Life after Death - Why Bother?

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by ardy »

Why are we so ego centric that we put up all sorts of mumbo jumbo to convince ourselves that we will continue at varying levels after our death?

Many main stream religions offer the pearl of a wonderful paradise [providing you do what you are told]. Then there is the Buddhist re-incarnation stating that if you are amazingly competent and achieve Nirvana then you can die, if not you come back as something else. This of course then brings on a stream of weirdo's who, if women, were re-incarnated from Cleopatra, she has been very busy since she killed herself, notice it is never Molly the scullery maid. If its men then someone equally elevated and not the smelly thief of women's knickers from the 1800's.

My brother died a few years ago for a few minutes in a hospital following a stroke, although he is religious he claims that he experienced NOTHING! No white light saying 'go back it is not your time' or some other experience.

As we don't know what happens after death why is our default thinking NOT NOTHING? Until someone comes back and states this is what it is like why would we make up stories that tie us in knots and cause wars?

If all we want is to be able to accept the meaningless of life then get someone to sing to you as you die it should work as well as anything else. If it to subdue fear then we need to be braver and more accepting of our animal nature and the state of the planet where NOTHING continues all is washed away and new life forms.

Personally I love the idea of birth, growth, old age and death. It has a ring of wholesomeness and completeness that the religions and story 'maker uppers' can only dream of.
User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by Cahoot »

Where are we going, where are we from. Did you know that like a tree, most of your body comes from the air?

And since people invariably resemble one or both of their seed parents, you are apparently derived from the air according to a design. How wise and effortless this designer, yes?

Jonathan Drori: What we think we know
http://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_drori ... _know.html

"Oh bother."
- Pooh bear.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by ardy »

Cahoot wrote:Where are we going, where are we from. Did you know that like a tree, most of your body comes from the air?

And since people invariably resemble one or both of their seed parents, you are apparently derived from the air according to a design. How wise and effortless this designer, yes?

Jonathan Drori: What we think we know
http://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_drori ... _know.html

"Oh bother."
- Pooh bear.
Hi Cahoot - If there is a design I fail to see it. I agree about the unarguable fact that we are built of air, water and some carbon, they live on after 'we' are gone. But to me the universe is unknowable from where we are now. I will just wander through here, happy to be here and happy to die here.
User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by Cahoot »

The design is why you look like a human, and not a cow.

The cow follows the cow design, and because the design is repeatable, like a legitimate scientific experiment, it is not an accident.

Transmutation by design.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by ardy »

Cahoot wrote:The design is why you look like a human, and not a cow.

The cow follows the cow design, and because the design is repeatable, like a legitimate scientific experiment, it is not an accident.

Transmutation by design.
In which case we have nothing to argue about - damn it! I thought you were talking about a grand designer.
User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by Cahoot »

A design without designer? Amidst designs of humans, cows and trees being replicated out of thin air, a designer undetected due to the limited perceptions of the annamaya kosha doesn’t seem all that farfetched, does it?
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by ardy »

Cahoot wrote:A design without designer? Amidst designs of humans, cows and trees being replicated out of thin air, a designer undetected due to the limited perceptions of the annamaya kosha doesn’t seem all that farfetched, does it?
If I knew what 'annamaya kosha' was I might be able to agree or disagree. Will google it and see what [maya] horror stories unfold!

Wiki - This is the sheath of the physical self, named from the fact that it is nourished by food. Living through this layer man identifies himself with a mass of skin, flesh, fat, bones, and filth, while the man of discrimination knows his own self, the only reality that there is, as distinct from the body.

Is it too much to accept that there is no designer, either detectable ie religion, or undetectable ie what you are writing about? Why can't life and the universe just be why do we need a constructed theory about it?

