What is it that travels from one life to the next?

[Goldenage]

OK, but just nudge it a little....

Again I'll refer to my old question: what kind of energy is thought? To me, thought and consciousness are synonymous to the "Soul. It is this essence that travels from one lifetime to the next. It is US, each and every individual, forever maintaining our own individuality, that are the "observers" traveling through space and time...

:thumbsup::thumbsup:
& end it with "creating or manifesting [or some such] space & time" instead of

traveling through space and time..

Why? Because that puts you in the driver's seat - it is who you really are. Thus we are not traveling anywhere anyplace or anytime such notions are themselves all within the context of the apparent lives - projected experiences or whatever one may choose to call them. The projector (by whatever name) is indeed this essence [to which you correctly refer] - it experiences the lifetimes and associated infrastructure but it does not move in and of itself because it is all that there is and all that there has ever been. In such manner, thought (or if you will the capacity thereof) is not an energy as a physicist would understand it, since it precedes all that you have referenced and some may call it God but there is so much more to it than any known description thereof.


Now you may choose, in reference, to split this essence (in the way that you indicate some spiritualists do). But this leads to a grosser understanding than the essentially pure thought you started with & there is thus no need for it (except, maybe, as a first point of departure for pre-school explanations??)


Also, the individual, manifests itself by means of the creative capacity of the essence. All the rest (the lives, the forms etc) can be summed up under the heading "the struggle to return to the purity of this one essence" - it is a lot easier to get out than to get back in............ because of But, none the less, it is the TRUE test of Self

 

[Charles Stuart]

Hi Robin,

In such manner, thought (or if you will the capacity thereof) is not an energy as a physicist would understand it, since it precedes all that you have referenced and some may call it God...

Yes, indeed, in my understanding, the "Intelligent Principle" of which we, as "Souls", are a result of Its individualization, is what we would refer to as "God". We, as "Souls", are of the same essence, which is immaterial (meaning it has no mass that can be detectable by physicists or by "scientific" means), immortal and eternal. It is "That Which Creates" (Soul, Consciousness or "God", the "Divine Principle" or "Divine Essence").


However, IMO each "Individualization", each "Soul", although its origin is "The Essence", indeed becomes separated from it by its own individualization, and cannot again become "one" with the original source, if this means the loss of its own individuality. This is what is called "the gift of eternal life". We, as Souls, have our origin in "The Light" (within each and every one of us there is a "Divine Spark"). We are of the same essence, but "created by" and not "creators of" (although we also "co-create", seeing as "The Essence" is the same).


IMO, we are Light. We are in the Light. But we are not "The Light" Itself.


The struggle to reunite with "The Light" (re-ligion) is the ultimate struggle of every Soul, and the ultimate objective of our existences, and can only be achieved through the purification of our thoughts (consciousness), deeds and actions, with the understanding that, at our common origin, we are all ONE...

 

[Charles Stuart]

Hi again,


Upon posting the above, I remembered a song that is sung in the rituals of the spiritualist line of African origin here in Brazil known as Candomblé, which refers to the spiritual struggle to reach enlightenment, heaven, nirvana or whatever term or name one might wish to use:

Those who think the sky is near,
The clouds they will not see.


Even the angels in heaven are laughing,


At how great their fall will be...

:thumbsup: : angel

 

[alaskanlaughter]

Hi John,
Welcome to the forum.


My personal take is that the soul is vast and eternal and is what is 'carrying on' from one body to the next. The soul exists outside of space and time, in my view. The body must obey normal rules of space and time - travel methodically from A to B in real time, grow old and die, etc. So it is an illusion that the soul 'goes' anywhere - similar to the illusion that the sun is moving through the sky even though it is actually stationary and it is earth that is moving. It is a very powerful illusion nonetheless.


I believe the 'soul' is a container for all the memories of a person and is in touch, through some unknown mechanism, with an even vaster and more 'eternal' level of reality. Since the soul operates outside of time the term 'memory' really only has meaning for the mind in any case. The soul has access to a far greater and more complex order of information than the mind can comprehend without becoming discombobulated.


