admin

by 1 Comment

Avowed atheist, the late Christopher Hitchens, often accused theists of wanting to believe in a Heaven because they want “the party to go on”.  (Christopher Hitchens was this scary man with a deep voice who always reminded me of my Dad when he gets really angry and I am in big trouble.)

Hitchens compared religious references of Heaven to a never-ending party because he felt that people were afraid of no longer existing after they die, of losing their identity or connection to loved ones.  They want to imagine some kind of world where they will once again be alive and able to experience all the fun they had while on earth, but this time without any of the sorrows or negatives.  They want to know that they will once again be reunited with Mom, Uncle Charlie, and their hamster Gerald.

It’s interesting to note that this idea of existing after death is a relatively Western concept.  Eastern philosophy is a bit different.  We do not want the party to go on.  Especially one that involves grey hairs, cellulite craters, saggy skin, saggier body parts, and general old age as the night grows longer.  (Not that I have real experience with any of these myself yet, but theoretically speaking!)

Instead we wish for jeevan mukti or moksha which is a release from reincarnation, or the cycle of rebirth.  Our goal is ceasing to exist as a constantly suffering, vulnerable, and transitory lifeform.  The final resting state is simply imagined to be one with no hardships or even existence, as opposed to a fun, colorful, heavenly party with harps and angels.  The Eastern vision of Heaven may sound a bit drab at first, but think of it as a dreamless sleep where you get to nap for as long as you want.  On gazillion-thread-count sheets.  Not so bad now, is it?

Bored Angel with halo and wings

In Hindu teachings, it is thought that both Heaven and Hell are accessible to us in our current state as humans.  The idea of a separate Heaven or Hell, after this life, does not really exist – except, as just discussed, the heavenly feeling of liberation from reincarnation.  But it is believed that one can be free from one’s physical body even now, in our current life, simply through the use of the mind.  Detachment of one’s expectation of a permanent happiness from temporary, worldly pleasures is supposedly the key to bliss on earth.  Perhaps comparable to the old Native Indian way of living – one of community, sharing, harmony with nature, simplicity, respect for young and old, and minimal material comforts – which was considered a sustainable, loving way to live together during our short time here.  Or maybe it is possible to have another kind of Utopia, one where we can still have our chocolate and Mc-80-inch-TVs.  (I own the former and am addicted to the latter.  Yeah, yeah, I know I don’t come across as completely enlightened yet, but I’m WORKING ON IT!)

Meanwhile, it is believed that Hell on earth can also be experienced.  Many years ago I visited a company in Bombay to look into the creation of a green eco bag with my company logo that I wanted to gift to clients in the US.  After some initial small talk, the shrewd, money-minded owner took me to the inner chambers of his factory, to show me where the work was being done.  I will never forget what happened next.  When he opened the door to a small room with about twenty women and children inside, the heat and stench hit me squarely in the face.  It comprised the most horrific working conditions I had ever seen, a dark, humid, airless room with no human comforts, just a concrete floor and frail women and children hand stitching garment after garment.  Not even sewing machines were visible, it was a simple line of humans crouched on the floor with needle, thread, and nothing else.  Not even a window. 

OTHER POSTS YOU MIGHT LIKE

To me, this scenario was the quintessential example of Hell on earth.  The devil, fire, and forced labor was all here, in a small sweatshop in Bombay.  Hell can also be seen in refugee camps, crowded jails, ISIS videos, battle sites, domestic abuse shelters, slums or simply in ordinary, everyday life.

The reality of the atrocities actually suffered on Earth can be far more horrendous than the flimsy scare tactics dreamt up by religious books and leaders.  So to the atheists who believe that theists and agnostics are desperately clinging to the idea of a higher power because they wish to remain eternal – I would like to emphatically and clearly say that this is not true.  

There are many of us, like myself, who have no need to continue existing as an identity or as anything at all.  We are happy enough to have an end to our suffering, whether that happens within the framework of a random or planned design.  If our suffering ends simply because we are a random product of the Big Bang and we will cease to exist once our bodies break down – we are okay with that.  There is no need to believe in a planned or intelligent design or a God or Heaven simply for the hope that we continue to enjoy the party.  The goal is an end to suffering, not a continuation of fun times.

So on behalf of all party poopers who prefer an eternal nap to an eternal dance floor — let the party go on without us!

by Leave a Comment

Fighting with family, friends, and colleagues is inevitable, at least to some degree.  My two brothers, for example, can be annoying and often wrong.  So it’s my sacred duty as their brilliant older sister to set them straight as much as possible.  We clash even more because instead of appreciating the precious pearls of wisdom they are privileged to receive, they call me mean and untrue words like BOSSY.  Obviously when they’re being such babies it’s going to cause a fight, isn’t it?

Their whininess aside, other people can also set me off, for a spectrum of reasons.  As can happen with all of us – the spouse who knows which buttons to press, the parents who nag, the coworkers who get on every last nerve, the friends who voted for Trump (sorry, couldn’t resist!)  We all have encounters that bring conflict, and if we’re totally honest, may not always be the other person’s fault.  I acknowledge that I may have a teeny, weeny tendency to be slightly . . . um . . . bossy-ish.

