What Happens When You Die?

[horizon_mj1]

It may be in some book considered holy, but the basis for it being reality is still YOUR belief that it is so, based on YOUR belief that such a book is an infallible source of Absolute Truth.

You are right these writings do not give me a sense of what is holy and what is not. What I and pretty much every other Human have a consciousness of action. This is NOT 'Belief" it is fact; if it is not a fact you are what is called a Sociopath.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Chopra: No Sir! Why? Because I don't exist in the first place!

Then where did that interview come from? Is he implying I don't exist either? Er, wait, if he doesn't exist, he couldn't be saying or implying anything.

 

[godnotgod]

Then where did that interview come from? Is he implying I don't exist either? Er, wait, if he doesn't exist, he couldn't be saying or implying anything.
[/COLOR]

He is saying that he does not exist as an individual skin-encapsulated ego apart from the world; that his Identity as 'Deepak Chopra' is not real. The only 'real' is the universal Unborn Deathless consciousness speaking through him.

 

[godnotgod]

You are right these writings do not give me a sense of what is holy and what is not. What I and pretty much every other Human have a consciousness of action. This is NOT 'Belief" it is fact; if it is not a fact you are what is called a Sociopath.

Let us return to your original statement, that Hell is on the 3rd Ring of Heaven. You seem to have stated that as fact, not belief. Is that the case?

Not sure what 'consciousness of action' has to do with your claim re Hell. While it is a fact that we possess a 'consciousness of action', much of it is based on belief, conjecture, concept, opinion, social indoctrination, etc, and otherwise motivated by fears and desires.

 

[godnotgod]

Same old same old?...never.
Each occurrence of flesh renders a unique soul and perspective.

Which dies, making each occurrence temporal. Think of a kaleidoscope, or a snowflake. The fascination lies in the fact that images, colors, and light are constantly in flux. No new arrangement is like any previous one. Were they to suddenly insist on hanging around, they would muck up the flow of new creations. If they were conscious, they might be happy to give up their temporal manifestation for the joy of the next moment, and IT'S manifestation, and not go on permanently in some 'afterlife', because there is no need to do so. That which is manifesting such variety is already permanent, and that which is being manifested emerges from it as form and dissolves back into the formless. All is Absolute Joy, but it's experience is in the Present Moment, and not in some anticipated future Heaven. So what else is there to desire?

 

[George-ananda]

I think Chopra knows his stuff.

But his approach to presenting it is sometimes not appropriate for the audience he is actually addressing. His comments in that article should have been presented in a more down-to-earth manner. What he said was presented in too much of a cryptic and mystical way to help his audience.

 

[godnotgod]

This is NOT 'Belief" it is fact; if it is not a fact you are what is called a Sociopath.

What is a fact is that I do not subscribe to what most people think is reality, and you may be interpreting that as my being a sociopath.

 

[godnotgod]

I think Chopra knows his stuff.

But his approach to presenting it is sometimes not appropriate for the audience he is actually addressing. His comments in that article should have been presented in a more down-to-earth manner. What he said was presented in too much of a cryptic and mystical way to help his audience.

That is a good point. It seems there are two approaches; one where metaphor, explanation and patience are utilized in the attempt to awaken others, and shock, often used in Zen. Both are valid, IMO.

He just cuts to the chase, and lets the chips fall where they may, THEN addresses the results.

I like his approach because it has a tendency to short-circuit the thinking process.

 

[horizon_mj1]

Let us return to your original statement, that Hell is on the 3rd Ring of Heaven. You seem to have stated that as fact, not belief. Is that the case?

Not sure what 'consciousness of action' has to do with your claim re Hell. While it is a fact that we possess a 'consciousness of action', much of it is based on belief, conjecture, concept, opinion, social indoctrination, etc, and otherwise motivated by fears and desires.

No consciousness of action is based more on moral upbringing and perception, more desire than fear based. And no, I do not necessarily believe everything I read, but do know that in the Secrets of Enoch, Hell is in the 3rd Ring of Heaven. I do not understand how it is that you can not comprehend the link between Hell and making a decision consciously in which could be quite consequential to your beliefs. I do however know that a "conscious existence" is there for us when we die; the only tangible evidence I have however is that I died (of course I do not have any for my experience unfortunately) and it is not even close to any explanation I have ever been given or even remotely comparable to most Religious concepts.

 

[godnotgod]

No consciousness of action is based more on moral upbringing and perception, more desire than fear based.

