Life after death

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Locked
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Dan Rowden »

jufa wrote:Why would finding a cause for all a man is aware of be a non=stop process in the scientific world should Nature have no cause?
You appear to have little capacity for logic, given that this simple point has been made to you multiple times now. Nature is being defined as the totality of the tapestry of causation itself. By this definition, there cannot be a cause external to or of Nature. If we substitute the term "everything", the folly of asking for a cause is surely immediately clear given what "everything" means.

And science has nothing whatever to do with this point. Despite what you may think, the Big Bang Theory is not any sort of attempt at describing the cause of Nature or "everything" or "existence" etc.
User avatar
Bob Michael
Posts: 692
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Reading, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Bob Michael »

David Quinn wrote:Bob says forget logic, go with movement. (And receives a big thumbs up from the world's paedophiles, generals and dictators).

David will ask: Why?

Bob will answer: Because .... [blah, blah, blah...]

And so we're back to going with logic again.
Bob says go with the flow of Life's Holy Spirit and soar high above it all. And with perfect understanding of it all. And with Love (not logic) for all.
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by David Quinn »

Why?

-
Whatshappening
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 11:02 pm

Re: Life after death

Post by Whatshappening »

I got to wonder, with all this back and forth, how does anyone make it through the day?

Look to something simple to find perspective. Look deeply at your successes, compare them to your failures.

Compare
Gary

P.S. I don't want to say anymore, that would be (more) insulting.
jufa
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by jufa »

Dan Rowden wrote:
jufa wrote:Why would finding a cause for all a man is aware of be a non=stop process in the scientific world should Nature have no cause?
You appear to have little capacity for logic, given that this simple point has been made to you multiple times now. Nature is being defined as the totality of the tapestry of causation itself. By this definition, there cannot be a cause external to or of Nature. If we substitute the term "everything", the folly of asking for a cause is surely immediately clear given what "everything" means.

And science has nothing whatever to do with this point. Despite what you may think, the Big Bang Theory is not any sort of attempt at describing the cause of Nature or "everything" or "existence" etc.
If what you say is true of jufa, then surely you can teach jufa and give him the logic for existence.

In simplification of your capacity of logic, what is the logic for existence to exist as Nature, as anything, or everything? Can you go to the root of Why? Or are you saying, as your counter-part D. Quinn says, just look and see?

Well I am asking you to tell me - look and see what? what? what? for the sake of logic and reasoning.

Moreover, what logic would I, and even you, find that would prompted us to look for any meaning or logical reasoning to anything when Nature has no cause of purpose in and of itself? What is the logical sense of reason to be applied to this?

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

http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com
User avatar
Bob Michael
Posts: 692
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Reading, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Bob Michael »

David Quinn wrote:Why?
Why or why not doesn't really enter into picture here, David. He who is endowed with a highly-sensitive organism is simply compelled to totally abandon the conditioned self, lest he continue to be caught up in the universal human mediocrity and consequently continue to suffer. And personally I've had enough suffering, though in retrospect it was all quite necessary in order to finally bring me to a state of sheer blissful harmony with the universe and all of its living and non-living creatures.
User avatar
Bob Michael
Posts: 692
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Reading, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Bob Michael »

Whatshappening wrote:I got to wonder, with all this back and forth, how does anyone make it through the day?
I make it (flow) through my days quite wonderfully, Gary. How goes your days?
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Life after death

Post by Pam Seeback »

David,
I don't recall what I said back then, but I certainly wouldn't define logic as the activity of making causal references.

Rather, logic is the activity of exposing and undermining delusion. Delusion is the belief in things that don't really exist and expresses itself in the form of contradictory thinking.
And by what criteria then, does one define their existence once logic has exposed the things that [they believe] don't really exist? From what I have observed on this forum, the criteria of thinking of the habit of living without delusion is all about making meaning in the form of projecting one's reasonings of the reasonings of another. To me, this is self-righteous storytelling, pure and simple.

What I am saying is that there is only The Story and that the logical man cannot escape this truth. What I am also saying is that it is the righteous man who arrives at the understanding of emptiness and fills it with the Story of emptiness. This is what the Buddha did and what Christ did. No where in their words will a man find any projection of “I think” with regards to another man's interpretation of his sentient world. Of my understanding of their wisdom, both came to the realization of emptiness, and realizing that man is the storyteller of Himself, proceeded to tell the Story of Emptiness, the Story of the nondual, non-sentient I AM.