It’s commonly said that a good way to judge a person’s character is by the way they conduct themselves during conflict.  I don’t know if I agree with that exactly, because I’ve seen kind, loving people become totally illogical and emotional when arguing.  They can be the type that would sacrifice their left arm for their friends, but never let them have the last word in an argument.  So I wouldn’t say it’s a reflection of character as much as I would call it a mirror of one’s level of enlightenment and detachment from the ego.

Two monks fighting through martial arts

There are two general ways to fight: fair or dirty.  Of course, there can be shades in between, it’s not just a binary set of two camps.  But I’ve seen that overall a person leans towards one side or the other in terms of how they resolve disagreements – on the fair side they are more interested in solving the problem and progressing forward, versus the other where a person is more focused on stroking their own ego and always being right.

A person who fights fair is not so blinded by their own identity and desires.  The first indicator is that they are able to empathize with the OTHER soul across from them.  A fair fighter recognizes the fact that another person may also have valid points, and perhaps there is no right or wrong but simply a difference of opinion.  Consequently, a dispute will be a productive discussion rather than a boxing match.  They are able to float above the shackles of their own bodies and minds and see things from a macro level view.

A second indicator of an evolved soul is one who will readily concede if they are at fault.  They are big enough to say “I’m sorry, I was WRONG, and I could have done better.”  Proving their own superiority is not so important because they are not as preoccupied with their image.  If the conflict arose from something that they are doing incorrectly, a higher being can admit to it without hesitation.

When someone fights dirty, they want victory at all costs.  Because their ego is at stake.  Hence they can become base and petty.  Even if they know they made a mistake, they’ll stubbornly refuse to yield, and dig in even harder to prove their invalid point.  They will drag in irrelevant tangent topics or past baggage or use personal insults.  They’ll add extra noise to the conversation just to bury their opponent with an avalanche of hurt and venom.  They’ll do whatever it takes to “win”.  In fact, there is an official term psychologists use to describe this kind of person, which is, quite literally, Right-Fighter.   A Right-Fighter values being RIGHT above anything else.

What’s interesting is that a Right-Fighter is not necessarily someone who is uneducated or mean.  As I mentioned earlier, I don’t think it is tied to one’s entire character – just a part of it.  A person can be charitable and generous in situations that enable them to enhance their reputation, or even in situations where they act anonymously.   But the minute they are involved in a personal confrontation that threatens their ego, that same person can become ferociously blind in defending it.  

I’m constantly surprised at how many of my friends and family – from very young to very old – remain immature, stubborn brick walls when it comes to any kind of disagreement.  For example, I’ve noticed that those in their golden years had way more stamina and wisdom than I ever did.  They lived through hard times, displayed remarkable resilience, sacrifice, and pragmatism, and worked their way through situations with a stoic steel discipline that my weak and spoiled self could never emulate.  And yet many of these amazing grey-haired souls can turn into tantrum throwing toddlers if they feel that their authority is threatened.   The same goes for many of my own peers.  At least 25% of the people in my circle have never conceded an argument in the entire time that I have known them.  Yet they are souls who I would otherwise view as warm, giving, and intelligent.

OTHER POSTS YOU MIGHT LIKE

This is why I perceive behavior in a conflict to be a test of one’s awokeness and lack of ego, which is a very SPECIFIC aspect of a person’s overall character.  A person may have many admirable traits but still be a sore loser.

I’ll admit, all of us are human.  Sometimes it just feels oh-so-good to win a fight.  Especially when it’s with your two brothers who know how to press your buttons!  

But the more classy thing to do is to refrain from yelling, and take not-so-subtle digs at them through articles that you publish instead.  🙂 

Sibling rivalry aside, God knows (if he exists) that I do have a ways to go myself.  I’m certainly not the most perfect example of an adversary either.  I was on the debate team in school and I am pretty good at arguing and pummeling my opponent with a verbal barrage if I choose to.  I’ve won awards for it in fact!

But most of the times I try to refrain from deploying my natural manipulation skills.   Once I get past the limiting barriers of my reputation and ego, it feels liberating to solve a problem and move on to bigger and better things.  Like take a nap.  Or float in a pool.  It takes a lot of energy to fight, sometimes it’s just not worth it unless you’re Mike Tyson and getting paid for it.  Fighting FAIR is not just good karma, it’s good time management.  A helpful tip for the enlightened AND lazy!

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons
View on Facebook
·Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

View Comments
  • Likes: 15
  • Shares: 4
  • Comments: 5

Comment on Facebook

It seems to me that most of the conflicts in life are the result of one or more participants need to be the most important member of the argument. We don’t like it if someone else seems to have something we don’t. I recommend distance races. You probably won’t come first but you probably won’t come last. The important thing is to take part and learn from those around you.

It used to be said that you can't truly be friends until you have had a fight. A friend will refrain from hurting you badly, not go for the kill.

At the domestic and personal level the truly enlightened gain the optimal objective without fighting and without leaving the opponent with a sense of defeat. This ideal is rarely achieved because the cruder alternatives require far less thought and effort and ask less of our ego.

Is whether we fight a measure of enlightenment?

