's a Mahayana Buddhism also, where you stay in lower realms and help them to get more enlightened. There is a hard fact, which somewhere meets your dream.

Yes revelation is a kind of proof, but it's quite personal. When many people would get revelations, they would create proofs based on that - but in our common speech, it's very important that decisions of people with very different sense abilities, truth perceptions, IQ's would understand them about the same way. When we have common notations for our basic points, we meet much less counteractivities - the revelations you get from your spiritual advancements are often misunderstood and suppressed by other people.

I have to disappoint you - I have a lot of mystical experience. In my case, the two are not opposites; this post is about a very intellectual topic - being Scientific about God, and for this topic, reliance on mystical experience would not be beneficial. I also have a lot of scientific experience. I have got a lots of wisdom in short time; but science is communicative tool - others would not always have anything to do with this experience. It's hard to answer, why I look for this scientific reality - you are very skeptical about this ..but shortly, it's bad when the material senses interfere with spiritual senses - each sense needs to come to conclusions from it's own data. To be an integrated whole, one also needs to develop an intellectual wisdom from their five senses and ability to think; this is a very communicative wisdom.