MJ, watch your post count...I believe this one makes 44.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@...> wrote:
>
> did you have any experience like Unity or God Consciousness or anything like
> that in the past that at the time led you to believe that the enlightenment
> thing was real? I am curious.
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: turquoiseb <no_re...@yahoogroups.com>
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2012 2:33 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Lincoln
>
>
> Â
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@> wrote:
> >
> > Bbbbbbut...wha wha wha what if we had us some visions of
> > our past lives? What do we think then? (Happened to me
> > at MIU - he he!)
>
> Well, I can speak with some confidence about this,
> having Been There Done That with "past-life recol-
> lections." I've had dozens of *waking state* (as
> opposed to dream state during sleep or under the
> influence of drugs or "rounding") "flashbacks"
> of myself living in previous eras.
>
> In most of them, the "trigger" or "catalyst" for
> the experience was being in the physical location
> where the supposed past events took place. I'd be
> walking around a 13th-century walled city in the
> south of France and the present-day city would just
> waver and go all hazy and then disappear, and all
> of the visuals were replaced by the same scene, but
> 800 years earlier. I'd be *in* my body as of that
> supposed incarnation, and able to look down and see
> what I was wearing, what my body type was, etc., and
> often it would have nothing to do with my present
> body type or style of dress. Then after a few seconds
> or minutes the experience would fade, and I'd be "back"
> in the present.
>
> And?
>
> Having had a number of these experiences, I have to
> describe them as "So What?"
>
> Nice experience, but it no more "proves" the existence
> of past lives than simply believing in them does. It
> could have been Just Another Brain Fart.
>
> Similarly, I have had remembered experiences of what
> it was like to traverse the Bardo between death and
> rebirth, in full color and 3D. Again, So What?
>
> All of this tends to make *me* believe in the possibility
> of reincarnation, but it doesn't "prove" shit. These were
> just my subjective experiences, and as such CANNOT BE
> TRUSTED. If science has taught us anything, it's that
> people can convince themselves that they have experienced
> almost *anything*. This "convinced believerism" often has
> nothing whatsoever to do with the actual events that the
> person can objectively be shown to have experienced.
>
> I'm chiming in on this because I think that a *lot* of
> people here tend to believe that if they experienced
> something subjectively, then it must be true. I do not
> believe this, even about my most intense or "spiritual"
> experiences. *At the best*, they were only What I
> Experienced, Subjectively. Nothing more.
>
> "Truth," they ain't. "Reality," they weren't, and will
> never be. The experiences were -- and will always remain
> -- subjective, going on only inside my head, or in the
> synapses of my brain.
>
> Bottom line is that my subjective experiences lead me to
> believe that there may be something to this reincarnation
> thang. If asked to put it in terms of percentages, or
> odds, I would bet on this heavily. But I try not to *ever*
> ASSUME that reincarnation is true, because it might not be.
>
> The only time I will be able to attest to its existence
> or non-existence will be too late -- I'll be dead. At that
> point, even if my spirit is flying free in some astral
> Bardo Bordello cavorting with the wraiths of my yet-
> unresolved lust fantasies, I will be unable to communicate
> that to anyone who is still living. If, on the other hand,
> if it turns out to be just as the hard-core atheists believe,
> and my consciousness and existence just switches OFF when
> I die, like with the throwing of a light switch, there will
> be no "me" present to even be disappointed.
>
> So whatever I believe about "future lives" is basically
> IRRELEVANT. It has no bearing on this life whatsoever,
> *unless I choose to give it relevance*. I don't. YMMV.
>
> > ________________________________
> > From: Ann <awoelflebater@>
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2012 9:30 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Lincoln
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <no_reply@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann" <awoelflebater@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ <no_reply@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > PVR Narasimha Rao says that it looks like Lincoln is re-incarnated
> > > > > right now based on the birth chart of a well-known individual but I
> > > > > would imagine that person does not know it or believe it himself.
> > > >
> > > > So then what does it matter?
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Who says it matters ?
> >
> > "Who says", you ask? Why, the people who take the time and trouble to
> > conjecture on such things obviously think it matters. Seems a complete
> > waste of time to me. No one could ever prove something like this and even
> > if someone was Lincoln in one life it has no bearing on who they are
> > currently, what they remember, what they will do in this new body. How does
> > one possibly come up with these theories anyway? Much better to figure out
> > who we are in this lifetime since there isn't even a way to prove we live
> > multiple, reincarnated lives and all we really have is the 'what's
> > happenin' now'. It never ceases to astound me the things people think up to
> > spend their time pursuing. Lincoln, my ass.
> >
> > It's a simply fact that people die and later gets a new body. Same will
> > happen to you, so "make hay when the sun shines" :-)
> > >
> > >
> > > My God, some of you live in a dream world. Assertions are made and not a
> > > hope in Hell of proving anything. Lincoln one day, some bum the next. All
> > > in a day's work.
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <no_reply@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <noozguru@> wrote:
> > > > > > > Scorsese in his commentary on "Gangs of New York" talked about
> > > > > > > Lincoln
> > > > > > > not being a popular as our school history books would have made
> > > > > > > out.
> > > > > > > Some of those facts come out in the film. Similarly his HBO
> > > > > > > series
> > > > > > > "Boardwalk Empire" mirrors much of the corruption we see in
> > > > > > > modern day
> > > > > > > politics.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'll get around to seeing "Lincoln" probably the way I watched
> > > > > > > "The Dark
> > > > > > > Night Rises" on Bluray as I did last night. First off I was
> > > > > > > pissed that
> > > > > > > the was mostly 16:9 instead of 2:35:1. Gives me pause to ever
> > > > > > > rent
> > > > > > > another WB title again. Second, the story seemed to telegraph to
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > audience that it is bad to go up against the rich and be for the
> > > > > > > people. That seemed to be some social engineering that wasn't
> > > > > > > needed.
> > > > > > > Afterward I found a Netflix indie to wash my palette.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The incarnation of Lincoln is today a highly developed individual
> > > > > > living in Washington DC were he works for the government. I
> > > > > > wouldn't be surprised if Scorsese, a long-time TM meditator,
> > > > > > interviewed "Lincoln".
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
