When I die, what's it all about?

[Kriya Yogi]

The dawning of the new age is the coming of simultaneity. Which trumps telepathy and alla that stuff... and will be so cool that the actual potentials cannot be derived from our currently unenlightened position. (Sorry, hadda throw some "cool god gospel" in there. )

I just don't have a view that my soul is me so much as it is like a routing number - the path of ellenjanuary has been walked. I don't mention "after" much because I consider it to be taking the eyes off the ball, which is now. But I basically go with the premise - all things come from god, all things return to god - in these spiritual (non-scientific) matters. That I will essentially return to god, and there never will be again "ellenjanuary;" and it is cooler than I can explain in under than ten thousand characters, soo...

I'm saying the problem I have with reincarnation is that much of what I am is deterministic, and there is no need to assume that the soul carries that information. As for past lives, heck, I went there and kicked with Ezekiel... but I do not believe that I am Ezekiel reborn so much as my path has had such vivid similarities to his path, cross-referencing seems to occur.

So you're saying you go back to God once you die? Or are you saying you believe in reincarnation but not Karma and the carry over from your past lives?

 

[Kriya Yogi]

A simple google search.

When it comes to matters of the cosmos, I prefer to go to modern astronomy for my knowledge.

That's fine but when you google something you have to question the source. I know my Guru's Guru knew about things before many scientists even thought of them. Look up Sri Yukteswarji. He is a fully awake Yogi Christ that didn't live to long ago and I get much of my information from him. Must of astronomy is proving him to be right much time after he said things.

 

[Kriya Yogi]

Well, kinda. The universe tells us that all of existence is just four entirely mundane mechanisms dancing in unison, but we're not entirely sure how the four of them fit together.

It is intelligent energy that composes our bodies and all material existance.

 

[Riverwolf]

That's fine but when you google something you have to question the source.

Here's where I got my numbers:

Galaxy Dynamics

BTW, I'm currently reading Yogananda's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita, as well as Autobiography of a Yogi. The wisdom is great, but I've still not come across a Sage who is absolutely perfect. Every sage I've read has still maintained some kind of bias, and has been wrong. When it comes to spiritual matters, I'm also not going to believe what I read just because I've read it; I'll believe it fully when I experience it for myself.

I trust what modern science tells us, because I'm aware that the system is designed to weed out bias, and has thus far proven to be the most effective method by which knowledge of the gross material world can be obtained.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Not sure what you are saying here? Our very existance relies on a higher power and its intelligent light and energy. What do you think sustains your cells and your breathing. The whole solar system is governed and organized by something greater than ourselves otherwise it would not be organized and utter chaos. The same goes for our very systematic bodies that automatically work together to keep you healthy and alive. The very fact that our lives exist on a planet that is composed of exploding stars guided together in perfect distance from the sun is miraculous as anything else. Hard to ignore once you look at the big picture.

Don't confuse the human mind's propensity to impose patterns and order, with those patterns and order actually existing. Until you can step outside the human need to create a predictable, orderly world, you'll never really see the big picture.

 

[Riverwolf]

Don't confuse the human mind's propensity to impose patterns and order, with those patterns and order actually existing. Until you can step outside the human need to create a predictable, orderly world, you'll never really see the big picture.

Except I think mathematics are discovering that there is, in fact, an underlying order in apparent chaos.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Except I think mathematics are discovering that there is, in fact, an underlying order in apparent chaos.

Anything can sound meaningful out of context.

 

[Riverwolf]

Anything can sound meaningful out of context.

Then place it in the context that I apparently took it from. I'm neither supporting nor refuting the idea of "intelligent energy" (in fact, I'm rather skeptical of such energy existing considering that intelligence as we know it requires a physical brain). I'm simply stating that there may well be an order to apparent chaos.

 

[Kriya Yogi]

Here's where I got my numbers:

Galaxy Dynamics

BTW, I'm currently reading Yogananda's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita, as well as Autobiography of a Yogi. The wisdom is great, but I've still not come across a Sage who is absolutely perfect. Every sage I've read has still maintained some kind of bias, and has been wrong. When it comes to spiritual matters, I'm also not going to believe what I read just because I've read it; I'll believe it fully when I experience it for myself.

I trust what modern science tells us, because I'm aware that the system is designed to weed out bias, and has thus far proven to be the most effective method by which knowledge of the gross material world can be obtained.

Well I myself will admit do not understand exactly what science says or what Sri Yukteswar says. I'm just stating my beliefs that are pretty solid because I just know them to be extremely reliable in their statements. What have they been wrong about or biased about? Yogananda tells it how it is, not because he wants to coerce people to believe what he says.

 

[Riverwolf]

Well I myself will admit do not understand exactly what science says or what Sri Yukteswar says. I'm just stating my beliefs that are pretty solid because I just know them to be extremely reliable in their statements. What have they been wrong about or biased about? Yogananda tells it how it is, not because he wants to coerce people to believe what he says.

I haven't finished any of his books (I found those little collection books are too... simple to be useful to me), but one apparent imperfection that I found in Sri Yukteswar was, in fact, mentioned as such: when he spoke badly about Yogananda to his father, apologizing a few minutes later. Great that he so quickly caught himself, but it's still an apparent fault.

In addition, I've been reading a lot of the works of Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami, who, despite having great wisdom, has been wrong on a few accounts (such as claiming that the Bhagavad-Gita is a book of carnage, and that violent video games are training us to be violent ourselves; both of these are wrong, though I can understand why he'd think the latter.)

