Life after death

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Post Reply
User avatar
Sarge_Jr
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 6:20 am

Re: Life after death

Post by Sarge_Jr » Wed Aug 27, 2008 6:42 am

Dependant that actual 'Life' as we view it is built by our brain, There is a very slim chance that part of that will carry on to somewhere else in a way. Possibly a fragment of consciousness will slip through time after the bodies main systems die and decompose. It may also depend on how one's death is caused; A gunshot wound to the head (brain) may lower the possibility of some form of consciousness to slip through time. However, if the mind is as smart as we know it to be, maybe it could escape the body in some way.

Sadly there is no way we can know this. However if the human body has a spiritual alternative, theres also a chance of that existing somehow. Then theres the dialema of religion, which is based around the theory that the bodies spirit goes to either Heaven or Hell, dependent on how good you've been.


But if you think about it logically, it would only make sense if the human body is just a organic machine, that we die and cease to exist for the rest of time.

Coming to a conclusion on this subject will prove difficult in so many different ways...

User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5559
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by David Quinn » Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:13 am

Alex Jacob wrote:Now this is an interesting turn of events...

Kevin, it was not school that instructed me to have those opinions of Wilde, and I don't really care how he is viewed in that circle, my opinions were formed by growing tired of reading him. He is formulaic, and given his core constitution---shallow and artificial---all that he ever wrote, except De Profundis and a few lines of poems, fell vastly short of what 'great art' or great intellect can be. What is remembered of Wilde, for those who haven't looked into his personal excesses, is the witticism of his epigrams, and though they are revealing on one level, that level remains always shallow, and lacks moral backbone.
I agree that he was formulaic. His favourite formula was probably the simple inversion. Still, designing such formulas and applying them to conventional beliefs and morals is a rare enough pursuit and it can produce some gems.

I also agree that he had no real moral spine and that he broke easily under a little pressure. I don't think it was due to his sexual activities so much as his fixation with shocking society with his wit and being the centre of attention. He used to spend hours alone on his couch thinking up his aphorisims - not for any philosophical or spiritual purpose, but for the simple purpose of dazzling the crowd that night. He didn't have the foresight to plant deeper roots and fell away when people began to turn against him.

For aphorisms I think La Rochefoucauld is infinitely deeper, and there is moral strength there.
Not bad, but a bit dull. No real deeper spark to him.

Perhaps it was because he was French. It is hard to imagine a profound thinker emerging from France, a country where everything is expressed in pose.

-

User avatar
Carl G
Posts: 2659
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Videos and criticisms

Post by Carl G » Wed Aug 27, 2008 11:02 am

Kevin Solway wrote:Consciousness requires something other than itself to be conscious of. That's why the Universe can't be conscious.
Why? I hope you have more evidence then that a finger cannot touch itself.
Good Citizen Carl

User avatar
Kevin Solway
Posts: 2709
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 8:43 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Videos and criticisms

Post by Kevin Solway » Wed Aug 27, 2008 1:10 pm

Carl G wrote:Why?
Answered in the "Definition of consciousness" thread.

mikiel
Posts: 588
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 9:27 am

Re: Videos and criticisms

Post by mikiel » Sat Aug 30, 2008 4:55 pm

Kevin Solway wrote:
mikiel wrote:The locus of Omnipresent Consciousness known as Kevin Solway.
Two points:
1. If there are no loci of consciousness, then there is no consciousness.
2. Consciousness requires something other than itself to be conscious of. That's why the Universe can't be conscious.
Well, I just spent about 20 min responding to your post, and then it went away before I posted it. Amazing! Was I over the time limit? Is there a time limit? Do they (you) delete stuff on a whim while we compose? (Not likely... i really am not "paranoid.")

So, if there is is a time limit, should it not be made very clear so that we don't waste our time here writing just to see it vanish just before it is posted?

So I'll "hurry" this time.
There is One Consciousness... Many "loci" of It..All conscious entities throughout the cosmos.

