Top Neurosurgeon ‘Spent Six Days In Heaven’ During A Coma

[pandora]

Thank you, Antlerman. I still have a hard time believing that my own spirituality affects the world at large. It affects those around me when I interact with them, but even if a whole group of us get together to meditate on loving-kindess, it won't stop a war, or the neighbor down the street from beating his wife. My compassion may encourage others to be compassionate, I get that. The whole pay it forward concept works. However, I just don't think that we have the capability to literally change the world in any major way. That part is difficult for me to get.

 

I have kind of an off-topic question/issue to bring up. How does one cultivate higher levels of morality or higher motivations for doing the right thing? Especially in people who have been abused and haven't had good parental role models?

[Akheia]

This thread would be a hell of a lot more fun to read with a nice glass of red wine and one of those Ghirardelli squares that look precisely like those fancy condoms you see sometimes. (Talk about a wrapper that could easily provoke a serious conversation if found out of context...) Thanks, AM, I appreciate the clarify. I'm a pretty skeptical person and was starting to feel left behind.

 

Pandora: +1, gal. For me, spirituality isn't about me per se and my own edification but about connecting with humanity at large. It's about progress and trying to do the right things--promoting/accepting science, ensuring that everybody can find his/her voice at his/her pace without fear, moving toward greater understanding and hope. I'm not a real fan of private religion/spirituality, I guess. Having a cute little altar in my house is nice, but it'd only "feed" me. It isn't nearly as important as using that money to donate dental care to those who lack the means, or feeding kitties at a no-kill shelter. Going on a religious retreat sounds fun in a lot of ways, but I'd rather use the time to do something a bit more concrete if my resources are strained. That doesn't mean that activities that just "feed" me are bad or wrong and it certainly doesn't mean I'll never do them out of disdain, just that I look at spirituality as a "doing" horse. Like if you have $100 for kitchen gadgets and have to decide between a juicing attachment for the standing mixer OR an 8" Wusthof chef's knife. If I ever manage to scrape together $200, I might get both, but if I have just one choice, I'll go for the Wusthof. They're both nice and either would be valued and cherished, but one's a lot more multi-purpose and would be useful for more situations. So I have no altar, but I donate a lot of money to charity. I think that if there are divinities of any sort, they'd like that more than me spending money on pretty statues to the exclusion of hospitality to the world.

 

For morality, I read philosophy and look to role models, real and fictional. My dad wasn't an awesome role model, but my mom was, so sometimes I do stuff because I know she'd have approved. I had a teacher about whom I still reflect when I consider situations (that grammar thread has messed with my head!). It's not a good idea to glorify someone else, but when you take those aspects of them that you would most like to see in yourself, you can work toward cultivating those qualities. Nobody is honorable or fair or level-headed out of the box. It's the habits we build that make us that way. I also consider how I'll feel about a certain situation or decision many years from now. Would doing X embarrass me? Or would I be proud of how I acted? Or I'll consider how Y decision will impact my relationships with those around me, or how I'd feel if someone did Z to me. How do you go about it?

[mymistake]

In fairness, this is the ex-C spirituality board. Being a little more open to metaphysical explanations and ideas is part of the forum rules. Out of every single board on this forum with the exception of the extimony section, this is the one place where that openness is requested. I appreciate having a safe space even if I don't always necessarily go along with every single discussion I see here.

Thank you! Yes. It's not that we can't talk about differences of view, but calling it "woo", or "Prove it!", or such crap as that, is not sitting down at the table and have a respectful discussion. That's just waving a banner about how stupid everyone else is. People aren't stupid, because they have reasons for seeing things differently. The topics center an interest in spirituality, not in so-called "debunking" it. That's the difference.

 

I think when people are presenting an idea they can't back up they should be open about the fact that they can't back it up. Lack of proper support doesn't make the idea false. The idea might be true. It might even be false but useful in other ways such as an aide for something else. If you have to take a leap of faith or assume it to be true in order to make sense of it then let's call it what it is - belief.

[pandora]

I practice loving-kindness meditation and general meditation. I like to comtemplate my actions and words and strive to improve myself and my attitudes. I also like to read up on eastern spirituality. I take time to connect to my pets and nature. Other than that, I don't really purposefully do anything else. I try to make sure I keep an open mind on spirituality because sometimes I do notice myself getting too cynical and dismissive of alternative perspectives. I'm pretty boring actually. LOL

[mymistake]

Yes, hardcore spiritual is contradiction in terms as well as hardcore skeptic. Hardcore anything is religious fundamentalism, Atheist or Christian, and my point stands, neither are interested in discussion, just proving themselves right. That is in fact, not welcome at the table. Should it be?

 

An egomaniac who always insists that he is right has many problems. However proving the truth right is a noble goal and certainly appropriate at some tables. (I use a lower case "t" because I'm using the word "truth" in it's typical, every day meaning.) Prove something as the truth and you gain knowledge. The proving is what turns the idea into knowledge.

[Antlerman]

Thank you, Antlerman. I still have a hard time believing that my own spirituality affects the world at large. It affects those around me when I interact with them, but even if a whole group of us get together to meditate on loving-kindess, it won't stop a war, or the neighbor down the street from beating his wife. My compassion may encourage others to be compassionate, I get that. The whole pay it forward concept works. However, I just don't think that we have the capability to literally change the world in any major way. That part is difficult for me to get.

I would say if we are looking to perform specific manipulations, that's not going to work, except maybe indirectly. It's not just a means to perform magic. I see it as a general, overall influence, like the way light shines from the sun to all of life. Not every plant grows, as there is more than the sun required for its growth. It's presence in the world, radiating through people has an effect I believe. Without it, then the whole would be in darkness. This is difficult to explain, but I see it as a downward causation. The higher levels affect the lower levels. It does not change the lower levels directly, but influence them in upward movement. I believe that same Nature is in everyone alive. But it is obscured and clouded. Outside those with deep psychological damage (sociopaths), people ultimately respond to that light, so to speak. It depends on the conditions for that plant to grow. But in being that Light, that Compassion in the fullest measure we can, that influence becomes stronger.

