« At the heart of religion...a lie | Main | U.G. Krishnamurti -- intriguing, irritating, inspirational »

February 01, 2009


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The following quote is taken from Jung and the Candle in the Dark and may be
a bit off topic.

If the Creator were conscious of himself, he would have no need of conscious creatures; nor is it probable that the extremely indirect methods of creation, which squander millions of years upon the development of countless species and creatures are the outcome of a purposeful intention.
In other words, it is not man’s purpose to “seek enlightenment”, as if it already existed somewhere out there. That is a false fire started by fools. It is man’s purpose TO enlighten, to convert the macular dark of the ground of being, into light, and this is what he does by way of his spiritual experiences, at least in the private conjugate relation between the erstwhile empirical consciousness of the person and the ground of being.
End Quote.
I need to thank "MarineBoy" at Nderf forums
for this quote.
All the best

Interesting. I have been doing some of this thinking recently again myself. I tend to agree more with what you say than what the writer suggests. The question for us is do we exist after death. Along with that goes the question of life purpose. If life ends with death, than purpose is not spiritual but physical and the idea of some divine life purpose is unlikely.

I've been enjoying a DVD series called Mystic Lands. It's a superficial look at religions around the world. Some are very mainstream and some ones we rarely think about what might be their view of the cosmos. Because I have had an interest in religions, I knew a lot of it but always there is something new that I learn in this quick look at a culture's belief set. It gave me a great appreciation for my own culture where I have the freedom to accept or not the belief of the majority living around me. This is not always the case.

After posting my last post I realized that just
dropping the post off like I did does not really
say much.So here is a short explanation.
When I found this quote some time back I found it very intriguing and because of this I offer it to other readers of
Brian's blog with the hope they may find it as interesting as I did.

Interesting statement,

"At worst, all that is left of me are the ripple effects which are created by what I do while I am here. In that sense, you survive your bodily death by everything you do while you are alive, no matter how small (good or bad)."

---These ripple effects? What is a ripple effect? When I do something, how does the ripple effect process know what I have done is good or bad? Is there a ripple effect for things I do that are neither good or bad? Brian, could you e-mail Kelly, my question, for a response?



My term "ripple effect" is just my way of saying for every force there is an equal and opposite reaction. And I did not mean to imply that it matters whether it is good or bad--we place those judgments on actions. But your actions, whatever they are, necessarily impact upon those who are connected to you. Whether reactions you put into effect have a large of small impact, or whether your name can be attributed to them decades after your death, does not change the necessity that everything you do has an impact. The fact that the impact is more diffused after the passage of time is true, but do they still ultimately make a difference? Of course they do. Our world is filled with seemingly small actions that, repeated over large spans of time, have dramatic effects that are not immediately apparent or foreseeable.

To address one of Brian's thoughts, the laws of physics that humans have discovered are not our laws, they are the laws of the universe that describe forces we are trying to explain. We may not explain them correctly, but, we are not creating them from our imagination, but from forces that we observe. For example, cause and effect.


Thanks for your reply, I understand the cause and effect concept.

However, in your statement, "you survive your bodily death by everything you do while you are alive,...."
---how would a baby, that only lived for a month, participate in your "you survive" remark? That is, how would this baby continue to survive (as you describe), after only one month of life? How much doing, can this baby have done, in only one month?


Dear Obed,

Although perhaps unnecessary for me to add, I did find another citation of part of your cited quotation at http://www.friesian.com/jung.htm -

" As Jung said in Memories, Dreams, Reflections again:

If the Creator were conscious of Himself, He would not need conscious creatures; nor is it probable that the extremely indirect methods of creation, which squander millions of years upon the development of countless species and creatures, are the outcome of purposeful intention. Natural history tells us of a haphazard and casual transformation of species over hundreds of millions of years of devouring and being devoured. The biological and political history of man is an elaborate repetition of the same thing. But the history of the mind offers a different picture. Here the miracle of reflecting consciousness intervenes -- the second cosmogony [ed. note: what Teilhard de Chardin called the origin of the "noosphere," the layer of "mind"]. The importance of consciousness is so great that one cannot help suspecting the element of meaning to be concealed somewhere within all the monstrous, apparently senseless biological turmoil, and that the road to its manifestation was ultimately found on the level of warm-blooded vertebrates possessed of a differentiated brain -- found as if by chance, unintended and unforeseen, and yet somehow sensed, felt and groped for out of some dark urge. [p. 339]

In other words, a "meaningful coincidence." Jung also says,

As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being. It may even be assumed that just as the unconscious affects us, so the increase in our consciousness affects the unconscious. [p. 326]"


I neither endorse nor dispute this Jungian contention. I provide it only for further context in considering what you have contributed.

