Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
"Constituent parts alone roll on." As the self was formed by the gestalt of those parts, it is now dissolved and reformed into other beings.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Can Someone Put a Name to my Beliefs?
- Thread starter dolphin910
- Start date
"Constituent parts alone roll on." As the self was formed by the gestalt of those parts, it is now dissolved and reformed into other beings.
What happens to the consciousness that died with unfulfilled cravings? Versus what happens to the consciousness of someone that attained Nirvana.
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
Consciousness is an aggregate, and is thus passed on to another after death. Consciousness is not Self though. As for the consciousness of a Buddha, that is unknowable, and therefore was not answered by Buddha.
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
Self is a gestalt of the five aggregates. As for how consciousness is passed on, not a clue. Why does it matter since consciousness is not Self?
But since consciousness is passed on, do you believe in mechanisms not understood by science (in the past, mislabeled 'supernatural').
You missed my other question, 'What is Self?'
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
Depends what you mean by "supernatural". Most likely, no.
I didn't miss your question. I answered it: Self is the combination of the five aggregates.
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
Your position now seems contradictory. There is nothing even remotely close to a mechanism accepted by western science that would allow consciousness to transfer to another brain.
Ok, thanks. It seems odd you would use a capital 'S' with that kind of a definition though.
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
Contradictory? Not at all, if you accept that consciousness is a product of matter, or perhaps an intrinsic property of matter.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
No.
Right, but there is also the difference in concept from what you are referring to and say, Pure Land Buddhism.
facepalm, really?
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
Right, but there is also the difference in concept from what you are referring to and say, Pure Land Buddhism.
facepalm, really?
Pure Land is weird...It's like Buddhism hijacked by Jesus.
And the facepalm was so I could hit the 5 character limit.
Sorry but to me it seems to be getting more contradictory. OK. I'll consider that consciousness is a product of matter. That makes it even more difficult to explain how consciousness from a dead person can effect a new person.
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
Karma.
How can Karma possibly work in a materialist view of consciousness???
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Pure Land is weird...It's like Buddhism hijacked by Jesus.
And the facepalm was so I could hit the 5 character limit.
o.k.:ctr:
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
That's like asking why a car gets smashed when hit by another car. Karma is action. Action is causality.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Do you believe in karma,
Last edited:
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
Sure.
I can understand the mechanism of how a car gets smashed by another car. But where is there any mechanism by which the mental state of a person that dies can effect a new life; particularly in the materialist view of consciousness.
Anyway, thanks for the discussion and for being more open. I have to go to the gym before it closes and I will catch up with you at a later point.