 

That's all just an attempt to explain how I experience being that within meditation practices. You become, that itself, in you. You experience its grace and power, yet unimposing light to the world. It radiates like a trillion suns, yet with a touch so light and pure that it would harm nothing. That I can't explain well with words. It's that inner knowledge thing. You have to experience that, and then it becomes clearer, not that I fully understand it myself!

 

I have kind of an off-topic question/issue to bring up. How does one cultivate higher levels of morality or higher motivations for doing the right thing? Especially in people who have been abused and haven't had good parental role models?

Hmmm... you raise a good question. I struggle somewhat conceptually with this, as personally I've always tied it to deepening that inner awareness, which opens us to compassion. But I've come to understanding somewhat that there are different lines of development, and someone who has the most incredible depth in spiritual awakening, may be morally stunted. I've never quite gotten that, and still don't yet. But I will say this that morals are actions that operate within certain ethical frameworks. The ethical frameworks are cultural and philosophical. The moral actions, or choices, I do believe are better guided through a greater inner awareness.

 

The reason I say this is because the more you go inside like this, the more you see others. It's the opposite of what people think that meditation is selfish. It is not. It leads one to selflessness, by exposing us to something much, much larger than our simple egos! If we cling to our self-facing needs, it retreats from us, or rather we withdraw ourselves from It. If we empty ourselves into it, it swallows us whole in loving embrace. So in realizing others this way, our moral choices are deeply influenced through that awareness, seeing the world through compassion, as compassion within ourselves.

 

Not sure that helps much, but I'll chew on this for some time and we can discuss it again later.

[Margee]

For me, spirituality isn't about me per se and my own edification but about connecting with humanity at large. It's about progress and trying to do the right things--promoting/accepting science, ensuring that everybody can find his/her voice at his/her pace without fear, moving toward greater understanding and hope. I'm not a real fan of private religion/spirituality, I guess. Having a cute little altar in my house is nice, but it'd only "feed" me. It isn't nearly as important as using that money to donate dental care to those who lack the means, or feeding kitties at a no-kill shelter. Going on a religious retreat sounds fun in a lot of ways, but I'd rather use the time to do something a bit more concrete if my resources are strained. That doesn't mean that activities that just "feed" me are bad or wrong and it certainly doesn't mean I'll never do them out of disdain, just that I look at spirituality as a "doing" horse. Like if you have $100 for kitchen gadgets and have to decide between a juicing attachment for the standing mixer OR an 8" Wusthof chef's knife. If I ever manage to scrape together $200, I might get both, but if I have just one choice, I'll go for the Wusthof. They're both nice and either would be valued and cherished, but one's a lot more multi-purpose and would be useful for more situations. So I have no altar, but I donate a lot of money to charity. I think that if there are divinities of any sort, they'd like that more than me spending money on pretty statues to the exclusion of hospitality to the world.

 

 

 

THIS Akheia ^^........and I do think this is where Antlerman's (Am I right Ant?) whole concept on compassion comes from...having compassion for the outside world. This would be my 'spirituality' without a lot of meditating........not that there's anything wrong with that. I just think it's all so simple. Treat people as nice as you can, help somebody if you can.. contribute a bit to the world's hurt...........unless they are tryin' to hurt you of course. It is OK to walk away from those who want to hurt us.

[Margee]

Thank you, Antlerman. I still have a hard time believing that my own spirituality affects the world at large. It affects those around me when I interact with them, but even if a whole group of us get together to meditate on loving-kindess, it won't stop a war, or the neighbor down the street from beating his wife. My compassion may encourage others to be compassionate, I get that. The whole pay it forward concept works. However, I just don't think that we have the capability to literally change the world in any major way. That part is difficult for me to get.

 

I have kind of an off-topic question/issue to bring up. How does one cultivate higher levels of morality or higher motivations for doing the right thing? Especially in people who have been abused and haven't had good parental role models?

 

I think you're right on here Pandora! I feel the same way...it would take ALL of us to realize that this is all about evolution of mankind. Monkey's turning into 'higher monkeys'. All the religions and politics would have to go. We would need real smart leaders..... kind of a 'leader of the pack' for every community to make this whole world into a better place. The leader would look out for everybody's interest and well-being.

 

 

When you have a whole world full of brainwashed people.... (as I was) I don't think it's ever going to happen............. very sad........I can't fight it no more......i just try to be nice to everyone that I can..it's the best I know how to do!...

[Antlerman]

Thank you! Yes. It's not that we can't talk about differences of view, but calling it "woo", or "Prove it!", or such crap as that, is not sitting down at the table and have a respectful discussion. That's just waving a banner about how stupid everyone else is. People aren't stupid, because they have reasons for seeing things differently. The topics center an interest in spirituality, not in so-called "debunking" it. That's the difference.

 

I think when people are presenting an idea they can't back up they should be open about the fact that they can't back it up.

Depends on what you mean by presenting an idea. If I was to make a claim that something was a fact, or that it is objectively true, then yes, I should expect them to be able to back that up if the claim seems like it's pulled out of thin air, like saying "No NDE experiences are anything alike". That's a truth claim about an objective reality that can be supported or refuted based on the available data we have, on inconclusive at worst. But if you mean someone saying, "I pray to Sophia", and someone come out and says "Where's the evidence Sophia exists!", that is not the same thing. If you want evidence in this case, the evidence is the fact that they pray to Sophia. They just said it. It's irrelevant whether or not Sophia exists, she does to them, and is the object of their devotion. It is irrelevant there is 'proof' or not. This person is not presenting an idea, they're making a statement of their religious practice.

