The Neural Basis of NonDuality

[Eodnhoj7]

...

Not sure of your point.


If you insist God exists as real, where is the evidence to justify your claim?

The question is subjective to your interpretation, unless you provide a framework for evidence. But this framework is subject to personal desire or fallacy of equivocation and bandwagon at the larger level. Regardless, pick a framework of evidence.

The framework I pick is that of Science and the highest possible framework of critical thinking within philosophy-proper.
Now prove to me your God [illusory] exists within the above frameworks.

Okay.

The scientific method is dependent upon a progressive circularity that makes it a conscious means of interpretation. This circularity is common within all natural law and human reasoning and is premised within the book of the 24 philosophers directly and indirectly as one of the definitions of God (along with the Socratic and medieval interpration of circularity being divine.)

The scientific method, exists because of this circularity, and as such and extension of the human conscious. Both observe a further circularity where man as image of God is God existing through man. The scientific method, as a rational means of consciousness, is an extension of Divine consciousness where while it cannot exist on its own terms is still a means of truth and is an approximation of God and Man as an image.

The scientific method itself, and it's framework, is a proof of God with circularity due to its infinite nature being a defintion of God.



Note at present you are using your brain/mind in making a claim 'God exists' which is illusory. How can you even proceed when you do not understand thoroughly what is going inside your brain/mind?
Actually above you said the brain is not the soul [sole] determinant of consciousness so the argument contradicts itself.

What?? did not expense your skull to be that thick.
Yes, it is not the sole but I stated it is the ultimate determinant of human consciousness.
The brain/mind is the ultimate [with the heaviest weightage] in judgment.

It cannot be the ultimate if it is dependent upon other functions of the body to exist. It would be like saying the arm is the most useful aspect of the body, but it is fundamentally useless without a strong back, or eyes to give it direction.

I am not asking you to give a critique of the Scientific Method.

If you insist God exists is real, then call or point to your God and subject it to the Scientific Method and if all scientists accept the paper presented then I will agree God exists as real subjected to the Scientific Method.

Note Stephen Hawking who body had degenerated and was still recognized as one of the world best scientific thinkers. Because his brain/mind was still very active, I bet if he was supported by an artificial heart, and other artificial organs, he would had been able to think and express this thoughts via what his brain/mind can direct and communicate with, e.g. eyelids, lips, etc.
This prove the brain/mind is the ultimate determinant of a person's basic consciousness.

The heart, where one places value hence premise to truth, cannot be denied. It may also be argued his consciousness suffered because of his lack of health. What you offer is not proof of anything.

There is not greater or determination of consciousness if everything is connected. Otherwise you are left with a relativistic interpretation.

The scientific process, as the embodied form of circularity which is a definition of God and natural law, is a means to conscious awareness of the universe and hence has a self reflective property that is also synonymous to a definition.

The formation of consciousness and progression of it, through the scientific method and it's embodied is attributed to aspects and definitions of God, hence constitutes its own proof when reflected upon these definitions.

[Veritas Aequitas]

The scientific process, as the embodied form of circularity which is a definition of God and natural law, is a means to conscious awareness of the universe and hence has a self reflective property that is also synonymous to a definition.

The formation of consciousness and progression of it, through the scientific method and it's embodied is attributed to aspects and definitions of God, hence constitutes its own proof when reflected upon these definitions.

How can you leverage the scientific process to God when you have not proven God exists as real?

Note God in this case is claimed to be absolutely Absolute, i.e. totally unconditional.

"hence constitutes its own proof when reflected upon these definitions."
Note it "you" [a fallible human being] who is speaking on behalf of God.
Get God itself to speak for itself, or subject itself to proof within any of the acceptable framework, then I will be convinced God exists as real.

[Dontaskme]

Neurology is in the realm of the atomic form, which is a sheath, or kosha, that simultaneously exists with other, more subtle forms of the same entity/being.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosha

All these 'Kosha' can be explained by its emergence from the fundamental atomic brain.
The test is, kill the brain and all the "Kosha" vanishes. QED.

That's like saying kill the ''lightbulb'' and the electricty vanishes.

Nothing can be killed because nothing is all that is, was, and ever will be.

example a soul that survives physical death and God [aka Absolute] which are impossibilities.

Nothing is physical, there is no such thing as physical death, or birth, except in this conception, AN illusion.

.

The awakeneing is going mainstream.
...they cannot stop it.

.

