Material v. Spiritual Pleasures

[lightgigantic]

Prince_James:

So you are claiming that one can know, with one hundred percent certainty, what happens after death in this life?

Yes, if you apply the correct epistemology

You can prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, where we go when we die?

Only if you are co-operative to the process of enabling you to see - like a high school drop out could lay the same foundations for an eternal disbelief in electrons not because electrons don't exist but because of his lack of qualification.

If so, I would ask you to present here your proof!

IF you can prove to a high school drop out beyond a shadow of a doubt what an electron is Icould theoretically apply the same process to enable you to perceive the proof.

As many joys require some suffering, yes, indeed I do seek suffering. In fact, a joy I have recently taken is punching a brick wall bare-fisted in order to deaden my hands to such pain. Though it hurts a great deal sometimes, I find the process enjoyable, and I marvel at how much greater resistance I have now, even after only a few weeks of doing such.

lol - no offense - but that sounds completely stupid
- like for instance if you were perusing resumes for a position and where it said hobbies/interests one person wrote "punching brick walls" what would you think?
Anyway, even if you are under the influence of some unresolved anger issues or whatever, I think it is sufficient to say that most people in a sound state of mental equilibrium endeavour to avoid the bad things and pursue the goodthings - its just their misfortune that they pursue happiness in the material world

But no, I cannot think of anything in life which is pleasurable and does not have some aspect of suffering to it.

Hence, you have cold pizza

Yet surely there must be a loser? And thus that person suffers

you missed the point - competition doesn't thrive on envy -at least in the spiritual world - competition in the material world thrives on an inherant lacking that usually makes "trying one's best" take the form of cutting down one's opponents - tall poppies

Would not this then mean there'd be no art? For if beauty is to be found only in God, what is the point of art, yes?

If beauty is found in an object and things related to that object there is art, is there not?

What is an example of all the pleasures above in the spirit realm?

You can take practically any material pleasure you care to mention, re-establish it from its perverted reflection and you are left with the platonic counterpart

So we are expected to find serving God enjoyable? This sounds like Hell! To be eternally trapped serving a being far greater than oneself? In what way, whatsoever, is this to be construed as pleasurable? It is eternal debasement!

This is why we are inthe material world, which BTW teaches us that service to someone else is repulsive, yet we remain fruustrated because it is impossibleto organise things here for our personal service (which is a desire in everyone's heart from the ant to the president) - our material experience however tells nothing of the spiritual, andin the mean time we suffer the embaressment of trying to establish our material goals and ambitions (have you ever seen a donkey get kicked in the face by a she-ass when he approaches her for sex?)

"Thats right - that explains why you, and even the worm in stool, is currently satisfied with the respective current level of "happiness" in the material world "

Indeed. Ignorance is bliss, they say. So no position in this material world shall ever be that horrible, depending on one's form.

Thats right, the worm is thinking "at last I have found my castle!!"

That's pain, but not Hell. Is it not?

It is a sudden incident that affects your standard of happiness for some time to come

"No - we gravitate towards the service of god when we perceive there is pleasure to be obtained there - this is high grade intelligence"

Yet God mandates all things at this point, no?

No - he doesn't mandate the gravitation of the living entity towards where they perceive happiness to lie - he does however give facility for the gravitation ("OK - this is what you want - fine")

So basically, if one wants to leave God, one can? And that the fact that we are here, shows that we once denied an eternity with God?

yes
apparently we had better ideas

 

[Prince_James]

LightGigantic:

"Yes, if you apply the correct epistemology

Only if you are co-operative to the process of enabling you to see - like a high school drop out could lay the same foundations for an eternal disbelief in electrons not because electrons don't exist but because of his lack of qualification.

IF you can prove to a high school drop out beyond a shadow of a doubt what an electron is Icould theoretically apply the same process to enable you to perceive the proof."

I hope this epistemological verification entails more than "because the sages and saints and the holy books say so". If it is, speak about what proves it, if you might?