I believe that dreams, visions, images, feelings, and so on are how the soul communicates with the 'mind' - or waking consciousness - when it has something important that it feels we need to know which might effect our destiny in an important way. I belive this is why we have only fairly limited memories of previous lives (of which there may be many thousands) - some more than others. Our conscious mind has an important job to do in just navigating around in normal reality, not getting hit by a taxi, finding food and so forth and cannot compute the volume of info available to our higher level of consciousness - which I term the 'soul'.


Imagine a vast and eternal tree, shedding its leaves every year then growing new ones. That is how I see it. The tree does not 'go' anywhere, it is the leaves which are beautiful and interesting and useful, but ephemeral. The imaginary tree on the other hand is the 'real deal' and is immortal.

i totally agree with you tanguerra and i love the image of the tree, its beautiful

 

[Goldenage]

yes, ok.....


Hi Charles,


You wish to preserve the notion that we

cannot again become "one" with the original source, if this means the loss of its own individuality. This is what is called "the gift of eternal life"

. But, might this not be a matter of "choice"? The gift of eternal life can surely not be compromised by ultimately conjoint existence?

IMO, we are Light. We are in the Light. But we are not "The Light" Itself

& I must say it is difficult to necessarily see that your above statement does not really preclude unity as is the case when an individual drop of water fusing with the sea becomes the sea...... and still the drop of water is yet "with the sea"....
Anyway, what then are we to make of Christ's prayer (Sacerdotal, offered up before the crucifixion) ....

And now glorify thou me , O Father, with thyself, with the glory which I had before the world was, with thee.

the meaning surely turns on the words "with" and "glory/glorify", which, it appears, can be had "both ways" as the water drop with the sea.
And consider also (John 10.30.) "My Father and I are One".

 

[PaulAdams]

I have reconstructed reincarnation this way:


Our true essence, our form of life is not this one.


This one we have now is more like a school or, if you prefer, it's like a very big wardrobe.


What religious people call it "the soul" is our true nature.


Just think about that: how do you feel after recovering from a week of painful illnes or from a long desease? You feel better that before, isn't it?


It's like you are unconscious about your health when you have it and you need an illness to realize you're healthy then.


And the same is with knowledge. Not knowledge by literature, maths, physics, biology, history or stuff like that.


Knowledge about yourself and, consequently, about other people.


If you know all it's like when you're healthy. You are not aware completely about this condition.


It's like knowing what is being blind without being it, for example. Difficult if not impossible.


We experience confusion/uncertaninty and being limited to get "the unlimited" and clearness/certainty. It's like cutting your right arm because without doing that you don't realize the importance of the right hand (unless you're left-handed).


This is what survives and what people carries "inbetween".


When i read books or forum posts about reincarnation, i see most people believing that "the shoe is the foot". It's nothing like that, or better, it's not like that to me.


The foot is important for the goal you need to, but what decides or what is really important is the foot.


Obviously a bad shoe can hurt the foot, for that the foot will not be confortable in the wrong shoe. The sow will be changed into a new one more confortable.


When people who regress and seems to recall past lives really, pratically realizes that. They see the fatue meaning of a single life and realizes that what we here think it's so important, it's truely not.


It's like watching a movie and taking part to the story of a particular charachter. Nothing more, nothing less.


But what cotinues after the movie ends, it's the watcher.

 

[torrd25]

Hi all,


In Buddhism, there is theory behind the cycle of rebirth.


It it called " Dependent Origination ". The explanations includes consciousness and feelings and a few other.


Anyone interested can do a search base on that title.


Buddha recollected many many of his previous lives on the night of his englightenment.


That is all from me.


Torrd

 

[Charles Stuart]

Hi Robin,


We're really going in deep now...

But, might this not be a matter of "choice"? The gift of eternal life can surely not be compromised by ultimately conjoint existence?

It certainly might be, and who are we to know for sure? But personally I don't think so. Just as an example, Jesus is still Jesus. He is still the same "individual persona", even though by all accounts he is "already as one with the Father".


