Your brain hallucinates your conscious reality

[Veritas Aequitas]

I am raising this OP is this section to support my point, the idea of God is actually a transcendental-hallucination out of this set of empirical-hallucination proposed by Anil Seth.


Your brain hallucinates your conscious reality
Anil Seth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyu7v7nWzfo

Right now, billions of neurons in your brain are working together to generate a conscious experience -- and not just any conscious experience, your experience of the world around you and of yourself within it.
How does this happen?

According to neuroscientist Anil Seth, we're all hallucinating all the time; when we agree about our hallucinations, we call it "reality."

Join Seth for a delightfully disorienting talk that may leave you questioning the very nature of your existence.

Long ago, V. S. Ramachandran had made the same claim,

“Indeed, the line between perceiving and hallucinating is not as crisp as we like to think.
In a sense, when we look at the world, we are hallucinating all the time. One could almost regard perception as the act of choosing the one hallucination that best fits the incoming data.”

― V.S. Ramachandran, The Tell-Tale Brain: A Neuroscientist's Quest for What Makes Us Human

Views?

[Ramu]

Sounds a LOT like a belief system!

[Veritas Aequitas]

Sounds a LOT like a belief system!

In a way, it is a set of belief but based on possible empirical reality and inferred from various sources of real evidences. You have to read the books of both neuroscientists to gather more information that support their hypothesis.
It is a matter of time this belief [empirically based] can be turned into a theory when there is sufficient evidence and consensus.

But the idea of God, Brahman, Absolute Oneness and the likes is merely an opinion [arising from an illusion] without any degree of empirical possibility to be proven at all. God is an impossibility to be real.

[Ramu]

Well you know VA, I used to be a materialist like you so I can see why you have this belief system where brains exist. Materialists also believe that the universe is just a dumb universe full of bouncing particles that are governed by rational physical forces.

However why do most materialists think this way? Did you realize that the great minds of the quantum physicists of the day back 100 years ago debunked materialism. What did the great minds like Neils Bohr and Albert Einstein discover? That the universe is non physical, VA!

[Ramu]

Sounds a LOT like a belief system!

In a way, it is a set of belief but based on possible empirical reality and inferred from various sources of real evidences. You have to read the books of both neuroscientists to gather more information that support their hypothesis.
It is a matter of time this belief [empirically based] can be turned into a theory when there is sufficient evidence and consensus.

But the idea of God, Brahman, Absolute Oneness and the likes is merely an opinion [arising from an illusion] without any degree of empirical possibility to be proven at all. God is an impossibility to be real.

Sorry VA. I guess Dam and me, not mention Deepak Chopra, Gangaji, and Papaji and Mooji all suffer from depersonalization disorder.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Sounds a LOT like a belief system!

In a way, it is a set of belief but based on possible empirical reality and inferred from various sources of real evidences. You have to read the books of both neuroscientists to gather more information that support their hypothesis.
It is a matter of time this belief [empirically based] can be turned into a theory when there is sufficient evidence and consensus.

But the idea of God, Brahman, Absolute Oneness and the likes is merely an opinion [arising from an illusion] without any degree of empirical possibility to be proven at all. God is an impossibility to be real.

Sorry VA. I guess Dam and me, not mention Deepak Chopra, Gangaji, and Papaji and Mooji all suffer from depersonalization disorder.

Yes, depersonalization to some small degree but not to the extent of a disorder.
However I have reservation re DAM who do not follow any tradition. I am not sure of your position since you do not post much about your beliefs.
Deepak, Gangaji, and Papaji and Mooji at least can trace their beliefs to some lineage.

Even for those who currently follow to a lineage, I would still have reservations because their earliest founders could have some degree of depersonalization disorder. In those days, there were no psychiatry to verify their psychological states. In India at present certain people with schizophrenia are still revered as holy in some places.

Re depersonalization and fraud, note Jeff Foster on radical advaita.

In 2011, Foster wrote an article explaining why he no longer considered himself to be an "Advaita teacher" or "nonduality teacher," pointing out problems with the one-sidedness of contemporary "radical Advaita" teachings.[4]
Instead of a strict impersonal philosophy, he started to embrace and emphasise the relative, human, personal existence in his writings and gatherings, a relativity which he felt was not in conflict with the impersonal Absolute.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Fost ... l_teacher)

I recommend you read Jeff Forster's story and his counter views to radical advaita.

