Hi ya zen: As I see it: I spent much of my life
(acrtually since as old as I can remember back 4 years
old) attempting to reason (what I thought was logical)
with other humanbeings mostly to no avail thus I have
come to the conclusion thatmwe humnas have no free
will we are programmed at the instant of conception if
not before. You came from your mother & father & they
came from their mother & fathere & they came from ..
Ad Infinitum.. In other words you are the sum total of
all your ancestors.
As for people do not expect to much if anything from
them.. Accept them for what they are or reject them..
they won't change nor will you. If you were meant to
become frustrated so shall you be, if you were meant
to be "accepting" so shall you be. We are all like
characters in a book.. the uncreated creator ( god to
many) is the author.. We unfold just like the
characters in the book.. page by page (minute to
minute) I am not religious but my observations
lead me to this "only conclusion".
If both your parents have an allergy there is an
overwhelming great probability that you also will have
it. Just what I mean to infer by that will soon become
patently obvious. An apple doesn't fall far from the
tree. A human can, reluctantly on occasion, be
brought to admit & agree that he perhaps inherited the
color of his eyes, skin & physical shape from his
family but he struggles with the concept that his
likes & dislikes, his attitudes & prejudices, his
talents & or lack of them also are inherited. There
are no blank pages to be filled in as one goes on.
"Destiny", the script was written & set long before
you were ever thought of of let alone even concieved!
Sandcastles; Almost completely, myopically, ignoring
the present & "building" for the future. You certainly
can't take "it" with you. When you "go" it's of no
value to you! Sandcastles; Just as surely as the surf,
no sooner said than done, is quick to "dismantle" &
wash away the sandcastles the child has labored so
to build, so too will evaporate from your possession &
wash away in this blink of an eye all that you have
labored to "build". When you "go" & go we all will,
even you, you'll go with what you came with, nothing!
When your time comes to "pass away", someday, the only
things you will ever keep are the things you gave
away!
They was afraid chiefly for they percieved that with
the loss of themselves (death) was lost the knowledge
of loss. Being dead they would be unconscious of the
fact that they had indeed lost themself. So what?
Illogical but understandable. Some wonder, upon death
does "awareness" which doesn't seem to be made up of
the same material "stuff" as the body follow the
same decomposition route back to the basic elements,
from dust to dust, ashes to ashes? I would say no.
Is memory a sad thing, once real but now not, a thing
once had but now lost or is it something immortal &
pleasant to be cherished, a thing to be experienced
over & over when one wishes & deems it to be again, a
thing saved forever? We can run a small experiment,
which to me, indicates that the self does not die.
This quick experiment does not require you to even
leave your chair & only that you keep your eyes
closed & use alone your lucid imagination, your
memory, if you will. First sit still & close your
eyes. Think of someone you are familiar with, a
family member, friend or acquaintance. Get a good
picture of them in your "memory". If you happen to be
sitting in your living room "imagine" getting up &
going into the kitchen, all this time with your eyes
closed, ( sitting in the living room) "look around" at
all the things you are so familiar with. Now form once
again a mental image of another acquaintance. This
done, return to the living room & all this time
allowing only your minds eye to do the walking. Now
open your eyes. What has just occured, your mobility
& ability to see with your minds eye both
acquaintances & things did not require a physical
body & I believe that this is what remains upon death
when the physical body perishes. What you have just
done is absolutely nothing compared to what you, after
a time, will be capable of with your minds eye once
you develop & "mature after death"; in this new state,
in this new dimension. You, upon death, will be not
unlike a new born baby & you will, so to speak, also
just have been born. Just as the infant is unable to
very efficiently utilize its body & is unco-ordinated
so shall you be for a short term. However just as the
infant soon begins to "harness itself" & perform
various complicated tasks as it grows so shall you.
Certainly you have borne witness to the vast
difference in versatility of a new born & the same
child of five. The small experiment we have just done
with your minds eye is more or less the infant stage
of this new form of, I won't say life but rather
existence after death. To further support this
conjecture lets take a moment to consider cognition.
Examine the phenomenon of "phantom pain". An
individual has a limb severed & therafter continues
to feel pain or itch ect, in the region of the
amputation,where the limb used to be! This is
cognition in its best dress. The limb is gone however
cognition doesn't accept this physical abscence. Take
this concept one step further, you die but the very
same cognition that continues to act as though the
severed limb is still there, perhaps not "physically";
but nevertheless there in "cognitions way", continues
to recognize your existence! Thus as the invisible
limb remains "real" in the abscence of physical form &
so shall you, minus a body of course. This is pure
consciousness, that which is the only thing that can
really be said to be you. In your new state you will
be able to do everything you can now & much, much
more albeit without a physical body & of course you
will have no need for your present five "senses"
although you will have acquired new & different ones
& so you should. Senses percieving nothingness!
The "self"! Not the body, not the brain but that
aware "thing" you are conscious of being "you". That
"thing" that does not perish nor die upon "death" as
does all else.
--- zenbuddha98 < zenbuddha98%40yahoo.com">zenbuddha98
yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I'm having a particularly tough time with the fact
>; that 99 percent of
> people do not consider facts before reaching
> conclusions. And it's not
> a thing about intelligence. I think plenty of
> people are rather bright
> people and very capable if they would set their
> minds to something.
> However, I cannot deny my observation of how very
>; few people are
> considering facts(particularly facts that contradict
> their point of
> view). And they are also absolutely certain at the
> same time that they
> are considering the facts. I don't know why this is
> such a strong part
> of the human condition. It appears human beings
> have much more of a
> need to believe in something rather than truly
> consider things
> factually. People would rather go along with a
> system and authority
> rather than think for themselves and consider all of
> the facts. You
> can have facts written by scientists printed out on
> a sheet and most
> people, including medical staff, will outright deny
>; what is on the
> paper.
>
> I'm sure there are plenty of people that disagree
> with me on what I'm
> saying but try to be objective and observe what is
> really happening.
> I don't think most people want to accept that the
> facts are being
> overlooked so horribly by just about everyone. And
> I don't think
> anyone wants to consider that maybe just maybe we
> are unaware of all of
> the facts.
>
> "life is a comedy to those who think and a tragedy
> to those who feel".
>
> So true.
>
> To shift around a little. I wish there was someone
> that really was out
> there that understood what I was saying. Just one
> person that I could
> talk to.
>
> Perhaps it would be helpful for me to understand
> mechanically or
> psychologically what is really taking place
> consciously in most
> people. I would like to understand why people are
> the way that they
> are or at least the mechanisms that make people the
> way that they are.
>;
> Win, do you have any ideas? Anyone else have any
> ideas? Try to keep
> it relatively simple in your explanation. Win at
> least agrees with
> what I'm saying. I'd like to get answers from him
> and maybe he could
> educate the rest of us on this very important issue.
>
>
> Actually from an evolutionary perspective it is
> logical that
> consciousness would be more reactive and biased in
> nature than
> factual. Having to SURVIVE is different than having
> to think
> factually. As the theory goes we emerged more so as
> a result of
> pressures to survive, not to factually understand
> eachother. If we did
> evolve to factually understand eachother, and now
> thinking about it we
> must have, that would suggest that conditioning is
> very important.
> Dude, you can enhance or suppress any physiology
> with basic
> conditioning. Yet the nature advocates think
> everything
> is "genetic".
