Without a god to factor in, it all seemed to make so much more sense.

What a great a statement. Perhaps it isn't that things make sense, but at least, we stop torturing ourselves trying to explain the presence of God--or lack there of--in every situation. There's a lot of peace of mind in that.

Janet wrote: “With a thirst for knowledge, I took to reading everything I could to explain life, evolution, nature, psychology, etc. Without a god to factor in, it all seemed to make so much more sense.”

That’s exactly how i felt. As Richard Dawkins and others have remarked, the universe is exactly as we would expect it to be if there were no god. Postulating a personal god simply added imaginary complications to the order of things; it was the ultimate violation of Occam’s razor. No god means no contradictions to explain, no absurdities to swallow, no need for theodicies, and no need to rationalize unanswered prayers.

As for those things that can’t yet be explained, they are better resolved through finding the answer, not by erecting an ineffable god of the “You Can’t Go There” gaps.

Janet wrote: "Without a god to factor in, it all seemed to make so much more sense."

Not only does nature make more sense when you take god out of it, but all the tough theological questions are easily answered by your phrase "There is NO GOD!"

And by "god" of course I mean some sort of caring, active, bible or koran type god. An unknowable prime mover or first cause is still an option, but that is not the issue here.

Here are some questions and answers:

Why are there so may contradictions about god's nature in the bible and koran and all the other revealed religion books? Because there is no anthropomorphic god, and the bible and other books are all BS.

Why do bad things happen to good people? Because the universe is random and there is no god.

Why does prayer not work? Because there is no god to answer.

Need I add more? Your simple phrase seems to answer them all pretty well.

I could extend the answer to include a qualifier like this: "or god is not paying attention, or does not care, or is powerless, or ..." But in all of these qualifiers, the active caring bible god just does not fit.

It's funny (or sad) to think how many people - including myself - have struggled over these questions when the obvious answer is sitting right there.

Thanks for your post.

Lance

Lance wrote: “It's funny (or sad) to think how many people - including myself - have struggled over these questions when the obvious answer is sitting right there.”

“Of course, people of faith regularly assure one another that God is not responsible for human suffering. But how else can we understand the claim that God is both omniscient and omnipotent? There is no other way, and it is time for sane human beings to own up to this. This is the age-old problem of theodicy, of course, and we should consider it solved. [bold added]” —Sam Harris

Janet, can I publish your story in my book titled "Atheist Acrimonious" ?

Mike

Dear Janet: Thanks for your professional views on genetics.

Just to inform you that the Chaos Theory from the latest Physical Science points out that nothing in this world is truly random.

I don't believe in God, but I think there are certain governing rules in the universe, including gravity, electromagnetic forces, conservation of mass and energy. No creator made the rules, but the rules secured the existence of the universe. One ultimate rule is the Law of Cause and Effect. The universe tends to reject evil and preserve the good. Think: If it is otherwise the universe will not exist! However, the fact that good people received bad destiny and bad people received good destiny does not necessary nullify this rule. Actions are like planting various types of seeds. They all take various time and conditions to fruition. This fruition latency explained that good people => good destiny and bad people => bad destiny are not always visualized in a short time within a single life.

From observations, we can see that life has begun long before we were born. We have behaviours and preferences that cannot be explained by genetic makeup alone. Through hypnosis we can even recall our past lives in order to explain certain present behaviours. Therefore, we can easily deduce that life will not end after we die, along with it are all the seeds (all the results of the actions that you have done).

Throughout the 1500 years of Buddhism experiments in China, we have mountains of evidence (many made official) to support the important rule of Cause and Effect. If suitable opportunity arises, I strongly suggest you read the documentation before hastily jump to a conclusion, as many of us had done the same to believing in Christianity.

Cheers!

Amitabha
- male
- consider an open-minded scientist and Buddhist
- contactable at Lsw22 at hotmail dot com

Scientist/Buddhist...Just to inform you that the Chaos Theory from the latest Physical Science points out that nothing in this world is truly random.

Thanks for that info'....however, in the case of "selection", as in "natural selection", I'm not quite sure how one would conclude that this means "random". In other words, it seems like your statement attacks a strawman. After all, whether selection/"random"---or even, organized/"Chaos"---both are incongruous.

Scientist/Buddhist... We have behaviours and preferences that cannot be explained by genetic makeup alone. Through hypnosis we can even recall our past lives in order to explain certain present behaviours.

Hypnosis is evidence of nothing, except maybe the power of suggestion.

Scientist/Buddhist...Throughout the 1500 years of Buddhism experiments in China, we have mountains of evidence (many made official) to support the important rule of Cause and Effect.

Existence exists. It's an absolute/First Principle. If this "important rule" that you speak of posits that what exists requires a "Cause", and if a theist posits that a "God" exists, then we can logically ask, what caused "God"? If we are to accept as a plausible answer that "God" can exist UNcaused, then that surely breaks the "important rule", does it not?(asked rhetorically)

Scientist/Buddhist...If suitable opportunity arises, I strongly suggest you read the documentation before hastily jump to a conclusion, as many of us had done the same to believing in Christianity.

.."documentation"? The word is very vague. Perhaps you mean, published, peer-reviewed literature from the scientific community? If so, I'd be curious to see any such source that supports the notion that an invisible, uncaused, self-existing mind "Caused" everything into existence, using "telepathy".

Amitabha wrote:
Through hypnosis we can even recall our past lives in order to explain certain present behaviours. Therefore, we can easily deduce that life will not end after we die, along with it are all the seeds (all the results of the actions that you have done).
------
Amitabha,

You statement here begs a few questions (at least from me it does).

While you don't come right out and use the word "Reincarnation", it's obvious this is what you are talking about here.
So here are my questions to you then:

1. If all 'souls' (energy or whatever) are reincarnated, then I see a problem with an
ever-growing human population over the 'thousands' of years humans have been around.

Obvioulsy these human souls had to come from some place and you say you don't believe in a [creator] god, so then who/what produced all the original souls, and what 'force' then let them increase their population over the eons, as they obviously have, into a far larger population?

Do souls/spirts 'mate' and produce new 'baby' souls, that would then take a physical human body?


2. Do you believe (as some do) that former human souls also exist inside other life forms and if so, would our present lives determine if we next become human again (if we deserve it) or get reduced to an urban city Rat?

If this is your thinking, then what non-god force is determining who gets to be human and who becomes the Rat?
If you eventually become the best human possible, do you become a god-like entity, or, what becomes your fate?
If so, again I ask, what force makes that determination?


3. You clearly state that one can recall our past lives via hypnosis.
Would that be only a former human life, or even a life in a lesser form?
For instance, if I used to be a cat or ape, how would hypnosis verify that?
(I guess I would start to MEOW a bunch huh)

Now I have to say that I have yet to read ANY legit study done (that has proved to a skeptic), where hypnosis has generated any positive proof of anyone having a former verifiable life on earth.

Many cases studied in India (where reincarnation beliefs are common) have never proven that a soul of an elder who died, comes back to reside in a young child; as is the common myth in that country.

Every case studied by the experts, exhibits only hearsay evidence, or out-and-out trickery.
e.g. In the recent book "SPOOK" by Mary Roach, this reincarnation subject is covered in depth, in one of the book's chapters. While she had greatly hoped to find positive evidence to show life goes on after death, she found NO evidence in her firsthand research of India, to show even one verifiable case of a soul migrating from one human to another.
Folks there were quite eager to demonstrate this common belief to her, but they failed every time to do so.

4. The FEW cases I've read about, where a person claimed to have a previous human life and the evidence was obtained using hypnosis; the results show that the person was a faking it (for fame/money, the usual things) or those memories were actually those of some elder person, who once told this person their own stories (or those of one they themselves had known) and then over time the story of that other person 'melds' into a belief that the story was the person's own memory from a former lifetime.

There is not one documented (as in, proven) case that I've seen where someone had a memories from another person's lifetime, that they couldn't have obtained from a non-supernatural source.

I highly suspect that the so called evidence supporting reincarnation is no different than for any other supernatural/religious belief. Folks who want to believe will cherry pick the positive evidence that supports their belief while ignoring the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Folks believe in god(s) because they have some want/need to do so.
Folks believe in anything paranormal, supernatural, or metaphysical, because they want to and will fine-tune their perception of the evidence to fit their desired beliefs.

The more current studies I've seen on hypnosis have greatly reduced the idea that one is under a 'spell', where one can be made to do things that goes against one's very nature.
They also show that while we once formerly believed that a person had no recall of the time under hypnosis, that this was a fallacy, as they certainly are shown to recall the entire event. No time is lost and nothing is done that would be against their normal nature.

It is a power of suggestion, where one is putting their TRUST in another person and if you trust someone ENOUGH, you'll just do as requested....up to a point that is.
Frankly, I see it almost like in the category of getting someone drunk, where they lose their inhibitions and will do things they wouldn't have the courage to do while sober.

There is nothing magical/supernatural about hypnosis.

There is nothing I could ever find that showed one's so called former life could be found using hypnosis, and trust me when I say, I used to believe in this sort of stuff a long time ago, so I would actually be pleased if the evidence actually showed we all got another chance to live again and again.... and maybe even again.
However, what I might happen to WISH for, doesn't make that thing a reality.