As for Jesus, though, more specifically, I have the personal experience of for 12 years having participated in a spiritualist line of religion here in Brazil known as Candomblé and Umbanda, which has similar African origins to Vodum and Santeria. In it, there is the legend of Oshallah, whom in the religious synchretism here in Brazil is associated to Jesus. The mythological legend goes that Olorum (the Creator God) first created the spiritual realms (the Orum). After having done so, he made two eggs. From the first egg (remember this is mythological symbology), Oshallah, His first son was born. From the second, His first daughter was born, whose name was Oduduah, and from them all the other "first beings" (the Orishas) were born.


Olorum (God) then delegated to His daughter Oduduah the responsibility for creating the "Physical Realms", and to His son Oshallah (which means the son of Allah) the responsibility for creating the beings who would inhabit it (us). So, as far as this legend goes, Oshallah (Jesus) is the "Son of God" (His first son). To us, he would be both our father (creator) and our brother (created by God just as we were).


I personally very much like this interpretation, but we can never know for sure, here from our material observation point, exactly what is involved in the history of the spiritual realms...

& I must say it is difficult to necessarily see that your above statement does not really preclude unity as is the case when an individual drop of water fusing with the sea becomes the sea...... and still the drop of water is yet "with the sea"....

Yes, I agree, and I'm not saying any different... :thumbsup: But yet I believe that we always retain our own "individual persona".

And now glorify thou me , O Father, with thyself, with the glory which I had before the world was, with thee.

Yes, but if we take the above legend as true, it throws an entirely different interpretation to this passage, doesn't it? :cool

 

[Goldenage]

Dear Charles,


yes you can say that the Candomblé and Umbanda story is the way to go but "My Father and I are one" and "I am that I Am" is a simpler way to go, less structure & so forth. Besides which Christ Consciousness can be had by anyone with with the urge to follow what Jesus was saying. He was talking to anyone that would/could listen and references to The Father indicate his own clear consciousness and thus anyone wishing to, can follow suite in comprehension. The kingdom of heaven is truly within, there is only one God and it is the task of life to see this "fact". Getting confused in life leads to the endless array of other-lives (past or future) and continued subdivision of form and manifestation.

 

[Groovy]

However, IMO each "Individualization", each "Soul", although its origin is "The Essence", indeed becomes separated from it by its own individualization, and cannot again become "one" with the original source, if this means the loss of its own individuality.
…


The struggle to reunite with "The Light" (re-ligion) is the ultimate struggle of every Soul, and the ultimate objective of our existences, and can only be achieved through the purification of our thoughts (consciousness), deeds and actions, with the understanding that, at our common origin, we are all ONE...

Would you mind describing the reunion that you are referring to, seeing that it doesn’t entail the loss of individuality? In what sense are we reunited?

 

[Charles Stuart]

Hi to both of you,

Would you mind describing the reunion that you are referring to, seeing that it doesn’t entail the loss of individuality? In what sense are we reunited?

The way I view it, The Soul/God Essence of which we are formed, in our own individual basis, is tied to matter and the space-time continuum only by our spiritual or physical bodies. Apparently the more "evolved" a Soul becomes in its evolutionary process, the less dense becomes its "Spiritual Body", and the closer to the "Immaterial Essence" that we all originated from. We become more "attuned" to the "Greater Consciousness" or "God", but without, however, losing the "individual persona/consciousness" we have been created to be.

Besides which Christ Consciousness can be had by anyone with with the urge to follow what Jesus was saying. He was talking to anyone that would/could listen and references to The Father indicate his own clear consciousness and thus anyone wishing to, can follow suite in comprehension.

Yes, I agree.

The kingdom of heaven is truly within...

I would say: "Within and without". It is both internal and external to us. "Internal" because we were created from it and are of the same Essence as it, but it is also all around us...


The Trinity: God (Universal Consciousness), Spirit (the Universal Cosmic Fluid that permeates the whole universe, which is apparently electro-magnetic in nature and often referred to as "The Light") and Matter (the physical manifestation) is, IMO, the foundation of the existence of all things. The higher we evolve in consciousness (morally and intelectually), the less dense becomes the body that surrounds us (whether physical or in the various density levels of the spiritual bodies) and the closer we get to "The Essence"...


:thumbsup:

 

[Groovy]

The way I view it, The Soul/God Essence of which we are formed, in our own individual basis, is tied to matter and the space-time continuum only by our spiritual or physical bodies. Apparently the more "evolved" a Soul becomes in its evolutionary process, the less dense becomes its "Spiritual Body", and the closer to the "Immaterial Essence" that we all originated from. We become more "attuned" to the "Greater Consciousness" or "God", but without, however, losing the "individual persona/consciousness" we have been created to be.

Perhaps reunion is not the best word. It seems to be about growing more alike without actually uniting.

The Trinity: God (Universal Consciousness), Spirit (the Universal Cosmic Fluid that permeates the whole universe, which is apparently electro-magnetic in nature and often referred to as "The Light") and Matter (the physical manifestation) is, IMO, the foundation of the existence of all things.

Now that you mention it, another version of the Trinity that I’ve come across that makes sense to me is that of knowing (the Father), experiencing (the Son) and being (the Holy Spirit). It was offered as a contrast to life in the physical realm, which tends to be dualistic in nature.

 

[Charles Stuart]

Hi groovy,

Perhaps reunion is not the best word. It seems to be about growing more alike without actually uniting.

I agree 100%. How about "reconnection"?

Now that you mention it, another version of the Trinity that I’ve come across that makes sense to me is that of knowing (the Father), experiencing (the Son) and being (the Holy Spirit).

Yes, there are MANY definitions. Another would be God, the First Son (Jesus, as our co-creator), and the "Holly Spirit" would be the combination of ALL Soul/Spirits. In other words, US. The passage in the bible in which the apostles receive the visit of the "Holly Spirit" is interpreted in spiritualistic circles as a mediumnic phenomenon, in which the apostles would have mediumnically begun to speak in other languages... :thumbsup:

 

[Goldenage]

Holy Spirit


Holy Spirit = God Consciousness (visitation by the Paraclete).


Prior to the crucifixion the apostles were a bunch of "wannabees" all of whom cleared out or denied Christ in the instance of that "heavy" social event. Afterwards they became "enlightened", were as Christ (obtained Christ Consciousness etc), were enabled to do God's work & so forth, obtained the experience of being at one with God etc. God = absolute identity & the origin from which all derive, Christ (the Son) = the incarnated being (soul) , - in this case being the human-form-epitome of perfection (almost perfect in practice but yet not quite) - needing only to earn the grace of "forgiveness" to obtain perfection, hence tough going up on the cross "father, father why hast thou forsaken me?" [learning the ultimate lesson of forgiveness "forgive them father for they know not what they do"], the Holy Ghost = the fleeting but timeless & eternal experience of God-consciousness, the visitation of the Paraclete etc. etc.


Get this straight and a person is "off the wheel" of cyclic life-phases followed by unfortunate "death" (as the result of confusion) followed again by obligatory "reincarnation" & ....... (repeats).


Christ consciousness = God consciousness = are in the end the same thing (as in "My Father & I are 1").

 

[Cloggie777]

A quantum leap in the search for the soul


Hi everyone


From the book "Past Lives" by Peter & Elizabeth Fenwick (I will try not to copy this verbatim but I need to read through it again myself to understand it):


The theories of relativity and of quantum mechanics have shown that matter may be interconnected. Light can exist as either waves or photons. Waves are connected with every other wave in the universe. However, at the macro level, matter behaves as particles and the interconnectedness is less apparent. An important quantum-mechanical concept is that until the precise position of the particles is measured, the state of the system in undefined. Meaning that in order for the world to become manifest, it has to be acted on in some way. Until then, it remains in a virtual form. Measurement in a quantum-mechanical experiment can be carried out by a remote sensor or by a human observer. The important point is that the measurement has to be made before the quantum-mechanical (virtual) state collapses into a defined physical state. This is the closest that any physical theory has come to incorporating consciousness.


