It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Proof of What Happens To Us After Death and the Subsequent denial of it.

page: 11
12
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 1 2015 @ 10:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: bb23108
Wow! I just caught up with this thread and am amazed at some of the bs you are posting. A lot of this must have been while others were away too, given how much you said without too much retort.


originally posted by: Entreri06
You do know that almost every bit of the 3rd eye, adrenal gland stuff can all be traced back to one fraud who wrote self help books right? All the "crystals are magic" y"you just gotta uncalsify your adrenal glad" garbage comes from one book in the 60s or 70s. There are no anchient texts or shoulin monasteries that put spiritualism out there. It's from for profit self help authors taking advantage of drugged up hippies.

Where in the world did you come to believe the third eye was created in the 60s? What mysticism did you say you read?

At a very minimum, at least check Wiki before spouting off these kinds of terribly uninformed misconceptions - it may help you to decide not to.


originally posted by: Entreri06
The concept of heaven and everything that you consider a "soul" is a FAR more modern creation with a paper trail the same as Mormonism.

Good Lord. More of the same terribly uninformed misconceptions.


originally posted by: Entreri06
There isn't. I got all into every mystical, religious, spiritual thing I could devour!

What mysticism did you actually read? From just these quotes above, I can't even imagine! It sounds like you got swindled on whatever books you bought if those are your conclusions about the origins of these matters. Or else you missed something in them.


originally posted by: Entreri06
I always do think the way almost everyone mixes spiritualism, mysticism and religion into a crazy coctail of faith is intresting. If ones true, then the others are not. You don't get to pick and choose what you do and don't like.... Well personally you can :p but don't expect me to buy it !! :p

You do make a point about people revising various truths to fit their specific agenda. I see this constantly with New Age spirituality that often misses the true message of non-dualism that the adept realizers of non-dualism were always consistently making.

Many New Agers think they are enlightened because they have some kind of mental insight into the truth of non-duality; and then some even start offering weekend seminars about "how you can be enlightened too!" based on some misconception about non-dualism.

However, there are many ways that various spiritual traditions are truly the same - and this is most evident in comparative mysticism where there are many parallels between diverse traditions because they are dealing with known structures in the subtle body-mind - such as the Third Eye.

So in a very real sense, I do not buy your statement that "If ones true, then the others are not." Truth is the truth regardless of which tradition speaks of it. One can find it is consistent in various traditions certainly to one degree or another.

Anyway, please look a bit more deeply into these traditions before you go off about them as though you really are some kind of expert in them.


Spiritualism developed and reached its peak growth in membership from the 1840s to the 1920s, especially in English-speaking countries.[2][3] By 1897, Spiritualism was said to have more than eight million followers in the United States and Europe,[4] mostly drawn from the middle and upper classes.

The religion flourished for a half century without canonical texts or formal organization, attaining cohesion through periodicals, tours by trance lecturers, camp meetings, and the missionary activities of accomplished mediums. Many prominent Spiritualists were women, and like most Spiritualists, supported causes such as the abolition of slavery and women's suffrage.[2] By the late 1880s the credibility of the informal movement had weakened due to accusations of fraud perpetrated by mediums, and formal Spiritualist organizations began to appear.[2] Spiritualism is currently practiced primarily through various denominational Spiritualist churches in the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom.


That's from spiritualism wiki page. Notice the start date of 1840, not 12000 BC....


I'm searching for the write up on the 3rd eye, penial gland stuff. If memory serves it's from a self help yahoo in the 1960s. That caught on in the 70s hippi counter culture.


Obviously truth is truth, but your (not you personally) religion accidentally getting something right isn't the TRUTH. It's a fluke that the author didn't even KNOW he had right.

IMHO and using Christianity as an example. What first century Christians believed has almost no resemblance to what modern Christians believe. It is insane to see the difference between the two and impossible to merge the two. I seriously doubt that the farther we stray from the original beliefs, the closer we get to the TRUTH of Christianity. The same goes for every other religion and double for spiritualism being that that spiritualism has no concrete beliefs in the first place.




posted on May, 1 2015 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: bb23108

Fair enough.




So after all is said and done, you can make all the arguments you want, but they do not actually prove that you are only the body.


