Forum
- Home
- Forum
Notifications
Clear all
General Discussion
24
Posts
12
Users
0
Reactions
1,808
Views
Topic starter
If an incorporeal, eternal, infinite realm exists beyond this corporeal, temporal, finite realm – which, as I’ve explained in another thread, I believe to be factually the case – what then is death?
I’m going to answer this question (or do my best to answer this question) in a slightly round-about fashion.
My mother, ever since I had known her (which was, of course, from my birth) and before I knew her, was a spiritual person. I don’t mean spiritual in the religious sense, although a religion (Christian Science – or more specifically, Mary Baker Eddy and her book, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures) was the founder/initiator and, she would say, the daily replenisher, of her spirituality. What I mean by her being a spiritual person is that she believed in – or KNEW – the existence of a reality beyond this physical reality, of a spiritual reality. This belief or knowledge infused her being and emanated from her. When a stranger talked to her, they knew instantly that this was not an ordinary person. They FELT the emanation of her spirituality – and what they felt was love. She emanated love, increasingly as she got older – and closer to the end of this physical life. She called absolute strangers dear and honey – and meant it. You could tell. It was in her kindness and concern for you. She was outward directed. As a result, nearly all who met her, loved her back. You couldn’t help it. When you are loved, that love calls to your own love, which flows out from you toward the source of that call in response. Not that mother called for or required your love. It was essentially a one way flow – outward. And it washed out upon all she met.
Except, in a sense, niggers – when they behaved like niggers. Mother was a racist – I suppose you could say and jews would say. “Damned nigger!” she said out-loud one day in her 80's when she was driving, slightly hair-raisingly for me, and a nigger cop stopped us stupidly and purposelessly to let some other car turn left ahead of us. She was a southern girl, after all, in fact a southern belle, an extraordinary southern beauty as a young woman. If you saw the early pictures of her, they would almost take your breath away – that kind of Aryan beauty. Long natural slightly wavy auburn hair, a lightly freckled complexion, perfect facial features, a beautiful body, and lovely deep blue eyes. She was Scottish by ancestry. Anyway, as a Southern girl, she understood niggers very well – as only those who have been around them for a good portion of their lives, can. She certainly didn’t “hate” them. But she considered them children – who, as children do, need to be externally controlled and disciplined, since they lack internal discipline mechanisms – or they’ll run you and everything around them over. She told me this. Was she wrong? But, yes, her love washed over niggers as well – insofar as they behaved as humans. And those niggers who were capable of so doing, loved her in return. Fortunately, for her, she didn’t have to be around niggers much when she was between the ages of 18 and 57, because she lived mostly overseas during those years – and, indeed, met my father in Berlin and married him there, before the jews’ WWII – when Berlin was the most wonderful city in the world and Hitler was in charge. But, when she was 57 (and Dad was 62), Dad retired and Dad and Mom returned to Florida (with its inevitable American and Haitian niggers) to live out the remainder of their days on earth (at least until the next go round, if there is such). She lived there to age 89, Dad to 95.
She died without fear, as I told you in another thread. I was with her a few days before she died. She was looking forward, not to her death, but to her LIFE, to the next phase of her life, to her change in life. She told me so. And you could tell it was true.
Death isn’t death, but change – change in life.
I’ve often wondered, as many of us have at some point, how God (remember I believe, in my areligious way, in a God) – if God is good, if God is love (as my mother always told me) – how could God have conceived of a universe with an Earth with life on it struggling with so much pain, so much death. I think I understand now. He didn’t. There is no death, no individual death. Oh, there is pain. There is killing. There is murder. But there is no death.
There is only change. That is an ancient Aryan wisdom – and that wisdom is well illustrated, in case you have ever seen it, by today’s Tibetan Buddhist monks’ sand-painting ceremony – in which they work collectively for days creating a huge, intricate, truly beautiful, work of art, a mandala, made solely from patterns of variously colored sand, a sand-painting. And then, when it is completed and lovely and contemplated, they brush every grain of sand up and put all the sand, formless once more, back into a bottle. And then throw the sand into a river, the river of life. The Buddhistic lesson here is acceptance, acceptance of change, of death, of reality.
There is no stasis. Only endless flux and variation. We can’t stop change any more than we can stop the source of change – time. All things in the universe endlessly change. If death is change, change is death. What appears to us to be death of life is change of life. Each day, the you that was you yesterday dies – and is forever gone. But the you of today, lives, although you are unstoppably a slightly different you. And so it is on our last day – and on the day after our last day.
