Serious Discussion: What is Consciousness?

What does silence bring? Silence is only necessary when one does not know what to speak about.

What makes you think this? Why not use authoritative knowledge instead of trying to manufacture some idea?

Lord Jesus Christ is a great Spiritual Master, it is unfortunate most of his disciples just simply did not understand what he was speaking about fully.

What specific teachings of jesus do you follow?

What is your view on the commandment " Thou shalt not kill ".

Should this not apply to the massive amount of slaughterhouses we have in america?

Does that apply to fish?

Is there any authorative knowledge on the nature of consciousness...we're not exactly dealing with facts here... Where consciousness is concerned it's all just philosophy. So my notion is as valid as any...

Yes there is. You must search for the knowledge. You have to read them in order to find out if they are truthful or not, you cannot simply skip them over and assume they are incorrect.

The path is wide open, why do you not accept? It does no harm to traverse down the path to determine the truth of the knowledge claimed in the Vedas.

In Sanskrit, Vedas means Knowledge.

In our society we accept knowledge from 2 ways.

1. Ascending, experiential knowledge.
Example: Learning to ride a bike

2. Descending, revealed knowledge.
Example: Attending college for a degree in electrical engineering.


All the kings of India relied on the Brahmanas to lead their societies, and they would not have been successful without this Vedic Knowledge.

What makes you think it is incorrect? Are you fully read on Vedanta?

If you are silent enough you can hear Lord speaking to you, non-verbal.

Not in this case though...wouldn't you say life is the best teacher where consciousness is concerned? Or would you rather base your opinions on the ideas of others, who are also merely guessing?

The opposite goes as well...you cannot simply absorb knowledge and take it for the truth...that's just as ignorant.

It's just one truth...one aspect of it...

Well I'm no King of India and I'm sure there's something to be learned from Vedic Knowledge...but the truth...I'd rather find my own truth. And no, I'm not very familiar with the Vedanta...doesn't mean I'm wrong and those people a long time ago were right...it's the question that matters...not the answer. Perhaps there isn't even an answer.

Not in this case though...wouldn't you say life is the best teacher where consciousness is concerned? Or would you rather base your opinions on the ideas of others, who are also merely guessing?

The opposite goes as well...you cannot simply absorb knowledge and take it for the truth...that's just as ignorant.

It's just one truth...one aspect of it...

Well I'm no King of India and I'm sure there's something to be learned from Vedic Knowledge...but the truth...I'd rather find my own truth. And no, I'm not very familiar with the Vedanta...doesn't mean I'm wrong and those people a long time ago were right...it's the question that matters...not the answer. Perhaps there isn't even an answer.

The vedas come from Lord Brahma, creator of the universe, and supreme being, an expansion of God.

If you cannot accept that knowledge comes from God, where else can it come from

What does life have to teach you?

The material world is only full of miseries, there is no happiness in the material world, only illusory happiness.

This is the first thing that is described in the vedas, you are a fool if you will not accept intellectual literature. It is still authoritative to this day and taught in colleges in India, and many advanced scholars and philosophers are astounded by the coherence and consistency of this knowledge.


"Formerly, the Vedas were heard by the student from the spiritual master, and thus the Vedas became known as sruti, meaning "that which is heard." In Bhagavad-gita, for example, we see that Arjuna is listening to Krishna on the battlefield. He is not engaged in the study of Vedanta philosophy. We can hear from the Supreme Authority in any place, even in the battlefield.

