Science Coexisting With Enlightenment

[MarkusR]

@Leo Gura Well, since it is my passion I may as well join the scientific conquest to come into contact with this fact. It is not that I am waiting for science to prove enlightenment it for me, but to realize it as well  as bring it forth into science with my own ideas and experiments. (hopefully)

P.S

Leo this forum was an awesome idea! The entire community is amazing. If you ever decide to leave for your own reasons I think we would all appreciate if atleast this forum were kept alive, maybe hiring someone else to run this place while you are gone.

P.s P.s

It would be cool to think that after a while you would probably become some sort of urban myth or legend in this community.

Edited April 15, 2016 by MarkusR
Extra notes

[MarkusR]

@Chives99 Yes because neuroscience studies the brain, consciousness can not be found in the brain it goes much deeper than that. So although neuroscience is great for understanding why and how we act, I do not think it is the science that will be able to explain consciousness itself. Consciousness to me seems to be a universal force, the means to which everything exists, so it goes way beyond what our brain functions are.

[SkyPanther]

7 hours ago, MarkusR said:

@Chives99 Yes because neuroscience studies the brain, consciousness can not be found in the brain it goes much deeper than that. So although neuroscience is great for understanding why and how we act, I do not think it is the science that will be able to explain consciousness itself. Consciousness to me seems to be a universal force, the means to which everything exists, so it goes way beyond what our brain functions are.

Look up Penrose, Orch-Or and Panpsychism.

There are very celebrated physasistes trying to tackle the question, but currently they are being ridiculed by other scientists for it. 

[Isle of View]

54 minutes ago, SkyPanther said:

... but currently they are being ridiculed by other scientists for it. 

Because it is contrary to the current paradigm of the scientific dogma.

[SkyPanther]

3 hours ago, Isle of View said:

Because it is contrary to the current paradigm of the scientific dogma.

I agree, and this is what I mean by people take concepts too seriously (in science, philosophy, and religion). 

In my view religion -> philosophy -> science are all tied in a process, one came out of the other. And none of them are "true" because all three deal with conceptualized thoughts, ideas, emotions, and observations (using the six sense bases)tied together by the mind.

 

[Isle of View]

@SkyPanther Right.

Some schools are more precise than others.

And some people are more prepared to get the message.

When truth is the absolute, we can ever only approximate the truth through symbols and other communication systems (sound, language, conceptualizations). 

 

~Chris

 

[Kelley White]

Someday Science and spirituality will learn to tango, but I think its going to take a bit more time to evolve there.  

[Will Bigger]

On 4/13/2016 at 0:52 PM, abrakamowse said:

I think Leo was referring to a different thing. Sometimes people use science to deny the existence of a God. They call it Universe hehehe... but they deny that the universe can be also God.

Like Sam Harris, I agree with everything he says. The only difference is that he believes there's a big consciousness and that we are all one, so he says "there's no God"... I think, that's God.

 

The problem is the labels we use, and the realities we create, to see the same thing differently and to arrive to different conclusions even when the facts are the same.

yes. What i realized when asked if i believed in God recently is that I don't even relate to the question anymore. lol

[FirstglimpseOMG]

My thoughts are that if you make the efforts to understand just the layman's terms and demonstrations of how Quantum Mechanics seem to work and the subsequent quantum theories that are lately meshing very nicely with the hard mathematics side of things, you may hit on a few mini Aha! moments a little later during your enlightenment quest a little easier. The way the top physicists are very recently describing the universe via quantum experiments and theories, and matching/backing it up with the wicked mathematics that they go through looking for matches that correlate with their knowledge + theories, is profound lately. The way these advances are being explained and exposed to the public in layman's terms through lectures featured on Youtube etc., really manages to explain very, very well and convincingly, without religion or philosophy, the nature of us and the Universe and thoughts and probability waves collapsing and the nature and origin of consciousness... I absorbed all of that out of sheer curiosity, just before discovering Leo's site and videos. Get that latest quantum science unpacked in your head (whoah, already), then get Leo Gura just crushing your ego and illusive sense of self in his Enlightenment intro and part 1 and part 2 videos. However it happens that the sense and illusion of self dissolves for you long enough for you to sense and experience your true nature is going to be different for everyone when they get there. Science, current quantum mechanics and theories - superposition, entanglement, all the probability wave collapse stuff that happens, all that unity field stuff, with the string theory and super-string theory... all that new quantum science, all of it in my opinion and understanding, dovetails perfectly, naturally, and flawlessly with every word Leo says about enlightenment and our true nature in his 3 Enlightenment videos. In my very strong opinion anyway, lol. If you were to study the quantum stuff 'til it resonated with you (took me a few months, casual online study and research), then, however it happened, you were able to calm your monkey-mind down and make it still enough to start grasping 'No Self', and actually looking inward and recognizing for the first time in your life, your true nature?

I'm convinced current science and Enlightenment are absolutely intermingled now. Perfect fit if you do the research and think long and hard on it. 

I honestly believe that without current quantum science as I understand it now as a stepping stone before having Leo hammer away at me on the No Self Truth.... I don't think l would have experienced that elusive flash of Ego Death, revealing my true nature. 

 

[Leo Gura]

On 4/14/2016 at 11:26 AM, Flower said:

Yes, But does this not assume that brain= mind, so that ego is situated in brain structure?

So does ego exist only at the neurobiological level, what about the phenomenological aspects of ego?

Yes! Brain = mind. No brain, no ego, no mind.

But enlightenment is outside all of that!

Your distinction between neurobiological and phenomenological is bogus. There is no such thing. There is only one substance: awareness. Everything else is illusions within awareness.

On 4/15/2016 at 9:10 PM, MarkusR said:

@Leo Gura Well, since it is my passion I may as well join the scientific conquest to come into contact with this fact. It is not that I am waiting for science to prove enlightenment it for me, but to realize it as well  as bring it forth into science with my own ideas and experiments. (hopefully)

P.S

Leo this forum was an awesome idea! The entire community is amazing. If you ever decide to leave for your own reasons I think we would all appreciate if atleast this forum were kept alive, maybe hiring someone else to run this place while you are gone.

P.s P.s

It would be cool to think that after a while you would probably become some sort of urban myth or legend in this community.

The problem is that enlightenment might not be an idea or anything you can experiment on. It sits outside of any experiment you could possibly run or any idea you could possibly have. You can screw around with ideas and experiments for a million years, and you still will never come one step closer to enlightenment. When you say "enlightenment", what you're actually talking about is all possible existence & non-existence of reality and non-reality.

P.S. Hopefully I won't have to leave