Umm RP I don't think I can agree with you here. Whether a transendental moment occoures via drugs or meditation or other avenues, the same thing happens in the brain.
The I we speak about is present in the brain, when the brain is dead the I has gone, to suggest that this change in brain chemistry if occouring via drugs is not spirtual makes no sense to me. If I walk across the road or run, I still get to the other side. The end result is the same no matter what route I take. As to God state, then being Sikh I simply must disagree. The aim of my faith is obtaining Gurmukh(God conceiousness)whilst still alive. On Jul 12, 9:11 am, paradox <[email protected]> wrote: > Happy birthday, Ash! > > Hope i got this right; if i didn't, happy birthday anyway! :) > > On Jul 12, 2:42 am, Ash <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > [Life] hath many doors [yet to open] RP. Shouldn't there be infinite > > potential between absolutes? > > > I've gotten the new-ish Sam Harris book about Morality, a great German's > > Chocolate-deluxe cupcake thingie with a candle and everything! It's that > > time of year again. 28, FTW! > > > On 7/11/2011 2:12 PM, RP Singh wrote: > > > > The state of enlightenment , or self-realization , is simply a state > > > of awareness like the dream -state or deep-sleep , and can be attained > > > through concentration or substance - use. It is the mind which is > > > aware and as the mind is finite , whatever it is aware of is also > > > finite. The very fact that the so-called transcendental state can be > > > experienced through use of entheogens casts a doubt about its > > > spiritual nature. A person experiences such a state and when he comes > > > out of it is just his ordinary self. God-state cannot be experienced > > > by any being as it is beyond experience and can only be understood. We > > > find it difficult to accept that we are mortal and hence believe in > > > re-incarnation etc. The fact is that the " I " has nowhere to go on > > > the death of the organism , it is simply an attribute of life and is > > > no more on the death of the body , and is thus just an " illusion " . > > > This is , of course , my reading of the matter and can be erroneous as > > > my reason is not infallible and is subject to my limitations.- Hide > > > quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
