Is Consciousness a Miracle?

[Socrates]

14 hours ago, Osaid said:

The materialist guy isn't necessarily wrong, all he really did was state his position, which was on point scientifically speaking.

Notice If we use the word "scientific" correctly, he is as scientific as someone who quotes the bible. The fact he has adopted a belief that even 30' of contemplation about consciousness can refute, is not scientific, it is closeminded and audaciously dogmatic.
You can't ground a superset on a subset, it is both spiritually and scientifically incorrect but the theoretician (I won't call a scientist any fool parroting theory) fails to notice it.

[Salvijus]

7 hours ago, Osaid said:

Sadghuru casually obliterating solipsism brain rot:

"there is no 'my consciousness', there is your being and my being" 

Closest we'll get to his take, I guess.

There is actually one video in sadhguru exclusive place where he says solipsism is not true in a very straight forward way. 

[Princess Arabia]

The part that gets me thinking is where, at the 38:00 marker, the Scientist says "we are not divine". Saying something is not divine implies you believe in divinity. So I wonder what does he think is divine. He must know what divinity is to say we are not it. 

To me, that's a flaw right there in his stance. 

[An young being]

1 hour ago, Socrates said:

Notice If we use the word "scientific" correctly, he is as scientific as someone who quotes the bible. The fact he has adopted a belief that even 30' of contemplation about consciousness can refute, is not scientific, it is closeminded and audaciously dogmatic.
You can't ground a superset on a subset, it is both spiritually and scientifically incorrect but the theoretician (I won't call a scientist any fool parroting theory) fails to notice it.

He agrees that science doesn't have answers to everything. He is open minded atleast within his bubble.

[Princess Arabia]

1 hour ago, An young being said:

He agrees that science doesn't have answers to everything. He is open minded atleast within his bubble.

I don't think there's a being in this world that says we have the answers to everything. So that is to be expected. Nothing open-minded about that.

[Guest Bazooka Jesus]

2 hours ago, Princess Arabia said:

Saying something is not divine implies you believe in divinity. So I wonder what does he think is divine. He must know what divinity is to say we are not it.

That's a very good point. Touché!

As soon as you label something, you automatically imply its opposite. Concepts always come in pairs of opposites. "Light" implies "darkness", "white" implies "black", "me" implies "other", "God" implies "not God".

Which is why I always say that the Absolute cannot be labeled, described or measured in any way whatsoever. Any word that you say about it is one word too much. (And yes, the irony of me saying all of that is not lost on me, lol.)

---

Tao called Tao is not Tao.

Names can name no lasting name.

Nameless: the origin of heaven and earth.

Naming: the mother of ten thousand things.

Empty of desire, perceive mystery. Filled with desire, perceive manifestations.

These have the same source, but different names.

      Call them both deep -

            Deep and again deep:

The gateway to all mystery.

- Lao Tsu -

 

 

Edited November 11, 2023 by Bazooka Jesus

[Princess Arabia]

3 minutes ago, Bazooka Jesus said:

That's a very good point. Touché!

As soon as you label something, you automatically imply its opposite. Concepts always come in pairs of opposites. "Light" implies "darkness", "white" implies "black", "me" implies "other", "God" implies "not God".

Which is why I always say that the Absolute cannot be labeled, described or measured in any way whatsoever. Any word that you say about it is one word too much. (And yes, the irony of me saying all of that is not lost one me, lol.)

 

Tao called Tao is not Tao.

Names can name no lasting name.

Nameless: the origin of heaven and earth.

Naming: the mother of ten thousand things.

Empty of desire, perceive mystery. Filled with desire, perceive manifestations.

These have the same source, but different names.

      Call them both deep -

            Deep and again deep:

The gateway to all mystery.

- Lao Tsu -

 

I'm always looking out for flaws and inconsistencies even in my own interpretations.  You see what I'm saying, though. He comes up with all these intellectual explanations and observations, but I think he's closed himself off to other possibilities, thus contradictions will occur, but you have to notice them because, in the intellectual, they will be subtle because they can sound so intelligent, it can captivate you.

[An young being]

28 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

I don't think there's a being in this world that says we have the answers to everything. So that is to be expected. Nothing open-minded about that.

Believe me, there are.

[Princess Arabia]

Just now, An young being said:

Believe me, there are.

Yes, maybe, but it still doesn't make you open-minded to think we don't know everything. Open-mindedness wouldn't even have an opinion on it either way. That's true open-mindedness. There are degrees to how open-minded one can be. So, to classify someone as just mere open-minded without specifying what they are open-minded with is using the term loosely because he could be closed-minded about a lot more aspects of Reality that you're not aware of.

[Guest Bazooka Jesus]

28 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

in the intellectual, they will be subtle because they can sound so intelligent, it can captivate you.

Exactly.

Which is why you have to be really really really careful to not put too much stock in your mind-made stories and always hold them very loosely. It's very easy to confuse the map with the territory, as Leo used to say (before he himself started to confuse the two and insist on the validity of his mental map).

