When does the soul enter the body?

[karo]

The Atman,Soul,or Supreme Self is housed in

the vehicle of the physical body.The body can

bleed,be made wet,or burnt to ashes;however,

such things do not effect the Soul.Christians

believe that the wicked shall be burned in the hereafter,but how does one burn spirit?

The act of burning is a physical-chemical ex-

perience wherein stored energy is released.

The physical body will be reduced to ashes

through cremation;however the Soul is released to return to its eternal abode..or

so it is for the liberated Soul.The Supreme

Self is without a beginning,undifferentiated,

deathless.Though it dwells in the body,Arjuna,it neither acts nor is touched by action.-BhagavadGita:13:31.

[Guest guest]

And if the soul "descends from the heavenly realm through the rain, and enters into the grains" then how about people who do not eat vegetables?

 

And someone has mentioned the Eskimos, as an example of that kind.

 

As it was explained in a former post, the cycle that ascends and descend from Svarga (haven) is named the 5th oblation cycle. Only very exalted people may follow this path. It is not an ordinary path.

 

There is another path coming from prti-loka (4th oblation cycle) and there is another one that is coming from lower species (3rd oblation). This 3rd cycle is very fast, that's to say, one receives another body immediately after his death.

 

Those who are placed in the lower stages of human life follow this 3rd cycle, and may permute some births in animal species until they ascend to an upper human condition.

 

[shvu]

 

I have always wondered how does medical science not accept existence of a soul.

Because there isn't the slightest indication anyhwere in nature to show that there may be a soul, except in old religious books which all differ among themselves. The same books also talk about people walking on water, dancing on the heads of snakes (which have multiple heads), etc. Thus it is only logical that they are not taken seriously.

 

I may be grossly mistaken but once I thought about what exactly happens when a human dies? Everything "material" or "physical" that existed when someone was alive also exists when death occurs. So what is the difference between a dead body and a live body. Soemthing that used to operate that mass which is "dead" has disappeared now resulting in death.

I would not say disappeared. Something that was functioning is not functioning anymore.

 

When a bullet pierces a body. it takes away nothing "physical"? Then why does one die?

When we buy light bulbs, its life is indicated as 1000 hrs or such. When the bulb eventually dies out, nothing physical is taken away. Then why does it die?

 

Cheers

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Can someone please tell me whats the difference between "Atma" and "Atman"?

Atman is the crude form of the noun, whereas AtmA is the nominative case of the noun.

 

The rule is if the crude form ends in 'n' and the noun is not neuter, then the 'n' is dropped and the last vowel is lengthened. Thus:

 

brahman becomes brahmA (The creator.)

 

Atman becomes AtmA

 

yogin becomes yogI

 

Thus there is no difference between AtmA and Atman other than one's preference.

 

Shvu:

Because there isn't the slightest indication anyhwere in nature to show that there may be a soul...

You must be trying very hard to keep your eyes closed. Not the slightest indication?

 

 

When we buy light bulbs, its life is indicated as 1000 hrs or such. When the bulb eventually dies out, nothing physical is taken away. Then why does it die?

Good example, but for the wrong side. It's because the filament has broken. Try this experiment. Take a light bulb that has burnt out. Then shake it to get the two broken filaments to touch each other. Slowly put the bulb back in the socket, and presto - its alive again. Try that with a human.

 

Up till now there isn't the slightest indication as to what it is that causes life to stop existing in a body. Therefore, intelligent people like yourself naturally ignore the speculative hypotheses of confused scientists. Well, not really, but anyway, you get the idea.

 

[Guest guest]

Originally posted by shvu:

When we buy light bulbs, its life is indicated as 1000 hrs or such. When the bulb eventually dies out, nothing physical is taken away. Then why does it die?

 

 

Even a scientist who has never heard "sruti" will tell you that the SUM can be greater than the total of the parts

 

 

[Gauracandra]

I thought the lightbulb analogy was good but reversed. When a lightbulb dies, the energy source is still there. Its not that the electricity disappears. As soon as another suitable lightbulb is put it, once again it comes to life.

 

Gauracandra

[shvu]

 

Up till now there isn't the slightest indication as to what it is that causes life to stop existing in a body.

 

Life goes out when the body cannot function anymore which can happen for various reasons. It is purely physical and is clearly obvious to anyone...when the eyes are open and the mind is unbiased, that is.