"lol - no offense - but that sounds completely stupid"

No offense taken. I like to experience pain from time to time, as well as test my mettle against things. It seems silly, but it is very enjoyable.

"- like for instance if you were perusing resumes for a position and where it said hobbies/interests one person wrote "punching brick walls" what would you think?"

Ha ha! Yes.

"Anyway, even if you are under the influence of some unresolved anger issues or whatever, I think it is sufficient to say that most people in a sound state of mental equilibrium endeavour to avoid the bad things and pursue the goodthings - its just their misfortune that they pursue happiness in the material world"

Yes indeed. But not all pain is bad, and indeed, a bit of pain enhances life. In fact, when we suffer a bit, and end up conquering what forced us to suffer, it is exceedingly rewarding.

"you missed the point - competition doesn't thrive on envy -at least in the spiritual world - competition in the material world thrives on an inherant lacking that usually makes "trying one's best" take the form of cutting down one's opponents - tall poppies"

To compete entails a competition where one person or team wins. This means loss for another. In what way in the spiritual world is this different? Do both the Yankees and Red Sox win the world series, or some such nonsense?

"If beauty is found in an object and things related to that object there is art, is there not?"

Art is really a representation of something beautiful - real or imagined - in order to convey it in a new way, to inspire beauty. Yet when everything would be of equal beauty in the spiritual world, there'd be no reason even for this. Indeed, one could hardly say that the painting and the wall are more beautiful in such a spiritual realm, no?

"You can take practically any material pleasure you care to mention, re-establish it from its perverted reflection and you are left with the platonic counterpart"

So what would be the equivalent of love? Of sex? Of crushing one's enemies?

"This is why we are inthe material world, which BTW teaches us that service to someone else is repulsive, yet we remain fruustrated because it is impossibleto organise things here for our personal service (which is a desire in everyone's heart from the ant to the president) - our material experience however tells nothing of the spiritual, andin the mean time we suffer the embaressment of trying to establish our material goals and ambitions (have you ever seen a donkey get kicked in the face by a she-ass when he approaches her for sex?)"

It is impossible to organize things for our personal service? Perhaps 100 percent of the time, but many men and women conquer life enough to get what they want. In fact, it is rather easy to accomplish such things.

"Thats right, the worm is thinking "at last I have found my castle!!""

Yes, precisely.

"No - he doesn't mandate the gravitation of the living entity towards where they perceive happiness to lie - he does however give facility for the gravitation ("OK - this is what you want - fine")"

So God makes us happy because we want to find happiness in him?

"yes
apparently we had better ideas"

So I guess that God isn't so great, if we can deny him maybe even a million times before, no?

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

THeoryOfRelativity:

Did you have to tell your youngest son what each facial image meant? Or did he grow to sense and to intuit the meaning of each expression himself?

?

He showed an interest in wanting to know and he demonstrated keen observation of the differences, basically this consideration he applies is 'his thing' it is what seperates him and identifies him, it is very unusal. I did teach him and even now he'll ask me, 'what does that face mean?' 'what are you feeling mummy?'

 

[Prince_James]

TheoryOfRelativity:

"He showed an interest in wanting to know and he demonstrated keen observation of the differences, basically this consideration he applies is 'his thing' it is what seperates him and identifies him, it is very unusal. I did teach him and even now he'll ask me, 'what does that face mean?' 'what are you feeling mummy?'"

Very intriguing!

Does he ever sense you, or anyone else's, emotions before it is explained to him? Or does he always ask and never infer on his own?

 

[lightgigantic]

Prince James

I hope this epistemological verification entails more than "because the sages and saints and the holy books say so". If it is, speak about what proves it, if you might?

What proves it is that it delivers the result

" Devotion, direct experience of the Supreme Lord, and detachment from other things — these three occur simultaneously for one who has taken shelter of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, in the same way that pleasure, nourishment and relief from hunger come simultaneously and increasingly, with each bite, for a person engaged in eating."