Robert Paul Howard

I have no idea what happens after a person takes her/his last breath -- that's because I'm still breathing. Since there is absolutely no way to know until it happens -- and whose to say we'll even know then? -- I've decided that worrying about it in this life is a complete waste of time!

We can't "know" the answer through faith, science, mysticism or anything else. For that matter, we don't even know if this life is real or some entity's lazy daydream. So, I try to concern myself with those things I can understand or those things that I might partially hope to understand.

All very good points Rambling Taoist. I agree.

Yes definitely, "a big leap of faith going on".

I'd have say so too.

When oh when are people going to quit offering faith as an answer, as the answer?

Also... Brian, to offer you some consolation, how about the fact that you and I have lived - have actually existed (apparently) - and for some 60 years now. That 60 years has, in a way been an eternity, and also just a sort of timeless moment we call now.

If we are to someday actually cease to exist (which means we will also cease to have any knowledge that we ever did exist) then we will not be around anymore to miss our life, to miss our existence. We won't know anything because there will be no me, no us to know or to remember anything, including what it was like to exist. And it appears that there is nothing we can do about this.

The only question is, whether or not existence can suddenly just cease to exist, or conversely, whether or not existence can arise out of nothing (non-existence prior to birth).

If we are only the body and brain, then we will not even know that we died the moment after we die. We will not even know that we ever lived or existed. We will not know ANYTHING. So there won't be any one to complain or miss existing.

On the other hand, if existence itself (or even our own apparent existence) is not born and has no beginning, then it will have no end, regardless of the appearance (birth), growth, and eventual death and disintegration and disappearance of the body and brain. This present human life & body will be no more, but the underlying unborn existence itself will remain unchanged and endless. So like a tree, nothing will be lost except the leaves in the winter.

...Just some thoughts.

Yes Well, with all this grand hypothisising of the universe.. lets not take a perconcevied view of our own human bodies and the miraclel they contain.

The outward power of the shakti able to create new life, new human beings, new consiousness.

Actually it is creating the world, since the world and the mind are inseparable.

And the inward power of the shakti. What can that create I wonder ?

What next evolution has nature set in motion ? Or is there no more evolution, it's all over now.

The power of this body is divine and the sensation are divine and good. Forget the dogma that is stupid and makes no sense.

It does everything to invest consiousness to develop itself, and the brain for our own evolutionary progress.

"This present human life & body will be no more, but the underlying unborn existence itself will remain unchanged and endless."

---What is this "underlying unborn" existence, that in itself will remain unchanged and endless? Is this existence just in ones thoughts?
---Is this "uu" existence, what Kelly was writing about?

Thanks for any replies,

"What is this "underlying unborn" existence, that in itself will remain unchanged and endless?

-- It is infinite totality. It is whatever all of this vast cosmos is, regardless of whether or not you or I are here, alive and aware.

"Is this existence just in ones thoughts?"

-- What are thoughts? Sure, we seem to have thoughts - or thoughts just seem to occur - about existence, but also about all sorts of other things. But thoughts don't create existence. There apparently exists a more or less infinite totality (which is prior to the arising of any thoughts) of which our personal individual lives and existence is merely part of, and that is so regardless of whether or not any thoughts arise in our so-called human minds.

A question: Long before we humans ever existed, it appears that there were other extremely primitive organic life forms such as bacteria, amoebas, algae, etc on this planet. These primitive one-celled life forms had no brains and thus no so-called thoughts. But there still was an incomprehensibly vast interstellar cosmos EXISTING. So therfore, how could this vast more or less infinite "existence" be dependent upon, or be a product of, mere "thoughts"???

