Logic Is Part And Parcel To Enlightenment

[SOUL]

@Russell Parr

Well, what do you mean by illusion?

[Russell Parr]

The illusion is that things inherently exist. That things exist beyond conscious observation. When in truth, ultimately, reality is infinite. Consciousness divides reality into finite demarcations to suit its purposes.

[SOUL]

@Russell Parr Ok, so your interpretation of what is meant by illusion is that it 'does not exist'. Which isn't the actual meaning of it.

You also assert that things don't exist without conscious observation of them.

On the quantum level we know that a particle isn't determined until observation is made but that isn't the same thing as does not exist until observation is made which correlates to your misinterpretation of the word illusion.

Yet there is existence with it's natural laws that does exist, hence it being existence, and affects the manifest universe regardless of whether there is any manifest conscious being there to observe it.

Well, what is this consciousness that is the observing which has the power to manifest the universe of things into existence that doesn't rely on manifest consciousness to observe it into reality?

It could be then understood that the presence of consciousness as the initial form of infinite potential is what brought the manifest into existence through it's observation, aka awareness of it.

So, I state that it is the awareness within our consciousness that transcends to unite with the consciousness form of the infinite potential without the machinations of the mind even if it's effects are present within the mind.

You assert it's all an illusion, with you defining it as 'does not exist', including consciousness, though here you are arguing on behalf of your idea that something that does not exist being the only way to attain something that does not exist.

Hmm...

[Prabhaker]

8 hours ago, Russell Parr said:

Logic is the linguistic representation of cause and effect

Religion says: Produce the effect and the cause follows. This is absolutely illogical.

Jesus says the same thing in different words: Seek ye first the Kingdom of God, then all else will follow. But the Kingdom of God is the end, the effect. Seek ye first the end – the end means the effect, the result – and the cause will follow. 

[Prabhaker]

5 hours ago, Russell Parr said:

The mind is not to be transcended

The mind is just a process. In fact, mind doesn't exist, only thoughts - thoughts moving so fast that you think and feel that something exists there in continuity. Thought exist , mind doesn't exist. Mind is just the appearance.

 

[Russell Parr]

1 hour ago, SOUL said:

@Russell Parr Ok, so your interpretation of what is meant by illusion is that it 'does not exist'. Which isn't the actual meaning of it.

You also assert that things don't exist without conscious observation of them.

On the quantum level we know that a particle isn't determined until observation is made but that isn't the same thing as does not exist until observation is made which correlates to your misinterpretation of the word illusion.

Yet there is existence with it's natural laws that does exist, hence it being existence, and affects the manifest universe regardless of whether there is any manifest conscious being there to observe it.

Well, what is this consciousness that is the observing which has the power to manifest the universe of things into existence that doesn't rely on manifest consciousness to observe it into reality?

It could be then understood that the presence of consciousness as the initial form of infinite potential is what brought the manifest into existence through it's observation, aka awareness of it.

So, I state that it is the awareness within our consciousness that transcends to unite with the consciousness form of the infinite potential without the machinations of the mind even if it's effects are present within the mind.

You assert it's all an illusion, with you defining it as 'does not exist', including consciousness, though here you are arguing on behalf of your idea that something that does not exist being the only way to attain something that does not exist.

Hmm...

I agree with this, I think, except for where you assert that I define illusion to mean "does not exist." I said that things do not inherently exist. That is to say, the existence of things is but an appearance created by the interaction between consciousness and its environment.

[Russell Parr]

1 hour ago, Prabhaker said:

Religion says: Produce the effect and the cause follows. This is absolutely illogical.

Jesus says the same thing in different words: Seek ye first the Kingdom of God, then all else will follow. But the Kingdom of God is the end, the effect. Seek ye first the end – the end means the effect, the result – and the cause will follow. 

To produce an effect is to cause that effect.

"Seek first the Kingdom of God" is a teaching to inspire one to remain spiritually grounded, as to not get caught up in and bounded by the labyrinths of the subjective experience. It's a wonderful teaching.

43 minutes ago, Prabhaker said:

The mind is just a process. In fact, mind doesn't exist, only thoughts - thoughts moving so fast that you think and feel that something exists there in continuity. Thought exist , mind doesn't exist. Mind is just the appearance.

 

The mind is just as equally an appearance as thought.

[Prabhaker]

1 minute ago, Russell Parr said:

"Seek first the Kingdom of God" is a teaching to inspire one to remain spiritually grounded

Not at all, it is a religious law.

2 minutes ago, Russell Parr said:

The mind is just as equally an appearance as thought.

What is mind according to you ?

[SOUL]

12 minutes ago, Russell Parr said:

I said that things do not inherently exist.

Well, now I have to ask what do you mean by inherently?

Also, what did the initial form of potential as consciousness interact with to create existence?

I am aware of what it is but I just would like to hear your answer on it.

[Russell Parr]

9 minutes ago, Prabhaker said:

Not at all, it is a religious law.

What is mind according to you ?

Well then that is my interpretation of it, if Jesus was indeed enlightened, which I suspect that he was.

I'm happy to define the mind to be the abstract representation of what emerges from the chemical and electrical processes of the physical brain, as well as the body to a lesser degree.

[Prabhaker]

Just now, Russell Parr said:

Well then that is my interpretation of it

Your interpretation is not correct. Religion says : you create the effect, and see: the cause follows. It will look absurd if you don’t know it and don’t experiment with it.

