Post Reply
Page 1 of 3  •  1 2 3 Next
Switch to Forum Live View The Afterlife--The Discussion
5 years ago  ::  Jun 25, 2009 - 12:50PM #1
whirlinggal
Posts: 4,329

Neo and anyone else interested in discussing the Afterlife using words--


I think we were discussing the different between OBEs and NDEs--is that where we were when that thread got interrupted?


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 25, 2009 - 2:11PM #2
Neomonist
Posts: 2,686

Jun 25, 2009 -- 12:50PM, whirlinggal wrote:


Neo and anyone else interested in discussing the Afterlife using words--


I think we were discussing the different between OBEs and NDEs--is that where we were when that thread got interrupted?





I'm sure that is where we were.

Standard Disclaimer: This is just my 2cents worth.
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 25, 2009 - 9:37PM #3
Neomonist
Posts: 2,686

The popular image of Hindu reincarnation is that of individual souls traversing the Wheel of Life, while Buddhist Transmigration denies the concept of individual soul . The difference I see between the two approaches is the Hindu approach pays attention to the Actor while the Buddhist approach pays attention to the action. While the Hindu campfire story of all this being the dream of -O- makes perfect sense, we need to realize this is a story told in the Language of the Heart. The Buddhist campfire story of mutual dependence makes sense as well, but it is a story told in the Language of the Mind.


Who and/or What is it that transmigrates? There is no "Who" that experiences Transmigration and there is no "What" that Transmigrates. Tathata is what is transmigrating and Sunyata is what transmigrates. As Nagarjuna says: "Things derive their being and nature by mutual dependence and are nothing in themselves." Concepts are regarded as things. "Who" is a concept one can wrap their mind around. "What" is a concept one can wrap their mind around. Talk about 'who' is just that, talk. Talk about 'what' is just that, talk. They are ways to talk about Reality, they are not Reality Itself. This does not, however, mean that talking about them is useless as humans communicate through the use of symbols. Our problem is that we confuse the Symbol for the Reality and as a result make idols out of ideas.

Standard Disclaimer: This is just my 2cents worth.
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 25, 2009 - 11:01PM #4
whirlinggal
Posts: 4,329

Neo--hi--I've been trying to figure out how to experess what an OBE is in as understandable a way as possible.


It's not as easy as it first might seem.


However--here's my first stab at it--an out of body experience ca be on purpose/intentional or it can be spontaneous.


Basically it consists of the spirit/vital energy travelling outside the physical body and then coming back to re-join the physical body.


Many people engage in intentional OBEs on a regular basis--Shamanic Journeying is a good example of an OBE.


It can be quite spectacular or it can be almost mundane.


 


Does that make sense to you? Are there things I've said that don't make sense? Ask and I'll do my best to answer.


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 25, 2009 - 11:51PM #5
Neomonist
Posts: 2,686

whirlinggal


>Neo--hi--I've been trying to figure out how to experess what an OBE is in as understandable a way as possible. It's not as easy as it first might seem.


I understand. I've been attempting to make the mystical understandable for a long time.


>However--here's my first stab at it--an out of body experience ca be on purpose/intentional or it can be spontaneous. Basically it consists of the spirit/vital energy travelling outside the physical body and then coming back to re-join the physical body. Many people engage in intentional OBEs on a regular basis--Shamanic Journeying is a good example of an OBE. It can be quite spectacular or it can be almost mundane.


Same as with mystical experience. One could almost say that by 'forgetting' the body, one is having a form of OBE. There are experiences that are as subtle as a sledge hammer upside the back of the head or as simple as "Oh yeah."


>Does that make sense to you? Are there things I've said that don't make sense? Ask and I'll do my best to answer.


I did some mining in this dusty ole memory of mine and remembered an echat I had with a person who did remote viewing for a certain agency.

Standard Disclaimer: This is just my 2cents worth.
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 26, 2009 - 12:12AM #6
whirlinggal
Posts: 4,329

Neo--hi--I'll have to think about what you've said--but off the top of my head--


 


Mystical experiences and intentional  (non NDE among other) OBEs don't feel the same IMO.


And Remote Viewing doesn't feel like a mystical experience nor much like an intentional OBE (IE Shamanic Journey for example).


Cool


But I'll think about it and see if I can express the differences better.


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 26, 2009 - 9:43AM #7
Neomonist
Posts: 2,686

whirlinggal


>Mystical experiences and intentional  (non NDE among other) OBEs don't feel the same IMO.


