Maharishi Effect - Group Meditations Lower City Crime Rate By 16% On Average

[snowleopard]

@Leo Gura  Alas, poor bodhisattva's may now have to not only wait for all sentient beings to be enlightened, but now robots as well, before attaining nirvana ... the game is fixed  

[Leo Gura]

10 minutes ago, Maxx said:

A robot is not "organically created and developed by consciousness" and the "will to live". It is some hardware, "artificially" put together, and software, i.e. a language nature doesn't understand.

Natural/artificial is a contrived duality.

Alive/not-alive is also a contrived duality.

Hardware/software is also a contrived duality.

The entire universe is made of one substance, and it is capable of life and consciousness and anything else, given the proper structure and organization. Whether humans can actually engineer the right structure and organization is another matter. That's an empirical question. My guess would be, they probably will figure it out at some point, but not in our lifetimes. It will not happen at least until all of science acknowledges that materialism is false, and nonduality is true. Only then will neuroscience and AI really blossom.

[snowleopard]

@blazed  Ok, as soon as Leo is finished deconstructing Derrida, next up is Black Mirror ... Gotta love it, home alone with metaphysics and Sci-fi induced existential fear... New Year's eve just doesn't get any better ... Well, maybe if I had some shrooms ! 

Edited January 1, 2018 by snowleopard

[snowleopard]

@blazed  Yeah, season 4 only just became available here, and I've seen all the others, including the White Christmas one. Still, as entertaining as they may be, they truly pale in comparison to my own dreamtime explorations. But whereas those do have to be interrupted by consensus idea constructions, on this occasion, Black Mirror will have to do  

[Joseph Maynor]

Nature works a certain way, and then labels and meanings are attached to how the Mind conceives of that way.

[Leo Gura]

Of course dog shit and chocolate are ultimately made of the exact same thing: nothingness or consciousness.

Yes, dog shit/chocolate is a duality. What you choose to eat is up to you. Personally, I prefer chocolate, but then again, that's just a matter of taste. Humans like chocolate, flies like dog shit. Maybe flies are on to something. You gotta keep an open mind about such things

[zazed]

@Maxx I am drunk, so a bit too direct, but i love you regardless.

It doesn't matter. Your reality does what your reality enjoys. You can turn or take it however you want. You can fight the nature of good taste for billions of years. But nothing will ever change the fact human anatomy is hardwired to crave sugars, fats. This does not mean anything other than the evolution of your biology. A dog shit does not nourish your flesh, whatever illusions you may hold.

Dog shit exists, chocolate exist, you exist, eating exists. It all exists in some form. Eat what the fuck you want, chocolate or dog shit, nobody really gives a fuck about what YOU eat. There is no duality, it is all possible, nothing is obligatory, nothing is optional. There is the reality, period, end of story. Whatever labels you want to give, feel free to give them, it only impacts your own mind and reality... You will exist regardless, awareness does not need your labels to do so. Whatever you construct, you construct only for yourself.

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, zazed said:

nobody really gives a fuck about what YOU eat.

Tell that to these folks, they got arrested:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/09/26/russian-cannibal-couple-may-have-drugged-killed-and-eaten-as-many-as-30-people-police-say/?utm_term=.4a879d1b0cc3

[sgn]

@Leo Gura Aaaaaand hope in humanity lost..

[Guest Annetta]

Wendigos.

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Maxx said:

You cannot take some pieces of metal you cobble together, some computer-chips, which you program in a certain programming language (like DOS for example) to execute certain things by differently conducting electricity, and expect it to be the way nature develops consciousness, believing that the so called AI will become conscious.

That is an empirical question.

But from what I've experienced, I see no reason why that cannot happen. Because consciousness doesn't actually exist. So no consciousness needs to be created. There is just BEING, which isn't just an abstract philosophical platitude. It resolves the mind-body problem, which is the chief obstacle to people accepting the possibility of conscious machines.

The problem is, under the materialist paradigm, people think that humans "have consciousness". This is technically false. Humans don't have consciousness. Everything is just BEING. And a computer can BE just as easily as a human. So the task for computer scientists isn't to spawn awareness or consciousness, it's to create a digital mind which can fool itself into thinking it exists when it really doesn't.

Of course I am just theorizing here, but theorizing based on my direct experiences of the Absolute.

If I had to bet, I would bet that computers can be made as self-aware or more self-aware than humans, and access levels of consciousness which humans cannot even dream of. But I could be wrong.

