The existence of supernatural powers
-
Jiani got sixth sense ?
-
Originally posted by I No Stupid:
hahaha, trying to lob me off this thread? I am sitting while posing the many questions here. and there are many gurus, meditators and teachers here. can they answer my questions?
I read between your lines: you don't like the line of my questioning, therefore you said "you would be asking more constructive questions". Indirectly, you are saying my questions are not constructuve, and go Google?
nope not trying to get u off the thread, you make your own choices.
saying there's a need for meditative practice with a qualified teacher before the answers to some of your questions will reveal in your own mind. No one other than you can provide the answers, cos everything others say will just be another opinion to you.
erm.. dun misread.. im saying Directly (not indirectly) that your questions are not constructive and to go google :)
to add on to that, its not that i dun like your line of questioning. its that your line of questioning reveals a lack of meditative insights. so it will be more fitting to clarify questions with regards to meditation with a teacher than to ask unrelated questions here.
-
Originally posted by I No Stupid:
I call you a fake because you are thoroughly confused about supernatural powers. What a trick answer you gave: Buddha ate so as not to give the impression he had supernatural powers. Who are you trying to kid? The boy who can go for years without food by meditating?
Ｙｕ�．　Ｔｈｅｓｅ　�ｒｅ　ｆ�ｃｔｓ．　Ａｃｃｅ�ｔ　ｉｔ　�ｒ　ｎ�ｔ．　Ｉ　have presented facts.　Ｙ�ｕ　�ｒｅ　ｔ��　ｎ�ｒｒ�ｗ　�ｉｎｄｅｄ　ｓ�　let's just leave it there.
-
jiani got 6th sense??????really??im awed!!
-
i have got some...but never use them..rusty.but can be up n werkin in 1 day.
-
I rather be a normal human being than someone with super natural power.
-
Originally posted by I No Stupid:
Transfer from another post to here:
I shall focus on Buddha's power. Could you specify what kind of power the Buddha had and how it is compare to "people nowadays have powers". I know what kinds of power people have, for example: power of corruption, power of authority (legitimate as well as illegitimate), power by possesion of arms, power of using money, power of influence, power of physical/sensual attraction, ...... and more (perhaps, you can add).
Taking a cup of milk as an example, the kind of power people have is liken to a cup of milk drink. Buddha kind of power is plain water in the cup of milk - very ordinary. The power of Buddha is so pleasantly blissful and amazing that it merely extracts out the milk powder in the cup of milk beverage, and what innately remain is the supremeness, the same as Buddha Gotama
Namo Amitabha Buddha. -
Originally posted by Rich industrialist hitman:
jiani got 6th sense??????really??im awed!!
I call mine intuition. And its telling me to ignore ignorance, identify arrogance and relinquish preseverance. In other words, stop antagonising yourself by releasing the responsibility of guiding the misguided. Equilibrum shall prevail!自�以�虚胜实。。。。
-
Originally posted by Amitayus48:
Taking a cup of milk as an example, the kind of power people have is liken to a cup of milk drink. Buddha kind of power is plain water in the cup of milk - very ordinary. The power of Buddha is so pleasantly blissful and amazing that it merely extracts out the milk powder in the cup of milk beverage, and what innately remain is the supremeness, the same as Buddha Gotama
Namo Amitabha Buddha.This analogy of milk in water or water in milk doesn't make much sense. If Buddha' s power is very ordinary, then everyone should have it.
Buddha applies his mind conscioulsy and concientiously to attain bliss. This is the ordinary power you are talking. If you extract milk from water you get milk powder not Buddha power!
-
can i have some please ?
-
Don't give you kekeke
-
Originally posted by lce:
can i have some please ?
haha, add Ice to water and you have chilling power.
-
Originally posted by I No Stupid:
This analogy of milk in water or water in milk doesn't make much sense. If Buddha' s power is very ordinary, then everyone should have it.
Buddha applies his mind conscioulsy and concientiously to attain bliss. This is the ordinary power you are talking. If you extract milk from water you get milk powder not Buddha power
-
Originally posted by I No Stupid:
haha, add Ice to water and you have chilling power.
