Dan/who incarnates?

[Guest guest]

Hi Xanma,

>>Dan: What isn't clear here when reading such

>>statements is "who" incarnates. If there is only Self, how can

>>incarnation be described as beginning or ending?

>

>Just as there is the apparency of a physical body which we perceive through

>the senses of that body (and we sanely act-as-if is real) there are more

>subtle bodies. The mental and emotional functions are less dense

>configurations of energy than the physical and could be thought of as mental

>and emotional "bodies" because they are unitary - unique to each apparent

>individual within common structures. Other bodies have temporary existence

>also, of longer duration than the physical, made of consciousness and finer

>expressions of energy, bonded with and yet able to function without the

>physical form. They are what incarnate.

 

Just a semantic quibble:

I was going to say that the word means to be in a body and therefore it is

not the body that incarnates. But I checked the dictionary, and as I read

the various definitions, it seems to me that the word can be used _either

way_. ) "Joe is incarnating Shiva" and "Shiva is incarnating as Joe"

seem to both be acceptable uses of the word. An "incarnation" can mean the

form that embodies the spirit, god, quality, etc., or it can mean the

spirit, god, or quality that is embodied in the form.

>All forms appear within and as

>expressions of Self.

 

DK says that, looking up from a plane/level of consciousness, the higher

plane appears to be spirit. But looking down from a plane, the lower

plane appears to be a body. In my experience this seems to be so. So from

the point of view of whatever plane a man is identified with, is really

living on, everything higher seems to be spirit. But from the highest, the

entire manifested creation is the body/bodies of the All. Even Goddess

Shakti is a body or incarnation... some say the first... the first

emanation.

>The physical brain and DNA are structures which hold memory

>in the carnal form. More subtle bodies also have structures of memory which

>account for continuity of themes through serial incarnations.

>

>What is surprising to me is not that these more subtle energy forms exist,

>but that the veils of mind in "this world" most often serve to block human

>awareness of a greater subtlety of life forms and memory beyond the material

>dimension. Not to mention, of course, the rarity of awareness of the eternal

>silent foundation from which all these appearances arise.

 

After his mescaline experiences as the "guinea pig" of some psychiatrists,

Aldous Huxley wrote in _The Doors of Perception_ that the physical brain

blocks the perception of much of what exists... and that that is necessary

for us to exist as humans. Abstraction... _not seeing_ most of what is,

in order that we _can_ be aware of this limited part of the world where we

live as human. You may remember Jerry's posts about the woman who suddenly

lost all sense of ego, of any "I." It seemed to me that she had probably

had a stroke that destroyed that part of the brain function that is

involved in the separative function of being aware as ego, as an "I."

 

Love,

Dharma

 

P.S. And if I'm not making any sense, blame the flu bug... I've got a

little relapse. Going back to bed...

[Guest guest]

--- Xanma wrote:

> <Dan: What isn't clear here when reading such

> statements is "who" incarnates. If there is only

> Self, how can

> incarnation be described as beginning or ending?

>

> Any other comments that might shed light here would

> be appreciated.

 

Namaste All,

 

It is my understanding that the only thing that really

incarnates is the tendencies or samskaras etc that are

imprinted.

 

More specifically the anandamayakosa and the

vjnanamayakosa( the annamya, lower-pranamaya and

manomayakosas disintegrate on the death of the

inividual or sometime afterwards), are what incarnate

and this is what we call the 'soul'.

 

It is a thought entity, for there is only one soul in

the universe. As these descend or take rebirth the

'entity', attracts to it the vibrations left at lower

levels like the material plane from previous

incarnations.

 

Depending on one's state of awareness etc at death

one goes to the lower planes and takes a form, much

like one has here in appearance, one's mind creates

the form and even the surroundings in concert with

like minded people. If one goes to a higher plane one

takes a somewhat amorphous light energy form, not

recognisable as a late human. Here and on lower planes

learning still continues between incarnations. The

higher planes are very blissful and the very low

planes are the hellish planes. Most ordinary folks are

in the middle planes.

All in the one illusory mind though ha ha!!

 

Some entities get stuck in the bardo after death and

become pretas, they don't drop the lower bodies

properly.

 

A great number of unenlightened souls, remain

virtually unconscious between incarnations.

 

So the ego/mind incarnates with it's tendencies.

Just my view on it. Although it has also been my

experience, on visiting people after they have died.

 

God plus thought equals man, Man minus thought equals

God.

Love, Om Namah Sivaya, Tony.

 

=====

Keep on truckin-Chant the Gayatri! Breathe So----Ham!

http://members.xoom.com/aoclery/sanskritglos.htm

 

ASATHO MA SATH GAMAYA, From the unreal lead me to the real,

THAMASO MA JYOTHIR GAMAYA, From darkness, lead me to light,

MRITHYOR MA AMRITAM GAMAYA.From death, lead me to immortality.

OM, SHANTI SHANTI SHANTI. Om, Peace Peace Peace.

 

 

Talk to your friends online with Messenger.

http://im.