Discussions
Why Does Death Exist?
Posted by VikramMadan • 1/06/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: death, emotional pain, masochism, Mysticism, pain, Princess Diana, sadism, sadomasochism, Spirituality, suffering
My point of view is that decay, disease and death exist due to the hostile nature of human desires.
This of course is an argument from within the mystical framework.
The enlightened reader is well aware that biology is just ONE of the frameworks, not THE ultimate framework for discovering the mysteries of life and death.
This blog entry discusses the connection between emotional pain and death.
Princess Diana, Emotional Pain, Death
User Comments
-
The mystical framework?
Really.
Death is completely unimportant as far as spirituality is concerned, as is the nature of the death. Physical suffering is not within the realm of the spirit, nor is time.
Time is a purely physical metric in place for physical manifestation to be orderly and understandable, but completely without need to the mystical.
This holds true in all things, including death, decay, pain, etc. -
HYPERLINK TO MY BLOG ENTRY ON DEATH, PRINCESS DIANA, EMOTIONAL PAIN:
vikram-madan.blogspot.com/2007/10/death-not-ends-it.html-
CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL! -
sorry about the caps lock
-
-
I think decay and disease are preventable, but death isn't.
Death is natural. We only fear it because what lies after is unknown.-
No amount of philosophy will change the inevitable: death to our mortal flesh. Though the outer body decays, our inner spirit can be renewed by the one who gives eternal life. The question is: who wants eternal life? -
We don't know. There are a lot of new advances being made in the area of health and medicine. Who knows? Maybe they could eventually delay death forever.
-
-
Joepro.....we plus our physical bodies are a part of the mystical framework. Part of life.
It is impossible for any 'spirituality' or 'mysticism' to be meaningful if it ignores the existence of death. Death is a topic that is extemely important to all humans, at some point in their life, whenever that point comes.
If you read about the Buddha, his entire 'spiritual journey' began when he saw death happen. -
Can you imagine the poverty, disease and famine if no body ever died?
It's called built in population control. -
scholarpreneur.....dont old age, decay and disease precede death in most cases? In general, the cause of death is decay and disease.
So I doubt it is correct to seperate decay, disease and death the way you just did. -
Death comes as a result of one of two things (one is natural, the other is destruction): Competition and viruses.
On a cellular level, cells only die when they either cannot get the food they need to function or a virus destroys them. When you cut someone's throat, the blood cannot carry the oxygen to the brain and the cells die. That is all that death is.
No spirituality needed. -
voodooKobra....M. Scott Peck, reknowned Psychiatrist who's theories are taught at some of the best universities in the world, said that science has helped us build so much, yet it cannot understand the NON-ANATOMICAL differences between men and women.....his point being....spirituality is indeed needed.
Werner Heisenberg, one of the fathers of Quantum Physics, endorsed a book on the parallels between Physics and Ancient Mysticism, a book named 'The Tao Of Physics'. It is a book that takes mysticism very very seriously.
Heisenberg read every page of this book, and gave suggestions, BEFORE it was published.
SO M. Scott Peck and Werner Heisenberg feel that spirituality and mysticism are very very necessary. Makes one think, doesnt it?-
We don't really NEED spirituality; collectively.
-
You need to define what 'NEED' you are talking about. Maslow's heirarchy defines many types of needs in a human. The need to discover the secrets of life/death is ONE type of need. There's many types of needs.
Once 'lower needs' like food, water, sex, safety' etc. are satisfied, the person's needs inevitably move towards wanting to understand his existence.
This is exactly what the Buddha also said. Although indirectly.
This changing nature of 'needs' applies to all individuals; if it applies to the individual, it will and does spill over into the collective level.
-
-
I think that death is preventable. just not at the moment lmao
All jokes aside. Forget the spirit world because majority is not heavenbound.
" Only the meek shall inherit the Earth" When will that happen?
"There will be a new Heaven and a new Earth" What about this?
We all have diffrent beliefs about the nature of death and what happens after, and even why death is with us at all.
Christians even have diffrent views depending on what Sect and Dogma.
Some believe that your spirit is either in Heaven or in Hell or Purgatory
Some believe in the Resurection.... Some believe in a new earthly paradise.
Death I believe is with humanity as a lesson. A lesson humanity messed up when the human body was perfect. .. just my opinion.-
The meek only inherit the earth because they get up so damned early they can change the will without anyone knowing it.
-
-
What has a beginning has an ending. Even if we could prevent physical death, entropy will eventually win out, and the Universe will cease to exist as we know it.-
Hi Unfettered,... M. Scott Peck, a shrink, has an interesting answer to what you are talking about here.....in his book 'The Road Less Travelled', he says that the 'pull of grace' is slowly defeating entropy. M. Scott Peck is taken very seriously by millions....his theories are taught at some of the best universities in the world.
-
You might check out the fictional works of Spider Robinson, who said: Shared pain is lessened; shared joy is increased; thus do we refute entropy.
-
Reminds me of yet another quote by M. Scott Peck....'The Kingdom of God lies not IN you, but AMONGST you'....said this while analysing the Bible. He was, of course, talking about the community spirit, like Spider Robinson.
-
Guess this Scott Peck did not read the gospel of Thomas, who reported that the kingdom of God is within you AND all around you. Same, same. Alpha Omega Alpha. When you can hold it all, life is eternal. -
Perhaps Scott Peck was trying to destroy the 'God Complex' that many people develop; I guess he is trying to promote the community spirit, saying that the community is more important than the individual. A good thing to do, in the age of selfishness.
-
The seperation more important than the oneness. An interesting viewpoint that will certainly effect how we live and how we die. I think that universal and relative truth are equally important to our experience. But that's me.
-
-
You know when you're deep asleep and don't remember dreaming about anything..add a 'not waking up' factor..
There's death for you..
-
my answer to this sounds funny!
there is death because there is a life!
as theres is a light and darkness!
but why we have to live if we are only going to die?-
Why do we have to eat, if it's going out back anyway
It's called a necessarity for evolution/life..
-
-
To justify life. Without death we would not understand life.
Now, if a tree falls and theres no one to hear it does it make a sound?-
Some of the kinetic energy will be diverged as a sonic ripple; so yes, there is sound.
-
-
I always thought it was a law of motion
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. -
All Good Things Must End.
What Goes UP, Must Come Down.-
except for age
-
-
So the "GOTH" crowd will have something to do-
lol! I love that answer.
-
-
You could argue that death exists because life exists. You need the polar opposite of a thing in order to validate its existence. -
Death exists to stop us going completely insane. The idea of putting up with the crap that life can throw at us for more than a century doesn't appeal to me in the slightest. Some of my friends didnt even want to see the next sunrise and made sure they didn't. -
no offence but this topic is rather invalid none of the bloggers on here eg the public cna answer that death exists because they still alive and only a secret group probably could. -
Simply because there is an end to everything. I don't want to see how my grandchild will look like when he get old! LOL -
death is there to remind is to live ...
i paraphrased/retold an explanation of death based on several stories from southwestern american indian beliefs. if you're curious, you can read that post
www.coyotethunder.com/RedMonkey/archives/2005/07/for_diane.html -
If we didn't have death we'd run out of room.-
lol ... details, details.
if we didn't have death maybe we'd have spread to other planets faster???
-
-
Death is a door, just as birth is.
-
"When the doors of perception are cleansed, everything will appear to man as it is...infinite"...William Blake.
-
-
for me death is like closing the light forever. but in a more pragmatic way we all die one day or another because if we were all eternal we would have a serious overpopulation issue here on earth! -
We live in an entropic universe. Physical death is not only natural, it's expected. Else, we are eternal, uninhibited by the laws of physics. -
again the public can't prove what death is because they haven't experience. science is made from us humans and we can't believe it no matter if they say its proven
-
OK, James, if we can't prove that death exists, do you mind telling me what we've been burying in graveyards all these hundreds of years?
-
-
-
Death was invented by the bullet factories. -
lol that isn't death that is body of that persons outer layer
-
That is the body ... DYING. It's the only death we know of. Care to recant?
-
-
exactly fish you talkingh about when the body dies and the death that the normal public only know however no1 is certian till we die so i guess we never know
-
Dude, your body is going to die. That is death. It is the only death we're talking about. See, that's why they refer to the various philosophical and spiritual states that may or may not occur "after death" as AFTER DEATH.
See, read the topic again:
"My point of view is that decay, disease and death exist due to the hostile nature of human desires.