Not for you, not for me, not for anyone!!


ATF (Who thinks folks put far too much in this idea, that a huge amount of faith in something, can somehow make it real)

Dear boomSLANG (and other reading on this post): Thank you for your prompt interest in my remarks.
(Just call me Amitabha will do. Sorry about my English skills because I am a native Chinese speaker.)

(1) Natural Selection: IMHO, the Selection theory is only part of the truth. I believe there is some spiritual element behind the genetic modification mechanism. For example, most crows are interested in frogs. However, in a remote island in South America there is one kind of poisonous frog (forgot its name) whose body’s toxin is capable of killing thousands of crows. Crows recognize this animal by its bright orange color and will always avoid them. However, there is a special snake species whose diet is that poisonous frog. The snake developed a special anti-toxin that provides resistance to the toxin. Despite so, the snake will have to shut down all its metabolic system (similarly to passing into a coma) in order to recover after ingesting the frog.

Scientist tends to explain that that is a toxin-vs.-antitoxin war in the long course of evolution of both frogs and snakes. However, if you study the case carefully, it may not be fully natural selection. Let’s say if due to a genetic mutation a certain frog developed a more potent toxin that manage to kill the snake, and happened to be ingested by the snake. The snake went to a coma and eventually died. What happen to the newly mutant frog? It also will have to die! Unless (the dying frog in the snake stomach managed to mate to another dying frog in concentrated digestive fluids, in an air free environment, and quickly give rises to tadpoles in one nanosecond, and the tadpoles escaped out of the snake stomach, and at least one survived), there is no chance for the frog to pass down its genetic code to its offspring and hence that is some difficulties in the natural selection mechanism based on present theory.

In science we made assumptions, but some of the assumptions have yet to be proven. How come genetically identical twins developed entire different IQs and personalities? Some even have different preferences (one left and the other right, for example)! If you have an open-mind, you will also see there are many other difficult cases. Using genetic makeup to explain the behavior, personality and IQ of living creatures, like the white supremacy and Nazism, is very dangerous. This, I believe, is the “superstition” of science.

In general, I believe in evolution, but I believe natural selection is only part of the equation of evolution.

(2) Past life and Hypnosis – Hypnosis is a power tool invented by the West. Past life recall by hypnosis is now carefully studied. I am not saying that 100% of the cases are true evidence of our past life recalls, but some important cases cannot be explained by suggestion or coincidence alone. For example, under a hypnosis a child can recall his/her past life’s parent name, his/her best friends, their past home, how he/she died. In some cases, the child can even speak in a foreign language that he/she has absolutely no prior knowledge. In many cases, the child can be proven that he/she has never traveled before and if the data in his/her recall happened to be verifiable after careful investigation.

In China, past life recall is not done by hypnosis, but my plain memory alone. In Northern China, a number of counties have customs that when a child speaks shortly after birth, the child must be a demon and must be killed. I am sure this may also have happened to the West but I believe if happened, the cases invites few publicity because the Western culture prohibits the belief of such incidences.

For your reading pleasure, below is one of the stories I recently translated:

“Rolling a ferry twenty years ago, there came a fish with two heads of gold.”

In China, the central government rules all provinces. The provincial government is sub-divided into county governments. This is one of the judicial records from a county’s magistracy in Ching Dynasty.

One time there was a father and a son in that county. The son was born very intelligent and used to be very filial and obedient. However, soon after the son turned twenty he changed to a monster. He always argued with the father upon the slightest dispute. In his anger he frequently beat up his father. As the days went by the situation escalated and the son resorted to clubs and sticks. One day he almost killed his father. The poor old man was weak and could not resist. So he appealed to the county’s magistracy for his case.

Beating up parents was highly unusual and highly unacceptable in the old feudal Chinese society. The magistrate quickly summoned the son to the court. The son could not manage to give any explanation at all. So the magistrate ordered a corporal punishment of slamming twenty planks into the buttock.

After the punishment the son was later released. On that night the son did not go home but went to appeal his case to a Taoist temple. On the same night the magistrate had a vivid dream. He dreamt that an old man, dressed as the Magistrate of the Beyond approached him and complained that he made a bad case this morning (regarding the punishment of the son).

The old man in the dream told the magistrate, “According to human jurisdiction, you may have made a good case. However, according to the jurisdiction in the beyond, you have made a very bad case and punished the wrong person.”

The magistrate was very puzzled and asked the old man for his advice.

The old man told the magistrate to summon the old man to court the next day and told him the lyrical phrase: “Rolling a ferry twenty years ago, there came a fish with two heads of gold.”

The next day the magistrate indeed summoned the old man to court, told him about the story and the lyrical phrase in his dream and asked him if he could help to understand the case. Immediately the old man fell to his knees and pleaded for mercy from the magistrate.


After intense fear and a long calming down period, the old man slowly told the magistrate what had happened some twenty years ago.

The old man had been operating a ferry across the river for a living until twenty years ago something happened and changed his fortune.

The ferry was usually operating during rush hours (in early mornings and late evenings) when most passengers crossed the river to report to work for to go back home. In between rush hours he used to rest by the riverbank to wait for the occasional chartered rides by small group of individuals.

One afternoon a young man dressed as a scholar with a large baggage approached him and asked the ferryman for a chartered ride across the river. He was the only passenger.

Upon boarding the ferry the young passenger tripped and fell down. Out from his baggage a few pieces of silver nugget dropped out. The passenger was quick to pick up the silver nugget and put back to his baggage, but the event did not escape the ferryman’s eyes and his greed.

After rolling the ferry to the middle of the river, the ferryman suddenly shouted,” Did you see that? A huge gold fish with two heads! A two-headed fish!”

Without knowing this was a trick, the young passenger rushed to see the fictitious fish. “Where is it? Where is it?”, asked the young passenger. So the ferryman pointed to the water and said, “You must look down more into the water in order to see the fish. It is right there.” So the young passenger bent his body down even further. The ferryman seized this opportunity to lift up the passenger’s legs from behind and pushed him into the water.

No body was since found and no one knew about this past events that happened twenty years ago. The ferryman took all the silver nuggets in the bag and became very well off. With a sense of guilt he gave up his business in ferrying and operated a small grocery shop. After nine months his wife gave birth to a boy and was a born prodigy.

Even after hearing the father’s story the magistrate could not do anything but to release the old man due to the restriction of the law but the magistracy continue to monitor the case.

It was reported that the son continued to torture his dad for an extended period of three years. However, the old man has accepted his fate and all the tortures were not fatal. Only after the three years of torture did the son stop and regain his normal conscience again.

It is indeed a story that worth considering regarding the Law of Causality.

Note: I will response to your other comments in another post

Amitabha

Dear boomSLANG (and other reading on this post): This is the last part of my response to your comment.

‘.."documentation"? The word is very vague. Perhaps you mean, published, peer-reviewed literature from the scientific community? If so, I'd be curious to see any such source that supports the notion that an invisible, uncaused, self-existing mind "Caused" everything into existence, using "telepathy”’

(1) Documentation: The documentations I cited are mainly from several sources during the 1500+ years of Buddhism experience. One source is from publications of very well known government officers or playwrights. Another is from county’s judicial records (as in my previous translated story). Yet another form is from records from the temple (I will tell you another story shortly after). I also had direct experiences from my close friends and myself. Unlike the West, we do not publish this in scientific journals (at least not yet). At this time, formal study of such phenomena is still not ready, even in China, mainly because of the difficulties in producing the same result in a lab. Recently, many Buddhist practitioners publish their own experience in the web. I took a very cautious attitude to study such articles. I normally see if the story made sense or have consistency with other stories, and to see if it works under similar circumstances.

In Taiwan, there is a documentation of one living woman who came back to life using another woman’s body (who has been pronounced dead). After waking up, the woman spoke in a totally different dialect. She could no longer recognize anyone, including her parents. But she insisted that she was another person with the name Ju Xao Hua (朱秀華). She described how she was killed, the period in the beyond, and how she was arranged to come back again as a human body. A TV-serial has been dedicated to investigate the case and found her story to be quite credible. The lady is Lin Wang Yieo (林罔腰) and is still alive today! If you or your friend can understand Chinese, cut and paste the names in Google and soon you will arrive at lots of documentation regarding this event.

(2) Cause and effect. The invisible mind causing the phenomena of the World is a day-to-day observable fact. All buildings are designed by human’s mind. All deeds good or evils are also originated from the mind. The mind is not only invisible, but also has no form. Note that the brain is not actually the mind machine per se. It is just an interface. A perfect healthy brain can be in coma forever. Without the mind the brain is nothing. Everything in this world is actually transient and hence illusionary (unreal). This is a paradox: Things that are real have no form! Because the mind is not made up of matter, it is not subjected to aging or any kind of destruction. Believe it or not, once our life has ended, the mind will take another form of life. It may even exist only by itself. This is not identical to reincarnation. However, the Cosmo has a memory effect. Every of our actions are memorized. Some day, in some life form, you will have to receive the effect of such action. This mechanism of life is called karma.


