Every human being is god himself, but it does not understand its true self, and it is constantly engulfed by the influence of its mind, its intellect, which you call as a great illusion, says Vamsi Krishna.
All people are as droplets in an ocean, says David Icke.
And all it is, as everything else is, a choice. A choice between fear and love.
Mr Icke was previously a European footballer, free kicks and defensive walls. For life to be choice between fear or love, it would be the bipolar disorder.
He could be yet the most remarkable as the first in history Briton to claim that Shakespeare would not make it for a fish pond.
We can view “The Awakening of a New Wave of Consciousness” on YouTube.
Minds and words
The linguist I have been by profession, I may read words a bit different, with dictionaries and resources more. In Mr. Vamsi’s words, I sense some Latin. ■Divinus got interpreted into things godly after it was used for alternates with ■dividuus, partible. We may compare Emily Dickinson and her ■Exclusion.
The soul selects her own society,
Then shuts the door;
On her divine majority
Obtrude no more.
Mr. Vamsi would be saying that everybody is god, but nobody knows own true self or god part, because every person lives under own mind or brains, and these are illusions.
If the mind is an illusion, then any opinion by it is an illusion, inclusive of the opinion that the mind is an illusion.
Let me yet explain here already, I do not intend a religious contestation. My lifetime philosophy is my Fable of Philosopher Honeybee, emphatically not a doctrine.
ADVERTISEMENT
About Earth and Cosmos he said,
Perpetuum mobile was already with ancients a phrase for the impossible in a solitary thing, and the stars continue to show, Earth has been twirling itself and around the Sun, neither slowing nor going faster in the long run. It is improbable there would be nothing more than Earth.
The soul
Honeybee would agree there is strong probability that everyone has own soul indivisible, or everyone is own soul indivisible in own mortal body. The “divided ego” is a bodily ailment, and it takes more than muscle to flip sometimes. ■Shapely and Handsome have more.
God would be yet a Creator of a Living Day. There are no beings on Earth known for such skill, as it takes making cosmoses and free will in a bud, for every human being to have own. People are not gods.
Seeing the soul
To children, a rainbow is something vivid and real; but the grown-ups know that it is merely an illusion caused by certain rays of light and drops of water — says a Buddhist teaching to deny people have souls. [1]
Rainbows are physical phenomena and thus they are absolutely real, only not easy to touch. They do not prove the human soul — the quote does really say the soul is as difficult to the eye as a rainbow is to touch.
Soul recycling
Some Buddhist belief would say there is the soul. It is not much of a fancy prospect, as souls would be recycled — amnesic and also against will. To escape the recycling, you have to be your “own monarch” and of proper escape velocity. Admittedly, these are terms of politics and physics.
To try being king without proper office and stamps is obviously madness. You would rather be a mogul or tycoon, with proper inks.
Honeybee would say, the word “king” has come with the Greek kine as in kinesthesia, for doing things, that is, moving about too. Ability precedes the office, and the original idea as represented in the first trigram, sovereignty, is the kine of independent movement in man.
Those oldest as of now Greek scripts were possibly not the earliest, and this would be the southern, “green” Greek along with Phoenician, to explain on word origins as kw(e)n, for as able a queen, originally a ■girl. The letter symbol Y could make quite a story alone, see ■Wikipedia.
It could be by a physical process in part, that the indivisible has to leave the world of partible physics after the body dies. Soul recycling would be yet unlikely. All souls become on Earth. Everyone has one, own eternal fiber.
To recycle a soul you would need a “blank body”, without the fiber or soul, and such cannot live. Alternately, you would have to split the fiber — the indivisible — because there are more and more people on Earth. Neither would appeal to the philosopher.
Denial of the soul
There is yet also Buddhism that rejects the soul. The poem, the Exclusion, was created by “a collection of processes, not an entity”? The movie below explains, five aggregates together make an “illusion of a self”.
Honeybee would say, a linden tree may live a thousand years and blossom. Change or variance does not deny identity.