 

What the cynic, and I'll call them this here to correct the oxymoron of "hardcore skeptic", with an accurate description of what that actually means, in such a challenge is not actually a challenge to an idea, but to make that person justify the religious practices to them. Why should they? They weren't asking you to believe that, and it's not making a truth claim about some fact in nature. If however someone would like to gain an understanding of why that person chooses such a practice/belief, than that is entirely different! That's actually being open to learning from that person their reasons for it. It shows respect and curiosity, even if at the end of the day you don't agree with the value or need for it for yourself.

 

Lack of proper support doesn't make the idea false.

I key in on the word 'proper' support. I think that's an important world. Asking for support has to be asked with the proper question. See above. What is 'proper support' for someone choosing an object of religious faith, for instance? That it exists in nature to satisfy the cynic? Or that it is a proper symbol for its intended purpose? Which is the proper question?

 

The idea might be true. It might even be false but useful in other ways such as an aide for something else. If you have to take a leap of faith or assume it to be true in order to make sense of it then let's call it what it is - belief.

Are people here calling it something different? Or is that how the cynics read it, which is what I've been suggesting all along, that they read it the way the Christian presents it as a fact of nature? There are things I will state as rational and supportable, and I'll be happy to present those to those who ask, and I'll be clear when I am speaking as a matter of belief. I know the difference.

 

Yes, hardcore spiritual is contradiction in terms as well as hardcore skeptic. Hardcore anything is religious fundamentalism, Atheist or Christian, and my point stands, neither are interested in discussion, just proving themselves right. That is in fact, not welcome at the table. Should it be?

 

An egomaniac who always insists that he is right has many problems. However proving the truth right is a noble goal and certainly appropriate at some tables. (I use a lower case "t" because I'm using the word "truth" in it's typical, every day meaning.) Prove something as the truth and you gain knowledge. The proving is what turns the idea into knowledge.

The word "proving" is way too sweeping to be used in most contexts outside talking about the facts of physics. Certainly when it comes to things like human relationships "proving" is hardly an appropriate word. "Prove you love me". Good luck with that. Now when you move into the even greater subtleties of religious experience, "proving" is even less appropriate a criteria. It becomes much more about the value, the profit, the gain, the benefit, the validity (fitting the need), etc, of the practice. Now those are legitimate questions! Not, "prove to me God exists". That's invalid. It errantly defines an expectation of what God is, lower than what it is, like a mysterious animal in the forest like a Bigfoot. "See, no proof exists!", is easy when it's understood like that.

[mymistake]

Now those are legitimate questions! Not, "prove to me God exists". That's invalid. It errantly defines an expectation of what God is, lower than what it is, like a mysterious animal in the forest like a Bigfoot. "See, no proof exists!", is easy when it's understood like that.

 

You are, of course, free to make whatever rules you wish for the table where you are master. At most other tables in the world "Prove to me God exists" is a perfectly valid request. The honest answer is "I can't". Personally I can't prove that atoms exist. If you asked me to prove that atoms exist I would have to say "I can't". However my lack of proof regarding the existence of atoms doesn't bother me. I certainly don't feel threatened by it. I wouldn't put such questions off limits nor feel any stress over it.

[Antlerman]

Now those are legitimate questions! Not, "prove to me God exists". That's invalid. It errantly defines an expectation of what God is, lower than what it is, like a mysterious animal in the forest like a Bigfoot. "See, no proof exists!", is easy when it's understood like that.

 

You are, of course, free to make whatever rules you wish for the table where you are master. At most other tables in the world "Prove to me God exists" is a perfectly valid request. The honest answer is "I can't". Personally I can't prove that atoms exist. If you asked me to prove that atoms exist I would have to say "I can't". However my lack of proof regarding the existence of atoms doesn't bother me. I certainly don't feel threatened by it. I wouldn't put such questions off limits nor feel any stress over it.

It sounds like you didn't hear what I was meaning to say. I wrote that this question might in fact be appropriate depending on the context of the discussion. You should read that part of my post above again. I, and anyone with good social skills, would recognize appropriate questions at the table that show respect to the discussion at hand - rather than redefining the conversation to suit some personal ideological bent that person has to try to prove to the other person. That is not about the conversation or the people in it, it's about themselves. Are they really, seriously looking for proof of God, or just tying to make a point? Do you see what I'm saying?

 

I have to question when you say "most other tables", this is a valid question. What tables are those? What is the context? If it is your typical apologist trying to insert God into science, then I would agree with you. But how many tables do those like Dawkins, et al, going charging into that are not those discussions? Do you not see when it may be an inappropriate question? I gave some good examples above. Do you see where it may be an invalid question like in my examples? Could you offer an example of your own to help illustrate when it might be a legitimately inappropriate type of question for a particular discussion?

 

As far as me just making the rules, I'll clarify that I am a moderator of this forum, but I'm not just arbitrarily making rules that suit me. It's about moderating discussions so they are allowed to happen. It's my job to facilitate healthy discussion - which is in fact why I will allow valid, legitimate, appropriate questions to be asked from a healthy skeptical, questioning point of view. I realize the Hardcore people will cry out I'm discriminating, shutting down their voice and whatnot, but that's just irrational. I will only moderate when the questions are being leveled in to make some point, "There is no God, prove it". I will shut that down, and for good reason. That ideological parade is outside in the street, not in a discussion surrounding an interest in exploring spiritual topics with each other.

 

Skeptics of course are most welcome. I would hope everyone who approaches spirituality be guarded and skeptical of just any claim. But I hereby and forever revoke the word skeptic from all those who use it to mean the opposite way a Christian uses the word believer. That is not skepticism. I am a skeptic too, you know. A skeptic has an open mind. Cynics have closed them.

