What Happens When You Die?

[godnotgod]

I have only one request. I do not have any objection to any of your posts. But please do not justify them by resorting to Shruti like 'Tat Tvam Asi".

Or if you use "Tat Tvam Asi", then kindly also pay heed to the Shruti "Knower of Brahman becomes Brahman".

I am sorry but I cannot comply with your request because it is asking me to be untruthful.

Thank you very much.

 

[godnotgod]

Brahman is changeless yet it is that which changes first. Brahman is motionless yet it overtakes all.

That is how Brahman is explained in Shruti. Taking one aspect and rejecting the other is sign of a bias.

However, whatever we see as 'change' is maya, so there is no change at all. Therefore, the integrity of the Absolute as being The Changeless is always maintained.

There is no 'one' and the 'other'; 'this and that'. You are still in the realm of duality.

 

[godnotgod]

A Shruti like "a knower of Brahman becomes Brahman" takes cognisance of the seeker's perspective.

Brahman-God is deathless and never in ignorance. So, the question of "What happens when you die" does not apply.

This question can only apply to us who die. So, the perspective must begin from our end.

Selectively superimposing Buddhist atheistic idea on selected Vedanta verses to impose the Absolute Brahman perspective can only lead to another superposition.

Atheistic nor theistic has nothing to do with it. The question of the existence of God is not the issue. The issue is Emptiness.

The author of the posted piece is not imposing anything; Brahman is The Absolute. All he is saying is that Brahman is also empty.

While I agree with you about the seeker's perspective, I cannot agree that the seeker 'becomes' Brahman. What occurs is that the seeker vanishes completely because he never existed in the first place, just as there never was a snake in relation to the rope. Again, the very reason the Buddhists say: 'If you see the Buddha on the road {ie; 'becoming the Buddha'], kill him!'

The 'seeker' is none other than The Absolute, playing a game of Hide and Seek with itself, pretending not to be The Absolute; pretending to be the Seeker; the Becomer; the Experiencer; the Thinker of Thoughts; the Doer; and all the rest of the myriad Universe.

'The universe is the Absolute as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation'
Vivikenanda


The fundamental difference between Buddhism and other religions is that Buddhism has no God or gods before whom people bow down in return for peace of mind. The spirit enmeshed in the Buddha's teachings refuses to offer a god in exchange for freedom from anxiety. Instead, freedom from anxiety can only be found at that point where the Self settles naturally upon itself.'

from: 'From the Zen Kitchen to Enlightenment', by Dogen/Uchiyama

 

[Thief]

That is your ninjaic interpretation.

It is possible to be perfect as the Father in Heaven is.

And the odds of perfection...altogether.....

And perfection without manifestation.....?

If ever I become AS God....I would perform as He does.
Powers of creation in hand.

 

[atanu]

And the odds of perfection...altogether.....

And perfection without manifestation.....?

If ever I become AS God....I would perform as He does.
Powers of creation in hand.

None of above is denied, however, then, notions of "I" and "You" will be deadly. A deadly Ninja (I) will demolish another deadly Ninja (You).:yes:

So ...............

 

[Thief]

None of above is denied, however, then, notions of "I" and "You" will be deadly. A deadly Ninja (I) will demolish another deadly Ninja (You).:yes:

So ...............

But on the spiritual plane....it will be all in good fun!
(death having been dealt, will no longer be a threat)

Now that's not to say bad behavior and intent won't be dealt with.

I don't believe we all go to heaven.
Some of us can't be the children that God would prefer.
The frame of mind and heart makes a difference.

Not wanting to diverge too far.....have you seen a movie?
What Dreams May Come

 

[atanu]

I put a note here:

This is a pain and pleasure body, but inside, beyond all the bodies -- mental, emotional and psychological -- lies that which is nobody. And when this nobody is found to be no other than one's own Self, all delusions end.
~ Mooji

 

[atanu]

But on the spiritual plane....it will be all in good fun!
(death having been dealt, will no longer be a threat)...

Yes. But often forgetfulness overtakes and the fights become deadly as they are now.