ONE CHALLENGE THE EVIL, INJUSTICE, UNFAIRNESS NOT BECAUSE OF HATRED ,AND ANGER ,BUT JUST PART OF THE GAME IN THE COSMIC DANCE. FIGHTING FOR JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS WITHOUT ATTACHMENT ,AND HATRED, THEN ONE HAS LIVED THE DHARMA. (RESPONSIBILITY).ONE HAS FULFILLED THE SPIRITUAL PURPOSE FOR WHICH ONE WAS BORN.

by 1 Comment

Buddhism’s Four Noble Truths do a brilliant job of explaining the root cause of suffering as attachment to one’s desires, as follows:

    1. All of life is suffering
    2. Suffering comes from attachment
    3. The end of suffering can come from letting go of attachments
    4. The Eightfold path (such as right actions and words) is the way to letting go

Letting go of one’s attachments – or DETACHMENT – is not an easy feat, however.  And each of the eight steps can take a lifetime to master.  But before any of that is attempted, one needs to start by getting on board with the first two points.

Elizabeth Gilbert, one of my favorite authors, wrote in Eat, Pray, Love that she didn’t understand the concept of detachment.  She couldn’t get behind the idea of not wanting things, people, or experiences, she felt it would mean she was not fully living.

I am not surprised.  She is a creative and energetic individual with many interests, and it would be hard for someone like that to relate to the austerity of such a practice.  She might have changed her views on it since way back then, but I know many other people who have started exploring spirituality and say the same thing.  The concept of detachment is not easily grasped by those actively living their best life. 

I will confess that I, too, find it a bit difficult to follow.  I am still attached to things like my sheepskin blanket and No Pudge Fudge and the Internet.  Surfing uselessly for hours on end makes me happy!

However the general concept of detachment is one that I also happen to find quite logical, at least in theory.

While the Four Noble Truths introduced the concept, it was a lecture by the late Swami Chinmayananda, which I had the privilege to hear, that finally made the concept click for me.

I will attempt to replicate his spiritual teachings here, but because I am right AND left-brained, I do better when analyzing ideas through charts and data.  The following is what I heard Swamiji say, plotted by me visually for better understanding and impact.  I call it The Happy Graph.

The ideal Happy Graph would look like this:

Happy Graph with Permanent Line

An eternal, complete Happiness would resemble a straight line that does not waver, or go up and down with time.  This is what we are hoping to achieve – permanent Happiness.  Or conversely, as the mirror of that picture – detachment from Suffering.

Now let’s say we start specifically plotting events that bring us Happiness.  Let’s start with objects or a few of our favorite things.  One of my most favorite objects is (no surprise for those who know me) . . . chocolate.  I’m going to plot it on the graph, but because some men or general weirdos might not completely align with that, I’ll add beer as well.  (Whoever doesn’t like chocolate probably hates puppies and babies too.)  I’m also going to plot the data point for the ramifications of having too much chocolate and beer, which can be pretty hefty weight gain.  As follows:

ChocoBeer Gut Happy Graph

Now what else brings us Happiness?  Let’s try something different from an object – say an event, such as a promotion at work.  A promotion can be exciting because of the raise and corner office and increased power that it might bring.  But it can also result in extra responsibility and longer hours.  Plotting various sources of Happiness, such as a new iThing, car, vacation, or even our loved ones, along with any ramifications the object, place, or person could bring might look as follows:

Happy Graph with life ups and downs

As we can see from the chart, there are many external sources and events that can give us pleasure.  The list is endless.  However for most of us, the same sources of Happiness can be a source of UNhappiness as well.  An iThing can be stolen or lost, a brand new car might lose it’s sparkle the next day when a neighbor buys one model up.  Vacations can result in a substantial backlog and a need to catch up again upon return.  Even loved ones such as family and friends can get sick, move away, or God forbid, pass on.  Nothing external ever stays the same, it is always subject to change, either in reality with a physical change (car dent) or internally, inside one’s mind in terms of how we perceive the object (inferior car model).

The most volatile of these external factors is time, which is always running and never stays still.  Youth may bring vitality, energy, and dreams but that quickly gives way to old age, disease, and death.  The physical body – the flesh and blood cage that surrounds our soul and mind – and our ego and identities that we assume while we are alive in the world – all of them are depreciating assets that disappear over time.

When looked at from this perspective, it is easier to understand that attaching one’s INTERNAL, PERMANENT happiness to EXTERNAL, TEMPORARY factors is an oxymoron. 

How can we expect to derive something permanent – a straight, constant line of Happiness – from something temporary that causes peaks and valleys in the Happy Graph?  A Happiness that is attached to a factor that is guaranteed to change, is also going to change, just by default.  Once we understand that, detaching our Happiness from temporary, volatile factors now seems like a logical process to follow in the search for complete and permanent Happiness.

But here comes a valid argument against detachment – if one is able to detach from everything in life, as Liz Gilbert wondered, what is there left to live for?  According to Swami Chinmayananda, the answer – everything.  HOWEVER . . . the trick is to enjoy all of the blessings and rewards that come along in life but NOT be as sad or affected if they go away.  Not all of us need to be ascetics and renounce the world.  Instead, recognizing that it is a given that external factors come and go and being able to keep a constant, unwavering line of Happiness instead of going up and down with life’s unpredictability, is the way to remain detached and yet still stay involved in the world and enjoy the fruits of one’s labor.

Easier said than done, trust me, I get it.  I’m not there completely myself.  I’m not ready to let go of my many adult binkies.