Ramakrishna was apparently against modern feminism, using the pedestal argument. ("Don't let the pure women to come down to our male imperfections.") This is very much wrong.

Don't get me wrong; all three of these men have taught great things, and were all very, very wise in their own schools of thought. (Subramuniyaswami was also a great writer.)

 

[ellenjanuary]

So you're saying you go back to God once you die?

I have my own NDEs which lead me to conclude that the two perspectives of ellen, after, are as follows:
As far as the world should be concerned, this body becomes biological waste. Recycle it or burn it, but I have no desire for a "grave" which seems to me a wasteful form of ancestor worship. But I do understand the appeal of "monument" and I would like to see Cantor's one day.
As far as I am concerned, the "I" of ellen returns to god where no "i" is necessary and things are too cool for words.

Or are you saying you believe in reincarnation but not Karma and the carry over from your past lives?

Did I mention being a witch? Karma can be overcome in the real world by application of scale. I could do "nasty stuff without fear of retribution," but it is a long and involved process... and I ain't teaching nobody no witchcraft (other than, of course, what can be availed through self-exploration).
I don't ask you to believe these claims so much as state them as evidence as to the limitation of Karma. I tend to feel it is just another one of those things applied to doctrine for those who feel weak and somehow violated to have a sense of "divine retribution." Because of my "sense of unwordable cool god," I feel that any sense of injustice will be beyond the concern of the soul newly returned to god.

No. I don't believe in reincarnation in the sense that three hundred years from now, some guy will be typing away on a net forum and suddenly go, "I remember being ellenjanuary!"

 

[PolyHedral]

It is intelligent energy that composes our bodies and all material existance.

To describe energy as "intelligent" is exactly as sensical as me describing yourself as "hypothetical." Energy does not make any decision; it does not perform any action. It merely flows from place to place within strictly defined rules, and the only thing that can possibly be described as "intelligent" is specific patterns of that flow.

Except I think mathematics are discovering that there is, in fact, an underlying order in apparent chaos.

Order and chaos are not mutually exclusive. There are merely views on the same mathematics.

 

[Riverwolf]

Order and chaos are not mutually exclusive. There are merely views on the same mathematics.

Uh... what?

 

[PolyHedral]

This image is fairly chaotic, isn't it? Yet the equations that define it are even smaller than the image itself.

They look perfectly orderly when they're written down like that, don't they?

 

[Kriya Yogi]

I haven't finished any of his books (I found those little collection books are too... simple to be useful to me), but one apparent imperfection that I found in Sri Yukteswar was, in fact, mentioned as such: when he spoke badly about Yogananda to his father, apologizing a few minutes later. Great that he so quickly caught himself, but it's still an apparent fault.

In addition, I've been reading a lot of the works of Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami, who, despite having great wisdom, has been wrong on a few accounts (such as claiming that the Bhagavad-Gita is a book of carnage, and that violent video games are training us to be violent ourselves; both of these are wrong, though I can understand why he'd think the latter.)

Ramakrishna was apparently against modern feminism, using the pedestal argument. ("Don't let the pure women to come down to our male imperfections.") This is very much wrong.

Don't get me wrong; all three of these men have taught great things, and were all very, very wise in their own schools of thought. (Subramuniyaswami was also a great writer.)

Noone is absolutely perfect until their being is wholey immersed in God. Then only God exists and that is when no imperfection can occur. The closer they are to that the less faults they will have. That as a matter of fact is the only fault I noticed of Sri Yukteswar as well. Other than that he was faultless. The same goes for Paramhansa Yogananda. My Guru has never ever faulted once he achieved Nirbikalpa samadhi. Besides true wisdom is little found in reading their books, however true wisdom is found by applying their meditative practices and teachings in your own life. Then you will know by personal experience.

 

[Kriya Yogi]

To describe energy as "intelligent" is exactly as sensical as me describing yourself as "hypothetical." Energy does not make any decision; it does not perform any action. It merely flows from place to place within strictly defined rules, and the only thing that can possibly be described as "intelligent" is specific patterns of that flow.

This is true, but there is a guidance behind this energy. God is the dreamer and doer of everything behind every molecule and atom of energy in this universe. That is what I mean by an intelligence behind energy. The energy and light itself is God's tool and dream.

 

[ellenjanuary]

This image is fairly chaotic, isn't it? Yet the equations that define it are even smaller than the image itself.

They look perfectly orderly when they're written down like that, don't they?

But is deterministic chaos equivalent to the philosophical sense of a god of chaos?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

This is true, but there is a guidance behind this energy. God is the dreamer and doer of everything behind every molecule and atom of energy in this universe. That is what I mean by an intelligence behind energy. The energy and light itself is God's tool and dream.

A beautiful sentiment that many people derive comfort from. Like a big, fluffy comforter lulling you off to sleep.

 

[PolyHedral]

This is true, but there is a guidance behind this energy. God is the dreamer and doer of everything behind every molecule and atom of energy in this universe. That is what I mean by an intelligence behind energy. The energy and light itself is God's tool and dream.

Then God is surely identical to the laws of physics themselves?

But is deterministic chaos equivalent to the philosophical sense of a god of chaos?

Yes, until you can define "free will" rigorously.

 

[Riverwolf]

This image is fairly chaotic, isn't it?

Not really. It looks like a fine mirror image.