One of Darwin’s greatest contributions was in scientifically deepening our understanding of life as endless variation and of the implications of that in the death and creation of species. Evolution requires, happens only because of, change, variation. Variation of the species. Not only individuals, but the species to which they belong is ever changing. The lion of today, as a species, will never ever quite be the same species tomorrow. What is true of species is true of the flora/fauna, taken whole, of the world – ever changing, ever dying, ever being reborn. Adding new species, species dying out, species changing – always. This is why creationism ultimately is against the law of the universe. It implies stasis. Stasis is contrary to the universal law of change. It cannot be. God did not create “lions.” God created Change. Evolution – which in turn created and still creates, moment to moment, the universe.
Before there was death, there was no life. Life cannot be without death. Evolution of life-forms without death cannot proceed to newer, higher forms. If there had been no death in the world, there would be no humans. The evolution of human beings required and require death – as the forward propellant of higher and higher human evolution. Out with the old, in with the new. Now, the evolutionary process for humans has reversed – downward, less and less complex, lower and lower. But the fact of change remains. The only stasis is the stasis of change.
There is no death. And there is always death. But death isn’t death. It is life.
Posted : 02/12/2006 12:00 pm
Lions and Negroes are not evolving, they are static.
Buddhism is just a primitive beleif-system, and Darwinism is just a theory.
Only the White race has the ability to evolve toward a higher level of being.
It is our destiny to move beyond planet earth and colonize the universe.
The only thing stopping us is the jewish drag-factor.
God manifests himself in the laws of nature, and nature's greatest manifestation is the white race.
If God created man in his image, then that means soley the White-man, for it is only the white race that is truly creative.
The White man invents and forgets.
The yellow man copies and remembers.
The black man does neither.
Posted : 02/12/2006 9:00 pm
Got me! I read halfway through that and was starting to mellow into it until I hit the evolution crap. I thought it was some meaningful, sincere essay, but it turned out to be another evolutionist rant.
We're all changing, dude! Rock on...
Vote from the rooftops
Posted : 02/12/2006 9:32 pm
Devere, I approach your writings with a bit of cautiousness, as one would wading into a deep river! 
(Sometimes I find myself in too deep, with the water over my head, LOL).
Greek philosopher Parmenides believed in something beyond our mere life, a lifeforce independent of our physical body. Death was a rebirth, because once something existed, it could not not exist.
Existence can not exchange places with non-existence. It is impossible to think of something that does NOT exist. Something can not become nothing.
Thinking and being are the same…you will not find thinking apart from what is, for thought is OF what is.
Posted : 02/12/2006 9:38 pm
Topic starter
Lions and Negroes are not evolving, they are static.
Nothing is static. Law of nature. The lion, if it survives the negro in Africa (which is unlikely), in 50,000 years will be different from the lion of today. At the least, genetic drift. The unmixed variety of negro is DE-volving because White medicine and do-gooders are intervening to save those nature would not have saved.
Buddhism is just a primitive beleif-system, and Darwinism is just a theory.
There is such a thing as truth. Truth can be discovered at any time. Ancient Aryans discovered much truth thousands of years ago. The truth of that truth remains valid today. Evolution is a scientific theory]Only the White race has the ability to evolve toward a higher level of being.
I believe this.
It is our destiny to move beyond planet earth and colonize the universe.
Yes it is. We must awaken and then fight to fulfill that destiny.
The only thing stopping us is the jewish drag-factor.
True.
God manifests himself in the laws of nature, and nature's greatest manifestation is the white race.
Yes, he must have created those laws and in them he is manifested. Re us as nature's greatest manifestation. On planet Earth, yes. And perhaps in the entire universe. This is a possibility -- although the universe is large beyond our comprehension and the number of potentially life supporting planets number, no doubt, in the billions, perhaps trillions.
If God created man in his image, then that means soley the White-man, for it is only the white race that is truly creative.
I don't believe that God created man, at least not physical man. He created the laws and context that created man. We are what we have made ourselves to be over tens of thousands of years. And we will survive if WE allow ourselves to survive.
The White man invents and forgets.
The yellow man copies and remembers.
The black man does neither.
Nice too-true distinctions.
Posted : 02/12/2006 9:52 pm
Topic starter
Got me! I read halfway through that and was starting to mellow into it until I hit the evolution crap. I thought it was some meaningful, sincere essay, but it turned out to be another evolutionist rant.
We're all changing, dude! Rock on...
I like your mandala.
If you read as far as the evolution truth, then you got 3/4ths the way through my little essay. That's not bad -- and was good for you. Now finish it.
We're all changing. Yes. Not many people realize that truth in depth, however.
Posted : 02/12/2006 9:56 pm
Topic starter
[
QUOTE=MacManus]Devere, I approach your writings with a bit of cautiousness, as one would wading into a deep river!
(Sometimes I find myself in too deep, with the water over my head, LOL).
I'll take that as a compliment -- I think. Whenever I sit down to put my serious thoughts into written form, I'm not trying very much to entertain or impress, but to communicate. I WANT you to understand what I WANT to tell you. If you, as an intelligent White man, don't understand my writings, then to that degree I have failed -- although I don't believe in writing down. I write my best about what are my best thoughts. The writing of others which I like best is clear and deep and true -- as truth. And that's what I strive for too.
Greek philosopher Parmenides believed in something beyond our mere life, a lifeforce independent of our physical body. Death was a rebirth, because once something existed, it could not not exist.
Existence can not exchange places with non-existence. It is impossible to think of something that does NOT exist. Something can not become nothing.
Yes. This seems true to me. Although, whatever exists -- changes, always, unstoppably. In that sense, whatever exists both never dies and always dies.
Thinking and being are the same…you will not find thinking apart from what is, for thought is OF what is.
Yes. Thinking is being because being is thinking. This suggests levels of being, just as there are levels of thinking -- both among human beings and among species. This is why we, justifiably I believe, feel far less compunction and hesitation about killing a fly than we do about killing a fellow White man. The fly has orders less being -- existence. Killing a fly is less lethal an act.
Posted : 02/12/2006 10:27 pm
A very beautiful piece about your mother. Is there life after death?.. I doubt it, even though I wish there was. A Roman naval general I read said that what you experience after death is probably the same as what you experience before you were born.
I think consciousness is probably an emergent ability in a massively complex, massively parralel computing device. For example our brains estimate by neural scientists and computer scientists is that it calculates about 1 million times more operations per second then a 2005 intel desktop processor. And of course the two are quite different computing architectures.. for example you can't just run software on the brain.
So when your own massively complex brain dies, in that case so too does your consciousness 'shut down'.
Still even though someone might be shut down... it doesn't mean their impact is dead. Their biological legacy still goes on, especially if they breed well. Their contribution to human civilization even if very small still has a lasting impact. For example lets say you purchase a new computer.. on some level you are having a non-zero contribution to the development of computers.
And through writing and discussing ideas with others you are hopefully part of the increased understanding of humanity. We still read philosophers thousands of years after their death.
Posted : 02/12/2006 10:35 pm
In my opinion, death is a permanent state of unconsciousness. I hope. I'll have had enough of myself and life on Earth by the time my candle is out.
Posted : 02/12/2006 10:38 pm
Topic starter
In my opinion, death is a permanent state of unconsciousness. I hope. I'll have had enough of myself and life on Earth by the time my candle is out.
🙂
I understand -- though I don't share your opinion. I like consciousness, life -- at least as a White man. But, in any case, I think you may not get the luxury of the unconsciousness you feel ready for. I suspect your (and my) education is not yet complete -- and that graduation lies many many lifetimes ahead.
Posted : 02/12/2006 10:49 pm
Topic starter
A very beautiful piece about your mother.
Thank you. She became more beautiful with age. And she became more beautiful in my ability to appreciate her beauty -- with my age.
Is there life after death?.. I doubt it, even though I wish there was. A Roman naval general I read said that what you experience after death is probably the same as what you experience before you were born.
But does our inability to remember life before birth mean there isn't life before birth. I think not.
I think consciousness is probably an emergent ability in a massively complex, massively parralel computing device. For example our brains estimate by neural scientists and computer scientists is that it calculates about 1 million times more operations per second then a 2005 intel desktop processor. And of course the two are quite different computing architectures.. for example you can't just run software on the brain.
So when your own massively complex brain dies, in that case so too does your consciousness 'shut down'.
This is logical and a good analogy. But I look at the mind a little differently. The physical brain we were born with is the tool or mechanism we use (are stuck with) in this lifetime. Who is "we"? I've asked this question in another thread. Is "we" the sum total of the stored memory and thoughts and feelings contained by this physical brain? Or is there an aspect of consciousness -- the I that is I and not you -- independent of the physically created mind? I think the latter is the case. And I have reasons to so think -- as I am still in the process of explaining in another thread.
Still even though someone might be shut down... it doesn't mean their impact is dead. Their biological legacy still goes on, especially if they breed well. Their contribution to human civilization even if very small still has a lasting impact. For example lets say you purchase a new computer.. on some level you are having a non-zero contribution to the development of computers.