But what is the alternative?  Allow ourselves to ride the biggest and scariest roller coaster out there, called LIFE?  Some would say yes, in order to experience the incredible highs, one also has to dip down to the deepest lows.  There’s nothing wrong with that, each person has to decide for themselves what they want their Happy Graph to look like.  My very extroverted friend took one look at that straight line that I aspired to and said it reminded him of a no pulse EKG.  🙁

I respect his morbid viewpoint but I don’t see it that way for myself.  I took my turn on the world’s tallest roller coaster when I was young – from riding high with enthusiasm as I pursued the next entrepreneurial venture with great hope – to the abject disappointment when I failed – to the motivational speakers urging me to dust myself off and not accept defeat – with the cycle repeating itself over and over.  I experienced the usual desires for a big house and nice gadgets, gaining them in my early 30s, then losing them again once I was divorced.  I spent hours investing in numerous friendships that I later outgrew, or fretted over bonds to family that were once strong and then started to weaken.  Many times I’ve experienced maya (a Hindu term), similar to the illusion of an oasis in the desert, and once reaching it, seen it dissipate into thin air.  Been there, done that.  I don’t have energy for all of that chasing anymore.  I’m sure age is a part of it, but I’m slowing down now and just chilling by adding more whitespace to my day.  For the Bollywood fans out there, I’m channeling my inner Zeenat from Dum Maro Dum*.

OTHER POSTS YOU MIGHT LIKE

If I lose my home tomorrow to some of the more frequently occurring global warming events like hurricanes and floods, I’m not saying I won’t be sad and disoriented.  I can’t even IMAGINE the trauma.  But I’ll probably be able to deal with it in a much calmer way than I would have a few decades ago.  I would love to become well-known so I can share my ideas with more people, but if I don’t become the next Salman Rushdie with my controversial spiritual publishings, maybe that’s a good thing.  I’ll be able to keep spouting whatever I want and not have a fatwa on my head.  If I don’t end up in another relationship, hallelujah, one less man-baby I have to cook and clean for.  🙂

Call it jaded, or call it mellow, my Happy Graph line doesn’t move up and down as much anymore.  Because I’ve had the lightbulb realization – in a way I’ve never had before – that external factors will always be changing.  One can’t control that.  And it’s an oxymoron to expect permanent, complete Happiness from temporary, changing sources.  Just like the Four Noble Truths, the Happy Graph makes it clear – letting go of your binkies is the ultimate path to enlightenment.

 

*A famous Bollywood song from the 70s showing actress Zeenat Aman smoking and taking drugs and singing a hypnotic song while high. 

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons
View on Facebook
·Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

View Comments
  • Likes: 12
  • Shares: 2
  • Comments: 6

Comment on Facebook

What Buddhist sutra did you get this from? Focus your desires on positive actions.

Happiness is a desire. Detachment is to end suffering not cause happiness.

Cheese in my a/c room, practising gratefulness

🦟

Detach from that phone in your hand. Yes, I am talking to YOU

I like chips... (...with ketchup...). 🙂

by Leave a Comment

Oftentimes when I am talking to my scary atheist friends and debating the veracity of certain stories or books, they will shoot them down because they claim that the information or arguments used in them are based off anecdotes instead of authentic research or measurable laboratory results.

So I thought I’d take a look at the anecdote and think about whether its narration could ever be considered valid.  An anecdote is defined as a short story about a real person, thing, or event.

I will begin by conceding that the protest against the anecdote is fair to some extent – there is no great way to confirm whether the experience described by the person relating the anecdote is true.

For example, I have a friend who claims to have been haunted by a poltergeist in one of his past homes.  He described to me several incidents of having doors close and drawers slam and lights turn off.  He related everything calmly, and in great detail, and except for this one unusual experience he did not seem to have any other superstitions or ultra-religious beliefs.

I will confess that his stories spooked me a bit – I don’t think I roamed around in my house thereafter without some garlic and cat’s blood.  Or something like that.  But in general, I had no way of knowing whether these episodes actually happened or not.  Perhaps my friend was making them up completely.  Perhaps he truly believed events like that occurred, but he was hallucinating or seeing something else and misinterpreting it.  Or perhaps he was too young and his memory of what happened is distorted.  There could be numerous reasons why his stories may not be true.

Woman Speaking with Microphones

I can’t properly judge this particular scenario because I haven’t known my friend long enough to discern the truth behind his credibility or any biases.  But here is what I tell my atheist acquaintances in terms of how I view anecdotes of spiritual or religious experiences, and how I believe others view them as well:

A THEIST is someone who is prone to easily believing anecdotes, because one of the biggest recountings they trust is that told by their holy book – for example, the Bible.  After all, holy books are stories of historical incidents and people, which may or may not have been real.  So I would categorize ardent theists as individuals who tend to believe most, if not all religious anecdotes.

A hard-core ATHEIST is someone who may not believe ANY spiritual anecdotes, no matter who is saying them or what they are about.  The atheist view is that if something cannot be proven by science or evidence, it is not tenable.  It probably wouldn’t matter if God himself came down and spoke to us, atheists would most likely claim that the government put drugs in everyone’s water and we were all hallucinating together.

