Messages

I studied lots of different spiritual theories and topics for many years. I should have mentioned it in my original post. I have studied all of the topics you mentioned.  I'm not denying that there are amazing experiences you can have with your mind. All I have ever found and all I continue to find is people saying things like 'the universe is like this, because I experienced it like this.' All talk about what the author thinks reality is, but no supporting reasoning or evidence.

The reason that I don't believe the theory that thoughts and emotions dies with the brain, is that there are so much logical information available that talks against it.

I've never found any and I have been looking for years. Care to point me to any?

Hello
Another thing that is very questionable to me is the conversation on page 29. They travel very fast between the stars. Then they manage to see a comet at that great speed. And when Michel asks how far away that comet is from the spacecraft, Thao replies "4 150 000 kilometers".
What is the point to give such an exact answer to the question, given that the speed of light is 300 000 km/s, and they where going at many times the speed of light?

/nibor

Yes, there are lots of things wrong with it. It's a very cleverly written fiction, using little bits from all subjects that 'sound correct'. Just look at what the author says at the end - that the more evolved reader will just 'know' it's true. The book was written in 1987 I think. Back when everyone thought there were 9 planets in our solar system. So the book says that all solar systems have 9 planets. Well, we now know that there are 10 planets in our solar system, maybe more. Or 8 if your definition of planet is different, there certainly aren't 9 though.

Actually, (and this is totally true) I found it the other way around. I experienced it first, then after reading a textbook on consciousness (Susan Blackmore), I started to realize that 'science' points to the same thing. (Apart from a general no religious 'self' idea, which was previously clear with minimal understanding of science.)

PassiveFist, so if nothing exists and there is no 'you', then how do you perceive that?

Didn't mean nothing exists. Your mind's sense of self is an illusion. Hard to describe obviously. There seems to only be what we refer to as 'awareness' - whatever that is. Not someone aware of something, just awareness. As in: not a thing, but an action.

Another thing though, is that I could break down any other experiences when people were talking to themselves :cough: I mean, spirits. Experience is not good enough on its own.

...even though it would be great to know that this 'no-place-space' or 'nothingness' that I have found is 'only the beginning', and that I would go on to discover what all of you have been talking about  

(I've edited this post so many times   I've lost count, I have to stop )

You choose your way of life, you shouldn't be choosing what you think reality is. Atheism is not a choice, it's the world as it is - to me. Fun? How we feel about something is down to us.

Let me tell you my experiences then:

When I fully break through the mental chatter and nonsense, still the mind, I find no 'self', no 'personality', certainly no 'soul', there is just nothingness or emptiness. Just like science says I would find. This is what I believe enlightenment is. My thought-created self doesn't exist and neither does anything else that is 'me'. The greatest liberation comes from realizing the pure material 'nothingness' that you are. The path to that is simply being here in the now, without illusion.

So, in a way, it is both my reasoning AND my experience that there is no such thing as a soul, or a spirit.

None of us have 'souls'. 'We' are just a result of the physical processes in our body. As modern neuroscience and buddhism say, there is no 'self' except the story we concoct with our thoughts. There is no death because all that exists is the NOW, future and past don't exist, we don't experience the moment of death (being dead and all). There is no eternal life though, unless you mean that the NOW is infinitesimally small.

I don't like doing this, I don't like reading this kind of thing. I have just stated what I believe, with no justification. If I was to do the same but support the existence of the 'soul' or an 'afterlife', people would accept it much more readily.

Concepts like 'life essence', 'life force', 'souls', 'self' are religious ones to me. I really don't understand why people believe something like this with no justification.

There are some people who do not have a soul, when they die their spirit becomes absorbed
into the collective consciousness like raindrops in a lake.
Only people who become awakened have the ability to continue after death as a soul.

Wait, when they die, these SOUL-less people's SPIRIT becomes absorbed?? Now we have spirits and souls??

I say we have 'spourls' that absorb the spirit of the soul and are conscious of the life essence and energy that permeates through the mind-universe. In fact, we are all one big 'Spourl'.

I also believe in 'Keet'. This is the essence of all feet. Our physical feet and their muscles and movement are just reflections of a higher foot dimension "Keenehtiks". This came to me in a dream once.

I am not an expert on the brain but I'm trying to speak from a common-sense standpoint.

I don't think consciousness has been studied enough in neuroscience and I don't think they know (yet?) how consciousness is created, or what it is. There aren't many definitions of consciousness from anyone that don't have problems.

How does the 'soul' create consciousness?

I have heard of the idea that the brain is simply a receiver of mind. It is hard to disprove it, but at the same time, I have never seen any evidence that supports it, except testimony of peoples experiences. Is there any reason to think it? It sounds like passing the buck to me, in order to hold on to spiritual beliefs.

Do these people not believe in (biological) evolution?

Why believe in a whole extra unsupported concept when the brain is there and makes sense along with evolution? Why would someone believe that feelings are not caused by the chemicals in the brain, just as drugs cause feelings? Why would someone believe that reason and rationality aren't products of the neocortex? Is there anything more than wishful thinking? The mystery of subjective experience and 'qualia' is certainly reason to be interested in consciousness, but not to abandon the search for justification and just accept something 'spiritual'.

while dmt gets released into your body, which is known to be a beginging process of leaving this dimension

Couldn't dmt + other released chemicals cause NDE hallucinations?

In my opinion: The Choice is full of blatantly incorrect statements, but the prophecy is a cleverly written story that is hard to find anything that can be clearly shown to be false. There is nothing to make the story true either though, except wishful thinking perhaps. As others said, it is a collection of eastern mythology, little vague bits of recent science mixed in, along with phrases telling the reader that the truly evolved person will 'feel' that the book is true.

A few (hopefully familiar) questions. I've left my ego at the door, believe it or not.

When we die, the brain stops working and immediately starts decaying. Consciousness is lost, thought-processes stop, emotions cease.

Unless we pretend the brain doesn't exist, or does something totally different: How can any part of my mind continue to exist after I have died?

Do those who believe in reincarnation have a different understanding of how the brain works? I don't hear much 'scientific' discussion of how the brain works from those who believe in reincarnation, so I would appreciate help with that issue.

Then there are 'souls', which have no clear definition, making them easy to attribute things to without obvious contradiction. I have yet to see any evidence of souls or any explanation of the theory or logic of them. Or does the soul 'just happen' to also do everything the brain does?