That's why I qualified it with 'almost'. It was an analogy in the loosest sense of the term. One consequence of my mysticism is that I sometimes blurt out headlines - sometimes it feels like I have a mystical version of Tourettes Syndrome.


Wink


>And Remote Viewing doesn't feel like a mystical experience nor much like an intentional OBE (IE Shamanic Journey for example).


She talked about them as OBE, but this was over 20 years ago. I could be misremembering.

Standard Disclaimer: This is just my 2cents worth.
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 26, 2009 - 1:26PM #8
williejhonlo
Posts: 3,444

Jun 25, 2009 -- 9:37PM, Neomonist wrote:


The popular image of Hindu reincarnation is that of individual souls traversing the Wheel of Life, while Buddhist Transmigration denies the concept of individual soul . The difference I see between the two approaches is the Hindu approach pays attention to the Actor while the Buddhist approach pays attention to the action. While the Hindu campfire story of all this being the dream of -O- makes perfect sense, we need to realize this is a story told in the Language of the Heart. The Buddhist campfire story of mutual dependence makes sense as well, but it is a story told in the Language of the Mind.


Who and/or What is it that transmigrates? There is no "Who" that experiences Transmigration and there is no "What" that Transmigrates. Tathata is what is transmigrating and Sunyata is what transmigrates. As Nagarjuna says: "Things derive their being and nature by mutual dependence and are nothing in themselves." Concepts are regarded as things. "Who" is a concept one can wrap their mind around. "What" is a concept one can wrap their mind around. Talk about 'who' is just that, talk. Talk about 'what' is just that, talk. They are ways to talk about Reality, they are not Reality Itself. This does not, however, mean that talking about them is useless as humans communicate through the use of symbols. Our problem is that we confuse the Symbol for the Reality and as a result make idols out of ideas.



Hi neo, if their is no "who" or "what" how can these terms exist in language? Since who or what refers to objects they just can't be ideas. You ask what is the soul, the soul is the knower and enjoyer, and the body and mind are the two bodies that it knows and enjoys. By maya's way, the soul think it is the body and mind and by doing so it creates different perceptions about life and goes about trying to enjoy, by doing so its karmas take it to different levels of perception ( some good, some bad,) according to its karma. It is the mind that is the vehicle for all of this. An NDE is just the mind separating from the gross body maybe due to some trauma, this happens when the mind perceives the body of being of no longer being of any use. An OBE is the same thing but an OBE doesn't necessary involve trauma, some people can experience an OBE by meditatiing or focusing real hard on a place. All and all these are experiences experienced by a knower therefore you can define the soul as " the entity that knows". You see, all experiences exist as knowledge and knowledge can only be known if there is an entity that perceives such experiences.

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 26, 2009 - 7:13PM #9
whirlinggal
Posts: 4,329

Jun 26, 2009 -- 9:43AM, Neomonist wrote:


whirlinggal


>Mystical experiences and intentional  (non NDE among other) OBEs don't feel the same IMO.


That's why I qualified it with 'almost'. It was an analogy in the loosest sense of the term. One consequence of my mysticism is that I sometimes blurt out headlines - sometimes it feels like I have a mystical version of Tourettes Syndrome.


Wink


>And Remote Viewing doesn't feel like a mystical experience nor much like an intentional OBE (IE Shamanic Journey for example).


She talked about them as OBE, but this was over 20 years ago. I could be misremembering.






Neo-hi.


I've been trying since I last posted to come up with a good description of how Remote Viewing feels and how it feels different from other intentional experiences like intentional Shamanic work etc.


At this point I have to say that one of the reasons I don't talk about these often is because it is almost impossible to express what they feel like to someone who hasn't had a similar experience.


Ditto for journeying which can feel many different ways--each one could almost be considered unique.


I appreciate your patience while I struggle for adequate words,


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 26, 2009 - 7:58PM #10
Neomonist
Posts: 2,686

Jun 26, 2009 -- 1:26PM, williejhonlo wrote:


Hi neo, if their is no "who" or "what" how can these terms exist in language? Since who or what refers to objects they just can't be ideas.




They exist because we humans communicate via language. Is there an intrinsic object 'tree' or does the word stand for an idea?


Jun 26, 2009 -- 1:26PM, williejhonlo wrote:


You ask what is the soul, the soul is the knower and enjoyer, and the body and mind are the two bodies that it knows and enjoys.




Is this triadism of soul and body and mind logical or existential?


 

Standard Disclaimer: This is just my 2cents worth.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 3  •  1 2 3 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook