Discussion Afterlife (and related) general discussion

[laiduponit]

I've not caught up with the pages that are already filled on the thread but I'll write my own opinion on what is after, though I'm pretty optimistic.

To start with, I've never been a spiritually involved or a religious person. Infact I was the exact opposite when I was a younger teenager, cynically atheist and lacking any hope or desire for something afterwards. As I grew up I started to wonder more about life and existence, though I wouldn't consider myself religious now I'd definitely say I'd be closer towards it now then I ever was, the same with spirituality.

Based off of my own feelings of afterlife I almost hundred percent believe that we continue living on in some form or another, maybe this is my overly optimistic side speaking but for me it to suddenly be able to have memories of the past and present then there must be a time where I'm still around in the future beyond death to even be able to comprehend my current state of existence. Personally, I think we probably reincarnate or exist in another form. A form that we can't comprehend ourselves.

On the other hand, we could just go back to what we felt before even being born. A void in which you are unaware where you actually are, an endless slumber that'll never be awoken again. Though I don't like the idea of it so maybe that is why I prefer to believe in reincarnation.

 

[NoGameNoLife]

For me, I maybe could be okay with an afterlife(depends on the kind) if there were one, but fuck reincarnation. I hope that isn't real.
I absolutely do not want to ever be reborn into this hellhole.

 

[JoeFailure]

To me it sounds like from reading some of this stuff that some of these dieties or Dharma or Buddha or whoever that condemns suicide so much needs to learn the phrase "Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones".

I'd love to see Buddha try to make in America with super high rent while he has severe ADHD, OCD, and is on the autism spectrum and having something messed up happen to him sexually when he was young and deal with constant anxiety and depression. The guy fasted and made himself suffer but he always had the safety net of a rich dad to fall back on if he wanted it. Sorry, not buying this shit about being enlightened. We could all be under those circumstances.

And I would take 3 days of torture on the cross for an eternity of heaven over 30+ more years of constant anxiety.

 

[Shamana]

To me it sounds like from reading some of this stuff that some of these dieties or Dharma or Buddha or whoever that condemns suicide so much needs to learn the phrase "Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones".

I'd love to see Buddha try to make in America with super high rent while he has severe ADHD, OCD, and is on the autism spectrum and having something messed up happen to him sexually when he was young and deal with constant anxiety and depression. The guy fasted and made himself suffer but he always had the safety net of a rich dad to fall back on if he wanted it. Sorry, not buying this shit about being enlightened. We could all be under those circumstances.

And I would take 3 days of torture on the cross for an eternity of heaven over 30+ more years of constant anxiety.

It's not really the Buddha or Buddha's who make up the reality of suicide. They don't create Samsara heaven or hells. They teach from the perspective of endless rebirth/death until Nirvana. My teachers Guru Tulku Orgyen Rinpoche said that if death meant the end of suffering then all the worlds nuclear powers should get together and blow up the whole earth. Unfortunately though as he and buddha's see it, death is followed by rebirth according to our karma.

The buddha sanctioned 2 suicides of his students who wanted to leave their bodies because of severe illness. He saw that their minds were liberated from samsara and thus let them kill themselves with their permission.

He doesn't condem suicide because he thinks that people who do it are great sinners, but simply because from his insight it does not end suffering at all.

Thankfully nobody is forced to buy into the buddhist teachings.

There was a famous incident with a vietnamese monk who self-immolated and never flinched a nerve or muscle while being burned alive. I wonder how people who are 100% convinced that our brain is our mind believe that you can train yourself to undergo the most painfull way to die without flinching a nerve or muscle. It's certainly not anything I've been taught in my 12 years of being buddhist.

 

[JoeFailure]

It's not really the Buddha or Buddha's who make up the reality of suicide. They don't create Samsara heaven or hells. They teach from the perspective of endless rebirth/death until Nirvana. My teachers Guru Tulku Orgyen Rinpoche said that if death meant the end of suffering then all the worlds nuclear powers should get together and blow up the whole earth. Unfortunately though as he and buddha's see it, death is followed by rebirth according to our karma.

The buddha sanctioned 2 suicides of his students who wanted to leave their bodies because of severe illness. He saw that their minds were liberated from samsara and thus let them kill themselves with their permission.

He doesn't condem suicide because he thinks that people who do it are great sinners, but simply because from his insight it does not end suffering at all.

Thankfully nobody is forced to buy into the buddhist teachings.

There was a famous incident with a vietnamese monk who self-immolated and never flinched a nerve or muscle while being burned alive. I wonder how people who are 100% convinced that our brain is our mind believe that you can train yourself to undergo the most painfull way to die without flinching a nerve or muscle. It's certainly not anything I've been taught in my 12 years of being buddhist.

There's no logic to this though.

If I'm in shitty circumstances at my age now because I was some kind of asshole in a previous life that I have absolutely no knowledge of and am a completely different person, why am "I" in this life, the one who has to suffer? And was that predetermined to happen for it to end up this way? If it's predetermined, there's no free will. And if there's no free will, how can you possibly be judged on karma if you're not really making your own decisions?

None of this makes sense. It sounds to me like Buddhism is extremely short-sighted and again, a lot of judgement from ivory towers.

As I said, Buddha "suffered" with the safety net of a rich father in the back of his mind. You can say he fasted and lived poor and did whatever, but there is a psychological well-being knowing that you can go back to your palace if this doesn't work out. Buddhist monks today are taken care of by the community. It's not a glamorous life but they're not going hungry and they don't really work. They basically traded in the stress of working and making ends meet for a life without material things and vacations, but being given food and gifts by the community.

"Enlightenment" is easy in these circumstances when you stigmatize mental and physical illness.

 

[Shamana]

There's no logic to this though.

If I'm in shitty circumstances at my age now because I was some kind of asshole in a previous life that I have absolutely no knowledge of and am a completely different person, why am "I" in this life, the one who has to suffer? And was that predetermined to happen for it to end up this way? If it's predetermined, there's no free will. And if there's no free will, how can you possibly be judged on karma if you're not really making your own decisions?

None of this makes sense. It sounds to me like Buddhism is extremely short-sighted and again, a lot of judgement from ivory towers.

As I said, Buddha "suffered" with the safety net of a rich father in the back of his mind. You can say he fasted and lived poor and did whatever, but there is a psychological well-being knowing that you can go back to your palace if this doesn't work out. Buddhist monks today are taken care of by the community. It's not a glamorous life but they're not going hungry and they don't really work. They basically traded in the stress of working and making ends meet for a life without material things and vacations, but being given food and gifts by the community.

"Enlightenment" is easy in these circumstances when you stigmatize mental and physical illness.

You can call your past life ego your predescessor. It was his/her karma that led you to be reborn as a human into your family. Your karma in this life is your thoughts, words and actions. It is said that if you could recollect your former lives you would see that is the same singular mindstream that is incarnated. I think Buddha was a all or nothing type when he left the princely life. And yes its easier to become enlightened as a monastic. Thats the whole reason Buddha created a monastic sangha.

There's no logic to this though.

If I'm in shitty circumstances at my age now because I was some kind of asshole in a previous life that I have absolutely no knowledge of and am a completely different person, why am "I" in this life, the one who has to suffer? And was that predetermined to happen for it to end up this way? If it's predetermined, there's no free will. And if there's no free will, how can you possibly be judged on karma if you're not really making your own decisions?

None of this makes sense. It sounds to me like Buddhism is extremely short-sighted and again, a lot of judgement from ivory towers.

As I said, Buddha "suffered" with the safety net of a rich father in the back of his mind. You can say he fasted and lived poor and did whatever, but there is a psychological well-being knowing that you can go back to your palace if this doesn't work out. Buddhist monks today are taken care of by the community. It's not a glamorous life but they're not going hungry and they don't really work. They basically traded in the stress of working and making ends meet for a life without material things and vacations, but being given food and gifts by the community.

"Enlightenment" is easy in these circumstances when you stigmatize mental and physical illness.

I dont really see how buddhism stigmatizes mental or somatic illness.

 

[Shamana]

A lot of people critizing buddhism want's samsara to be fair or that is some sort of plan. Buddha was all about pointing out that samsara is horribly unfair. There is no master plan either. Buddhism teaches that the only positive thing about samsara is that there is a way out of it.

 

[JoeFailure]

A lot of people critizing buddhism want's samsara to be fair or that is some sort of plan. Buddha was all about pointing out that samsara is horribly unfair. There is no master plan either. Buddhism teaches that the only positive thing about samsara is that there is a way out of it.

That would make more sense at least. Does he think Samsara is just the universe or that there's something controlling it?

 

[throwaway123]

I've not caught up with the pages that are already filled on the thread but I'll write my own opinion on what is after, though I'm pretty optimistic.