 

Therefore, intelligent people like yourself naturally ignore the speculative hypotheses of confused scientists. Well, not really, but anyway, you get the idea.

Confused scientists? Science is used by the 'pure' devotees whenever it is convenient. But if there is any indication of it threatening their religious beliefs, they switch to contempt towards scientists.

 

It is fear and nothing else. Fear that such a discovery will upset their cherished religious beliefs. Having the carpet pulled from under their feet is not what anyone would like.

 

Cheers

 

[dubeyrakesh]

I think the lightbulb example can help further enlighten us. When a bulb fails, we can follow the science and do something to make it work again. We cant do that something for a dead body.

Agreed that the failing of bulb and body are both examples of "Something that was functioning is not functioning anymore". But science provides "exact" reason and remedy for the bulb but not for the body (Actually my question was whether it provides a reason/remedy for death).

Because it does not, it simply rejects the reson to be the soul (becuase the filament is not visible in this case) ;-)

Thanks,

Rakesh

 

[shvu]

 

I think the lightbulb example can help further enlighten us. When a bulb fails, we can follow the science and do something to make it work again. We cant do that something for a dead body.

We cannot do so today does not mean we can never do it.

 

Let me quote my favorite flying example. A couple of hundred years back, the idea of man flying was a joke to many, just like genetics is to some today (The idea of migration patterns being genetic sounded funny to some people who are of the opinion that Krishna tells the bird where to go).

 

Science is still in it's infancy and it has a long way to go.

 

Cheers

 

[Maitreya]

We have nothing to fear from mundane scientists.For instance the knowledge that has come through them concerning how rapidly

atoms change in our bodies just gives more evidence to the fact that we the conscious living beings are seperate from that process.

Atoms come and go, we remain.

 

Anyone familiar with the work of the theortical quantum physicist Michio Kaku?I can't follow these deep scientific theories, but I recently caught a show on tv's Dicovery science channel called the lab,in which they were showing how his ten dimensional universe theory shows how mystic siddhis could work.From pyschic communication to physical bodies disappearing from this dimension and slipping into another one.How due to the interconnectedness of the universe all these different dimensions are reachable right here and now.Prapti?

 

I can find something to respect in them as they are searching for knowledge.But their approach is ackward and limited.Better to hear from the self realized.

 

 

[dubeyrakesh]

Science may do that someday (hope not) but the question is does it agree today that there is something non-physical missing in a dead body that was present in a live one. This is not contradicting the functional incapabality of the dead body.

Is there no medical professioanl here in these forums?

Thanks

Rakesh

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

We cannot do so today does not mean we can never do it.

Yes, its "just now coming".

 

But that does proove that the modern medical scientists do not know what is the cause of death, nor do they have a remedy for it. What is it that makes a body stop living?

[Maitreya]

dubeyrakesh,

 

They have no one opinion.You want to find one opinion that they all agree on over this but it doesn't exist.

 

For instance many surgens and other operating personnel have come to accept life after death or that the person is distinct from the body simply from hearing the narrations of their patients who have had near death experiences and told them about them.Or out of body experiences where the patient while unconscious from the bodily viewpoint,or even "clinicaly dead" recounted specific things said between them as they worked on the body.Including others entering the room etc.The patients would have often floated up to the ceiling area of the room and witnessed their own operations.Then reentered the body and in due course became alert again through the body and told of their experiences.

 

Some believe them some don't.The ones who don't can't offer any other reasonable explanations but because it goes against their preconceived notion that there is no life after death, they are left in a defensive posture.

 

You may be interested to try sites on near death experiences to hear some of these stories.Some have forums for discussions and may prove to be quite interesting.

 

Hare Krishna

[Maitreya]

Satyaraja,

 

That is the best of accounts due to his having been born blind.

 

shvu,

 

What about that account from Satyaraja?Can you give an alternative explanation?

 

[dubeyrakesh]

Mr Satyaraja Dasa,

 

Good to find a Doctor.

 

You see different people may differ in their opinion but what does medical science say about all this. I am almost certain that it provides something "solid" to counterattack the "departure of soul from body is death" theory.

 

More simply, what is the difference between a dead body and a live one that makes the dead non-functional?

 

Thanks,

 

RAkesh.

 

[shvu]

 

shvu,

 

What about that account from Satyaraja?Can you give an alternative explanation?