Thoughts arise (appear) and then subside ((vanish) just like waves upon the sea. And yet the vast sea still exists, whether there are waves arising upon the sea, or not. The waves don't create the sea. The waves only exist, because the sea exists. So too with thoughts. We are aware of thoughts only because there is a vast cosmos existing where creatures like us exist who able to be aware of thoughts. The thoughts obviously appear in the sea of awareness, which is our awareness, but this awareness may or may not be dependent upon the existence of creatures with brains.

Does awareness depend upon having a brain... or does awareness exist prior to organic life? That is still a question that remains to be determined... until death.

"Is this "uu" existence, what Kelly was writing about?"

-- I rather doubt it... but I don't really know what "Kelly" was writing about. There was too much contradiction there for me to say for sure. And I don't think Kelly has any clear insight in what she was talking about. Her conclusion was more about faith, than it was about insight into the nature of existence and awareness.


Liked the response.

PS: Humans are far too anthropocentric or human-centric. The popular new-age notion that existence itself is somehow dependent upon thoughts, is an aspect of this anthropocentric skewed mentality. This idea is irrational and illogical and unenlightened, and it appeals to people who want to believe that they create reality. It is fundamentally ego-centric, and ignorant, and basically absurd imo.

It is far more likely that the sense of "existence" is absolutely inherent in awareness itself, rather than due to the appearance of transitory and ephemeral thoughts.

Humans are humans. So, what are those, that are not anthropocentric? When One states, "those people," who are the other people, that are not, those people?

---So who decided, we are humans and people?
---any reason why comments take so long to log on to this blog, lately?

Roger, I'm pondering a move to a different commenting system for this blog, so I'm curious about your "so long" statement.

I haven't had any problem with leaving comments. Have you? Or anyone else?

To return the compliment, what tAo wrote on February 02, 2009 at 01:16 PM speaks my mind very well!


I'm guessing, after typing in the (spam protect) series of numbers and letters, it is approximately 5+ minutes to see my comment appear on the particular thread. In addition, I can see someone's name listed (comment posted)on a thread, with no comment present to read.
This is a recent observation, within last few weeks.


Hmmmm. Comments show up immediately for me. See if the problem continues now that I've switched this blog to TypePad's new commenting system. You won't have to do the spam protection thing (TypePad says they have better spam defenses, and it isn't necessary for commenters to enter those letters and numbers).

Testing Testing I am Roger Testing Testing There is no Roger


I can see my post reply quickly now, however, my name on list (recent comments)above is absent. Must be a short delay to see name on list, this is no big deal.

Only a bunch of abstract sqwiggles that TypePad, in its wisdom, decided should be associated with the non-entity called "Roger." Hey, you need to set up a profile and get your own identity.

Wow !!! I really like the cool graphics by my name ! And the others too.

In answer to Roger about what endures..

A lot of people who get zapped with a CC experience, they said it's all consiousness, beyond lanaguage to express.

Cyfer, if you sign up for a TypePad profile you'll be able to substitute your own photo/image for the cool graphics. And get an underline link under your name that will lead to whatever info about yourself you want to share.


Noticed, when I log to (left click)a particular thread or comment, the page is blank. I click a second time, the thread or comment will appear. Are you noticing this too?

Testing: My Profile setup

Roger, in both Safari and Firefox, when I click on a comment or a post link in the left sidebar, the post comes up immediately.

Not the comment, which is a defect of TypePad that I hope they'll fix. So I have to scroll down to the comment. But I don't get a blank page. Let me know if your problem keeps happening and I could ask TypePad support about it.

TypePad had some problems yesterday. The bugs may not be completely worked out.


The blank, on right side of page, is present when I click on a recent comment or post. You are correct, One just needs to scroll down to find the post with comments. This is just an extra step, do big deal.

Hi Roger,
Really cute dog.Is it yours?

Hi Obed,

No, the puppy is not mine. Just a pic, I found on the Internet. I like to use it on other blog profiles. I have had much fun with pic, many persons have found much joy, looking at it.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.