Why not?


proof |pro͞of|
noun
1 evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement: you will be asked to give proof of your identity | this is not a proof for the existence of God.
• Law the spoken or written evidence in a trial.
• the action or process of establishing the truth of a statement: it shifts the onus of proof in convictions from the police to the public.
• archaic a test or trial.
• a series of stages in the resolution of a mathematical or philosophical problem.
2 a trial print of something, in particular:
• Printing a trial impression of a page, taken from type or film and used for making corrections before final printing.
• a trial photographic print made for initial selection.
• each of a number of impressions from an engraved plate, especially (in commercial printing) of a limited number before the ordinary issue is printed and before an inscription or signature is added.
• any of various preliminary impressions of coins struck as specimens.
3 the strength of distilled alcoholic liquor, relative to proof spirit taken as a standard of 100: [ in combination ] : powerful 132-proof rum.


A closed argument is where the argument can only refer to itself. It is your arguments that are closed, being that they cannot refer to anything else, and one is left in a closed loop when he reads them.

"I'm right, you're wrong", is what your posts amount to.

Thanks for at least replying.



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: bb23108


Found it. Wasn't looking under new age... This is from it's wiki page.


The New Age movement is a religious or spiritual movement that developed in Western nations during the 1970s. Precise scholarly definitions of the movement differ in their emphasis, largely as a result of its highly eclectic structure. Nevertheless, the movement is characterised by a holistic view of the cosmos, a belief in an emergent Age of Aquarius – from which the movement gets its name – an emphasis on self-spirituality and the authority of the self, a focus on healing (particularly with alternative therapies), a belief in channeling, and an adoption of a "New Age science" that makes use of elements of the new physics.

The New Age movement evolved from an array of earlier religious movements and philosophies, in particular nineteenth-century groups such as the Theosophical Society and Gurdjieff. It also incorporates strands from metaphysics, perennial philosophy, self-help psychology, and various Indian teachings such as Buddhism, Hinduism and Yoga[1] In the 1970s, it developed a social and political component.[2] Its central precepts have been described as "drawing on both Eastern and Western spiritual and metaphysical traditions and infusing them with influences from self-help and motivational psychology".[3] The term New Age refers to the coming astrological Age of Aquarius.[4]



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: bb23108


The way you just characterized it, shows that you are not sensitive to this matter and much less, how to speak with dying people about it. In fact I have spoken to people on their death bed and they do understand something about being beyond the sheer physical meat body. I was able to do this recently with my father-in-law and he very much appreciated it.

Not even a nice try, LesMis - your statement certainly does not obviate what I said about everything anyone ever experiences is psychic (perceptual) in nature.

This is completely obvious, and once you start living on the basis of this truth of your actual situation here, you will not feel so separated from, and superior to, others. Then perhaps your treating many of us the way you (or at least your online persona) does, will be more participatory, open-minded, and respectful.


I am very sensitive to death and the dying. What I am insensitive towards is dishonesty. The way you speak of people as "meat bodies" is dreadful to me. It is no wonder that when you look at them, you need to concoct a story of your own devising given this insidious notion. I sincerely hope they do not see themselves the same way, and that they only allow you to continue to concoct fictions out of respect for your feelings.


i was under the impression that the whole point of this thread is "we will become rotting meat sacks when we die". and anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional. im paraphrasing obviously, but thats the gist.

maybe i misunderstood.

edit on 1-5-2015 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: bb23108

This is from the encyclopedia brittanica, does it get more credible then that? Lol on the way Jews and early Christians viewed the soul. Which was completely connected to the body before and after death. It was centuries later before the concept of a heaven we go to after death would pop up.


he early Hebrews apparently had a concept of the soul but did not separate it from the body, although later Jewish writers developed the idea of the soul further. Biblical references to the soul are related to the concept of breath and establish no distinction between the ethereal soul and the corporeal body. Christian concepts of a body-soul dichotomy originated with the ancient Greeks and were introduced into Christian theology at an early date by St. Gregory of Nyssa and by St. Augustine.



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 10:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Entreri06

That's from spiritualism wiki page. Notice the start date of 1840, not 12000 BC....


