Thread: Reincarnation

Ok to keep this simple...

¿¿CAN ANYONE HERE PROOF ME THAT REINCANATION IS NOT POSSIBLE???

simple question...

No scientists or academic have been able to proof this to be impossible..

so, you will know when you die..... let me now.

Originally Posted by Ben_

Ok to keep this simple...

¿¿CAN ANYONE HERE PROOF ME THAT REINCANATION IS NOT POSSIBLE???

simple question...

No scientists or academic have been able to proof this to be impossible..

so, you will know when you die..... let me now.
[/b]

lol XD

Funny man.

Can you prove me I am not god? You can't?

When you die... let me know or you agree with my verdict. After all, lets conclude dieing is the only rational way to approach such a question. You go first.

Also, I think that anything metaphysical that interferes with Our physical reality is by the standards of Our reality measurable. What is metaphysical but does not interfere with us in any way, really doesn't matter to any extend. Unless it does, Nothing can be said about it.[/b]

fair enough. i mostly agree...i still strongly suspect that Mind and Brain are not synonomous processes, based upon certain personal experiences. but i can understand where you are coming from, intellectually speaking....it is only because these indescribable experiences of the "Void" (unfiltered Mind) that i feel there is something to consciousness besides brain activity.

however, each science must neccessarily limit itself to certain assumptions in order to discover anything at all. seeing how far those assumptions hold is usually the best and most efficient way to test the merit of a certain perspective before moving on to other ones neccessary to more fully explain a natural process.

a newtonian psychology is a worthy, fascinating project. if it ever fully explains all conscious phenomenon, i'll be the first to "switch sides".
---------
and thanks for humouring my ill-organized posts. i have changed my way of thinking about certain things as a result of our conversation.

Originally Posted by Neruo

. You go first.
[/b]

NO, You go first... I insist...

Originally Posted by wombing

fair enough. i mostly agree...i still strongly suspect that Mind and Brain are not synonomous processes, based upon certain personal experiences. but i can understand where you are coming from, intellectually speaking....it is only because these indescribable experiences of the "Void" (unfiltered Mind) that i feel there is something to consciousness besides brain activity.

however, each science must neccessarily limit itself to certain assumptions in order to discover anything at all. seeing how far those assumptions hold is usually the best and most efficient way to test the merit of a certain perspective before moving on to other ones neccessary to more fully explain a natural process.

a newtonian psychology is a worthy, fascinating project. if it ever fully explains all conscious phenomenon, i'll be the first to "switch sides".[/b]

I totally agree that science most assume certain assumptions. Actually, I think it is all it can really do. That is why absolute truth is impossible to gain, yet one can get very far with assumptions (like: A rock is real, and solid, ect).

Anyhow: You say you have had experiences that felt like feeling a/the 'Void' of somesort, the unfiltered omnipresent mind? Wasn't it just LSD or something?

I do totally get why you believe what you believe. There are some interesting clues. Like A LOT of people that have made genial inventions, or great artistic accomplishment say that they felt like the inspiration just 'came to them'. Indeed 'as if they just let it flow trough them', the brain-as-a-filter-theory.

However, I believe that way of thinking is just a way we are build. We feel as if we get the inspiration for some external source. However, it might just be your subconscious, a part of your brain that is totally unconnected in a way to your conscious mind that it Seems as if you get inspiration and stuff from outside your brain, while it actually is just outside you conscious.

I actually just made up that theory while writing, maybe I had some inspiration from the cosmos too It does sound a reasonable hypotheses, to me at least ^_^

---------
and thanks for humouring my ill-organized posts. i have changed my way of thinking about certain things as a result of our conversation.
[/b]

As in you will no longer make huge posts that are hard to read, or you changed the way you percieve this world, I have given you divine inspiration©?

Anyhow, my posts are maybe even more un-comprehensive. Who cares, its the internets.