What's the difference?

And no, I do not necessarily believe everything I read, but do know that in the Secrets of Enoch, Hell is in the 3rd Ring of Heaven.

OK, now I see your meaning. But Hell being in the 3rd Ring of Heaven is not a fact; it is only true from a religious dogma point of view, and who knows how the Book of Enoch came to that conclusion. If someone believes it to be true, it is true for that person, but not necessarily so.

I do not understand how it is that you can not comprehend the link between Hell and making a decision consciously in which could be quite consequential to your beliefs.

Oh, but I DO understand the link; it's just that I do not give credence to Hell as being a physical place of torment in some other future realm after death. For me, there is no other realm than the one we find ourselves in here and now, and that is always the case. So Hell is here, now, and is a psychological hell. That is why I said it is only in your head. The same is true for concepts of Heaven.

I do however know that a "conscious existence" is there for us when we die; the only tangible evidence I have however is that I died (of course I do not have any for my experience unfortunately) and it is not even close to any explanation I have ever been given or even remotely comparable to most Religious concepts.

Who is it that lives?
Who is it that dies?

 

[horizon_mj1]

What's the difference?

In my world there is a very big difference between Desire and Fear.

OK, now I see your meaning. But Hell being in the 3rd Ring of Heaven is not a fact; it is only true from a religious dogma point of view, and who knows how the Book of Enoch came to that conclusion. If someone believes it to be true, it is true for that person, but not necessarily so.

Isn't that the way it is with all beliefs? Until there is evidence to back something up, it remains theory; even scientist sometimes believe in theories a bit too much, just as religiously based people may.

Oh, but I DO understand the link; it's just that I do not give credence to Hell as being a physical place of torment in some other future realm after death. For me, there is no other realm than the one we find ourselves in here and now, and that is always the case. So Hell is here, now, and is a psychological hell. That is why I said it is only in your head. The same is true for concepts of Heaven.

I hate to tell ya, but your theory has substantial evidence working against it (multi-dimensional theory being one of many, life itself being the other; every living creature has its own dimension). It makes me feel sad that your life is so horrible that you would compare it to a place that people have created to be that of torture and pain; but it just adds to your stance, and I can respect that

Who is it that lives?

Who is it that dies?

You lost me a bit here If you are speaking literally, when the body ceases to function in full capacity, this is life as opposed to death; IMO we have more of a choice in the matter than what we may even like

 

[godnotgod]

In my world there is a very big difference between Desire and Fear.

But in terms of social indoctrination and morality, they are interlinked. We desire The Good and its (Heavenly) rewards, and fear The Evil and its (Hellish) consequences.

Isn't that the way it is with all beliefs? Until there is evidence to back something up, it remains theory; even scientist sometimes believe in theories a bit too much, just as religiously based people may.

OK.

I hate to tell ya, but your theory has substantial evidence working against it (multi-dimensional theory being one of many, life itself being the other; every living creature has its own dimension). It makes me feel sad that your life is so horrible that you would compare it to a place that people have created to be that of torture and pain; but it just adds to your stance, and I can respect that

Sorry if there is a misunderstanding: my life is not horrible. I was merely iterating the common belief as to what Hell is like. The bottom line is that, no matter what theories may exist re: 'other realms' and dimensions, the only thing we know for certain is THIS reality we are now immersed in. To fantasize on some 'other realm' is a substantial delusive idea that has no bearing in fact. The only 'Hell' we know of is the one we create for ourselves in THIS world, either psychological, or physical, when action is taken based on psychologically delusive ideas. The Inquisition and the Holocaust are prime examples.

You lost me a bit here If you are speaking literally, when the body ceases to function in full capacity, this is life as opposed to death; IMO we have more of a choice in the matter than what we may even like

What I meant by "who is it that lives/who is it that dies", is: when you say "I live; I die", then who is this "I" that lives and dies? When you realize that "I" is nothing more than an illusion, where is there anyone who lives and dies? That is why Chopra says he has no fear of death, because he, as an egoic entity that is "I", actually does not exist, so there is no one who actually dies.

*****

 

[horizon_mj1]

But in terms of social indoctrination and morality, they are interlinked. We desire The Good and its (Heavenly) rewards, and fear The Evil and its (Hellish) consequences.

I got ya now, and yes I see your point.