Which means that the logical stories of “I think” sentient projection that are told on this site are not stories of nonduality as is the belief of many here. They are a beginning of awakening to nondual awareness, to be sure, but since they are 'other' directed, they are stories of duality, pure and simple.
It's not a matter of our being unable to know the cause of Everything.
There is literally no cause to know.
Clearly our assertions are different with regards to knowing a cause. I agree, no one can know the cause of Everything; however, one can know the cause of sentience. And, since sentience = suffering [hunger, thirst, both physical and psychological], when one knows the cause of sentience, they also know the cause of suffering and by extension, how to end the cause of sentience. Logic cannot make a person aware of any of these things. Why? Because logic is of sentient self-righteousness. Only the spirit of a pure heart pushing away all self-righteous thinking can come to know these things of the cause of their suffering.
It has nothing do with our status as sentient beings. Not even the greatest of super-beings can determine the cause. Not even Everything itself can determine it.
The ending of suffering has everything to do with our status as sentient beings. Did you not once proclaim Meister Eckhart an enlightened being? What do you think he was referring to when he said that man's task is to break through the creature [sentient] emanation? And in order to achieve this, does man not need to know its cause?

The cause of sentience is the arising thought or idea of sentience in the Godhead, and then, of dividing this arousal of I AM into good and evil. It really is that simple. This is why the term “emanation” is so important. The wisdom of sentience as being an emanation of Everything means that sentience is not a permanent consciousness in the Godhead of infinite emanations or worlds.

I am aware that you place yourself in the same league as the Buddha in Gautama and the Christ in Jesus with regards to your perception of being enlightened. I posted a link to the Buddha's last thoughts, the parinirvana sutta, in my thread on the logic of causal transcendence. If you are aware of this sutta, you must also be aware that in its contents, the Buddha clearly identified suffering with sentience and rebirth into sentience. There are other suttas that address this wisdom, which I can provide if you wish, but none so direct as this one.

True expansion beyond humanism or the creature emanation as Eckhart calls it is the expansion beyond sentience into the infinite house of the Father or the Totality so as to be moved into other worlds of the Father's “I AM.” This places you and me and everyone on this site in the position of being the one who interprets themselves out of sentience and into the purified body of their infinite House. This is the Story of awakening to one's dual thinking process, of repenting one's dual thinking process, of obedience to one's repenting and, finally, of ascension into the Unknown Story that lies beyond this one. The Story of I AM that includes metaphors and myths such as used by the three spiritual giants already mentioned. To the man who is in denial that he is always telling a story about something that doesn't really exist, this Story of ascension out of the suffering of sentience remains untold.

I once asked you where you rested when you are not using logic. You told me you rest in the mystical, which was helpful, for I too, rest in the mystical, but unlike me, who reveals her mystical, resting-place language on this forum, you have not revealed yours, at least that I am aware of.

Being as mystical definitions transcend logical definitions, is not the more enlightened mind the mystical mind? This question also relates to your statement to Dennis about there being Meaning in meaninglessness or emptiness. Can you define this Meaning of meaningless for me?

To sum up, when you said
As for enlightenment, it is simply the habit of being without delusion.
I assert that you are speaking of the first step of enlightenment only.

I am aware this is a long, drawn-out, perhaps even rambling post. My access to wifi is hit and miss, therefore it is important to me to say as much as I can in one 'go.'
User avatar
Bob Michael
Posts: 692
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Reading, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Bob Michael »

movingalways wrote:Logic cannot make a person aware of any of these things. Why? Because logic is of sentient self-righteousness. Only the spirit of a pure heart pushing away all self-righteous thinking can come to know these things of the cause of their suffering.
A mind that is bound up in logic and/or reason is essentially a restless mind, a mind that is never fully free of fear and at peace, a mind that is never truly and serenely still. And it's only from a mind that is still and serene that right or potentially edifying and harmonizing thoughts, words, and actions spring forth. Which is to also say that these things then spring forth from God or Love.

On the Logical, Psychological, and Higher (esoteric) Mind.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/The_Schoo ... essage/310
_________________________________________________________

The following view that I picked up years ago also comes to mind here, the source of which I have no idea.

Mind running fast = insanity
Mind running slow = saint
Mind stopped = God (or Love)
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by David Quinn »

movingalways wrote: David,
I don't recall what I said back then, but I certainly wouldn't define logic as the activity of making causal references.