Anyhow: You say you have had experiences that felt like feeling a/the 'Void' of somesort, the unfiltered omnipresent mind? Wasn't it just LSD or something? [/b]

*laughs* nope, never done LSD...though, to be truthful, i had taken psilocybin mushrooms before a couple of those experiences (which, like LSD is a tryptamine psychedelic). if those were the only such experiences, i would've simply chalked them up as incredibly bizarre, but simply drug induced, episodes.

but "i've" had another couple such happenstances while stone sober (meditating), and one while lucid dreaming, which is why i increasingly doubt it is just a matter of temporary arrangments of neural pathways and such. tripping, meditating, and dreaming are much different states within the organic brain, yet they each led to seemingly the same Void.

it is as if this "ground state" (or the hokey sounding "Mind" i keep harping on) is a circular room with almost innumerable doors, any of which you can potentially enter by. but as soon as you enter the room, you are everywhere and nowhere within it all at the same time...until suddenly you are outside again and leaving, with no idea how much actual time has passed, though awareness has never been interupted, only ego-consciousness.

so, although the entrance to the state is different each and every time, each "doorway" is a seamless entry point and/or exit point to the exact same room.
---

heh, that almost certainly made no real sense, but i made an attempt...

if you are interested, experiment for yourself.

as you said, science can't really do anything more than make assumptions and work with them. which is all that eastern mysticism is based on. it assumes the Void and invites the curious to verify or debunk it themselves. the same way we can both verify that a rock is hard and real.

so why not give the inner science some of the credence you give to material science? after all, the eastern science of mind had a couple thousand years head start on the western variety...perhaps it has something to offer all curious minds...

just a suggestion...

As in you will no longer make huge posts that are hard to read, or you changed the way you percieve this world, I have given you divine inspiration©? [/b]

i shall forevermore continue to make huge unreadable posts, divine though you may be!!

but i realized that i need to refine how i relate certain ideas and/or experiences to others...

Originally Posted by wombing

intersting stuff
[/b]

Well... interesting stuff... however, I just can't help but think: Don't all those similar experiences flow from you expecting them to happen? Like self-furfulling-prophecy? Don't forget there are also millions of people certain of astrology, auras, their sometimes occurring ability to see into the future, talking to god multiple times, talking to Allah multipe times, ect. People are expecting to see god, the real god talking to them, in their dreams, because they are certain of it.

Do you get why I kind of really doubt your claims?

Also, I actually completely read your last post. Structuring is for Nazi's, and old Greek saying goes.

Originally Posted by Neruo

Well... interesting stuff... however, I just can't help but think: Don't all those similar experiences flow from you expecting them to happen? Like self-furfulling-prophecy? Don't forget there are also millions of people certain of astrology, auras, their sometimes occurring ability to see into the future, talking to god multiple times, talking to Allah multipe times, ect. People are expecting to see god, the real god talking to them, in their dreams, because they are certain of it.

Do you get why I kind of really doubt your claims?

Also, I actually completely read your last post. Structuring is for Nazi's, and old Greek saying goes.
[/b]

of course i get why you are doubtful. you should be...however, i would go so far as to say that the Void can only be experienced when doubt is fully present. which is really the same as saying that doubt must be fully absent, because if one doubts EVERYTHING, they must also doubt the worth of doubt itself.

now, i realize that sounds dangerously like a christian saying you just need to have faith in jesus to be saved, or someone saying you can't see auras because you just aren't "open" to them, but in my mind there is a profound difference.

the examples above are all cases of one directing doubt (which is inseparable from expectation in the end, just as "up" is inseparable from "down") to all possible scenarios except one. for example:

jesus was born of a virgin , healed the sick, was crucified, and rose from the dead to ascend into heaven and sit at the right hand of the father.

now, we both can only laugh at such a claim,and yet, what is our alternative claim? where do we direct our doubt/expectation, and in what proportions?

-----

the human biological brain is a product of time and evolution.

it contains the R-system (pure reaction, almost chemical in nature), the limbic system (emotion, and the beginnings of language and extrasomatic communication), and the neo-cortex (human language and the ability for extended foresight).

but these systems are only useful in navigating the purely sensory universe. our brains expect historical causes to have similar effects in the future.

this is the true basis for all expectation. our human capacity for incredibly subtle expectation is what has allowed our race to survive.

but it is not neccessary for BE-ING or NON-BE-ING.

it seems reasonable to believe that expectation or doubt did not exist before Life existed.

---------

the way i view belief systems is like this.

if someone benefits personally by holding a particular belief, or expectation, it should not be trusted. like the example a christian who believes they will (as an eternal "soul") experience eternal heaven as a result of somehow thinking that christianity is true.

the Void experience is neither pleasant nor unpleasant. it simply Is. and not only that, but it cannot aid one in their temporary life as biological organism navigating an ever-changing world. causality is no more real in terms of the Void than chaos.

which means space-time is no more real in terms of the Void than "the opposite" of space-time.

the Void has no opposite. it holds all possibility (and thus all doubt and expectation). it holds "you" and everything that is "not you".

we can only ignore the Void (and our be-ing AS Void) so long as we indentify with limited, imperfect expectations or doubts. imperfect knowledge.