[Ramu]

Once again you've fallen into a trap buddy. Its not a belief system. Its based on direct experience. Your scientific mind is just as dogmatic as a preachers. Non duality is NOT repeat NOT a belief system. IT IS based on DIRECT EXPERIENCE. No Brains. No preacher. No Sunday School. No Sunday Services. God does not go to church on Sundays. Its based on direct experience. It can't be quantified because its beyond that.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Once again you've fallen into a trap buddy. Its not a belief system. Its based on direct experience. Your scientific mind is just as dogmatic as a preachers. Non duality is NOT repeat NOT a belief system. IT IS based on DIRECT EXPERIENCE. No Brains. No preacher. No Sunday School. No Sunday Services. God does not go to church on Sundays. Its based on direct experience. It can't be quantified because its beyond that.

It is definitely a belief system, i.e. at least a personal belief system.
What one experience personally, that would form one's personal beliefs.
If you feel good eating sweet things, you will have a personal belief system regarding eating food that are sweet.

DIRECT EXPERIENCE is never reliable at all.
Do you trust yourself with this direct experience of two normal faces?
Do you understand this experiment, if not I will explain?



Would you believe a person [schizo] who claimed he had direct experience of a God and that God will be throwing a 1 ton stone on your head at a certain time on a certain date?

To be philosophically and morally honest, the point is whatever claims of actuality or objectivity from any direct experiences by anyone or group, they must be justified and verified via empirical-rational testing and proofs.

[Dontaskme]

DIRECT EXPERIENCE is never reliable at all.
Do you trust yourself with this direct experience of two normal faces?
Do you understand this experiment, if not I will explain?

DIRECT EXPERIENCE is total perfection in every moment. It's this pure imageless unborn unchanging infinite awareness aware of itself.
This is SELF without an object, minus its reflection, aka an image.

''The wild geese do not intend to cast their reflection and the water has no mind to receive their image.''

That quote is the perfect description of what is actual direct experience. And the reason direct experience is possible is the universe wanted to wake up to itself, it wasn't man that made awakening happen..it was/is the whole universe making this happen right now.

The wild geese analogy refer to the (body) the body is without awareness of itself. The body is not aware, the body is being awared by awareness itself. The water refers to imageless awareness that has no image of itself, it has no mind...the water refers to the substratum of groundless pure imageless awareness that has to be ..as it is the only knowing there is upon reflection of itself via the mind's conceptual image artificially superimposed upon itself, creating the illusion of a ''thing'' appearing to ''no thing''...the mind being an integral aspect of awareness itself aware of itself via image while it itself is imageless, producing the illusory effects of a moving living image...the movie of I

Here we can see that awareness has no image of itself, no mind to receive an image, not until it reflects itself as an image via the minds intent to become self aware, and in that moment duality is born, the sense of other. But that sense of other is only and ever awareness aware of itself, its actually nondual in every direct moment.

.

You are not the image seen in the mirror, you are the mirror reflecting itself everywhere upon intention. Aka the un-moved mover of intent, via desire..any projected image is the hallucination within the mind as it tries to fill in all the gaps of your imageless awareness without a face.

.

[Veritas Aequitas]

DIRECT EXPERIENCE is never reliable at all.
Do you trust yourself with this direct experience of two normal faces?
Do you understand this experiment, if not I will explain?

DIRECT EXPERIENCE is total perfection in every moment. It's this pure imageless unborn unchanging infinite awareness aware of itself.
This is SELF without an object, minus its reflection, aka an image.
...

You blatantly avoided the question in blue and start blabbering your illusory experiences.

Isn't that like the schizo who keep insisting 'gnomes are real' because he had the DIRECT EXPERIENCE of talking to them in the garden?

[Dontaskme]

Do you trust yourself with this direct experience of two normal faces?

But this has nothing to do with actual direct experience of SELF which is prior to any concept or image, or ideas about people with mental problems.

SELF simply means nothing and everything manifesting everywhere and nowhere from out of the infinite void of pure potential to actuality.

In all actuality there is no 'me' experiencing myself, theres just the experience of nothing and everything HERE right NOW.