Just as eating delivers a result (as well as studying physics under th ecorrect epistemolgy) so does the epistemology of surrendering to god

Yes indeed. But not all pain is bad, and indeed, a bit of pain enhances life. In fact, when we suffer a bit, and end up conquering what forced us to suffer, it is exceedingly rewarding.

Actually this is the concept of austerity in the mode of goodness - what apears like poison in the beginning is like nectar at the end - there are also two other options - namely the mode of passion , nectar in the beginning but poison in the end (ie benefits of material or short term happiness) - and the mode of ignorance - poison in the beginning and end (like punching brick walls)

To compete entails a competition where one person or team wins. This means loss for another. In what way in the spiritual world is this different? Do both the Yankees and Red Sox win the world series, or some such nonsense?

You can't understand because you have a material concept of life - in other words it is not possible for you to leave a paradigm of enjoyment that doesn't directly or indirectly establish your position as teh supreme enjoyer - spiritual life has a different principle - the closest example in material life is the enjoyment that a mother gets from tending her baby

Art is really a representation of something beautiful - real or imagined - in order to convey it in a new way, to inspire beauty. Yet when everything would be of equal beauty in the spiritual world,

Everything is not equally beautiful - everything is beautiful, but some things are more beautiful than others - like for instance god stands out as the most beautiful, even amongst the beautiful things in the spiritual world

"You can take practically any material pleasure you care to mention, re-establish it from its perverted reflection and you are left with the platonic counterpart"

So what would be the equivalent of love? Of sex? Of crushing one's enemies?

Ok we will take love - love in the material world operates within conditions of selfishness - like for instance when jack writes "jack loves mary" it means that jack loves mary as long as she is beautiful and speaks to him sweetly - when mary writes "Mary loves Jack" it means mary loves jack as long as he pays the bills. IN other words according to how one interacts with one's notions of sense enjoyment, one is said to be loved by the other, and when these conditions get ruptured there is a cessation of such relationship - ie divorce. - this is material love, the perverted reflection of spiritual love

Spiritual love however continues depsite there being all casues for the dissolution - and thus what actually constitutes the beloved in spiritual life is ultimately god and not some seperated part and parcel of his potency conditioned under the stringent laws of material existence and frailty

It is impossible to organize things for our personal service? Perhaps 100 percent of the time, but many men and women conquer life enough to get what they want. In fact, it is rather easy to accomplish such things.

But they never get exactly what they want - again its either a case of fooling all the people some of the time or some of the people all of the time - Generally we are so conditioned to frustration in the material world we don't properly recognise how our desires are getting deflected from fulfilment inthe outside world virtually at every moment

"Thats right, the worm is thinking "at last I have found my castle!!""

Yes, precisely.

Prahlāda Mahārāja said: One who is sufficiently intelligent should use the human form of body from the very beginning of life — in other words, from the tender age of childhood — to practice the activities of devotional service, giving up all other engagements. The human body is most rarely achieved, and although temporary like other bodies, it is meaningful because in human life one can perform devotional service. Even a slight amount of sincere devotional service can give one complete perfection.

SB 7.6.2: The human form of life affords one a chance to return home, back to Godhead. Therefore every living entity, especially in the human form of life, must engage in devotional service to the lotus feet of Lord Viṣṇu. This devotional service is natural because Lord Viṣṇu, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is the most beloved, the master of the soul, and the well-wisher of all other living beings.

SB 7.6.3: Prahlāda Mahārāja continued: My dear friends born of atheistic families, the happiness perceived with reference to the sense objects by contact with the body can be obtained in any form of life (including a worms), according to one's past fruitive activities. Such happiness is automatically obtained without endeavor, just as we obtain distress

So God makes us happy because we want to find happiness in him?

IN the same way that a fire makes us warm by its natural constutional position

"yes
apparently we had better ideas"

So I guess that God isn't so great, if we can deny him maybe even a million times before, no?

How many times did you have to touch a hot iron before you worked out not to touch it anymore?