And through writing and discussing ideas with others you are hopefully part of the increased understanding of humanity. We still read philosophers thousands of years after their death.
Yes. This is true. And particularly true within our own race. I have a feeling that if our race succumbs to the jew murder of us, then even the Chinese (if they survive the coming attempted jew murder of them), near our equals though they may be, will probably not care too deeply about Michelangelo's "David" (a statue of a White man after all, not a Chinese) or even about Aristotle or even about Shakespeare -- BECAUSE they weren't Chinese. Of course, they'll still use some version of cars and planes -- but it will be their versions. In the sense of life after death you allude to here -- that too will mostly vanish if our race vanishes.
Posted : 02/12/2006 11:08 pm
If an incorporeal, eternal, infinite realm exists beyond this corporeal, temporal, finite realm – which, as I’ve explained in another thread, I believe to be factually the case – what then is death? SNIP
Although I usuallly like your thoughtfull if somewhat dry posts, this one is a dud.
Perhaps you are waxing poetic in the rememberance of your beloved mother.
Perhaps you are considering your own "mortality".
Don't know either way but I F****** hate this one; I feel like I was sucker-punched.
Darwin tried to "scientize" ideas that preceded him by millenia.......with the exception of perhaps usefull data of the detail variety, his work sucked eggs.
Please, try again.
Posted : 02/12/2006 11:27 pm
Yes. This is true. And particularly true within our own race. I have a feeling that if our race succumbs to the jew murder of us, then even the Chinese (if they survive the coming attempted jew murder of them), near our equals though they may be, will probably not care too deeply about Michelangelo's "David" (a statue of a White man after all, not a Chinese) or even about Aristotle or even about Shakespeare -- BECAUSE they weren't Chinese. Of course, they'll still use some version of cars and planes -- but it will be their versions. In the sense of life after death you allude to here -- that too will mostly vanish if our race vanishes.
Well that is the great travesty.. so far when the great white civilizations have fallen apart there still has been a great lasting impact. Like the laws and government structure we have today is based off of Rome. And our science off of Greek philosophy and scientists. Yet at the same time a great many inventions were lost.. Its not just the great peoples works lost though, but the combined efforts of all the people in the civilization. The only honorable way to me to die is to do all that work, then be outclassed by another great civilization, and merge into it.
The worst outcome I imagine is what happened to the arabs from race mixing. These great cities with their scientists and invention, yet 30 generations later the savage remnants of that civilization stand amongst its ruins. Or herd their goats through the ruins, and desert where once there was forests. And most can't even conceive of the algebra and algorithims that their part ancestors discovered. Because their own brain isn't sophisticated enough from down-mixing.
Posted : 02/12/2006 11:30 pm
Topic starter
Although I usuallly like your thoughtfull if somewhat dry posts, this one is a dud.
Perhaps you are waxing poetic in the rememberance of your beloved mother.
Perhaps you are considering your own "mortality".
Don't know either way but I F****** hate this one]Sorry you feel that way, Ajax. Joseph, I gather, felt sucker-punched too with Darwin. I've been surprised by the emotionality of people's response to Darwin and his theory of evolution. Folks either love him or hate him, accept his theory as fact or hate it as a lie and an attack on creationism and, I suppose, Christianity. As you likely know, I think evolution is a fact and that evolution and creationism (at inception) are not mutually exclusive. I also think that evolution of life cannot proceed without the fact and mechanism of death. For that reason, any fairly extensive discussion of death must involve, at some point, a discussion of evolution. That's how it came up again here.
Posted : 03/12/2006 9:04 am
Sorry you feel that way, Ajax. Joseph, I gather, felt sucker-punched too with Darwin. I've been surprised by the emotionality of people's response to Darwin and his theory of evolution. Folks either love him or hate him, accept his theory as fact or hate it as a lie and an attack on creationism and, I suppose, Christianity. As you likely know, I think evolution is a fact and that evolution and creationism (at inception) are not mutually exclusive. I also think that evolution of life cannot proceed without the fact and mechanism of death. For that reason, any fairly extensive discussion of death must involve, at some point, a discussion of evolution. That's how it came up again here.
I was raised an xian, thus taught to hate Darwin. Later, in college we studied some of his stuff, and I came to be a believer...somewhat.
I can definitely see the logic behind evolution, but I fail to see how evolution explains the "origin" of anything.
Posted : 03/12/2006 9:29 am
Page 1 / 2
Next