Comments on jr_esq's response to Barry


 What are the characteristics of a 'Prime Mover'? How do you find those out? 
How do you determine if there is a prime mover or not? What is the test?

 With regard to experiences that result from meditation etc., I have had a 
number of really interesting experiences in my life in this regard, but I can 
only relate them, but I can't show them to anyone. If I speak about them they 
are simply data which can be believed or disbelieved, i.e., opinion. These 
experiences fall into two categories. 1) awakening experiences and 2) spiritual 
experiences, and they are very different. The spiritual experiences have shall 
we say a religious flavour, while the awakening experiences make the religious 
like experiences seem like straw, unreal and also do not reveal anything other 
than what I previously thought about these things was insubstantial, that is 
spirlitual experiences are in the nature of very nice hallucinations, and 
awakening experiences have a rock solid sort of effect that cannot be doubted, 
but they are empty, tautological.

 What those awaking experiences reveal is the idea of a prime mover is not 
real, nor is the idea there is no prime mover real. There is experience, but if 
you call it anything, that calling is not it. People who push religious 
explanations either believe what they say based on what others say, or they 
have spiritual experiences. Atheists on the other hand either simply do not 
have such a belief or some have an active not-theistic belief. Those that have 
awakening experiences are probably more at a loss at what to say because 
nothing can be said about it that is true. The experience is undefined, you 
cannot call it a prime mover or anything, as no label will stick. There is no 
proof except in experience, so no proof can be offered. We humans are well 
noted among ourselves for pursuing phantasies. As I have said before, 
enlightenment is the resolution of the ultimate confidence game. The joke is on 
us, for it answers a question that need never have been asked. But as we are 
kind of dumb, we do ask it. Now you could call this experience finding God. But 
that word is so pale and inadequate. Rather it is more likely you would call a 
spiritual experience something like God or personal evidence of God because 
those experiences happen when the mind still thinks it is a person acting in a 
larger universe that is bigger than the mind and person rather than simply a 
function that runs within a larger framework of the entire range of experience. 

 You can tell people of both types of experience, but only the awakening kind 
is really useful for living and feeling fulfilled. This is the kind that the 
term enlightenment applies to. But as I said, that reveals nothing other than 
whatever idea you had of enlightenment was, it was not correct, and that you 
had always been living the full value that enlightenment reveals. Very 
paradoxical. It is really great though. But this is just my opinion. Are you 
stupid or smart enough to pursue enlightenment? If you want to find God, or a 
prime mover, you are going to fall short, because those terms, in spite of what 
you might think about them, set certain kinds of limits, in other words, using 
those words structures the mind with boundaries. If you visulaise a prime 
mover, those boundaries create a prime mover in you mind that has a constipated 
value. This is why spiritual disciplines use meditation techniques, to break 
those boundaries down. Not to have spiritual experiences, but to get away from 
them, even though as the mind is breaking up, releasing stresses as it were, 
you may have spiritual experiences, hallucinations, and so on. You treat them 
like thoughts in TM, no big deal. They become an obstacle to clear experience 
if you remain attached to having had them. It is pretty hard to avoid 
attachment to spiritual experiences, so it takes a while to get over them, but 
an awakening experience is different, there will always be something about it 
that cannot be grasped; you cannot pin it down or hold onto it. Because at this 
point you realise that awakening is just another experience. It will pass. Some 
other value takes hold in life, and gradually the whole edifice of spiritual 
chotskies falls away; religion falls away, beliefs fall away. It is no longer 
necessary to care about these things.

 If you want others to have this experience, though, you can create a religion, 
and if you are good, it might work for a while until your followers screw it 
up. How many gods has mankind come up with in the last 10,000 years? Even when 
someones comes up with just one over mastering god, other come up with another 
version of it. And then they fight over it. Great sport.

 This can be said in so many, mostly misleading ways. When you finally give up 
all your ideas about this particular weird path of seeking, you end up with the 
absolute being, but it is not a god, nor is it a prime mover, it is not 
anything you can think of or describe. But it is fulfilling. When you are 
emptied out, you gain fulfillment, and you live what is left of the body's life 
from fulfillment. You have become undefined. There is no you. You are gone. 
There is just life. Sounds crazy doesn't it. This is my opinion. Barry probably 
has a somewhat different opinion, perhaps in the details, but maybe something 
major. I am not going to fault him for it. This is because the human mind is 
the creator, it is what makes up all this stuff about what is supposedly real 
and what is supposedly not real. The creator is a son-of-a bitch (or the 
daughter-of-a-bastard). One can talk endlessly about this stuff because the 
mind just makes up stuff all day long. It's spontaneous. You ('your' mind) are 
the creator. Why not give up the job? Life is a whole lot simpler that way.

 It is really cold here, because I have the heat turned down to save $$. Maybe 
I will make some hot cocoa and watch a totally frivolous TV show. 



---In, <jr_esq@...> wrote:


 It's logical to say that there is a Prime Mover if one reaches an infinite 
regression situation.  It isn't arbitrary.   Specifically, space and time are 
mental constructs.  They cannot exist without a Knower.  Without a Knower, 
there is NOTHING, NOWHERE, NOTIME.  How is it possible for the universe to 
start in the past and to exist as it is now?  As such, the Knower is the Prime 

 As a human being, you're supposed to find out and understand the world around 
us since you too are a knower.  You cannot force everyone to accept what you 
believe is true without making any inquiry-- scientific is the best--to get the 
right answer.  Otherwise, you become a dictator.

 Although some church thinkers do not agree, there are some scientists who 
believe that it's possible to know what happened before the universe began.  
These include Roger Penrose, Michio Kaku and Leonard Susskind.  Are you 
criticizing these scientists for making an inquiry that you believe is 

 IMO, human beings are knowers and should use their full intelligence and 
reason to find out how the world works, including how the universe started, and 
if possible to know what happened before it started.  What is wrong with that?

 There is no greater enjoyment and bliss than knowing the Truth.  If you enjoy 
your day today, there is nothing wrong with that.  But is it enough?

Reply via email to