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

Very intriguing!

Does he ever sense you, or anyone else's, emotions before it is explained to him? Or does he always ask and never infer on his own?

He infers his own first but with a questionable tone seeking explanation and confirmation.

'are you happy mommy?' I may say 'yes' then he will say 'so what was that face?' (as he did not recognise the expression as happy) and I say 'what face' and so it goes on. He desperately wants to understand the 'feelings' behind my 'face'.

Sometimes when I am aware of an expression change in myself I see him observing and he stops his activity to observe the change.

When myself or any other is upset he immediately seeks to give comfort and when he has done doing so he checks 'are you happy now?' it is important to his that other people are happy.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

That comes across as some kind of a surprise.

Too much time spent on the sciforums?

My wife tells me it is "poisonous": "Can't you see the effect it has on you?"

If they don't already know the difference between the material and the spiritaul,
then the text on the screen is hardly likely to do it for them, is it?

--- Ron.

it is unusual Ron because of his age. No reason other than that.

 

[Sarkus]

It may have been asked - but was it ever answered:

WHAT IS A SPIRITUAL PLEASURE???

Please define it so that we may all know what is being considered.


As far as I am concerned - there is no "spirit" - it is all physical.
Now if by spiritual you mean more along the lines of psychological / cerebral / emotional etc then please can you clarify this.

Many thanks.

 

[S.A.M.]

It may have been asked - but was it ever answered:

WHAT IS A SPIRITUAL PLEASURE???

Please define it so that we may all know what is being considered.


As far as I am concerned - there is no "spirit" - it is all physical.
Now if by spiritual you mean more along the lines of psychological / cerebral / emotional etc then please can you clarify this.

Many thanks.

spiritual = that which is not material.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

It may have been asked - but was it ever answered:

WHAT IS A SPIRITUAL PLEASURE???

Please define it so that we may all know what is being considered.


As far as I am concerned - there is no "spirit" - it is all physical.
Now if by spiritual you mean more along the lines of psychological / cerebral / emotional etc then please can you clarify this.

Many thanks.

For me, it involves feeling that everything if allowed to flow naturally will flow your way.

 

[Satyr]

Material and Spiritual?
Huh?
I love how the very positing of the premise implies the reality of the supernatural, versus the natural. It’s one of those ways, even scientists fall into, that decide the outcomes of their answers by posing the right question in the right way.

Pleasure implies a placating of Need.

What Needs do your categories of Spiritual and Material placate?
Can Need be trusted?

 

[lightgigantic]

Spiritual pleasure indicates those activites that are deemed as pleasurable to god

Material pleasure indicates those activities that are deemed as pleasurable to one's body mind and senses.

It is the claimed that spiritual pleasures actually enable one to experience a higher state of material pleasure - materially this may not appear to make sense

 

[Sarkus]

Spiritual pleasure indicates those activites that are deemed as pleasurable to god

Material pleasure indicates those activities that are deemed as pleasurable to one's body mind and senses.

It is the claimed that spiritual pleasures actually enable one to experience a higher state of material pleasure - materially this may not appear to make sense

Okay - so all atheists are, by your definition, going to lump for the Material. Makes the job of deciding eaiser.
Chalk one up for the material!

 

[lightgigantic]

Okay - so all atheists are, by your definition, going to lump for the Material. Makes the job of deciding eaiser.
Chalk one up for the material!

But the irony is that if choose the material you get the booby prize

 

[Satyr]

Oh…My…God!
More revelations.

God feels pleasure!!!!
Therefore He has Needs.

How omnipotent of Him.

This dude is a genius.

I am awed by his intellectual power of speculation and emotive creativity.

It all feels great.

 

[S.A.M.]

Material and Spiritual?
Huh?
I love how the very positing of the premise implies the reality of the supernatural, versus the natural. It’s one of those ways, even scientists fall into, that decide the outcomes of their answers by posing the right question in the right way.

Pleasure implies a placating of Need.