I am ending this comment by another of my translated story:

(This story is from a record of a Buddhist temple, the author was a butcher before he converted to a monk and wrote his experience).

Once there was a temple on the top of a hill. Below the hill there was a village. The temple erected a big bell to give timing signals, or to call for a gathering. At dawn, the monks would sound the bell (by hitting with a big log). This would signal the monks to wake up to do the daily religious cultivation. Some villagers also relied on the sound of the bell to wake up and start work.

One morning, the temple bell did not sound. One butcher woke up and discovered that he was too late for the market because he should have slaughtered his pig hours ago. Since he also helped support the temple’s expenditure, he was so angry of the monks’ “laziness”. He rushed to the temple and made a big farce. The monks let him see the Abbot of the temple and had a very surprised result.

“It is my order not to sound the bell just for this morning,” said the Abbot, “I am very apologetic to whatever loss has caused to you. However, last night l dreamt of one green dress woman who came forward and knelt down in front of me to request that I not sound the temple bell next morning. She told me in tears that in doing so, six of her young children would be killed. She said she was not sad about herself, but she could not bear to see the kids’ life be take away. I thought this was just a dream. However, five other monks in the temple reported to me the same story this morning. We therefore took the matter seriously and decided not to sound the bell this time.” The other monks who experienced the same dream also came forward to talk to the butcher.

The butcher went back home very reluctantly. Upon arrival his worker rushed to report to him that one of the pigs (that supposed to be slaughtered this morning) gave birth to six piglets.

The butcher was extremely shocked. Shortly after, he closed his business and became a monk in the same temple.


Amitabha

Amitabha,

You failed to mention whether the pig wore a green dress.

Amitabha, aka "buddist/scientist",

Forgive me, but I must tell you that I'm seriously underwelmed; I'm unimpressed with your latest back-to-back posts. In the bulk of what you said, what I see is a lot of fallacious arguments, some of which include--but are not limited to--non sequitur, appeals to emotion, question begging, and a heaping helping of anecdotal "evidence"..i.e...cute little unverifiable parables that are meant to illustrate a principle, and/or, a moral. I would be willing to bet a large sum of money that most, if not all of said parables, are are nothing but cultural passed-down urban legend.

Nonetheless, I go over a few select points now that I'm done giggling at Jim Arvo's green dress joke:

Amitabha: Natural Selection: IMHO, the Selection theory is only part of the truth. I believe there is some spiritual element behind the genetic modification mechanism.

The crucial difference being, we have verifiable, tangible evidence, for the former "part"...and none of the like evidence for the latter "part". And BTW, this illustrates, perfectly, the difference between a "belief", and "knowledge". In other words, when you say "spiritual element", you essentially say nothing at all...that is, unless you can verify a "spirital" existence, of some sort. If you cannot, then your hypothesis is reduced to a "belief"..nothing more.

Next, you talk rather in depthly about a certain snake being resistant to a poisonous dart frog. For economy of time & space, I won't quote it. You then hypothesize:

Let’s say if due to a genetic mutation a certain frog developed a more potent toxin that manage to kill the snake, and happened to be ingested by the snake. The snake went to a coma and eventually died. What happen to the newly mutant frog? It also will have to die!

There are around 75 different species of poisonous dart frogs, all with varying color patterns. Perhaps, snakes will evolve to identify--either by sight, or scent---with the frog that is lethal to them, and simply avoid it...the same way birds will avoid a milk snake, due to it's color pattern mimicking the deadly coral snake.

Now, even if you find that explanation unsatisfactory, you still haven't provided any evidence that there is "spiritual" explanation for why there might be "gliches" in the evolutionary food chain.

Amitabha: In science we made assumptions, but some of the assumptions have yet to be proven.

You claim to be a "scientist"? I now find that extremely hard to believe. The whole POINT of "science" is to avoid "assumptions", and to remove as much bias as possible.

Amitabha: How come genetically identical twins developed entire different IQs and personalities?

Because they have entirely different brains, and chances are, entirely different experiences, thus, forming entirely different views of reality, and the world around them.

Amitabha: Using genetic makeup to explain the behavior, personality and IQ of living creatures, like the white supremacy and Nazism, is very dangerous. This, I believe, is the “superstition” of science.

Again, science is the antithesis of "superstition". Good grief! Furthermore, who is suggesting that racism and bigotry are "genetic"?

Amitabha: In general, I believe in evolution, but I believe natural selection is only part of the equation of evolution.

Yes, yes....we've already established this. You "believe" that there is a "gap" in evolution, and you attempt to fill that "gap" with something "spiritual" and/or, something "Cosmic", etc. However, you've presented no convincing evidence that there is any such "Cosmic" influence taking over where "evolution" allegedly leaves off.

Amitabha: Past life and Hypnosis – Hypnosis is a power tool invented by the West. Past life recall by hypnosis is now carefully studied. I am not saying that 100% of the cases are true evidence of our past life recalls, but some important cases cannot be explained by suggestion or coincidence alone.

Again, more things that "cannot be explained", yet, you attempt to explain them with mysticism. Moreover, if you admit that some "past life recalls" are fraudulent, and/or, not genuine--as you will probably concede that most are--then why wouldn't it make sense that the "hits" are, in fact, suggestion, and/or, coincidence?

Amitabha: Documentation: The documentations I cited are mainly from several sources during the 1500+ years of Buddhism experience. One source is from publications of very well known government officers or playwrights. Another is from county’s judicial records (as in my previous translated story). Yet another form is from records from the temple (I will tell you another story shortly after). I also had direct experiences from my close friends and myself. Unlike the West, we do not publish this in scientific journals (at least not yet).[bold added]

How convenient.

you continue...At this time, formal study of such phenomena is still not ready, even in China, mainly because of the difficulties in producing the same result in a lab.

Right. It cannot be consistantly reproduced in a lab. Imagine that.

You say: Cause and effect. The invisible mind causing the phenomena of the World is a day-to-day observable fact.

Um, whAT "phenomena"??? Like, progress? What are you talking about, specifically?

Amitabha: The mind is not only invisible, but also has no form. Note that the brain is not actually the mind machine per se. It is just an interface. A perfect healthy brain can be in coma forever. Without the mind the brain is nothing

You've got it backwards---without the brain, the mind is nothing. If, as you suggest, a "mind" can function independent of a brain, then people who suffer from such things as mental retardation, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, stoke, etc., would NOT be affected in the least. BTW, you speak of comas---why, then, are most people who end up in a coma, victims of physical head trauma? Why would a non-physical "mind" suffer from a coma?

Amitabha: Everything in this world is actually transient and hence illusionary (unreal). This is a paradox: Things that are real have no form! Because the mind is not made up of matter, it is not subjected to aging or any kind of destruction.

Again, these wild, mystical assertions of yours are entirely baseless.

BTW, if a "mind" can suffer the effects of being in a "coma"(since you posit that a healthy brain cannot be affected by one), then that clearly shows that, yes, the "mind" can be subject to "destruction". Several of your statements are completely contradictory(like I need to point that out)

Amitabha: Believe it or not, once our life has ended, the mind will take another form of life

Hey!....guess what!? NO, I don't believe it....as firstly, it's illogical---how will a presumably form-LESS "mind" exist in another "form"? Again, blatant contradiction. 'Try again?

Secondly, there's not one shred of evidence for post-mortem "life"; there's no evidence that consciousness survives the death of the physical brain. In fact, all the evidence points to the "self" being totally dependent on the brain---which would explain why Alzheimer's patients lose their "identities".

Amitabha: However, the Cosmo has a memory effect. Every of our actions are memorized.

Really? Memorized whERE, exactly? We require a brain for memory. After all, we don't store past memories in our livers, spleens, or intestines---we store them in our brains. Hence, if the "Cosmos" stores memories, they must be stored somewhere---whERE???

Amitabha: Some day, in some life form, you will have to receive the effect of such action. This mechanism of life is called karma.

'Seems like a watered-down version of the type of threats we're accustomed to hearing from Christians. Regardless, the fact that good things happen to extremely evil people, and bad things happen to very kind people, is all the evidence I need to say that "karma" is bunk. Not-to-mention, when/if the world's population exceeds those of the dead. It seems there will be a "soul" shortage.

Dear ATF: Thank you for your feedback and queries.

“If all 'souls' (energy or whatever) are reincarnated, then I see a problem with an ever-growing human population over the 'thousands' of years humans have been around.”

In Buddhism we prefer not to use the word “reincarnation” for two important reasons. First, reincarnate literally means taking over another fleshly body and to live again. This may not always be the case because some forms of lives you may not even need a fleshy body. Second, reincarnation has a connotation of a continuation of an everlasting self. According to the Dharma, nothing is permanent. The only permanence is the course of changing! While we can see our body changes years after years, can we not see our mind changes even faster (sometimes from one moment to another)? Therefore, rebirth will be a better word to describe the change of life form.

