Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
how can you know brahman or god, if you can't experience it first person?
by someone telling you? if so, then how can they know brahman, or god, if they didn't experience it first person?
I think people do experience it first person. It's called "life".how can you know brahman or god, if you can't experience it first person?
You know if a Teacher is for real, if The Teacher can grant you the Experiencehow can you know brahman or god, if you can't experience it first person?
by someone telling you? if so, then how can they know brahman, or god, if they didn't experience it first person?
how can you know brahman or god, if you can't experience it first person?
by someone telling you? if so, then how can they know brahman, or god, if they didn't experience it first person?
Since there is no experiencing without it you can’t miss.
yet there are many who see it god, brahman, as separate, apart, outside involvement and excluding self.I think people do experience it first person. It's called "life".
I don't know if people can actually know God completely. But I think most people know some aspects of God very well.
but then why do some see it as an event separate from self, or without self involvement?
how can you know brahman or god, if you can't experience it first person?
by someone telling you? if so, then how can they know brahman, or god, if they didn't experience it first person?
I'm playing with an idea these days...that everything we learn is merely a slight alteration of something we already know. So when we put a name to an experience the experience was already there but now the name has subtly changed it.
Brahman is not God. Brahman is the stuff (or whatever) which constitutes all things in the universe. God is human imagination.how can you know Brahman or god, if you can't experience it first person? by someone telling you? if so, then how can they know Brahman, or god, if they didn't experience it first person?
You do not need to become Brahman. You are already It.The only way to "know" Brahman is to become Brahman. One can, however, begin to get a mental or mathematical picture of the phenomenon from theoretical physics -- string theories and such.
That is what Chandogya Upanishad said some 2,000 years ago (father to son):I'm playing with an idea these days...that everything we learn is merely a slight alteration of something we already know. So when we put a name to an experience the experience was already there but now the name has subtly changed it.
Brahman is our core, We experience it more through stilling the noisy mind, The masters and Brahman-Realized adepts can tell us something about Brahman. Brahman has best been described in language as pure undifferentiated sat-cit-Ananda (being-awareness-bliss).how can you know brahman or god, if you can't experience it first person?
by someone telling you? if so, then how can they know brahman, or god, if they didn't experience it first person?
The only way to "know" Brahman is to become Brahman. One can, however, begin to get a mental or mathematical picture of the phenomenon from theoretical physics -- string theories and such.
God? God's whatever you make Him/Her/It/Them. There are millions of different god concepts; you can pick and choose.
Yes, and there is nothing wrong with this. Most folks don't need ( or want ) to climb Mt. Everest. Some people might even ignore Mt. Everest all-together.yet there are many who see it god, brahman, as separate, apart, outside involvement and excluding self.
I'm playing with an idea these days...that everything we learn is merely a slight alteration of something we already know. So when we put a name to an experience the experience was already there but now the name has subtly changed it.
Brahman is our core, We experience it more through stilling the noisy mind, The masters and Brahman-Realized adepts can tell us something about Brahman. Brahman has best been described in language as pure undifferentiated sat-cit-Ananda (being-awareness-bliss).
What I am trying to figure out is: What is threatening about this non-dual message. Why torture? Why execution?Ironically and tragically, both Jesus and Mansur were tortured and executed by conservative fundamentalists who were not able to comprehend or grasp their message of nondual perception, due to their conditioned mindsets.
What I am trying to figure out is: What is threatening about this non-dual message. Why torture? Why execution?
Yes, that's a reason, but it doesn't seem like "the" reason. Do you know what I mean?The fundamentalists and conservatives found it blasphemous and outrageous that they were 'daring' to equate themselves with God, Truth and divinity.