Evidence 1: Mystic experience can convert atheists to theism

[Swami]

A few months has passed since I posted a debate challenge to atheists regarding religious experience. To date, no atheist has taken up my challenge perhaps because there is some truth to what I'm saying. I hope that this will serve as a lesson to those so called skeptics and scientists who are so quick to dismiss religious claims.

Here is one interesting evidence of a woman who dropped scientific materialism after discovering the true nature of consciousness:

I was home alone, walking through the living room, not thinking of anything in particular, when suddenly my consciousness erupted. It no longer ended at the surface of my body but expanded outward, filling the surrounding space. I experienced everything around me as inside me and absolutely identical to myself. I was no longer Linda Johnsen; I was everything. The bliss of that single moment was beyond description.

I suddenly understood that the entire universe is held within an all-pervading, blissful awareness.

It wasnt as if I was the universe. I really was the universe. It happened spontaneously, and even though it only lasted a few seconds, I emerged from it changed forever. Any confidence I had in the materialistic scientific paradigm collapsed. So did my naive belief that heaven"the most joyful place Id heard of before that moment"was a physical site with streets paved in gold. I suddenly understood that the entire universe is held within an all-pervading, blissful awareness. Its useless for you to argue that I must have been hallucinating or having some kind of epileptic fit. The experience was real. In fact, it was far more vivid than everyday reality and it set me on a lifelong quest to understand exactly what had happened and how I could make it happen again.

The flash of cosmic consciousness I experienced when I was 14 happens more seldom than the first two states of mystical consciousness just described, but bring up the subject in a large group and youll almost certainly find at least one person whos had the experience. In this state the boundary between self and other dissolves and your individual consciousness merges with the living reality of everything around you, animate and inanimate. Theres a profound sense of coming home, of returning to a unity you suddenly knew all along was there, as if youve just awakened from a dream.

https://yogainternational.com/article/v ... xperiences

This experience is similar to many experiences that led me believe that there exist a consciousness that not only transcends body, but also, space, time, and yes, even the self.

To discussion:
Can mystical or religious experience convert someone to theism?

[Difflugia]

Can mystical or religious experience convert someone to theism?

A seizure of the right parietal lobe would do the trick, especially if someone isn't prepared for it and doesn't understand what he or she is experiencing.

I used to have experiences that I thought were the Holy Spirit. Whenever I would pray or study the Bible, I felt a kind of electricity up and down my spine and across my scalp. Eventually I could do it intentionally and, though I no longer thought it was the Holy Spirit, I still didn't know what it was for years.

I recently learned that listening through headphones to someone blowing on a microphone will give me the same sensation that I used to have when praying fervently.

[Divine Insight]

This experience is similar to many experiences that led me believe that there exist a consciousness that not only transcends body, but also, space, time, and yes, even the self.

The problem is that there is nothing about that experience that implies the conclusions you are jumping to.

Divine Insight,

There are 3 options for the experience of awareness. You don't experience it at all. You experience it from an individual standpoint (what we experience now, tied to one place or thing or perspective). Or you experience it as part of everything.

Linda Johnsen spent little time drawing "conclusions" but instead she recounted her experience that she did not feel tied to any one thing. She was part of everything. This can actually be scary to some people, the feeling that not only you are separate from your body, but also that you have no fixed point - you lose your sense of self.

If this does not convince you of the existence of a universal consciousness, which is simply a consciousness that transcends an individual self, then I would suggest that you have the experience again. If I remember correctly, you are not even an atheist so you are an example of my view. Reevaluate yourself, and ask why you feel an affinity to Buddhist philosophy.

Again you are doing nothing more here than displaying your own desire to jump to totally unwarranted conclusions.

You need to ask yourself the following question:

When you have this experience of being everything can you actually experience everything?

The answer is clearly and obviously no.

When you have this experience you don't suddenly see the world through someone else's eyes or experience their thoughts, or become them. You also don't return from this experience as a tree that you might have felt that you had become "one" with.

The fact of the matter is that no matter how hard you try to push these ideas even you need to confess to yourself that the conclusions you are jumping to are simply unwarranted.

In fact, we've already been through this before. I've pointed out to you that when you meditate I can easily interrupt your meditation by simply walking up behind you and pinching you. You would instantly feel that you are indeed still within your own physical body.

Moreover, if you were meditating in front of a tree imagining that you are the tree, and I walk over an pinch the tree, you don't feel that pinch, neither do you come out of your meditative state as the tree.