According to the Buddha, there are countless of worlds (or planets) similar to ours, though not all worlds are directly observable under the uncultivated eyes. This is similar to the theory of the parallel universes. Also, human form is only the one of the six life forms of cyclic existence (the others are heaven dwellers, animals, ghost, asuras and hell dwellers). In our earth alone, the other life forms are far more than humans. Therefore, even a seeming huge increase in the human number will have little effect on the overall numbers of other life forms. (FYI: Some reputable monks said that this time a world or several worlds similar to ours is/are undergoing the destruction process. Some beings that have former association with our world are seeking rebirth here. I am not sure whether this is true or not.)

FYI: Whenever there was a war, there would be a baby boom. Also, some animals (such as coyotes) will have a baby boom when they are killed in large number.

Also FYI: 2600+ years ago, the Buddha repeatedly told us that he observed tens of thousands of sentient beings under even a droplet of water. Therefore, the monks were required to use a cloth net to filter the water from the rivers when taken for drinking. “This will minimize killing, though there will still beings that escaped the filter”, said the Buddha. Remember this was 2600+ years ago!

“Do souls/spirts 'mate' and produce new 'baby' souls, that would then take a physical human body?”

When souls/spirits mate, if the other soul is not ready to take over, the result will be a failed fertilization or a stillborn. Life reproduction (esp. in humans) is something other than mere genetic recombination. This explains why many fertile couples have difficulty in conception.

“Do you believe (as some do) that former human souls also exist inside other life forms and if so, would our present lives determine if we next become human again (if we deserve it) or get reduced to an urban city Rat?”

Yes, I do. In fact, I have countless of reports of people who recall their former lives as animals and ghosts. If you observe carefully, the ghost and animal instincts are still within us. Therefore, to be a human and be able to hear the Dharma, even for a very short moment, is an extremely rare opportunity indeed. Please cherish it.

“If this is your thinking, then what non-god force is determining who gets to be human and who becomes the Rat?”

In the universe, there are two great forces that determine your future destiny. The first is the karmic force. This is the force created by your past actions. It is like a seed planted into the soil. Under the correct circumstances it will sprout out and grow into the corresponding plants. (Karmic force is so great that even a Buddha cannot escape the consequence when all the conditions ripened. The only difference is that a Buddha can ride through the consequence without suffering while we can’t.) The other is our will power. It is our mind that creates everything. In fact, the two great forces are the same – mind (or will) power. One is the past mind and the other is the present mind. An enlightened man will have a mind that can overcome the karmic force (or at least the sufferings) and to change his destiny. Therefore, if you have committed very heavy karma that is sucking you into the Rat domain, the only fighting force to get you out of this is your will power.

I shall use a past story to illustrate this point.

A monk in a Taiwanese temple told this story some 40 years ago. He had a diligent layman disciple who always came to the temple to hear the Dharma. At lunch this disciple always wrapped his right arm with a cloth. This had been for years, even during the hottest summers. One day the monk asked his disciple to come into a room and asked him of his “funny” act. The disciple show him unwillingly of his right arm that bore a strong resemblance to a pig’s forearm.

The disciples told the monk that he recalled his past life was a pig! Before that he was a very dishonest man. He could even remember his past name and location of that life. Upon the death of his human body he found himself walking on a very cold country road. After very long period of enduring the bone piercing bitter cold he saw a small house on the roadside. He opened the door and found a jacket hanging on the lobby wall. Because of this bitter cold he subconsciously put the jacket on his body. Very soon he found himself born in a pig’s pan with some other piglets. The pig’s life was very miserable and he could end his life only when he was slaughtered and had all the meat sold. After that he found himself back on the same bitterly cold road again. And he went into another building for shelter. He found a nice wool overcoat hanging on the wall inside. Again, he unconsciously tried to take the coat for warmth. As soon as he touched the coat he suddenly remembered the horrific past experience. He forced himself to run out of the house regardless of the bitter cold. He swore that even he has to die in the cold he would not want to be a pig again. After a very long suffering period he managed to reborn as a human, but his right arm was still covered with a different kind of long gray hair similar to the pig’s. Because he could remember what happened to the past, he was a devoted Buddhist. He passed away 10 years ago. The monk was so remorseful that he could not manage to take a screen shot of his arm from this shy disciple before his death.

“Now I have to say that I have yet to read ANY legit study done (that has proved to a skeptic), where hypnosis has generated any positive proof of anyone having a former verifiable life on earth.”

Dear ATF and boomSLANG: This is a common problem with our habit of understand and acceptance – Must we have legit study and belief that has been accepted by everyone in the world before we can accept it? If you observe very carefully, a lot of useful knowledge was acquired long before the scientific community’s acceptance. One such example is the development of acupuncture. FYI: This art has been practiced extensively in almost all hospitals in China as a supportive anesthesia. Despite such an easily reproduced phenomenon that has a history of thousands of years in China, it has yet to be accepted by the Western science. Is it because when a phenomenon cannot be fully explained that we can never believe it in? When you are in grave danger needing such a procedure, will it be too late? I am not forcing an answer here, but I have a different view that I would like to share with you.

Note that in this world everything is a faith – an established belief that may be essential to daily life. Have you ever wetted your bed while sleeping? I did! (the last incident was some 20 years ago). Because I dreamt that I was “high-tided” and went to the toilet. I am sure that most of us had this experience before. Next time when you go to the toilet, are you 100% sure that you are not dreaming? If not, we have to base on our faith – the established belief that we pee to the toilet bowl and not on the bed.

Therefore, everyone has a certain faith in something. Those who insisted that they are skeptics are having faith in doubting!

The difference is that we have “wise faith” and “blind faith”. I am suggesting a way to develop a “wise faith”.

- When things are happening every day and is mainly (and easily) reproducible.
- When the mechanism of the phenomena makes sense under our prior knowledge. For example, we never actually see a neutrino from any apparatus, but we deduce its existence from its effect. We have never seen our ancestors but we accept it.
- When the same or grossly consistent information from a phenomenon is received from a very large diversity of independent sources. (This is like asking for direction in the city. Never ask only a single person but to gather information from at least three persons from various locations.) Christian’s belief is centered on the Bible. Only the Bible is self-vindicating. The Koran is also developed from the same book. There are no alternate theories or experiments to support Creationism or Omnipotence. Therefore, the belief in God is nothing but a blind faith.

“e.g. In the recent book "SPOOK" by Mary Roach, this reincarnation subject is …, but they failed every time to do so..”

As I have stated, not all the cases in past life recall is easily verifiable. May be most of the cases (say 99%) are fraud. However, without a full investigation, are you sure that 100% are untrue? Therefore, we must have an open mind and study the cases carefully. Without fully understanding the mechanism and hastily conclude that things are true or untrue is equally superstitious. Scientists are not immune to such mistakes.

Finally, I would like to advise that Buddhism is not a religion, but rather, an education that only a very privileged group of people is able to fully understand and accept it. Those who can read the Chinese scripts and be able to access the original records are in extreme privilege because they can afford to analyze mountains of useful past records. I am spending my valuable time trying to introduce some information that you may never be able to access. However, unlike Christians, I am not forcing anyone to accept a blind faith.

(I will answer boomSLANG’s latest comment in another post soon)

Amitabha

Dear Jim: Thanks for your interest too.

“You failed to mention whether the pig wore a green dress.”

I am a translator, not a storyteller. If there is no mention in the record I will not fabricate any explanation.

Amitabha wrote:

(1) Natural Selection: IMHO....... However, there is a special snake species whose diet is that poisonous frog. The snake developed a special anti-toxin that provides resistance to the toxin. Despite so, the snake will have to shut down all its metabolic system (similarly to passing into a coma) in order to recover after ingesting the frog.

...... Let’s say if due to a genetic mutation a certain frog developed a more potent toxin that manage to kill the snake, and happened to be ingested by the snake. The snake went to a coma and eventually died. What happen to the newly mutant frog? It also will have to die! Unless (the dying frog in the snake stomach managed to mate to another dying frog in concentrated digestive fluids, in an air free environment, and quickly give rises to tadpoles in one nanosecond, and the tadpoles escaped out of the snake stomach, and at least one survived), there is no chance for the frog to pass down its genetic code to its offspring and hence that is some difficulties in the natural selection mechanism based on present theory.
--------------
Amitabha,

First, let me say that I'm no evolution expert, but I'm not ignorant of it's methods either.

Try as I may to search the internet for the snake/frog scenario you describe here, I have not seen any information that validates this particular scenario of yours.

I've seen articles that show how a snake eats poisonous frogs, and then in turn, uses the frog's poison for it's own defence.
I've seen that many of these poisonous frogs do not produce their own poison, but obtain it from the ants they eat.

I saw no article that described any type of snake that would swallow a poisonous frog whole and then subsequently goes into a coma, waiting to recover from the frog's poison.
Snakes in general do 'sleep' while digesting their meals, so maybe that is what you meant?

To the contrary (as I suspected), the snake will FIRST bite the poisonous frog, without swallowing it .
Hence, snakes learn which frogs they can swallow whole and which they have to 'test' first.
It's then not necessary for the snake to die, nor to use this 'coma' method you describe here to survive that poison.