This of course is an argument from within the mystical framework."
There isn't a question as to whether or not there is such a thing as death.
-
-
Ah, for the truly spiritual there IS no death.-
Not needing "final arrangements" then, are you?
-
Pine box, baby. YEAH!
-
Are you saying you do not fear dissolution of your form? I have not met anybody who has overcome the fear of death.
-
Overcome the fear of death? I guess there were many soldiers in the wars that had to overcome it? Did they die? You may say so, but there is no death.
JamesV is right. No one knows even what death is. The reference to a body being buried is no explanation. If you are mind, the body is irrelevant.
I know of someone who died innumerable times. He still teaches A Course In Miracles. He does not show any fear of death. He died, he says. So what would he have to fear? -
What you are fearing is PAIN. Death is not the same. Someone dead feels nothing.
My fear would not be for me, but for those left behind. After all, grief is only for the living.
-
-
This discussion has become quite interesting....
Let's add some more spice to the discussion....
Bono of U2 sings, in 'Batman Forever'.....'Hold Me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me, Kill Me'.
He is talking about the deepest desire in every human being. The desire to be killed. (Its not limited only to Goths!!, it is a universal desire, applies equally to all men and women.)
The desire to (kill and) be killed is a subconscious desire, people in general are not in touch with their subconscious desires, they do not know that such desires run around in their subconsious.
Sigmund Freud said that every human had a life and death instinct. The life instinct is called "eros" while the death instinct is called "thanatos".
Any comments? (I am sure this entry of mine will disturb many readers, but ah, no discussion on death can go on without someone or another getting upset! lol.)-
Freud is a classic, isn't he. Visiting his works is like visiting an old Roman bath. Nice to visit old theories and honor a pioneer.
But other sciences have gone beyond his theories. Neuro-psychology, cognitive psychology, behavioural science, etc, have acquired more and deeper understanding of the human mind.
With this, I will remark that Freud left out some insights (I have never understood why) and in other cases deliberately .. never mind, better unsaid in a thread.
What your comment does not address - because its anchored to Freud - is Altruism. What humans do for others often at a cost to themselves, all to benefit, protect, nourish, or preserve life. Something to ponder and comment on. -
Sigmund Freud had a serious oral fixation issue so I'm not sure I really trust his judgment on much of anything.
I believe that deep down we are all equally fascinated and afraid of death. Hopefully it is what keeps our minds on living life to the fullest and being good to one another. -
lol offendedblogger...hate to say this, but most males have 'serious oral fixation issues', so let's not haul poor Sigmund Freud down for that!
I wouldn't be surpised if you got biased against the poor guy after reading his comments on women...
"The great question that has never been answered, and which I have not yet been able to answer, despite my thirty years of research into the feminine soul, is "What does a woman want?" --- Sigmund Freud.
lol.
And yes, I agree with what you say....Death is going to come anyway, so why not embrace, to the fullest, what we have for the time being.
PS: In case any women on this discussion-list feel like giving me a hug...most welcome!!! I am here...for the time being! :P -
Aliaskhorn...I dont believe humans are altruistic....the stark realities of human behaviour point to the contrary.
Humans spend 1000 times more on war than on anything selfless. The contrast between the rich and the poor is startling, even WITHIN the SAME society, the SAME city.
The technology that civilians get their hands on is totally C-grade compared to military technology.
There is no place in this world that is free of rape, murder, guns.
George Michael sings....'charity is coat you wear, twice a year'. Charity, altruism...it is all show.
These are my points of view, based on my observation of how real people conduct themselves.
There is a huge difference between the things people say, the things they claim they have done, and the things they actually DO.
Isolated fragments in a hostile world that they themselves made hostile.
Once again: My points of view. -
Posted this in the wrong thread, sorry!!
For AliasinKhorn:
For example...I just got back from a lunch organised by someone...he spent a mindboggling amount on it.....just the alcohol there must've cost a fortune...but his company workers recently sued him for suppressing their bonuses which come to a meager amount, compared to what he must have spent on just this ONE lunch party!
(I just drank a lot of his alcohol, still I'm bitching about him! :P)
Reminds me of a certain country head, please dont ask me WHICH country lol....he spent about U.S. $15 million on a political dinner....but coughed up a tiny U.S. $2 million for earthquake relief victims in a certain remote part of the world... -
Sorry about the bad joke, in the 3rd post above this one!
-
-
LOL, lots of people are not afraid to die, it's like having to show up to work on a Monday. Your gonna die like it or not. If you take the time to look someone in the eyes that is dead, you'll see that dead is dead. Where we go when we die is up to us while we are alive and still have a belief, where we go after death when we are dead, well that is a whole other sense that we won't know about till death comes a knocking. And, I mean death, not death and back again. That is old news, by too many people who consider death a heart stopping, or a flat line. Death is where there is no return and you are there 100%. Don't think anyone can say that they have been dead to talk about it. Spending our lives thriving towards death only takes away time from living. We should spend more time wondering, How will I enjoy my life.
-
For example...I just got back from a lunch organised by someone...he spent a mindboggling amount on it.....just the alcohol there must've cost a fortune...but his company workers recently sued him for suppressing their bonuses which come to a meager amount, compared to what he must have spent on just this ONE lunch party!
(I just drank a lot of his alcohol, still I'm bitching about him! :P)
Reminds me of a certain country head, please dont ask me WHICH country lol....he spent about U.S. $15 million on a political dinner....but coughed up a tiny U.S. $2 million for earthquake relief victims in a certain remote part of the world...-
I had wanted to write a longer post anticipating your reply. I decided not to, but pleased I anticipated it correctly. :-)
Just a short note in reply, I hope :-)
We are informed about human nature based on the circles we travel in. The more circles, the greater and varied our experiences, the broader and more comprehensive our understanding of people.
In my travels, I have seen much and there is altruism. Yes, those with a great deal of money are less inclined to be altruistic and as a subset of the population notoriously stingy (but further examination of this would be best for a new thread).
The poor tend to be more altruistic. The subject is being studied, not from antique models of the human psyche but behaviourally and through neuro-science. To put pepper in the stew, there has been a gene identified with it, if my recollection serves me well. :-)
As for Freud, he was a man with his own shortcomings, and these not only helped drive his work but inhibited it. He was a man who could have an affair with his wife's sister, go to Switzerland for an abortion and create complications that reverberated through his marriage. That he had his own complicated psyche doesn’t discredit his efforts, but inform us of their limitations.
That he didn't understand what women want was a result of his poor understanding and his inability to theorize it. And he could be duplicitous regarding his findings as he was regarding Hysteria in women.
There are other men who face the same enigma Freud did in understanding women; on the other hand, there are other men that don't.
If you would like to advance your knowledge of Freud (and others who excelled Freud on the psychiatric world), read Norman O. Brown's works. He is an adept regarding psychiatric models and applies them with virtuosity to historic figures and human nature, providing outstanding insights. Love's Body could be exceptionally challenging if you have little knowledge of Latin, but I would still urge you to read it. And there are other's with much more profound insights than Freud, but let this suffice.
As far as death goes, it is my direct observation among many peoples around the world that it is not a matter of preoccupation. It is surprising how many accept it as a natural part of life, tho they grieve with the passing of those they honor or hold dear. From a psychiatric point of view - and Freud was a psychiatrist - preoccupation with death can be morbid and inhibitory to the full enjoyment of life within the span of time each has. For some, fearing death means the loss of status and possession. Note, I said some.
I wanted to reply to other remarks made but my short note has gotten too long :-) -
AliasinKhorn:
Well...from what I have seen, the poor are not exactly altruistic. I have interacted a lot with people from all socio-economic sections, and my observation is that human nature is the SAME, in every socio-economic section.----The poor are obsessed with money and sex, the economic-middle class is obsessed with money and sex, the rich are obsessed with money and sex.
The poor communities that reside in New Delhi, my city of residence---a lot of their people will slice a human's throat for as little as U.S. $5.
Note...I said, A LOT of their people, not ALL of their people.
If you go to any big city, the STREET THUGS are always brutal, and mostly from poor communities and poor backgrounds.
I am quite sure one can find people who will slice a human's throat for about U.S $5 in all parts of the world.
If the poor sections of society are nice and altruistic, why do they rape, murder, kill? Are there any poor communities in this world that do not have *guns*? I doubt it.
Poor communities in a city are often called the 'tough, dangerous side of town'. I have noticed such references everywhere.
