THE LIFE AFTER DEATH PROJECT

DaltheJigsaw

I highly recommend this great documentary. I saw it a few days ago.

Trailer for Paul Davids' new feature documentary that will premiere on Syfy as a late night movie May 15th, 2013: "The Life After Death Project." A scientific inquiry into evidence for life after death. His previous documentaries include "Timothy Leary's Dead," "Jesus in India," "The Artist and the Shaman," and "The Sci-Fi Boys," a Universal Studios Home Entertainment release that was winner of the Saturn Award for Best DVD of 2006. He was also executive producer / co-writer of Showtime's "Roswell," a Golden Globe nominee for Best Motion Picture for Television and co-author of six "Star Wars" books for Lucasfilm and Random House.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2838946/

sndymorn

My son attends UCR here in California. A professor there , I don't know his name, just received a multi million dollar grant to study this very thing.... It is easily search. They may be looking for input . I have experiences with these things and am therefore very interested.

sndymorn

I see that the UCR study is funded by the John Templeton Foundation.

Florian

A multi-million pound grant to study life after death?

I'm lost for words.

I wonder what it will be spent on.

Chrysalid

The sooner people accept that this is their one and only life and live it as well as they can, the better off we all shall be.

vinlyn

Chrysalid said:

The sooner people accept that this is their one and only life and live it as well as they can, the better off we all shall be.

But you can't know that.

DaltheJigsaw

vinlyn said:

Chrysalid said:

The sooner people accept that this is their one and only life and live it as well as they can, the better off we all shall be.

But you can't know that.

Good point!

DaltheJigsaw

Chrysalid said:

The sooner people accept that this is their one and only life and live it as well as they can, the better off we all shall be.

How about a balance of both? Live here the best you can, but to question other things as well.

Dakini

sndymorn said:

My son attends UCR here in California. A professor there , I don't know his name, just received a multi million dollar grant to study this very thing.... It is easily search. They may be looking for input . I have experiences with these things and am therefore very interested.

Could you tell us more, or provide a link to that prof's project? Feel free to share your experiences, too.

Barra

I just finished reading a fascinating new book on this topic. It's called Proof of Heaven, by Dr. Eben Alexander. The interesting thing is that he is a neurosurgeon and he got a rare E. coli infection in the brain that left him brain dead for seven days. During this time he had very detailed experiences in another world (that he calls heaven) where he received transmitted knowledge from an entity that he alternately calls God or Om. The message was that we are all one and that the basis of everything is love. He is now committed to spreading the word on what he learned. Personally I found the message to be consistent with Buddhist teaching.

vinlyn

Barra said:

I just finished reading a fascinating new book on this topic. It's called Proof of Heaven, by Dr. Eben Alexander. The interesting thing is that he is a neurosurgeon and he got a rare E. coli infection in the brain that left him brain dead for seven days. During this time he had very detailed experiences in another world (that he calls heaven) where he received transmitted knowledge from an entity that he alternately calls God or Om. The message was that we are all one and that the basis of everything is love. He is now committed to spreading the word on what he learned. Personally I found the message to be consistent with Buddhist teaching.

Interesting. I read the book a couple of months ago, was quite disappointed in it (primarily because it spent too much time talking about issues not related at all to the title), and felt that it supported the Christian view.

Ah well, different perspectives.

Chrysalid

vinlyn said:

But you can't know that.

There isn't anything to survive the death of the body.

Florian

Barra said:

I just finished reading a fascinating new book on this topic....

The message was that we are all one and that the basis of everything is love. He is now committed to spreading the word on what he learned. Personally I found the message to be consistent with Buddhist teaching.

Seems like he had a lucky break and short circuited a long process of meditation by doing it all in one week. I suppose he was bound to give it a Christian slant, but the proposition that all is one and all is love is non-demoninational.

betaboy

vinlyn said:

Chrysalid said:

The sooner people accept that this is their one and only life and live it as well as they can, the better off we all shall be.

But you can't know that.

Actually, that's the only thing we can be sure of. There has never been any evidence to the contrary.

sndymorn

@dakini Here is a link to article http://ucrtoday.ucr.edu/7496 which explains what the professor will explore in the realm of the after life . My " experiences" with spirits and the after life are not terribly interesting and can be explained by coincidence and or lack of sleep. I have not had a near death experience . But I am interested in studies of this sort because many people describe near death occurances similarly ,with consistent accounts crossing culture and time.

My own feeling is that at death, our spirit goes from our body like a pulsar. But where or whither I have no clue.

DaftChris

Chrysalid said:

vinlyn said:

But you can't know that.