If the frogs get their poison from what they eat (such as ants), then I don't see why we need a frog to escape the snakes belly in order for the frog to become more poisonous over time.
Wouldn't it be fairly easy for a frog to become more poisonous by just eating more ants or perhaps ants that contain a higher level of poison etc.

So if the snake need not die from a super-poison frog it swallowed in one gulp, and frogs seem to be able to adjust their toxicity levels without any god like intervention, then I see no reason to think that some supernatural force is at work here.

Now maybe I'm missing something, not being an expert like yourself, but it sure seems to me that the theory of evolution is evolving life just fine without any external influence from the mystical world you seem to promote here to us.

REF:
http://news.softpedia.com/news/How-Can-Snakes-Eat-Poisonous-Frogs-70691.shtml

Some snakes have 'a preference' for them, even venomous frogs, like the Australian northern death adder, and can feed on them without getting intoxicated. Some of the adder's preys have skins releasing powerful venoms or sticky foams that can kill the snake.

The adder is highly venomous and in the case of non-poisonous frogs, the snake swallows immediately its prey. This is not the case with the toxic frogs, which are bitten and immediately released. Then the snake waits the venom to have its effect, till the poison or foam in the dead frog's skin degrades to benign chemicals.

"The frog usually hops some distance before dying, but the snake can easily track the frog down using its forked tongue and sensitive olfactory system," said co-author Ben Phillips of the University of Sydney.

The team was amazed to find that the snake tuned its behavior according with the frog species: in the case of the Australian marbled frog (Lymnodinastes), the foam dries in 10 minutes following the death of the amphibian, while the adder starts to eat the frog 12 minutes following the bite, but in the case of Dahl's aquatic frog (Litoria), the skin poison turns inactive in 30 minutes after the death and the adder will start eating the corpse 40 minutes after poisoning the animal.

How does the snake adjust its behavior? It appears that frog toxins from the snake's poisoning bite persists in the snake's mouth in non-dangerous, low levels.

"So they seem to wait until they can't taste the toxin before attempting to eat the frog," Phillips told LiveScience.

"Often they go and taste, then drop the prey before waiting a further five minutes or so and trying again."

As the snake kills before the frog, natural selection cannot operate in frogs for longer-lasting toxins.

"The common assumption is that snakes are pretty stupid, and to them a frog is a frog. But here we see a snake that effectively discriminates between frog species and then deals with each species in an appropriate manner," said Phillips.


ATF (Who also does NOT take urban legends as evidence, to bolster a claim)

(I will answer boomSLANG’s latest comment in another post soon)

Amitabha

No, please!....I beg of you, do NOT address my comments, as it will be a complete waste of your time. You, like many religionists---and even though you don't consider Buddhism a "religion"---have the same type of ingrained conviction as any other religionist we see. And also like them, you have nothing to substantiate your beliefs, but hearsay...i.e.. "The Buddha said" this, that, and the other thing. Oh, and half a dozen statements starting with, "FYI"...as if you are the final authority on metaphysics. Annoying, quite frankly. The same with Christians..i.e.."Jesus said"...blah, blah, blah. And why is true?...why, of course, because "Jesus said it!".

Oh yeah, I like this one---Buddhism is not a religion, but rather, an education that only a very privileged group of people is able to fully understand and accept it.

Uh huh...one cannot understand Buddhism until they accept Buddhism as true. Boy, that one sounds all-too familiar.

And please, grasshopper!...please stop already with the parables(i.e..the "translations"). There are hundreds, if not THOUSANDS, of similar anecdotal stories as the ones you tell, currently circulating the internet.... yet, interestingly, they "support" religions other than Buddhism---and much like you, their respective religionists insist they have The One Universal Truth. Although, your hypothesis that because we can subconsciously train ourselves to hold our "pee" in our sleep, therefore, there is something "Cosmic" going on, is a new one on me....and quite amusing, I might add.

Again, please spare me, m'kay? Thanks.

Dear boomSLANG:

“… I'm unimpressed with your latest back-to-back posts. In the bulk of what you said, what I see is a lot of fallacious arguments, some of which include--but are not limited to--non sequitur, appeals to emotion, question begging, and a heaping helping of anecdotal "evidence"..i.e...cute little unverifiable parables that are meant to illustrate a principle, and/or, a moral. I would be willing to bet a large sum of money that most, if not all of said parables, are are nothing but cultural passed-down urban legend.”

I think we should not let emotion and prejudice overwhelm our judgment, as seems to be indicative in your comments.

I am not citing fables. The sources of the documentations have been listed in my former comment. I am not a salesman asking you to agree to any agenda such that a certain organization will get some financial supports from followers. Therefore, you don’t have to be so emotional and impulsive. If you wanna dismiss all of them it is OK for me. Remember the definition of “faith” in my previous comment?

“There are around 75 different species of poisonous dart frogs…, you still haven't provided any evidence that there is "spiritual" explanation for why there might be "gliches" in the evolutionary food chain.”

Thank you for the info. I am amazed at your knowledge in zoology! However, I incline to believe that both the poisonous frogs and the snakes that prey on them are also fighting a war in the spiritual domain. When either of them dies, their consciousness is revising their fighting strategy in the next life. It is like raging an ending war of revenge. Hence their genetic modifications are governed by the mind as well. Therefore, despite death and total destruction of their body, the knowledge of modification managed to pass through the spiritual domain. Remember what I mentioned regarding the baby boom after the wars and certain animals’ baby boom after a large amount of them has been killed?

“You claim to be a "scientist"? I now find that extremely hard to believe. The whole POINT of "science" is to avoid "assumptions", and to remove as much bias as possible. “

You are making the mistake of taking things too personal when you encounter views that you have never heard of before. As an independent thinker, you should focus on the points I made instead of attacking me in general.

I am not sure you are involved in Physical Science. We almost always make assumptions before developing a mathematical model. Remember the Ideal Gas Law in high school physics? Do you still remember how the Ideal Gas Law equation is derived? It was based on a number of assumptions.
Newton’s law is also based on assumptions. In his theory of mechanics he assumed that velocity combination is a linear. This was based on the theory that distance combination is linear. This poised a huge problem when we tried to use in Michaelson Morley experiment. Einstein is a free thinker. He pushed Newton’s assumptions aside and re-modeled his own assumption (i.e. speed of light is invariant) and hence published the great theory of Relativity. Therefore, scientists do make assumptions and sometimes can make inaccurate or even bad assumptions.

The correlation assumption between genetic makeup and personality/IQ/instincts is one such bad assumption. Also, we tend to believe that it is the brain that stores memories. However, why long-term memories are the last to sacrifice during the degeneration of the brain due to diseases? Can you take some brain out, put into a machine and to decipher the guy’s memory objectively? No, we don’t have the slightest clues! In fact, the more we look into the brain, the more we discovered that it was almost homogeneous. It is more an interface than a CPU by itself.

Psychology has a very long history with us. However, when other natural science progress leaps and bounces, psychology is lacking behind, to an almost standstill - to nothing more than classifications. So far, we can only use tranquilizer to calm down severe mental patients. There is no direct evidence that any mental patient has been completely healed by medical therapy alone. This leads to the suspicion that we are walking on the wrong path. Our science is revolving on the study of matters. We model everything based on this assumption. We keep on denying the formless spiritual existence that controls our physical body. Perhaps the study of Buddhism can compensate for this.

“you continue...At this time, formal study of such phenomena is still not ready, even in China, mainly because of the difficulties in producing the same result in a lab. Right. It cannot be consistantly reproduced in a lab. Imagine that.”

If you have enough knowledge, many “scientific” events are also not consistently reproducible, esp. when human or animal is involved. For example, how do you test a certain economic policy’s repeatability? How to you reproduce a true crime scene in the court (without the help of audio-visual recorder previously installed in the scene)? How come even the most potent medicine does not have 100% curing rate? Therefore, a consistently reproducible result is the easiest model to establish a belief, and such models are in the minority, unfortunately.

“You say: Cause and effect. The invisible mind causing the phenomena of the World is a day-to-day observable fact. Um, whAT "phenomena"??? Like, progress? What are you talking about, specifically?”

The PC you use. The keyboard you typed. The car you drive. The house you live in. All are created from the invisible mind. Without the human mind’s creation and hard work, our civilization will never appear. Note that mind (the true master) is not really the brain (the interface). Medical records indicates that even a very substantial amount of brain is removed there is no substantial change of personality or memory. In case of brain diseases such as Alzheimer, Pakinson, mad cow, or even mental diseases it is the degeneration of the interface instead of the mind. Therefore, we can also use this to deduce that after we die, we still have our consciousness (The other way is to observe the inherit personality and base memory that come with us at our birth).

“Amitabha: However, the Cosmo has a memory effect. Every of our actions are memorized. Really? Memorized whERE, exactly? We require a brain for memory. After all, we don't store past memories in our livers, spleens, or intestines---we store them in our brains. Hence, if the "Cosmos" stores memories, they must be stored somewhere---whERE???”

Memories are stored everywhere. Most of them are stored inside our consciousness. Remember we have a few laws of physics? Do you still remember that we also have the law of conservation of information? Information, which is basically formless, cannot be destroyed - at least in theory. It is the technical hurdle to recover information from the environment.

