my experience is very clear: after many decades of transcending the mundane delivers me to where Being and Knowing merge into one Unified existence. The qualities of this state are creative, intelligent, blissfully inspirational, stable, reality in its pure most basic, never to be lost field, it sort of takes my breath away, it is inner light that i live and move and have my being, so stable that i am home in the perfect sense, and finally, that life to come is so exciting and fulfilling and i will never lose it!
This seems like an agnostic speaking with a man of faith. All we ever know is only conjecture based on the experiences we've had. What is key is remaining open to new experiences and supporting others in their growth. This was a very open and supporting conversation, thank you both.
Thank you for this interesting discussion. Thank you Dr Nader. You are doing a great task: entering light into every corner of this relative world. I think that it is wonderful opportunity for everyone who have nothing more but just a simpatthetic vision, to make a jump and do experience what Dr Nader is talking about. It is a Great opportunity to gain a very advantage knowledge about true reality and Consciousness.
Dr. Keith is mainly roaming around in a "world of concepts" and does not have a question about what might be a "direct experience". What might be an experience that is not limited to subject-object knowing. This division of subject and object gets firmly established in the human in the first two or three years of life. If he would take the time to read and give some study and practice to even the first volume of John G Bennet's four volume work, The Drama Universe, he might begin to see there is an fuller or more whole way of knowing that is not just limited to the subject-object way of knowing. Ordinarily the kind of knowing that is limited to subject-knowing doesn't consider how it is limiting itself by being in a view that is stuck by and in the very early learned division of "in here" and "out there" which gives us our ordinary subject-object kind of knowing. We assume that by putting our attention and study on an object, it can be studied and understood as other than the subject. This is true enough but it is also a very limiting assumption especially when we consider the study of something like consciousness. Ordinarily we assume that what we are studying is 'out there'. This is so close to being the whole truth that it misleads us. Whether it be an object of the outer senses or an object that arises in our personal experience as what we ordinarily call a thought, a feeling or a sensation, it can be studied and understood as 'out there' but this will only reveal a partial understanding. The subject-object way of knowing has worked very well in for example physics, technology, many kinds of medicine, astronomy, chemistry and even biology; however, when it comes to mental phenomena if we limit the way of knowing to the subject-object dichotomy, we soon fall into fooling ourselves and do not know we are doing it. No wonder that this mode or method of knowing can come to the conclusion that some how consciousness is not real. The mind is easily deluded when dealing with the subject matter of the mind. As another example, to see what the problem is with limiting ourselves to subject-object knowing take the present work that Anoop Kumar is developing and give it a through and complete study. Tony knows all this in his own way.
Physical and physiological structure or pattern is very important aspect if any spiritual process:Russian and Georgian psychologists attached the subconscious,unconscious and. certainly the conscious level of human psyche to those body structures.From my own experience i can say that difficulty in learning French may be determined my inability to turn my tongue to the right while the opposite is easy to do.Surely I've no speech deficiency. Just speaking french consists greatly not only of tongue and glotal movements but include much nasal sounds involving both sides of nasal cavity.
porfavor, hoy en día ya deberían de activar los subtitulos, muchas personas deben tener este tipo de información, NO estan activados los subtitulos, gracias.
Two principled thinkers having a meaningful discussion. What a treat.
my experience is very clear: after many decades of transcending the mundane delivers me to where Being and Knowing merge into one Unified existence. The qualities of this state are creative, intelligent, blissfully inspirational, stable, reality in its pure most basic, never to be lost field, it sort of takes my breath away, it is inner light that i live and move and have my being, so stable that i am home in the perfect sense, and finally, that life to come is so exciting and fulfilling and i will never lose it!
This seems like an agnostic speaking with a man of faith. All we ever know is only conjecture based on the experiences we've had. What is key is remaining open to new experiences and supporting others in their growth. This was a very open and supporting conversation, thank you both.
Thank you for this interesting discussion. Thank you Dr Nader. You are doing a great task: entering light into every corner of this relative world. I think that it is wonderful opportunity for everyone who have nothing more but just a simpatthetic vision, to make a jump and do experience what Dr Nader is talking about. It is a Great opportunity to gain a very advantage knowledge about true reality and Consciousness.
JGD -much gratitude for the actual and thought provoking talk.👏☕☕🍦🍦🍰🍮🍸🍹
Dr. Keith is mainly roaming around in a "world of concepts" and does not have a question about what might be a "direct experience". What might be an experience that is not limited to subject-object knowing. This division of subject and object gets firmly established in the human in the first two or three years of life. If he would take the time to read and give some study and practice to even the first volume of John G Bennet's four volume work, The Drama Universe, he might begin to see there is an fuller or more whole way of knowing that is not just limited to the subject-object way of knowing. Ordinarily the kind of knowing that is limited to subject-knowing doesn't consider how it is limiting itself by being in a view that is stuck by and in the very early learned division of "in here" and "out there" which gives us our ordinary subject-object kind of knowing. We assume that by putting our attention and study on an object, it can be studied and understood as other than the subject. This is true enough but it is also a very limiting assumption especially when we consider the study of something like consciousness. Ordinarily we assume that what we are studying is 'out there'. This is so close to being the whole truth that it misleads us. Whether it be an object of the outer senses or an object that arises in our personal experience as what we ordinarily call a thought, a feeling or a sensation, it can be studied and understood as 'out there' but this will only reveal a partial understanding. The subject-object way of knowing has worked very well in for example physics, technology, many kinds of medicine, astronomy, chemistry and even biology; however, when it comes to mental phenomena if we limit the way of knowing to the subject-object dichotomy, we soon fall into fooling ourselves and do not know we are doing it. No wonder that this mode or method of knowing can come to the conclusion that some how consciousness is not real. The mind is easily deluded when dealing with the subject matter of the mind. As another example, to see what the problem is with limiting ourselves to subject-object knowing take the present work that Anoop Kumar is developing and give it a through and complete study. Tony knows all this in his own way.
The mechanisms of consciousness are able to be understood and replicated. They are causal at their level of description, but compatible with physics.
What a beautiful man!
Physical and physiological structure or pattern is very important aspect if any spiritual process:Russian and Georgian psychologists attached the subconscious,unconscious and. certainly the conscious level of human psyche to those body structures.From my own experience i can say that difficulty in learning French may be determined my inability to turn my tongue to the right while the opposite is easy to do.Surely I've no speech deficiency. Just speaking french consists greatly not only of tongue and glotal movements but include much nasal sounds involving both sides of nasal cavity.
porfavor, hoy en día ya deberían de activar los subtitulos, muchas personas deben tener este tipo de información, NO estan activados los subtitulos, gracias.
CONCRETENESS IS MISSING IN THIS DISCUSSION