Dont ask me how this is possible, but it is experiencial.. in no way shape or form is SELF impossible at all...because its a happening, this is it. It may well be an illusory mirage but the illusion is here to stay whether you like it or not because you are a part of the whole illusion that you cannot escape from.

.

[Dontaskme]

Isn't that like the schizo who keep insisting 'gnomes are real' because he had the DIRECT EXPERIENCE of talking to them in the garden?

No, what I am talking about has nothing to do with ''talking inanimate objects''...namely, gnomes.
Really, what you've just described is knowledge. (knowledge of other)
The schizo is a mental construction, aka (knowledge) so that doesn't even exist, because knowledge informs the illusory nature of otherness.

Paradoxically knowledge creates the illusion of otherness, as part of the whole illusion anyway. It works both ways, its a two way mirror.

ACTUAL DIRECT EXPERIENCE is prior to knowledge. (its the unknown known in the exact same moment one with it) ..note, there is no split mind involved with this, no division, or differential distinction, or quality, or attribute to this..its just pure raw empty awareness aware of itself.

Knowledge VA is just paint on the screen of awareness..aka the image of the imageless...a very beautiful illusion of oneness being the many.

.

What you are doing VA is singleing things out to exist in and of themselves as separate enities apart from the whole. But even you are not doing that, this is all mental projection, its part of the whole illusion, so its nothing and everything doing everything and nothing.

.

Reality is all the one love in action dreaming difference where there is none.

.

Including every war that has ever been fought, and every man woman and child that has been killed in the name of God...which is just man-made religion.

God is not religious in any way shape or form. God is nameless.

As soon as you name something, the illusion of otherness is created. There is no such separate entity.

.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Do you trust yourself with this direct experience of two normal faces?

But this has nothing to do with actual direct experience of SELF which is prior to any concept or image, or ideas about people with mental problems.

Point is, in the case of the normal face demo, do you agree 'you' were deceived by your own brain/mind. Yes/No. It is essential you confirm this fact.

SELF simply means nothing and everything manifesting everywhere and nowhere from out of the infinite void of pure potential to actuality.

In all actuality there is no 'me' experiencing myself, theres just the experience of nothing and everything HERE right NOW.

Dont ask me how this is possible, but it is experiencial.. in no way shape or form is SELF impossible at all...because its a happening, this is it. It may well be an illusory mirage but the illusion is here to stay whether you like it or not because you are a part of the whole illusion that you cannot escape from.

The above is only your explanation which cannot be verified as you stated,
"Don't ask me how this is possible,"
Yes, it is experiential, but one's experience cannot be trusted.
How do you know your experience is not due to some kind of temporary madness since many mad people also reported similar experiences of no-me, no-I?

[Dontaskme]

Point is, in the case of the normal face demo, do you agree 'you' were deceived by your own brain/mind. Yes/No. It is essential you confirm this fact.

No I don't agree, because this is all in the world of duality the play of mental cognition/memory and recognition and knowledge. It has nothing to do with direct first person experience of oneness. From that 1st person experience context there is no awareness of a brain or a mind or an image or a concept. Do you understand?

The above is only your explanation which cannot be verified as you stated,
"Don't ask me how this is possible,"
Yes, it is experiential, but one's experience cannot be trusted.
How do you know your experience is not due to some kind of temporary madness since many mad people also reported similar experiences of no-me, no-I?

Because the 'me' that wants to know the hows of direct experience doesn't exist separate from the direct experience that is a total mystery even to itself...but saying this is not to be trusted is again in the world of duality, within the illusory dream of separation in spacetime duality, its just a dream.

The only thing that can be trusted is what is present right here and now without doubt or error.

What or How this presence is is not known because there is no one to know. This is known by no one...isn't that amazing?

.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Point is, in the case of the normal face demo, do you agree 'you' were deceived by your own brain/mind. Yes/No. It is essential you confirm this fact.

No I don't agree, because this is all in the world of duality the play of mental cognition/memory and recognition and knowledge. It has nothing to do with direct first person experience of oneness. From that 1st person experience context there is no awareness of a brain or a mind or an image or a concept. Do you understand?

You are merely in denial and trying to escape reality.

I'll make the question more precise;
within the world of duality and in the case of the normal face demo, do you agree 'you' [empirical] were deceived by your own empirical brain/mind. Yes/No. It is essential you confirm this fact.