Thanks again for your feedback. All comments are welcome.

Amitabha

Dear boomSLANG:

“No, please!....I beg of you, do NOT address my comments, as it will be a complete waste of your time.”

So do you want me to ignore you? Yes I will. Before that, I wanna make a few remarks from your seemingly emotional statements…

“ And also like them, you have nothing to substantiate your beliefs, but hearsay...i.e.. "The Buddha said" this, that,...why, of course, because "Jesus said it!".

Can we establish all our knowledge without citing an established and reliable reference? Why we always said according to Newton’s first law of motion,…, according to Einstein’s relativity… I understand that you are sick of Christianity where followers always cite the Bible as authority and the sole directive and explanation of life. However, citing reference is not the true weakness of Christianity. The weakness is that they only have one reference and do not actually encourage parallel reference or reasoning. In Buddhism, what Buddha said is not an authority. In fact, believing in what he said is not good enough. We must be able to experiment in order to fully understand and apply the knowledge to put an end to suffering. I know I have a religious tone (which most people here are a very sick of), but I wish we can keep an open-minded attitude here. If we don’t change this attitude, we are just switching from one religion (of Christianity) to another religion (of rejection no matter what).

“Oh yeah, I like this one---Buddhism is not a religion, but rather, an education that only a very privileged group of people is able to fully understand and accept it. Uh huh...one cannot understand Buddhism until they accept Buddhism as true. Boy, that one sounds all-too familiar.”

Religion is something that you can live with or without it. Education is something if you are in lack of, you will make grave mistakes and suffer irreparable damage to yourself and others. Education can withstand challenge, is verifiable, and will not change with time. You don’t have to fully accept Buddhism in order to understand the Dharma.

“And please, grasshopper!...please stop already with the parables(i.e..the "translations"). There are hundreds, if not THOUSANDS, of similar anecdotal stories as the ones you tell, currently circulating the internet.... yet, interestingly, they "support" religions other than Buddhism---and much like you, their respective religionists insist they have The One Universal Truth. Although, your hypothesis that because we can subconsciously train ourselves to hold our "pee" in our sleep, therefore, there is something "Cosmic" going on, is a new one on me....and quite amusing, I might add.
Again, please spare me, m'kay? Thanks.”

Are you afraid that your blind faith (of doubting) be challenged? There was a saying that “Once bitten by a poisonous snake (without the frog’s anti-venous), you will be scared of strings for three years”. I understand your unpleasant past and hence the present phobia. I’ll let you go. As I have told you, what I translated may not be all parables. I translated them because I have similar personal experiences. If you insist to reject all the stories it is fine with me.

I will come back to you after three years, hee hee…

Amitabha
(the humble grasshopper of the Solin Temple)

Dear ATF:

Thanks for the information about the poisonous snake and frog evolution theory (with your assumptions).

Grasshopper Amitabha

Dear boomSLANG, ATF, Jim_Arvo and other readers:

Below is a story told by my brother Steve during his career with an insurance company in Hongkong in the year 1985. He worked in the Human Resources Department. Note that I did not make up this story myself.

One day, a young man went to Steve’s office and asked if his uncle had bought any life insurance there. His uncle had no direct family member and was reported missing to the police by one of his friends after an unusual flood. The young man told the claim officer that he dreamt of his uncle on three consecutive nights, asking him to approach this insurance company because he felt down from a rocky seaside while fishing. He told the nephew that he was trapped and was in severe suffering. He told him to approach Steve’s insurance company for assistance because he was his insurance policy's beneficiary.

The claim officer immediately dismissed his claim and laugh at him. “I also dreamt that HSBC bank is mine days and nights, but I don’t have your courage to make this claim”, the officer told the young man.

However, this young man was very persistent. So the claim officer did a search on the client’s record. To his surprise that this young man’s uncle’s was indeed his client and he did list his nephew as the sole beneficiary.

The officer told the young man that despite the verification, they are in no position to help his uncle. The young man burst to tears and ask the company to do something.

The officer then told the young man that he could help make a call to the police, but his seemingly ridiculous case may not be accepted.

The company indeed made the call to the police. To everyone’s surprise, the police did take up the case and arrived at the office shortly after. The police officers asked the young man whether he was sure of the location of his uncle. The young man said he dreamt three times of the scene shown by the uncle and he was absolutely sure where it was.

The police immediately called up a rescue team with the Fire Office. In order to be sure, Steve and his colleagues also follow the rescue team to the alleged drowning site. The Fire Officer ordered a team of divers to search under the turbid seawater. The search had been conducted for six hours until it was almost sunset. The young man was very embarrassed and agreed to the rescue team to give up the search. At this time, a senior officer made a bizarre suggestion.

He prepared a motorboat and bought some bread. He asked the young man to sit on the motorboat together with the rescue officers. “Throw one bit of bread to the water and call your uncle’s name loudly”, the officer told the young man.

Everyone thought it was a ritual to say good-bye to the deceased. They slowly moved the boat to the open water while the young man throw the bread and called his uncle. Upon the third throw of the bread and the third call, the body of his uncle surfaced up near the motorboat and everyone on the scene, including Steve, was in extreme shock and speechless for a few minutes.

The uncle was hence pronounced dead on site and the insurance company paid up the premium to the young man shortly after.

(I can provide you with more information to verify this case if you are interested to do the investigation.)

Amitabha

Amitabha,

I'm afraid there is one thing you said that I simply cannot let pass, as it is demonstrably incorrect, and I've devoted much of my life to correcting this error whenever I see it committed. To BoomSLANG you said, and I quote:

"So do you want me to ignore you? Yes I will. Before that, I wanna make a few remarks from your seemingly emotional statements…"

Now, sir, I wish to direct you to the wording of this elliptical statement of yours, and the blatant error you've committed; the error that simply must be stamped out. Do you see it? Please, sir, in the future, kindly refrain from using "wanna" as if it were a word! It is a most frightful and unsanctioned contraction of the words "want to". This abomination has been creeping into the English lexicon, exacerbated by text messaging, and it is producing yet another generation of unregenerate illiterates.

Thank you, and carry on.

P.S. Should you learn the color of the pig's dress, please do inform us.

Just as I said---a complete, and utter waste of time.

Ali Baba, you will inevitably drive yourself insane here. After all, this is what happens when you repeat the same thing... over, and over, and over...again, and again, and again... but yet, expect a different result.

At least you are consistent, though. Yes, once more, your arguments amount to: affirming the consequence, appeals to authority, appeals to emotion, non sequitur.....and again, sickening amounts of anecdotal "evidence".

Here, allow me to illustrate the latter type of evidence, so you get an idea of how you come across to others:

Me: This story is TRUE, everybody; I'm NOT making it up!

(already convinced, aren't you?)

According to my grandmother, my great-grandmother would get rid of warts(a type of virus) by taking a kernel of corn, rub it on the affected area, and chant "wart be gone in the name of the Spirit!".(in Pennsylvania Dutch) Then, she'd toss the kernel of corn over her right shoulder, while looking into a fullmoon. She would repeat this ritual for three days in a row, and low-and-behold, the wart would vanish!!

Ali Baba, this is exactly how you sound, each and every time you type one of your "translations" as "evidence". The point is, if we could get rid of warts using the above procedure, people wouldn't be paying large somes of money for medical doctors to freeze their warts off.

The same holds true for... uh, locating dead bodies with bread. Ali', if locating dead bodies with a loaf of bread was a fail-prove, tried-and-true, objective way to do so, then the world's private investigators, police depts, and Centers for Missing Persons would stock loaves and loaves of bread in their pantries, cruisers, and mobile units. What you have, is likely an old wive's tale, relative to your culture---one that you are touting as "evidence" for something. And even if you could verify said situation, you could NOT rule out plain ol' coincidence.

Then, to compound things, you feel the need to butcher, splice, and dice, my original quote. Here is that display, of either carelessness, or deceit:

"And also like them, you have nothing to substantiate your beliefs, but hearsay...i.e.. 'The Buddha said' this, that,...why, of course, because 'Jesus said it!'."

Here is my original quote in it's entirety, and also in context:

You, like many religionists---and even though you don't consider Buddhism a 'religion'---have the same type of ingrained conviction as any other religionist we see. And also like them, you have nothing to substantiate your beliefs, but hearsay...i.e.. 'The Buddha said' this, that, and the other thing. Oh, and half a dozen statements starting with, 'FYI'...as if you are the final authority on metaphysics. Annoying, quite frankly. The same with Christians..i.e..'Jesus said'...blah, blah, blah. And why is [it] true?...why, of course, because 'Jesus said it!'."

Previously, you said: Buddhism is not a religion, but rather, an education that only a very privileged group of people is able to fully understand and accept it.

To which I responded: "Oh yeah, I like this one---Uh huh...one cannot understand Buddhism until they accept Buddhism as true. *Boy, that one sounds all-too familiar."

*Let me clarify this: when I said/say it sounds familiar, I mean that it's the very same philosophically circular reasoning we get from Christians...i.e.. You cannot understand the Holy Spirit until you accept the Holy Spirit! In other words, when you believe and accept it as true, then it all makes sense! Evidently, the same is true with Buddhism---one cannot understand it, until they accept it as true.

