historyteach

That is magnificient!

What is the name of the book, article....whatever....from which this is exerpted? I'd love to read more. It made such sense to me, and I have had limited short term experiences with the recognition of the Oneness of the universe. When it happens, it's exhilirating! When it's gone, there's a void I seek to fill again with that experience. Ahhh, to be as one all the time....

But, as Plato points out, we go out into the sun, but, we must return to the cave to show others that truth which we have experienced. ("The Allegory of the Cave," from The Republic. An awesome read, I highly recomend!) Our G*D wrestle is that going into the sun; our struggle to explain it is coming back to the darkness of the cave.

Thanks for sharing that, Indie!!!

Shalom!

indigo

It was an article by Doug inspired by David Bohm who has written several really interesting books on this and other subjects. You can google him Teach.

indie

Five

I believe, sort of, that when we get to older, the brain somehow adjusts to the idea of death, and my 25 year old eyes cant really comment. I dont have anything of value to comment other than the 'worm food belief system' lol.

Five

interesting stuff.

Grasshopper

Hi,you say,i sometimes think it could be all ego,that religion etc,,etc..
If i think im all that there is,there isnt anymore,is this not ego????

Five

Thats the old lie that if you dont believe in God you must be a massive ego maniac.

Nonesense.

Grasshopper

Ahe five,my lad,i never said what your implying here.
What i am saying is,how can a person say to those who believe in God,or those who are relgious,their knowing that there is something much larger/bigger there than oneself,say to us folks we are the ones with ego?Believing that there is an after-life,with our souls.When they believe that there is not God,and believe only in their own existence,that there is not more,than who they areand what they see,phyically?
Just seems odd to me.Like the poit calling the kettle---well you know...smile!!!!
P/S,please dont put words into my mouth.My mouth can only fit my own words,,heheeee.

equus

I haven't had chance to read all the posts but I have strong feelings on the subject of death.

I understand life and death like this:

I am here now.
This is something I know and it has two parts 'here' and 'now'. The here bit means I am sat here, not in the US, not in Africa, Asia, France or Tibet - in all those places lives full and rich are being lived and I play no part in reference to my OWN existance/experience. There's no sense in feeling that I'm losing because I am only here and can only be here, there's no sense in wanting for myself all those lives and experiences.

Then there's the now part - it's just the same to me 'I'm here now' which means just by default I will not be here in 100 years and was not here 100 years ago. There's no sense in me being greedy and wishing I should have all those experiences. Just as I have a place in geography, I have a place in time and I don't wish for it to be another way - I don't look for a means to be in all places nor do I look for a means to be in all times.

Now here's where it get's interesting to me. I am here now and yet I can effect there - where you are reading this and that is part of my existance. This is incredible to me, beautiful and something that enriches my life. When I am no longer here in time the same may also be true, the impact of my life will still be playing out. Who I am, my life, extends beyond my physical boundaries - I can see that, so it makes me care for this life which is beyond ME and yet part of me.

I will always be the footprint I leave, who I will always be depends on the impact I have. I am here now - therefore I am able to chose, who I am, where I am and my own will, which will in turn dictate my behaviour, which in turns dictates my impact - which makes me me.

So I am not sat next to you, nor will I be sat next a person 100 years from now. Neither truth frightens me and both make me value being here now.

Five

Grasshopper, I am genuienly intriuged by your post, but I found it difficult to understand. Please, please rewrite it so I can attempt to get the jist.

Hope no offence is caused.

James

Grasshopper

lol,if i were to be offended that would be my ego,right?..lol.Im not offended.No.
umm.lets see,how i can be more clear.I will try,and hopefully,do it.
A person says that those who believe that there is an after-life,are using their ego,to think that their souls will live forever.And yet,this person does not believe there is more to them,than themselves.Could this not be,seen as ego also,going on this theory?Am just trying to figure out anothers logic,here.I dont see,how one can be called ego,and the other not ego.
I personally have never believed that those who dont believe in God,or the after-life,are using their egos.Have read alot about the ego,ultra ego,and i just dont buy alot of the stuff i read about da ego.To easy to call it ego,i think............And if i point to anyones ego,have i not just used my own ego to do this?.............lol..I think so.I really think that we need to be open and honest with each other.Open minds and hearts..Hope im clearer here Five.I do have issues,trying to put my thoughts/experiences on paper,at times.

Five

Grasshopper, yes I understand now! My take on the 'ego' is that yes, we all have a kind of selfish gene, a kind of biological make up that is geared towards a kind of 'me'ness'. Some very wise people and religious people can rain this in and become more evolved in a selfless way, where as others, like myself, are just ego and a bit of unselfishness. But thats okay. The balance is right. I think we can serve our own ego needs without destroying ourselves or others, quite the opposite: I can tie my needs in with a greater good. So I dont feel shame for having an ego. But I must make sure I use it with balance!

Rambling. Take care, 5