To start with, I've never been a spiritually involved or a religious person. Infact I was the exact opposite when I was a younger teenager, cynically atheist and lacking any hope or desire for something afterwards. As I grew up I started to wonder more about life and existence, though I wouldn't consider myself religious now I'd definitely say I'd be closer towards it now then I ever was, the same with spirituality.

Based off of my own feelings of afterlife I almost hundred percent believe that we continue living on in some form or another, maybe this is my overly optimistic side speaking but for me it to suddenly be able to have memories of the past and present then there must be a time where I'm still around in the future beyond death to even be able to comprehend my current state of existence. Personally, I think we probably reincarnate or exist in another form. A form that we can't comprehend ourselves.

On the other hand, we could just go back to what we felt before even being born. A void in which you are unaware where you actually are, an endless slumber that'll never be awoken again. Though I don't like the idea of it so maybe that is why I prefer to believe in reincarnation.

How do you explain personality changes that occur when the brain is damaged?
How do you explain the missing memory? How is one supposed to learn from mistakes if you can't even remember them?

There's no logic to this though.

If I'm in shitty circumstances at my age now because I was some kind of asshole in a previous life that I have absolutely no knowledge of and am a completely different person, why am "I" in this life, the one who has to suffer? And was that predetermined to happen for it to end up this way? If it's predetermined, there's no free will. And if there's no free will, how can you possibly be judged on karma if you're not really making your own decisions?

None of this makes sense. It sounds to me like Buddhism is extremely short-sighted and again, a lot of judgement from ivory towers.

As I said, Buddha "suffered" with the safety net of a rich father in the back of his mind. You can say he fasted and lived poor and did whatever, but there is a psychological well-being knowing that you can go back to your palace if this doesn't work out. Buddhist monks today are taken care of by the community. It's not a glamorous life but they're not going hungry and they don't really work. They basically traded in the stress of working and making ends meet for a life without material things and vacations, but being given food and gifts by the community.

"Enlightenment" is easy in these circumstances when you stigmatize mental and physical illness.

I agree with a lot of what you said. Karma and reincarnation make no sense yet people do everything to push it further. It's all because of this new age stuff that this stuff has gained traction again.

 

[Shamana]

That would make more sense at least. Does he think Samsara is just the universe or that there's something controlling it?

On this subject I am not as smart as I used to be. It's a long time ago I spent time studying. Samsara refers to cyclic existence in the 6 realms and this encompasses infinite universes. The most powerfull agent in our personal samsara is our own mind. The whole solution in buddhism is to realize the nature of the mind. In Buddhism everything ultimately is made by mind, wrought by mind, unmade by mind etc. I honestly don't know if there is someone controlling the universe so to speak. Gods exists in buddhism too but they are neither immortal, almighty or perfect. However because they are the first beings to enter the universe when it's formed, they think they are the cause of the universe and because they can live for millions or billions of years they think they are immortal.

 

[scrapindy99]

I am currently thinking about the afterlife. I don't think there is one. However, if there is, I want it to be a place where we can get our questions answered. As another forum member put it, a "review."

 

[ish]

Terminology

"GOD" - (I will use logic concepts here to facilitate understanding) is a basic collection covering literally everything,
matter, the laws that govern it, but also immaterial things - thought, ideas, etc. Literally everything that we know as
humanity and what we do not know. Few people take into account that as people we are limited by our senses
and the brain. Measuring instruments for examining ourselves and what surrounds us are adapted to our cognitive abilities,
which in a way is in itself an insurmountable barrier, and can even lead us to wrong conclusions.
Unfortunately, but even probably our imagination is limited (example - a journey in time - how was it?
- it's impossible, sooner neurosurgeons will be able to transplant the brain - condition if they do it in 1 minute).
Such a god is the supreme god, and regardless of beliefs, he exists even in unconscious atheists. A multitude of subsets
of various religions and religions (including atheism) in the collection of Religions God does not bother, it may even be
a desirable state. God is like UNIVERSE.

"Religion" - practically all aims at guiding the group, community, society, nation to ensure durability
humanity as a species, from religious practices derive origin social engineering, media influence, cybernetics,
manipulation etc.

"Man" - man as a unit is only a substitutable element, for GOD more important is humanity (a subset of the set of life).
Everyone, without exception, as an individual is selfish. Egoism this is synonymous with survival instinct.

"Human Soul" - what it really is - It's nothing but a psyche shaped from the day of birth and memory (inseparably connected
with time). The memory and personality of the individual disappears after the function of the brain has ceased.

"Good and Evil" - these concepts can not exist alone, that is, one without the other, and both have a relative value in relation to
a subject without which they practically do not exist. An example of a farmer wants to rain and a tourist to sunny weather.

"Suicide" - this is probably the only act of free will available to man, the loss of one element has no major impact on all humanity.
Every life ends in death anyway, regardless of the desire to survive.

"Life after death" - in fact after death you can only exist in the consciousness of living people, so "live" for example: Jesus, Lenin, Einstein, etc.
for his contribution to the intellectual achievements of humanity. The average person exists after his death in the closest consciousness
families and friends, in subsequent generations, knowledge gradually marginalizes.

 

[Dreamcolleger]

Does anyone have any thoughts or opinions on taking things with you into the afterlife? Do you need to wear them, hold them, be buried/cremated with them, perform a ritual etc?

 

[Shamana]

Does anyone have any thoughts or opinions on taking things with you into the afterlife? Do you need to wear them, hold them, be buried/cremated with them, perform a ritual etc?

I want to be cremated with all my relics. Dying ornamated with your relics is supposed to help towards a good rebirth through their blessings.

 

[ish]

Does anyone have any thoughts or opinions on taking things with you into the afterlife? Do you need to wear them, hold them, be buried/cremated with them, perform a ritual etc?

If you care about the message for future generations
human beings, do it, cremation falls away, stays only
burials in the ground.

 

[Soul]

I want to be cremated with all my relics. Dying ornamated with your relics is supposed to help towards a good rebirth through their blessings.

What are your relics, if you don't mind saying? If that's too personal please excuse me as I back off.

If you care about the message for future generations
human beings, do it, cremation falls away, stays only
burials in the ground.

I'm not sure I understand you, but if the aim has nothing to do with messages to future generations but is only to provide your spirit with things it needs in the afterlife, I think some religions consider cremating the things along with the body valid.

I personally hope that if there is an afterlife, it's so different from this one that nothing we have here will be of any use there. But what do I know.

 

[FFTMGD]

I believe the afterlife(if there is one) is like another dream of a reality based on what you in your subconcious feel you deserve. If you feel you did good you will have some for. Of a heaven or good reality to go to. Bad, you go to some eternal nightmare or reality of hell.

On the other hand if nothing happens: you cant perceive if you don't exist.

 

[Shamana]

What are your relics, if you don't mind saying? If that's too personal please excuse me as I back off.



I'm not sure I understand you, but if the aim has nothing to do with messages to future generations but is only to provide your spirit with things it needs in the afterlife, I think some religions consider cremating the things along with the body valid.

I personally hope that if there is an afterlife, it's so different from this one that nothing we have here will be of any use there. But what do I know.

Necklace amulents filled with mantra's and sacred texts. It's called liberation through wearing. It probably doesn't technically work for suicide, but If I do commit suicide I may as well have them. Have a mani wheel with 10 million om mani peme hung mantras i'd like there as well.

 

[Soul]

I believe the afterlife(if there is one) is like another dream of a reality based on what you in your subconcious feel you deserve. If you feel you did good you will have some for. Of a heaven or good reality to go to. Bad, you go to some eternal nightmare or reality of hell.

On the other hand if nothing happens: you cant perceive if you don't exist.

That is Some Cat, @FFTMGD!

 

[littlelady774]

I hope there is no afterlife..
I just don't wanna be reincarnated into a citizen of North Korea

 

[throwaway123]

I hope there is no afterlife..
I just don't wanna be reincarnated into a citizen of North Korea

same here bro

 

[JoeFailure]

I hope there is no afterlife..
I just don't wanna be reincarnated into a citizen of North Korea

Well hopefully there's an afterlife without having to reincarnate if you don't want to.

 

[Tazmaniac]

I think I've devoted more than one hundred posts to this topic, so I'll summarize them shortly answering that I don't have any belief in an afterlife -no matter how we're trying to fabricate it imagining all kinds of praises or punishments while we're alive-.

Our brain requires an exceptionally fine tuning to perform its functions and maintain through time our personality, the sense of self, and there's striking evidence about it. This machinery is not physically equipped to "pop out" its contents in a supposed n-th dimension where we could go on living indefinitely.

Anyway, I don't want to bore anybody. I just find it weird that people like speculating about possible other conclusions, since they would require death to deliberate about what's real and what's not.

Not boring, actually think you thought it out well. I basically feel the same way.