You were mentioning mysticism. You only finally mentioned Spiritualism. Mystical practices have been reported for thousands of years, including the 3rd eye.



originally posted by: Entreri06
I'm searching for the write up on the 3rd eye, penial gland stuff. If memory serves it's from a self help yahoo in the 1960s. That caught on in the 70s hippi counter culture.


So you cannot even find the source of what you so "expertly" stated? The third eye has been known as the gateway to cosmic mind since ancient times. It is even referenced in the Bible with the passage "If thine eye be single..."


originally posted by: Entreri06
What first century Christians believed has almost no resemblance to what modern Christians believe. It is insane to see the difference between the two and impossible to merge the two. I seriously doubt that the farther we stray from the original beliefs, the closer we get to the TRUTH of Christianity. The same goes for every other religion and double for spiritualism being that that spiritualism has no concrete beliefs in the first place.


I agree with you relative to Christianity - that the esoteric teachings of Jesus were snuffed out by the exoteric "official" church of Christianity. I have written more posts than I care to count about this very subject.

But to then draw your next set of conclusions from that, is not necessarily correct. There are various disciplines that do not even rely on beliefs because beliefs are just mental constructs that actually obstruct the real spiritual process.



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: bb23108


The way you just characterized it, shows that you are not sensitive to this matter and much less, how to speak with dying people about it. In fact I have spoken to people on their death bed and they do understand something about being beyond the sheer physical meat body. I was able to do this recently with my father-in-law and he very much appreciated it.

Not even a nice try, LesMis - your statement certainly does not obviate what I said about everything anyone ever experiences is psychic (perceptual) in nature.

This is completely obvious, and once you start living on the basis of this truth of your actual situation here, you will not feel so separated from, and superior to, others. Then perhaps your treating many of us the way you (or at least your online persona) does, will be more participatory, open-minded, and respectful.


I am very sensitive to death and the dying. What I am insensitive towards is dishonesty. The way you speak of people as "meat bodies" is dreadful to me. It is no wonder that when you look at them, you need to concoct a story of your own devising given this insidious notion. I sincerely hope they do not see themselves the same way, and that they only allow you to continue to concoct fictions out of respect for your feelings.


it feels like thats exactly what you are saying here though. when we die, our fleshly vessels decompose and "we" just disappear. "putrefaction" was the word you used. and "autolysis"...self-digestion? basically rotting meat sacks. right after you used some flowery language to deride the idea of a soul, of people being more than just flesh. you are sensitive to death yet mock the afterlife, souls, spirituality and everything in between. im finding it difficult to reconcile your opening post with what you say here.



Can't it be both?

Yes, we are just meat sacks and yes ,it's pretty flipping awesome anyway?

The universe is AMAZING already! We don't need to make up magic mumbo jumbo or place ourselves in some pedestal of universal significance. It's the fact that we are just meat sacks who even collectively combined aren't even a spec of sand in the ocean of reality that makes life and the universe amazing!!



Off topic, but I think the only thing that really adds up logically is the "matrix theory". Where this is all part of a computer program. That COULD BE the reason we are all just energy, it explains the double slit experiment and what observation seems to cause (no use in spending the processing power to operate areas that no one is observing, kinda the way you wouldn't run a dungeon in world of Warcraft if no one was in it.) .

However, if that is accidentally the case, my guess is we are more the ISO's from tron legacy. A spontaneous manifestation in the programming rather then the center of the universe. Maybe from some advanced races internet. Which from the inside looks like what we see. PS: this isn't my pet theory, just a hunch.



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Maybe my question is beneath you and that's why you chose to ignore it … But how can you explain free will in the context of "we are just atoms"? Atoms are bound by causal laws, free will is not. That is a clear indication that there is more going on that just well organized atoms IMHO.



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: bb23108

originally posted by: Entreri06

That's from spiritualism wiki page. Notice the start date of 1840, not 12000 BC....


You were mentioning mysticism. You only finally mentioned Spiritualism. Mystical practices have been reported for thousands of years, including the 3rd eye.



originally posted by: Entreri06
I'm searching for the write up on the 3rd eye, penial gland stuff. If memory serves it's from a self help yahoo in the 1960s. That caught on in the 70s hippi counter culture.


