primate

When viewed as a puzzle or problem that can be solved in principle, the question of what underlies our conscious perception and how it originates can be most concisely answered by assuming oneness, i.e., conscious perception and its origin are one and the same thing. They are not separate entities and they are ultimately the same stuff: consciousness. I find the inherent simplicity of such a theoretical framework scientifically attractive and my intuition tells me that it is most probably true. And, although I am not a religious scholar, it is also what attracts me in Advaita Vedanta, the idea’s of Iskcon, and Buddism.

Just don’t be terrified..

Is there..?

To me fundamental oneness is actually the simplest solution to the puzzle of origin and human conscious existence, which is intuitively (and scientifically) the best solution. And apart from Iskcon’s emphasis on a personal god, I don't see much difference between non-duality in Advaita Vedanta and Iskcon's notion of 'inconceivable oneness and difference'.

Although the Taliban allowed terrorist training camps in their territory and provided refuge for Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda organization, I’m not sure if you should call them terrorists. It’s more like a radical Islamist movement that violently tries to implement their specific brand of radicalism and Islamic law. Before 9/11, Pakistan even recognized the Taliban as Afghanistan's legitimate government. And the Taliban still has a lot of public support in Pakistan. Remarkably, at present there exists no internationally agreed definition of terrorism (!) My own definition would be something like: Terrorism is an anxiety-inspiring method of organized violent action whereby the immediate human victims are generally chosen randomly from a target population or are representative or symbolic targets within the target population. Terrorism serves to enforce demands, attention, intimidation, coercion, or propaganda.

Lila literally means pastime. If the concept of time is only relevant in material consciousness, then why is it used to describe the nature of the spiritual world? My point is that time doesn’t exist as a dimension of reality at any level. Only (beginningless) irreversible material change exists, which produces an illusion of time in material consciousness. In spiritual consciousness, even change may be absent because ultimately everything exists simultaneously. The illusion of time may be what distinguishes material consciousness from spiritual consciousness. Time may be derived from our limited (ignorant) material perception of reality. So, instead of stating that time is the impersonal energy of Krishna, it may be better and more fundamental to state that conscious perception of irreversible material change is the impersonal energy of Krishna. At least to me, this would make the big picture more consistent and understandable..

Very nice Sonic Yogi

Our sense of time seems to be a function of consciously perceived ongoing irreversible material change. Time doesn’t seem to exist as an independent aspect of reality. Time is just a concept to describe material change with. Could it be that the impersonal energy of Krishna then is: 'inducing ongoing irreversible material change'?

The very name Islam comes from the Arabic word 'salama' which means peace. Islam is a religion which is based upon achieving peace through submission to the will of Allah. Then how is it that so many acts done by its adherents are contrary to peace? The answer is simple. Such actions have no place with it. They are not Islamic and should not be thought of as Islamic. Poverty and oppression breeds terrorists. People become so desperate that they resort to performing the suicidal acts suggested to them in the name of Allah by a small group of power hungry fanatics and demagogs that adhere only to their own agenda and clearly misuse and misinterpret Islamic scripture to mobilize the poor and oppressed for their own political and economical purposes. I wouldn’t even be too surprised if Western economic interests appear to be behind some supposedly Islamist terrorist acts. This may explain why some terrorists are well educated and seem to live a normal life in a Western country. And let’s not forget that living in a Western country is no guarantee for mental health. Nevertheless, the root cause of most terrorism seems to be large scale poverty and oppression. Just look at the Israeli-Palestinian conflict..

No. The dualist is separate (alone). The monist is an integral part of the universe and everything.

God must exist. At least as the philosophical ‘Origin’. Some of the worst crap in this world may be due to the idea that there is no god, or that you are your own god, and its associated mindset..

These are actually 2 separate questions (a common error in questionnaires) that cannot be answered by a single yes or no. In advaitic thought, the answer to the first question is obviously: no. And as I understand it, the answer to the second question must be: yes. Material consciousness isn’t separate from Brahman, it is just ignorant of Brahman.

Where do you think bad ideologies come from? It's probably best to grant one and all the freedom to speak whatever one and all wants to speak.

Incidentally, I am Dutch, and the legal case against Wilders must be just a joke. If it is not a joke, then it will be a trial against the freedom of speech. As I said above: "perhaps through globally ending poverty and by facilitating proper healthcare and education for all".

Yeh.. right..

Well, that's terrorism I guess.. You just can't control it.. Perhaps we can prevent it..

Yeh.., right..

Infallible? Probably not. An authority? I would think so.. I think he probably intended to say: “the only way to tackle terrorism is through globaly ending poverty and by facilitating proper healthcare and education for all”.

No worries, the Dalai Lama reportedly said: "It is difficult to deal with terrorism through non-violence", and: "the only way to tackle terrorism is through prevention". This doesn’t necessarily mean: "the only way to tackle terrorism is through violence".

My guess is that only consciousness exists. Everything is consciousness. Our perception of a material outside world is the product of our consciousness and in that sense may be seen as illusion. The existence of (lucid) dreams, for example, strongly indicates that such a theory can indeed be valid. Why don’t we naturally accept this? I think because it ultimately implies that autonomous individual consciousness or individuality doesn’t exist, which is very hard to accept. If I see a brick wall and decide to run into it, I will experience a sudden stop of movement and pain. So the wall appears to be actually there. If you were witnessing me running into the wall, you would agree that there is a wall and that I ran into it. If, however, the wall is a conscious illusion, then we both must have experienced highly correlated illusions. Another example is the fact that we can communicate with each other through this forum. If the forum is an illusion, then somehow our individual consciousness must be intimately linked through some other medium. If there exists no outside material world to account for such correlated conscious experience, then the only explanation is that all individual consciousness is in fact part of one single complex conscious organization that mediates, synchronizes and arranges all our individual conscious experiences. Although obviously the (illusory) product of our consciousness, I don’t think that what we perceive as our material world is irrelevant. Somehow it is the way in which our consciousness makes sense of this complex underlying real organization. The human dream may be a limited but accurate reflection of aspects of reality.

Love of god feels cooling and soothing, or hot..? That sounds like two very different experiences..

Yes.

Are you depressed..?

Fair enough..

No, the (lucid!) vision of Prabhupada may have been absolutely correct. But the original question of this thread was: "Does time exist in the Spititual World?".