There isn't anything to survive the death of the body.

betaboy said:

vinlyn said:

Chrysalid said:

The sooner people accept that this is their one and only life and live it as well as they can, the better off we all shall be.

But you can't know that.

Actually, that's the only thing we can be sure of. There has never been any evidence to the contrary.

Yes, we know the heart and brain stop, and the body rots away after death; but the truth of the matter is we don't know what else happens once we leave this world. None of us on this forum has been dead (unless rebirth is true. ), so I don't think any of us can say that we know for certain that nothing happens after death.

vinlyn

Chrysalid said:

vinlyn said:

But you can't know that.

There isn't anything to survive the death of the body.

Thanks for restating your OPINION.

Nothing wrong with opinions, as long as you can separate them from fact.

vinlyn

betaboy said:

vinlyn said:

Chrysalid said:

The sooner people accept that this is their one and only life and live it as well as they can, the better off we all shall be.

But you can't know that.

Actually, that's the only thing we can be sure of. There has never been any evidence to the contrary.

That doesn't mean anything.

In 1700 there was no evidence of modern medicine, or transmission of electricity, or that man could fly.

Man never knows all the evidence for all things. It continually evolves.

Dakini

Chrysalid said:

There isn't anything to survive the death of the body.

Well, some Buddhists say there's the "very subtle mind".

Dakini

DaftChris said:

Yes, we know the heart and brain stop, and the body rots away after death; but the truth of the matter is we don't know what else happens once we leave this world. None of us on this forum has been dead (unless rebirth is true. ), so I don't think any of us can say that we know for certain that nothing happens after death.

Oh? Do we know that for sure? Has anyone here been dead?

Hello-o-o, :wave: have any members had a Near Death Experience?

I've spoken to people who've died from a heart attack or on the operating table, then revived. If accounts like that are to be believed, "something" does survive. I think each person needs to make up their own minds about that.

Chrysalid

vinlyn said:

Thanks for restating your OPINION.

Nothing wrong with opinions, as long as you can separate them from fact.

Go on then, isolate that part of yourself which survives death and post a picture of it.

vinlyn

So you think you can take a photo of everything that exists? Fine. Take a photo of your thought. Take a photo of your dream tonight. Take a photo of actual pain. Take a photo of the emotion of happiness. Did your parents take a photo of you being born? No? Then I guess it didn't happen. In fact, according to you, before the advent of photography, I guess nothing happened or existed. We don't have a photo of Buddha. Oops, guess he's just a fable.

Chrysalid

Ok, if you accept this "thing" which survives death cannot be photographed, then perhaps you'd do me the honour of describing it, perhaps where it is located in the body - or is it extant in all our cells? Does it have a colour or smell? How does it locomote after the death of the muscles? ? Does it hold memories, and if so by what mechanism?

vinlyn

Chrysalid said:

Ok, if you accept this "thing" which survives death cannot be photographed, then perhaps you'd do me the honour of describing it, perhaps where it is located in the body - or is it perhaps extant in all our cells? Does it have a colour or smell? How does it locomote after the death of the muscles? ? Does it hold memories, and if so by what mechanism?

I don't know.

And neither do you.

That's the point.

Nothing either way has ever been proven.

Chrysalid

Thus... absence of evidence equals evidence of absence.

vinlyn

No, actually it doesn't. Every scientific discovery leads to something we didn't know just days, weeks, months before. And yet, those same things existed before we knew of them.

And with that, you are welcome to continue this particular dialogue on your own.

riverflow

Somewhat relevant here, and interesting... I watched this this morning:



[LINK]

A BBC doco about the neurology and the sense of "selfhood." The experiment with the virtual reality eyegear seeing oneself is especially astonishing.

Chrysalid

vinlyn said:

...you are welcome to continue this particular dialogue on your own.

Ok, I will. Just to point out that, with science, people observe an effect, propose a hypothesis explaining that effect and then search for evidence to disprove that hypothesis. If they cannot disprove the hypothesis then it becomes an established theory.
With life after death no effect is observed, as you pointed out no one has ever offered us any reason (evidence) to conceive that once the brain dies the person lives on. But still, even with absolutely nothing observable to suggest otherwise people have still proffered hypotheses to the contrary, and they've gone looking for evidence to prove those hypotheses. And to this date not a scrap have they found.

DaltheJigsaw

riverflow said:

Somewhat relevant here, and interesting... I watched this this morning:



[LINK]

A BBC doco about the neurology and the sense of "selfhood." The experiment with the virtual reality eyegear seeing oneself is especially astonishing.

Thank you! Interesting!