For many years it was thought that the human brain was too large, too hot and too wet for quantum-mechanical events to take place. However, Stuart Hammeroff and Roger Penrose have suggested that there are areas inside the brain cells called microtubules, in which it is possible for quantum-mechanical events to take place. If so, it's likely that the brain and the nervous system as a whole work together as a quantum-mechanical computer. As quantum-mechanical events are spread throughtout the universe, it can be argued that brain function would be extended beyond the human body.


If we take these ideas and use them as a quantum hypothesis, we could postulate that the soul exists as a virtual field. This field need not even have a spatial location. When the field interacts with a brain, it would collapse from its virtual form into that of a defined soul. At death the field would return, modified by life experience, to its virtual form. This form would then await its interaction with another brain to again become manifest. One could then argue that in only a small number of cases would there be sufficient overlapping of the 2 soul states for previous memories to condense from the field. This would explain why not everyone has a past-life memory. Virtual fields would also solve the problem of location of memory outside the brain, and also the apparent population problem of "soul transfer", as you could argue for a field with extensive properties that are not significantly diminished by the condensation of a single soul. (I think this means, incarnating into 2 or more forms simultaneously, e.g. having 2 parallel lives) Quantum mechanics contains another important key concept which is related to the amount of information that it's possible to get from quantum states. If you wish to know the position of a particle, then quantum mechanics will not allow its velocity to be known, and vice versa. Therefore we can postulate a theory whereby the "soul" is of such a quality that it falls below the theoretical level of detection, and so cannot be *found*.

 

[gpvegas]

What is Scientific


Any sort of scientific evidence, or proof of anything in this world isn't proof or evidence at all since it originates from imperfect people making sense of a world completely beyond our comprehension. Facts are never facts; the truth is never the truth as long as it's interrupted by human beings in their current states. We can learn as much as we can while on this earth but I believe there are no absolutes... just discussions and theories which can expand or minds.

 

[Goldenage]

what is scientific?


I think it is the language of Science in the context of Cloggie's post (above) that is of interest here because it is used as just another way of pointing at the expanded state of human consciousness transcending what we often take to be the "real" world. What is described is neither real nor unreal, and, as gpvegas correctly says it is not (in itself) proof of anything. Instead we may say of the Fenwicks that they have done a commendable job of using this language in such a way that it just might tempt an ordinary-world scientist into a profound insight. Nothing new to be sure, but a powerful and compelling description for all that, falling short only because the subject matter although infinite is but a tiny part of our true selves.)

 

[Charles Stuart]

Hiya Robin. Hi Vegas.


Conclusions are almost always derived from that which is "observable". The truly creative minds are the ones that can reach conclusions by seeing even beyond what is "commonly observed", such as Isaac Newton with the falling apple. Nowadays quantum physics has challenged us by demonstrating that it is not even possible to draw definite conclusions from our observations, seeing as the observer interpheres with the results of that which is being observed...


Hopefully some scientists will also accept this fact and realise that they too cannot draw "final conclusions". A closed mind is an arrogant and ignorant state of being. It is essential, in all things, to always keep an open mind... :thumbsup:

 

[Titus Rivas]

Personal reincarnation


What I try to show in my article Rebirth and personal identity is that reincarnation can be conceptualised as a personal process which does not involve loss of personal identity.


Titus

 

[tanguerra]

Brilliant stuff Titus and thank you for resurrecting this brilliant thread.

Introduction

Some spiritualists, Swedenborgians, Christians, Muslims and others appear to regard reincarnation research as a threat to a realistic and positive perspective on personal survival after death. It seems that in their view, reincarnation theory could only be compatible with an impersonalist stand on personal identity. Accordingly, reincarnation would imply that death is followed by a radical disintegration of personality, or loss of self. Only certain memories, personality traits and skills would be 'recycled' during the formation of a fundamentally new person. In a sense, the theory of reincarnation would be remarkably similar to the materialist theory of extinction after death in that the person as such would really be irreversibly destroyed. The consolation offered by reincarnation for the eternal loss of a person would be very bleak indeed, adding a new bizarre dimension to life rather than taking away the apparent absurdity of death. However, this particular concept is not the only rationally conceivable perspective on reincarnation...