The reality of it is so far above what we know, that to all intents and purposes it is unknowable. It is in our nature to understand our existence, but from this, as from many other points come our discriminations.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

ardy wrote:My brother died a few years ago for a few minutes in a hospital following a stroke, although he is religious he claims that he experienced NOTHING! No white light saying 'go back it is not your time' or some other experience.
Aren't you assuming everyone would have complete memories of the experience or that there would be some cosmic rule that everyone would have similar, objective recall if there was anything "there" at all?
As we don't know what happens after death why is our default thinking NOT NOTHING? Until someone comes back and states this is what it is like why would we make up stories that tie us in knots and cause wars?
Our morals and values are certainly tied up to some shared metaphysical framework, regardless if you personally believe the specifics or not. As you said: "ego centric". Someone's larger narrative and linguistic symbols are tied to something beyond our tiny selves, no matter if you take that in some sociological, anthropological or mystical sense. As it happens, our personal beliefs might not be that relevant in that respect.
Personally I love the idea of birth, growth, old age and death. It has a ring of wholesomeness and completeness that the religions and story 'maker uppers' can only dream of.
Interestingly enough most of your being, shared values, imagery, language and history appears to be woven tightly with those religions and story makers. What you can do of course is just ignore that and be very busy with your own beautiful sphere which indeed is full of personal birth and death. But most of what you are is not born in that sphere and will not leave either after your death.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by ardy »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote: But most of what you are is not born in that sphere and will not leave either after your death.
Diebert - aren't you making an assumption based on your own mental processes? The reality of who I or you are is beyond you and I. This statement is the basis of just another religion. If you are just moving the goal posts where does that take you?
windhawk
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 4:47 am
Location: Michigan

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by windhawk »

Gain knowledge, and learn to love your fellow man.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by Pam Seeback »

Ardy: Why are we so ego centric that we put up all sorts of mumbo jumbo to convince ourselves that we will continue at varying levels after our death?
Imagining levels of consciousness keeps us from reasoning/causing what is to be wisely effected right here, right now, in other words, the reality of the moment. It is the projection of judgment into some future time as applied by some external force or entity. Having said this, one cannot deny evolution and degrees of wisdom (awareness of cause and effect) or the need to imagine levels of earth and heaven in order to cope with the first stages of seeking for truth in the dark of not knowing.
My brother died a few years ago for a few minutes in a hospital following a stroke, although he is religious he claims that he experienced NOTHING! No white light saying 'go back it is not your time' or some other experience.
Whatever he experienced it effected him. Which means “dead” or not, he was conscious of something, even if it was perceived as nothing. Who knows how his consciousness would have been effected if he hadn't “returned” to his body (even though he has no memory of being told to do so.)
As we don't know what happens after death why is our default thinking NOT NOTHING? Until someone comes back and states this is what it is like why would we make up stories that tie us in knots and cause wars?

If all we want is to be able to accept the meaningless of life then get someone to sing to you as you die it should work as well as anything else. If it to subdue fear then we need to be braver and more accepting of our animal nature and the state of the planet where NOTHING continues all is washed away and new life forms.
Wisdom of the infinite (the eternal existence of finite things) tells us that existence of nothing is impossible. Existence is, period. As long as consciousness knows this, it can stop imagining an existence and be conscious of the existence of now.
Personally I love the idea of birth, growth, old age and death. It has a ring of wholesomeness and completeness that the religions and story 'maker uppers' can only dream of.
Nothing happens in a vacuum, all things are caused into effect, even your consciousness of birth, growth, old age and death. And should your consciousness of birth, growth, old age and death cease to exist, causality itself continues to be.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

ardy wrote:As we don't know what happens after death why is our default thinking NOT NOTHING?

You do realize this very line can be turned back against your argument? And that when you repeat the opposite it actually makes more sense?

"I'm experiencing right now, I don't know what happens after 'death', why on earth would I assume 'being' ends when all I've ever known is existence?"

Same thing, turned around.

Your imagination of a 'nothing' is much less reasonable... since it is imagined... while the reality of our being is very real and we are experiencing it right now, especially taking into account that 'being' is not dependent on the body. (Which is 'not me', just an appearance)
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by ardy »

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:
ardy wrote:As we don't know what happens after death why is our default thinking NOT NOTHING?

You do realize this very line can be turned back against your argument? And that when you repeat the opposite it actually makes more sense?

"I'm experiencing right now, I don't know what happens after 'death', why on earth would I assume 'being' ends when all I've ever known is existence?"

Same thing, turned around.

Your imagination of a 'nothing' is much less reasonable... since it is imagined... while the reality of our being is very real and we are experiencing it right now, especially taking into account that 'being' is not dependent on the body. (Which is 'not me', just an appearance)
Seeker - Interesting and maybe the subject of another thread especially taking into account your statement that 'being is not dependent on the body. (Which is 'not me', just an appearance)' brings up the discussion how do we know that our being is NOT dependent on our body? We have no proof of either life after death or our being not dependent on our body. I prefer the NULL theory, dropping the arrogant theory idea that there is anything that survives our death.
User avatar
Russell Parr
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 10:44 am

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by Russell Parr »

Ultimately, speculating what happens to us after we die is as pointless as wondering if you might get hit by a bus or a comet tomorrow, or if we exist in a computer simulation. We simply don't know.