Maitreya,

 

I have heard a number of such stories and I will believe in them when I actually see one. Not until then, and I recommend that you do the same. See for yourself, someone floating in mid-air and then believe in it. It is enough if he goes one inch above the ground. That will do.

 

Assuming that there is a soul and it went out of the old man's body, it cannot see a thing, for it's eyes are still back in the body. So I see no way of such a thing happening. The soul if there is one, has no sense organs which enable it to see anything like it happens in movies like Ghost.

 

Cheers

 

[dubeyrakesh]

Shvu,

 

I conclude from your post above that:

 

1. You are sure that there is no soul.

2. You are sure that if there is a soul, it has no sense of sight, smell etc etc.

 

The two seem sort-of contradictory.

 

We are all trying to assist each other reach some conclusion here and not just oppose.

The least we can do is believe in what others post here.

 

Thanks,

Rakesh

 

[shvu]

 

Dear Shvu,

You have stated that it should be clear to anyone that death is a purely physical thing and happens when the body can no longer function. I happen to be a biochemist and have some knowledge that most likely exceeds yours in this area (feel free to correct me if I am wrong). You are incorrect in your assumptions. In fact science is still grappling with the issue of consciousness and death. There are those 'scientists' who believe as you say, but that is a far distance from empirical data.

Death is certainly a physical thing. Heart stops, brain goes inactive, etc. What is the doubt here, may I ask?

 

As far as pure devotees using science when it is convenient goes - again you misunderstand and your contempt for those of faith is all too transparent. Pure devotees use everything for Krsna and have no disdain for science or scientists.

 

They certainly do have lots of disdain. Let me know if you are interested and I will send you an article which is about Srila Prabhupada's opinion on science. You may have also seen people refer to scientists as confused, etc right on this forum.

 

They have no fear of having their 'beliefs' shattered as they are living in a land of realization, not mere belief.

This is your opinion and let us agree to disagree on this.

 

A devotee will always point out where misconception is passed as knowledge and where dogma is pushed forward as 'science'.

 

The devotee objects to anything that goes against his beliefs and calls it dogma all the while forgetting that it is he himself who is begin dogmatic. Just to make it clear, there is no place for dogma in science, unlike in religion. I trust you are aware of this, being a bio-chemist.

 

The spiritualist looks at the world in a completely different way than the modern scientist. The spiritualist operates from the paradimagic view that life comes from life and that life generates matter.

For which he has no evidence and in the absence of evidence, it is all mere speculation. It may all be false.

 

The modern scientist operates from a world view that matter generates life and that all phenomena can be understood from a chemical/physical perspective.

Which has resulted in all the modern day comforts that man enjoys.

 

Much insight into life has been gained from both types of inquiry. You seem to feel that only the empirical data of the modern scientist is worthy of your respect and you have much faith in the 'scientific process'.

May I ask, what insight into life has been gained from the former type of inquiry?

 

You have chosen to ignore the insight and investigation of 'spiritual scientists' in favor of an atheistic world view which denies the existence of 'spirit'. Still, you are a conscious being. That you cannot deny.

Show me irrefutable proof that there is a spirit/soul and I will believe in these 'spiritual scientists' [not sure what that means]. As simple as that.

 

Those you have placed your faith in have failed in their understanding of consciousness. It cannot be explained empirically.

 

I will never use the word 'cannot'.

 

Spiritualists have faired much better in this area. You deny their findings and call them fairy tales. Yet you cannot deny that you are conscious.

 

Trust me, I can answer any question in the world, so long as it does not have to be proved, which is what the 'spirtualists' do. Nothing can be more easier. It does not require saffron clad people from mystical India to give answers that cannot be proved. Anyone can do it. All he needs is an audience who are willing to buy his talk. This is how the Gurus from India are making lots and lots of American dollars.

 

I am conscious. What does that show?

