“I used to be an atheist until I realized that I was God.”

This statement runs the risk of being taken completely out of context. It highlights the necessity for caution when discussing such profound subjects publicly.

What might Deepak have meant by this?

Was it a jest? Unlikely.

Could he have been referencing his own interpretation of God? Possibly. He might be suggesting that we are all interconnected as part of a greater whole. If one defines God as encompassing everything, then logically, we are all part of that essence.

However, such a statement can easily be misinterpreted. Why use the terms “atheist” and “God” at all? Why not simply express, “We are all interconnected as part of the whole”?

When I search for “God” on Google, I encounter these two definitions:

1. (in Christianity and other monotheistic faiths) the creator and ruler of the universe, the ultimate moral authority; the supreme being.
2. (in various other religions) a superhuman entity or spirit revered for having influence over nature or human destinies; a deity.

Dictionaries are descriptive rather than prescriptive; they reflect common usage rather than dictating meanings. Thus, most people interpret “God” in line with one of these definitions.

Consequently, when someone asserts they are God, it's likely to provoke laughter. To many, this statement implies, “I once thought the universe lacked a supreme creator. Then I realized it was I who created everything. I am the supreme being.”

“DNA is a quantum computer that localizes a non-local omnipresent consciousness or spirit into space-time energy information and matter.”

This is incorrect. Deoxyribonucleic acid is defined as:

“a molecule made of two polynucleotide chains that coil around each other to form a double helix, carrying genetic instructions essential for the development, functioning, growth, and reproduction of all known organisms and many viruses.”

Quantum computing refers to:

“a computation method that leverages collective properties of quantum states—such as superposition, interference, and entanglement—to carry out calculations. The devices utilized for such computations are termed quantum computers.”

DNA does not perform calculations. Well, it can be used to facilitate calculations in specific scientific contexts, but that does not imply DNA functions as a calculator in our bodies.

The phrase “localizes a non-local omnipresent consciousness or spirit” suggests that consciousness exists before it is manifested in a human. The part about “into space-time energy information and matter” seems to be a convoluted way of stating something vague.

Let’s attempt to simplify this quote:

• Quantum computer = performs calculations.
• Localizes a non-local omnipresent consciousness or spirit = makes non-local consciousness manifest.
• Into space-time energy information and matter = becomes physical.

Thus, the essence of the quote could be interpreted as:

DNA performs calculations that manifest consciousness within physical entities.

However, I’m unsure if that aligns with what he intended. This complexity underscores the issue with such statements—complicated language often leads to misunderstanding. To foster comprehension, it’s vital to communicate in plain, accessible language. Successful writers excel at distilling complex ideas into straightforward concepts.

“Slip into the gap, have the desire, detach from the outcome, and let the universe take care of the details.”

Let’s break this down into simpler terms:

• Slip into the gap = find a niche.
• Have the desire = wish for something.
• Detach from the outcome = be indifferent to the results.
• Let the universe take care of the details = refrain from taking decisive action yourself.

Essentially, he seems to be advising:

Find your niche, identify your desires, disregard the end results, and avoid taking action yourself.

However, this advice is misguided.

A more pragmatic approach would be: Define your goals, determine the steps needed to achieve them, and put forth your best effort. If you don’t succeed, be proud of your attempt, and remember to enjoy the journey.

“An intention synchronistically organizes its own fulfillment.”

This idea appears to stem from The Secret. Writer Mark Manson articulates that:

It's primarily about confirmation bias—what we focus on becomes more prominent in our lives.

Thus, if you concentrate on positive aspects, you'll perceive more positivity, and vice versa for negativity. This does not imply that the actual quantity of positive or negative occurrences changes.

This quote suggests that having a desire will guarantee its realization. However, this notion is not accurate. Countless individuals lack what they yearn for.

Do you believe that all the hungry people in the world simply did not want food? Is their starvation solely their responsibility?

“EVERYTHING that happens in the universe starts with an INTENTION.”

If everything originates from an intention, who initiated the very first intention?

This raises the age-old question of God. If God created the universe, who created God? Perhaps our current understanding of God is merely a subsequent version, birthed by an earlier one.

But who, then, created the first God? Perhaps it's a cyclical question—God 1 becomes God 2, and so forth. The quandary remains: who originated God 1?

Here’s Rationality Rules on YouTube debunking arguments for God:

“Every day in every way, I am increasing my mental and physical capacity. I am reversing my biological age.”

Every single day? In every conceivable way?

So, you're claiming to enhance your mental and physical prowess daily? That’s doubtful. Human growth does not operate on a constant upward trajectory. Even elite athletes experience plateaus and setbacks.

As for reversing biological age?

According to some claims, it is feasible to regress one's age by three weeks over eight weeks through lifestyle changes.

Yet, Chopra’s assertion implies a daily reversal of aging.

Consider this evidence:

Here’s a photo of Chopra from 2001. And here he is 20 years later in 2021.

“When you do one thing at a time, you’re guaranteed excellent results.”

While focusing on a single task is indeed preferable to multitasking—multitasking can diminish productivity—it doesn’t ensure remarkable outcomes. One could dedicate an entire day to a project without distractions, yet it might still yield disappointing results.

Such instances are a part of life, and that’s perfectly acceptable. The key is to learn from failures and strive again.

# Deepak Chopra vs a Quantum Physicist

In a public debate, a quantum physicist posed questions to Deepak Chopra:

They ended up co-authoring a book titled War of the Worldviews: Science vs. Spirituality.

# Notable Reader Responses

M Arun Subash:

> I haven’t listened to Deepak’s speeches or read his works. Some points in your article resonate with Hindu scriptures. > > “Until I realized that I was God” — The Upanishads state “tat tvam asi” — You are that. It’s fundamental to Advaita. One must look within to discover the divinity that resides inside. > > “Detach from the outcome” — This embodies Karma Yoga. Fulfill your duties without fixation on results, and accept outcomes as they come.

These concepts are broad and should not be taken literally.

Read next: 8 Ridiculous Things Said by Eckhart Tolle Which Don’t Stand Up to Scrutiny