 

P.S. Yes, you can prove atoms exists. There's physical proof of them. God is not a material object, so "proof" in that sense is not a comparison.

[Ouroboros]

Skepticism vs Cynicism: http://fledgelingske...sm-vs-cynicism/

 

A skeptic keeps on testing what he/she knows.

 

A cynic stops testing and decides what he/she "knows". It's kind of a religious conviction.

[mymistake]

Do you see where it may be an invalid question like in my examples? Could you offer an example of your own to help illustrate when it might be a legitimately inappropriate type of question for a particular discussion?

 

I do not agree with your position on that but I don't see the point in going down that road. I'm not going to split every hair. That is why I am leaving many of your questions without answers. I'm just trying to address the few points with the best chance for progress.

 

I do realize why this section exists and why it has certain rules in place. I'm not questioning the reason for that. I expressed frustration with those rules but I do not want them changed. They are not for me. My frustration is irrelevant.

 

P.S. Yes, you can prove atoms exists. There's physical proof of them. God is not a material object, so "proof" in that sense is not a comparison.

 

Just to clarify I did not mean that nobody can prove atoms exist. I meant that I personally cannot do it. It is said that somebody can prove it but I have never seen the proof myself. I don't feel the slightest bit threatened by my lack of ability in that area. I wish all spiritual people were just as comfortable with things they cannot prove. Want to believe something? Go ahead. It's your life and your mind. Nobody can stop you and nobody else really has a say. (IMO we don't directly control what we believe anyway.)

[Antlerman]

Just to clarify I did not mean that nobody can prove atoms exist. I meant that I personally cannot do it. It is said that somebody can prove it but I have never seen the proof myself.

I think I see the crux of your point here. For myself, I have done the experiments, and I can support my views having direct, firsthand experience. I'm not just believing what someone says.

 

I wish all spiritual people were just as comfortable with things they cannot prove.

Aside from those with direct experience, do you feel they aren't comfortable somehow?

 

Want to believe something? Go ahead. It's your life and your mind. Nobody can stop you and nobody else really has a say. (IMO we don't directly control what we believe anyway.)

You see, I think there is a large misunderstanding of what all this means to the minds of many people. It is not just 'belief'. Belief is not the substance of this. Experience is. Beliefs are mere, temporary supports to help interpret this. Some beliefs are better than others, and some need to be rejected because they fail or hinder growth. That's the big difference between this, and what you are familiar with in a Christian context. That's the point I've been driving at the whole time in this side-topic. We should get back on topic again though.

[blackpudd1n]

Par: Do you really think there is a "growing discontent"? Is it on your part, or are others also upset?

 

I am just interested.

 

Well, it's pretty easy to know when and where you're not welcome.

Everyone is welcome.

 

I'm not going to get into this tonight. I'm not in the right headspace.

 

Okay, I am in a better frame of mind tonight, so I will attempt to explain myself here and be as concise and to the point as possible. That may not quite work out, but I'll give it a shot.

 

I am an atheist, this is true. My dad even goes so far as to refer to me as a "radical atheist". That same father is my best friend, and is also a pagan. With our differing views, we could shy away from conversations upon which we have opposing views, but we do not. Instead, we discuss, and often, our discussions on a particular topic will go on for months. I will concede his point, he will concede mine, often we will both go away and have a think, sometimes we will do further research. We've been discussing gun control laws for about a year now. We're getting to a place of mutual agreement on that topic and all its ins and outs.

 

It's been a similar journey for us through spirituality and religion. That particular discussion has been going on for at least three years now. It started with myself as a fundy christian, and dad as a mystical pagan. For some time, dad told me his issues with christianity, and I told him mine with paganism. I explained my beliefs to dad, and he explained his to me. I read up some of dad's books and bought some of my own on the subject. I conceded that there were fewer issues with paganism than christianity.

 

Then, I started investigating christianity and lost my faith altogether. The issues I found in my research I discussed with dad. Honestly, I thought I'd end up a pagan when I deconverted. Four months later, I realised I was an atheist. Dad was happy, as he saw that as my path. Next thing you know, though, as I start discussing atheism and science and what I was know learning with dad, he came to the brink of losing his paganistic beliefs, unbeknownst to me. Dad went from being a mystical pagan to being a philosophical pagan. Not long ago, dad asked to borrow my copy of The God Delusion. Yes, my pagan dad is now reading Dawkins, and we continue to discuss.

 

The thing is, though, I don't feel that there is that same freedom to just discuss here, in this sub-forum. For someone like myself, who is intensely curious about the world around me and other people, that is bitterly disappointing. My father and I have an understanding when we discuss, that we don't have to be right. And neither do we discuss to try and win someone over to our own point of view. A question asked is a question answered in the spirit of being a question, nothing more, nothing less.

 

In this sub-forum, it can feel as though if I don't agree, I'm instantly being an ignorant, hard-headed atheist. I feel as though I am misrepresented, and I resent that. It feels as though if my views are different, then they are invalid, even if I am not actually attacking anyone, just disagreeing. And when the rules of language are changed, and words don't mean what they actually mean, that just feels really mean, like the joke's on me and everyone's laughing at the stupid, reductionist atheist. How is anyone meant to grasp a new concept when the language used to describe that concept doesn't mean what it means in vernacular, and one has to try and work out what the hell each new meaning is first before they can put together all those new meanings and try to understand the new concept? Feels like some of you are just fucking with my head on purpose, and my head does that sufficiently all by itself.

 

So, I gave up a long time ago. Figured that being an atheist meant by default I was not welcome, and kept the fuck out of it.

 

EDIT: Fixed a couple of errors.

[Realist]

I guess I'm seeing my process, and BP's, and Florduh's, and everybody else's as parallel tracks and not as one big long track where one person is further along than everybody else or anybody's lagging behind.

