Hi Rigs, this interpretation looks too short sighted. Or the other way round - you know what I mean. Anyways, I would postulate that the so called afterlife (a too two-dimensional translation by the way) begins as soon as the navel cord of whatever you accept to be your baby has been cut. In that respect or from that perspective is commonly achievable to be able to oversee and remember even more that one afterlife.
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 12:06 PM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > I believe the memories remaining with the living or creations left > behind- even our genetic codes- are our afterlife. The lure of an > afterlife is to give hope to those who found real life pretty > miserable plus provides a rationale for various religious and moral > rules. What was the sale of Indulgences during the Middle Ages except > a form of a protection racket? > > On Mar 18, 3:58 am, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > > Some people believe in an after-life because some people claim to > > remember past births , experience is on their side , they say. You > > might as well believe in ghosts and ghouls because some people claim > > to have experienced them. So much for experience ! > > > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 3:07 AM, Vam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > How do you know that, RP, when your dead ? Have you ever died before ? > > > > > We all have a body and a mind. Based on its capabilities, or > > > incapabilities, what are we talking about ? Nature ? We hardly know > > > what, how much, how far, in what ways... it works, in all the 10 to > > > power 22 star worlds. What we know of it can hardly determine what we > > > do know about it, quite as the past can hardly define the future ! > > > > > Likewise, God. WTF are we talking about ? Now this could seem rude but > > > should make perfect sense in the context. As in what is this God ? > > > What constitutes it ? How does it relate to that other fog word " > > > Nature " ? > > > > > I sincerely believe such threads are started on account of something > > > diseased within us ! > > > > > Healthy people should be talking of matters they know or have > > > experienced. One can then opine, extrapolate, theorise... and still be > > > understandable. > > > > > On Mar 17, 11:26 pm, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Good > > >> Allan > > >> On Mar 17, 2012 5:28 PM, "RP Singh" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> > As long as I am alive I am conscious of the world and myself , but > when I > > >> > am dead I reach a state of permanent unconsciousness , a state of > supreme > > >> > peace where nothing disturbs me , a sort of nirvana. that is the > ultimate > > >> > state from which nobody returns. > > > > >> > On Friday, March 9, 2012 3:32:12 AM UTC+5:30, Ash wrote: > > > > >> >> This does make some sense to me RP so I hope my question doesn't > sound > > >> >> critical. For me thinking in this way causes a massive amount of > > >> >> difficulty, as it sounds like immutable truths, so I have to > translate > > >> >> away the language to get glints of my own thinking through. We > could > > >> >> easily call my predicament not seeing the forest for the trees, and > > >> >> that would be a fitting if not limited statement. In my mind I > prefer > > >> >> to start with the will representing laws of nature which are > dynamic, > > >> >> and work more along an opportunistic heuristic. For me it is > obvious > > >> >> that some people talk about an n-dimensional entity, but n is an > > >> >> aspect of scope in one's perspective. If n is potentially infinite, > > >> >> then the truths may have strength but are more optimizations than > > >> >> static ontology. I am wondering if there is some useful perspective > > >> >> that can be used in my situation, or perhaps it is a hopeless case. > > >> >> Perhaps you have something to help me? > > > > >> >> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 4:21 AM, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> > Neil , there is no difference. The universe is not nature but a > > >> >> > manifestation of Nature or God. It is unconscious but not dead, > as > > >> >> > that would have meant no life , further it has to be unconscious > as > > >> >> > the conscious is always bound to certain limits and is dual. > > > > >> >> > On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 3:57 AM, archytas <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> >> >> That's a little bit different - and I'm in agreement. Some > scientists > > >> >> >> have suggested we could make a universe with life conditions in > the > > >> >> >> laboratory - still leaving us with issues about beginnings. > Science > > >> >> >> fiction wise one can imagine making such universes in order to > travel > > >> >> >> in time in them to discover more on how we were made - by > occupying > > >> >> >> earlier stages of them. I tend to think of the unconscious as > what > > >> >> >> isn't in rational consciousness, but I know this is inadequate > as much > > >> >> >> human consciousness in action is not known to the participants > > >> >> >> rationally. > > > > >> >> >> On Mar 5, 2:59 am, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> >>> Life had to come from somewhere , why not from an unconscious > Nature > > >> >> >>> which would explain the presence of Laws behind every action > and > > >> >> >>> inaction. > > > > >> >> >>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 2:36 AM, archytas <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> >> >>> > That doesn't help RP. Why this rather than a host of > alternatives? > > > > >> >> >>> > On Mar 4, 4:28 pm, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> >>> >> God is not made of fire , air , earth , water , ether and > > >> >> consciousness , > > >> >> >>> >> rather all these emanate from Him. God is unconscious and > without > > >> >> >>> >> attributes. > > > > >> >> >>> >> On Sunday, January 29, 2012 8:51:49 PM UTC+5:30, RP Singh > wrote: > > > > >> >> >>> >> > God , Nature , Truth , Reality is unconscious and the > Creation > > >> >> which > > >> >> >>> >> > emanates from it has no choice. You may think that you > have > > >> >> choice , but > > >> >> >>> >> > whatever you think , feel and do is as certain as the > trajectory > > >> >> of the > > >> >> >>> >> > celestial bodies. The entire universe , you included, is > bound > > >> >> by laws and > > >> >> >>> >> > everyone is a slave to" Laws", that is , "The Will of > God". > > >> >> >>> >> On Sunday, January 29, 2012 8:51:49 PM UTC+5:30, RP Singh > wrote: > > > > >> >> >>> >> > God , Nature , Truth , Reality is unconscious and the > Creation > > >> >> which > > >> >> >>> >> > emanates from it has no choice. You may think that you > have > > >> >> choice , but > > >> >> >>> >> > whatever you think , feel and do is as certain as the > trajectory > > >> >> of the > > >> >> >>> >> > celestial bodies. The entire universe , you included, is > bound > > >> >> by laws and > > >> >> >>> >> > everyone is a slave to" Laws", that is , "The Will of > God".- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - >
