Monistic Panentheism
-
This is not true. Science and spirituality are not contradictory. And I do not mean exoteric religion here, I mean mysticism. Mysticism merely says that Consciousness (capital C) is transcendent -- that mind creates matter, not the other way around.
No. Mind does not 'create' matter for that would imply reality is subjective and reality is anything but. Also, if mind created matter then it would also imply that the universe is only bound by the limits of the mind which has the ability to be both rational and irrational, thus by extension it would imply that the mind can cause irrational events to take place, such as something coming from nothing.
You may be aware of the controversies surrounding consciousness in the scientific world these days. You can read "The Conscious Mind In Search of a Fundamental Theory" by David J. Chalmers, who is a steely rationalist and has created a minor sensation by pointing out that materialism does not explain why we have conscious experience at all. He argues that consciousness has to be seen as a fundamental property of reality rather than an illusion created by our neurons. Here is a paper that summarizes these views
http//www.imprint.co.uk/chalmers.htmlNo one argues concsiousness to be an 'illusion', to argue that would be asinine. However, consciousness can't be measured - not by the tools we have today, which is why science doesn't dabble in it.
As for whether these scientists tried to reconcile their faith with their practice -- they were very clear that science did not prove mysticism. But they were equally clear that science did not contradict mysticism.
Please. This is the same argument religous appeasers use to 'rationalise' the notion of god, that is "science can't prove it wrong". Incorrect. The answer is science doesn't care. The domain of god/spirituality/religion has nothing to do with science. If you want to argue mysticism on a metaphysical level then that is fine, but please let's not pull the pretentious "OMG ITS SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE" stuff okay?
They understood that while science deals with the world of form, mysticism deals with the formless. Mysticism involves a psychological transformation, it requires one to alter their consciousness.
Yeah, I can 'alter my consciousness' with a good ol joint too.
I do not mean we should mix science and mysticism necessarily in the way you are assuming. One of the greatest challenges is to combine the data from science (the third-person approach, objective experiment) with the data from mysticism (the first-person approach, subjective experience or phenomenology), without abusing either genuine science or genuine mysticism.
I hope you can see that what you're saying is inherently contradicting. You're attempting to mix the objective with the subjective.
I say demarcate the boundaries between science and mysticism clearly -- but why should there be a ban on combining the data obtained from these two approaches to understanding reality? Why dogmatically stick to just one way of understanding reality? There are so many ways, and science is just one of them.
Because you're either a proponent of empirical thought and procedure or you are not. You can't combine the ideas of science, which is objective by nature, with the dieas of spirituality which is subjective by nature. It's like oil and water. It's like infinite and form. It's like 1 and 0. They do not and will not superimpose each other to reveal some kind of hidden truth; leave that to science fiction.
I did not say that, please don't mince my words. There have been and continue to be scientists who believe in scientism. Scientism is also a religion. As opposed as I am to pseudoscience, I am equally opposed to scientism. Science does not claim to have absolute knowledge of the universe but scientism claims that anything apart from the scientific method is inadequate for understanding reality, and lumps the huge body of data from cultural studies, phenomenology, mysticism and so forth into the garbage. As I keep saying, science neither proves nor disproves the Godhead. It is forced to remain agnostic.
I've already addressed this.
Every mystic would disagree with you.
Awesome. I don't want people whom I take to be incorrect to agree with me.
My faith in God comes from a kundalini awakening -- that's as empirical as it gets for me.
|
Do you know what 'empiricism' means? It is a measure of reality, and as such, it is highly objective. What you just described is a subjective phenomenon.
It depends on what you mean by empiricism. If you mean third-person experimentation, then, no, it can't prove God. But if you mean altering one's consciousness, experiencing higher levels of the mind, then yes you can experience God -- this is phenomenology and it is the method used in mysticism, and moreover also in psychology.
Great. But there's nothing 'scientific' about it.
You cannot prove the existence of the unconscious mind in the same way as you can prove that air contains oxygen, but so many people report phenomena or exhibit symptoms that force us to assume the existence of an unconscious mind.
The existence of an unconscious mind is accepted in most neurological circles.
There is the within and the without. The inner realities and the outer realities. Science works great with the outer realities. But the more we go inward, the more we try to find the "I", the less experiment works, and the more we are forced to turn to experience. This is why science does not work too well with things like anthropology, sociology and psychology.
And mysticism, which attempts to, in your words, answer questions of one's self.
Again this depends on what you mean by empiricism. The mystical position is that there is a level of mind beyond the rational mind and if one can achieve that level of growth, one can experience a cosmic consciousness which is the direct experience of the Absolute. The rational mind cannot grasp this but the transrational mind can.