So you cannot even find the source of what you so "expertly" stated? The third eye has been known as the gateway to cosmic mind since ancient times. It is even referenced in the Bible with the passage "If thine eye be single..."


originally posted by: Entreri06
What first century Christians believed has almost no resemblance to what modern Christians believe. It is insane to see the difference between the two and impossible to merge the two. I seriously doubt that the farther we stray from the original beliefs, the closer we get to the TRUTH of Christianity. The same goes for every other religion and double for spiritualism being that that spiritualism has no concrete beliefs in the first place.


I agree with you relative to Christianity - that the esoteric teachings of Jesus were snuffed out by the exoteric "official" church of Christianity. I have written more posts than I care to count about this very subject.

But to then draw your next set of conclusions from that, is not necessarily correct. There are various disciplines that do not even rely on beliefs because beliefs are just mental constructs that actually obstruct the real spiritual process.




This is from the wiki on third eye...

The third eye refers to the gate that leads to inner realms and spaces of higher consciousness. In New Age spirituality, the third eye often symbolizes a state of enlightenment or the evocation of mental images having deeply personal spiritual or psychological significance. The third eye is often associated with religious visions, clairvoyance, the ability to observe chakras and auras,[4] precognition, and out-of-body experiences. People who are claimed to have the capacity to utilize their third eyes are sometimes known as seers.




The Buddhists believed in a forehead chakra, but every bit of the penal gland, psychicness came from modern spiritualism in the 70s... Exactly like I said.

Hindu/buddist beliefs are not very similar to the mystic third eye adopted by mysticism. In fact isn't buddism/Hinduism about self reflection far more then any magic ability to cause the world to change? (That's a real question not a slam)



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
A closed argument is where the argument can only refer to itself. It is your arguments that are closed, being that they cannot refer to anything else, and one is left in a closed loop when he reads them.



Your argument that you are only the body hinges only on body-based (physical) proofs, as I already stated in my previous post, and as caricatured there as a medical scientist saying:

"Yep, we cannot get an x-ray of you, Mr. Spirit, so you can't exist! You can go now. Next! Miss Spirit over here! You are sure cute! Oh dear, no x-ray came out. Sorry, but you can't exist either!"

The point I was making is you have a closed loop relative to your argument and its proof. Its proof is limited by the same physicality that is your very argument. No current technology can detect spirit. This is likely someday, since it obviously has observable properties by the subtle mind.

When you get to the subtle world, I wonder if you will then engage in arguments that the even more subtle world (the causal world) can not possibly exist! Probably. I will keep an eye out for this, that way I may easily find you.

I will try to explain the above in a different manner:

Of course our awareness and attention are typically identified with the physical body here. That is what generally results in re-embodiment via reincarnation here in the first place.

So just because all these body-minds can only manifest tools that are encumbered by this same realm's limits, certainly does not mean we are only the products of this realm. This is what I mean by your using a closed argument.

So if you actually had a visitation from an other-worldly manifestation, would you first try to write it off like Ebenezer Scrooge?

In the end, only the self-evident truth avails - the rest is based in limited mental concepts and dies with the brain, just like you say. Yep, a closed loop there, no doubt.


originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Thanks for at least replying.

Of course. You too.

edit on 5/1/2015 by bb23108 because:



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 11:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: AllIsOne
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Maybe my question is beneath you and that's why you chose to ignore it … But how can you explain free will in the context of "we are just atoms"? Atoms are bound by causal laws, free will is not. That is a clear indication that there is more going on that just well organized atoms IMHO.



Who says we have free will lol?

The chemical reactions in your brain are controlling all of us like puppets. Hell, there are parasites that can secrete this or that chemical and control your every thought and action. Plus you have to add in all the instinctual stuff like a sex drive, territorialism, biological clock to reproduce, secadian rythmes ( sleep drive), none of which can you will yourself to ignore.

Free will is a concept created by religions to explain why we are not born believing in whatever god and to explain why a "loving god" would create monsters.

In reality we are slaves to our brains wiring. Can some one with Autism or bipolar decide Not to be? Can some born attracted to women decide not to be?