As regards death---an obsession with death is not healthy. But a flowing, evolving discussion on death is healthy. Mystical teacher Eckhart Tolle says there is an urgent need in human society to discuss death openly. People are afraid to discuss death.
As far as Freud goes, I judge the man according to his work, his insights into human nature, not according to stories about his personal life. Everybody's personal life has its share of controversy......
When I observe people's behaviour, and then think about what Freud says about human nature......the world of people starts making sense.
Thanks for the book recommendations.
-
-
why don't you guys ennjoy life first then worry about it, i know its only natural but theres no point asking yourself if it exist because we will never know to the time comes.
-
... because everything must come to an end!
-
Who wants to live forever? I'd be bored and go insane! -
Entropy -
Mulch... it's all about mulch.
-
Hopefully, that's a process I don't become a part of until *after* death.
-
-
Everything must come to an end. That is only partly true. It is valid only if you say, everything that has a beginning will end. If that is so, then we have to accept that we did end and are already over. You really are living only the past. Time is just a deceptive mechanism to make you believe that what did happen already is still to come. All time is going on all the time, and it's over. Talk about a different experience of mind.
What about what was before time and space? Does eternity not mean a long time? A long time of struggle and conflict as you see it in time, or the repetition of the same old story over and over again? Or is it, that eternity does not know of limitations such as body identities? If you are mind, what could time and death mean to you? It is only a matter of how you see yourself, based on the values you hold in your mind.
And obviously, we are addicted to our experiences in space time. Being in space time is what death is, actually. As the thread shows, the tendency to question the validity of our ideas about life seems very diminished. Death is regarded as something natural and inevitable. Yet, based on what? Is life only to die? What would be the purpose of death? Well, some say, to prevent over-population. But, would there even be a world, if there is no death? Is there a world? Wouldn't it be totally ridiculous to live forever in a body? Yet, is that all we can come up with, when we look up into the stars in this universe with billions of galaxies? There must be more to it, and obviously, this is not it.
Being bored is an expression of a sense of being limited in space time. To project this onto eternity is not valid.
Vikram, are you saying, if one rids himself of his human desires, that he will not experience death anymore? That is what Jesus was offering, to change your mind so completely by aligning yourself with truth that you leave this hovel of existence altogether, isn't it? This would mean, there really is life unlimited, and from the perspective of this world, one could not say what it is. It would have to be an experience, wouldn't it? One then would have to question the reality of this world of death, if there is a reality of no death. Because, and that is what we don't like, only one can be true. Eternal life and death cannot both be true, though we may accept it in our poor logic as so, mostly avoiding even to look at the issue.-
Hi Albran, you write:
"Vikram, are you saying, if one rids himself of his human desires, that he will not experience death anymore?"
Yes, it is my hypothesis that a human who becomes totally free of violent emotions, becomes absolutely at peace with life AS IT IS--his body will not decay and die at all.
It is just a hypothesis. I have not seen such a person in my life, who's body has stopped growing older. But then, I have not seen any person who is free of violence.
Yes, what you say is right in my opinion. Eternal life and death cannot co-exist. I agree with this. Means what we think is death is just a door.....
When I used the word 'Death' when i started this thread, I meant 'death of the physical form'. -
Thanks for replying, by the way, Vikram. I appreciate it. No I follow what you were saying. Thanks.
It is a concept often used that death is just a door. Yet what does that mean? If one has to say, there can be no death in reality, I would have to take responsibility for my idea of it. Then it can't be a door to something else. It is an idea that takes many forms. As such it can't do anything I did not ascribe to it. I give everything all the meaning it has for me. In other words, death can't get me to Heaven. If so, I would have killed myself already, and we all know that this is not the way to go. Master Teacher says, once you are incarnate, you are always incarnate. The only way out is a complete physical transformation.
-
-
when the God exist evil is there, when the light exist dark is there, when the life is exist death is there, when the death is exist rise is there-
That makes no sense to me, Exinco. How could there be evil in God? God and evil are mutually exclusive. There can only be one truth. Contradiction does not exist in realiy. One source of reality can create only like itself. Evil, death and limitation is an idea of separation from this one reality, which is an impossibility. Truth is true, and nothing else is true. What contradicts one thing, cannot be true, unless its opposite is proven false. That does not exclude that the human mind makes up all this impossible contradictions. God does not know of any of it. That is why it is meaningless. God did not create death, this world of death, or infact any limitation. God would be evil indeed, if He did.
Love cannot create evil. Therefore, either there is only love, or only evil. Is it up to you to decide? Would any decision be meaningful, if it by its very nature must assume a split reality? -
Albran, I'll have to agree with you again. You write 'Contradiction does not exist in realiy.'. Absolutely correct. Reality is not mindf**d. I agree with the essence of everything you have written in this comment; (I mean I agree with your ideas, but I am neutral to your using the word 'God', neither against it, nor for it.)
A course in miracles somewhere says (I think, not sure): 'Only illusions fight with illusions. Life does not fight with life.'
This would mean that the violent side of a human being was never alive in the first place. Once violent urges slip out of a human being's mind/body, he will become invincible, eternal.
This is just a hypothesis, I'd want to add...because I have not seen an eternal person in my life, and I believe only what I see.
'Love cannot create violence, or evil'. 100 % correct. -
forgive me if my sentence was wrong. my point was, God and satan are two entity. when the life exist and therefor death is exist. everything that life will dead someday.
-
You are correct, Vikram. Truth does not struggle with lies or untruth. Untruth does not even have a basis of reality. So why bother? It is only me in my investment to be right, isn't it? I judge untruth, and thereby make it real. That is why it says, God does not judge. He does not even know of this world, because, as you said about violence, it was never there in the first place.
The conclusion is that it must be me dreaming it, since I cannot deny the fact, that there is a world in my perception. Yet it is only my perception. A Course In Miracles offers me another purpose for that perception, and my time being here. That is to heal my mind and be restored to sanity.
Of course, words for Reality or God must fail entirely. A Course In Miracles does not shy away from using words of western thought and tradition. It has to, since it wants to reach me in my limited perception, and offer me a way out of it. Yet it is very clear to me, that this work and how it is set up, is not coming from a human mind construct.
You might want to watch some of the videos of Master Teacher. He underwent dramatic transformations, and based on what he said, I can say, he went through his final death experience. He died, and yet he knows with absolute certainty, there is no death. That is why he teaches A Course In Miracles in everything he does. What he demonstrated to me, is beyond what is human. There is nothing like him. So, have a go. -
Again, Exinco, this makes no sense to me. How can there be two entities, directly opposing each other? If God is cause, there can be no devil or evil in reality. Otherwise you claim that there is a power beside God, maybe even more powerful than God. That is a contradiction. God as an idea is singular, and there is nothing beside Him. What He creates must share his qualities. Otherwise it is not of Him. Yet what could be that is not of Him, if He is all there is.
-
Things and urges that are violent, death-seeking, decay seeking, are anti-life.
Life can never be anti-life. Because that is a contradiction. And life is not a contradiction.
An entity like 'satan' or 'shaitan' or 'devil', that supports decay and death just cannot exist. It cannot be alive, by definition. Because 'death' is not life. Life cannot destroy life.
Things that are anti-life are dead already.
Violent, destructive urges within the human are just bizarre, dead movements within the human being, that can go away if and when the human's consciousness, awareness expands.
Just my points of view. Not thrusting anything on anyone.
-
-
deth is just the transformation into a new life -
vikram this is rather daft question because no one alive can explain does death exist or why it does,everyone's point of view is a nice comment but is sadly wrong
-
It ain't a daft question James...
-
-
mistake. please excuse me.
-
Albran, you write:
"One then would have to question the reality of this world of death, if there is a reality of no death."
I studied quantum physics formally at college, but its been a long time.
Only recently I started reading quantum physics again, but this time with a different aim in mind...this time my aim was to see to what extent it agrees/disagrees with mysticism.
Quantum Physics seems to suggest that we live in a world of illusion and oddities, and absurdities. For example, Quantum Physics suggests that what we perceive as 'solid' is not exactly solid, because there is no such thing as solid!!
The point I am trying to make here is....questioning the reality of this world we are a part of, currently, is a very sane idea. It all seems to be an illusion.
You write:
"Master Teacher says, once you are incarnate, you are always incarnate. The only way out is a complete physical transformation."