Again, there's absolutely nothing scientific about that.
I meant with reference to materialism or physicalism, the dominant orthodox paradigm in science. Materialism denies the existence of any levels of reality or realms beyond the material (such as subtle energies like kundalini, psychic and spiritual realities).
It doesn't really deny it, it says it's irrelevant.
I should mention that I would appreciate some more courtesy from you. What exactly are you doing on this forum anyway? Everyone here believes in God.
I'm not rude, I'm just 'to the point'; it's how I post in serious discussions. And please, let's not character assasinate, you know nothing of my beliefs.
-
I can see there is no point in arguing with you.
Namaste.
See, here I would say "of course not, it's because I'm right" to which you'll accuse me of arrogance which I would riposte by quoting you here
I was respectful toward exoteric religion but did not place much intellectual value on it.
But I won't do that.
-
god's in the house, people!
- Did the news come to you of the person who debated with Abraham regarding his Lord, while God had given him a kingship? Abraham said ?My Lord is the One who gives life and death,? he said ?I bring life and death.? Abraham said ?God brings the sun from the east, so you bring it from the west.? The one who disbelieved was confounded! And God does not guide the wicked people.
-
Peace Nadia,
Thank you for sharing your story and position. Your post is certainly thought-provoking and I find myself agreeing with you on many points. Rather than harp on the discord, I would appreciate some further insight on a few points which I'm currently fascinated with.
You stated
Information was emerging from my unconscious mind at an incredibly fast rate. This experience culminated in some genuine psychic effects (I experienced heighted empathy) as well as in what is called a kundalini awakening the rising of an etheric energy reservoir at the base of the spine. It was accompanied by the "I am God" realization of the mystics.
I've experienced glimpses of something similar but only from a "thought" perspective. In other words, my mind was chattering from a resource unbeknownst to me at the time. I was imparted information that I did not posess. I've also experienced similitudes in my deeper states of artistic expression, when I let the soul speak without the filter of the mind. This, of course, has always been wordless, leaving the mind with nothing to hold onto.
What I'm learning is that the mind and the soul are not 2 sides of the same coin, as I once understood, but that the soul is the Infinite, and the mind is the finite thought processing machine, the vehicle through which we experience physical reality, which, if left unchecked, can bury the soul with often useless information.
All that being said, I'm to the point now where I understand what needs to be done. I'm just refining the technique that will work best for me. I'd be interested in your thoughts regarding how you maintain a spiritual perspective without getting swept away in the current of mind-activity.
Thanks,
Tay -
Peace Tay,
What I'm learning is that the mind and the soul are not 2 sides of the same coin, as I once understood, but that the soul is the Infinite,
I would like to know more about the soul being infinite as infinity as a rule has no limits...because a soul is created it has a starting point. This beginning/starting is a limit. You could call it indefinite but not infinite...Is there a difference between 'the soul being the Infinite' and 'the soul being infinite'?
-
Hello nehdia,
This being the case, I no longer feel the need to bind myself to the dictates of any one scripture, or any scripture at all.
I am impressed with your insight into the connections between the worlds religions. I have myself being arguing on this forum that "transcendence" is the key to human spirituality, and the reality that many have called "God", "Allah", "Nirvana", "Tao", "Brahman-Atman" are derived from the human experience of "transcendence". All scripture is therefore is an interpretation in limited human language of a "transcendent" reality that lies beyond reason and language. This has also been the insight of the Great Seers, Sages, Prophets, Mystics and Meditators. But it has been hard to make others see this connection that you have made on your own.
I have also argued that "God" is not an OBJECTIVE fact but has always been a SUBJECTIVE experience of the individual. Even Prophet Muhammad did not rise up to highest heavens for the revelations but rather he descended to the very core of his soul in a "meditative-trance" to meet his "maker". Therefore "Revelation" is an event that happens in each individual soul and therefore every individual is capable of having an experience like the Prophets. This experience is had via meditation.
As for myself I have not progressed enough in my meditation to "confirm" any of this "trascendence" yet. But I have so far achieved a "sense" of "infinte space" and "unity" within myself in my meditation sessions. I would like to believe, however, I am on the right track and perhaps one day it may lead to enlightenement. I will just have to remain patient, courageous and dedicated and continue to cultivate and nurture compassion for my fellow human beings and for myself too.