The knowledge is received, not manufactured. Some people think, "Why should I listen to Him? I can think for myself. I can manufacture something new." This is not the Vedic process of descending knowledge. By ascending knowledge, one tries to elevate himself by his own effort, but by descending knowledge one receives the knowledge from a superior source. In the Vedic tradition, knowledge is imparted to the student from the spiritual master, as in Bhagavad-gita (evaa parampara-praptam imaa rajarnayo viduu [Bg. 4.2]). Submissive hearing is so powerful that simply by hearing from authoritative sources we can become completely perfect. In becoming submissive, we become aware of our own imperfections. As long as we are conditioned, we are subject to four kinds of imperfections: we are sure to commit mistakes, to become illusioned, to have imperfect senses and to cheat. Therefore our attempt to understand the Absolute Truth by our faulty senses and experience is futile. We must hear from a representative of God who is a devotee of God's. Krishna made Arjuna His representative because Arjuna was His devotee: bhakto 'si me sakha ceti. (Bg. 4.3)

No one can become a representative of God without being a devotee of God's. One who thinks, "I am God," cannot be a representative. Because we are part and parcel of God, our qualities are the same as His, and therefore if we study these qualities in ourselves, we come to learn something of God. This does not mean that we understand the quantity of God. This self-realization process is one way of understanding God, but in no case can we preach, "I am God." We cannot claim to be God without being able to display the powers of God. As far as Krishna is concerned, He proved that He was God by displaying so much power and by revealing His universal form to Arjuna. Krishna showed this awesome form in order to discourage people who would claim to be God. We should not be fooled by one who claims to be God; following in the footsteps of Arjuna, we should request to see the universal form before accepting anyone as God. Only a fool would accept another fool as God."

Krishna is an authoritative, historical figure in the world. Do you deny this? Why not listen to what he has to say and then judge if that is Godlike?

Hmmm do you experience consciousness without life? Do you ask yourself these questions when you're dead? It doesn't matter where it comes from...it's not something you learned from your own experience...

And HOW exactly do you know this...have you experienced this happiness outside of the existence you're leading now?

You're a fool if you take something at face-value...always question...just because it's written down somewhere doesn't automatically make it true...that's the whole point of life...to find your own truths. And somehow because it's studied by scholars and philosophers, who agree with its contents, it's true? Did you every have thoughts of your own regarding consciousness? I'm a little bit inebriated right now, so I might come across a bit harsh and my ability to digest information isn't at peak capacity...so I'll do us both a favor and I'll come back to this thread tomorrow... One last thing I'd like to impart though...think for yourself...you might be surprised what you can come up with.

The first step in thinking for yourself is first humbling yourself, and then listening. Only in this way can you really decipher whether there is truth or not.

I'm not gonna continue to push the point of descending knowledge, it is authoritative and accepted by any learned person.



Go sober up a bit and then maybe you can come to the realization that you don't always have the answers and never will. There is aways greater authority.

Hmmm okay...I should prolly not reply...but have YOU listened to me? What makes MY theory any less valid than those given by those vedic scholars...have they mysteriously travelled around the universe, learning it's ways in ways we mere mortals can not?

I'm not saying that what I believe/think is true... There's nothing wrong with being humble, but there's also something like being gullible (not the word I'm looking for, but English isn't my native language). And letting others think isn't a good thing, in most cases anyway. You say I should listen...I say you should listen to the multitude of people that don't adhere to your beliefs and consequently reach a conclusion of your own.

The truth is in the middle somewhere most of the time. There are more philosophies out there, you know....This isn't a discussion, because you bring no arguments disproving my theory to the table...this is you trying to push your beliefs on others...

Furhtermore you're implying that anyone that disagrees with you isn't a "learned" person...how do you come to this conclusion?

Indeed there is...there's always someone who thinks they know it better and have all the answers..that's what I meant when I said "It's the question that matters, not the answer" There isn't just ONE answer...it all depends on what you believe.

Thanks for the link...I'll look into it...hmm better bookmark it...hope this thread will be around for awhile.

You are welcome. As you can see they have spent much time translating this into many languages, what for? Just to benefit everyone else, they distribute these books on the street to the people who need them most, and only ask a donation, many times people get books for free, and sometimes 1 guy can pay for books for 300 people. That is how it works.

Well you have to admit...most religious texts are translated into many different languages. Yeah I gotta have the last word...sorry can't help it, part of my nature. But thanks again and I will come back to this thread.