----

we can only ignore the Void so long as we ignore Death.

if there is one thing all humans seem to agree on, it is Death. and yet, no individual can die and then come back to describe it. they can only experience it.

and what is death? the nullification of our biological brains and our awareness of "inhabiting" a specific position (perspective) within space and time.

it is the moment when we are no longer capable of HOLDING specific beliefs, because we cannot doubt or expect without a functional brain. again, doubt/expectation is nothing more than a biological phenomenon useful for existing as homo sapiens.

DEATH IS THE ULTIMATE REALITY CHECK.

but it is ultimate precisely because one is not longer using eyes, or ears, or tongue, or a sense of bodily position as reference points in their exploration.


all i am trying to say (like many before me) is that it is possible to bypass the physical brain-to ignore its ignorance-and thus experience complete ego-death without dying.

sense of self is no longer present, and yet a moment is still present...a moment of all possibility.

a moment which needs neither time, nor space, nor the biological brain by which you navigate time and space.

----
well, i think that's all for this thread for me.

you doubt that you are already dead in favour of believing that you are alive.

but what is life?

define its meaning...

you cannot. there is no meaning aside from our brains.

meaning: the message that is intended or expressed or signified; "what is the meaning of this sentence"; "the significance of a red traffic light"; "the signification of Chinese characters"; "the import of his announcement was ambiguous"

the idea that is intended; "What is the meaning of this proverb?"

meaning(a): rich in significance or implication; "a meaning look"; "pregnant with meaning"
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn


truth has nothing to do with "right" and "wrong". those are simply words which mean "beneficial expectation" and "unbeneficial expectation".

but the truth benefits no body. least of all you or i.

only illusion benefits you or i.
we are only an illusion.
the Void is all that is real.

we are alive only because we assume that we are alive.

the best western science can come up with is "i think, therefore i am".

we assume a "self" (whatever that is), cause and effect ("therefore"), and being (i am).

but we only do so in order to seek as much pleasure as possible for our "selves".

science is really just a way to assume life as a condition, and then dissect it into component parts which we can play with.

science and technology have the same aim: personal pleasure.


but is anyone ever "really and truly" happy and pleased?
only because they want to be.

only because as long as they are PRE-OCCUPIED with the idea of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" they cannot possibilty doubt the existence of self. only expect that they will get what they are looking for. what they are after.

they cannot possibly real-ize that they have never existed, and never will exist. only pretend they are somewhere in between.


*laughs*

so again, if you are even still reading, i encourage you to attempt a complete reality check. doubt everything, while still expecting something to remain.

and when you no longer believe or remember that "you" exist, the Void shall remain.
it shall not benefit you whatsoever.

likely you shall "return" only to be constantly frustrated at your ability to convey this truth to others.
but it cannot be conveyed, by language or any other means.

it cannot be described, because it has no purpose, or meaning.
it is beyond desire or aversion, expectation and doubt.

it leans towards neither life, nor death.
simply accepts truth.

the truth that there is neither eternal life, or eternal death.
only the Void, of which we are an incomplete part.

it is only when one expects to "one day" learn enough to understand the Void that they trick themselves into THINKING that they are separate.

and yet, we as humans are creatures of learning. or expectation and doubt. meaning is our food.
and we only eat because we fear death.
and we only fear what we do not know.
and we do not know only what we are ignorant of...what we ignore.
and what does every living being ignore more than anything else?
death.
the fact that all their aims and pursuits and desires are empty and meaningless in relation to the whole. only ful-filling and meaningful in relation to their illusory "self".

not realizing that there is no such thing as a real self, as a soul.
because "i" am equally a product of death AND life, simultaneously.

we separate ourselves from other animals because of our capacity for language. for definition. for foresight and the ability to predict the future.

and also because we are aware that we will one day die.
or so we say.

but i know that you have never fully real-ized this fact, just as i do not fully realize it right now either. if i did, i would not be sitting here typing to you, trying to transmitt that which you already are towards you.

meh...the truth needs no defence. it cannot possibly come under attack. that would be like a sword knowing that it is the only such item in existence, and yet fearing that it will cut itself.

there is only one Self- Buddhahood, or the Void- which is beyond the poles of life or death. which knows it has no need for a body, and thus doesn't assume one.

but there are countless selves in existence pretending to be Self incarnate. pretending they are alive now, and will someday die. ignoring the fact that True Self is beyond opposites, beyond causality, beyond perspective, beyond language, and certainly beyond their laughable projection of self.

that is all reincarnation is to me. every time Self forgets itself in order to make believe. to identify with specific possibilities more than others.

of course, maybe the Void is simply the equilibrium of the electrical signals in the brain which cause doubt and expectation. maybe i've simply fluked out and experienced this balance a handful of times.

but then, what actually are "doubt" and "expectation"?
we can never know one without the other.