 

Cheers

 

[Audarya lila]

Dear Shvu,

 

That you are conscious proves that you can experience and that you, at least in theory, have the possibility of awareness beyond the confines of your mind and senses. This is the realm of yoga and meditation. As I said, you have shown by your posts that you have no appreciation for the contributions of spiritualists. You ask me to prove to you the existence of the soul. By this request I assume you want logic and reason. You are well aware that this is not possible and so you will continue on in your materialistic way. One only has to read the Bhagavad-gita or Srimad Bhagavatam, or for that matter the Bible or Koran, to understand what the 'spiritual scientists' have contributed to humanity. Love and beauty, truth and justice, dedication and service are just a few of the endearing and noble contributions to humanity that come not from science in the modern sense but from rather they come to us as fruits of spiritual pursuit. Control of the mind and senses by yoga and meditation has proven beneficial to the health of the human being even as measured by empirical data. Spiritual awakening comes from a deep inquiry within yourself and a crying out to the Supreme lord with all your heart. The Bible says 'seek and ye shall find, knock and the door shall be opened to you'. This 'truth' can only be understood by one who is willing to submit him/herself and cries out in all sincerity to the Lord. Other than that there is no empirical proof and if you are waiting for that you will wait for eternity. Realize your own limitations and cry out for mercy and help and you will find that it is coming in ways unexpected and abundantly.

 

Life is ultimately meaningful and fruitful because of our ability to love. And you will never find a higher love than you will experience if you give yourself to loving and serving the creator of all that is.

 

Your servant,

Audarya lila dasa

[Audarya lila]

Dear Shvu,

 

You have stated that it should be clear to anyone that death is a purely physical thing and happens when the body can no longer function. I happen to be a biochemist and have some knowledge that most likely exceeds yours in this area (feel free to correct me if I am wrong). You are incorrect in your assumptions. In fact science is still grappling with the issue of consciousness and death. There are those 'scientists' who believe as you say, but that is a far distance from empirical data.

 

As far as pure devotees using science when it is convenient goes - again you misunderstand and your contempt for those of faith is all too transparent. Pure devotees use everything for Krsna and have no disdain for science or scientists. They have no fear of having their 'beliefs' shattered as they are living in a land of realization, not mere belief.

 

A devotee will always point out where misconception is passed as knowledge and where dogma is pushed forward as 'science'. The spiritualist looks at the world in a completely different way than the modern scientist. The spiritualist operates from the paradimagic view that life comes from life and that life generates matter. The modern scientist operates from a world view that matter generates life and that all phenomena can be understood from a chemical/physical perspective. Much insight into life has been gained from both types of inquiry. You seem to feel that only the empirical data of the modern scientist is worthy of your respect and you have much faith in the 'scientific process'.

 

There are many who don't consider that these two are mutually exclusive - although the underlying world views are certainly diametrically opposed to each other. Still, any honest person should appreciate knowledge, whatever it's source, as it sheds light on our world and our very selves. You have chosen to ignore the insight and investigation of 'spiritual scientists' in favor of an atheistic world view which denies the existence of 'spirit'. Still, you are a conscious being. That you cannot deny. Those you have placed your faith in have failed in their understanding of consciousness. It cannot be explained empirically. Spiritualists have faired much better in this area. You deny their findings and call them fairy tales. Yet you cannot deny that you are conscious. And that you experience life based on that consciousness. There are conscious experiences that validate and verify the findings of saints and spiritualists. You have to be willing to try the experiments on yourself in order to gain access to that validation as it is 'experienced' - not 'thought about'.

 

Your servant

Audarya lila dasa

 

[This message has been edited by Audarya lila (edited 07-19-2001).]

[shvu]

 

Maitreya,

 

Not all the people who believe in souls are of one opinion either. The christians believe that only humans have souls and not plants and animals, although plants and animals have life. Thus according to them, life is not connected to the soul.

 

About people floating up to the ceiling, have you sen anyone do that? I am sure you watched the program in discovery on levitation, about the Brazil guy's photo where he was floating in mid-air in a church. The photo was found to be doctored.

 

About pre-conceived notions, I am sure you will accept that plenty of 'religious' people have pre-conceived notions that there is life after death, so strong that they just do not want to acknowledge any alternate possiblity. In fact, they are so sure about it that nothing is going to convince them that it may be false. What about those people?

 

The religious guy with his dogma, is much much worse than the 'confused' scientist.

 

Cheers

 

[Guest guest]

For instance many surgens and other operating personnel have come to accept life after death or that the person is distinct from the body simply from hearing the narrations of their patients who have had near death experiences and told them about them...

 

That is true. I'm a Doctor and used to work at an Intensive Care Unity in a hospital. I worked there for 15 years, and I could hear countless relates of near-death experiences. One of them was very amazing. It was and old man and blind since born. He had a heart stroke and stood 'lifeless' for some time until we made the resuscitation job. After his 'return' he told us the whole disposition of the Unity, the doctors, nurses, equipment, the clothes that we were dressing and so on in details. Inside his old body he could never see it. Never, as he was a blind since he was born.

