[blueprint]

> Anyone who says no one has ever attained enlightens through meditation is lying. I know he's lying because such a statement is literally impossible to support rationally and scientifically, no evidence can be provided for such a statement.

This is where there is a difference between your level and my level of understanding about the world.

What you said about knowing that someone who makes a non-falsifiable statement is a liar, is actually a lie. It's not only the fact that you didn't understand the statement (and therefore can't accurately judge if it's falsifiable), and besides the fact that you yourself do not know if there will be anyone in the future who manages to prove the statement (you're making the same mistake you're pointing out), but there's another, more essential reason that I know you don't know what you're talking about.

An apple tree only knows how to produce apples because that is what is encoded in its nature (origin). There is nothing in the world that shows some kind of behavior or result that it doesn't already have inside its nature.

The reason I can say confidently here that the practice of meditation does not lead to enlightenment and that no truly enlightened being would teach that it does, is the simple fact that meditation has a certain effect (result) on human beings (which sometimes differs slightly within small boundaries depending on individual, unless the person is already enlightened himself), and that effect on human beings is orthogonal to that of enlightenment as well as nirvana. Meditation will never be able to produce an Enlightened Being, and no one who had Supreme Enlightenment came out of any schools or religions, because they are trying to go in opposite directions - practicing meditation can create karma, but you have to remove all your karma to experience nirvana and have the possibility of being Enlightened. That is to say that Enlightenment (also known as salvation), as well as nirvana (liberation) are in the opposite direction of the goals of meditation (no suffering, darkness/closing your eyes, stopping the flow of your mind/one-pointed concentration, letting external spirits come in or practicing compassion for them, abandoning oneself, not having any attachments, and practicing not to be reborn again). The result of Enlightenment is that you save yourself, and can begin to save others. The result of meditation is that you kill your soul and die forever. So there are some basic things you've learned from others about Buddha's teaching that don't match the reality of life, and that in itself lets me know it's not the teaching of a real Buddha. Do you yourself honestly believe that a living Buddha would teach people the way to die forever? The point of him coming to the world was to show us that we are our own saviors and are capable of saving ourselves.

[gnaritas]

Your reply is so full of wowo nonsense that I won't bother to rebut it piece by piece but I'll end with this. You completely fail to understand evidence based thinking and falsifiability and thus your opinions are not remotely rational, they are emotional. You need to learn to stop trying to explain yourself, and start providing evidence that anything you say is true. You just look like a crazy person to me; I doubt I'm alone in this assessment.

I'm not interested in your opinions of why you're right, I'm interested in evidence of your claims. If you don't have that, you aren't worth my time.

[blueprint]

> You need to learn to stop trying to explain yourself, and start providing evidence that anything you say is true. You just look like a crazy person to me; I doubt I'm alone in this assessment.

> I'm not interested in your opinions of why you're right, I'm interested in evidence of your claims. If you don't have that, you aren't worth my time.

You are not alone in your 'assessment', sir, and to be quite honest, I gave you what I consider to be logically sound evidence that meditation can't lead to Enlightenment, but you won't find the evidence of this statement from me since I don't meditate. Therefore I am asking you to go look at what really happens to people who practice meditation and then confirm how what they can see, how they behave, and what kind of problems they have, are different from some people in human history who really had opened their eyes completely. If you don't want to, that's your loss. But even if I show you evidence by bringing the people in front of your eyes, if you don't want to confirm the axioms I set forward nor check the results of them, if you just reject me without confirming, then how can I be sure you properly understood my meaning in the first place?

Science and philosophy are two sides of the same coin, and you can't recognize evidence until you can understand what it means. I regret that I couldn't have had a proper conversation with you.

[gnaritas]

> I gave you what I consider to be logically sound evidence that meditation can't lead to Enlightenment

You did no such thing. You just told me why you think that, based on nonsense woowoo about karma, rebirth, and spirits; that is not logic, and it is certainly not rational. You've given me zero reason to believe anything you say.

> but you won't find the evidence of this statement from me since I don't meditate

Then you shouldn't be speaking with authority on the matter; you clearly know nothing about it.

> the goals of meditation (no suffering, darkness/closing your eyes, stopping the flow of your mind/one-pointed concentration, letting external spirits come in or practicing compassion for them, abandoning oneself, not having any attachments, and practicing not to be reborn again).

You've clearly confused the practice of meditation with certain religions that use the practice as part of their woo woo nonsense.

Meditation isn't about any of that; meditation is simply about learning to control the tool that is your mind rather than letting it control you. It is the practice of awareness without the incessant chattering of the mind. It is about learning that you are not your thoughts, nor are you a slave to them. There's nothing mystical about it.

> Therefore I am asking you to go look at what really happens to people who practice meditation and then confirm how what they can see, how they behave, and what kind of problems they have, are different from some people in human history who really had opened their eyes completely.

I didn't ask you to give me homework, I ask for evidence that your claims about meditation are true. You've provided none. If you can't back up claims you make, don't make them.

> Science and philosophy are two sides of the same coin, and you can't recognize evidence until you can understand what it means.

No they are not. Science is a philosophy, one based on evidence and logic. None of which you have shown here.

> I regret that I couldn't have had a proper conversation with you.

I don't believe you do. I believe you regret being asked for evidence of your claims.