 

... you are correct in what you are seeing here Akheia but I am afraid others on here appear to not see it that way.

 

I made the mistake of stepping into this sub-forum because of the title of the post. Does that suggest I have a locked made up mind in what I believe? I would have thought the opposite.

 

We have to understand given the complexity of the human mind, one cure in life will not work for all! Was that not what we came from? Christianity was meant to work for all!

 

Is maturity in where you have made it to on this life "track" about what you DO believe or is it the true acceptance of being strong enough to accept all others beliefs seeing that many different beliefs work for so many different people?

 

I for instance now can look at my sister and brother in law and see the happiness fundie christianity has brought to them ... as it has many people. Do I want them to change? No! In fact I would feel sad if they did change! Live and let live is what I see ... it is the individual's responsibilty to find out what works for them in life! Sure, they can be subject to a mix of ideas being expounded ... but at the end of the day is going headlong down a track, and suggesting it will work for everyone, any different from what we left?

[new2me]

Well, it's fairly obvious I'd like to believe in something beyond this. I guess I'm surrounded by Ex-Christians who are also Ex-Spiritual. I thought this sub-forum was something different.

 

I did not pay adequate attention to the forum in which this posting was made. My previous posting was probably out of place here. I apologize and hope that I did not offend.

[Antlerman]

The thing is, though, I don't feel that there is that same freedom to just discuss here, in this sub-forum. For someone like myself, who is intensely curious about the world around me and other people, that is bitterly disappointing. My father and I have an understanding when we discuss, that we don't have to be right. And neither do we discuss to try and win someone over to our own point of view. A question asked is a question answered in the spirit of being a question, nothing more, nothing less.

 

In this sub-forum, it can feel as though if I don't agree, I'm instantly being an ignorant, hard-headed atheist. I feel as though I am misrepresented, and I resent that.

Fair enough. I hear your points and respect them. Personally, I enjoy just the sort of dialogs you are describing with your father. I'm quite interested in exploring these things through reason and a mutual thirst for furthering our understandings, or at least gaining greater perspectives. Unfortunately what you see happening is true, and I've been guilty of just taking a reactive position occasionally myself as there historically has been this onslaught of evangelical-style atheism driving our regular members with any spiritual interest off into a corner of their scorn in all the other threads.

 

So it was the Webmaster's idea to create the safe forum where they could openly explore important areas for themselves without the "prove it!" crowd accosting them every time they even opened their mouth about any sort of spiritual practice. Yet, they persisted. A disregard of the stated purpose of this forum, a disregard of the respectable intentions of it happened, and in they came "prove it!" Woo!" and such. We lost many members. I finally said enough to that. Then of course complaints, "oh yeah, we're not allowed to say anything. We must coddle these woo views". I am not exaggerating in the least here, as a stream of members will attest to.

 

So then, for me personally, the loss I see in this unfortunate need to create this wall between true free-thinkers and the evangelical "Hardcore Cynics", is that those like you, and many others who actually do enjoy exploring ideas respectfully, get swept into that wash of the militants. For that, I personally apologize. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has unduly drawn that sword in defense against those who are not the Hardcore atheist believer (you do realize that even I would be considered atheist by many as well?). Yes, I have a sour taste in my mouth, and frankly it came from watching this happen without any application of reason being applied, despite my reasoned appeals for reason, again, and again, and again as a moderator. I finally had to be like a parent, and not a friend and lay down the law for those that could not self-govern. Sad, but the way of it.

 

I personally want exactly what you say you want. Dialog. I wouldn't be surprised if most others here who are regulars of the spirituality forum wouldn't in fact enjoy the same! But I fully get their feeling the need to not expose themselves to what sounds even close to that evangelical atheism that pushed them away - much the way all of us don't want to hear fundamentalist Christians coming after us saying we were never "true believers", we never were sincere in our faith, and the like. It's the exact same thing, just from a different ideology. Would that reason would in fact prevail!! I am very pleased you are not this way, and I apologize if at any point I have branded you unduly this way. I hope for nothing more than that all of us can explore possibilities in all areas together without prejudging where someone is coming from. Agreed?

[Antlerman]

For me, spirituality isn't about me per se and my own edification but about connecting with humanity at large. It's about progress and trying to do the right things--promoting/accepting science, ensuring that everybody can find his/her voice at his/her pace without fear, moving toward greater understanding and hope. I'm not a real fan of private religion/spirituality, I guess. Having a cute little altar in my house is nice, but it'd only "feed" me. It isn't nearly as important as using that money to donate dental care to those who lack the means, or feeding kitties at a no-kill shelter. Going on a religious retreat sounds fun in a lot of ways, but I'd rather use the time to do something a bit more concrete if my resources are strained. That doesn't mean that activities that just "feed" me are bad or wrong and it certainly doesn't mean I'll never do them out of disdain, just that I look at spirituality as a "doing" horse. Like if you have $100 for kitchen gadgets and have to decide between a juicing attachment for the standing mixer OR an 8" Wusthof chef's knife. If I ever manage to scrape together $200, I might get both, but if I have just one choice, I'll go for the Wusthof. They're both nice and either would be valued and cherished, but one's a lot more multi-purpose and would be useful for more situations. So I have no altar, but I donate a lot of money to charity. I think that if there are divinities of any sort, they'd like that more than me spending money on pretty statues to the exclusion of hospitality to the world.

 

 

 

THIS Akheia ^^........and I do think this is where Antlerman's (Am I right Ant?) whole concept on compassion comes from...having compassion for the outside world. This would be my 'spirituality' without a lot of meditating........not that there's anything wrong with that. I just think it's all so simple. Treat people as nice as you can, help somebody if you can.. contribute a bit to the world's hurt...........unless they are tryin' to hurt you of course. It is OK to walk away from those who want to hurt us.