Yeah, THAT post was an hard-to-read pile of steaming letters.

However, from what I got from it: I get your reasoning, everything we see and do IS an illusion... in a way. Well I don't really have the energy to go by your post line by line and respond, but what I think is the case:

-You think there is no absolute knowledge to be obtained, because we are just humans, we just process stuff from our senses, it can all be fake. I agree.
-You think, at least that is what I think you that, that in death or some other form of lack-of-ego you go into the true, only thing real, neutral 'Void'. I kind of disagree. I think the concept of Nothing and infinity are interesting, because that is basically what the void seems to be about, is interesting. I just rather stick with things I can relatively explain. I do not think absolute knowledge can be obtained, but if you just set boundaries (like all people do in their brain), you can say 'within this reality this chair is real'. If absolute truth/knowledge is impossible, then this relative-absolute knowledge is the truthiest truthful knowledge we can obtain.

Anyhow, really the bottom line is that I agree with a lot of what you think, but once you go and glorify the 'The Void' as being absolute truth you kind of get the 'hippy-bullshit'-label from me

How DO you know for sure your perception of the void isn't just your human, thus weak, mind playing a trick on you? You Can't be absolutely certain of the void, even if it is real.

Anyhow, really the bottom line is that I agree with a lot of what you think, but once you go and glorify the 'The Void' as being absolute truth you kind of get the 'hippy-bullshit'-label from me [/b]

and i am glad

one vague label deserves another.

I do not think absolute knowledge can be obtained, but if you just set boundaries (like all people do in their brain), you can say 'within this reality this chair is real'. If absolute truth/knowledge is impossible, then this relative-absolute knowledge is the truthiest truthful knowledge we can obtain.[/b]

you do not think absolute knowledge can be OBTAINED. grasped, in other words...possessed. posession assumes some THING outside one's being. it ASSUMES one's being is limited TO BEGIN WITH.

but the void is pure relation and possibility and union of opposites (including self and other, awareness and thing).

you can never see the truth, or hold it, or "feel" it emotionally, or comprehend it by rational science. because science only amplifies and refines our limited senses.

as in, we have eyes as a result of evolution, and so we can enhance our physical vision with telescopes and microscopes...but we can never do anything more than SEE things WITH VISION.

and to take this further, we can perceive many things with our (often enhanced and amplified) senses, but in the end it is our ability to reason and use logic that unifies all these perceptions into "our" being.

and you can only define and limit your being via words. never explore the boundaries and limitations of BE-ING IT-SELF.

How DO you know for sure your perception of the void isn't just your human, thus weak, mind playing a trick on you? You Can't be absolutely certain of the void, even if it is real.[/b]

i don't. because i have never PERCEIVED the void, only BEEN it. just as i am actually the void now, but choose to ignore that...why, because the Void is GOOD FOR NOTHING. it simply is, whether we want it to be or not. it cannot give me a blowjob or explain how weather works or play me a song. and so, as a human being who would rather be subjectively alive than objectively "dead" (no longer having or seeming to have or expecting to have life) i choose to pretend i am alive.

perception is inseparably tied in with knowledge (about some thing) and interpetation and limitation and perspective.

but there can be BE-ING without perception.

a rock is as neccessary as you or i in the grand scope of things. it has no more, nor no less awareness than you or i. because ALL RELATION REQUIRES AWARENESS.


*laughs* i'll stop now, so that you might actually read the whole post.

in the end, i am more sure of the Void than all else, because it IS only a trick of my weak human mind so long as i think it is "my" void. so long as i think i grasp it or UNDER-stand it (like a turtle with the universe on its back) BETTER THAN ANYONE/THING else.

you think we are simply things with limits. and so that is what you experience.

but you cannot prove it with your human mind which is essentially as weak as my own.