Um, duh?

Recently, you said: Religion is something that you can live with or without it. Education is something if you are in lack of, you will make grave mistakes and suffer irreparable damage to yourself and others. Education can withstand challenge, is verifiable, and will not change with time. You don’t have to fully accept Buddhism in order to understand the Dharma.

This amounts to thinly veiled ad hominem. The implication is that, if one cannot, or will not, grasp the concepts of Buddhism(the "Dharma"), then they are lacking, or missing out on an education, and thus, uneducated to a degree. How arrogant.

I know I have a religious tone (which most people here are a very sick of), but I wish we can keep an open-minded attitude here.

An attempt at honesty, but followed-up with more arrogance...i.e.. the implication that if we cannot, or will not, accept your arguments/philosophies as Universally True, then we are being close-minded.

If we don’t change this attitude, we are just switching from one religion (of Christianity) to another religion (of rejection no matter what).

I'm sorry?.. "rejection no matter what"? Please, take a minute and see strawman argument.

Now, rejection in lack of CREDIBLE EVIDENCE???...yes!

Buh bye!

Amitabha, you wrote:

In fact, the more we look into the brain, the more we discovered that it was almost homogeneous

Amitabha, that is incorrect, the brain is highly differentiated (although plastic to some degree)

List of regions in the human brain


Medical records indicates that even a very substantial amount of brain is removed there is no substantial change of personality or memory

That is also incorrect, brain injury can cause major changes to personality and memory:

Coping with Behavior Problems after Head Injury

Traumatic brain injury

Amitabha, you claim to be open minded, but I suspect you will dismiss any evidence that does not support your beliefs.

alan h wrote:
Amitabha wrote:
In fact, the more we look into the brain, the more we discovered that it was almost homogeneous
----
Thanks alan for your input on this brain issue.

I have known of a particular well-known brain injury case for many years now, that proves our Amitabha assertion had to be incorrect.

This is the story of that case.
http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=231

Here are some excerpts of that brain injury incident

In 1848, a twenty-five-year-old construction foreman named Phineas Gage won nationwide fame by way of a hole in his head. While working on a railroad project in Vermont, he experienced a severe brain injury when a three-foot-long, fourteen pound tamping iron was violently propelled through his skull. Astonishingly, he lived to tell about it...........

Gage was fitful, irreverent, indulging at times in the grossest profanity (which was not previously his custom), manifesting but little deference for his fellows, impatient of restraint or advice when it conflicts with his desires, at times pertinaciously obstinate, yet capricious and vacillating, devising many plans of future operations, which are no sooner arranged than they are abandoned in turn for others appearing more feasible. A child in his intellectual capacity and manifestations, he has the animal passions of a strong man. Previous to his injury, although untrained in the schools, he possessed a well-balanced mind, and was looked upon by those who knew him as a shrewd, smart businessman, very energetic and persistent in executing all his plans of operation. In this regard his mind was radically changed, so decidedly that his friends and acquaintances said he was 'no longer Gage'.

As Boomslang said, the brain is the whole enchilada and everything that makes up our minds, resides solely in that gray matter.


ATF (who knows of many more brain injury/disease cases, that greatly have changed a person's brain functions and personality)

To Amitabha:

Your current text I'm replying to will be marked with ">>", while my previous text is marked with "ATF:"

I do have to admit that you not only have a good command of the English language, but certainly exhibit intelligence to boot.

However; intelligence---without verifiable evidence to back a claim, really won't change the minds of someone who looks at things with a critical eye.
As Skeptic Mike Shermer is fond of saying, "Smart people believe weird things for non-smart reasons, but can use their smartness to defend those weird things very convincingly"


That said now, let's look at your reply to me.

ATF:“If all 'souls' (energy or whatever) are reincarnated, then I see a problem with an ever-growing human population over the 'thousands' of years humans have been around.”

>>In Buddhism we prefer not to use the word “reincarnation” for two important reasons. First, reincarnate literally means taking over another fleshly body and to live again. This may not always be the case because some forms of lives you may not even need a fleshy body.

So if this 'soul' doesn't happen to enter another fleshly body right away, then where do you suppose it resides, and for how long and who/what decides when it's time to enter yet another living organism?
I mean, you claim no god is at the helm of all this, so are you saying it's all done via some cosmic auto-pilot?


>>Second, reincarnation has a connotation of a continuation of an everlasting self. According to the Dharma, nothing is permanent. The only permanence is the course of changing! While we can see our body changes years after years, can we not see our mind changes even faster (sometimes from one moment to another)? Therefore, rebirth will be a better word to describe the change of life form.

In a nutshell you're saying here that the only thing that doesn't change is change itself.
Well, that's pretty much a given fact of life.
So far, the Dharma then seems to state the obvious, no?

Because I wasn't all that familiar with this Dharma that you seem to cite (as xtians cite their bibles with overzealous assurances), I took the time to look it up on the net.


This is what I just found about Dharma from.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_philosophy

Early Buddhist philosophers and exegetes created a pluralist metaphysical and phenomenological system in which all experiences of people, things, and events, can be broken down into smaller and smaller perceptual or perceptual-ontological units called dharmas. These dharmas (roughly synonymous with "phenomena") were interpreted differently by different schools: some held they were real, some held only some were real, some held all were illusory, some held they were empty, some held they were intrinsically associated with suffering, etc.

Seems that your Dharma believers have the same types of disagreements, that xtians do about their bible creeds. Why does that not surprise me in the least.


>>According to the Buddha, there are countless of worlds (or planets) similar to ours, though not all worlds are directly observable under the uncultivated eyes. This is similar to the theory of the parallel universes. Also, human form is only the one of the six life forms of cyclic existence (the others are heaven dwellers, animals, ghost, asuras and hell dwellers). In our earth alone, the other life forms are far more than humans. Therefore, even a seeming huge increase in the human number will have little effect on the overall numbers of other life forms. (FYI: Some reputable monks said that this time a world or several worlds similar to ours is/are undergoing the destruction process. Some beings that have former association with our world are seeking rebirth here. I am not sure whether this is true or not.)

I will tell you that I love science fiction and what you say here, sure would be fitting OF science fiction plots.

Parallel universes are a mere theory at this point and a world not observable by "uncultivated eyes" sure puts your creed in the realm of the supernatural.
The term uncultivated is mysterious in itself. It's as if you're saying our physical eye's have to change somehow in order to be able to observe these 'invisible' worlds?
I take it that these special worlds are not part of our known universe, but perhaps exists in some other dimension?

So far, you have no better case than anyone else who makes supernatural claims of realms beyond the human senses.
We can dream up whatever fantasy world we WISH to exist, but fantasy and/or wishful thinking does not change reality.

Can you prove these special worlds actually exist, other than with hearsay evidence?

You also speak of ghost and hell dwellers.
Well, if hell is not a physical place on this earth, then these "hell dwellers" have no more proof than the xtians have for their bible hell.

I also have never seen any valid proof for 'ghosts', so if you're stating that we have ghosts roaming this earth, then again, you need to prove that claim before anyone even mildly skeptical, is going to buy into that claim.
I have absolutely no reason to believe ghost are real, so you have a long ways to go to justify your claim of them....at least with me you do.


>>FYI: Whenever there was a war, there would be a baby boom. Also, some animals (such as coyotes) will have a baby boom when they are killed in large number.

While I won't deny that baby boom's occur AFTER a war is over with, I don't know why you feel this fact is caused by anything other than basic human nature, along with opportunity.

As far as animals repopulating after their population has suffered a tragedy, I see again no reason to think this has anything to do with more than them trying to get their numbers back to a level that their environment can support.

Are you making a supernatural claim that a given animal population; which dwindles or increases with their food supply, is instead responding to 'souls' looking for a home?
If so, you must already realize that you believe this on faith alone, as I can't see how it could be proven out.


>>Also FYI: 2600+ years ago, the Buddha repeatedly told us that he observed tens of thousands of sentient beings under even a droplet of water. Therefore, the monks were required to use a cloth net to filter the water from the rivers when taken for drinking. “This will minimize killing, though there will still beings that escaped the filter”, said the Buddha. Remember this was 2600+ years ago!

No way!!
Even if one supposed this Buddha had a microscope to see thousands of bacteria in a drop of water, one would then have to assume each bacteria was a sentient being in itself.
Sorry, you'll never convince me of that.

If this Buddha was right, then each time someone drank water, they landed up killing millions of innocent sentient beings.
Sounds to me like they should have stopped drinking water altogether, just to save millions of sentient beings, and gave up their own ONE human life instead.

Also, if this were true, then that would mean that each of us is composed of billions of tiny sentient beings.
Again, I'm not buying this....at all.

ATF:“Do souls/spirts 'mate' and produce new 'baby' souls, that would then take a physical human body?”

>>When souls/spirits mate, if the other soul is not ready to take over, the result will be a failed fertilization or a stillborn. Life reproduction (esp. in humans) is something other than mere genetic recombination. This explains why many fertile couples have difficulty in conception.