-
Originally posted by Blacktron:
Jiani got sixth sense ?
i had a deja vu....once -
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Ok, I just checked the dictionary definition of supernatural:
1.of, pertaining to, or being above or beyond what is natural;unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal.2.3.of a superlative degree; preternatural: a missile ofsupernatural speed.The six supernatural powers as defined above, certainly does not agree with 2. Why? Buddha and monks who have such powers are not 'gods' or 'deities'. Also, 3. seems a bit unrelated.
So it comes down to 1.Is it beyond what is natural and unexplainable by natural law?
This depends on 'which laws you are talking about'.
Is it classic science laws? Yes, supernatural powers cannot be explained by classic physics laws, but it certainly can be explained in Buddhism, and it can be explained by quantum physics, and it can be explained by the holographic theory:So whether those powers are supernatural, depends on how you define 'beyond explanation by natural laws'. From the perspective of Buddhism, we have quite a good understanding of supernatural powers, of the kinds of supernatural powers and how they are being developed or can be developed. They also do not contradict our basic doctrine, since we do not posit inherent existence (i.e. emptiness teachings), and we understand dependent origination and the holographic universe principle (which in fact is a teaching on dependent origination).Because they can be explained in Buddhism, they are not beyond the natural laws of dharma, hence are not supernatural from the perspective of Buddhism, but may be supernatural from the perspective of classic physics (with laws such as things being unable to surpass the speed of light, etc), but may be acceptable from quantum physics, holographic universe theory, etc.You should buy the book 'The Holographic Universe' as it provides a scientific explanation on how supernatural powers are possible (but it is not a book just about supernatural powers, that is just a small but well explained portion of it).In 1982 a remarkable event took place. At the University of Paris a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect performed what may turn out to be one of the most important experiments of the 20th century. You did not hear about it on the evening news. In fact, unless you are in the habit of reading scientific journals you probably have never even heard Aspect's name, though there are some who believe his discovery may change the face of science.Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn't matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart. Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing. The problem with this feat is that it violates Einstein's long-held tenet that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light. Since traveling faster than the speed of light is tantamount to breaking the time barrier, this daunting prospect has caused some physicists to try to come up with elaborate ways to explain away Aspect's findings. But it has inspired others to offer even more radical explanations.
University of London physicist David Bohm, for example, believes Aspect's findings imply that objective reality does not exist, that despite its apparent solidity the universe is at heart a phantasm, a gigantic and splendidly detailed hologram.
To understand why Bohm makes this startling assertion, one must first understand a little about holograms. A hologram is a three- dimensional photograph made with the aid of a laser. To make a hologram, the object to be photographed is first bathed in the light of a laser beam. Then a second laser beam is bounced off the reflected light of the first and the resulting interference pattern (the area where the two laser beams commingle) is captured on film. When the film is developed, it looks like a meaningless swirl of light and dark lines. But as soon as the developed film is illuminated by another laser beam, a three-dimensional image of the original object appears.
The three-dimensionality of such images is not the only remarkable characteristic of holograms. If a hologram of a rose is cut in half and then illuminated by a laser, each half will still be found to contain the entire image of the rose. Indeed, even if the halves are divided again, each snippet of film will always be found to contain a smaller but intact version of the original image. Unlike normal photographs, every part of a hologram contains all the information possessed by the whole.The consensus among physicist is that any apparent conflict with special relativity is illusionary. The intuitive reason is that even though the two photons are spatially separate, their common origin establishes a fundamental link between them. Although they speed away from each other and become spatially separate, their history entwines them; even when distant, they are still part of one physical system. And so, it’s really not that a measurement on one photon forces or compels another distant photon to take on identical properties. Rather, the two photons are so intimately bound up that is justified to consider them, even though they are spatially separate, as part of one physical entity.
When Einstein says that nothing can travel faster than he speed of light, the ‘nothing’ refers to the familiar matter or energy. But the case at hand is subtler, because it doesn’t appear that any matter of energy is traveling between the two photons, and so there isn’t anything whose speed we are led to measure. The speed limit of special relativity remains in force.
To reiterate, two things can be separated by an enormous aount of space and yet not have a fully independent existence. A quantum connection can unite them, making the property each contingent on the properties of the other. Space does not distunguish such entangled particles, and cannot overcome their interconnection. Space, even huge amount of space, does not weaken their quantum mechanical property. We are required to understand that the universe we live is a non-local one.
