A Challenge To Everything You Think You Know

[electroBeam]

@jse

"To reach the most distant star in our own galaxy would take 100000 light years. These calculations are made using the assumption that light has a speed."

True. light doesn't have a speed. Really, speed is a mental construct, and when we say that nothing is faster than the speed of light, we are making a claim that isn't necessarily true. 

Sadghuru talked about this once, that time changes all the time. When you're having fun time goes fast for instance. In our western scientific view, we would say that no our brains just made time seem quicker, it didn't actually go quicker. BUT as sadghuru said, this view is inside out, because empirically speaking, purely empirically speaking, the sensory world is the only world we know, and the only truth, and hence our western scientific view that time doesnt change is flawed. 

And also, in my opinion, this is a very good point:

". In other

words, everyone knows that if you drop something it will fall, but no one

knows precisely why. Many people know that electric ch

arges push or pull

on each other even if separated in a vacuum, but again no one knows why.

Although the phenomena are quite different, the equations which describe

the force of interaction are quite similar:

For gravitation: F=Gmm'r

2

For electrostatic interaction: F=Kqq'r

2

The attractive force between our planet and our sun is described by the

gravitational equation. The attractive force between orbiting electrons and the

atomic nucleus is described by the electrostatic interaction equation. Now

each of th

ese equations was determined experimentally. They are not

apparently related in any way, and yet they both describe a situation in which

attractive force falls off with the square of the distance of separation.

A mathematical representation of an action at a distance effect is called a

field, such as a gravitational or electric field. It was Albert Einstein’s

foremost hope to find a single relation which would express the effect of

both electric and gravitational phenomena; in fact, a theory which would

uni

fy the whole of physics, a unified field theory. Einstein believed that this

was a creation of total order and that all physical phenomena were evolved

from a single source."

 

[jse]

1 minute ago, electroBeam said:

light doesn't have a speed. Really, speed is a mental construct, and when we say that nothing is faster than the speed of light, we are making a claim that isn't necessarily true. 

Sadghuru talked about this once, that time changes all the time. When you're having fun time goes fast for instance. In our western scientific view, we would say that no our brains just made time seem quicker, it didn't actually go quicker. BUT as sadghuru said, this view is inside out, because empirically speaking, purely empirically speaking, the sensory world is the only world we know, and the only truth, and hence our western scientific view that time doesnt change is flawed.

Do you know why GPS is so accurate, specially the new European GPS system (Galileo )?

Very precise and accurate measurement of time.

[kurt]

7 minutes ago, jse said:

ppplease... you can't compare these two beings on the "enlightenment scale".  Rali is just a kid looking to make a buck  (his own words) out of people's inherent search for the truth.

I agree, I've watched Raileys videos and his teaching "get out of your head and into your senses" is not enlightenment teachings, it looks like mere therapy for the ego.  

[Leo Gura]

I don't want this thread to devolve into a debate about how best to achieve enlightenment. You can discuss that separately elsewhere.

I will just again point out to you guys a very common-sense point:

THE WORLD DOES NOT REVOLVE AROUND YOUR DESIRE TO BECOME ENLIGHTENED.

It's quite silly to interrupt every topic of discussion unrelated to enlightenment with the objection: "But why talk about this if it isn't about enlightenment?"

Guess, what? We're allowed to discuss stuff outside of enlightenment.

I can't believe I even have to argue this point.

[kurt]

15 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

 

Just because you choose to do that way, doesn't mean everyone else does. Those are your values at work.

 

You just proved my point very well.  Its a matter of personal choice, but the way you dress enlightenment up is that all this extra curricula is necessary, even desirable.  Which is a little bit misleading because it actually takes people away from realization, all this extroverting the mind toward sense objects and ideas.  Enlightenment is realizing your true nature, the rest is just education.  In fact, if people want enlightenment proper they need to adopts a specific worldview for a number of years, there is a whole psychological programme too, path specific.  That takes most of your time and energy.  Its all or nothing.

Edited December 17, 2016 by kurt

[jse]

"Our research group uses what I prefer to call “tuned trance telepathy” to communicate with an extraterrestrial race called Ra. We use the English language because it is known by Ra. In fact, Ra knows more of it than I do.

Ra landed on Earth about 11,000 years ago as a sort of extraterrestrial missionary with the objective of helping Earthman with his mental evolution. Failing in this attempt, Ra retreated from the Earth’s surface but continued to monitor activities closely on this planet. For this reason Ra is highly informed about our history, languages, etc."