I did read about a certain 'Sant Tukaram' somewhere, don't remember where...it is claimed that he found what is called 'full body enlightenment'...you might want to check this bit out. I would say that if indeed 'Sant Tukaram' found full body enlightenment, that would mean Sant Tukaram found immortality.
I would interpret 'full body enlightenment' as 'all violent, life-negating emotions vanished from Sant Tukaram's mind/body.'-
It is whatever it is, Vikram, the good thing for me is to have a Master that is available now.
I love quantum physics. I should read more of it. I like it because it makes my mind go look for the light in all things. -
Albran,
I have covered some quantum physics, keeping mysticism in mind...here's the link. Feel free to leave comments on my quantum physics posts, or anywhere else;
vikram-madan.blogspot.com/search?q=quantum+physics
-
-
it is adaft question because if death exists there so be it and if it doesn't then rock on brother see you in the next life time
-
VikramMadan, I had written two comments to this thread and neither mysteriously posted. Perhaps just as well.
I read your reply to my comment earlier this evening and was struck that an understanding had failed to be conveyed as I intended in my writing regarding Freud. (On the other hand, if you do post graduate work in psychology, views change, otherwise there's little sense, and too much time and expense to continue your education and re-age your knowledge).
Freud had an attitude about death that hasn't been displayed in the thread yet. He was a practical man, and a voracious reader, as well as an empiricist that formulated theories that established the psyche as a science. But back to the point about death. I always thought that his work entitled Attitude Toward Death held the real key to his thinking. I nearly remember it by heart but to be faithful to his words take liberty by copying from his writing:
'Life is impoverished, it loses in interest, when the highest stake in the game of living, life itself, may not be risked. It becomes as shallow and empty as, let us say, a . . . flirtation, in which it is understood from the first that nothing is to happen, as contrasted with a . . . love affair in which both partners must constantly bear its serious consequences in mind.'
Well put.-
Shows he liked taking risks; perhaps life-threatening games. And dangerous sex?!!!
Is that what you are pointing at? That he enjoyed life threatening sexual situations?
Majority of humans like watching life-threatening, violent games. Most humans love watching violent sexual games too. Some love playing violent sexual games.
The connection between sex and death (in the human mind) is quite apparent, in most people's attitude, if one analyses typical curse words and phrases. Its something quite common. -
Aliasinkhorn,
Did you know, Jesus in A Course In Miracles (the version of the original dictation) speaks very high of Freud:
"Freud's psyche was essentially a good and evil picture, with very heavy weight given to the evil. This is because every time I mentioned the Atonement to him, which was quite often, he responded by defending his theory more and more against it. This resulted in his increasingly strong attempts to make the illogical sound more and more logical.
I was very sorry about this, because his was a singularly good mind, and it was a shame to waste it. However, the major purpose of his incarnation was not neglected. He DID succeed in forcing recognition of the unconscious into man's calculations about himself, a step in the right direction which should not be minimized. Freud was one of the most religious men I have known recently. Unfortunately, he was so afraid of religion that the only way he could deal with it was to regard IT (not himself) as sick. This naturally prevented healing."
You can look up more about Freud in A Course In Miracles here: search.atomz.com/search/?sp_a=sp10024ddf&sp_q=Freud&sp_p=any&sp_f=ISO-8859-...
He refers also to Freud's treatment of the "death whish". -
That makes sense, Vikram, since death is one of the strongest defenses of the human mind for its existence. What would it do without the idea of death? It would have nothing to hope for by which it can escape the mess in which it finds itself. Death, because of its defense and escape value is a key idea in the human mind. It all justifies the idea of a body identity.
"The body is a fence the Son of God imagines he has built to separate parts of his Self from other parts. It is within this fence he thinks he lives, to die as it decays and crumbles. For within this fence he thinks that he is safe from love. Identifying with his safety, he regards himself as what his safety is. How else could he be certain he remains within the body, keeping love outside?
The body will not stay. Yet this he sees as double safety. For the Son of God’s impermanence is “proof ” his fences work, and do the task his mind assigns to them. For if his oneness still remained untouched, who could attack and who could be attacked? Who could be victor? Who could be his prey? Who could be victim? Who the murderer? And if he did not die, what “proof ” is there that God’s eternal Son has been destroyed?" (ACIM, Workbook) Read the whole section "What Is The Body?" here: courseinmiracles.com/workbook_lessons/part_2/acimwhatisthebody.htm
-
-
Death exists because of something with a toad, a frog and a broken jar
-
Death is something we all dont want to face, some do, but I think its going to be more beautiful, especially when the DMT kicks in hahaha.
When everyone dies, there is a fluid released from the Spinal cord into the brain know as DMT, this is also available in plants and is a psychedelic.
So when people on their death bed say they can see the tunnel and they can see their families and love ones, you know the Dmt has just about kicked in -
@ VikramMadan, this is not what he meant at all.
@ Albran, thank you. Your comment spares me from writing more :-)-
Aliasinkhorn, I didnt understand what he meant, then.
-
Freud was as much a product of his era as he was a well read, learned man, and original and daring enough to foster a new era.
In his remarks, Freud keeps company with other greats that addressed death. Because he was Jewish, his knowledge was informed even by the Maccabean books, and the remarks by Josephus, how Jews captured mocked torture and death, and how many early Christians (many of them Jews) were put to cruel forms of death through the iron chair, being burnt alive, etc. He was so well informed that to understand his works it is said students must also study what he read.
So when he wrote these lines in his book,
'Life is impoverished, it loses in interest, when the highest stake in the game of living, life itself, may not be risked. It becomes as shallow and empty as, let us say, a . . . flirtation, in which it is understood from the first that nothing is to happen, as contrasted with a . . . love affair in which both partners must constantly bear its serious consequences in mind.'
he was saying brilliantly a number of things; his sentences were embedded with much more than is obvious.
In sum, Freud's text may be described this way: Life is a waste without living on the edge of it, it cannot transcend ennui, it has no satisfaction, no value, without putting it on the line for something, even in the face of death.
It portrays a person's life as flirting with the enticement to do so, but with no step taken, no risk, nothing ever happens. Perhaps this is fear, or fear of failure, or fear of looking ridiculous, etc; it is certainly not bravery.
But he who does risk using his life, does so as a serious commitment. In the end, it may be said this is triumph over death, an old Greek notion Freud was familiar with.
-
-
@ friedclydeGeneral, you appear to be a man who has deep interest in science. Here is a site you might find profound and interesting. In spite of its theme, I think it will touch upon some of your interests. Theory of Religion: The Formalized Integration of Science and Religion. world.std.com/~awolpert
-
mystical framework... ?
mystical work of life and death? hmm...
dunno.. never been in life lately
certainly never been in death
why don't i tell you one day, when we meet up in heaven...
Yahahaha...
IF, heaven..-
Why heaven? I know of some very good restaurants on planet Earth! ;-)
-
-
This discussion has been fantastic so far, I'm very happy to run into some very intelligent minds in this forum.
Let's spice up this discussion a bit, with a poem I wrote....inspired by the Jim Morrison song "The End"...a couple of lines by morrison, the rest by me!
---------------
This is the end
My only friend, the end;
Can you picture what will be
in a world beyond we see;
Will I be
desperately in need
of a stranger's hand, in a strange land...
My friend, will you be there for me?
When I set off on the journey;
But
What if this act of madness is in vain?
What if death does not kill the pain?
What if my nemesis is to remain
forever entrenched in misery
burning in a hellish eternal flame...
_________________________
Any comments?-
Metaphysical, and a great deal of uncertainty and angst. Traveling to a strange land, there is want for a friend if not companion. The trouble will not be found in where he goes, it is already found in what he carries in his soul.
-
Absolutely. What you just wrote was Jim Morrison's state of mind, all through his life....and...it was also my state of mind, a few years back, when I wrote this poem. Confusion, chaos, fear. Fear of life, fear of death.
-
Fear of death is a fear of life.
-
Jim Morrison often ripped off William Blake. I can only appreciate that he brought the genius of Blake to a new audience. This song is no exception. Read Blake's Marriage of Heaven and Hell and see.
-
-
Aliasinkhorn:
Your Freud passage....a great passage and a great explanation. I agree with everything expressed by you here.
Especially when you write:
"Perhaps this is fear, or fear of failure, or fear of looking ridiculous, etc; it is certainly not bravery."
Wonderful words...what kind of a life is a life lived in fear. Living in fear is enslavement...premature death.
