Buddhist Have a Soul

[George-ananda]

It is genuinely interesting though, and I intend to check out what you suggested to see if the factors I can think of have been accounted for or not.

Well, my comment was not just referring to NDEs but to a wide range of different phenomena. Here's a sample list

 

[atanu]

What is this "one" that exists? Please identify it.

What will we name 'awareness' of sunyata as?

 

[HarihOm]

Namaste,

No need to get to over complicated with words, the Dharma Shastras and great teachers were never totally literal. It needs some insight, some inner cooking of the these broader concepts.

Lets take the word Soul as an example, it can mean the inner core, the essence , the substratum. If this meaning is given then both Buddhist and Hindu will have the same concept. In Buddhism its Dharmakaya as Substratum in Sanatana Dharma it is Brahman, Ground all of Being as the substratum. So we can all agree that there is some substratum accepted by all schools and definitions. These are huge concepts that need to be deeply contemplated for them to give their true light which is not in the intellectual and conceptual reach.

 

[buddhist]

What will we name 'awareness' of sunyata as?

It's still awareness.

 

[atanu]

It's still awareness.

Yes.

 

[buddhist]

Yes.

Yet the Buddha states that there are meditation spheres where awareness itself ceases (third and fourth ayatana).

 

[George-ananda]

Questions of confirmation bias and other forms of self-delusion, even when honestly believed, persist in what I've read up on to date. If blind people have truly been able to see in NDE's, it is indeed more interesting and harder to explain away. Yet my mind is good at thinking of difficult to answer questions. I am curious, for instance, if the NDE experiencers actually see the color "orange" when they say they saw such a color, or did their minds subconsciously imagine what seeing the color orange would be like and they awakened still believing this subconscious suggestion? An analogy might be similar to a non-psychic having an NDE that they're psychically reading the minds of others (i.e. "blindness" concerning this sixth sense). Not having actual psychic experiences, how do we discern whether the non-psychic NDE experiencer is actually psychically picking up things, or just imagining what it's actually like and awakening convinced by their subconscious suggestion that they indeed had a psychic experience? For if we consider the possibility that an NDE is merely an oxygen-deprived brain manifesting a dreamlike state, we know very well how we can convince ourselves while dreaming that we can fly, or move very slowly in a nightmare, and so forth. I imagine it would be harder to discern upon waking whether a non-psychic person actually had psychic insights or not, or if a blind person had visions, during an NDE or a dream since flying for instance is a far less believable phenomenon and much more easily dismissed when awake.

Now in your consideration remember a lot of the external events later described by the NDE experiencers occur during flat-lined brain activity; meaning that there was no higher brain functioning occurring.

Another thing I notice is people arguing against a non-physical aspect to the NDE want to quickly forget about the issue of people knowing 'real-world' events they could not have known in any normal way. This aspect of the phenomena would seem to put a nail in the coffin on a materialist explanation. Many case studies have led me to believe such things (veridical perception) do occur.

 

[atanu]

Yet the Buddha states that there are meditation spheres where awareness itself ceases (third and fourth ayatana).

Possible, but I wonder how Buddha came to know and then teach about those dhyana states?

Actually, the word used is 'Vijnana'. Consciousness/Jnana/awareness is not just Vijnana.

 

[buddhist]

Possible, but I wonder how Buddha came to know and then teach about those dhyana states?

Actually, the word used is 'Vijnana'. Consciousness/Jnana/awareness is not just Vijnana.

He claims to have experienced those ayatana states himself.

 

[Kartari]

Hi George,

Now in your consideration remember a lot of the external events later described by the NDE experiencers occur during flat-lined brain activity; meaning that there was no higher brain functioning occurring.

Well, while the heart might cease to pump, the brain can continue at some level to function for minutes afterwards.

Another thing I notice is people arguing against a non-physical aspect to the NDE want to quickly forget about the issue of people knowing 'real-world' events they could not have known in any normal way. This aspect of the phenomena would seem to put a nail in the coffin on a materialist explanation. Many case studies have led me to believe such things (veridical perception) do occur.

Yes, except unfortunately, it's not that simple imo. I cannot in all good conscience simply take people at their word when they tell me about extraordinary experiences. The valid possibility of lies aside, there is a lot of research into how so very easy it is for the human brain to trick or fool itself, with the person in question entirely unaware of being fooled.