From where we sit, the only evidence that we have on what happens to 'us' (i.e., consciousness) after we die is based on empirical history. Assuming that we all are experiencing human bodies, my guess is that in death, Reality looks a lot like it did before we were born.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

Russell wrote:my guess is that in death, Reality looks a lot like it did before we were born.

I agree though, there is no memory, so that would just as easily be the same as after "birth".
ardy wrote:Seeker - Interesting and maybe the subject of another thread especially taking into account your statement that 'being is not dependent on the body. (Which is 'not me', just an appearance)' brings up the discussion how do we know that our being is NOT dependent on our body? We have no proof of either life after death or our being not dependent on our body. I prefer the NULL theory, dropping the arrogant theory idea that there is anything that survives our death.
Perfect, you just said it.
ardy wrote: that there is anything that survives our death.
There is absolutely no self hood or personal quality that survives our death. Exactly the point. There never was anything, not even right now. Nothing to lose, no person to perish, beginning-less and endless.
ardy wrote: brings up the discussion how do we know that our being is NOT dependent on our body?
Appearances arise and distinctions, quality or meaning is placed upon them, reality doesn't hold that meaning on it's own.

The distinctions don't hold up ultimately, they aren't inherent in reality, you create the idea "I was born" but it's meaningless. An appearance is not you, or more accurately, particular appearances (which of course are all impermanent) are definitely not you.

A refutation of that meaningless distinction or imagination does not require scientific evidence, it simply points out delusions that arise from that general sense of an ego.

To say "there is the experience of existence/being" is not an assumption or an imagined idea, it ends there and does need to go further.

To say "This experience of existence/being is temporary" is an assumption, and so far the evidence for that assumption is founded upon the delusion of 'body as self'.
User avatar
Russell Parr
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 10:44 am

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by Russell Parr »

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:To say "there is the experience of existence/being" is not an assumption or an imagined idea, it ends there and does need to go further.

To say "This experience of existence/being is temporary" is an assumption, and so far the evidence for that assumption is founded upon the delusion of 'body as self'.
Furthermore, it is equally delusional to assume to know for certain that the experience of being is not dependent on the body.

In all practicality, I see no reason to believe that the sense of self (being, consciousness, whatever you want to call it) doesn't originate from the body.. for (what should be) obvious reasons. To compare, we can't know with 100% certainty that computers run on electricity.. it could be some uber elaborate trick someone is playing on us. But for the sake of practicality, we assume that our computers would die if we unplug the power cord or pull the battery.

Actually, a better way to put it my computer analogy: we don't assume that the software is still active on a powerless computer, or that Windows goes to OS Heaven or the Infinite OS Realm after the CPU shorts out.

But you could bet that people would believe in such a thing if it felt good to do so.
Last edited by Russell Parr on Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

The functioning of a computer, or other household items we observe, has zero relevancy to consciousness/existence. You're applying conventional thinking to ultimate reality, it doesn't hold up.
Russell wrote:it is equally delusional to assume to know for certain that the experience of being is not dependent on the body.
It was explained clearly why this is not an assumption.

To provide the theory is the assumption. To refute it is only to point out that there is no ego-substance or self bound up in form, which is a truth revealed through recognition of meaninglessness, it shows the theory to be caused by a lack of understanding, an error in thinking/perception.

If you want to have a long discussion about meaning-making, or imputing self/other/environment, Dennis is never far.
User avatar
Russell Parr
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 10:44 am

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by Russell Parr »

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:The functioning of a computer, or other household items we observe, has zero relevancy to consciousness/existence. You're applying conventional thinking to ultimate reality, it doesn't hold up.
Experience of being has just as much to do with ultimate reality as our observance of household items.
To provide the theory is the assumption. To refute it is only to point out that there is no ego-substance or self bound up in form, which is a truth revealed through recognition of meaninglessness, it shows the theory to be caused by a lack of understanding, an error in thinking/perception.
I make no theory (edit: actually, the body as self thing is indeed a theory. I mean to get beyond that point).