Well, yes. I think the bottom line is to see the world for what is is through the eyes of compassion. It's a far larger perspective than simply my needs and wants, and all the trappings that go into creating, defining, and protecting that for ourselves. There is of course nothing wrong with taking care of yourself, which you in fact need to. That in fact is the first priority. Think of that like putting the oxygen mask on yourself first, before you try to help the child next to you. You're no good if you're dead, right? That's not selfishness, and there are many factors that going into nurturing our own needs first. But then, then you take that and give that back in some fashion, whatever presents itself to your own heart.

 

I'm going to really expose myself personally here, yes even to the "hardcore" out there. I meditate every morning for one hour. I try to write a journal entry afterwards as part of that practice. See if you hear in this from my entry today what you are saying above:

 

The greatest movement within this comes when what you receive, you return, and in this is a release of the infinite wellspring from within you. This is what I learned 30 years ago in my 2

^nd

experience, that as Light, Life, and Joy streamed out of every molecule of the universe that vibrated with its Being, you allow that to fill you to the point it overflows back out of you to itself and into the world. You become a living source when you are consumed by it. In this you find life eternal. It is the Marriage. You, its Living partner. It receives from you, and gives of itself through you to the world.

 

All this, is an awakening to this.

 

I agree with you that we can realize compassion within ourselves without meditation - after all, it is the core of our Being. But I very much encourage you and everyone else to practice meditation, as it takes that small burning flame and exposes it to yourself as a blazing solar flare. Knowing this my friend, well... no words.... no words.... you will be forever changed.

[LivingLife]

I personally have no issues with a persons personal beliefs. I do not believe anyone has some eliteness b/c they tried something and it worked for them. Where I do take umbrage is when this "what happens in the brain" is proffered up as some "proof" of alternate dimensions and realities and when it rejected with plausible explanations and refuted with the ad authoritarian fallacy, the people that believe this w/o empirical evidence take offence. Why is that?

 

The studies/experiments with various techniques should for the average person illustrate that this is merely a product of the brain either being fooled or creating an alternate reality. Why are these rational alternate explanations dismissed?

 

Any of these so called "factual statements", if preceded with a "disclaimer" of "this is what I believe" or "this is what works for me as an individual" usually gets a pass from my very cold atheist challenge.

 

IMO there is no "path to enlightenment". That term in itself suggests "there is something out there" and while the best way to find empirical evidence is using the scientific method, the mystics want us to believe that there is "another way". To me that is no different to religion and repackaged in what may seem a prettier wrapping. The mere fact that everyone has different experiences in the world of mystics, should by pure reduction prove that these are ALL products of an active imagination/brain. It boils down to the same argument I posit with theists that "their god" is a fabrication of their own mind and persona and even this morphs as time passes.

 

Even atheist's worldviews are shaped by different external influences and we as a collective are not really similar either. We just all tend to dismiss claims of the supernatural as balony.

 

Many of us vested a whole lot of wasted years chasing the elusive dream of perfection only to realise that the concept of perfection is probably the most subjective word out there. How does one achieve perfection? You cannot as the measure is not even a standard. You are always having to measure up to someone else's opinion or rules. One could take smoking pot as an example, illegal in most countries with criminal implications yet the moderate users really see no harm in it and will cite contrary abuses of alcohol which is legal. This is not a strawman argument but to demonstrate the subjectivity of the matter. For me, pot is bad alcohol in moderation OK but that is personal as pot screwed me up, alcohol has never screwed me up even when I used it too much.

 

The other aspect of this whole shedangle is "purpose to life". This again departs from the perspective there has to be a purpose. Who decided that in the first place? The only purpose to life is to live and reproduce and then die, mileage may vary. It is this stone cold hard "fact" that has folk looking for other answers where in reality there are none, only ideas.

 

As an atheist, I see the religious roots still very prevalent in these alternate religions and philosophies and much ado about nothing important.

 

Life and the universe goes on whether I can influence anyone or not in their way of thinking.

 

At the end of the day, what baffles me is that the measure we apply to suggest Christianity is BS, why then should we give any form of spirituality a pass? All of these philosophies were written/suggested by fallible men.

 

Wisdom comes with age/time and there is no short-cut.

 

When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things 1Cor. 13:11

[Margee]

I get so frustrated reading and researching all this stuff...enlightenment, altered states, changing your brain, out of body stuff....I have always dabbled in it - I have practiced it until I'm blue in the face. I have all the binaural alpha, theta, delta beats, downloaded on my computer....... I have tried 'out of body' experiments.....there is nothing I haven't tried. If the topic is 'altering your brain' - I got the books and the tapes. I have praticed all the meditations and nothing has really changed for me.

 

I've got 'certificates on my wall in 'The Law of Attraction'. Right now, I've attracted having a 91 year old gal living in my home. You think that's a fun attraction?? What new 'lesson' am I supposed to learn at 57 years old with this 'challenging' situation??? Last year, I 'attracted' a car accident that wrecked my car, has hurt my back and changed my life the way it used to be.... $200.00 to take that course.... I wish there was a 'sucker' emoticon face...You KNOW I'd use it!

 

I've also watched every documentry and youtube.....Hours and hours of my life, dollars and dollars - trying to find the magic pill. Nothing really happens for me. And I have stayed with some of these 'practises' for a good time.....

I don't give up easily. EVER!

 

None of these 'practises' have hurt me - as a matter of fact , they've made me aware of my shitty attitude and how to help myself out of it. I like the relaxing aspects of meditation.

 

But....I still find that I choose whether I stay in a bad attitude or get in a good one. There dosen't seem to be any magic' solution for me.....I can't seem to find this 'enlightenmnent' that people say I can have.