Consciousness "requires" *nothing*. It exists independently of all manifest creation... "It's creation."

I am moved to emphasize this misconception:
"2. Consciousness requires something other than itself to be conscious of. That's why the Universe can't be conscious."

You do not understand what consciusness is. As I sit for an hour a day in meditation I realize what consciousness is as the awareness transcending the content of awareness ... what arises in this person's consciousness as I sit.
You have never experienced this transcendence... beyond *what we are conscious of.*
So you think consciousness "requires" content. It doesn't. I creates content. It creates "Creation." We create creation... locally... as "our lives."
You have not a clue. Yet you presume to be a wise man and founder of such a website wit such a lofty purpose.
You are just another egocentric pretender overt your head but still pretending on the subject of enlightnment.
No edit. (Might go over the time limit again.., and that would test my patience.

User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5663
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Dan Rowden » Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:08 pm

The only time limit that exists is your attention span. If for some reason you find yourself losing posts, write them offline in a simple text editor or one especially made for phpBB forums like this with the tags etc built in (there's a few out there - Google is your friend). That way you can just cut and paste and never lose a post.

User avatar
Kevin Solway
Posts: 2709
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 8:43 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Videos and criticisms

Post by Kevin Solway » Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:49 pm

mikiel wrote:it went away before I posted it.
I've now disabled the time limit, which I didn't know existed.

As a safety precaution, I always copy the text of my post to the clipboard (Ctrl-A, followed by Ctrl-C) before hitting the submit button.

If the server is overloaded at the moment you hit the submit button, your post may be swallowed up.

mikiel
Posts: 588
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 9:27 am

Re: Life after death

Post by mikiel » Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:53 pm

Dan Rowden wrote:The only time limit that exists is your attention span. If for some reason you find yourself losing posts, write them offline in a simple text editor or one especially made for phpBB forums like this with the tags etc built in (there's a few out there - Google is your friend). That way you can just cut and paste and never lose a post.
\
You as usual ignore the subhstance of my post and reply like a tech nerd. I really don't give a shit why my last post dissapeared.
I'd really very much rather that you responded to the substance of my post. No way. I know your MO. Avoid all criticism and mock those who disagree with you... ignoring all real points of argument.
This applies to all three of you.
This could be a forum of serious debate.
If it is just about who is the master of insults... I might win that contest easily.
But I expect more from this forum. Not by example... which has been very dissappointing, but by subtitle alone. .. Which attracted me to this forum in the first place.

User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5663
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Dan Rowden » Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:15 pm

mikiel wrote:
Dan Rowden wrote:The only time limit that exists is your attention span. If for some reason you find yourself losing posts, write them offline in a simple text editor or one especially made for phpBB forums like this with the tags etc built in (there's a few out there - Google is your friend). That way you can just cut and paste and never lose a post.
You as usual ignore the subhstance of my post and reply like a tech nerd. I really don't give a shit why my last post dissapeared.
Then why did you proceed to speculate on it to the point of accusation?
I'd really very much rather that you responded to the substance of my post. No way. I know your MO. Avoid all criticism and mock those who disagree with you... ignoring all real points of argument.
I have exactly zero interest in engaging you because there's zero merit in it. I was simply offering you a solution to the prospect of losing posts in future. It's frustrating but avoidable.

Ramayana
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 5:47 am

Re: Life after death

Post by Ramayana » Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:21 pm

I have had instances where spending a extended time in the 'post a reply' screen has returned an error when finally hitting the submit button. Never lost the post though, if I recall i just hit the back button, cut my post and returned to the thread an replied again. A fail safe would be to just to right click "copy" before you post. Or preview your post before hitting submit. *shrug*.Some ppl would likely rather complain than spent two seconds to save the grief it seems.

I don't really see a point in even addressing mik's points. I mean, he knows he's is right. What challenge of perspective can be won here? What is the point? Might as well debate with a brick wall what your perception or understanding of "enlightenment" means to you. If one is not open to suggestion they are just preaching. mik's made this forum and likely everyone he's participated in his personal propaganda arena. Whether appreciated, wanted or not.

