Reincarnation?

[Desert Shrimper]

I hope you're coming to the 1st Nov beer club. I'm sure you'd be even more fascinating drunk :D

He talks in Latin when he's pi$$ed....

 

[MK Shrimper]

Ozzy: "ROMANES EUNT DOMUS"?
Szone massive: "People called Romanes they go the house"?

... you know the rest :)

 

[osymandus]

I hope you're coming to the 1st Nov beer club. I'm sure you'd be even more fascinating drunk :D

Ah sadly im in Cornwall with my beloved then :D Im actually a terrible drunk i fall asleep . NOt sure if Birris going to teh next one ???
(Who is having to learn latin at present for her Law degree)
Latin oh i wish , Deus est Hommo and Et in Arcadia Ego , is the most I know ;)

Ozzy: Right now write it out 100 times, .
If it's not done by sunrise, I'll cut your balls off!

 

[MK Shrimper]

Ah sadly im in Cornwall with my beloved then :D Im actually a terrible drunk i fall asleep . NOt sure if Birris going to teh next one ???
(Who is having to learn latin at present for her Law degree)
Latin oh i wish , Deus est Hommo and Et in Arcadia Ego , is the most I know ;)

Ozzy: Right now write it out 100 times, .
If it's not done by sunrise, I'll cut your balls off!

Boo the Ozy :mad:

 

[Crabby Shrimper]

Im not sure we do , i think we have to answer the more imeediate question of what "we" are . Then as the methods seem to suggest , that leads us back to this mass of beings (also re ego , most if not all literature seems to suggest it is not an alteraritic or self serving as what ever it is or who joins it no longer has "human" emothions , reason , ideals etc). Maybe theres filters in place to stop this anyway ;)

QUOTE]

Firstly, I think the question as to who we are is indelibly linked to any collective, as it'd be who/what we are, who/what we'll become, and possibly even who/what we were. When one considers the vastness of time, or, taking man out of the equation for a second, of infinity, the idea that we go onto another form, whereby we remain is inconceivable as is that we started off at any particular point. I'd argue the case, therefore, that whatever we are, or that we're going to become, is purely transitionary, and possibly even cyclic.

As for the second point, I think we're talking at cross purposes to an extent (to be honest this is a very tricky subject to put into clear terms, well, it is for me anyway :p ) When I said about god being a collective of "selves" I meant in the purest emotional from. I didn't mean as a group of conscious forms (heck, imagine that? God by committee? :eek: ) Now, I'm not an expert, but have done a little research into the paranormal, which of course does lead onto religion and philosophy as well as science, and it seems there are two sides to a "self". One's the conscious side, which is capable of thought, emotion, and all the things we do from day to day. Think of this as MS windows if you like. The other side operates away from the conscious, and is a much "purer" self. Thoughts are capable by this, and are much quicker (think reflex actions, and "gut feelings") This is more like an assembler language, where you're not distracted by having to show your workings out as it were. This side, I'd argue, doesn't have a conscious personality, but has emotional trends (ie good/bad/greed/envy etc). This is the side that I was meaning would make up a "collective" god. The individuality is lost, yet the emotion remains to an extent to influence the greater existence.

Does that make sense? I do tend to ramble on a bit sometimes :o

 

[MK Shrimper]

Bet you don't get this on MillwallZone.

 

[osymandus]

Im not sure we do , i think we have to answer the more immediate question of what "we" are . Then as the methods seem to suggest , that leads us back to this mass of beings (also re ego , most if not all literature seems to suggest it is not an alteraritic or self serving as what ever it is or who joins it no longer has "human" emotions , reason , ideals etc). Maybe there's filters in place to stop this anyway ;)

QUOTE]

Firstly, I think the question as to who we are is indelibly linked to any collective, as it'd be who/what we are, who/what we'll become, and possibly even who/what we were. When one considers the vastness of time, or, taking man out of the equation for a second, of infinity, the idea that we go onto another form, whereby we remain is inconceivable as is that we started off at any particular point. I'd argue the case, therefore, that whatever we are, or that we're going to become, is purely transitionary, and possibly even cyclic.

