To: K-list
Recieved: 2002/04/22 21:51
Subject: Re: [K-list] Mind & Spirit
From: Caio Rossi
On 2002/04/22 21:51, Caio Rossi posted thus to the K-list:
El bombastico:>Where do you draw the line between your brain and your soul,
for example can you sould do mathematical reasoning or is that ur brain? Are
emotions caused by astral stuff or by chemicals? If memories are stored in
your brain, how is it possible for people have
memories of a past life? Can a soul or stral body be capable of something
like speech and communication, even though a part of the brain is
responsible for this?<
That question is really "bombastica"! :-)
I'll give you MY point of view, according to what I've read (metaphysics,
philosophy, etc ) and I think you should take it into consideration for
FURTHER theoretical explorations ( and you thought after the awakening of
your kundalini your problems were over, hein?! Here's a new lifelong task).
I capitalized "MY" above because I know much of what I'll say here will
displease some readers, but I want to make clear I respect different
perspectives.
Your questions do not make sense under a "traditional" point of view, only
under a post-cartesian perspective ( you know, René Descartes, dualism and
stuff! hehe ). By "traditional" I mean most world's spiritual traditions
Advaita-Vedanta, Buddhism, even Christianism, etc ).
The idea is not that of two "natures" ( soul and body ), but of a spectrum,
a "range, or shades of manifestations". Just like the sun "manifests" itself
in different ways ( gravitational attraction, seeable light, ultra-violet A
and B, heat, solar winds, whatever else ), the "self" has different
manifestations ( the physical body, the mind/ psyche, etc ). The brain's
activity is the mind, and the mind is the brain's activity. Do you have a
television image without a TV set? You may have the signal, but not the
image.
Also, and this may shock most of you: In Advaita-Vedanta, Buddhism, Kabala,
Sufism, etc, there's a difference between the "immortal self" ( or the
non-self, in Buddhism ) and the "aggregations" ( that is a Buddhist term,
but it does the job pretty well ). Those aggregations include the body and
the vital and psychic elements.
In other words and in a simplified version, the mind (psychic element )
survives as a "field", rather than as an astral BODY, after the physical
body's death, and it MAY manifest itself in different ways, such as in
so-called mediumship or "reincarnated".
Reincarnation, or rebirth, isn't the right word for that concept, in fact.
Reincarnation is a European concept from the 18th century. It was created by
a German utopian socialist to explain social differences. That concept
became very popular among anti-clerical French socialists, who influenced
Allan Kardec, the penname of a French intellectual who first investigated
Spiritualism in depth and created "French Spiritism", which, differenly from
the original Anglo-Saxon Modern Spiritualism, was pro-reincarnation ( for
obvious reasons: the socialist influence ). Mme. Blavatsky was influenced by
Kardec and introduced that concept in the US, where it was adopted not only
but Theosophy, but also by spiritualists at large.
But reincarnation/rebirth refers to the return of the "self" to physical
life, something that's considered impossible in those traditions. They
defend "metempsychosis", that is, the partial or complete return of the
"psychic aggregation" we usually call our "mind" to a new body, as if
attracted by another "self". That's why Buddhism emphasizes that you ARE NOT
YOUR MIND ( thoughts, emotions, etc ).
That's about if for the moment, but I guess that's enough to cause a heated
discussion.
Best wishes,
Caio
http://www.kundalini-gateway.org
http://www.domin8rex.com/serpent/spirit/kindex.htm
DISCLAIMER!
Home | Archive Index | Search the archives | Subscribe
K. List FAQ | Kundalini FAQs | Signs and Symptoms | Awakening Experiences | K. list Polls | Member Essays | Meditations | List Topics | Art Gallery | Cybrary | Sitemap | Email the moderators.
symbol.