So the problem with your arguments is that they simply are credible. Period.

You are demanding that people jump to utterly absurd conclusions that simply aren't warranted. In short, you really have no valid arguments for your claims.

To the contrary, I've already shown that your claims are clearly wrong.

Is what you claim were actually true, then you should be able to go into this state where you become everything and simply return from that state into anything you want to be leaving your physical body behind to just drop to the ground unconscious because you have left it.

That simply doesn't happen. Therefore your claim that you are actually becoming everything doesn't hold water. If you truly were everything then you wouldn't need to return to the original body that you had originally been captive in.

So I'm afraid the materialist's views are far stronger than yours. Their views are actually compatible with known facts about our physical reality. Your views are not.

I may be open to possibilities, but that doesn't weaken the materialist's arguments. The materialists still have the strongest arguments to date. Like it or not.

[William]

[Replying to post 22 by ]

Divine Insight: You need to ask yourself the following question:

When you have this experience of being everything can you actually experience everything?

The answer is clearly and obviously no.

When you have this experience you don't suddenly see the world through someone else's eyes or experience their thoughts, or become them. You also don't return from this experience as a tree that you might have felt that you had become "one" with.

William: I have been thinking along similar lines.
With - what is often presented as an 'ultimate' in experiences..."Being ONE" as in being able to experience being everything simultaneously, appears to be some kind of state which is presented as 'the state we should all reach for' but I suspect that this state is where we came from, not where we will ultimately return to, or should even be advising others to do so.
As a state of experience it can no doubt enlighten the individual enough to at least allow the opportunity to let go of the non-theist/atheist positions, which in itself is practical, but returning there full time seems counter-intuitive, for why did we leave that place if not to explore everything and experience what we will, of everything?

Material Science confirms anyway, that we are indeed part of everything material, so while experiencing being one with everything might add to that evidence, one should be able to appreciate that 'in ones own skin' so to speak, just by accepting it as a given.

From information I have read up on, one can indeed experience being 'others' while in a certain state of mind.
The remnant imprints from such experience can and do help individuals appreciate the unseen reality at subconscious levels, but when one 'returns' one does not have the full conscious sensations - only the echo of the experience.

For some, that is more than sufficient and for others, it is delegated to the realms of 'over active imagination' and not regarded as significant.

Divine Insight: So the problem with your arguments is that they simply are credible. Period.

William: I love how typo's sometimes support a truth. Perhaps it is a product of the subconscious finding a way through the maze of barriers conscious filters normally have in place to prevent happening....

[Swami]

This doesn't answer my question. I'll state it again in case you missed it:

• "What error of materialism?"

Reveling the error of materialism would require providing verifiable evidence of the immaterial. You haven't even attempted to do so.
Tcg

The primary error of materialism is not about the immaterial. The primary error is where it places consciousness in nature. There is verifiable or objective evidence that consciousness is fundamental and primary. The appearance of matter is derived from it. So in this sense we can say that all of reality is reducible to consciousness (or psychology?) and can be explained in terms of it. This is what the Eastern worldview does.

On the other side of the spectrum, the materialist will tell you that the level of physics, the atomic and subatomic world, is fundamental. Everything in existence, including consciousness, can be reduced to and explained in terms of this level. But this is not proven not only because of the 'hard problem' but also because of all of the evidence from the Eastern worldview.

[Aetixintro]

[Replying to post 1 by Swami]

Notice:
I just like to say that Best practice psychiatry, in curing schizophrenia, is likely to do the same. Perhaps this best practice also makes for the open mind to appreciate these mystical/paranormal aspects of nature.

[Swami]

Again you are doing nothing more here than displaying your own desire to jump to totally unwarranted conclusions.

You need to ask yourself the following question:

When you have this experience of being everything can you actually experience everything?

The answer is clearly and obviously no.

I am not sure if you are asking or just wanting to disagree with me. If you are asking, then why not wait for my answer?

Insight for the audience:

The Buddha divided all questions into four classes: those that deserve a categorical (straight yes or no) answer; those that deserve an analytical answer, defining and qualifying the terms of the question; those that deserve a counter-question, putting the ball back in the questioner's court; and those that deserve to be put aside.
...
The first duty of a teacher, when asked a question, is to figure out which class the question belongs to, and then to respond in the appropriate way. You don't, for example, say yes or no to a question that should be put aside.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/aut ... self2.html

I believe that answering your questions will not convince you. If you really want to know the answers then go experience. Test it, experiment, and repeat it until all of your questions are answered.