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Entreri06
I don't see how that supports your argument that the Third Eye was concocted by someone in the 60s. It clearly was not.



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 11:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: bb23108

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
A closed argument is where the argument can only refer to itself. It is your arguments that are closed, being that they cannot refer to anything else, and one is left in a closed loop when he reads them.



Your argument that you are only the body hinges only on body-based (physical) proofs, as I already stated in my previous post, and as caricatured there as a medical scientist saying:

"Yep, we cannot get an x-ray of you, Mr. Spirit, so you can't exist! You can go now. Next! Miss Spirit over here! You are sure cute! Oh dear, no x-ray came out. Sorry, but you can't exist either!"

The point I was making is you have a closed loop relative to your argument and its proof. Its proof is limited by the same physicality that is your very argument. No current technology can detect spirit. This is likely someday, since it obviously has observable properties by the subtle mind.

When you get to the subtle world, I wonder if you will then engage in arguments that the even more subtle world (the causal world) can not possibly exist! Probably. I will keep an eye out for this, that way I may easily find you.

I will try to explain the above in a different manner:

Of course our awareness and attention are typically identified with the physical body here. That is what generally results in embodiment here in the first place.

So just because all these body-minds can only manifest tools that are encumbered by this same realm's limits, certainly does not mean we are only the products of this realm. This is what I mean by your using a closed argument.

So if you actually had a visitation from an other-worldly manifestation, would you first try to write it off like Ebenezer Scrooge?

In the end, only the self-evident truth avails - the rest is based in limited mental concepts and dies with the brain, just like you say. Yep, a closed loop there, no doubt.


originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Thanks for at least replying.

Of course. You too.


But the physical part can be proven, studied, predictions made and every other thing that anyone would consider proof. While there is no actual evidence for ANYTHING metaphysical at all in the first place.


That's like claiming the water is red in changrala (the mystical Chinese city I'm sure I slaughtered the spelling). Then saying we can't prove the water isn't red in changrala . when we have no reason to believe there is a changrala in the first place.......



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 11:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: bb23108
a reply to: Entreri06
I don't see how that supports your argument that the Third Eye was concocted by someone in the 60s. It clearly was not.




The fore head chakra is not the mystical psychic power third eye you are referring to. That's like saying the Native American sun symbol is a nazi swastika. When thy look the same but have totally separate meanings.



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 11:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Entreri06

originally posted by: AllIsOne
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Maybe my question is beneath you and that's why you chose to ignore it … But how can you explain free will in the context of "we are just atoms"? Atoms are bound by causal laws, free will is not. That is a clear indication that there is more going on that just well organized atoms IMHO.



Who says we have free will lol?

The chemical reactions in your brain are controlling all of us like puppets. Hell, there are parasites that can secrete this or that chemical and control your every thought and action. Plus you have to add in all the instinctual stuff like a sex drive, territorialism, biological clock to reproduce, secadian rythmes ( sleep drive), none of which can you will yourself to ignore.

Free will is a concept created by religions to explain why we are not born believing in whatever god and to explain why a "loving god" would create monsters.

In reality we are slaves to our brains wiring. Can some one with Autism or bipolar decide Not to be? Can some born attracted to women decide not to be?


Fair enough. Let's begin the game!

Am I assuming correctly that you think we are a biological entity, made up of only atoms? Your answer is probably a "yes". There is one simple law that governs all atoms: actio - reactio. I posit that humans have the ability to circumvent that law. (Animals do not, because they are bound by instinct.)

We can freely think of anything we want without there being an apparent cause for that to happen. Would you agree? Do you think me thinking of ice cream, quantum flux, or an Eb/F chord at this very moment is only governed by atoms?



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: bb23108
a reply to: Entreri06
I don't see how that supports your argument that the Third Eye was concocted by someone in the 60s. It clearly was not.





I just did some reading in the "third eye" chakra, it doesn't have anything to do with mysticism really. It isn't the most important chakra and most of the attributes attributed to the "third eye" are attributed to different chakras. The forehead chakra is where your good and evil personas fight for dominance, not where psychic powers come from. The top of head chakra is the primary one and the forehead chakra is almost the least important from my (admittedly quick) understanding...