WOW, that's a real stretch of imagination, if you ask me.
So now you're saying that the failures some couples have to get pregnant, aren't caused by problems with their bodies or problems with their sperm/eggs, but these problems stem from spirits not yet ready to bond with a new life?

You also makes it sound like these souls can mate without a physical body....was that your intent?

ATF:“Do you believe (as some do) that former human souls also exist inside other life forms and if so, would our present lives determine if we next become human again (if we deserve it) or get reduced to an urban city Rat?”

>>Yes, I do. In fact, I have countless of reports of people who recall their former lives as animals and ghosts. If you observe carefully, the ghost and animal instincts are still within us. Therefore, to be a human and be able to hear the Dharma, even for a very short moment, is an extremely rare opportunity indeed. Please cherish it.

Sorry, I can't "cherish" something I've never experienced and most likely, never will.
I have no 'ghost' instincts in me and I suspect anyone who does, has a very active imagination going for them.

Now animal instincts might make some sense, but only because we evolved from lower life forms. i.e. animal ancestors.
That does NOT mean that if we feel animalistic that it's because of something coming from a spirit part of us.

ATF:“If this is your thinking, then what non-god force is determining who gets to be human and who becomes the Rat?”

>>In the universe, there are two great forces that determine your future destiny. The first is the karmic force. This is the force created by your past actions. It is like a seed planted into the soil. Under the correct circumstances it will sprout out and grow into the corresponding plants.

Okay, you have a theory here of karmic forces.
It doesn't matter who thought up this concept, but where is the proof such a 'force' exist?

On a side note, I have to wonder how it is that most of us have no idea about this force, but someone thousands of years ago figured it all out, without any technology to aid them in such a grand quest.

>> (Karmic force is so great that even a Buddha cannot escape the consequence when all the conditions ripened. The only difference is that a Buddha can ride through the consequence without suffering while we can’t.)

Again, how do you KNOW this is true?

Sounds very much like a fairy tale to me.
Let's suppose your assertion is true. How would any physical human come to realize this knowledge?
Sorry, but I didn't "get-the-memo" here on this.


>>The other is our will power. It is our mind that creates everything. In fact, the two great forces are the same – mind (or will) power. One is the past mind and the other is the present mind. An enlightened man will have a mind that can overcome the karmic force (or at least the sufferings) and to change his destiny. Therefore, if you have committed very heavy karma that is sucking you into the Rat domain, the only fighting force to get you out of this is your will power.

WHEW....so then where/what is this force of the universe, that would be responsible for sucking me into a Rat in my next life?
If our next life depends on what we do in this life, who/what is the great 'supervisor', making sure everyone follows the proper path in their destiny?
Are you saying it's our own minds;as if a human's mind is made stronger or weaker by how good/bad they were in this lifetime?

You can't tell me that this doesn't sound very far-fetched, right.

>>I shall use a past story to illustrate this point.

Listen my friend, Boomslang has a valid point here, in that stories won't do a thing to help your case here. I have no way of verifying such stories as being more than fables, and certainly no way to verify the details of such fables, aren't just hearsay or flat out lies.
If I thought the supernatural world was real and accessible by us, then your stories might be able to fine-tune my thinking about that unnatural world, but you have a long way to go to even prove such a supernatural world(s) exist to me.

Every group of folks who claim ANYTHING supernatural or incredible, have stories and other weak forms of so called 'evidence', but anytime one starts to look closely at their evidence, that evidence falls apart quickly.

If such things were of reality, then it should be EASY to prove them out and one shouldn't see them as rare happenings, nor should it be very hard to find credible evidence to support such claims. For some reason, the 'evidence' of such things never holds up under any scrutiny.


>>This is a common problem with our habit of understand and acceptance – Must we have legit study and belief that has been accepted by everyone in the world before we can accept it?

Frankly, YES!!!
Now I won't say the world has to be convinced, but at the very least, the results have to be verifiable and repeatable by those who don't have an agenda in the conclusion of such studies.
My experience with any group claiming something extraordinary, is that they mold the evidence to their liking.
i.e. they cheat, either intentionally or by ignorance of the scientific methods.


>>If you observe very carefully, a lot of useful knowledge was acquired long before the scientific community’s acceptance. One such example is the development of acupuncture. FYI: This art has been practiced extensively in almost all hospitals in China as a supportive anesthesia.

If you were looking to bolster your case to me by citing acupuncture, then I have to tell you that I'm a huge skeptic in the claims made for it.
Now it MIGHT be possible that one can use it to 'numb' certain nerves, even if that numbness is only in the belief that it will have such an effect, but anything beyond that use has no evidence to show it works as some say it does.

I do NOT think there is anything great about acupuncture and I certainly would never recommend it to heal a person.
There is no science behind the mechanism it claims as a basis for it working.
The tests I've seen done here in the USA, have yet to show it does anymore than relax a person, much as a good massage would also do.

>> When you are in grave danger needing such a procedure, will it be too late? I am not forcing an answer here, but I have a different view that I would like to share with you.

I don't think I'd ever be in 'grave danger' of needing acupuncture.
Thanks, but I'll just stick with proven medical methods, if you don't mind.

>>Therefore, everyone has a certain faith in something. Those who insisted that they are skeptics are having faith in doubting!

I think we would need to define what you mean by 'faith'.
I think there is some confusion about the difference between what you see as faith, and what I see as "earned TRUST".

I disagree that us skeptics have faith in doubting.
That makes it sound like we refuse to weigh the evidence of an assertion.
That said, I will say that we do not have the time to chase after the thousands of extraordinary claims that are made. Therefore, based on previous knowledge/experience, many claims must be dismissed from the start.

For instance, plenty of research has been done with the psuedo-science of divining for underground water. So if someone makes a claim that they have this talent, as some do each day of the week, then should we waste our time testing each and every person that makes this claim, or should we expend our energy/time looking at claims that are new?

We have many here in the USA who are sure ghost exists and that they can detect them, yet all their evidence so far is based on hearsay, natural explanations and their own minds creating the very evidence they seek to find.
Same for Aliens flying around in UFO's.


>>- When things are happening every day and is mainly (and easily) reproducible.
- When the mechanism of the phenomena makes sense under our prior knowledge. For example, we never actually see a neutrino from any apparatus, but we deduce its existence from its effect. We have never seen our ancestors but we accept it.

In both cases here you cite, we are not speaking about anything supernatural, so it's far easier to believe in their reality, than the claims you make sir.

ATF:“e.g. In the recent book "SPOOK" by Mary Roach, this reincarnation subject is …, but they failed every time to do so..”

>>As I have stated, not all the cases in past life recall is easily verifiable. May be most of the cases (say 99%) are fraud. However, without a full investigation, are you sure that 100% are untrue? Therefore, we must have an open mind and study the cases carefully. Without fully understanding the mechanism and hastily conclude that things are true or untrue is equally superstitious. Scientists are not immune to such mistakes.

So then tell me, if this rebirth process is so ever-present, then it should be EASY to find evidence of it and not have to weed through this 99% fraud rate.
Also, if it was real, then we wouldn't have this need for so many folks to be faking it, right.

So, if the best you can do is to find a mere 1% that aren't easily explained away, well, I'm sorry, but you'll have to do better to convince most of us here; I should think.

>>Finally, I would like to advise that Buddhism is not a religion, but rather, an education that only a very privileged group of people is able to fully understand and accept it. Those who can read the Chinese scripts and be able to access the original records are in extreme privilege because they can afford to analyze mountains of useful past records. I am spending my valuable time trying to introduce some information that you may never be able to access. However, unlike Christians, I am not forcing anyone to accept a blind faith.

It sure sounds like a religion to me, albeit, lacking some single creator god being.
It has all the elements of a religious belief.

It uses piss poor hearsay evidence, requires a ton of blind faith, requires a belief in things beyond the natural and spends a lot of it's energy trying to explain life.
From what I read, it's also very much about the quality of "righteousness", but uses that quest for living the right type of life, for the purpose of climbing the 'ladder' to a better next life.

What your 'religion' seems to be lacking, is a definitive force that is controlling all these claims you cite here. Without a god in control, then one has to speculate that when the universe was formed, that some part of it was made supernatural and some force of that realm is responsible for determining the destiny of every living thing on this planet...maybe even right down to an ameba; from the sounds of it.

Tell you what sir, I'll take a chance that your ideas here are only remotely possible, at best.
Given that I could pick a lot of things in life that have a remote chance of being factual, but choose to ignore such things for good reason, then why would I jump on your bandwagon without solid evidence for your claims?
That to me is no better than betting your week's salary on a race horse, just because some stranger whispered you a tip at the race track.

So, if I doomed to become a Rat in my next life, well, then I'm pretty sure it will be a SHORT life, as rats don't live very long, do they....LOL

BTW....just how would a rat know it has to live a proper life, in order to become a dog in the next life?
Do they just automatically move up the food chain ladder until they reach the human level, and it's only then that some invisible forces out there, decide on their next fate?

Frankly, your beliefs just sound like another means to get the vast majority to behave in a desired manner. Not really much different, than the way Chr