[Eodnhoj7]

The scientific process, as the embodied form of circularity which is a definition of God and natural law, is a means to conscious awareness of the universe and hence has a self reflective property that is also synonymous to a definition.

The formation of consciousness and progression of it, through the scientific method and it's embodied is attributed to aspects and definitions of God, hence constitutes its own proof when reflected upon these definitions.

How can you leverage the scientific process to God when you have not proven God exists as real?

Note God in this case is claimed to be absolutely Absolute, i.e. totally unconditional.

"hence constitutes its own proof when reflected upon these definitions."
Note it "you" [a fallible human being] who is speaking on behalf of God.
Get God itself to speak for itself, or subject itself to proof within any of the acceptable framework, then I will be convinced God exists as real.

Proof is God as proof gives order to thought and being, hence is an inherent element of consciousness that mirror the nature of God. Because God is not limited to existence alone, by definition, your question of proof is subjective and irrational.

Because of this subjective nature that proof you desire is actually a contradiction in terms.

[Eodnhoj7]

Neurology is in the realm of the atomic form, which is a sheath, or kosha, that simultaneously exists with other, more subtle forms of the same entity/being.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosha

All these 'Kosha' can be explained by its emergence from the fundamental atomic brain.
The test is, kill the brain and all the "Kosha" vanishes. QED.

That's like saying kill the ''lightbulb'' and the electricty vanishes.

Nothing can be killed because nothing is all that is, was, and ever will be.

example a soul that survives physical death and God [aka Absolute] which are impossibilities.

Nothing is physical, there is no such thing as physical death, or birth, except in this conception, AN illusion.

.

Most of your arguments reflect a Buddhist concept of negation, if veritas argues against you he is arguing against central tenets of certain schools in Buddhism, the religion he places such a high emphasis on.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Neurology is in the realm of the atomic form, which is a sheath, or kosha, that simultaneously exists with other, more subtle forms of the same entity/being.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosha

All these 'Kosha' can be explained by its emergence from the fundamental atomic brain.
The test is, kill the brain and all the "Kosha" vanishes. QED.

That's like saying kill the ''lightbulb'' and the electricty vanishes.

Nothing can be killed because nothing is all that is, was, and ever will be.

example a soul that survives physical death and God [aka Absolute] which are impossibilities.

Nothing is physical, there is no such thing as physical death, or birth, except in this conception, AN illusion.

.

The awakeneing is going mainstream.
...they cannot stop it.

.

How can you be so stupid?

Nothing can be killed because nothing is all that is, was, and ever will be.

Why don't you destroy and kill your own brain then?

[Dontaskme]

How can you be so stupid?

There is no 'you' to be stupid. Words like 'stupid' or 'you are stupid' are fictional beliefs artificially founded upon heresay aka secondary knowledge.

Knowledge is thought based conceptual utterances believed to be real, but is nothing but dreamscape within the dream of separation which is an illusory appearance within the absolute which is this immediate actual real direct experience that is reality.

The Awakening is happening, it's going mainstream within this conceptual(dreamscape) and nothing can stop it.

Nothing can be killed because nothing is all that is, was, and ever will be.

Why don't you destroy and kill your own brain then?

Because the knowledge of you is not who you are, there is no knowledge of you except in this illusory conception.

Knowledge of death or birth is a lie, knowledge informs the illusory nature of reality, in that all knowledge is secondary heresay (appearances of nothing)

Direct infinite intelligence has no mind to kill itself because it has no mind to know it exists. Knowing is all ONE with itself. One cannot die because One was never born.

So even if you did kill yourself.. that would be nothing killing itself. Which is rather counter intuitive and pointless.

I don't think you quite get this radical hardcore shocking truth.

.

This provable empirical I that you believe to exist is a fantasy, it's dreamscape within the minds dream of separation.

.

[Veritas Aequitas]

How can you be so stupid?

There is no 'you' to be stupid. Words like 'stupid' or 'you are stupid' are fictional beliefs artificially founded upon heresay aka secondary knowledge.

Knowledge is thought based conceptual utterances believed to be real, but is nothing but dreamscape within the dream of separation which is an illusory appearance within the absolute which is this immediate actual real direct experience that is reality.

The Awakening is happening, it's going mainstream within this conceptual(dreamscape) and nothing can stop it.

Nothing can be killed because nothing is all that is, was, and ever will be.

Why don't you destroy and kill your own brain then?