The Anatta
Entire collections of teachings were attributed to Siddhartha from reportedly a tradition that was ■spoken, and ■first committed to writing about 400 years after the Buddha’s death. The copies people have today are still younger and by no means ■autographs by the Buddha or his disciples.
Even the Buddha’s language is uncertain, speculation pointing to Middle Indo-Aryan dialects and particularly ■Pali. The time the ■Anatta emerged is not known. It might have been late Middle Ages: the ■Middle Indo-Aryan period ended around 1500 after Christ.
Possibly, the early learner got hold of Grecian writings in the meantime. Those happened to be misunderstood, on being.
A Shapely and Handsome Fable, chapter 5
True Being is not a person.
To reckon on teachings, Honeybee would think about a garden. It agrees with the Great Design to have beautiful orchards. If Buddhist ideas do not meet the expectation with regard to horticulture, they could not be fitting to express lore about human beings.
■Upanishadic concepts are worded today as,
□ All psycho-physical processes (skandhas) are impermanent;
Should all life in a garden be evergreen?
□ If there were a self, it would be permanent;
Should all fruit always be on trees?
□ If the self existed it would be the part of the person that performs the executive function, the “controller”;
Should we decide the size of the fruit or not have it?
□ The self could never desire that it be changed (“anti-reflexivity principle”);
Should we never plant new trees?
□ Each of the five kinds of psycho-physical elements is such that one can desire that it be changed.
Should we plant new trees every year?
The Upanishadic conclusion is ― There is no self.
Honeybee conclusion is, if you can, you’d better have a beautiful orchard.
Honeybee offered an exercise where you envisioned a vastness and placed objects of thought. You could say, it was to be done by the ego or self. Naturally, you could imagine a beautiful orchard.
The skandha
A Buddhist skandha means a heap, aggregate, collection, or grouping. It refers to five aggregates, that “constitute and completely explain mental and physical existence of sentient beings”, says ■Wikipedia.
You add up or merge the five and you get a human being you totally understand, they actually say, without any reasoning on horticulture.
The aggregates
The five Buddhist aggregates or heaps would be:
(1) rupa, the form, matter, or body;
(2) vedana, sensations or feelings;
(3) samjna, perceptions;
(4) sankhara mental activity or formations;
(5) vijnana, consciousness.
The aggregates and the verb “to be”
The verb to be is a wonderful test on things of the mind and the world around. Whether you hold the world for your reality or not — some Buddhist teachings would say the world is not real — you live a form of existence.
The verb phrase, “to live a form of existence” meets the requirements for a reality. If you wrote in figures, you could say all people are realities, and those meet only sometimes.
Honeybee’s ideal is to live one, own life, here and After, with kindness. With this regard, the verb to be needs to work as the verb to be, or an argument is fallen, or not fitting at least.
Rupa
(1) The first skandha brings form, matter, and body under one term, rupa.
If we carved a word in wood — let us say the word is you — and then wrote it in ink or printed it out, it would be the same bodily representation in form, and different material realizations.
In simple words, it would be visibly the same word, you, carved in wood, written in ink or printed.
In everyday life, we do not just carve words, and if we put them to note, they are more than one word. It makes a difference if we have a piece of wood, a book, or a copybook, when we think about words.
Form is not the same thing as matter, and thus the skandha does not truly exist. We cannot use the verb to be for it, because rupa would be and not be at the same time, and this is not the way we feel about cash, either.
Vedana
(2) The second skandha generalizes feeling and emotion into “sensations received from form”, vedana. Since the Buddhist form would belong under the same term with body and matter (rupa), a prod would be the same as a sentiment. We cannot have the verb to be with the second skandha. It is not objectively real.
Samjna, sankhara, and vijnana
(3) The third skandha separates perception, samjna, from (4) activity of own mind, sankhara, and (5) consciousness, vijnana.