I am glad that your spiritual transformation have helped you to deal with your sexuality and the abuse. My spiritual transformation has allowed me to connect with humanity regardless of their religious beliefs as opposed to connecting myself to a certain scripture or set of beliefs. I now celeberate the best of humanity and also come to terms with worst of humanity through understanding. But I have not reached the end yet. I am still learning, I am still continuing with my spiritual journey but I am glad that I have met another traveller on this lonely spiritual path -)
Regards,
-
Peace Nadia,
Good to hear from you )
You stated,
I would like to know more about the soul being infinite as infinity as a rule has no limits...because a soul is created it has a starting point. This beginning/starting is a limit. You could call it indefinite but not infinite...Is there a difference between 'the soul being the Infinite' and 'the soul being infinite'?
Here's some questions to think about that may or may not help...
Is the soul created or is this life a metamorphasis?
Can you think of any examples of something coming from nothing?
Is there any seperation between you and any atom in the universe?Peace,
Tay -
Is the soul created or is this life a metamorphasis?
Yes. By Allah.
Can you think of any examples of something coming from nothing?
No.
Is there any seperation between you and any atom in the universe?
Define seperation. If you're talking of atoms then I'd assume you don't mind going down to the quantum level and in that case quantum entanglement get's mixed up in the argument.
Oh, btw, god must be seperate from this universe.
-
Peace Tay,
Good to see you around, after your post on AP's thread, I thought thats it D
Neo has already answered the questions the way I probably would, so I'll avoid redundancy... It would be good to discuss this...
I don't know if a seperate topic should be started for this as it might be considered off topic?!?
-
Science = proof by disassociation
Spirituality = anathema to proofAnyone who tries to combine them is not worth my time.
Neo, try telling that to some of the greatest scientists of the 20th century, such as
Albert Einstein
Erwin Schrodinger
Werner Heisenberg
Louis de Broglie
James Jeans
Max Planck
Wolfgang Pauli
Arthur Eddingtonpeace nehdia.
You forgot Richard Feynman and David Bohm!
Maybe "organized religion" and science are incompatible, but I would agree that physics and spirituality are quite complimentary. In quantum mechanics, there are principles that must be accepted on blind faith, as it were, yet are highly accurate and useful.
There is a function that yields a finite exterior in the shape of a cone, which has an infinite interior. My memory fails me here, since I haven't done calculus for a long time, so I can't remember the series that produces this object. However, I do remember, when I first heard of it, I thought this mathematical paradox sounded very much like a human body that contained an infinite soul. )
-
peace nehdia.
You forgot Richard Feynman and David Bohm!
On the contrary sir Feynman was vehemently against the use of religion in scientific practices. He always maintained that his faith and his practice existed on two seperate realms. As with most notable scientists throughout history.
Maybe "organized religion" and science are incompatible, but I would agree that physics and spirituality are quite complimentary.
Lol.
In quantum mechanics, there are principles that must be accepted on blind faith, as it were, yet are highly accurate and useful.
No. Quantum physics accepts nothing on blind faith.
There is a function that yields a finite exterior in the shape of a cone, which has an infinite interior. My memory fails me here, since I haven't done calculus for a long time, so I can't remember the series that produces this object. However, I do remember, when I first heard of it, I thought this mathematical paradox sounded very much like a human body that contained an infinite soul. )
If you could remember it, that would be good.
-
Peace Neo, Nadia,
Nadia, I apologize if my post to Apple Pie was vague. It was a turning point for me, one which was long overdue, that resulted in my conscious effort to withdraw from any theological debate or even defense. For that matter, any discussion that I do not find either enlightening or entertaining, I am doing my utmost to avoid, despite my mind's practically insane desire to get involved in things. I didn't mean to sound as if I was leaving the forum. Hope that makes sense wink
Neo & Nadia,
I asked
"Is the soul created or is this life a metamorphasis?"and you replied
Yes. By Allah.
I can't argue with the answer, but I can point to a paradox of sorts. If the Hereafter is eternal, then we are infinite, however, according to this understanding, the infinity that we currently represent had a starting point and is thus rendered atleast partially finite. This leads to Nadia's question - How can a soul be infinite if it did not exist at some point? The easy answer would be, "Because God said so, and God can do anything." Is this really what the Qur'an is telling us?
I asked, "Can you think of any examples of something coming from nothing?"
You answered
No.
Does Allah not ask us, via the Qur'an, to verify all information? How does one verify without a reference or similitude?
What you'll find in nature is evidence that nature does not spontaneously spawn life nor does anything truly decay. Everything is constantly changing form. The universe is in a constant state of flux. This brings to mind the problem I was having with the supposed covenant we made before birth. I think there's more to uncover here.