When you have this experience you don't suddenly see the world through someone else's eyes or experience their thoughts, or become them. You also don't return from this experience as a tree that you might have felt that you had become "one" with.

The fact of the matter is that no matter how hard you try to push these ideas even you need to confess to yourself that the conclusions you are jumping to are simply unwarranted.

In fact, we've already been through this before. I've pointed out to you that when you meditate I can easily interrupt your meditation by simply walking up behind you and pinching you. You would instantly feel that you are indeed still within your own physical body.

Moreover, if you were meditating in front of a tree imagining that you are the tree, and I walk over an pinch the tree, you don't feel that pinch, neither do you come out of your meditative state as the tree.

So the problem with your arguments is that they simply are credible. Period.

You are demanding that people jump to utterly absurd conclusions that simply aren't warranted. In short, you really have no valid arguments for your claims.

To the contrary, I've already shown that your claims are clearly wrong.

Is what you claim were actually true, then you should be able to go into this state where you become everything and simply return from that state into anything you want to be leaving your physical body behind to just drop to the ground unconscious because you have left it.

That simply doesn't happen. Therefore your claim that you are actually becoming everything doesn't hold water. If you truly were everything then you wouldn't need to return to the original body that you had originally been captive in.

So I'm afraid the materialist's views are far stronger than yours. Their views are actually compatible with known facts about our physical reality. Your views are not.

I may be open to possibilities, but that doesn't weaken the materialist's arguments. The materialists still have the strongest arguments to date. Like it or not.

Instead of trying to figure out everything in your head, I recommend that you go have the experience. This is the lesson that you should get from the topic here.

[bluegreenearth]

For some reason, this topic is reminding me of the philosophical problem of hard solipsism. Is someone's mystical experience of harmonious existence with the everything in the universe a metaphysical reality or an elaborate simulation produced by the mind of the person having the experience? If it is a simulation produced by the mind of the person who has the experience, how could that be distinguished from the metaphysical reality of that person's existence?

[Divine Insight]

Instead of trying to figure out everything in your head, I recommend that you go have the experience. This is the lesson that you should get from the topic here.

I've already had the experience you are talking about several times over throughout my life. The bottom line is that this experience does not imply what you have mistakenly concluded that it implies.

This experience is fully compatible with a materialistic worldview. So it's already fully explained under materialism. Apparently you just don't understand the materialistic worldview. That's all.

[Divine Insight]

If it is a simulation produced by the mind of the person who has the experience, how could that be distinguished from the metaphysical reality of that person's existence?

Exactly. In fact, it's explained away precisely as that. It's simply a perspective of conscious experience.

In fact, people who think that their body ends at the boundary of their skin are also creating that perspective from within their mind as well. That's because they simply don't realize that the air pressure around them is an extremely important part of their current situation. They take it for granted and so don't include it as being part of themselves.

[Swami]

For some reason, this topic is reminding me of the philosophical problem of hard solipsism. Is someone's mystical experience of harmonious existence with the everything in the universe a metaphysical reality or an elaborate simulation produced by the mind of the person having the experience?

I am not religious, but I use some of the Eastern philosophies as a guide to understand life. I don't believe my position fits with solipsism.

Under my view, the mystical experience that Linda Johnsen describes is the reality. But the experience that she has when not in union with "the everything" (I like that!) also exists. The difference is that the first perspective with the everything involves seeing everything as it really is, while second perspective is only seeing reality as it appears to us.

If it is a simulation produced by the mind of the person who has the experience, how could that be distinguished from the metaphysical reality of that person's existence?

The simulation comes from the mind of "the everything". Reality does not exist outside of the mind of this source. Our own minds at best sustains the simulation in its own limited way.

The way you can tell the difference between the two realities is by removing the filter of the mind and the senses. Then you can access the reality of pure consciousness.

Yoga VasisthaBook VI, ch. 31 vs. 1-3

1 Vasishta said:" He who has devoted his whole soul to the contemplation of Consciousness and feels it stirring within himself, knows in his mind the vanity and unreality of all worldly things. 2 By habituating himself to this sort of meditation and seeing the outward objects in his perceptive soul, he sees the external world like an appearance in his dream. 3 All this is truly the form of Consciousness represented in a different garb. Consciousness is more subtle than pure air, but collects and condenses itself as the solid world, then recognizes itself as such. The world is no other than the consolidated consciousness, and there is nothing beside this anywhere.

[/quote]