-------

PLEASE READ THIS QUESTION AND PONDER IT...

can the Absolute It-Self EVER BE Absolutely certain that It Is Real?

real in the sense of:

being or occurring in fact or actuality; having verified existence; not illusory; "real objects"; "real people; not ghosts"; "a film based on real life"; "a real illness"; "real humility"; "Life is real! Life is earnest!"- Longfellow

use your logic and you will easily see that of course it can't. only people are certain of anything. and the absolute isn't a person.

or if it is, it must be a terribly lonely and confused and suicidal and tortured being. only able to eternally suspect that there is nothing outside itself.

is it possible that the absolute is dissatisfied with itself?

satisfy: fulfil the requirements or expectations of
make happy or satisfied
meet: fill or meet a want or need
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

is anything absolutely neccessary? if so, it must be the absolute it-self.
but what purpose can the absolute (neccessarily synonymous with "the whole" in this discussion). what "truth" can it apprehend or grasp outside itself?

NO THING, of course.

it simply is, whether it wants to be or not.

how are we any different?

we simply are, whether we want to be or not.

and so we attempt to live in a way which makes us as happy as possible

---
i said earlier that our conversation has changed the way i view the world.

i meant it in this sense.

everything is without purpose.

the absolute (reality) can never logically have CHOSEN to come into being, as only beings can make choices. it can simply have always been. that is the whole concept of infinity/eternity.

do you agree?

if so, why do you continue living, when it is pointless in the end?

well, be-CAUSE IT is better than NO-THING.

for now anyways.

just like a rock is better than no-thing...for now.

-----
so i realized that it doesn't matter if anyone else experiences the Void exactly as i do, or even whether the Void is "the same" for everybody that experiences it...the whole point is that no ONE can experience the Void without BEING the absolute.

and we are all the absolute anyways, whether we want to be or not.

you believe as a result of evolutionary science that we have no free will, and are simply the products of certain "scientific laws".

well, i have arrived at this conclusion as a result of exploring my subconscious until it seemingly melted into All That Is.

nothing separates us but our wording. thinking that we can explain IT better than anyone else.

which is absurd, because all that we can perceive or relate to is as much IT as we ourselves are.


All That Is is synonymous with the Void.
because all that is isn't.
====
but you can't describe the void, because description is a product of language, and language is the imperfect product of our weak minds (brains), just like our eyes or ears. and though we enhance it, eventually it will reach its limits.

one can't SEE every THING, because a THING (eye) must be the instrument of sight, and it can never SEE it-SELF (its THING).

one can't HEAR every sound (vibration), because a THING (ear) must be the instrument of hearing, and it can never HEAR the sound of it-SELF (its THING)

one can't ever KNOW every piece of knowledge, because a THING (knower/sentient being) must be the instrument of knowing, and it can never KNOW the BEING of its BEING.
--------
the whole must neccessarily be one, and neccessarily be composed of separate parts.

or at least, that is the only way one (human) can logically think.

there is no such thing as A soul, because there is only THE soul.
and yet that soul must neccessarily be composed of little souls, or it could not know what a soul is.

Soul: the immaterial part of a person; the actuating cause of an individual life
the human embodiment of something

the actuating cause of your individual being is supposedly "nothing more" than scientific law. which can only be concerned with ever changing things.

which seems to say that CHANGE is the essential scientific law...the closest to an absolute that we can approach.

but you cannot extract change as something purely material (or at all material).
and you cannot assume the material is all there is, or YOU could not exist as an ever-changing, souless ape-being.

if the Absolute was purely form, it would be dead.
and if it was purely change, it could not be real.

so, logically, it must be a mixture of the two.
-------
but you can never describe or grasp change as a purely metaphysical concept. anymore than you can grasp change as a purely physical concept.

for if there were one unchanging law governing change, it could only be change itself.

just like there can be no language which consists of a single word.

except the absolute.

and what is the absolute?

it is what it is.

or, as some biblical character quoted god: "I Am what I Am".

-------
*laughs* i fear i've gone too far and rambled yet again, so you probably aren't even reading this.

but, oh well, if nothing else, i''ll take that a sign that we understand each other.

because the absolute can never be proven...or reality for that matter.

only lived. because the absolute can only be what it is. nothing more, and nothing less.

and thus, your words making fun of the Void as hippy bullshit are as neccessary as my rambling trying to explain that the Void cannot be explained. they allow the other to be.

so i guess we are both just playing with words, and should try to make that play as fun and satisfying as possible. strive to make our words mirror the fluid, ever-changing nature of existence, instead of concrete ideas and theories which are only useful as the tools by which we fashion and accept our illusions of selfhood.
----

you wanna have sex? haha...