Because the knowledge of you is not who you are, there is no knowledge of you except in this illusory conception.

Knowledge of death or birth is a lie, knowledge informs the illusory nature of reality, in that all knowledge is secondary heresay (appearances of nothing)

Direct infinite intelligence has no mind to kill itself because it has no mind to know it exists. Knowing is all ONE with itself. One cannot die because One was never born.

So even if you did kill yourself.. that would be nothing killing itself. Which is rather counter intuitive and pointless.

I don't think you quite get this radical hardcore shocking truth.

.

This provable empirical I that you believe to exist is a fantasy, it's dreamscape within the minds dream of separation.

.

Crazy

[Dontaskme]

Crazy

“What matters most is how well you walk through the fire.”

“Ready must thou be to burn thyself in thine own flame; how couldst thou become new if thou have not first become ashes.”

“Life tried to crush her, but only succeeded in creating a diamond.”

“And just as the Phoenix rose from the ashes, she too will rise. Returning from the flames, clothed in nothing but her strength, more beautiful than ever before.”

The Awakening is going mainstream and nothing can stop it.

.

[Walker]

True the present periodic table do not identify all things.
However it there is any thing not in the periodic table at present, it has been identifiable, i.e. verifiable and justifiable by Science and rationally acceptable.

Example?

[Eodnhoj7]

Relative to Veritas statements on Buddhism:

Sexual Abuse:

https://www.quora.com/Have-there-been-s ... onasteries
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/ne ... dAbuse.htm
https://nltimes.nl/2015/05/25/buddhist- ... -revealed/

Violence:
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32929855
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/05/opin ... rance.html
https://wikivisually.com/wiki/Buddhism_and_violence

[Veritas Aequitas]

Relative to Veritas statements on Buddhism:

Sexual Abuse:

https://www.quora.com/Have-there-been-s ... onasteries
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/ne ... dAbuse.htm
https://nltimes.nl/2015/05/25/buddhist- ... -revealed/

Violence:
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32929855
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/05/opin ... rance.html
https://wikivisually.com/wiki/Buddhism_and_violence

You are kicking your own intellectual ass by linking the above without proper understanding of the essence of Buddhism.

Note this from one of your link;

Buddhism and violence refers to acts of violence and aggression committed by Buddhists with religious, political, or socio-cultural motivations, as well as self-inflicted violence by ascetics or for religious purposes.[1] Buddhism is generally seen as among the religious traditions least associated with violence.[2] However, in the history of Buddhism, there have been acts of violence directed, promoted, or inspired by Buddhists.[3]

As far as Buddha's teachings and scriptures are concerned, Buddhism forbids violence for resolving conflicts.

https://wikivisually.com/wiki/Buddhism_and_violence

Note the bolded above.

The fact is almost all religions are open to anyone [inherently good or evil] who want to be affiliated with the respective religion.
Thus terrible evil persons on Earth at present can claim to be a Buddhists or be members of any other religion. If these evil people commit crimes we cannot blame any religion unless the religion itself promote evil and violence within its core doctrines.
Get that!

The only religion that commands its followers to commit terrible evil and violence against non-believers is TROP.

I have asked you for evidence where Buddhists had quoted from the Sutras or Buddha to justify their evils and violence.

[Veritas Aequitas]

True the present periodic table do not identify all things.
However it there is any thing not in the periodic table at present, it has been identifiable, i.e. verifiable and justifiable by Science and rationally acceptable.

Example?

The above point was not written properly.

Correction;
However if there is any thing not in the periodic table at present, it must have the empirical possibility to be identifiable, i.e. verifiable and justifiable by Science and rationally acceptable.

Example?
I cannot give you any example of any element not yet in the periodic table.

However many elements not found in the past were based on predictions from the gaps then.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mendeleev ... d_elements
These gaps are empirical possibilities, thus it was a question of waiting for the actual empirical evidences.

The point with nonduality is the speculated Absolute [aka God, Oneness, etc.] is an empirical and rational impossibility.
This is like predicting a square-circle [an impossibility] exists.

[Walker]

Energy is not on the periodic table.

“It is important to realize that in physics today, we have no knowledge of what energy is.”
- Richard Feynman

Man in his duality has already divided energy into light and dark (divided darkness from the light), all the while having no knowledge of what energy is.

Why not call energy, God?

[surreptitious57]

According to Einstein anything that has mass will also have energy
Nothing is ever truly at rest so everything in motion needs energy