[Leo Gura]

@Maxx I'm not interpreting, I was speaking from my direct experiences. Reality is so empty, there isn't even consciousness.

That is true Sunyata, true Mu.

Utter nothingness. Reality doesn't need consciousness. It just is. Directly!

It's a mindfuck for sure. I sympathize with anyone trying to understand all this conceptually. It is just utterly, utterly radical. The mind cannot believe it.

There can be no distinction between inherent vs not-inherent. That is a duality.

You have to consider the possibility that your mind is lying to you more than I am.

[Dodo]

12 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Maxx I'm not interpreting, I was speaking from my direct experiences. Reality is so empty, there isn't even consciousness.

That is true Sunyata, true Mu.

Utter nothingness. Reality doesn't need consciousness. It just is.

It's a mindfuck for sure. I sympathize with anyone trying to understand all this conceptually. It is just utterly, utterly radical. The mind cannot believe it.

Emptiness is such a clear concept. Yet people keep trying to add subtle somethingness on top.. I know im not qualified to speak with authority on this yet, but here's a cool related pic!

[Leo Gura]

@AleksM Sorry for hijacking your thread.

[petragr]

no kidding , life is so incredible messy , even for beings without minds , like animals for an example , they are either predator or prey , one has to only watch the animal/nature shows and it tells all there .  One minute a little baby animal is walking around the next minutes it gets attacked and devoured! Or even baby birds , the bigger baby bird will kick the smaller one out of the nest , so it can survive better but the smaller one dies. Deepak Chopra once wrote that life on Earth is actually hell , I think he is right.

Being part of nature is so messy unless you are a flower or tree , i guess....

Edited January 1, 2018 by petragr

[Dodo]

36 minutes ago, Maxx said:

@Leo Gura I am speaking from direct experience, too. And emptiness (sunyata) just means that things do not exist inherently. That is Nagarjuna's philosophy in one sentence. That is what Buddhists refer to when speaking of dependent origination. Read some Nagarjuna or anything else about Madhyamaka and you will see. 

Stating that Nagarjuna's philosophy is dualistic, that's what you are implying, is wrong. The Buddhist masters of the last 2000 years know more than you.

Obviously there needs to be the knowing there in order to know this emptiness. But the knowing IS the emptiness itself

I think you are talking about the same no-thing/nothing and are just fussing over how it is described. 

 

Edited January 1, 2018 by Dodo

[Guest Annetta]

If reality is so empty that there is no consciousness, then how would the experience of everything being conscious fit into that statement?

[Dodo]

7 minutes ago, Maxx said:

@Annetta the point is that emptiness and appearance are the same. They are not different things. Everything is without essence. Appearance is empty vibration. But this does NOT (!) mean that things don't exist at all. That's the error several people make here. Of course everything exists including consciousness. But not in the way it appears to the unenlightened mind. Things do not exist on their own.

You are addressing a good point @Annetta, which points out the flaws of nihilistic philosophy.

When I see an image and add no thought to the perception, the image is self aware/there is absolutely nothing on the other side perceiving it, there is nothing except the present image. There is no enlightened mind, there is no anything, if thought doesn't swoosh in, just the image, being itself - nothing about existing on its own or connected to something else. This is your present moment experience too, do you deny it?  

[zazed]

31 minutes ago, Dodo said:

When I see an image and add no thought to the perception, the image is self aware/there is absolutely nothing on the other side perceiving it, there is nothing except the present image.

Interestingly, they have been able to restore sight to people who were born blind. These people can see perfectly, but cannot make any sense of it. Their brain cannot distinguish people from objects. Or even where one object begins and another ends in his vision. Its just a whole mess of visual stuff. The reason for this is that their brain has never learned how to see, it cannot make sense of this sudden new data.

So even the simple act of seeing without thinking, involves a whole lot of labeling and processing in the mind.
Similar to how certain optical illusions work for us. But an optical illusion would mean nothing to these people even.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/10/feature-giving-blind-people-sight-illuminates-brain-s-secrets

[Dodo]

39 minutes ago, Maxx said:

@Dodo I basically agree. I would just add one word to what you are saying. There is no "inherent" enlightened mind. The perceiver is what is perceived. "Everything" is looking. Agree?

Well there seems to be no looking either, there seems to be just the isness of it  But I guess it can be seen/expressed in different ways

Edited January 1, 2018 by Dodo