Rather, logic is the activity of exposing and undermining delusion. Delusion is the belief in things that don't really exist and expresses itself in the form of contradictory thinking.
And by what criteria then, does one define their existence once logic has exposed the things that [they believe] don't really exist? From what I have observed on this forum, the criteria of thinking of the habit of living without delusion is all about making meaning in the form of projecting one's reasonings of the reasonings of another. To me, this is self-righteous storytelling, pure and simple.

What I am saying is that there is only The Story and that the logical man cannot escape this truth. What I am also saying is that it is the righteous man who arrives at the understanding of emptiness and fills it with the Story of emptiness. This is what the Buddha did and what Christ did. No where in their words will a man find any projection of “I think” with regards to another man's interpretation of his sentient world. Of my understanding of their wisdom, both came to the realization of emptiness, and realizing that man is the storyteller of Himself, proceeded to tell the Story of Emptiness, the Story of the nondual, non-sentient I AM.

Which means that the logical stories of “I think” sentient projection that are told on this site are not stories of nonduality as is the belief of many here. They are a beginning of awakening to nondual awareness, to be sure, but since they are 'other' directed, they are stories of duality, pure and simple.
It was Jesus who said:
  • "Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.

    By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them."

movingalways wrote:
It's not a matter of our being unable to know the cause of Everything.
There is literally no cause to know.
Clearly our assertions are different with regards to knowing a cause. I agree, no one can know the cause of Everything; however, one can know the cause of sentience. And, since sentience = suffering [hunger, thirst, both physical and psychological], when one knows the cause of sentience, they also know the cause of suffering and by extension, how to end the cause of sentience. Logic cannot make a person aware of any of these things. Why? Because logic is of sentient self-righteousness. Only the spirit of a pure heart pushing away all self-righteous thinking can come to know these things of the cause of their suffering.

It should be noted that you're using logic all through out this paragraph, but not very well.

For example, there is the faulty premise that sentience automatically equals suffering/self-righteousness/ignorance. If that were the case, then it would be impossible for any sentient being to become enlightened while remaining sentient. Buddhas would be an impossibility. So at the very least, a distinction needs to be made between deluded sentience and enlightened sentience.

As for logic working out the cause of suffering, this is exactly what the Buddha and other wise people in the past were able to accomplish without any problems. Suffering is essentially the experience of lack, of desiring to be somewhere else. Logic thus dictates that suffering ends either when you are so fulfilled by the moment that you no longer experience any lack (i.e. a fleeting emotional attainment that is experienced very rarely), or when you put an end to desire altogether.

movingalways wrote:
It has nothing do with our status as sentient beings. Not even the greatest of super-beings can determine the cause. Not even Everything itself can determine it.
The ending of suffering has everything to do with our status as sentient beings. Did you not once proclaim Meister Eckhart an enlightened being? What do you think he was referring to when he said that man's task is to break through the creature [sentient] emanation? And in order to achieve this, does man not need to know its cause?

Eckhart essentially taught the same solution as the Buddha - namely, that God is only realized when we empty ourselves and abandon utterly everything, even our desire to realize God.

This is what he meant by things like, " The kingdom of God is for none but the thoroughly dead", and, "Virgin is . . . a person void of alien images, free as he was when he existed not".

movingalways wrote: The cause of sentience is the arising thought or idea of sentience in the Godhead, and then, of dividing this arousal of I AM into good and evil. It really is that simple. This is why the term “emanation” is so important. The wisdom of sentience as being an emanation of Everything means that sentience is not a permanent consciousness in the Godhead of infinite emanations or worlds.
What is the difference between sentience and consciousness?

movingalways wrote: I am aware that you place yourself in the same league as the Buddha in Gautama and the Christ in Jesus with regards to your perception of being enlightened. I posted a link to the Buddha's last thoughts, the parinirvana sutta, in my thread on the logic of causal transcendence. If you are aware of this sutta, you must also be aware that in its contents, the Buddha clearly identified suffering with sentience and rebirth into sentience.

If "sentience" means deluded consciousness, then what the Buddha is saying is perfectly correct. Consciousness becomes deluded the moment it takes samsara (the ups and downs of life) seriously.

movingalways wrote: I once asked you where you rested when you are not using logic. You told me you rest in the mystical, which was helpful, for I too, rest in the mystical, but unlike me, who reveals her mystical, resting-place language on this forum, you have not revealed yours, at least that I am aware of.
Here is a Zen story:
  • Flowers rained down on Subhuti. The gods whispered to him "We are praising you for your discourse on emptiness".

    "But I have not spoken of emptiness" said Subhuti.

    "You have not spoken of emptiness, we have not heard emptiness", responded the gods. "This is true emptiness".

    Blossoms showered upon Subhuti as rain.
movingalways wrote: Being as mystical definitions transcend logical definitions, is not the more enlightened mind the mystical mind? This question also relates to your statement to Dennis about there being Meaning in meaninglessness or emptiness. Can you define this Meaning of meaningless for me?
It is meaningful in two ways:

- It is true. Not the whole truth, but one facet of the larger overall truth of Emptiness.

- Understanding the fundamental meaninglessness of all things impacts on every aspect of one's life. Every fact that one has been taught, every previously-held belief, every experience that one has ever had - in short, every nook and cranny of one’s consciousness and identity, however large or small - all of it is thrown into stark relief and demands to be reevaluated in the light of the realization.

So to the degree that one finds one's own life to be meaningful, the realization of meaninglessness is meaningful.

movingalways wrote:To sum up, when you said
As for enlightenment, it is simply the habit of being without delusion.
I assert that you are speaking of the first step of enlightenment only.

On the contrary, it is the very end. Once you are permanently without delusion, there is nowhere else to go. You are fully integrated with Reality at all times.

-
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by David Quinn »

Bob Michael wrote:
movingalways wrote:Logic cannot make a person aware of any of these things. Why? Because logic is of sentient self-righteousness. Only the spirit of a pure heart pushing away all self-righteous thinking can come to know these things of the cause of their suffering.
A mind that is bound up in logic and/or reason is essentially a restless mind, a mind that is never fully free of fear and at peace, a mind that is never truly and serenely still. And it's only from a mind that is still and serene that right or potentially edifying and harmonizing thoughts, words, and actions spring forth. Which is to also say that these things then spring forth from God or Love.

On the Logical, Psychological, and Higher (esoteric) Mind.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/The_Schoo ... essage/310
_________________________________________________________

The following view that I picked up years ago also comes to mind here, the source of which I have no idea.

Mind running fast = insanity
Mind running slow = saint
Mind stopped = God (or Love)
That stillness of God can only be realized through the full and free practice of logic. Enlightenment is the fruit of logic, not the rejection of it.

Logic is like a fire that consumes everything in its path. It is only when everything has been consumed that the stillness is able to emerge. It can't emerge while those fires are still burning.

Of course, most people are too busy trying to put those fires out, their egos desperately trying to save everything from being consumed. You, for example, Bob, use the love of your wife to put those fires out.

-
User avatar
Cory Duchesne
Posts: 2320
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:35 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Cory Duchesne »

Superman has a wife?
Liberty Sea
Posts: 116
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: Life after death

Post by Liberty Sea »

The problem and confusion of this argument may stem from the difference in each side's definition of logic. To me, logic is a faculty of reasoning to bring about clarity, correctness and certainty in systematical formulation. An intuitive understanding that is yet to be clarified out [with the help of logic, for lack of better known faculty] is not a perfect understanding. What is the enlightened mind? The mind that is able to conceive with perfect clarity, piercing through all cloud of delusions.

Logic and the enlightened mind are certainly related, in the name of clarity. The enlightened mind works logically, with or without the intent to do so.
User avatar
Bob Michael
Posts: 692
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Reading, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Bob Michael »

David Quinn wrote:Logic is like a fire that consumes everything in its path. It is only when everything has been consumed that the stillness is able to emerge. It can't emerge while those fires are still burning.

Of course, most people are too busy trying to put those fires out, their egos desperately trying to save everything from being consumed. You, for example, Bob, use the love of your wife to put those fires out.
There's not a trace of desperation or ego here at all, David. Just an unextinguishable fire of pure Love and Wisdom. And my wonderful wife, Karen, helps keep that fire burning ever so brightly. Actually, when 'two become one flesh' the fire then becomes quite explosive in nature. Which is the rare kind of fire that's necessary to effectively help awaken and enlighten others. Whereas the feebly flickering and smouldering fires of those of mere logic or reason, and celibacy too of course, will be of absolutely no value whatsoever in this greatest of tasks.
Last edited by Bob Michael on Wed Feb 22, 2012 2:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Cory Duchesne
Posts: 2320
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:35 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Cory Duchesne »

David Quinn wrote: That stillness of God can only be realized through the full and free practice of logic. Enlightenment is the fruit of logic, not the rejection of it.
-
My humble theory: people who devalue logic all have something in common - entanglements with the world, and from those painful entanglements (samsara) they have these brief moments of poetic consciousness, where they use symbolism and emotion to transcend their painful memories, and since the process seems magical, they think it's a good reason to throw logic away. This is why plenty of modern spiritual philosophers like Ken Wilbur will speak of "trans-rational" consciousness. There are similar terms, all of which suggest a state of consciousness that is transcendent and otherworldly. They don't realize that even in these altered, poetic states, they are achieving an entirely logical aim, with a very logical method.