I'm simply pointing out that to assume whether something is or isn't, yes "isn't" included, is in fact a theory. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

To say that the body carries the experience of self is a theory.

To say that the body does not carry the experience of self is equally a theory.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

That's actually incorrect.

To point out meaninglessness is not a theory, it is an inarguable truth.

Pointing out the lack of inherent existence of all the things you mentioned is not a theory, yet at the same time it makes the theory that body carries the experience of self completely void, empty of any meaning.

'Some believe in existence;
others believe nothing exists.
Uncommon is the one who believes nothing
and is never confused.'

Without belief/delusion there is 'nothing to get', no theory, only reality.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by Pam Seeback »

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:That's actually incorrect.

To point out meaninglessness is not a theory, it is an inarguable truth.

Pointing out the lack of inherent existence of all the things you mentioned is not a theory, yet at the same time it makes the theory that body carries the experience of self completely void, empty of any meaning.

'Some believe in existence;
others believe nothing exists.
Uncommon is the one who believes nothing
and is never confused.'

Without belief/delusion there is 'nothing to get', no theory, only reality.
Belief stands in the way of getting the nature of reality - the causality.
User avatar
Russell Parr
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 10:44 am

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by Russell Parr »

Those are good points John, but what I'm wondering is if you've really applied 'meaninglessness' to statements like these:
SeekerOfWisdom wrote:... while the reality of our being is very real and we are experiencing it right now, especially taking into account that 'being' is not dependent on the body.
To say "This experience of existence/being is temporary" is an assumption, and so far the evidence for that assumption is founded upon the delusion of 'body as self'.
It seems you confirm over and over an adherence to the theory that the experience of self is absolutely not dependent on the body. Have you placed 'being' on a pedestal above all other things in reality? Have you recognized 'being' as just another thing within Reality or do you equate it to Reality itself?

All we can know of the self is that we experience it. Ultimately, we are in no place to say whether it does or doesn't depend on the body.

In short, it seems to me that you still believe in an 'inherent self'.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Being is a priori to language.

What does language do?
weaving understandings, thinkings, formulas, scripts for the possibility of a 'bullet-proof' shining forth.

belonging to language?
for the sake of?

pep talks?
tips?
pointers?
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by ardy »

Russell wrote:Ultimately, speculating what happens to us after we die is as pointless as wondering if you might get hit by a bus or a comet tomorrow, or if we exist in a computer simulation. We simply don't know.

From where we sit, the only evidence that we have on what happens to 'us' (i.e., consciousness) after we die is based on empirical history. Assuming that we all are experiencing human bodies, my guess is that in death, Reality looks a lot like it did before we were born.
Yes Russell, reality exists just as it always has done but almost certainly not with you, or any shade, essence, electricity, ghost, reincarnated body etc etc of you.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by ardy »

Seeker wrote
you create the idea "I was born" but it's meaningless. An appearance is not you, or more accurately, particular appearances (which of course are all impermanent) are definitely not you.
OK let me stamp on your foot and see if your appearance is definitely not you! It is too easy to get caught up in all these ideas which really take you nowhere. Until I experience something different, I will try to eat when I'm hungry and sleep when I'm tired - frankly I find doing this almost too hard. To sit and contemplate reality and a re-incarnation, as Buddha stated that he was the umpteenth Buddha and the previous one was Fred Blogs is a form of delusion that all humans can be subject to.

The only way life after death means anything to me is in terms of my water and carbon that I leave in the ground.
User avatar
Fox
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 9:02 pm

Re: Life after Death - Why Bother?

Post by Fox »

ardy wrote:
Cahoot wrote:The design is why you look like a human, and not a cow.

The cow follows the cow design, and because the design is repeatable, like a legitimate scientific experiment, it is not an accident.

Transmutation by design.
In which case we have nothing to argue about - damn it! I thought you were talking about a grand designer.
Ardy,

On, a grander scale...Premise. Like, the twittle of your feet' when you are born. Birth is deception by design. Because, our alter-egos/places of contact/visions of truth sum a whole-greater death by design. If, you die there; you stay there. That, is not all entire true in the sense-of we own a soul.

The Soul which Jesus the Father, Son, & Holy Spirit/ consider your counter deity is a place. A place of comfort....

I find comfort in Ardy's words...
Locked