I asked,
"Is there any seperation between you and any atom in the universe?"You answered
Define seperation. If you're talking of atoms then I'd assume you don't mind going down to the quantum level and in that case quantum entanglement get's mixed up in the argument.
I say let's keep it simple for now for the sake of progress, unless you feel inclined to dig deeper. That's fine also. For now, here's my rephrased question
Is there any seperation between the carbon atoms in your body and the carbon atoms on, say, the planet Neptune?
Peace,
Tay -
Tay, first of all I'd like to say that I try to analyse all things philosophical from a strictly logical perspective (hence some of my rather 'crude' replies in this thread because I simply do not adhere to obfuscated thoughts). Now, on with it...
I can't argue with the answer, but I can point to a paradox of sorts. If the Hereafter is eternal, then we are infinite, however, according to this understanding, the infinity that we currently represent had a starting point and is thus rendered atleast partially finite. This leads to Nadia's question - How can a soul be infinite if it did not exist at some point? The easy answer would be, "Because God said so, and God can do anything." Is this really what the Qur'an is telling us?
Well, god having the ability to do 'anything' doesn't mean god can do 'the impossible'; it means god can do anything that is possible. If you dictate god as an entity that can do both the 'possible' and 'impossible' then there's no point in debating anything, and furthermore you create a logical contradiction within the attributes of god (if you want to read more about this I can link you to various sources which discuss this in detail). Thus the answer "because god says so" does not apply here, because infinite cannot be equated to 'partial infinity' or even the 'indefinite'. Infinite is self sustaining and indivisible and the fact that it is indivisible is what gives it its primary attribute of boundless.
Does Allah not ask us, via the Qur'an, to verify all information? How does one verify without a reference or similitude?
Apologies, I assumed "no" was enough for the question "can something come from nothing" since it is the fundemental axiom of all logical concepts.
What you'll find in nature is evidence that nature does not spontaneously spawn life nor does anything truly decay. Everything is constantly changing form. The universe is in a constant state of flux.
Agreed. However, that does not make the universe infinite. But yes, something can not come from nothing, it is logically inconsistent.
This brings to mind the problem I was having with the supposed covenant we made before birth. I think there's more to uncover here.
Like?
Is there any seperation between the carbon atoms in your body and the carbon atoms on, say, the planet Neptune?
For the sake of practicality I would say they are seperate because they are discreet entities but like I've said before, it depends on what level of detail you want to penetrate.
I would also like to add that nature is not continuous because then it creates a fundemental contradiction that should, if true, mean nothing exists. Why? Becuase if nature is continuous then one can divide, say, an atom into infinite parts and thus we would all be made of 'infinitely small' parts, with infinitely small meaning 0/undefined, thus we would be made of 'nothing'/'undefined'. When you're doing any sort of calculation in physics, if you yeild infinite as an answer that's a flag telling you that you are wrong. This is the fundemental problem of classical physics, it's the reason why it breaks down in the picoscopic world because it works with point particles as opposed to QM's more accurate discreet particles.
-
Peace Tay,
Nadia, I apologize if my post to Apple Pie was vague. It was a turning point for me, one which was long overdue, that resulted in my conscious effort to withdraw from any theological debate or even defense. For that matter, any discussion that I do not find either enlightening or entertaining, I am doing my utmost to avoid, despite my mind's practically insane desire to get involved in things. I didn't mean to sound as if I was leaving the forum. Hope that makes sense
Sometimes I feel the same, makes a lot of sense )
Excellent points in neo's post...this discussion cover some very interesting ground...much anticipation
-
Peace Neo,
Thanks for the heads-up on your technique.
You stated
Well, god having the ability to do 'anything' doesn't mean god can do 'the impossible'; it means god can do anything that is possible. If you dictate god as an entity that can do both the 'possible' and 'impossible' then there's no point in debating anything, and furthermore you create a logical contradiction within the attributes of god (if you want to read more about this I can link you to various sources which discuss this in detail). Thus the answer "because god says so" does not apply here, because infinite cannot be equated to 'partial infinity' or even the 'indefinite'. Infinite is self sustaining and indivisible and the fact that it is indivisible is what gives it its primary attribute of boundless.
I'm not sure which side of the fence you're on at this point. My "Because God says so" comment was rhetorical. Rather than getting lost in sidetracking, please answer the following...
You say that we are created by Allah. You also say that ithe nfinite cannot be equated to partial infinity or the indefinite. How do you describe the human soul? Is it infinite or finite?
My position is that the human soul is infinite, and was not created but is simply a metamorphasis of energy. I haven't worked out the logistics, and I may not ever be able to with a human mind, but this avenue seems the most likely, in my opinion.
Thanks,
Tay