As for the second point, I think we're talking at cross purposes to an extent (to be honest this is a very tricky subject to put into clear terms, well, it is for me anyway :p ) When I said about god being a collective of "selves" I meant in the purest emotional from. I didn't mean as a group of conscious forms (heck, imagine that? God by committee? :eek: ) Now, I'm not an expert, but have done a little research into the paranormal, which of course does lead onto religion and philosophy as well as science, and it seems there are two sides to a "self". One's the conscious side, which is capable of thought, emotion, and all the things we do from day to day. Think of this as MS windows if you like. The other side operates away from the conscious, and is a much "purer" self. Thoughts are capable by this, and are much quicker (think reflex actions, and "gut feelings") This is more like an assembler language, where you're not distracted by having to show your workings out as it were. This side, I'd argue, doesn't have a conscious personality, but has emotional trends (ie good/bad/greed/envy etc). This is the side that I was meaning would make up a "collective" god. The individuality is lost, yet the emotion remains to an extent to influence the greater existence.

Does that make sense? I do tend to ramble on a bit sometimes :o

Ah well you see on your first point "who" and "what" we are are human concepts and on a shall we say a "cosmic" or higher level concepts are pointers to their meanings i.e. the more you become and become aware of them the less important they become , like training aids or stabilisers :D
The map is not the terrirtory . In Taosim for instance , the first line is "The Tao that can be named is not the true and enduring Tao" . Some take this to mean when we give a part of teh eternal essence a form or "engender" it we remove part of it and our perception of it from the ternal core that produced it (in this case the Tao (for reference its not god it is something beyond the concept of Gods (there's Philosophic Taoism and religious (which came later))

Which leads me nicely on to then next point , dualism , what your describing is commonly referred to as the Concious and subconscious , or in Taoism its represented as Yin and Yang . MAle female , light dark etc . What people seem to forget is the two must be entwined to produce completeness . And really neither are separate from the other (you cant have light with out dark for instance as one is the absence of the other and with out it you'd have no reference :D)

Heck ramblings a pre requistie for this game ;) . Everything i've read points to an eventiual merging of the individual in to the universe (As above so below so the saying goes ) . Or Deus est Hommo (please correct the latin of totally wrong)God is man . In Buddishm its said we are all sleeping Buddha's who mealy need to remember ourselves and wake up . The individual isnt crushed or destroyed yet is not longer singular . They other thing is language is insiffecent to explain this concepts . Only point the way that others have been .

Now as Ive said i do a few bits and pieces and some of the more astute among you may have noticed im affiliated with a certain type . If you want to know more PM or email me any time

*Disclaimer * at not time am i claiming to be right or wrong I'm just learning its all IMHO :)

93 93/93

 

[osymandus]

Bet you don't get this on MillwallZone.

Bloody humanistic and followers of Darwkins on there :P :P

 

[Winkle]

whoooooooooooooosh! Who started this thread anyway!!! Just one thing to say,

'Cause I remember when we used to sit
In the government yard in Trenchtown
Oba, ob-serving the hypocrites
As they would mingle with the good people we meet.
Good friends we have had, oh
Good friends we've lost along the way.
In this bright future you can't forget your past
So dry your tears, I say.

No woman, no cry
No woman, no cry
Little Darlin', Don't shed no tears.
No woman, no cry

And thats all I gotta say about that.

 

[Crabby Shrimper]

Ah well you see on your first point "who" and "what" we are are human concepts and on a shall we say a "cosmic" or higher level concepts are pointers to their meanings i.e. the more you become and become aware of them the less important they become , like training aids or stabilisers :D
The map is not the terrirtory .

Yep, I'm pretty much in agreement with you on that. I used the term who/what merely to allow for the fact that all we really know about ourselves is that on some level we exist.

Which leads me nicely on to then next point , dualism , what your describing is commonly referred to as the Concious and subconscious , or in Taoism its represented as Yin and Yang . MAle female , light dark etc . What people seem to forget is the two must be entwined to produce completeness

Aha, at last, a point in which I disagree! :p Personally, I believe that the conscious is merely an interface we use between the self, and the physical world. I say world, and not body, as otherwise "out of body" experiences would be on a sub-conscious, and less "human like" level. Maybe my terminology is wrong (probably is) but I was getting at a level at which the "self" is no longer attached to a physical body, but is free of all earthly ties.

Everything i've read points to an eventiual merging of the individual in to the universe

Yes, again agree entirely. This is the stage I was getting at above, where the soul (not sure i like that word tbh) ceases to have any ties to the physical, and becomes at one with the celestial. To be honest, one of the things that always put me off too much thinking on this was the fear that I may come to the conclusion that eventually we'll lose our individuality, and personal identity. That we'll just become "another brick in the wall". Maybe this shouldn't worry me though, or maybe it only does because i'm not ready? Who knows. I do know one thing though, the ideas take some getting used to for the conscious mind!