 

[sadsadinfp]

I know I'm probably talking about this in the wrong place, but I'm Catholic and I actually do more or less believe in all that stuff. According to the catechism suicide is a mortal sin, but it can be mitigated by a person not being in their right state of mind, which is usually the case. Anyway I don't want to be in this world anymore, but like Hamlet, that the "Almighty set himself against self-slaughter" is holding me back... a little. If I knew that I could eventually be forgiven for killing myself, and my many other sins, and be with Jesus instead of here in this modern hellscape, I'd sign off as quickly as I could.

Even if I could die soon by some long, painful illness I'd welcome that over having to wait until I go by natural causes. I can't bear the thought of another 50-60 years of this.

 

[woxihuanni]

I was never a believer in reincarnation, but now that I am set on ctb, I am extremely scared of the mere possibility. No idea of a supernatural hell could be more terrifying than experiencing this world again.

It is not that I don't love life, I do. Just that you need to be very lucky to have the circumstances to enjoy life, otherwise the very beauty of it is painful if you can only look from the sidelines.

 

[Wayfaerer]

There isn't any. Humans assume we're special just because we are conscious, which is a trait not even unique to us. It's an invention to sooth our fear of death and to cope with an unjust world. Nothing more.

Believing or disbelieving in afterlife =/= atheist

One can be theist but believe or disbelieve also

I just found out recently that there are atheists who believe in an afterlife (excl. buddhists) and even the supernatural like ghosts. I find that utterly ludicrous! Even moreso than theism which I find very slightly less absurd. At the very least they're consistent.

...it can be mitigated by a person not being in their right state of mind.

They say that suicide is always an irrational decision made by those who cannot think for themselves, so I guess that means all people who commit suicide are in the clear.

 

[Soul]

Well ... I don't know who said being conscious is so special.

I don't understand what you mean by "excluding Buddhists" in your statement about atheists believing that death may not be the end of some form of existence. Is it hard to imagine someone who believes in an ongoing whole without personalizing it and calling it a god?

I'm also not sure which "they" say suicide is always irrational, but ... whatever you say! 8]

 

[Shamana]

There isn't any. Humans assume we're special just because we are conscious, which is a trait not even unique to us. It's an invention to sooth our fear of death and to cope with an unjust world. Nothing more.


I just found out recently that there are atheists who believe in an afterlife (excl. buddhists) and even the supernatural like ghosts. I find that utterly ludicrous! Even moreso than theism which I find very slightly less absurd. At the very least they're consistent.



They say that suicide is always an irrational decision made by those who cannot think for themselves, so I guess that means all people who commit suicide are in the clear.

The continiuty of mind doesn't have to be related to a God. It's possible to believe that Mental Phenomena or Subjective Phenomena can exist without the support of the body.

 

[Wayfaerer]

Well ... I don't know who said being conscious is so special.

I don't understand what you mean by "excluding Buddhists" in your statement about atheists believing that death may not be the end of some form of existence. Is it hard to imagine someone who believes in an ongoing whole without personalizing it and calling it a god?

I'm also not sure which "they" say suicide is always irrational, but ... whatever you say! 8]

What I meant was that I understand how buddhists do not believe in a personable god so they are technically atheists but I was befuddled as to how other atheists could rationalize extra-physical phenomenon to exist that wasn't intelligently designed e.g. ghosts? It violates all the knowledge that we know and makes no intuitive sense at all.

and by "they" I'm referring to pro-lifers.

The continiuty of mind doesn't have to be related to a God. It's possible to believe that Mental Phenomena or Subjective Phenomena can exist without the support of the body.

How could one have thoughts when there is no brain to generate said thoughts? Conservation of Energy exists but it does not mean that consciousness continues after death. The energy is just transferred into the environment in different kinetic ways e.g. heat, sound, etc. I suppose that reincarnation may make sense but I cannot believe that we would retain any of our past memories. It would only be a fresh perspective over and over again. I still think it is a very, very long shot but I would sooner believe in that than any form of magical realms like heaven or hell.

 

[Soul]

You're welcome to believe what seems true to you, of course, as are the rest of us; all I personally believe is that I don't know what's true. But I can gently point out that you seem to be smushing a lot of different ideas up together in ways that don't stand up too well.

If "they" = "anti-choicers", their beliefs don't determine whose suicides the Roman Catholic church considers forgiveable. (Nor does the Roman Catholic church determine whom the almighty forgives for what, but that's a different matter.)

And if you give Buddhists a green light to believe in an afterlife, why not other atheists? (Not that they need your permission!) And why decree that ghosts are not a form of energy? Magnetism, wind, radar, deep-sea creatures - why not ghosts?

I'm not arguing with you, just: It would be good to be a bit more rigorous in your thinking. Have fun.