 

[Thief]

Yes. But often forgetfulness overtakes and the fights become deadly as they are now.

I have heard of wars in heaven.
Brother angel against brother angel.
and over an argument of something that looks like us.

I hear one third of heaven lost their positions for that argument.
They might want us dead.
The other two thirds lost their brothers....they might not care.

Still I remain hopeful.

Peace first.

 

[Nakosis]

Never mind Buddhism or Hinduism. Maybe neither is your path. However, Sunyata is the perfection of wisdom. Why would you not wish to experience that, not that actively seeking it will get you the experience. On the contrary, the more you push, the further away you will become. From what you are telling me, however, it seems it would be fruitful for you, not to pursue Sunyata, but to find out why you fear it.

I'll just say your posts have help me to reevaluate things.

 

[godnotgod]

I'll just say your posts have help me to reevaluate things.

Hopefully in a beneficial way.

On emptiness:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxLZp0jNMPY

 

[atanu]

I have heard of wars in heaven.
Brother angel against brother angel.
and over an argument of something that looks like us.

I hear one third of heaven lost their positions for that argument.
They might want us dead.
The other two thirds lost their brothers....they might not care.

Still I remain hopeful.

Peace first.

I agree with you more than I agree with a confused nihilistic view.

Since if one finds emptiness but loses the Self and thereby becomes like an unconscious stone, then what will be the benefit?

If one throws out Lokitesvara in favour of the Sunyta that Lokitesvara experiences and teaches then that is Nihilism.
...................

Lokitevara however is no more different from the Universal consciousness, as Jesus is not different.

The knower of Brahman becomes Brahman, which has no second.

 

[godnotgod]

Since if one finds emptiness but loses the Self and thereby becomes like an unconscious stone, then what will be the benefit?

If one throws out Lokitesvara in favour of the Sunyta that Lokitesvara experiences and teaches then that is Nihilism.
...................

You are misconstruing Sunyata as nihilism. A common mistake of those unfamiliar with Buddhistic teachings.

To find emptiness is to find the Self. That one becomes anything, let alone an 'unconscious stone', is purely an outcome of your conceptual mind, and is not what occurs in reality.

That one is 'throwing out' something in favor of something else is a direct reflection of your dualistic thought. Nothing is thrown out. Nothing is lost. The only thing that occurs is that one now sees things as they are, rather than how the dual mind thinks they are.

What you fail to realize is that you are in Sunyata exactly at this very moment. In fact, you have ALWAYS been in Sunyata; IN FACT, you ARE the Indestructible Sunyata itself!

If, as you say, there is 'no second', then one thing cannot become another, because there is no other; no second, just as you claim. Any such 'becoming' is purely delusional.

 

[atanu]

You are misconstruing Sunyata as nihilism. A common mistake of those unfamiliar with Buddhistic teachings....

You seem to have not even read my post.

1. I have not said that Sunyata was Nihilism. I said that Sunyata is an experience of "emptiness of all things/objects" and the yogi that experiences is not a thing/object. Such Yogi is not separate from Brahman, which is of nature of Existence-Consciousness-Bliss. I said that those who uphold Sunyata and reject the Yogi are Nihilists.

2. And I have repeated a few times that the Consciousness is not devoid of Being and Being is not devoid of Consciousness.

In all these, I am merely paraphrasing Shri Ramana Maharshi and not airing my own concocted view.


First one sees the Self as objects, then one sees the Self as void, then one sees the Self as Self, only in this last there is no seeing because seeing is being.”
(Bhagavan in 'Day by Day with Bhagavan' 21-7-46)

If, as you say, there is 'no second', then one thing cannot become another, because there is no other; no second, just as you claim. Any such 'becoming' is purely delusional.

Again. "Knower of Brahman becomes Brahman" is a Shruti that depicts a Seeker's perspective. Shruti, to a Hindu, is infallible. So, when you use a Shruti "Tat Tvam Asi" and reject another, you are not being impartial ... you are intent upon proving your mental concept and you are resortingg to pick and choose.