Reminds me of words from the movie Braveheart, words of William Wallace, when his men are feeling afraid of fighting:
"what will you do without freedom? Fight and you may die. Run, and you'll live, for at least a while....and dying in your bed, many years from now....will you be willing to trade all the days from this day till that...all those years...for just ONE chance...for just ONE chance....to come back here....and tell our enemies....that they make take our lives...but they'll NEVER TAKE OUR FREEDOM!!!"
Applies to us too....dancing to the tune of oppressors....(lousy boss, bad husbands, bad wives, bad parents etc.)
Fear of death kills prematurely......people afraid of death, rejection, the unknown...giving up freedom for false security, dancing to the tune of an oppressor. That's death aint it?-
For some, of some number, death is lived, long before they die.
When the Christ speaks about the 'talents', He speaks about those who don't use what they have including their lives completely and to good use. They are like Freud says, 'flirting' but commitment is never made. They would 'like to but'. Incidental fears rule their lives, and incidental possessions of prestige, overvalued, too great to lose, to live free.
I have long conjectured that when the Christ said, 'Pick up your cross and follow me' He meant, you are already dead, now live. (There is more to my thought on this, but let this suffice.) -
"Pick up your cross and follow me." Nice words.
The meaning it gives to me is...
Do not live in denial, do not try to escape your pain. Carry your pain, responsibilities(which are often painful) without whining and crying, carry your pain like mature adults and be brave enough to follow me, follow a road less travelled, a road towards freedom from enslavement... You live in enslavement, fear, denial, escapism; that's not life, that is death.
Indeed.
-
-
I think this is due to the third Law of motion. We have to die because we have borned.
Our born in this earth is action and the opposite reaction is definitely death.There should be balance of energy in this earth.Then only the earth and the whole system will exist. -
sounds interesting...
go on...-
What are your views on death, Genopianist?
-
death is...
death is...
the end of the life of a biological organism and...
wait... (where is that wikipedia web link)
oh,
ooops DC...
-
-
good topic Vikram.
I actually just recently posted a blog about this topic: zombierobotfrosting.blogspot.com/2008/01/i-want.html
this is one of many blogs ive posted on the subject.
I personally like to believe Aubrey DeGrey's theory about anti aging and immortality. I know it is a long shot, however, if I am going to dream I like to dream large. In the long run I think death is enivitable, but extending life given our advanced researches is very possible. Old age could no longer be a reason for death, instead it would have to be something much more gruesome or applied for.
I admit what has been said above, I fear death, I accept it, but I fear it. I think the fear drives me to eat healthy, excersize often and strive for a better quality of life. So i consider my fear of death a good thing.
My fear does not keep my couped up, hidden in a basement. My fear prepares me to be in the best possible health to take on all possible dangers and face them with my best.-
Hi William, If the fear of death motives one to live life to the fullest, nothing like it.
The way I see it, the hostile nature of the human emotional world human causes decay and death in the human trajectory.
Sigmund Freud said the human has two instincts. Eros--instinct to live. And Thanatos---the instinct to die.
Overcoming Thanatos would mean overcoming the hostile emotions we carry within.
My hypothesis is that a human who overcomes hostile emotions will become immortal.
Hostile emotions manifest themselves as disease in the body/mind. Everyone is aware of the connection between bad moods and headaches; stress and so many diseases. So on and so forth.
One who becomes totally free of hostile emotions will indeed become immortal, in my view.
Once again...I'd like to say...this is just a hypothesis. I have not met any eternal person.
-
-
I would tend to think that if one thing must be born one thing must also die. To each beginning is there not an end? In ALL living things there is birth, life and death. It is the cycle of life. A flower has no hostile nature of human desire and yet it is born and it dies. We all spring from the earth and we return to the earth. Even a raindrop has a birth and death, a process it goes through to become and then end when it falls.-
Excellent logic.
But...a flower is not 'self-aware' as a human is. A flower is not aware of its birth, it is not aware of its death.
A flower has NO concepts of birth and death. It is not *self aware*.
So the words 'birth' and 'death' cannot be applied to a flower the way they are applied to humans.
Agreed that both the flower and the human are life.
But the flower is a process. The human is a person. Different ballgames. -
VikramMadan, I beg to differ, plants are sentient, they are aware. Trees even moan in distress. I'll keep this reply short, and recommend a book entitled 'The Secret Life of Plants'. And there are a number of studies I am confident you can discover on the Net. And, interestingly, if I recall my facts correctly, E.A. Poe's work, 'The Fall of the House of Usher' was prompted in part by a work from France addressing sentience in plants. The book was written in the 1700s.
-
Regarding birth and death, examine the work of Heidegger. Simplifying it, or better, taking liberties with his work, life and death are entries and exits..
Because of own experience, I can tell you that there is continuity in one's existence. There is death in that the biology of our being 'dies', but the essential aspect of what interacted, managed, and drove that biology remains.
Long ago, a doctor weighed people before and after death and found that they lost grams of weight at 'death'. (And yes Hollywood did a movie on this theme with Sean Penn, but it wasn't new in the academic community; in fact I learned of it in middle school before learning it again at university). 'Something' that was there as a part of that dead life 'disappeared'.
Birth and death are more than biology and chemistry. Note the words 'more than'. Discussion becomes constricted by solely understanding life within scientific disciplines. And as a result, discussions can demand proof that there is something before birth and after death to align with current science. But not everything in science is empirical, and not everything that exists can be translated into its language of mathematics and chemical notations. And sciences' explosive growth of knowledge in the past 50 years is a wake up call to all to be humble in what is not known to date.
Case in point, the 'Will' was central in understanding human behaviour and dynamics until roughly 100 years ago, because science had changed, models developed, that couldn't measure it. So it was dismissed. But nature is indifferent to academic dismissals. We have a will. But it is known by inference, individual experience, by the result of locomotion and micro and macro action. We cannot see it, we cannot smell it, we cannot taste it, we cannot hear it .. but it exists.
It existed before birth and it exists after death. And this is not the only thing that continues when the biology ends.
Just some thoughts before I retire. It's 2:55am here, and my eyes are nearly shut :-) -
Aliasinkhorn,
You write:
"Long ago, a doctor weighed people before and after death and found that they lost grams of weight at 'death'."
I've heard of this before. but I don't subscribe to it. Whatever it is that leaves the body cannot have 'weight', weight implies it is something 'solid' and matter like, which I doubt it is.
Mystics maintain that formless life does not have weight, and cannot be sensed without an expansion in awareness.
As regards the awareness level of plants, trees, flowers etc, I highly doubt they are at an awareness level that can be called SELF-AWARENESS. -
VikramMadan, either there is science or there is none to reveal phenomena even if it cannot explain it. :-) Science has recently discovered trees moan under distress at a certain frequency. Like so many other matters, one may have an interpretive opinion. Animals moan out of distress, also. This is commonly understood as self-awareness.
Regarding the weight loss. I understand and appreciate your reply. Nothing is said that the loss in weight resulted because a person's soul left, but certainly there was a loss in weight. What it is and how it happens is by science currently unknown. I find the weight of the spirit immaterial, but not troubled, for various reasons, if it does have weight.
-
-
Why is there death? Because we haven't figured out that there isn't! Good conversation.
-
Hi Molly, I had no idea Jim Morrison ripped off William Blake!!!
Check out my exchange with William Hessian. (A few minutes old.)
I believe death of the 'person within' is not possible...but the death of the physical form is real.
-
-
Oh! I just finally thought of an answer for this.
Death exists so that all of the evil people like Hitler can't rule the world for eternity.
OK, I know, it's lame... -
I was just thinking about this:
Death may be the balance of birth (as mentioned above) but who determines our life span on earth. Doesn't it seem completely possibly to extend our life span to a much larger number. Birth isnt a choice, and neither is death, but prolonging life should be. -
I think that all of the above is true. And when we are ready to consider the possibility that we can transcend this life body and spirit, the information on those who have done so before us will find us. I think it is possible. Death, then, becomes a relative experience that includes all of the ideas mentioned and depends on the viewpoint of the dying.
-
with out death there would be no sequel and every one loves a sequel right LOL? -
ummm. what?
-
death exists to kill pointless discussions like this...LOL. -
ah. i get it now.
-
Death exists because...Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:... "Adam" sinned against God. -
i guess, death exists because theres life.. life beyond death -
My response is more philosophical in nature:
If there is no death, essentially there is no such thing as life. What is life without the opposite reality of death? What is happiness without sadness? What is light without darkness? Are they not all intertwined? One cannot know these things without knowing their opposite.