I love this remark from Goldenage: "....That is, is stuff plain just "not there" until science "finds (creates) it"?"


I also love this post from PaulAdams

When i read books or forum posts about reincarnation, i see most people believing that "the shoe is the foot". It's nothing like that, or better, it's not like that to me.
The foot [shoe] is important for the goal you need to, but what decides or what is really important is the foot.


Obviously a bad shoe can hurt the foot, for that the foot will not be confortable in the wrong shoe. The sow [shoe] will be changed into a new one more confortable. When people who regress and seems to recall past lives really, pratically realizes that. They see the fatue [factual?] meaning of a single life and realizes that what we here think it's so important, it's truely not.


It's like watching a movie and taking part to the story of a particular character. Nothing more, nothing less.


But what continues after the movie ends, it's the watcher.

Or, as Titus puts it in his article:

Conclusion


Spiritual personalists may benefit a lot from reincarnation research. Rather than giving up on our personalism, we could extend it to the notion of a personal evolution over several lives on earth. Losing one's present physical body and adopting a new one may be accompanied by changes in one's psychological functioning, but this should not be confused with an ultimate disintegration or loss of personal identity.

Indeed.

 

[Goldenage]

Titus, your link is dead now, sank along with Geocities


Hi Titus,


can you please post a redirect for the link "Rebirth and personal identity"? Thanks and regards


Robin#G^H

 

[Goldenage]

Found it


http://www.newdualism.org/papers/T.Rivas/personalreincarnation.htm


:angel:

 

[Goldenage]

What is it that travels from one life to the next?


Dear Titus,


I have now carefully read your very interesting article “Rebirth and Personal identity: Is Reincarnation an Intrinsically Impersonal Concept?”


I report to you (from my own experience) that “personal” rebirth is recallable as a seemingly infinite series (parallel or sequential). The essence is always the same “core” identity that elected to abandon the “mother-ship” of being-consciousness-bliss in the very first instance. This I would call the “center of emergence”. It launched (in my case) as a sort of self-test to “see if I could return” to the origin – ie. Back to purity itself.


However, the very first iteration immediately became “lost in error”. By this I mean that the realized “departure into error” at the physical death of the expressed vehicle (the body) was sufficient to promote a re-effort to obtain perfection in the course of yet another “incarnation”, a re-incarnation. This is the origin of Samsara. This process accounts for the reinforcement and continuation of Samsara. It is part of a potentially infinite process of personal iteration.


From the initiation of Samsara a “spiritual personalism” exists and persists until the cycling entity can reclaim its desire for perfection; re-entry into the state of being-consciousness--bliss. As the name suggests, although this (being-consciousness-bliss) is a state of consciousness it is very far from being a state of personal ego-consciousness. However that may be, this state can be transcended as by inquiry “where-from being-consciousness-bliss?” A state devoid of consciousness follows (nir-vana, blown-out, the still or blank state) and this can only be appreciated when consciousness is regained.... This latter state is much as the Buddha described – discrimination ceasing – discrimination arising, consciousness is regained but this time the gap of non-consciousness is perceived as a discontinuity in the state (of consciousness) and thus something is known to “have happened” and the “what?" of it is revealed by the newly achieved content (of consciousness).


This transposition is exactly equivalent to “anatta” since no trace of any mindfulness is involved in the transposition - it is entirely impersonal. The actual transposition is also known as “The Buddha Mind”. Personal or impersonal? The situation can be truthfully described by neither one term nor the other but I suppose, in practice, it has been variously deemed by one tradition or another strictly according to some form of overarching theological construct. The caution here is just that words are only words and no word can properly describe that capacity from which words emerge. Indeed it also makes perfect sense to say that reincarnation cannot be a personal process, as there never is or has been a real substantial self therein in the first place...Call the still state God, call it the Buddha Mind - it does not matter. It is a state of being that has never not existed - it is the fundamental essence from which all derives, to which all returns and which always expands.... it is not in itself a self (exactly) but it is the center from which any movement (of thought) emerges as a sense of self and it is thus all that anyone of us is (moment to moment).


