ADN

From the topic Reincarnation it can be said that most of us actually believe that souls reincarnate, however do all souls take another body after they abscond their own bodies and are bound to roam the streets without a body of their own?

If ghosts do exist then why cant they move on into another body and are left without one?

Also since they are in a totally different plane of existence how can they communicate with us if they can communicate with us?

Sorry to pose so many questions in one thread but they to me are all intertwined.

I am not so sure that "ghosts" exist...I do believe in the continuation of energy...But...Ghosts, in the traditional sense, seem a bit much...I would really like for us to define a ghost and go from there...I like this topic, and geting us some good, set definitions will give it some good depth I think....

By defintion ghosts are the supposed apparitions of the dead. A ghost is often thought to be the spirit or soul of a person who has remained on Earth after death. According to some sources, a ghost may be the personality of a person after their death, and not tied directly to the soul or spirit. Every culture in the world carries stories about ghosts, but they vary across time and place, with disagreements both as to what ghosts are and whether they exist in reality.


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghosts

Over here I guess I'm talking about the wandering souls without a body that are just there and not doing any harm to anyone or maybe even harming people you know. Just the wandering souls that are left on the same plane of existence as humanity.

one more question came to mind ... if ghosts are harming someone are they judged like we humans get judged?

Through karma etc... in the end its the soul is left with the karma of the actions of the body so when the soul acts without a body in an act; either harmful or good, is the karma affected?

I don't really believe in those kinds of ghosts I suppose...The ghosts of dead people...Hanks, or spooks as older people here would call them...I do, however, believe that there are some that move beyond this dimension, and in trying to appear into this one where they could be seen, they would be called ghosts...I believe that there are some peopel that have figured the way to navigate the astral plane, and in doing so, become "ghosts" or ghostly...I believe anyone that has seen a ghost, has seen the astral projection of not a dead person, but in fact a living one...

I believe in the power of the mind being so real, that we ourselves can create such apparitions, and they be very real to us, so much in fact, they could indeed appear to others...When you think of the many ways that energy can be moved and transformed, it is not as far fetched as it seems...If the mind can induce affliction as well as healing, why couldn't it move, shape, and form energy and matter..?

So, while I won't say the sixth sense is completely off the wall, I will definitely say that it can be looked at from another perspective...

Check it...I don't know if this counts as a ghost or not....The first time I can remember is at 4 years old...At night, a figure(ghost, apparition, etc.) would come into my room and take me various places. I would be conscious of where we went when I awoke. Some of the scenes I would encounter later on in life; some people I would meet later on as well...It was always a silhouette of a medium sized figure...My brother is my personal witness...Never tried to harm me...Just enlighten and take on a lot of trips to places that actually exist...Happened continuously until I was 13. I would often be tired the next morning from my travels...20+ years later, still searching for answers to this one...

Damn bro, that's crazy..

Was it a girl? Was she hot?

But I digress..

Ghosts exist I think, but not as commercially as some think (as in i dont buy the haunted house tv shows, etc)

Thats pretty much all i got to say on this..

this ties into all the other active posts, yah?

first law of thermodynamics, "Energy can not be created or destroyed." (this Infinity includes bioelectricty, yah?)

second law, "That which works ceases to work when it runs itself into the ground, or runs out of gas." (life includes death)

third, "letting a machine take a break will cool it off, and keep it from running int the ground." (we sleep to relax so we prolong the BIG SLEEP)

so, now look at this, the dilemma becomes "Is consciousness a form of energy? It is clearly not matter, though it is informed by it (most explicity in the form of the nervous system, and other sensory and bodily organs)." What happens the the energy of the consciousness when entropy enacts the break-down of the machine that informs it? If it is energy, than what form was it in before it converted into "consciousness?" Even still, what enacted that change? What is the catalyst for the conversion of energy into consciousness? Is there a catalyst for a further conversion? Is there a means by which to quantify it?

Thus you begin to see the basis of the conundrum of the philosopher, and the meaning behind the use of "Light" as a intangible but undeniable metaphor for the consciousness. By objectifying light as a means of approximating his consciousness, he develops a certain realization that is impossible to be communicated in lower octaves of energy, such as sound. Thus, it can be seen, but not shown, but only when certain lower visual and audible capactitors are there.

it is for this reason he says "This is a secret i can not reveal to you." It is by you very asking of this secret that you demonstrate you are not capable of buffering it within your consciousness. Thus, the first clue someone is not a guru is that they are looking for the guru. A master does not look for a Master, he knows there is nowhere to look and not see the Master! He is completely self-informed, and thus is his total annhilation complete. He is no fixed state, and thus no conversion from this no fixed state is possible. The man who seeks Life after Death foolishly believes he was the same man the instance before the present. We are in constant states of change. By myopically looking at the focused point of your immediate existence, you create a point of space and time in which you can ACT. But if you limit yourself to that, you will never detach yourself from your personal interests long enough to be aware of the non-atmomic infinity of your own consciousness.

He sums this by asking a series of questions, which only begin with such as "Does essence preceed existence? Does essence exceed the limitations of existence? If essence is not fully informed by existence, then in what composition or structure is the remainder of essence informed? What is the capacity for consciousness of the *remainder of that essence*? what are the limitations, in any, for interaction of the existing essence and the sum of the essence?"

The states of potential energy and kinetic energy teach us much about the modes of consciousness, and the inherit flaw in presuming that any fully kinetic force of energy (even that of consciousness) can not by nature be informed of matter. Therefore, there must, by nature, inform that part of yourself YOU ARE NOT, even as there is that part of yourself YOU ARE.

vertical,
raum