Florian

If we believe that the state after death has not been proved then we think the Buddha was a liar. It has not been proved intersubjectively and never will be, but proof can be immediate or empirical experience. Or perhaps 'verification' is a better word. I'll stand up and say that I have been beyond death, but I must admit it is an interpretation of a fairly brief experience, and I may be wrong. I can only say that ever since I have had no worries about death.

vinlyn

Florian said:

If we believe that the state after death has not been proved then we think the Buddha was a liar. It has not been proved intersubjectively and never will be, but proof can be immediate or empirical experience. Or perhaps 'verification' is a better word. I'll stand up and say that I have been beyond death, but I must admit it is an interpretation of a fairly brief experience, and I may be wrong. I can only say that ever since I have had no worries about death.

No, I can't agree with that at all. No one here is saying Buddha was a liar.

Buddha may be absolutely correct.
Buddha's interpretation of what he saw may have been incorrect to some varying degree.
Reports of what Buddha said may have been transliterated incorrectly by others.

There are at least 3 statements that do not say that Buddha was a liar.

Additionally, not that it applies here, there's generally considered to be a huge difference between saying that someone told a lie, and that a person is a liar. Saying a person is a liar generally indicates a pattern of behavior, not a single incident.

And finally, what any one human (and Buddha was a human) says is not proof. Of almost anything.

Beej

To die will be quite an adventure! (i am assuming)

Florian

vinlyn said:

Florian said:

If we believe that the state after death has not been proved then we think the Buddha was a liar. It has not been proved intersubjectively and never will be, but proof can be immediate or empirical experience. Or perhaps 'verification' is a better word. I'll stand up and say that I have been beyond death, but I must admit it is an interpretation of a fairly brief experience, and I may be wrong. I can only say that ever since I have had no worries about death.

No, I can't agree with that at all. No one here is saying Buddha was a liar.

Buddha may be absolutely correct.
Buddha's interpretation of what he saw may have been incorrect to some varying degree.

But the Buddha did not interpret what he saw. He realised what he is. There is no possibility of misinterpretation at this level of knowledge. If we think that his teachings are an interpretation rather than an expression of direct knowledge then we do not believe the teachings but, rather, hold the view of many sceptics, viz. that meditation is the seeing of visions and not an empirical method.

vinlyn

Ah, @Florian, now I see. When it comes to Buddhism, you just accept everything without question. You are free to do so.

But I wonder...when a Catholic accepts all Catholic teachings without question, how do you react? When a Muslim accepts all Islamic teachings without question, how do you react? When a Hindu accepts all Hindu teachings without question, how do you react?

karasti

I personally believe in rebirth or reincarnation of sorts. Not exactly in line with what Buddha teaches, but it changes with time.

That said, regardless of my beliefs, everything is energy, including us, and energy cannot die, it only changes forms. So even if you do not believe that we have a soul or a consciousness or a vat of karma that carries on to another body, rebirth still happens. When our bodies die, they contribute to life continuing on in some form. Whether you are buried and eventually the worms get your carcass, or whether you are cremated and your ashes spread in the ocean. You still carry on in SOME form. You do not simply just stop, because energy can not/does not just stop.

Florian

vinlyn said:

Ah, @Florian, now I see. When it comes to Buddhism, you just accept everything without question. You are free to do so.

But I wonder...when a Catholic accepts all Catholic teachings without question, how do you react? When a Muslim accepts all Islamic teachings without question, how do you react? When a Hindu accepts all Hindu teachings without question, how do you react?

No problem. I never accept anything without question. What made you think that I do?

vinlyn

Florian said:

No problem. I never accept anything without question. What made you think that I do?


Over time, I can't recall you ever disagreeing with a Buddhist teaching. Perhaps you do, I've just not seen it.

Which, of course, is okay. Each person must decide what to accept or reject in terms of religious beliefs.

Florian

Yes @vinlyn, you're right, I don't disagree with any mainstream Buddhist teachings. I have spent ten years trying to falsify them and have failed. This is not faith, it is a research result. I take nothing on faith.

Maybe this is the source of some of our disagreements, that you see Buddhism as a faith where I see it as a demonstrable result of metaphysical analysis capable of empirical confirmation.

vinlyn

But I note you're not answering the question that I asked. If people of all the main religions feel they are doing the same as you, then who is right...and who is wrong? I know people who say their prayers have been answered, and indeed they appear to have been.

Florian

Not everyone studies their religion in a serious way. In fact few do. So one would not expect everybody to agree. The truth is that very few people feel that they are 'doing the same as me'. ie. exploring the logical basis for their beliefs and testing them in practice. If they did then I suspect there'd be a lot less argument about the issues.