Just consider your effort in this thread.Who are you trying to convert to your opinion? If there is any one delusional, as per your own definition, it is you alone.

 

[atanu]

In a recent interview, famed medical doctor and spiritualist Deepak Chopra stated the following:
...
Q: Can you get reincarnated as a soul?

Chopra: [Sighs] Wisps of memory and threads of desire, which are specks of information, latch onto specks of consciousness and show up as recycled human beings. But in the bigger picture, the observer, the observed, the process of observation, is a single reality.
...

I am insisting on nothing new. I am re-stating the highlighted portion from the OP.The singular reality is not devoid of observation and not devoid of observer.

 

[godnotgod]

I said that those who uphold Sunyata and reject the Yogi are Nihilists.

Is someone doing that?

Your description of nihilism is not what it is:

nihilism is tth rejection of all religious and moral principles, often in the belief that life is meaningless.

s

• extreme skepticism maintaining that nothing in the world has a real existence.

...and I believe your concept of Sunyata is inacurrate.

Again. "Knower of Brahman becomes Brahman" is a Shruti that depicts a Seeker's perspective. Shruti, to a Hindu, is infallible. So, when you use a Shruti "Tat Tvam Asi" and reject another, you are not being impartial ... you are intent upon proving your mental concept and you are resortingg to pick and choose.

Just consider your effort in this thread.Who are you trying to convert to your opinion? If there is any one delusional, as per your own definition, it is you alone.

I am not reading 'Tat tvam asi' as a Hindu; I am merely understanding its meaning. I am not accepting it as infallible just because it is Shruti; I accept it as true because that is what i see as true; not becauae it is what I believe to be true from any religious perspective. Secondly, I am not accepting one and rejecting the other, because, as I explained, the problem is in the interpretation.

You insist that the knower of Brahman BECOMES Brahman, but that is purely dogma until you can demonstrate how this is so. My argument against yours is this: Brahman is The Absolute. As The Absolute, IT is Everything, against which there is no 'other' to which it can be compared. That is Reality. Anything else is maya. That there is a 'knower of Brahman that then becomes Brahman' is, literally, dualism. You are misunderstanding the meaning and intent of the Shruti, which means to say that the knower of Brahman realizes he already IS Brahman. Nothing 'becomes' something else, especially Brahman, which ALREADY is Everything. There is nothing that can exist apart from Brahman which can then become Brahman. This is totally illogical. Nothing is apart from Brahman....ever.

 

[godnotgod]

But in the bigger picture, the observer, the observed, the process of observation, is a single reality.

I am insisting on nothing new. I am re-stating the highlighted portion from the OP.The singular reality is not devoid of observation and not devoid of observer.

Still you misunderstand.

Think...

If the 'observer, the observed, and the process of observation all are a single reality, then there is no such separate observer or observed. These are merely concepts. To say that they all merge into a single reality is in keeping with 'Tas tvam asi'. IOW, what one only THINKS is 'this and that' is not so; 'this' IS 'that'.

 

[godnotgod]

Just consider your effort in this thread.Who are you trying to convert to your opinion? If there is any one delusional, as per your own definition, it is you alone.

You behave as if your Hindu beliefs are equivalent to infallible Truth, and that anyone who questions such beliefs is merely expressing opinion.

This is precisely the same problem with the Christian, who treats his beliefs as if they were Absolute Truth.

 

[atanu]

........ This is totally illogical. Nothing is apart from Brahman....ever.

Agreed. But are you behaving appropriate to this knowledge?

I had stated the following:

Just consider your effort in this thread.Who are you trying to convert to your opinion? If there is any one delusional, as per your own definition, it is you alone.

And you had nothing but insult in reply.

 

[atanu]

Still you misunderstand.
Think...
If the 'observer, the observed, and the process of observation all are a single reality, .........

And I say that you have never understood.

An ocean is all the waves. But the waves have their reality too .. in their own scope.

So, when we are in a phenomenal realm, the separate souls are phenomenally true.

Else you would not continue for 100 pages trying to convert others to your view point and in the process also insult them.

Who are you trying to convert and who you are insulting?