Similar material on this subject, but only suitable to those with an open mind:

Xenu

"Xenu was, according to Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard, the dictator of the Galactic Confederacy who 75 million years ago brought billions of his people to Earth (then known as "Teegeeack") in DC-8-like spacecraft, stacked them around volcanoes, and killed them with hydrogen bombs. Official Scientology scriptures hold that the thetans (immortal spirits) of these aliens adhere to humans, causing spiritual harm."

 

Edited December 17, 2016 by jse
stuff

[Extreme Z7]

@jse  A comic I made

 

It may have nothing to with the actual context of the discussion, but hey, I gotta get people to see it somehow.

Anyway, I don't think GPS is evidence that time remains constant. Simply because if nature of time does actually change, the input that determines how the device would work would have to change as well in proportion to GPS calculating it.

Time could very well just be a construct of the human mind. Sadhguru has spoken of experiences in his life where he sat and meditated for far longer than he thought he did. A few hours of sitting for him once turned out to be fourteen days (allegedly).

Edited December 17, 2016 by Extreme Z7

[electroBeam]

Just now, jse said:

Do you know why GPS is so accurate, specially the new European GPS system (Galileo )?

Very precise and accurate measurement of time.

Did you know that GPS and the thought of moving from one place to another in the first place or all just walls and ceilings of your matrix?

Yeah concepts like measurement are great.... if you want to support your other concepts like the concept 'im moving from England to the US'.

If you want to come out of your shell a little bit, and place any value on empiricism, you would agree with the book. 

 

[Leo Gura]

8 minutes ago, kurt said:

Its a matter of personal choice, but the way you dress enlightenment up is that all this extra curricula is necessary, even desirable.

And that is my personal choice as to how to guide people on this path.

Every teacher is forced to make a choice. There is no way to teach nonduality without making a stylistic choice.

If you stay openminded, you may discover my choice has hidden merits beyond what you presently can envision.

[jse]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Guess, what? We're allowed to discuss stuff outside of enlightenment.

Alrighty, then Leo - why post this in the "Meditation, Consciousness, Enlightenment, Spirituality" forum section then?

Perhaps it would be better suited in the entertainment section, if there was one.

[electroBeam]

Just now, kurt said:

I agree, I've watched Raileys videos and his teaching "get out of your head and into your senses" is not enlightenment teachings, it looks like mere therapy for the ego.  

His main message is, to not get caught up following a path, and to accept reality as it is, because there is no such thing as a path, and you are already enlightened, and chasing enlightenment is bad, because you are chasing a fantasy, etc.

[Leo Gura]

5 minutes ago, jse said:

Alrighty, then Leo - why post this in the "Meditation, Consciousness, Enlightenment, Spirituality" forum section then?

Perhaps it would be better suited in the entertainment section, if there was one.

Well, if you actually read the book, you'd see it was about enlightenment.

But that would again require openmindedness, tolerance, and curiosity, all of which seem lacking in this thread.

You're committing the classic epistemic error of thinking you know before you've done the research. If research worked that way, we wouldn't need to research, because we'd already know everything.

Research is done out of humility: an assumption is required that it might lead to something you haven't imagined.

[jse]

9 minutes ago, Extreme Z7 said:

Time could very well just be a construct of the human mind. Sadhguru has spoken of experiences in his life where he sat and meditated for far longer than he thought he did. A few hours of sitting for him once turned out to be fourteen days (allegedly).

Perception of time is not the same as measurable time.

BTW, great comic, @Z7 - there's definite talent there!

[Egoisego]

 I would like a Quick summarize

[Leo Gura]

@NTOgen It is about enlightenment -- and other things -- but my point is that you guys have already failed the openmindedness test.

Whether it is about enlightenment.

Or other areas of spirituality.

It shouldn't matter.

If you're not curious about life, then don't bother reading it.

[Leo Gura]

@NTOgen Enjoy basking in your Zen Devilry.

[jse]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Well, if you actually read the book, you'd see it was about enlightenment.

But that would again require openmindedness and tolerance, both of which seem lacking in this thread.

Well, make up your mind, Leo - is this thread about enlightenment or isn't it?

And as for openmindedness and tolerance, please consider this: Ad hominem

[Leo Gura]

@jse Why must a thread be decidedly about enlightenment or non-enlightenment?

Am I now obligated to preface every thread I start with: "This is about enlightenment."?

Are we in kindergarten?

[jse]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

-- but my point is that you guys have already failed the openmindedness test.

Damn... these tests always trip me up. 

[Egoisego]

I see this need to Triumph over science even if One says enlightenment is something Above . Strange

Edited December 17, 2016 by Egoisego