 

There is a common place to all these people who had this kind of near-death experience:

 

1. They become fully convinced that they aren't the physical gross body.

2. Near-death state use to be a peaceful and blissful event (with some exceptions).

3. In that state no one wants to return to his gross body.

4. The realization that this stage is an ordinary event in every lifetime.

 

>>> Fixed the bold command. - jndas

 

 

[This message has been edited by jndas (edited 07-19-2001).]

[Maitreya]

 

Originally posted by shvu:

Maitreya,

 

Not all the people who believe in souls are of one opinion either. The christians believe that only humans have souls and not plants and animals, although plants and animals have life. Thus according to them, life is not connected to the soul.

 

Agreed.There are also speculations about the soul.The Bible is not a good source for a working definition of what constitutes the soul in my opinion.I have come across Christians who believe that the soul is produced when the 'breath of life' meets the human form and then somehow ceases to exist at death only to be brought back to life when that mysterious breath of life meets the old physical body in the resurrection.I find this very strange.

 

Some also fail to understand that the soul is individual in nature.So you are right, opinions vary but ultimately someone is to be found who knows.

 

From our conditioned vantage point[or dis-advantaged point]there will always be a variety of opinions.Truth still exists.

About people floating up to the ceiling, have you sen anyone do that? I am sure you watched the program in discovery on levitation, about the Brazil guy's photo where he was floating in mid-air in a church. The photo was found to be doctored.

 

I did see that show and accept that people will fake anything.But just because counterfeits exist doesn't mean I will throw out the accept form of money that is in my wallet.

 

I was actually speaking of astral projection during the operations.And yes I have done that, as has everyone else.I have been outside of my physical body and looked back to see it sleeping in my bed. This is not uncommon at all.We do it everynight but rarely remember it.

About pre-conceived notions, I am sure you will accept that plenty of 'religious' people have pre-conceived notions that there is life after death, so strong that they just do not want to acknowledge any alternate possiblity. In fact, they are so sure about it that nothing is going to convince them that it may be false. What about those people?

 

Perhaps they have obtained knowledge on the fact.I am closed minded on the issue.I am convinced theoreticaly that I am not this body.The question is no longer a viable one.Notice I said theoreticaly.Now the only question is one of realization of that fact.No small thing I admit.

 

To remain forever undecided is to remain forever in ignorance.

 

Do you deny that knowledge can actually be realized?

 

The religious guy with his dogma, is much much worse than the 'confused' scientist.

 

From the level of belief take your pick and take your chances.

 

But why do you give more weight to the mundane scientist?They have no proof to offer.Why not be at least as sceptical towards them?

 

Hare Krishna

 

 

 

[shvu]

This 'truth' can only be understood by one who is willing to submit him/herself and cries out in all sincerity to the Lord..

To cry out sincerely to the Lord, one has to be sure that there is a Lord. According to you belief is necessary to know the truth, but for belief itself, one has to know the truth. It is a chicken_and_egg situation.

 

Some people are able/willing to believe in in old books and in people who claim to be spiritual. For whatever reason, I cannot do that. Perhaps I cannot, because they are all so varied in their opinions? Or maybe all my research has led me to see that spirituality is a con game handed down over the centuries to con people who are loooking out for "something more" than material life. They want to believe in something extra-ordinary and this weakness is exploited by some capable worthies who know exactly what it takes to fool someone and have no scruples about talking people for a ride in the name of spirituality, God, a colorful heaven, eternal state, etc.

 

There is one set of people in the world who are on the lookout for that magical 'something more' than material life. They are the ones who shell out the necessary dollars, time and effort which enable the Gurus to become famous and powerful by building temples, ashrams, meditation centres and by translating sanskrit books into english. All of which lures more people in, which means more dollars, and the story goes on...

 

Cheers

 

 

[This message has been edited by shvu (edited 07-20-2001).]

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Some people are able/willing to believe in in old books...

Yeah, I got a couple of those old books, science text books to be exact. Published by MacMillan and Company. They are around 25 years old. It is amazing how many of the theories in there have been proven false today, and how most of what is in these old science books isn't in the books printed today (except of course for in India, where the text books are still 30 years behind the rest of the world).

 

It is funny how some people are willing to put faith into old books, even when they are yet to become old.