From what I've seen everyone here likely has just as much an understanding, and actually do, "have a clue" (mik "you don't have a clue" I el's favorite attempt at a knock-down) at enlightenment as is the likelihood that mik just has a mental defect. A point mik has also dodged a few times. The only thing we/I can ever know, is that we/I don't know, we/I am not omnipresent, minus mik apparently (sarcasm :P just a tip for miks inability to understand social behavior) It's perspective that also cannot be "proven" wrong...

Is it possible we are individual cells or parts to a larger presence? Absolutely! Is it possible we are here by mere probable chance? Along with millions of current, previous & subsequent species? Absolutely! Could all of these religions, mystic and spiritual beliefs be nothing more than our human minds inability to accept we have no large scale purpose, just here for no other reason to spread our gene pool? Absolutely? Could it be something we/I cannot even imagine? Absolutely! What is the point if you are closed to suggestion? Only a damned fool (insert here) would say they "know" anything that can't be proven or at least minimally demonstrated with logical probability... Otherwise, it's a belief, an absolutely subjective experience, open to interpretation and individual perspective. A schizophrenic knows his/her experiences are real too. One cannot "know" a "vision" is reality, one cannot logically claim report with a mystical "something/consciousness" is not a fabrication of their mind. Yet, some here claim they are beyond doubt. How can you NOT have doubt? You cannot self-diagnose your own mind if it is defective. To claim an un-shared perception is absolute without doubt must surely be symptomatic of the an error in logic. Or is that the minds ego? Either way, I see a flaw in this reasoning!

The universe thus demonstrated, is by far devoid of caring or concern... There is nothing, and I mean nothing substantial to waiver the odds otherwise beyond physical probability and mathematical inevitability, or even a prevalence to propagate "consciousness", as one would expect from a "living" entity, thus far. Please spare me the unscientific and unsubstantiated Ramtha bullshit, ("What the bleep will you believe or can we sell you?") Cold hard, physics & mathematical odds are all we've been able to demonstrate...

Flame on mik...

mikiel
Posts: 588
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 9:27 am

Re: Life after death

Post by mikiel » Sun Aug 31, 2008 5:37 am

quote]
You as usual ignore the subhstance of my post and reply like a tech nerd. I really don't give a shit why my last post dissapeared.[/quote]

Then why did you proceed to speculate on it to the point of accusation?
Relative to actual dialogue on the substance of a given post, why it disappeared is a "don't give a shit" concern.
I'd really very much rather that you responded to the substance of my post. No way. I know your MO. Avoid all criticism and mock those who disagree with you... ignoring all real points of argument.
I have exactly zero interest in engaging you because there's zero merit in it. I was simply offering you a solution to the prospect of losing posts in future. It's frustrating but avoidable.[/quote]

This site gives lip service to:
"Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment."
The gnosis of which I speak is *knowing* God, everyone's true Identity, as distinct from mere *belief* in God. God consciousness *is* enlightenment, the Ultimate Reality.

You sir are a spiritually ignorant hypocrite.

User avatar
Alex Jacob
Posts: 1671
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:10 am
Location: Meta-Rabbit Hole

Re: Life after death

Post by Alex Jacob » Sun Aug 31, 2008 7:05 am

"Some of us are crazy or maybe we just take turns".

---John Trudell
Ni ange, ni bête

User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Kelly Jones » Sun Aug 31, 2008 10:51 am

mikiel wrote:This site gives lip service to: "Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment." The gnosis of which I speak is *knowing* God, everyone's true Identity, as distinct from mere *belief* in God. God consciousness *is* enlightenment, the Ultimate Reality.

You sir are a spiritually ignorant hypocrite.
Mikiel,

Perhaps your trips in and out of town are interfering with your memory. Kevin responded to your definition of consciousness in this thread, to which there is no reply from yourself, as you left town.

