The answer we gotten before from some here is, "random brain activity".

 From: "" <>
Sent: Saturday, September 7, 2013 7:46 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Chopra nothing without Maharishi

 I am really glad you wrote what you did, about the crown chakra experience 
perhaps modifying a person's atheism.  It is an experience, not just an idea or 
an attempt to use words. Somehow it rings really true.    
--- In, <> wrote:
Hi Xeno, this triggered something some time ago, when I wasn't subscribed. You 

"Ever wonder what a neo-Darwinist atheist would experience in GC? (Assuming GC 
is a real state of experience)"

I have been thinking about this, not really in the context of GC, which I don't 
really know, but rather in relation to another experience I have, namely that 
of the crown chakra, the Sahasradala. Speaking from that experience, having had 
this in a fairly clear and consistent way, I don't *believe* one could be a 
full-fledged atheist. Dawkins couldn't stay Dawkins with this experience. 

Now, I say *full-fledged* atheist, because it depends of course on your 
definition of the terms 'theist' and 'atheist'. I don't mean with that, that 
you have to believe in a very personalized concept of a creator God, or even 
any personal God, but you definitely experience a totally different dimension 
of Being, so I don't think you could deny a very clear and concrete sense of an 
Absolute, however inexpressible this may be. You could maybe be a Buddhist 
atheist, if that's how you would call it, but not in a sense, how Curtis or 
even Dawkins define it. 

That's just my 2 cents.
--- In, <> wrote:

>--- In, "authfriend" <authfriend@...> wrote:
>>> --- In, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@> 
>>> wrote:
>>While I do not have time to enter the fray here at the moment, I did notice 
>>this thread about 'Mind and Cosmos' which I have *not* read but which 
>>seemingly brings up once again the 'hard problem of consciousness'.
>>I do not think hard problem will go away philosophically or experimentally. 
>>When the brain is deactivated, all observable appearances of conscious 
>>behaviour vanish. But as meditators of one sort or another, the experiences 
>>we have are something else. In particular for me, the gap I experienced 
>>during surgery was most interesting. Did I in fact experience it? Was it an 
>>experience? Was it pure being? Like TC, but lasts for hours but has no sense 
>>of time. 
>>Then there is the experience that everything has an equal value of 
>>consciousness, which in some way, seems redundant to say there is some value 
>>called consciousness that is somehow distinct from any kind of experience. To 
>>me consciousness = being, and this contradicts the idea that consciousness 
>>can be snuffed out by destroying the brain. But then when the brain is 
>>largely deactivated by anaesthesia there is nothing, or is there? Because 
>>that gap has a value, at least in retrospect in memory of its having been 
>>there. It is a paradox. At least intellectually it is a paradox, and perhaps 
>>leaving it as a mystery on the level of the mind can leave one settled. 
>>Ever wonder what a neo-Darwinist atheist would experience in GC? (Assuming GC 
>>is a real state of experience)
>>I came across some web pages discussing Nagel's book:

Reply via email to