I'm not here to talk about your buddhism theory beacuse I am an atheist. Being a physics student I do want to point of some of your misinterpretation. Reason is simple, some people have interpreted this as "everything is connected to everything else" or that "quantum mechanics entangles us all in one universal whole." While i like the sentiment, such gushy talk is lose and overstated.
Have a nice day.
-
Originally posted by wayne471:
The consensus among physicist is that any apparent conflict with special relativity is illusionary. The intuitive reason is that even though the two photons are spatially separate, their common origin establishes a fundamental link between them. Although they speed away from each other and become spatially separate, their history entwines them; even when distant, they are still part of one physical system. And so, it’s really not that a measurement on one photon forces or compels another distant photon to take on identical properties. Rather, the two photons are so intimately bound up that is justified to consider them, even though they are spatially separate, as part of one physical entity.
When Einstein says that nothing can travel faster than he speed of light, the ‘nothing’ refers to the familiar matter or energy. But the case at hand is subtler, because it doesn’t appear that any matter of energy is traveling between the two photons, and so there isn’t anything whose speed we are led to measure. The speed limit of special relativity remains in force.
To reiterate, two things can be separated by an enormous aount of space and yet not have a fully independent existence. A quantum connection can unite them, making the property each contingent on the properties of the other. Space does not distunguish such entangled particles, and cannot overcome their interconnection. Space, even huge amount of space, does not weaken their quantum mechanical property. We are required to understand that the universe we live is a non-local one.
I'm not here to talk about your buddhism theory beacuse I am an atheist. Being a physics student I do want to point of some of your misinterpretation. Reason is simple, some people have interpreted this as "everything is connected to everything else" or that "quantum mechanics entangles us all in one universal whole." While i like the sentiment, such gushy talk is lose and overstated.
Have a nice day.
Good you are here to share your view. There is space here for atheist if you mean not believing in a big God that has supernatural powers. However, there are people who believed there are powers which can supersede the speed of light. I am not into quantum physics so I won’t be entangle in loose and gushy talks. I am into intellectual space where antagotons are at opposite ends.
-
Originally posted by wayne471:
The consensus among physicist is that any apparent conflict with special relativity is illusionary. The intuitive reason is that even though the two photons are spatially separate, their common origin establishes a fundamental link between them. Although they speed away from each other and become spatially separate, their history entwines them; even when distant, they are still part of one physical system. And so, it’s really not that a measurement on one photon forces or compels another distant photon to take on identical properties. Rather, the two photons are so intimately bound up that is justified to consider them, even though they are spatially separate, as part of one physical entity.
When Einstein says that nothing can travel faster than he speed of light, the ‘nothing’ refers to the familiar matter or energy. But the case at hand is subtler, because it doesn’t appear that any matter of energy is traveling between the two photons, and so there isn’t anything whose speed we are led to measure. The speed limit of special relativity remains in force.
To reiterate, two things can be separated by an enormous aount of space and yet not have a fully independent existence. A quantum connection can unite them, making the property each contingent on the properties of the other. Space does not distunguish such entangled particles, and cannot overcome their interconnection. Space, even huge amount of space, does not weaken their quantum mechanical property. We are required to understand that the universe we live is a non-local one.
I'm not here to talk about your buddhism theory beacuse I am an atheist. Being a physics student I do want to point of some of your misinterpretation. Reason is simple, some people have interpreted this as "everything is connected to everything else" or that "quantum mechanics entangles us all in one universal whole." While i like the sentiment, such gushy talk is lose and overstated.
Have a nice day.
-
Originally posted by Aneslayer:
True, I won't deny that.. thus the same raeson one cannot question about whether that is the reality, only whether it works. Since physics is about measurements and observation, asking a physicist to prove the reality is like asking him/her to clap with one hand.
-
Or...
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
-Richard Feynman
P.S: I'm not implying anyone is dumb.... by the above quote...
-
i ask from professor X
-
Originally posted by lce:
i ask from professor X
haha... or u may volunteer for some science experiment... who knows u can gain supernatural powers during the process... lol