What Needs do your categories of Spiritual and Material placate?
Can Need be trusted?

If you were dying and had a choice between a pot of gold or someone to hold your hand, what would you choose? That is what the categories mean. Don't over-rationalise, for heaven's sake.

 

[S.A.M.]

Okay - so all atheists are, by your definition, going to lump for the Material. Makes the job of deciding eaiser.
Chalk one up for the material!

It's not that clear cut.

There are atheists who practise spirituality.

A lot of atheists though miss out on the experience since they look at the external trappings and decide it is emotive or subjective - which they falsely decide is thus insignificant.

 

[Satyr]

If you were dying and had a choice between a pot of gold or someone to hold your hand, what would you choose? That is what the categories mean. Don't over-rationalise, for heaven's sake.

And one is spiritual and the other material?
A hand is spiritual and not animated matter?

Oops…over-thinking, again.

Stop thinking, damn you brain.
Be like dimlightgigantic and his slew of female minds.
Just feeeeeel, man. Pass the bottle brothers and sisters.
Time for non-escapism and some ‘reality’.

The spirit is contained in the body.
This feels right and needs no substantiating.

Therefore spirit is eternal. This feels correct. I read it in a book.
Scientists often believe in superstition, therefore all science is flawed and religion is correct.
Spirit being eternal makes me eternal.
No conflict of interest there.
I feel great!!!!
No death…poof.

I follow the emotive reasoning process now.

It just needs some epistemological direction and training.

Thank you my selfless, spiritual brothers and sisters.
Being dumb is fun and happy.

 

[Prince_James]

lightgigantic:

"What proves it is that it delivers the result

" Devotion, direct experience of the Supreme Lord, and detachment from other things — these three occur simultaneously for one who has taken shelter of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, in the same way that pleasure, nourishment and relief from hunger come simultaneously and increasingly, with each bite, for a person engaged in eating."

Just as eating delivers a result (as well as studying physics under th ecorrect epistemolgy) so does the epistemology of surrendering to god"

Many people take drugs and natural hallucinogens to produce same "experiences of God". Are we expected to believe them?

Similarly, how are we expected to believe that one "knows" any of this, because one feels it?

"Actually this is the concept of austerity in the mode of goodness - what apears like poison in the beginning is like nectar at the end - there are also two other options - namely the mode of passion , nectar in the beginning but poison in the end (ie benefits of material or short term happiness) - and the mode of ignorance - poison in the beginning and end (like punching brick walls)"

Indeed a bit of austerity can be "poison at first, nectar at the end", but I'd actually claim that my "brick wall punching" is of that type. Though I originally bruised my hands, it is not an enjoyable experience of conquering and strengthening, as well as giving me the practical benefit of making my hands less likely to come to harm, by the strengthening of the bone and tissue from striking. It is actually a technique developed by Okinawan karate.

"You can't understand because you have a material concept of life - in other words it is not possible for you to leave a paradigm of enjoyment that doesn't directly or indirectly establish your position as teh supreme enjoyer - spiritual life has a different principle - the closest example in material life is the enjoyment that a mother gets from tending her baby"

So we are expected to be the mother, and God the child, in the analogy?

"Everything is not equally beautiful - everything is beautiful, but some things are more beautiful than others - like for instance god stands out as the most beautiful, even amongst the beautiful things in the spiritual world"

So there is comparative ugliness in the spiritual world?

"Ok we will take love - love in the material world operates within conditions of selfishness - like for instance when jack writes "jack loves mary" it means that jack loves mary as long as she is beautiful and speaks to him sweetly - when mary writes "Mary loves Jack" it means mary loves jack as long as he pays the bills. IN other words according to how one interacts with one's notions of sense enjoyment, one is said to be loved by the other, and when these conditions get ruptured there is a cessation of such relationship - ie divorce. - this is material love, the perverted reflection of spiritual love

Spiritual love however continues depsite there being all casues for the dissolution - and thus what actually constitutes the beloved in spiritual life is ultimately god and not some seperated part and parcel of his potency conditioned under the stringent laws of material existence and frailty"

Why shouldn't love be as it is in the material world? If love is very important, why would one not put conditions upon it? Similarly, if God changed, would not we not love God? Suppose that instead of being as great as you claim, he was a horrible despot, that did terrible things, and caused his worshippers and followers immeasurable pain for his sick enjoyment? Would we be told to love God?

Moreover, why would one love God in such a way?

"But they never get exactly what they want - again its either a case of fooling all the people some of the time or some of the people all of the time - Generally we are so conditioned to frustration in the material world we don't properly recognise how our desires are getting deflected from fulfilment inthe outside world virtually at every moment"

A person wants to drink some juice. They get that juice, drink it, and then sigh in pleasure. In what way were their desires deflected?

Perhaps you are taking an overally pessimistic view of life?

And if we did not have some barriers in life, however would we grow strong and powerful, which themselves are extremely pleasurable to become?

"Prahlāda Mahārāja said: One who is sufficiently intelligent should use the human form of body from the very beginning of life — in other words, from the tender age of childhood — to practice the activities of devotional service, giving up all other engagements. The human body is most rarely achieved, and although temporary like other bodies, it is meaningful because in human life one can perform devotional service. Even a slight amount of sincere devotional service can give one complete perfection."

So wait. If we do a little bit of devotion - and I'd like you to quantify how much is a little bit - we get all this? So why then are people spending their whole lives, instead of five minutes of devoted effort?

"Such happiness is automatically obtained without endeavor, just as we obtain distress"

Cannot this be said for devotional service, also? For if all actions are determined by our karma, then does it not stand to reason that even our devotional actions would be, too?

"IN the same way that a fire makes us warm by its natural constutional position"

And if we don't find happiness in him, why does he not let us find happiness in other things?

"How many times did you have to touch a hot iron before you worked out not to touch it anymore? "

Only once. But evidently, at the very least, I, and everyone here, have chosen to break away from God and we did not immediatly recoil from life, and in fact, has lingered here for perhaps millions, or even billions, of years. Similarly, that God was not worth staying with instead of seeking material pleasures...

Theoryofrelativity:

Once again, I must remark: Intriguing!

And please, do not let me overally worry or concern you, but do you think that this could in anyway indicate a bad thing? Like for instance, he asks you whether you or happy or not afterwards, yes? Could this be because he is not sure? That he cannot determine such things? That is the only concern I have, that he is perhaps showing signs of being curious because he cannot honestly infer, cannot draw the conclusions, and this could indicate something wrong with him as it were.

Again, please do not let me worry you. I just want to put it out into the open, so you might tell me if I am completelyu wrong.


perplexity:

"To the contrary, it is the smallest, not even an imaginable loss.
As has been shown several times over during the course of various threads here, the most difficult thing of all to imagine in scientific terms is the self, the essence of consciousness. c.f. for instance "zombie", as a philosophical proposition.

If there is no "one" beyond annihilation, then there is no "one" to know the loss, the antithesis of "what you never have you never miss": where there is no having there is no missing."

That an entity would not exist beyond annihilation is, of course, true. If annihilated, it assuredly absurd to speak of existence afterwards. Thus he would not feel any loss, you are correct. However, judging from a pre-annihilation state, that entity woul dindeed perceive the cessation of all capacity to be of supreme harm and, of course, one could say that by no longer existing that said entity has indeed lost everything, as now he has no capacity for anything, whereas previously he had at least some capacity for something, good or bad.

"One may suppose so.
Others suppose a strength in compassion.

I have learned at least to beware of what I wish for.
We are more like gods than we dare to imagine."

Oh? How do you figure?

 

[S.A.M.]

And one is spiritual and the other material?
A hand is spiritual and not animated matter?

Well I could give you a rubber hand, but would that be the same?

And will any hand do?

Oops…over-thinking, again.

You overestimate, my dear.

Being dumb is fun and happy.

You must have a lot of fun then.