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Entreri06

The fore head chakra is not the mystical psychic power third eye you are referring to. That's like saying the Native American sun symbol is a nazi swastika. When thy look the same but have totally separate meanings.


When one turns the attention to the internal energy of the body-brain-mind upwards, and concentrates it in the core of the brain, that is the position of the 3rd eye also known as the ajna chakra. This is where the subtle mind is. This is the gateway to various visions of subtle worlds, etc.

So what is your experience - or at least understanding of this process?



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 11:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: AllIsOne

originally posted by: Entreri06

originally posted by: AllIsOne
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Maybe my question is beneath you and that's why you chose to ignore it … But how can you explain free will in the context of "we are just atoms"? Atoms are bound by causal laws, free will is not. That is a clear indication that there is more going on that just well organized atoms IMHO.



Who says we have free will lol?

The chemical reactions in your brain are controlling all of us like puppets. Hell, there are parasites that can secrete this or that chemical and control your every thought and action. Plus you have to add in all the instinctual stuff like a sex drive, territorialism, biological clock to reproduce, secadian rythmes ( sleep drive), none of which can you will yourself to ignore.

Free will is a concept created by religions to explain why we are not born believing in whatever god and to explain why a "loving god" would create monsters.

In reality we are slaves to our brains wiring. Can some one with Autism or bipolar decide Not to be? Can some born attracted to women decide not to be?


Fair enough. Let's begin the game!

Am I assuming correctly that you think we are a biological entity, made up of only atoms? Your answer is probably a "yes". There is one simple law that governs all atoms: actio - reactio. I posit that humans have the ability to circumvent that law. (Animals do not, because they are bound by instinct.)

We can freely think of anything we want without there being an apparent cause for that to happen. Would you agree? Do you think me thinking of ice cream, quantum flux, or an Eb/F chord at this very moment is only governed by atoms?




How is the ability to think not "action reaction? You try and think of something (action) then you think of something (reaction). The chemicals in your brain mix and electric signals fire (action) you think (reaction)......


Please could you give one example where your neurons don't fire but you still think of something?

You mentioned atoms, yet are ignoring the billions of actions and reactions on the way to you thinking at all.
edit on 1-5-2015 by Entreri06 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Entreri06
But the physical part can be proven, studied, predictions made and every other thing that anyone would consider proof. While there is no actual evidence for ANYTHING metaphysical at all in the first place.

That's like claiming the water is red in changrala (the mystical Chinese city I'm sure I slaughtered the spelling). Then saying we can't prove the water isn't red in changrala . when we have no reason to believe there is a changrala in the first place.......

As I said, it is only the self-evident truth that ultimately avails. You can only discover this - nothing else, no amount of logic will completely convince me one way or another. Even if there were all the scientific proof one could imagine for the existence of the subtle worlds, or life force, etc., it would not make one iota of a difference in terms of the weight the self-evident truth carries relative to our being consciousness beyond the body-mind.

But at least it would stop all this arguing about it, so I guess that is one difference it would make!

edit on 5/1/2015 by bb23108 because:



posted on May, 1 2015 @ 11:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: bb23108

originally posted by: Entreri06

The fore head chakra is not the mystical psychic power third eye you are referring to. That's like saying the Native American sun symbol is a nazi swastika. When thy look the same but have totally separate meanings.


When one turns the attention to the internal energy of the body-brain-mind upwards, and concentrates it in the core of the brain, that is the position of the 3rd eye also known as the ajna chakra. This is where the subtle mind is. This is the gateway to various visions of subtle worlds, etc.

So what is your experience - or at least understanding of this process?


That there is no process, that human imagination and Psychology is an amazing computer, that can cause you to be sick or to be healed (placebo effect). All the chemicals to kill you or heal you are already inside of us. Pharms only trick you into releasing the right amount at the right time.


If mysticism were true (past psychology) then after thousands of years of searching we would have more evidence then what we have. Science took us to the moon in less then a century of belief. What did 100k years of religion and mysticism get us? Wars, atrocities, slavery with a pinch of charity mixed in...







 
12
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join