That is why Otto W. was wise to state:

"The genius does not need the transcendental method, because he has enough certainty in his normal intuition."
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by David Quinn »

Bob Michael wrote:
David Quinn wrote:Logic is like a fire that consumes everything in its path. It is only when everything has been consumed that the stillness is able to emerge. It can't emerge while those fires are still burning.

Of course, most people are too busy trying to put those fires out, their egos desperately trying to save everything from being consumed. You, for example, Bob, use the love of your wife to put those fires out.
There's not a trace of desperation or ego here at all, David. Just an unextinguishable fire of pure Love and Wisdom. And my wonderful wife, Karen, helps keep that fire burning ever so brightly.
Inside you there is an "unextinguishable" fire that needs an external source to sustain it....?

Sorry, but this does not compute. It is like someone boasting that he is a self-made businessman with a large independent income, whereas in reality he is being financially supported by his wife.

There is a glaring contradiction that goes to the heart of your life, a contradiction between your proclamation of unconditional love and the reality that your love is in fact conditional (i.e. dependent on a particular person, your wife, continuing to behave in a certain way).

This is a very serious issue which calls into question your spirituality and the integrity of your life. It's no wonder you try to undermine the role of logic so much.

-
User avatar
Bob Michael
Posts: 692
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Reading, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Bob Michael »

David Quinn wrote: Inside you there is an "unextinguishable" fire that needs an external source to sustain it....?

Sorry, but this does not compute. It is like someone boasting that he is a self-made businessman with an large independent income, whereas in reality he is being financially supported by his wife.

There is a glaring contradiction that goes to the heart of your life, a contradiction between your proclamation of unconditional love and the reality that your love is in fact conditional (i.e. dependent on a particular person, your wife, continuing to behave in a certain way).

This is a very serious issue which calls into question your spirituality and the integrity of your life. It's no wonder you try to undermine the role of logic so much.
David, David, David! You just don't seem to get it. If my wife were to die today, I'd be just fine. If my apartment building burnt to the ground I'd also be fine. And my Ark project would go on. While you're all wrapped up in ("a very serious issue", no less) trying to project your totally false logical contradictions onto me. God bess ya, David, but you make absolutely no dents in my armor. Perhaps in you own logical mind you think you do, but that's surely not the truth of the matter. Far from it.
User avatar
Tomas
Posts: 4328
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 2:15 am
Location: North Dakota

Re: Life after death

Post by Tomas »

Bob Michael wrote:
David Quinn wrote: Inside you there is an "unextinguishable" fire that needs an external source to sustain it....?

Sorry, but this does not compute. It is like someone boasting that he is a self-made businessman with an large independent income, whereas in reality he is being financially supported by his wife.

There is a glaring contradiction that goes to the heart of your life, a contradiction between your proclamation of unconditional love and the reality that your love is in fact conditional (i.e. dependent on a particular person, your wife, continuing to behave in a certain way).

This is a very serious issue which calls into question your spirituality and the integrity of your life. It's no wonder you try to undermine the role of logic so much.
David, David, David! You just don't seem to get it. If my wife were to die today, I'd be just fine. If my apartment building burnt to the ground I'd also be fine. And my Ark project would go on. While you're all wrapped up in ("a very serious issue", no less) trying to project your totally false logical contradictions onto me. God bess ya, David, but you make absolutely no dents in my armor. Perhaps in you own logical mind you think you do, but that's surely not the truth of the matter. Far from it.
David owns you.
Don't run to your death
User avatar
Cory Duchesne
Posts: 2320
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:35 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by Cory Duchesne »

Armor?

I am a principled warrior at GF - strictly loin cloth.

I imagine you got some soft spots behind that Armor, Bob. My guess is you could dry out a bit, where the sun don't normally shine?
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by David Quinn »

Bob Michael wrote:
David Quinn wrote: Inside you there is an "unextinguishable" fire that needs an external source to sustain it....?

Sorry, but this does not compute. It is like someone boasting that he is a self-made businessman with an large independent income, whereas in reality he is being financially supported by his wife.

There is a glaring contradiction that goes to the heart of your life, a contradiction between your proclamation of unconditional love and the reality that your love is in fact conditional (i.e. dependent on a particular person, your wife, continuing to behave in a certain way).