Honeybee says, the Great Design does not allow any separation of the soul indivisible from the body during earthly life. Separate, the indivisible has to leave, and the body dies.
Many people would have stayed on Earth as ghosts at least, to help their little children or other beloved, only if it were possible. Apart from folk tales, there could be infinity phenomena, where you might have impressions or visions, but your indivisible remains in your body.
For consciousness to be separate from the mind and perception, no brain would care to work, and thus again, we cannot have the verb to be for the aggregates. We keep the brain. It came with the Natural Design we may also know by the name of evolution.
Says Honeybee, we do not have to follow any one description of the senses exactly. The tongue may touch places in the mouth when man speaks; it is inner touch then. Further, there couldn’t be anything wrong with counting a mild sense of humor with the good sense.
ADVERTISEMENT
It is the inner common sense, together with the imagine power, to help learn spirituality and coherence in mind and body. No one is born with faith. Man is only born with own soul.
Contradictory vocabulary
The word ■gautama may also mean poison, and the vocabulary generally brings juxtaposition, to compare the Spoken Sanskrit for ■skandha, ■rupa, ■vedana, ■samjna, ■sankhara, ■vijnana.
The word form “skandha” alone may bring meanings as a branch, a war, or evil — and religion. Skandhā-pasmāra may mean a demon causing a particular disease, and skandha-şaşthīvrata may indicate a particular religious observance.
Nothing more to us people?
There is nothing more to us than just those skandhas, Wikipedia quotes Mark Siderits. [2]
The full form of the above yet should be, to our discernment, living in the mortal bodily form, in a mortal, partible physics world, we cannot see anything more to ourselves as human beings than 5 ideas developed in starving India.
There would not be much sense trying to embrace all of the humanity with such a statement, and thus it cannot be representative of the human being.
Alternately, the 5 ideas would be as telling everyone they’re no one, an impolite concept.
If you deny the human soul any existence, or if you would recycle the soul, you do get close to impressing of such a view — that everyone is no one, certainly soulless or in this life before the next — unless you refer your belief to yourself strictly and other people who keep their reference the same, to themselves.
The Buddha starved
The Buddha starved to meditate. The spoken tradition tells he even fainted during the practice. His observations might have been early reasoning on stochastic and deterministic modes of brain neural networks, standard for human neurophysiology today. It is enough to focus to perceive them, without hunger or stress. Feel welcome to try. The exercise is for grammar, not religion.
■Grammar Weblog, Mind practice.
The ego and self
If the woman in the video about soul recycling told her teaching in the first person singular, it would sound another set of ideas.
Her words would be as,
Spiritual amnesia puts me in repeated cycles; there is a nefarious nature with this; you can trace it back to narcissism; it is definitely gnostic to think so. The more I am in the state of amnesia, the more I am having my free will revoked. Amnesia is placed over my soul; it is instead of my conscious decision …
Things sound different when we refer to other people. It is not unusual that such reference turns out to be a projection from own self, and it is in own self that we should reconsider.
For the starving Buddha we may reckon, a starved human being may lose his or her somatesthesia. Dependent on translation, if you say there is no self anymore, you could be telling you cannot feel your body anymore, as when fainting.
What is certain, you need your soul, your own spiritual self that is, to have afterlife at all. You only cannot expect of this mortal world to tell you about the After.
ADVERTISEMENT
About life he said,
Earthly reality may show some heuristics for the lasting or eternal form. Mortality yet cannot demonstrate immortality; like under water, you don’t really smell the roses.
Endnotes
[1] What Buddhists Believe: Is There Eternal Soul? ■Screenshot | ■live page.
[2] Buddhist philosophy, Mark Siderits: “What the Buddhist has in mind is that on one occasion one part of the person might perform the executive function, on another occasion another part might do so. This would make it possible for every part to be subject to control without there being any part that always fills the role of controller (and so is the self). This would explain how it’s possible for us to seek to change any of the skandhas while there is nothing more to us than just those skandhas.” ■Screenshot | ■live page.