4 minutes ago, Russell Parr said:

mind to be the abstract representation of what emerges from the chemical and electrical processes of the physical brain

What emerges from the chemical and electrical processes of the physical brain ? 

[Russell Parr]

18 minutes ago, SOUL said:

Well, now I have to ask what do you mean by inherently?

Also, what did the initial form of potential as consciousness interact with to create existence?

I am aware of what it is but I just would like to hear your answer on it.

"Well, now I have to ask what do you mean by inherently?"
        Google defines "inherent" to mean "existing in something as a permanent, essential, or characteristic attribute." It is a most commonly held belief that the existence of things is a permanent, real quality of reality without and beyond conscious observation. Things can be said to exist in this way pragmatically, but only in such manner.

"Also, what did the initial form of potential as consciousness interact with to create existence?"
        If you are asking me what precisely causes consciousness, or the act or movement of consciousness, the answer is unreachable due to the fact that consciousness cannot be separated from itself in order to observe its causes. We can only speculate the source of consciousness through reflection, after the fact.

"I am aware of what it is but I just would like to hear your answer on it."
        Do you now

Edited May 4, 2017 by Russell Parr

[Russell Parr]

3 minutes ago, Prabhaker said:

1.Your interpretation is not correct. Religion says : you create the effect, and see: the cause follows. It will look absurd if you don’t know it and don’t experiment with it.

2.What emerges from the chemical and electrical processes of the physical brain ? 

1.Well I am no proponent of religion, which religiously misinterprets wise teachings.

2.Thought and experience. Or is "nothing" the answer you're looking for?

[Prabhaker]

2 minutes ago, Russell Parr said:

.Well I am no proponent of religion, which religiously misinterprets wise teachings.

You can know religion by living it, interpretation without experiencing is not possible, and you are misinterpreting.

6 minutes ago, Russell Parr said:

2.Thought and experience. 

Then , what is mind ?

[Russell Parr]

4 minutes ago, Prabhaker said:

You can know religion by living it, interpretation without experiencing is not possible, and you are misinterpreting.

What is religion to you?

4 minutes ago, Prabhaker said:

Then , what is mind ?

You've asked this already, and I answered. I do not follow where you are trying to go with this, care to explain?

[Prabhaker]

1 minute ago, Russell Parr said:

What is religion to you?

If you don't know then how do you know that 'wise teachings' are misinterpreted ?

4 minutes ago, Russell Parr said:

You've asked this already, and I answered

You never replied, you said that, "abstract representation of what emerges from the chemical and electrical processes of the physical brain, as well as the body to a lesser degree." 

Now you are telling that "Thought and experience" , emerges from the chemical and electrical processes of the physical brain.

I am asking , what is mind ?

[Russell Parr]

5 minutes ago, Prabhaker said:

If you don't know then how do you know that 'wise teachings' are misinterpreted ?

Religions are what emerge when wise teachings are attempted to be propagated. They do a pretty poor job, obviously.

 

5 minutes ago, Prabhaker said:

You never replied, you said that, "abstract representation of what emerges from the chemical and electrical processes of the physical brain, as well as the body to a lesser degree." 

Now you are telling that "Thought and experience" , emerges from the chemical and electrical processes of the physical brain.

I am asking , what is mind ?

What's wrong with that answer?

If you like, we can go by the definition offered by google instead: "the element of a person that enables them to be aware of the world and their experiences, to think, and to feel; the faculty of consciousness and thought."

Do you mind if I turn the question around on you? What is mind?

Edited May 4, 2017 by Russell Parr

[SOUL]

22 minutes ago, Russell Parr said:

It is a most commonly held belief that the existence of things is a permanent, real quality of reality without and beyond conscious observation.

Actually it is commonly held belief that things change and there are even some who think that the natural laws may not be constant eitherl.

Although, it seems like you are implying that things don't exist unless conscious observation but my point was that things still exist though may not be determined unless observed.

23 minutes ago, Russell Parr said:

If you are asking me what precisely causes consciousness, or the act or movement of consciousness, the answer is unreachable due to the fact that consciousness cannot be separated from itself in order to observe its causes. We can only speculate the source of consciousness through reflection, after the fact.

 You said "created by the interaction between consciousness and its environment." and I asked what would that environment be.

It can be reached if one transcends the mind.

23 minutes ago, Russell Parr said:

Do you now

I do and it takes transcending the mind to understand it.

[Prabhaker]

1 hour ago, Russell Parr said:

"Seek first the Kingdom of God" is a teaching to inspire one to remain spiritually grounded, as to not get caught up in and bounded by the labyrinths of the subjective experience. It's a wonderful teaching.

When Jesus said,"Seek ye first the Kingdom of God, then all else will follow" 

What is your interpretation of " then all else will follow "?

15 minutes ago, Russell Parr said:

They do a pretty poor job, obviously.

How can you say ,it is a "pretty poor job" ?

15 minutes ago, Russell Parr said:

What's wrong with that answer?

It tells nothing about mind !

 

Edited May 4, 2017 by Prabhaker

[SOUL]

13 minutes ago, Russell Parr said:

If you like, we can go by the definition offered by google instead: "the element of a person that enables them to be aware of the world and their experiences, to think, and to feel; the faculty of consciousness and thought."

Amoeba?