 

I dabbled in all this stuff even as a christian. I had to ask for forgiveness constantly from the lord for looking at this 'new age' stuff. I didn't get the magic from 'him' at times......so I turned elsewhere. At least in the Pentacostal chruch we could work our way up into a frenzy with the music and dancing and be high for a few hours..........But I still got up the next day and wondered where all the good feelings went?

 

So right now it Monday morning. I'm not that happy about that.....the weekend is over for me and today begins the race again.......Now it is up to me to make good or bad of this fact. I already did many mornings sitting here meditating at my computer.. Yeah, it's very relaxing....... bit I still have to get up off my arse and go do a million things to organize my week. I get pissed off that nothing ever comes easy for me. I'm not into 'self pity ' mode....I actually have a pretty good attitude right now.....

 

I'm also in the agreeance with a lot of people, that if all these 'experiences,' including NDE's are all so real, the 'universal' god or 'energy' should be giving us the secrets on how to run this earth properly.....give us the answers to all the problems that we suffer.

 

Yeah, it might be real nice to see my only sister again in the afterlife through an NDE, but she should have the wisdom to send me back to earth with a few good peices of information ....maybe a cancer remedy, stop the poverty, etc.... or something..............

 

So I will continue to read these threads and maybe, someday....something different will happen for me......I'm always happy for anybody who feels good. I t's a hard life, so it's good to feel good.

 

I'd like to have an out of body experience right now where my 'soul' leaves me and go gets me dressed and ready for the day.....

 

Love and compassion to all of you today!

[Vigile]

 

 

Margee, you just described my entire xian experience. Sincerity, commitment, a deep desire to have an experience and to transform in some way meaningful, yet nothing but frustration and wasted time to show for my efforts. For those of you who get something out of this path, I'm happy for you, but just know that for some, like us, it's a cruel and very false promise and an entirely empty experience that we'd just as soon leave in our past.

[Antlerman]

I personally have no issues with a persons personal beliefs. I do not believe anyone has some eliteness b/c they tried something and it worked for them. Where I do take umbrage is when this "what happens in the brain" is proffered up as some "proof" of alternate dimensions and realities and when it rejected with plausible explanations and refuted with the ad authoritarian fallacy, the people that believe this w/o empirical evidence take offence. Why is that?

 

The studies/experiments with various techniques should for the average person illustrate that this is merely a product of the brain either being fooled or creating an alternate reality. Why are these rational alternate explanations dismissed?

 

Any of these so called "factual statements", if preceded with a "disclaimer" of "this is what I believe" or "this is what works for me as an individual" usually gets a pass from my very cold atheist challenge.

 

IMO there is no "path to enlightenment". That term in itself suggests "there is something out there" and while the best way to find empirical evidence is using the scientific method, the mystics want us to believe that there is "another way". To me that is no different to religion and repackaged in what may seem a prettier wrapping. The mere fact that everyone has different experiences in the world of mystics, should by pure reduction prove that these are ALL products of an active imagination/brain. It boils down to the same argument I posit with theists that "their god" is a fabrication of their own mind and persona and even this morphs as time passes.

 

Even atheist's worldviews are shaped by different external influences and we as a collective are not really similar either. We just all tend to dismiss claims of the supernatural as balony.

 

Many of us vested a whole lot of wasted years chasing the elusive dream of perfection only to realise that the concept of perfection is probably the most subjective word out there. How does one achieve perfection? You cannot as the measure is not even a standard. You are always having to measure up to someone else's opinion or rules. One could take smoking pot as an example, illegal in most countries with criminal implications yet the moderate users really see no harm in it and will cite contrary abuses of alcohol which is legal. This is not a strawman argument but to demonstrate the subjectivity of the matter. For me, pot is bad alcohol in moderation OK but that is personal as pot screwed me up, alcohol has never screwed me up even when I used it too much.

 

The other aspect of this whole shedangle is "purpose to life". This again departs from the perspective there has to be a purpose. Who decided that in the first place? The only purpose to life is to live and reproduce and then die, mileage may vary. It is this stone cold hard "fact" that has folk looking for other answers where in reality there are none, only ideas.

 

As an atheist, I see the religious roots still very prevalent in these alternate religions and philosophies and much ado about nothing important.

 

Life and the universe goes on whether I can influence anyone or not in their way of thinking.

 

At the end of the day, what baffles me is that the measure we apply to suggest Christianity is BS, why then should we give any form of spirituality a pass? All of these philosophies were written/suggested by fallible men.

 

Wisdom comes with age/time and there is no short-cut.

 

When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things 1Cor. 13:11

I'm curious whose beliefs you are referring to in this restatement of your views? Is it anyone is this thread? I only see it applying to those outside this thread who use these NDE's as proof of something out there. It can't be me as I've already addressed in detail these points, repeatedly, and this is just a restatement of your views without addressing anything I said. Can you cite those in this thread who believe what you are refuting above?

[Antlerman]

there is nothing I haven't tried.

Except for the one thing that works? I'm sympathetic to what you're saying, but I have to confess I hear you doing what everyone else does which is trying to find the answer outside yourself. You're looking for the "magic pill", as you said.

 

Hours and hours of my life, dollars and dollars - trying to find the magic pill. Nothing really happens for me.

For me. Do you see what I see here? "For me". You see it as outside you. If I do this, swallow this pill, chant this chant, pray this pray, jump, stand, twirl, sit, something in those should do this for me. All those are external objects. And not a one of this will do this 'for you'. But..... anyone of them, or none of them and something else you find, may work for you to open you to you. What you are looking for, what everyone is looking for is already in them. All these "practices" are is simply tools to experiment with that aide you in find that in yourself which you already have. None of them, not one will every do it for you. It is not the pill to makes it happen for you. It's you.

 

This is true for me, you, and everyone. It is magical thinking that presumes there is some force out there that you are tapping into, and this destroys LivingLife's contention that anyone is saying there is.