And then there are us AGNOSTICS.  We usually like to be in the middle, like a godly Goldilocks.  Although I shouldn’t presume to speak on behalf of all agnostics, so I’ll speak for myself.  As someone with both theist and atheist viewpoints, I neither fully believe nor disbelieve an anecdote at the outset.  Instead, I might give more weight to certain anecdotes over others.  It all depends on who is telling the story and what the story entails.

An anecdote on a ghost sighting by my ya-ya theist friend – let’s call her Phoebe – who goes to church every week and also believes in tarot cards, the ouija board, or other superstitions?  On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most convincing, I’d probably rate her ghost encounter a 1.  At a rating of 1, the anecdote would be one of many spiritual data points I collect and analyze, but it wouldn’t significantly change my thinking.

A supernatural anecdote by a more rational theist friend who may not be as gullible as the blind faith devotee, but still has a huge bias towards anything religious?  Her stories might warrant a 3.

The tale told by Oprah who claims to have seen a ghost in a hotel once?  (You can listen to her talk about it HERE.)  Oprah is someone who appears greatly inclined towards theism on the one hand, but on the other seems rather astute and no-nonsense.  I’d rate her ghost story a 6.  Having someone like Queen Oprah attest to a ghost viewing would, and did, budge the needle on my “ISM” scale a bit, away from atheISM and more towards theISM, though it couldn’t convert me fully.

Atheism vs Theism

A hypothetical future confession of having experienced the divine by someone like Sam Harris – an avowed and passionate atheist who won’t even concede the existence of free will – and who now recants his atheism and says he believes in God because of some recent experience?  If that shocking event were to actually happen one day, I’d give that a resounding 9!  I’d take a point off because he may be someone who could fake a story to increase his popularity and book sales.  But mostly I’d be forced to believe someone like him because of the unlikely turnaround, and it would weigh heavily on my ISM scale.

It would be rare for me to be at a 0 or 10.  I would not fully dismiss a story, unless it was particularly silly, or fully believe it either, unless it was really significant.

So to summarize – one gullible side believes almost anything if it fits into their confirmation bias, and all religious anecdotes are a 10.  They judge like Paula Abdul – it’s all good.  The other group will arrogantly concede to nothing, and for them, every story rates a 0.  They are Simon Cowell.  And then there is the reasonable middle – we’re Randy – where shades of grey matter.  Some stories work, and some are just too pitchy, dawg!

The potential power of the anecdote is important because oftentimes a litany of them are used in books to make a point.  It’s very common in books on spirituality, such as Many Lives, Many Masters or The Scalpel and the Soul or Proof of Heaven: A Neurosurgeon’s Near Death Experience.  All of these were authored by doctors who described encounters with the supernatural within their practices or in their own lives.  The stories have never been proven but the perceived legitimacy of the people telling them – medical professionals – could lend them weight, at least in some people’s view.

The cousin to the anecdote – the case study – is also used in popular books to make a point.  The case study is a bit different in that it’s not a personal story that may or may not have happened.  Instead, it’s an analysis of some existing incident or company or product that can be vetted.  But though the case study SUBJECT itself is verifiable, the CONCLUSIONS drawn from it may not be.

For example, famous author Malcom Gladwell uses alot of case studies in his best selling books The Tipping Point, The Outlier, and What The Dog Saw.  Highly respected and considered a brilliant social scientist, he has nevertheless been accused by critics of using carefully selected case studies to back his assertions, rather than proper, statistically significant research.  The common objection to his work is that there will always be a few stories that can be plucked and planted to support any argument of any kind, in lieu of proof via a larger number of data points.

OTHER POSTS YOU MIGHT LIKE

Case studies are more reliable than anecdotes, of course, but they still fall into a grey area when used to support an assertion.  It’s interesting to note that some people will stubbornly shut out any kind of grey evidence when it comes to spirituality, angrily calling it “woo-woo nonsense” or “imbecilic superstition” but be open to grey in other areas.

To each their own, everyone has a right to their own opinion of course.  I remain friends with people on all ends of the ISM scale, though it can be a little frustrating when trying to have a discussion with someone on one extreme or the other.

On my end, I remain open to anecdotes.  If Bill Maher were to do an about-face tomorrow and tell us that he had a life-changing supernatural experience – one where he knows he was not hallucinating, and which has turned him from being an avid atheist to a passionate theist – you better believe that would make me sit up and take notice!  In fact, I’d run to the nearest ashram and give up the rest of my life to God, so spooked and convinced would I be with the shocking turn around.  For now, however, no anecdote or creepy ghost story has ever been powerful enough to knock me completely off my agnostic and hedonistic perch.  If one does, come find me . . . I’ll be hiding out at the nunnery.

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons
View on Facebook
·Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

View Comments
  • Likes: 2
  • Shares: 0
  • Comments: 4

Comment on Facebook

Funny what the brain can do, it even makes up crap when it don’t have all the information, know fact that has been stupid and papers written

The problem with anecdotes is that people too often take one tiny example and create a broad ideal from it.....like someone saying "I don't know anyone who died from Covid-19...it can't be all that serious." This ignores the data of more than 600,000 deaths in the US alone, based on one person's experience. It's like saying "But it snowed in Alabama last winter so there is no such thing as climate change." 🙄

Anything that shakes your carefully arranged ego house of concepts and idea cards is rather bothersome, because they disrupt your little house of cards. You’re frightened. How anyone reacts to an inexplicable ego crushing event depends on many factors. Seeing a ghost will create a crack which could either grow over or keep on cracking. Our fear is of the unknown. We like to think that what we know is correct. If not a rather uncomfortable collapsing feeling, a free fall feeling come on that average people will be frightened of. God is self evident. What is this now? Why is there life? It is and how! Most are so full and distracted and frightened to see the obvious. God is unknowable with words and concepts because it is everything. A man who had never seen the colour blue spent all his life studying it. He became a world renowned expert to all the rest who had never seen blue. You see blue. Blue cannot be defined with words to a blind man. So is the unknowable truth. People get glimpses and inflate their egos with the memory. Some pursue the truth all their live. BTW Maher is a 33 degree mason. He practices the dark path. He is a pathological liar.

by Leave a Comment

How many of you think more clearly once you’ve had your morning coffee?  (Raise your hand.)

How many of you have experienced some type of sugar high that caused you to feel happier or more productive?  (I have ten arms raised.)

How many of you have taken drugs sometime in the past and gotten high in general?  (I don’t really want to know.)

My point here is that food, drinks, and chemicals have the tremendous ability to affect our moods and thoughts in a way that we normally don’t question.  It’s common knowledge and taken for granted.  But if you stop to think about it – isn’t the SELF that we refer to – our CONSCIOUSNESS – our SOUL – that which helps us think and feel?  Isn’t our SELF supposed to be the part of our being that determines whether we are happy or sad, whether we’re motivated or feeling blah, whether we choose to zig instead of zag?

Most of us believe that we are not simply our physical bodies or even our brains.  We are not just biological robots, there seems to be a sentient force inside of us that is separate from the exterior.

When the Soul gets Lost in Science

But if that is true, how is it possible that our intangible self is subject to hallucinations or even violent thoughts after taking tangible items like drugs?  How is it that our moods can be manipulated by something as mundane as caffeine or sugar?  Why is my grouchy self a mushy lovebug after imbibing the right drink?

There is an anti-depressant called Abilify that can cause a person to impulsively and addictively gamble, eat, shop, or have sex.  As a financial planner, I was stunned to learn that a formerly money savvy client had gotten into extreme credit card debt after starting this medication.  I did not realize that something as elementary as a drug could cause one to involuntarily indulge in such specific behaviors for which one had little predisposition initially.  But Abilify and similar drugs have the scary ability to increase dopamine in the brain which in turn magnifies or stimulates its motivation and reward receptors, causing impulsive and extreme behaviors.  It appears it’s not a long slide from Abilify to Addictify!

ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE SELF
In The Man Who Wasn’t There – Tales from the Edge of the Self, an award winning book by science journalist Anil Ananthaswamy, the changing or disassociation of self with the body or societal norms is described through disorders like schizophrenia, autism, dementia, and epilepsy.  The book’s main purpose is to examine the concept of self and how it changes or even seems to disappear when certain biological or chemical factors affect the body and mind.  For example, he talks about Cotard’s syndrome (also called Walking Corpse), a rare and baffling condition where the afflicted feels he or she is already dead.  They believe that they no longer exist, and they are often severely depressed or disturbed as a result.

Mr. Ananthaswamy makes a distinction between the BODY Self and NARRATIVE Self.  The Body Self would be one where the person is associating themselves with their physical body, and the Narrative Self involves one’s memories or identity or more cognitive variables.  The Body Self would be affected by a disorder like Cotard’s and the Narrative Self would be impacted by something like Alzheimer’s.  The Narrative Self might also be disturbed through schizophrenia, where ideas that arise in one’s mind as part of the normal thinking process are thought to be separate and distinct, as if third-party voices are talking instead.  This leads to paranoia and the person feeling that they are being controlled by someone else.  When in reality, the issue is that they are simply not recognizing themselves as the creator or narrator of their own thoughts. 

(I always have my Tiger Mom’s voice in my head, controlling my actions, but I believe that’s another disorder discussion for another day.)

Mr. Ananthaswamy shows how some people can have their Body Self affected, but not their Narrative Self, or vice-versa.  The interesting takeaway is that biological and chemical disturbances can cause the loss of what we call the self in numerous ways.

The Man Who Wasn’t There is an illuminating read for those who have ever wondered how connected consciousness might be to the body and brain.  For me, it was compelling support for the possibility that there is no separate soul or self, that we are just complex configurations of neurons and protons and croutons, and our decisions or personalities are merely constructs of our biology and nothing more.

ARGUMENTS FOR THE SELF
Of course, there are always situations where the river flows the other way, i.e. the self seems to be directing the body instead of the body controlling the self.  There have been studies done on monks who are able to slow down their breathing rate to shocking low levels through meditation.  The Guinness record for longest time to hold one’s breath is 22 minutes.  Athletes constantly use willpower to push through blinding pain and perform astonishing feats.  There have even been reports of mothers being able to lift a car off their child through sheer determination and force of love.  And of course there have been reports of near-death experiences where the brain was declared clinically dead but the patient was later able to report the events that occurred during that time.

For this and other reasons there is also a part of me that simply can’t shake the idea of a ME or a FREE WILL that is separate from the physical body or any food, drink, or disease.  It’s the ME that I deem responsible for all of my moral choices. I am not able to understand those who argue against free will and imply that a criminal may be just an artificially programmed human lemon and not wholly accountable for his crimes.  That’s just too hard to swallow.

I believe this SELF is the one that still exists even if the Body Self or Narrative Self is affected.  And I believe it can be summed up in one word – INTENTION.  In addition to the Body Self and Narrative Self, I would argue that there is something called the Intention Self, the one that has to do with our ethics and intended choices.  And if there is an intelligent or planned design to the Universe, then I believe it would be the INTENTION Self that really counts in the end.

I liken the cosmic courts to the ones we have here on Earth.  If a person is not capable of determining their own actions, if they did not know what they were doing when they committed a crime because they were fully or partly insane, I would think that the universe would not hold that soul accountable. Their negative actions would not count against their positive karmic credit score.

OTHER POSTS YOU MIGHT LIKE

So for someone suffering from dementia who accidentally lights a house on fire, that would obviously be different from the actions of an arsonist who wants to expressly cause damage.  Both in this world, and the one after.  Taking it to a subtle degree further, if the person suffering from dementia is also grouchy and selfish and does nothing to help others, perhaps that doesn’t count against them either, as long as the prickly personality is due to involuntary reasons beyond their control.  (Yes ladies, hopefully this includes crying and yelling from PMS and menopause!)  It would only count when someone’s deliberate negative intentions give rise to their negative actions.

This would potentially mean that differences in our behavior due to environment, culture, biology, or upbringing would not be weighed on the cosmic scales of justice.  What would be measured is how we played the cards we were dealt to the best of our rational ability.  In cases of patients with Cotard’s or dementia or multiple personalities due to child abuse, there may not be much Intention Self left if the Body and Narrative Self are completely distorted, but whatever lucid part remains, and is operating from a place of free will and ethics, is what might ultimately get judged.  Theoretically.

CONVOLUTED CONCLUSIONS
It’s a stretch I know, to hypothesize all of this.  The theist in me can’t let go of the idea of an Intention Self, but the atheist in me starts kicking in once things become too convoluted.  It seems extremely unnecessary for the universe to create any kind of self distortion in the first place – mental or physical – if the goal of a sentient being is to right their karmic wrongs and achieve enlightenment.  What point is there to put obstacles such as schizophrenia in the way, and inflict such suffering on the unaware, if its not serving any existential purpose?  How are simple things like food and drink and drugs so able to manipulate us?  Why am I nicer to people after a Reese’s?

I don’t know.  Oftentimes I think the stories we try to weave to explain an “intelligent design” are too far-fetched to be true.  If things don’t make sense, maybe the most obvious reason is because there is no logic – it’s all random.  Sometimes the simplest answer is the one that is real.  So perhaps the atheists and scientists are right – it’s our biology and chemistry that controls and makes us.  Maybe there simply ISN’T a conscious self.  As we can see, science certainly has given us enough reasons to at least CONSIDER this a possibility.

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons
View on Facebook
·Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

View Comments
  • Likes: 105
  • Shares: 20
  • Comments: 14

Comment on Facebook

The Human brain certainly has the power to wonder !! So sad that some people are willing to shut down their instinctive ability to look for real, genuine answers and to favour a 'God delusion' which is an embarrassing joke given what we really, really, really DO know in 2021 !!

Soul= Mind, Will and Emotions. Outside stimulants can effect the soul. the Spirit of Man can only be inhabited by Jehovah God or satan, one or the other not both. Jehovah can help you control your soul for good, satan will use your soul to destroy you and others.

Fasting creates a higher focus...not on when is the next meal

If the brain were simple enough to understand itself, it couldn’t.

More complex than anyone can imagine. Pithy answers don't touch the issue.

No soul. Not robots. 😊

what about music for soul ?

Cells are the most evolved. They have been here from the beginning. And they form all the life that can be observed. It should be clear that we are cellular robots. It is the cells that decide whether we live or not, depending on how we treat them. For me the Ego is simply the memory recorded by the authority, something as sad as the memory that a turkey has when they put the hose to extract the foi-grass.

No soul. No spirit. The mind is the emergent property of the brain. Consciousness is the emergent property of the mind. There is no ghost in the machine. There is no god watching from a dimension outside of space and time. We are utterly alone in an infinite cosmos. We were not intended and we have no meaning other than that which we give ourselves. Each one of us will die and when we are dead we will no longer have consciousness. We will be just as we were before we were born: nowhere. We have but this one fleeting moment on this spinning blue ball... so let's dance and sing and make love and smell the flowers and hug the trees and pet the animals and hold the babies and kiss our loved ones and bring joy to everything that we do and be happy together while we still can.

The only thing wrong with the human brain is the introduction of some fairy tale god. We evolved folks, end of story.

Did God create Humans or did humans create God because it explains what we don't know?

We do not have a soul, we are a soul-simply means -air breathing

Affirmative.

imo we might be robots... the first AI being created according to the Genesis in Bible... but no problem, we are allowed to dream of free will 😉

by Leave a Comment

In Darwin’s book The Descent of Man, he famously claimed many of our anatomical features to be useless including the muscles of the ear, the tailbone, body hair, and the fold in the corner of our eye.  People generally think of goosebumps, male nipples, and the appendix as also being unnecessary to our existence.  They are often referred to as “vestigial organs”, which were once thought to be useful for survival, but are now mostly or completely non-functional.  Kind of like advanced calculus.