And this goes for spiritual seekers just as much as it does for scientists.

 

Edited November 11, 2023 by Bazooka Jesus

[An young being]

2 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

Yes, maybe, but it still doesn't make you open-minded to think we don't know everything. Open-mindedness wouldn't even have an opinion on it either way. That's true open-mindedness. There are degrees to how open-minded one can be. So, to classify someone as just mere open-minded without specifying what they are open-minded with is using the term loosely because he could be closed-minded about a lot more aspects of Reality that you're not aware of.

That's why I told within his bubble.

[Princess Arabia]

Just now, An young being said:

That's why I told within his bubble.

Ok. Point taken.

[Hojo]

@Salvijus he says some things that kind of elude to it. i remeber him saying he dosent care about anyone except who is directly in front of him. a reporter ask him who his favourite person was and he said her cause she is the one who is in his direct experience right now. but he also say he wont talk about alot of shit because he will come off looking insane and people will discredit him

Edited November 11, 2023 by Hojo

[Yimpa]

On 11/11/2023 at 9:28 AM, An young being said:

He agrees that science doesn't have answers to everything. He is open minded atleast within his bubble.

On 11/11/2023 at 10:52 AM, Princess Arabia said:

I don't think there's a being in this world that says we have the answers to everything. So that is to be expected. Nothing open-minded about that.

Actually, someone like Donald Trump.

 

Edited November 12, 2023 by Yimpa

[Princess Arabia]

12 minutes ago, Yimpa said:

Actually, someone like Donald Trump.

Donald Trump is the most awakened being on the planet next to Leo. He's just at the other end of the spectrum. Hehe

[Razard86]

18 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

Donald Trump is the most awakened being on the planet next to Leo. He's just at the other end of the spectrum. Hehe

LOL there are actually people more unconscious than him...his followers. So they are even more woke from that paradigm and they will tell you that if you talk to them. 

[Princess Arabia]

1 minute ago, Razard86 said:

LOL there are actually people more unconscious than him...his followers. So they are even more woke from that paradigm and they will tell you that if you talk to them. 

Oh yeah, I've spoken to a few. Can't tell them anything. I'm always so surprised at how "woke" they are. My cat's more woke than them.

[UnbornTao]

On 11/11/2023 at 7:21 AM, Salvijus said:

I'm indeed fascinated with how sadhguru dances with the situation and how his brain works. As an example. Even the very first sentence that came out of sadhguru's mouth is pure genius to me:

"rather saying "a response" same thing can be looked at many different directions" 12:40min

The narrator was pruning sadhguru into a confrontational response right after the scientists has stated his opinion. And sadhguru's choice of words just completelyn  defused that confrontational energy and made the atmosphere less of a battle but more of a exploration. Then he kinda just ignores the scienctist and shamelessly continues to pour his inner engineering message to people 🤣

I mean the way his mind and brain work is really fascinating to me. The way he delivers his message is wrapped so cleverly each time. Being aware of so many subtle things. Like how much you push. How not to step on anyone's toes when a scientists was so full of buttons ready to explode at any moment lol. It is the unspoken intelligence in everything that sadhguru does that is more fascinating to me then the things he actually says. 

got it, thank you.

[Carl-Richard]

A conversation between a spiritually illiterate person and an academically illiterate person 😆 That is unfortunately the best the mainstream can come up with at the moment. It's a start, but it's a quite clumsy clash of worldviews rather than an insightful dialogue. If you want the latter, you need more fringe people like John Vervaeke, Bernardo Kastrup. They can use words that Pinker brings up like "phenomenal vs. access consciousness" (and beyond) while also not beating around the bush when it comes to mysticism.

[Javfly33]

On 11/11/2023 at 8:21 AM, Salvijus said:

I'm indeed fascinated with how sadhguru dances with the situation and how his brain works. As an example. Even the very first sentence that came out of sadhguru's mouth is pure genius to me:

"rather saying "a response" same thing can be looked at many different directions" 12:40min

The narrator was pruning sadhguru into a confrontational response right after the scientists has stated his opinion. And sadhguru's choice of words just completelyn  defused that confrontational energy and made the atmosphere less of a battle but more of a exploration. Then he kinda just ignores the scienctist and shamelessly continues to pour his inner engineering message to people 🤣

I mean the way his mind and brain work is really fascinating to me. The way he delivers his message is wrapped so cleverly each time. Being aware of so many subtle things. Like how much you push. How not to step on anyone's toes when a scientists was so full of buttons ready to explode at any moment lol. It is the unspoken intelligence in everything that sadhguru does that is more fascinating to me then the things he actually says. 

Not trying to be a fanboy of sadhguru, but has anyone noticed that in all of his talks he has never slurred a single word when speaking? The scientist sometimes feels he's having a ictus.

Btw, Osho had also the habit of emphasising the 's' on the words that finish with that letter. Misterios. I don't know if is a coincidence.