I've always thought Roger McGuinn and The Byrds said it best in "Turn! Turn! Turn!"
To everything (turn, turn, turn)
There is a season (turn, turn, turn)
And a time for every purpose, under heaven
A time to be born, a time to die
A time to plant, a time to reap
A time to kill, a time to heal
A time to laugh, a time to weep
To everything (turn, turn, turn)
There is a season (turn, turn, turn)
And a time for every purpose, under heaven
A time to build up,a time to break down
A time to dance, a time to mourn
A time to cast away stones, a time to gather stones together
To everything (turn, turn, turn)
There is a season (turn, turn, turn)
And a time for every purpose, under heaven
A time of love, a time of hate
A time of war, a time of peace
A time you may embrace, a time to refrain from embracing
To everything (turn, turn, turn)
There is a season (turn, turn, turn)
And a time for every purpose, under heaven
A time to gain, a time to lose
A time to rend, a time to sew
A time to love, a time to hate
A time for peace, I swear its not too late-
"If there is no death, essentially there is no such thing as life. What is life without the opposite reality of death? What is happiness without sadness? What is light without darkness? Are they not all intertwined? One cannot know these things without knowing their opposite."
I would challenge you for a definition of life. You can't look for an opposite until you know what the source is, after all.
Badly-skewed Biblical verses by 1960s pop groups don't do it for me. Although, it is a groovy tune.
Most agree that death is not the opposite of life; it is an end to life, or at least, an end to a physical existance. Death is no more the opposite of life than hate is the opposite of love. -
interesting points. I still subscribe to the belief that one cannot truly know what life is without at least being conscious of what death is. Life could happen to you, but would you really know what it is?
As for my own definition of life? It is that which separates the animate from the inanimate (which upon writing I suddenly think I see your point).
Loved your line about badly skewed biblical versus. I fully expected someone to reply "hey man, is that Freedom Rock? Well turn it up!!!" (if you remember that rather hysterical commercial from the 80's) -
I was really hoping you wouldn't have brought that up. *puke*
-
what? Freedom Rock?
-
I bought it, you know. LOL
-
I dug this up just for you, ghosty! My sides hurt from laughing so hard
www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKDk-mg1J9Q -
Gee, thanks. *goes to play his bongos in the dirt*
-
-
I request the participants of this forum to stick to the topic...and not waste posts in idle banter and links like 'Freedom Rock', i.e. not connected to the discussion. Thanks.
-
Sorry about that....I started off on-topic. (pointts finger at ghosty)
-
-
The difficulty with discussions is the use of words and their limitations. Many words are synthetic, meaning they have more in them than common usage realizes. This is one factor that is transparently obvious in the Platonic dialogues; what does this mean? what does that mean?
Some cultures have many words for specific aspects or conditions of 'something'. For instance, English has one word for love, and Arabic has two hundred (if I recall correctly). The word Life is synthetic because there aren't other words for other types of life, either as perceived, experientially known (and held in common), or as a higher concept and reality, etc.
The proposition that there are other aspects in the word Life is problematic at BC because of personal views that exclude other meanings. This potential constraint has manifested itself continually in other threads, so it is reasonably assumed that other aspects and meanings of words entail difficulties. Reactions will confirm or deny this statement.
With this established, I will remark that Life is continuous. Birth and death are changes in its manifestation. To ask the question, 'why is there death' requires the corresponding question, 'why is there birth?'
My comment is that each individual life goes from birth to death, but birth is not its beginning nor death its end. Life 'is'. How it displays itself 'is' its own.
It is my further comment that Life is a product of God and that this product has been set and works beyond the visible state that humans have in common.-
Main point of the comment is that death is an event (among others) in a continual life.
-
-
It doesn't -
Technically speaking, I don't think death does exist. The word, "death" is simply used to describe the the "absence" of life that follows the end of a life once held.
Similarly... this is kind of like asking, "why does emptiness exist?" -
Death exists, to knock on our realization that we are human, otherwise we would think we are God (at 1st), but then when the body decays we will become crazy and we think we are monsters, yaiks!
And emptiness is there so we know what fulfillment is like, just like we need to feel hungry so we know when to eat and be satisfied (and grateful) for the full stomach, as in we need to feel sad so we can appreciate happiness, OK I can go on and on... *L*
And of course death doesn't really just exist, it is overwhelmed us when our time comes, and as it is an event, it is something that we cannot say no to but have to attend it (willingly or unwillingly). I would like to say death is just a process we have to go through to go to the next level.
Tq. -
There's a continuous stream of consciousness that changes shape, the shape being development of awareness of itself in progressive stages, from unconscious to conscious in many cases, but not all. This awareness manages to fool itself into thinking that it is locked within a body, which in truth is just a figment of its imagination but at various moments of its development it has glimpses of itself being greater than the limited identity which it believes itself to be.
And no, I don't take drugs :-)
Death is the constant recurring event that happens each time it is faced with letting go of the story about the identity that it has associated itself with. But really it is not the limited identity at all but something that has no centre but has its centre in all things. The journey of unconsciousness to consciousness is that awareness recognising its own existence as a stream of consciousness that never ever was imprisoned and limited. Once there is a total recognition of this process, it is aware that death never really was but was only just a false identification that it had created to experience its own existence. -
Interesting points of view here...
The question is...WHY does a person have to go through a process (known as death) in which he just ends, or SEEMS to end.
(There is no concrete evidence that suggests that re-birth is real.....all claims are shaky, and not accepted universally. There is no *accepted evidence* that people come back from beyond to talk to relatives. I don't believe in saints performing miracles from beyond the grave, don't even consider it, etc.... It is all heresay. )
So proceeding using pure logic is correct, like we are, in this forum. This discussion has been a wonderful experience so far, with many brilliant minds contributing.
*******
The following arguments ASSUME that re-birth is real...I am building logical trains, not stating beliefs:
Why will 'Vikram Madan' die and be re-born? I don't want to die and be reborn. I am sure others don't either. I want to live forever, (freddie mercury can take a hike!)
It is against my wish, i.e. against the wish of 'life' to die, but I will die. Thanatos beats Eros. (Temporary) Death defeats life.
This 'point' in the process of life, that is similar to a computer being re-booted, and stripped of all memory of previous processes...WHY does it exist?
What do I gain, from losing my memory, my body, my education, my life experience...only to start afresh? Go to school again, go to college again, and learn the SAME old stuff again. Which I have learnt in this life.
In the next life I will make the same mistakes all over again, due to lack of experience. I gained experience, very painfully, in this life...but this experience will not help me in my next life. My experience is wasted as I die.
So what *meaning* is there, in death and re-birth(if real?) of the human's physical form, and the human mind. I see no meaning in the death of a person.
I see death of a human being as a bad ACCIDENT in the process called life, an accident due to the hostility that has entered the human emotional world.-
VikramMadan said: "The question is...WHY does a person have to go through a process (known as death) in which he just ends, or SEEMS to end."
It seems to me that you are assuming that we do indeed go through a process of death. But before one can answer the why we do, we should determine in fact that we do. Not assume it. Because if death doesn't "exist" to begin with, there is no use in askin "why" about something that doesn't exist.
As I said earlier, technically speaking, I don't think death does exist. The word, "death" is simply used to describe the the "absence" of life that follows the end of a life once held.
If one is sick and dying, this "dying" part is used to describe that one is observably going towards the end of ones life. But it could be said that as soon as we are born, that we start dying. The proccess of evolution and change take hold, we grow up, are bodies change and live a life span determined by the envoronment and by ones genetic makeup. Why? To answer that, you may have to ask yourself "why do you live?" If there is no reason for living, then there may equally no reason for dying. -
Why go through the process:
Let’s put it this way
An entity comes into existence to experience multiple emotions. The package that experiences those emotions has a ‘use by date’ but only until it no longer recognizes the limitations it has consciously placed upon itself.
As for your opinions on rebirth or miracles, that’s fine, you asked a question and there’s multiple answers from different viewpoints. If you haven’t experienced it in anyway, the most sensible thing to do is come to a temporary conclusion that it’s not true, as I feel that to believe in things that you have no experience of, is possibly blind faith, but to be open to the idea that others experience things is reasonable and if they are honest about their experiences then maybe it’s worthwhile trusting in their truth but not taking on as a viewpoint, just a possibility.