This is a very serious issue which calls into question your spirituality and the integrity of your life. It's no wonder you try to undermine the role of logic so much.
David, David, David! You just don't seem to get it. If my wife were to die today, I'd be just fine.
Have you told her that? :)

Your sudden boast of independence here flies in the face of all the diatribes you have written about the failings of enlightened people due to their being solitary and single. Yet another contradiction.

Oh, what tangled webs we weave.....

-
Liberty Sea
Posts: 116
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: Life after death

Post by Liberty Sea »

If nobody has done this before, I think it's appropriate for you two to open a new thread in the Crucible section to debate about the role of logic in spiritual aspiration, and settle for once the war between the pro-logic school and anti-logic school. Similar to Yogacara school v.s. Madhyamaka school, we may now have Bob Michael - the self proclaimed one true disciple of J. Krishnamurti v.s. David Quinn - the self proclaimed enlightened logic master.
jufa
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Life after death

Post by jufa »

All which occur in life is life's continuum. All information men have received concerning death are given them as formed theorems of other men speculative imaginations, based on their interpreted analysis of yet other men speculative imaginations. All analysis of death is viewed from microscopic aware which does not even exist when the entire spectrum of life is considered, which is impossible by the human mind.

When even an inch of life's spectrum has been expanded in human comprehension, what will be realized is there's been no death of ideas, or inspirations, or hopes, or fortitude, or dreams, or the visions relied on to get from there to here. That these vibrations are what the body of flesh truly is. There's never been a death of the desire to love ones self, or wives, children, mother, brother, and sisters, and all who hearts touched and received touches reciprocated. Are these attributes of living no longer the rock which heals individual absence from the body by continuous life as a conscious memory? a part of us which continues the seeds of thoughts planted into the earth which had formed and shaped individual bodies, then reclaimed that which belonged to it?

Man knows nothing about death. No one does. Man only know about Life. Men are children of Life which never matures because it is the expansion of infinity. This indestructible life is God in men. It is the kingdom of God within each and every living body as the substance and essence of God's creation regardless of the name applied to it. It is the only life in the known universe. Without this life nothing would exist, not even death. Should any one man, or mass of men accept this truth, they will come to know the true meaning of "mortality must be swallowed up of life," not in life, but of life. When the concept of mortality has been swallowed up and dissolved of life, what other life is there but that which has absorbed and dissolved all that is not of Its creation?

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


http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com
ForbidenRea

Re: Videos and criticisms

Post by ForbidenRea »

Kevin Solway wrote:
Ryan Rudolph wrote:By my calculations – a 50% possibility. Because we have no way of knowing what happens at death, and so there are only two possibilities – continuity or no continuity. It doesn’t get any simpler than that.
By my reckoning, the chance that consciousness survives death is only about 0.000001%, because there's plenty of evidence that our consciousness is dependent on physical brain structures, and the brain dies with the body. And we have no evidence of anything else taking over the functioning of the brain when it dies.
Kevin Solway,

You've miscalculated.
ForbidenRea

Re: Life after death

Post by ForbidenRea »

David Quinn wrote:
Bob Michael wrote:
David Quinn wrote:Logic is like a fire that consumes everything in its path. It is only when everything has been consumed that the stillness is able to emerge. It can't emerge while those fires are still burning.

Of course, most people are too busy trying to put those fires out, their egos desperately trying to save everything from being consumed. You, for example, Bob, use the love of your wife to put those fires out.
There's not a trace of desperation or ego here at all, David. Just an unextinguishable fire of pure Love and Wisdom. And my wonderful wife, Karen, helps keep that fire burning ever so brightly.
Inside you there is an "unextinguishable" fire that needs an external source to sustain it....?

Sorry, but this does not compute. It is like someone boasting that he is a self-made businessman with an large independent income, whereas in reality he is being financially supported by his wife.

There is a glaring contradiction that goes to the heart of your life, a contradiction between your proclamation of unconditional love and the reality that your love is in fact conditional (i.e. dependent on a particular person, your wife, continuing to behave in a certain way).

This is a very serious issue which calls into question your spirituality and the integrity of your life. It's no wonder you try to undermine the role of logic so much.

-
David Quinn,
USSR landed in 1906. What the world has to offer is some sort of anal attractions brought on by a species from the naboo. Trying to booty my lemons.=)
User avatar
mental vagrant
Posts: 416
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: A flick of green to be seen between alone between two giants

Re: Life after death

Post by mental vagrant »

Is bullshit.
unbound
Locked