Sorry if there is a misunderstanding: my life is not horrible. I was merely iterating the common belief as to what Hell is like. The bottom line is that, no matter what theories may exist re: 'other realms' and dimensions, the only thing we know for certain is THIS reality we are now immersed in. To fantasize on some 'other realm' is a substantial delusive idea that has no bearing in fact. The only 'Hell' we know of is the one we create for ourselves in THIS world, either psychological, or physical, when action is taken based on psychologically delusive ideas. The Inquisition and the Holocaust are prime examples.

You are right once again, but the fact that every person lives in his/her very own limited reality can not be ignored. It is unfortunate when a person who is not only delusional but has a significant amount of power can have an extreme impact on the bearing of reality (and not just their own), such as Hitler. I guess what I am trying to get at is that the "Reality" in which you (or anyone else lives) is a "personal" reality; what can be viewed as delusional or incomprehensible to us may be as real as breathing air to others. The only time IMO when this is 'wrong" is when these delusions cause the harm of others such as in the situations in which you have mentioned.

What I meant by "who is it that lives/who is it that dies", is: when you say "I live; I die", then who is this "I" that lives and dies? When you realize that "I" is nothing more than an illusion, where is there anyone who lives and dies? That is why Chopra says he has no fear of death, because he, as an egoic entity that is "I", actually does not exist, so there is no one who actually dies.

*****

I see your concept but actually see it the complete opposite way (I do however see how "I" is considered an egotistic entity more times than not). Without the "I" and the separation from "us" or "all" there is no true reality, only a blending of realities. We are as different and unique as our fingerprints in which I find beauty and appreciation in.

 

[Thief]

Which dies, making each occurrence temporal. Think of a kaleidoscope, or a snowflake. The fascination lies in the fact that images, colors, and light are constantly in flux. No new arrangement is like any previous one. Were they to suddenly insist on hanging around, they would muck up the flow of new creations. If they were conscious, they might be happy to give up their temporal manifestation for the joy of the next moment, and IT'S manifestation, and not go on permanently in some 'afterlife', because there is no need to do so. That which is manifesting such variety is already permanent, and that which is being manifested emerges from it as form and dissolves back into the formless. All is Absolute Joy, but it's experience is in the Present Moment, and not in some anticipated future Heaven. So what else is there to desire?

So God is not a spirit?....and this creation of Man is not an attempt to form unique spirit?

Attempting to ignore the obvious?

 

[godnotgod]

So God is not a spirit?....and this creation of Man is not an attempt to form unique spirit?

Attempting to ignore the obvious?

The universe is that which is manifesting it.

Man and God are not two separate things.

Everything is The One.

There is no 'self' or 'other'.

The moment you begin to think of God as the creator of the created, you have gone astray. You have split reality in two, but that split is only in your mind. It has no bearing in reality.

 

[Thief]

The universe is that which is manifesting it.

Man and God are not two separate things.

Everything is The One.

There is no 'self' or 'other'.

The moment you begin to think of God as the creator of the created, you have gone astray. You have split reality in two, but that split is only in your mind. It has no bearing in reality.

If that were true 'you' and 'I' would have the same perspective.....
and 'you' have declared 'we' don't.

'Your' declaration is self contrary.

 

[RJ50]

Speculation about what happens after death is at best pure speculation. The logical answer is that we cease to be. If the consciousness is carried over into another realm, we have no idea what it would be like as no one has ever come back to inform us.

 

[godnotgod]

If that were true 'you' and 'I' would have the same perspective.....
and 'you' have declared 'we' don't.

'Your' declaration is self contrary.

All this time, you have not been paying attention:

We don't have the same perspective because you are immersed in Identification, in which you firmly believe the "I" to be real, when it is fiction, and so you see reality through a distorted lens.

When reality is seen through universal, rather than personal consciousness, it is then that we DO have the same perspective. Why should reality differ from one to another? The saltiness of the sea is the same everywhere.

Now show me where the division between you and I occurs.

 

[Desert Snake]

@Op, contradictory. sorry dude

 

[godnotgod]

Speculation about what happens after death is at best pure speculation. The logical answer is that we cease to be. If the consciousness is carried over into another realm, we have no idea what it would be like as no one has ever come back to inform us.

But, you see, Chopra is implying that there is no 'other realm'; that he 'returns to where he has always been', which is here, now. When one awakens from the fiction of a personal ego that experiences life and death, one sees that one's true nature has always been here, now. There is no 'other realm'. This is it. Only consciousness has changed.

Who is it that 'ceases to be'?