Vikram is only a label to time-stamp a serious of experiences, I think the question that needs to be asked is “Who or what is it that experiences so called re-birth?” And I don’t think the answer is an intellectual one but a transformation of the awareness of the experiencer.
Against your wish to die:
I think the main issue is about fear of the unknown, and the problem in the way is ‘clinging to what you know as reality’ and identification with body and the story it has created about itself.
A new life being like rebooting:
So you reboot as another named experiencer. The experiencer needs to forget because the bundle of experiences experienced before the reboot will inhibit the new experiences and colour them, so there is a new clearer slate, the experincer can then go about its business of self development reasonably unhindered, however, there will be a number of underlying tendencies that will subtly impact unbeknown to the experiencer.
The gain is this:
There is an imprint in the subtle part of the experiencer that the new ‘labeled bundle’ is unaware of but it has experienced those emotions. As a general rule because the experiencer has not yet reached its peak potential, it will normally go seeking those same emotions again, when in reality those emotions are no longer required for its development on its journey from unconscious to conscious because what was required has been met. So the issue is not so much about feeling a serious loss and pointlessness at losing what one has achieved but more about the experiencers failure to benefit from what it has experienced and considers that it needs to seek the same or similar experiences again.
So is there value in the so called death experience:
Yes, because gives the experiencer the ability to see through a child’s eyes which are not yet coloured by hostility, hatred, clised mindedness, false perceptions and negativity. -
acousticguitarist - Brilliant. I appreciate it; it struck a chord.
-
thanks kindly
-
-
[QUOTE]I see death of a human being as a bad ACCIDENT in the process called life, an accident due to the hostility that has entered the human emotional world.[/QUOTE]
It is not an accident, it is a way to go to some place else and becoming something more, still us but more than just us. Just like a seed, which has to go into the ground, decayed, to open up a new being from it, transformed into something else, that is still that seed, but bigger than the seed itself.
Is that process an accident due to the hostility to the seed's emotional world? Perhaps, for that seed before it knows what becomes of it, after it has gone through the process, THEN he knows. AH!....so that's why.
So, I think all of us will experience that AHA moment sooner or later *L* don't worry, we will get there....
Hey see you on the other end..haha -
This discussion is too mystical for me.-
Pascal was a mystic. :-) Perhaps Newton, too. The modern intellectual elite are like this: having no taste for juice from the orange, they say, 'See! Oranges have no juice! Proof!' :-) Missing one sense, they miss the most common one of all :-)
-
nobody's perfect...
-
Urikalish, It's not about perfection, and I have a view on that which is very benign and most enjoy no matter from what angle they are all coming from :-) There are differences in people, from the genes to their skin; the reactions to differences range from celebration to revulsion.
The differences of mind are just as wide and fascinating. And as for all the disciplines, they range, too, from axiology to zoology, and not one has preeminence over another. They are our servants, not our masters.
Many understand (which is considered higher than knowing) that there is more than what can be cataloged with a name and an official description. There are things that language cannot capture in a word, or phrase or a thousand books. But 'it' is there.
There are experiences that cannot be easily replicated, or, so rare, will not be seen again for decades or millions of years, but no less true than those that happen with regularity to all sentient beings, like the rising and setting of the sun.
Without the need for analysis - the analytics of deconstruction that demonstrates its own impotence in use - we can all see that we are on the same common road to a destination. There may not be a consensus on the destination, but there is a destination, and some in our midst tell us so, others have gone ahead and returned to describe it.
Many accept the description. Others do not. Still, live well and be good to, for, with and between each other while we are on the road.
-
-
That's great stuff acousticguitarist...I remember reading Eckhart Tolle, his views and teachings are very similar. I am a fan of Eckhart.
Eckhart Tolle draws from ancient mystical texts that talk of a silent space within, in which our thoughts and lives unfold. This silent space, this non-interefering consciousness is the core of life, without which this world, this life...nothing would exist.
"You are not your thoughts, you are not the one who thinks. The one who thinks is an illusion, he does not exist. You are the silent witness within, due to who's awareness thoughts/mind/body manifest. This silent witness within is eternal, cannot and will not die." --- Eckhart Tolle (paraphrase)-
My wife and friends read Tolle, I'm not a fan but nor am I against what he says. I briefly looked at it and it looked like Krishnamurthi in a Wstern more palatable packet and couldn't I find anything that was extraordinary, thoght provoking and life changing inspirational. Years ago I used to read a lot of that stuff and Ramana but as time went on I found it was very limiting. I never thought that I or anyone would ever say that about Ramana. I felt that my own personal experience was much more important and if I didn't experience something it's not my Truth. It's not possible to come to a concluson on anything because the mind is an inadequate tool to deal with this stuff, what is sought and experienced is outside the limitations of thouight. We can only imply experiences of the sublime. I think there is so much misinformation in many of the so called Spritual books that sends people on a ridiculous journey in a circle going nowhere. But based on the idea that we don't all experience the same thing it would be wrong for me to say something wasn't true, because it may well be for that person. I think the best material is material that questions us about our beliefs. I like these forums because anyone with an opposite view will hit you with something that is often very valid, thought provoking and it's incredibly useful to have our belief systems, world and spiritual views challenged.
-
-
You have to get out of the way and give someone else a shot.-
un ..who?
-
The next poor bastards being born - there's only enough room for so many people, you know:)
-
not only that, there are limited resources to support so many people.
-
we could all eat ess...i'm vego
-
I say we do the selfless thing and commit hari-kari en masse to make room for the less fortunate inhabitants of our lowly little rock in space . . . y'all first, I'm right behind you:o
-
Robeyf, it's hara-kiri (Jap--right?), kari in bahasa Indonesia is something spicy, very delicious, and hari means day, so, hari-kari would be a spicy delicious day, to kill oneself, hmm...not a bad idea.
-
-
Death is very much like a period(.)
A sentence won't be a sentence without a period. So is life.-
But if that period is changed into question mark? Wo-ow...^L^ we come here again to face the: 'why does death exist?' question...lol.
-
I like where you are going with that, but a period is part of the sentence. It makes the sentence complete. Death isn't part of life, it is the absence of life that follows the end of a life once held.
So perhaps death would be a space after the sentence. -
Morgantj, then there must be afterlife, because after a period of a sentence that could be (or OK, could not be) another sentence, right? The thing is, if, there's another sentence then another then still another etc, that will fit into reincarnation theory: Life. Death. Life. Death. Life.Death.Life.Death. Life.Death. Life.Death.
I'm tired typing, lol...when will it end? You know what? This is the ultimate prove that I have too much time on my hand, because I even bother to ponder upon a PERIOD!
(I hope this discussion will not kick my butt for j/k around please pardon me...) -
Not necessarily. The other sentences could simply be other peoples lives.
-
-
A paragraph from my latest blog entry on death :--
Princess Diana is dead but people just do not leave her alone. They are busy restoring her image, killing her image, restoring her image, killing her image. Kill her, restore her...kill her, restore her...Kill her, restore her...Kill me, restore me...Kill me, restore me...Kill me, restore me...death, birth...death, birth...death, birth....the karmic cycle...
U2 sings 'hold me, thrill me, kiss me, kill me' in the movie Batman Forever.
Sigmund Freud says there are two basic human instincts/urges...
Eros = Urge for life.
Thanatos = Urge for death.
Any comments, anyone?-
Death is on the way and every damn one of us will get on the bus; nothing we can do about that one . . . how about "Why does life exist?"
-
-
Death exists to keep the Earth from getting too overloaded with life, among other reasons. -
still wondering about death
ck ck ck... -
Because it gets us to another level?-
can you clarify
-
-
Death Vader does
-
dyslexic
-
-
Hi Acoustic, you meant J. Krishnamurti or U.G Krishnamurti? I've read a bit of both, and they contradict themselves very often, and use words in a vague, ill-defined manner, and many of their sentences don't go anywhere.
(In my opinion...I mean.)
I found Tolle to be more or less consistent; He does not use words in a vague manner, which is a relief...his writing/talking style is fresh and full of wisdom.
Like Tolle says....'I am not here to give you anything new...I am not here to satisfy your mind...I am discussing with you things that have been discussed for many centuries. I am here to transmit to you a silent knowing, a silent understanding that transcends the mind and touches your inner being.'
Tolle's points of view on death gave me a lot of insights. For example, at one point he talks of the 'Tibetian Book of the Dead', and explains the tibetian buddist point of view on why re-birth happens.....he explained it in a very simple manner.
(The following is the Tibetian Book of the Dead' point of view, as explained by Tolle...paraphrased.)
He writes that when people see the 'luminous splendour of conscious emptiness', they turn away in fear and terror because the love that emanates from this dazzling light starts burning their darkness, violence, emotional 'impurities'.
In their fear, they turn and run from this dazzling light of 'conscious emptiness' (or the light and love of the cosmos itself), and fall into the dimmer and more soothing realms of 'samsara', or what we call this world and lower realms. And re-birth occurs.
What I have written above is not my 'belief' (nor is it Tolle's belief...he does not have beliefs, as he says.)....
But it does make sense to ponder schools of thought that say that humans keep falling back into this world for more and more births. Their inner violence rejects the love of 'conscious emptiness' or the 'soul/essence of the cosmos' and runs away from it; and for this reason humans end up in lower realms.
(Of course, the soul of the cosmos exists inside the human too; so the above logic means he runs from his real, inner self. Same thing.)
If humans managed to inhabit the cosmos before purification of their emotional world, they will turn the universe into a fast food joint with trash lying everywhere, guns and knives and alcohol and drugs and prostitutes all over the place...-
Vikram
J Krishnamurthi, very interesting. Watch his videos and decide whether he's useful. Now Im not saying Krishnamurthi is who I am interested in because it's not so, but he's the greatest of pruners. And i'm not knocking Tolle, it's just it's of no use for me what he says, and he is only looking at the picture from one small angle, same as Krishnurthi is. A lot of people find Krishnamurthi too intellectual, but I think that's not a complete appraisal of him, generally what they aren't liking about him is he's undermining EVERYTHING they hold true and sacred. As I said, he's the great pruner. And I'm not an intellectual and I quite comfortably navigated his material.
I'm familiar with the Tibetan book of the Dead, and have had first hand experience using the techniques (guidelines what to be aware of) in there, and they are not just words but actually things that do happen. In the past I would have had a little difficulty with idea if I had just read it in a book because things get twisted by people. I am not a Tibetan Buddhist so to have an experience relating to it was very unexpected, howver I did read the book. When my son suicided, I used the Tibetan book of the Dead and actually tracked my son via the techniques in there, this is very complex discussion. It is possible to exit the body via the eyebrows, a system I had used in the past but had never encountered the experiences relating to my son.
I don't for one minute think that all persons passing over experience the same thing, and am confident it is an individual thing. So for anyone to say 'this is what happens' is kidding themselves first and secondly, accidentally kidding everyone else.
So I have no need for Tolle's story on the Tibetan B of D and have no idea if he has ever experienced it at all, and as you say he's only quoting something. But from my experience it's true, and I wouldn't care what anyone else said because I have pesonally validated it for myself and there's no way in the world that I would expect anyone to believe such a thing and don't really care what people think about it.
I think the sooner we abandon all teachings, books, philosophies the better. The are all obstacles in the end, but not the beginning. Only in the getting rid of the lot can change start to come about. The teachings of those that have gone before are all pointing the way but there is a time to throw off the trainer wheels. I think we always need to ask the question 'who is the experiencer', that is extremly important in the long run. What happens is neither here nor there.
Reading the last verse, I think there's a need for all of us to give up all judgement and embrace the diversity of the creation and find the sublime in even the things we consider unacceptable.
-
-
-
The way I see it...
In a few centuries, science will probably extend life expectancy to a few hundred years, most deaths will occur as a result of accidents, and natural death will be very rare. I think that death currently exists mainly because our science isn’t there yet.
p.s. Eventually, matrix-style mind uploading will enable us to live forever (almost).-
so long as there's an icream chip of some sort I'll be happy
-
-
Nicely put, Tony. After a point, the tools fall away and we become the creation, tools no longer necessary. But, as possibility is unlimited and becomming never ends, we continue to draw into our experience messages that lead the way. It keeps us engaged and validated and excited and appreciated. If you get this in a bible passage or a cup of ice cream or the color orange, it matters not. You feel the love and appreciation. Whoopee!
-
I think the logical explanation is that we are still evolving and so we need death in order to make room for birth - It is a cycle of potential adaptions towards nature and general improvements all together. -
-
The existence of death in the trajectory of the human being does not make sense.
How is it possible that LIFE dies? How is it possible that LIFE occupies only an infinitesimally tiny corner of the universe, for a tiny amount of time?
The universe is huge, beyond the imagination of the human mind.
How is it possible that the universe is beyond the grasp of humans, beyond the grasp of LIFE?
How is it possible that inanimate objects like the sun, the stars, exist for billions of years, but the average human exists for less than 100 years? How can an inanimate object exist for longer than LIFE?
Even if you consider the entire lifespan of mankind, it is NOTHING compared to the lifespan of the universe, as per established science.
There is something wrong with this picture.-
Before I make further comments, I have a question: exactly what/which LIFE are we referring to here? Are we referring to "existence" in general? Are we referring to life as in "length of existence of a living entity from point A to point B"? Other definitions? Which definition are we working on?
If we pose the question "why does death exist?", there is the presumption that death is not merely the "absence of life" but is rather a separate entity from life itself. Defining death as the negation of life won't lead us any further. There ought to be a working definition here. -
@iamthevoodoochild:
The question here is: "Why do people die?"
Definition of death here is : "Dissolution of the physical form."
There is no presumption that 'death is an entity' in this discussion. No such implied meaning.
Death is of course the opposite of life. We don't want to compare the life of a human being to that of crops, grass, trees etc.
For example:
"Old crops die so that new crops may come, therefore death is an important part of life...."
Such logic is not encouraged in this forum because we are talking about human beings, people, the life and death of people. Not plants or crops etc.
(Just an introduction.)
Join in!! -
I see. Let's not, then, cite examples about "inanimate objects like the sun, the stars" since "we are talking about human beings, people, the life and death of people."
-
@voodoochild:
My point was:
A star is not alive (as per established science) but its physical form exists for millions or perhaps billions of years.
A human is alive, yet his/her physical form disintegrates and dies after 70 odd years.
I am by no means comparing humans and stars in terms of 'life and living'.
When I write *a star exists*, I am not assuming 'it is alive'!
Therefore I am not comparing human life with 'a star-lifespan' the way you think I am.
When a scientist says 'lifespan of a star', no body says that the scientist is assuming that the star is alive!
The example I have given is therefore absolutely ok. -
self-righteous logic.
anyway, people die because they are alive. Anything that has life will soon die. Death begins where life ends. Once you are born in this world, death is most likely to follow, sooner or later following the definition of death as the "dissolution of the physical form". -
Very cliched, run-of-the-mill answer. Not saying you are wrong. ;-)
-
a very cliched, run-of-the-mill question begets a very cliched, run-of-the-mill answer
-
-
oh boy you ready for this one.
In the beginning god created adam and eve. They were suppose to live for ever right. But then they sinned against god. If you follow bible history. As you read through from beginning to end you will see that men lived shorter and shorter as time goes on. The further away man gets from god the earlier we die. If you really think about we are not suppose to die. Everything in our body renew and cleans itself. Take skin for example old skin dies and new skin takes its place. We are designed to live. Sin kills us and since we are all born with sin we all must pay the price for that sin.
Ofcourse this is my own take on the matter.
Some would say this life is just the first step to our existence and death is the continuation of our life.
Either way you look at it. Its what we do here and now that makes us who we are.
The young rarely treasure there life and the old wish they were young.
As for me I hope to to die with my eyes open.
Even if you were to live 200year it would be short in comparison to eternity. I am not sure why more people don't confront the fact that one day their hearts will stop beating. Fear of death is silly at best. as is pondering existence. We are in the moment and once the moment is gone its gone. I don't think any other creature on this planet concerns itself with life and death as much as humans. I think this is because we as humans are selfish creatures. Death is part of life without it we could never appreciate being alive. -
WORMS HAVE TO EAT TOO! -
Death with professor Shelly Kagan:
machine-human.com/past/2007/12/27/death_with_professor_shelly_kagan -
Death is just an "absence", an absence of life. But we only refer to this absence as "death" after a life has been held, not before.
For example, let’s say you were never born. So therefore there was never a "you" to die. There was an absence of life before one is born, but we do not call it death in this case. We only call the absence "death" after life has been experienced. But the absence is really the same before and after. We just label it differently in relation to one who has once held a life "before" the absence. -
The dance between Eros, and Thanatos. Pro life and anti life urges.
Who is the ultimate victor? Who wins eventually, and why?
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