It is good practice in a forum like this, to present one's views clearly at the beginning, and then respond carefully and thoughtfully to questions or criticisms. It is not good practice to return to presenting the OP repeatedly, or repeating points made in the past. If you find that you can't remember the points made by others, then perhaps you should print them before heading home again.

Otherwise, it gets tiresome for readers, and shows no little disrespect to them. People do often want to read intelligent discussion, that have been given some thought.


KJ

User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Kelly Jones » Sun Aug 31, 2008 10:58 am

I suggest you look at the "Definition of consciousness" thread. The other two (Making Judgments) or this one, don't focus as carefully on digging out the meaning of consciousness.

I think this is vital to your argument, since you seem to think that enlightenment means knowing God, and that God is a universal consciousness.

mikiel
Posts: 588
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 9:27 am

Re: Life after death

Post by mikiel » Sun Aug 31, 2008 11:17 am

KJ:
Mikiel,

Perhaps your trips in and out of town are interfering with your memory. Kevin responded to your definition of consciousness in this thread, to which there is no reply from yourself, as you left town.
Check my replies to Kevin's statements on consciousness stamped Aug 27 and 30 above.
PS: If you are referring to his usual cryptic evasion tactics like:
I reject your definition of "consciousness", since it's not conscious.....
I asked ...

How so?
He didn't reply... again, as usual.

User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Kelly Jones » Sun Aug 31, 2008 12:08 pm

He couldn't have been clearer.

User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Kelly Jones » Sun Aug 31, 2008 2:16 pm

Well, I thought he couldn't have been clearer. So, just repeating the matter for mikiel, in case he missed it:
mikiel wrote to Kevin: There has never been and will never be a case when there "is no conscious being"... the Universe ItSelf.

Kevin: I reject your definition of "consciousness", since it's not conscious.

mikiel: How so? Aside from the content of my post, who read it and replied to it? The locus of Omnipresent Consciousness known as Kevin Solway.

Kevin: 1. If there are no loci of consciousness, then there is no consciousness.
Kevin then clarified the definition of consciousness, which is now in the "Definition of Consciousness" thread:
2. Consciousness requires something other than itself to be conscious of. That's why the Universe can't be conscious.

Carl: Why?

Kevin: If there's nothing other than itself, then there's nothing for it to be conscious of. And if it's not conscious of anything, then it can't be appropriately called "consciousness."

I imagine you might say that "It can be conscious of part of itself." But can a fingertip touch part of itself? No, it cannot — not even a part of itself.

In the case that consciousness is aware of a part of something, it is always apart from that part.

mikiel
Posts: 588
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 9:27 am

Re: Life after death

Post by mikiel » Mon Sep 01, 2008 3:36 am

Re: Kevin's:
2. Consciousness requires something other than itself to be conscious of. That's why the Universe can't be conscious.
I've addressed this misconception in some detail in the "definition of consciousness" thread... excerpts and links.

Kevin has never grokked conscious transcendence of the objects arising *in* conwsciousness, the fundamental principle known to anyone with with a modicum of experience in meditation.
(See my meditation page and excerpt from "The Heart of Merrell-Wolff's Philosophy" links in that thread.)

BTW, regarding the following exchange;
m: " There has never been and will never be a case when there "is no conscious being"... the Universe ItSelf."

Kevin: "I reject your definition of "consciousness", since it's not conscious."

I asked "How so?" thinking he was calling *my definition of consciousness* "not conscious"... not "it", the Universe ItSelf.

I have directly experienced that the Universe is One Conscious Being my whole life as a mystic, so I am not impressed with Kevin's denial of it. It just reflects his shallow myopic and limited "rational/logical" perspective on "Reality."

PS: My 38 yrs of daily meditation (an hour a day) may have something to do with the difference in perspectives. But admitting one has never experienced cosmic consciousness is honest, while denying the possibility of it is outright ignorant arrogance.