 

[osymandus]

Yes, again agree entirely. This is the stage I was getting at above, where the soul (not sure i like that word tbh) ceases to have any ties to the physical, and becomes at one with the celestial. To be honest, one of the things that always put me off too much thinking on this was the fear that I may come to the conclusion that eventually we'll lose our individuality, and personal identity. That we'll just become "another brick in the wall". Maybe this shouldn't worry me though, or maybe it only does because i'm not ready? Who knows. I do know one thing though, the ideas take some getting used to for the conscious mind!

Lol well yes and no , i think many people reject the physical and think that you have to be lofty and celestial . Which is damn odd because why would you bother to incarnate at all if you it was so down lowly and worthless ;).
YEs there is a large aspect of Ego , and damn what I've done means something . Well yes it does and no it dosnt. In the moment it needs to be performed right action is done , but in 10,000 years will it have made any differnce ?

 

[Crabby Shrimper]

In the moment it needs to be performed right action is done , but in 10,000 years will it have made any differnce ?

This is getting very close to the thoughts of Tolstoy, that no mans action makes any difference. The action doesnt cause the ocurrence, but the fact that the ocurrence is going to happen causes the action.

As to why bother to incarnate? Why do/did we go to school? I guess also to understand the lofty, one has to know the lowly.

 

[Firestorm]

I guess also to understand the lofty,

I knew this thread would get round to Eastenders eventually

 

[osymandus]

This is getting very close to the thoughts of Tolstoy, that no mans action makes any difference. The action doesnt cause the ocurrence, but the fact that the ocurrence is going to happen causes the action.

As to why bother to incarnate? Why do/did we go to school? I guess also to understand the lofty, one has to know the lowly.

Ah now you see here in lies a failing of mine to properly convey (or even language itself :) ) what i meant .

If we perceieve our actions ti have consequence and are the sole reason for our performing those actions then thats where problems occur , if we perform them becuase they are the "right" actions to perform at the time (taosit concept of Wu Wei for indtance or Book of the Law true will can only be achieved without lust of result ).

So intent into action , at the "right" moment (minus judgmental dualistic perception), maybe what we are seeking, to perform .

Yet many of the worlds greatest thinkers, minds etc , never attended any formal schooling (Da Vinci being one ) , tis not the method by the Gnosis.

 

[osymandus]

I knew this thread would get round to Eastenders eventually

Heavens no this is more the Emmerdale of discussions (the old days with Mr Wilkes and Amos mind)

 

[Cricko]

How do we know there are more people alive today than have been previously...Its this singular human thinking where everything gets mucked up...Reincarnation to humans describes only a word that states we come back in maybe human life form. As there is no such thing as time why cant we just exist everywhere all at once. It is the nature of humans to try to "box things" to understand them and as Ozy says its a way to rationalize things in our own minds. I doubt for one minuite if you reached "Oneness" you would want to come back in human form and it would not mean you did not excist in another way. To know oneself and to move forward spiritually you have to experience the "all".....We are all "One" split into zillions of energy parts striving to get back to where we came from with enlightenment.

 

[osymandus]

How do we know there are more people alive today than have been previously...Its this singular human thinking where everything gets mucked up...Reincarnation to humans describes only a word that states we come back in maybe human life form. As there is no such thing as time why cant we just exist everywhere all at once. It is the nature of humans to try to "box things" to understand them and as Ozy says its a way to rationalize things in our own minds. I doubt for one minuite if you reached "Oneness" you would want to come back in human form and it would not mean you did not excist in another way. To know oneself and to move forward spiritually you have to experience the "all".....We are all "One" split into zillions of energy parts striving to get back to where we came from with enlightenment.

Totally agree. As often said the "ego" is what prevents us from returning to a more collective mindset. We're afraid of losing what we think is "us" .
When the guy down the road , or old lady next door (yes even the peado , sucide bomber , John Gaunt , Richard Littlejohn sigh) are us.

You have to accept the **** with the gold , help who you can . If you think someones doing something "wrong" talk to them offer to saw them soething different (even if its cracking them across the jaw if they take a po at you ;) )

 

[osymandus]

Ok one quick last one .
I feel this document sum's up nicely what maybe we could be doing
http://www.sacred-texts.com/oto/lib30.htm

By that funsters Aliester Crowley (rhymes with Holey)

 

[Winkle]

Just to re affirm this apparently I was singing " Could you be loved" In my sleep last night!

 

[DTS]

I personally think when your dead your dead end of.....

However I have often thought that I could be the rekindered spirit of Charles Hawtry of Carry on fame........