:angel:

 

[Titus Rivas]

Thanks for your comments, Robin. As a personalist I obviously do not share your views in this respect (which seem to amount to a synthesis of Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism), but as I write in my article, this should not be a problem.


Additional replies of March 2011:


For some reason, this part of the forum seems closed or so it says on my monitor. Therefore, here are a few other comments:


To Robin:

Although I studied your article very carefully & I take your point therein it still did not really help me to understand the personalist position - everyone is a personalist at some point (so it seems to me) and identity remains as long as there is consciousness to support such but once consciousness and therefore identity disappears there remains nothing that can be reported as to what might have transpired - once consciousness again reasserts (reforms) itself.

It is not a matter of consciousness versus lack of conscious but of being an individual experient, being a conscious subject that is not reducible to anything else.


To Remaining Spirit:

One question: Titus have you ever considered creating English videos for youtube? I have been listening closely to your videos, and can understand a bit, but my understanding of Dutch comes through my German, and I'm not even good at that!

Yes, I'm planning to do so. It's simply a matter of lack of time at the moment.

I think you're saying the consciousness is always there and continues, but without the presence of a persona we do not perceive the consciousness? That, persona is necessary in order to perceive life, and if we are capable of perceiving memory of lives before, then that is an indication that the persona continues from life to life?

Well, no. I'm saying that it is a conscious experient or subject that undergoes consciousness. Without an (individual) experient there can be no subjective experiences of any kind.


Titus

 

[Goldenage]

st hand


Hi Titus, thanks 4 your reply - I do not know exactly what a personalist is but I can maybe make a guess at it (I believe).


Although I studied your article very carefully & I take your point therein it still did not really help me to understand the personalist position - everyone is a personalist at some point (so it seems to me) and identity remains as long as there is consciousness to support such but once consciousness and therefore identity disappears there remains nothing that can be reported as to what might have transpired - once consciousness again reasserts (reforms) itself. Yet still it is not a situation in which "unconsciousness" reigned because potential still exists throughout.


Discrimination ceasing is maybe ok as the Buddha reported. Discrimination arising is clear but this is (must be) subsequent to the instigation of identity otherwise there is no capacity to notice instances of registration required to make any sort of discrimination......it just does not seem possible to describe the source encountered -


One enters with a question (where from being-consciousness-bliss?) and apparently exits with an answer, namely: the identity "I am that from whence all derives" a very curious transposition...


Don't let the language I use deter you from the point I am making - there is no possible synthesis of Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism - they both go off in different directions unless you count the way of the Arhat as being similar to Advaita.


I am simply telling you what I personally observed (using that language-set as a reference base only) - I have no allegiance to either Advaita Vedanta particularly or Mahayana Buddhism either for that matter. The language sets of both these traditions simply provide me with a facility for reportage - that is all.


How did I get into it? Simple (again) - I fell into it by accident - by profession I am (was) a scientist, Ecologist actually - PhD U California @ SantaBarbara, made a lifetime out of this function as a professional.....But upon arriving at the "point" I specify (above) I discovered that I had no language to express it initially so I had to shop around 4 approximate terms .......this was the best I could come up with - who knows I might entirely agree with the "personalist" position (or not) since I anyway do not particularly agree with any of available the standard formulations....:cool

 

[RemainingSpirit]

One question: Titus have you ever considered creating English videos for youtube? I have been listening closely to your videos, and can understand a bit, but my understanding of Dutch comes through my German, and I'm not even good at that!

 

[RemainingSpirit]

I think you're saying the consciousness is always there and continues, but without the presence of a persona we do not perceive the consciousness? That, persona is necessary in order to perceive life, and if we are capable of perceiving memory of lives before, then that is an indication that the persona continues from life to life?

 

[Gilligan]

I don't know about what science says, but I believe it is our soul/spirit that travels from life to life.