Just look at politics in the US right now. Indeed, the basis of magic tricks relies on the limitations of our brains to perceive more accurately what is going on. Have you seen the new show on Netflix called Brain Games? I highly recommend it. When I see people fooled on this show, I just naturally think about how so many can be fooled in politics, in religion, and really just about all other avenues of life. In one episode, they did an experiment where a group was told to meet for a card trick show. What they were not told was that a fake crime involving three "thieves" surprised them nearby, and the people were later asked to describe the thieves. Some didn't realize there were three, most remembering only two assailants. One thought one of them, a woman, was wearing a long beige coat of a particular material, but it was actually a short dark green jacket. Another witness thought she was wearing a specific type of red hat, but she was not even wearing a hat (and her hair was black). later, they did a mock police lineup of five guys and asked each witness one at a time to pick out the thief. EVERYONE picked not only the wrong man, but the same wrong man - the man they picked was actually one of the participants standing right next to them in the group watching card tricks, and they thereby were familiar with his face but wrongly associated him with the crime in their muddled memory. They didn't remember the actual "thief" who was in fact in the lineup, and who did show his face in a brief moment during the "crime" before running off with a wallet. Imagine if this were a real theft and the repercussions for the wrongly accused man.

I do not mean to suggest that every NDE experiencer or other paranormal experiencer is either a liar or has fooled themselves. Like I said, there are a few paranormal things I am more open to myself. This is either due to personal experience, or from what I have been told by someone close to me who has experienced them, someone that I not only completely trust to be honest, but who has additionally proven to me many times how extraordinarily perceptive she is. But the fact nonetheless remains, deceit, intentional or otherwise, is a very strong possibility that cannot be discounted. And it presents us with a possibility that conforms to what we do objectively know to be real. And therein lies the main problem for me. It's not that I don't want to believe people, but that I don't really have a basis to trust the stories of people who are complete strangers to me, especially considering just how hard it is for us to perceive the complete and accurate picture of what's happening at any given moment.

 

[George-ananda]

Well, while the heart might cease to pump, the brain can continue at some level to function for minutes afterwards.

I was talking about flat-lined brain activity (not just heart). No higher brain function is detected at that point and it doesn't seem reasonable to think higher level elaborate experiences that seem more real than dreams are occurring.

Yes, except unfortunately, it's not that simple imo. I cannot in all good conscience simply take people at their word when they tell me about extraordinary experiences. The valid possibility of lies aside, there is a lot of research into how so very easy it is for the human brain to trick or fool itself, with the person in question entirely unaware of being fooled.

Just look at politics in the US right now. Indeed, the basis of magic tricks relies on the limitations of our brains to perceive more accurately what is going on. Have you seen the new show on Netflix called Brain Games? I highly recommend it. When I see people fooled on this show, I just naturally think about how so many can be fooled in politics, in religion, and really just about all other avenues of life. In one episode, they did an experiment where a group was told to meet for a card trick show. What they were not told was that a fake crime involving three "thieves" surprised them nearby, and the people were later asked to describe the thieves. Some didn't realize there were three, most remembering only two assailants. One thought one of them, a woman, was wearing a long beige coat of a particular material, but it was actually a short dark green jacket. Another witness thought she was wearing a specific type of red hat, but she was not even wearing a hat (and her hair was black). later, they did a mock police lineup of five guys and asked each witness one at a time to pick out the thief. EVERYONE picked not only the wrong man, but the same wrong man - the man they picked was actually one of the participants standing right next to them in the group watching card tricks, and they thereby were familiar with his face but wrongly associated him with the crime in their muddled memory. They didn't remember the actual "thief" who was in fact in the lineup, and who did show his face in a brief moment during the "crime" before running off with a wallet. Imagine if this were a real theft and the repercussions for the wrongly accused man.

I do not mean to suggest that every NDE experiencer or other paranormal experiencer is either a liar or has fooled themselves. Like I said, there are a few paranormal things I am more open to myself. This is either due to personal experience, or from what I have been told by someone close to me who has experienced them, someone that I not only completely trust to be honest, but who has additionally proven to me many times how extraordinarily perceptive she is. But the fact nonetheless remains, deceit, intentional or otherwise, is a very strong possibility that cannot be discounted. And it presents us with a possibility that conforms to what we do objectively know to be real. And therein lies the main problem for me. It's not that I don't want to believe people, but that I don't really have a basis to trust the stories of people who are complete strangers to me, especially considering just how hard it is for us to perceive the complete and accurate picture of what's happening at any given moment.

Now human remembering may not be perfect but if it was not at least highly reliable, we couldn't function in the real world. I and all NDE researchers certainly consider the fallibility you mention. That is why I and the researchers are more convinced by a body of cases examined for quantity, quality and consistency than any one individual event. In the end we should look at all the data and all the arguments and form our best position on what we think is going on with this phenomena.

Also for me this phenomena dovetails with the eastern/Indian wisdom tradition teachers I most respect along with many other types of beyond the normal phenomena. So, I believe in the continuation of consciousness at death beyond reasonable doubt, but each must form their own opinion. Another thing I will add is that this society has a bent against what some have called irrational and weird beliefs and I think that is because the education of scientists today provides them with no familiarity with these types of subjects. I do not think many scientists or regular people are aware of the quantity, quality and consistency of evidence as I showed in that 'sample list' link I provided earlier,