 

And I have stayed with some of these 'practises' for a good time.....I don't give up easily.

Except for the one thing that prevents it from happening - expectation. That is singularly the hardest thing to let go of. In letting go of expectation, you are letting go of yourself. Now, 'giving up' is not letting go of expectation, its resignation. To clarify what I mean I'll put it simply, you need to have intention, but not expectations. Those two words are the key, and the hardest thing to master. It's a fine line, and paradoxical to everything we normally do, and one side is retreat and the other release. Resignation drops both expectation and intention.

 

I will say this, that this is universally true when it comes to this. You have to unlearn how you normally 'get' something. You can't get it. If you seek to "get" it, grasp it, possess, seize it, own it, you will fail - every time. This is because you already have it. You are looking for something you already have. You cannot find out there what you already have. You have to instead learn how to simply release it.

 

Its realization is effortless. Where our efforts lay is in our unlearning and simply allowing. We do not attain it, we do don't achieve it. It is is so simple, yet it is us who make it so hard. Nothing we try will in fact work. You've proven that. It is in fact not through anything we do. We cannot produce it. It's already there.

 

But....I still find that I choose whether I stay in a bad attitude or get in a good one. There dosen't seem to be any magic' solution for me.....I can't seem to find this 'enlightenmnent' that people say I can have.

What do you suspect that is? That some flash will hit you and you'll suddenly know everything there is to know? That you've hit the end of the road, that you are now standing at the top and have figured everything out?

 

That's the typical misconception of what Enlightenment means, as LivingLife went after in his response to those who think this way about these things outside of this thread. Enlightenment in this context is really an awakening of perception that releases someone from illusions of separation, of all the fears, stresses, anxieties, concerns, worries, etc, that come from being embedded within our small egoic self. There comes an opening through various paths for that person (this is why trying what works for others may or may not be right for you), that exposes our minds to the true nature of who we are, in ways that just simply reasoning and philosophizing, reading, learning, teaching, etc, etc, etc, can never impart that knowledge to you. It is in a word, a Realization. Is that the end then? Oh, hell no. That's the beginning.

 

Think of it is terms like this. Each stage of your life is a new, larger, more expansive understanding of the world as you move through childhood to adult. All that this is doing is taking that adult stage, that typical 'consensus consciousness' that we call our reality, and growing it further. When I hear someone say, "There is no such thing as Enlightenment", then aren't they saying that what they have is the top of the climb? There is nothing more than this? Then, isn't that itself calling where they are at Enlightenment? We have reached the top?

 

There is no end point to this, neither what many imagine Enlightenment to be, nor where they are at now. This is just greater and greater openings into Peace, Compassion, and Self awareness. Enlightenment is that Freedom, beyond the fully self-actualized individual, into a universal state of being through which we live our lives here, and now, picking up sticks, washing our cars, helping our friends, neighbors, communities, in every simple aspect of life. People look for it from above, from this god, for that guru, from that teacher, from this practice, etc, etc. No, it's who you are. All this is is meeting that person, your true Self.

 

Does this help? No Woo going on here.

 

I dabbled in all this stuff even as a christian. I had to ask for forgiveness constantly from the lord for looking at this 'new age' stuff. I didn't get the magic from him at times......so I turned elsewhere. At least in the Pentacostal chruch we could work our way up into a frenzy with the music and dancing and be high for a few hours..........But I still got up the next day and wondered where all the good feelings went?

I would love to have an in-depth discussion with you about this! I've been processing many thoughts about the Pentecostals and their practices, but won't distract away from this thread covering this.

 

But I want to focus on something here and really underscore this. If you get this understanding, it will be huge. What you say here, "I didn't get the magic from him at times......so I turned elsewhere", is the core problem for you and everyone else. Again, it's externalizing this. It is not magic. There is no force outside you, that you try to invoke to fill you will itself. New Age practices are this: Experimental Christianity. They are that because they are doing the same, identical thing the Christian does in their imaginations of this existing outside themselves in some form, or fashion.

 

Instead of God the Father in heaven, it's the Universe which has the power. And if they can just find The Way™ to get to that power, then they will find salvation, release, or Enlightenment. It comes from the same radical dualistic mindset of separateness. New Age approaches its objects of faith in the same way the Christian does. It doesn't matter what "Eastern" practices they attempt to incorporate, they're still approaching it with the same mindset, the same mentality. It is outside themselves.

 

So yes, you many have some 'feel good moments', which is natural, but that deep, inner realization will remain outside of you, because you see it as outside of you. Your mental frameworks of reality "all inside your head" create that for you. It is God "out there" that is that power, and consequently not seen within you. "God help me", is a statement of a separate self. "I invoke the Universe to show itself to us", same thing. I could go on, but I think this begins to get the point across.

 

Now simply mentally acknowledging this, is in fact, not the same at all as actually having your mind shifted to seeing it. That takes an inner awakening, however you are able to open that in yourself.

 

 

Anyway, I stop here and let the misunderstandings begin to rise to the surface in what I am saying and try to deal with those. I hope others try to ask for clarification, rather than assuming mindsets and 'refuting' what I, nor anyone else I've seen in thread are saying.

[Antlerman]

 

Margee, you just described my entire xian experience. Sincerity, commitment, a deep desire to have an experience and to transform in some way meaningful, yet nothing but frustration and wasted time to show for my efforts. For those of you who get something out of this path, I'm happy for you, but just know that for some, like us, it's a cruel and very false promise and an entirely empty experience that we'd just as soon leave in our past.

It's not a promise that if you do this, you have this. It's your path, and your own self you seek to find. I nor any teacher alive can give you that. See the difference? It's not a promise. It's a direction to help you do your own work. Nothing will every do it for you, or anyone one of us. Have I had success? Yes, definitely. Will you? I don't know. Will you?