To Darwin, this was strong evidence that man had evolved from primitive ancestors.  He theorized that over time, many vestigial organs or appendages began shrinking as they were used less and less.  For example, the tailbone is thought to have once been a longer tail used by our ancestors for everyday tasks and survival.  Having shrunk over time as we began relying more on the use of our hands, the tailbone now forms a tiny bump in our spines.  (Personally I’m glad, that’s one less body part to tone at the gym.  I have enough flabby appendages already.)

On the other side it is thought that when an organ or physical part is needed or nourished, it grows instead.  Humans may have grown taller in past centuries because we paid more attention to nutrition and medical cures, and because height gave humans a strength and power advantage over those possibly weaker.  As we all know, Darwin’s theory of survival of the fittest postulated that those who were stronger or more genetically advantaged were likelier to survive.

Darwin Figures of Evolution to Angel

Darwin’s theory has always appealed to me as a logical explanation for how we evolve.  It just makes alot of sense and of course it’s pretty much accepted science.  And being agnostic for the most part, I’ve never been able to fully believe the idea of a God created universe.  I normally need proof of a concept before I can consider it.  In the war between Creationists and Evolutionists I take the side of our ancestors being hairy apes.

Despite my bias towards science, I often wonder if Darwin’s theory is in fact, compatible, with Eastern spiritual beliefs.

(Warning: the following is more my whimsical musings than logic, so if you are an eye-roller, feel free to jump out now or snort your way through the rest of the article.   I won’t be offended.  I eye-rolled my way through my teenage years.)

Eastern philosophy does not talk about Creationism in detail and where we came from, but rather seems more focused on the concept of moksha, or where we go next once we are liberated from reincarnation, or the cycle of rebirth.  It is thought that humans were born into their current bodies because we had an attachment to sensory pleasures. Our desires caused us to manifest into physical forms which would enable us to experience these pleasures.  (I’m pretty sure I exist because of foot rubs and pie.)

According to Eastern philosophy, human bodies and the material life are viewed as flawed and temporary, subject to the cruelties of time and old age.  Living as a decaying human form in a suffering filled material world is not considered “survival” but rather a state to escape.

It is believed that we have the power to outgrow our attachment to the sense body.  Once the soul desires moksha or release from the cycle of rebirth, it can eventually shed its physical form and simply continue as energy.  It can be united with other energies in the universe and ride off into the sunset, having achieved eternal existence and survival in the non-temporary, non-changing form of the soul.

OTHER POSTS YOU MIGHT LIKE

It often appears to me that this philosophy fits right into Darwin’s Theory of Evolution and Survival of the Fittest.  If a soul begins to place more importance on its inner energy and consciousness, and less on its external physical form, then it seems plausible that eventually the body will be shed because it is no longer needed, just like the vestigial organs we no longer use.  Like the appendix, tailbone, or other useless appendages, the ENTIRE human form becomes unnecessary for survival.  You heard that right, perhaps in the end we’re all just giant, walking, redundant male nipples!

Perhaps it can also be said that the eternal soul, if it truly exists, is inherently more successful in survival than a temporary, vulnerable physical form which can be injured and has a guaranteed death in every lifetime.  It seems that survival of the fittest would apply to the soul triumphing over the body.

I wonder – is it possible that we can evolve to the point where our temporary, fragile bodies are no longer of concern to us, and we can shed the unwanted, no longer useful super-organ once we stop giving it so much importance?

And is it possible . . . (drumroll, not eye-roll) . . . that Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is not contradictory to the idea of Enlightenment but instead, a fitting description of what happens on our final spiritual journey?

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons
View on Facebook
·Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

View Comments
  • Likes: 201
  • Shares: 28
  • Comments: 11

Comment on Facebook

You've missed one huge and basic point in Darwins theory of evolution. Evolution is said to take place by survival and subsequent passing on of any beneficial adaptations to our offspring. How would the soul achieve any of this in order to evolve The soul you've described would not be subject to any enforced selective process. People getting taller over recent times is a consequence of better environmental conditions and better health not evolution To evolve being taller we would need to prevent short people breeding. Like living longer, no evolution involved in people having longer lives its a consequence of better environment and health care.

We are the underdeveloped larvae of some greater physical & spiritual being. 😒

Trying to use Darwin's Theory of Evolution to add credibility to something completely unrelated is not a new idea. You might as well invoke quantum mechanics or fluid dynamics to justify reincarnation.

Vestigial does not mean useless. It means that the organ no longer has its original use.

Darwin never proposed "Survival of the Fittest", that was philosopher Herbert Spencer. His views were called 'Social Darwinism' and precipitated several unfortunate social policies. Darwin was opposed to them. The rest is based on the supposition that there is a soul, something for which there is no evidence.

I love this eastern philosophy.

I believe in one God, the Almighty Father, Creator of Heaven and Earth and of all that's visible and invisible.

Darwin was a fool. Eastern religions are all false. Only the Bible has spiritual truth.

sure does -just consider the 3rd eye as a vestge of an eye hidden in the forehead of (certain?) reptiles ,or the importance of the colour blue from when we were fish!!

"Wrong !"" ,...

No

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Subscribe to our newsletter to get the latest content delivered to your inbox.  

(NOTE:  We hate spam and will never sell your email!)