One does not have to have a correct view of religion (whatever a correct view is) in order for ones prayers to seem to be answered.

But maybe I'm still not quite addressing the issue. Do you object to something specific that I've said?

You asked what I felt when Catholics, Muslims and Hindus accepted the teachings of their relgions without question. I feel it's a wonderful thing, but very dangerous and likely to lead to very muddled views. After all, if we do not question them we are unlikely to find out what they are. I'm with the Buddha on this one.

vinlyn

@Florian, it isn't a question of objecting to what you say. All of us on here have the right to our viewpoints, so whatever your viewpoint is, that's okay.

Florian

Oh okay. I thought we were disagreeing about something. My mistake.

But I would strongly disagree with the idea that whatever my viewpoint is that's okay. It's not at all okay if it's incorrect. It might be okay with you that it is incorrect, but it's my view and it wouldn't be okay with me.

vinlyn

It's just that I know sincere, thinking Buddhists, Christians, and Muslims.

They can't all be "right".

Or can they?

vinlyn

And actually, my personal belief is that there are multiple paths. I don't think there is a "right" religion, but I do think there are some "wrong" religions.

Florian

I agree that there are multiple paths. Or, that there is one path that appears in any guises. My guess is that we can follow the footsteps of Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, Mani, Al-Halaj, Chuang Tsu or whoever, and end up in the same place. But 'follow the footsteps' would not mean blind adherence to any text.

Sincerity does not guarantee the correctness of ones views, unfortunately, so that a sincere Christian is not necessarily one with a correct view. I agree that there are some 'wrong' religions, although I'd struggle to name one now that we've stopped sacrificing virgins to the Sun God. If there are wrong religions then there must be right ones, but I agree that there would not be just one right one. Rather, there would be many wrong interpretations of a small number of right religions.

It seems we agree about most of this.

Cinorjer

Florian said:

If we believe that the state after death has not been proved then we think the Buddha was a liar. It has not been proved intersubjectively and never will be, but proof can be immediate or empirical experience. Or perhaps 'verification' is a better word. I'll stand up and say that I have been beyond death, but I must admit it is an interpretation of a fairly brief experience, and I may be wrong. I can only say that ever since I have had no worries about death.

Please don't go there in accusing doubters of claiming Buddha was lying. This is the same mindset that shows up on bumper stickers that say "The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it" and a moment's thought will show it's nonsense.

If the sutras claim Buddha said he remembers multiple past lives, then actually there are lots of reasons for the sutras to be wrong in this case, if that is indeed the case.

Buddha did intentionally lie for whatever reason.
Buddha was mistaken but recounting what he firmly believed.
Whomever claimed later on to hear him say this lied.
...or misunderstood Buddha.
...or heard someone else say it, but was mistaken in thinking Buddha said it.
Whomever translated and passed down the sutra lied.

And so on.

Florian

This is odd.

If someone says they know the truth, and then states something that is not true, then they are a liar. Seems a fairly simple piece of logic.

But maybe I'm not seeing your objection.

Chrysalid

Florian said:

This is odd.

If someone says they know the truth, and then states something that is not true, then they are a liar. Seems a fairly simple piece of logic.

But maybe I'm not seeing your objection.

It's not that odd, lots of people firmly believe things that are untrue - Creationists for example.

vinlyn

Florian said:

This is odd.

If someone says they know the truth, and then states something that is not true, then they are a liar. Seems a fairly simple piece of logic.

But maybe I'm not seeing your objection.

I think you're mistaking being wrong for lying.

Florian

It does not matter what we believe. If we say that we are enlightened as to the true nature of reality, life and death and so forth, and teach it to other people, and yet do not actually know, then we are lying.

The Buddha's teaching are not an interpretation of dualistic visions with all the possibilies for misinterpretation and incorect theorising, requiring the teachings to be full of provisos and disclaimers.

I expect many people believe, as was said earlier, that 'Buddha was mistaken but recounting what he firmly believed'. But not Buddhists. Only a non-Buddhist could hold this belief. It is a denial of the teachings. It is a denial of the entire doctrine.

I have no problem with that. It's a common view. But where's the proof?

Cinorjer

@Florian can you accept that people can be lifelong, devoted, practicing Buddhists without believing every word in the sutras is the Gospel truth direct from Buddha's lips and that the Buddha was some sort of God who was incapable of making a mistake once he was enlightened? Then one can be a Buddhist and doubt that reincarnation is true. For instance, myself. I have been a practicing Buddhist for over twenty years now. Am I a non-Buddhist? What then is your test for being a real Buddhist?