User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Kelly Jones » Mon Sep 01, 2008 11:42 am

Kevin is probably not referring to your definition of consciousness as itself lacking consciousness, but what you think of as conscious (ie. 'Universal Consciousness').

Let's keep this discussion in the 'Definition of Consciousness' thread, as it's inefficient to triplicate arguments.

User avatar
Tomas
Posts: 4328
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 2:15 am
Location: North Dakota

The Gay Animal Kingdom

Post by Tomas » Thu Sep 25, 2008 11:25 am

.

-David Quinn-
None of us are gay. That should be obvious from the way we respect the power of woman and its various traps and dangers.


The Gay Animal Kingdom

Joan Roughgarden thinks Charles Darwin made a terrible mistake. Not about natural-selection-she's no bible-toting creationist-but about his other great theory of evolution: sexual selection

http://seedmagazine.com/news/2006/06/th ... ingdom.php


.

User avatar
Tomas
Posts: 4328
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 2:15 am
Location: North Dakota

Vatica says it does not owe Darwin an apology

Post by Tomas » Fri Oct 10, 2008 11:25 am

Tomas wrote:.

-David Quinn-
None of us are gay. That should be obvious from the way we respect the power of woman and its various traps and dangers.


The Gay Animal Kingdom

Joan Roughgarden thinks Charles Darwin made a terrible mistake. Not about natural-selection-she's no bible-toting creationist-but about his other great theory of evolution: sexual selection

http://seedmagazine.com/news/2006/06/th ... ingdom.php


.

Vatican says it does not owe Darwin an apology

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14751


.


User avatar
Tomas
Posts: 4328
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 2:15 am
Location: North Dakota

Re: Life after death

Post by Tomas » Thu Feb 09, 2012 11:46 am

David Quinn wrote:That gave me a chuckle. Alex believes that constantly hopping from branch to branch and chattering like an excited monkey is an expression of vitality and life .....

A sure sign that one's own inner existence is sterile and lifeless is the need to keep looking endlessly outwards - in books, in religions, in theories, in people, in guides - for inspiration. Or worse, to find refuge in them.

-
David nails it.
Last edited by Tomas on Fri Feb 10, 2012 3:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
Don't run to your death

jufa
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by jufa » Thu Feb 09, 2012 12:55 pm

Tomas wrote:
David Quinn wrote:That gave me a chuckle. Alex believes that constantly hopping from branch to branch and chattering like an excited monkey is an expression of vitality and life .....

A sure sign that one's own inner existence is sterile and lifeless is the need to keep looking endlessly outwards - in books, in religions, in theories, in people, in guides - for inspiration. Or worse, to find refuge in them.

-
Davd nails it.
He sure did. He nailed a faery tale. Should ones inner existence be sterile and lifeless, how could birth take place? Please explain!


Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com

User avatar
Tomas
Posts: 4328
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 2:15 am
Location: North Dakota

Re: Life after death

Post by Tomas » Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:53 am

jufa wrote:
Tomas wrote:
David Quinn wrote:That gave me a chuckle. Alex believes that constantly hopping from branch to branch and chattering like an excited monkey is an expression of vitality and life .....

A sure sign that one's own inner existence is sterile and lifeless is the need to keep looking endlessly outwards - in books, in religions, in theories, in people, in guides - for inspiration. Or worse, to find refuge in them.

-
David nails it.
He sure did. He nailed a faery tale. Should ones inner existence be sterile and lifeless, how could birth take place? Please explain!
Certainly I'll explain right after your definition of 'faery tale'.

I'd looked into (leafed through, paged) a few online [faery tale] teasers and a couple local-library hard-book dictionaries and another opinion from a (our local) university doctorate dude.

Also their usages in different english dialects canadian, aussie, usa, scottish-english, french, latin and for the kick of it, Aesop's Fables..

faery tale(s)
Last edited by Tomas on Fri Feb 10, 2012 1:05 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Don't run to your death

Post Reply