enzymewrath
New
Sorry for my bad English if my grammar or usage is too bad as to uncomprehensible please notify me. Within very limited time of mine I had tried to express my meaning as best as I could but I grasp deviant and erroneous grammar rules and little and inaccurate vocabulary. I really like to discuss here. Thanks for everyone who have undertaken my awful English sentences.
http://www.nderf.org/NDERF/NDE_Experiences/peter_n_nde_6584.htm
This nde account is very long, and is meticulously written and elaborately written, one thing aroused my interest is its narration about that "communication system". Briefly speaking, in his nde, he found he was in a vast universe space strewed with stars, and the stars were all beings and were all communicating mutually concurrently, and because the communications were all mind to mind directly without inaccuracy or misunderstanding, it felt like all the communications just happened in himself but simultaneously be being between his identity and the others' identities.
This is a possible explanation and interpretation of the term "Oneness" which has been repeated by a lot of nde accounts again and again.
Before I read this nde account, "Oneness" had always seemed a nonsense and philosophic bloat to me, when one said "Oneness", I always thought that was a vain balderdash for showing off one's profoundity.
But this nde account gives a more meaningful explanation and interpretation for "become one" assertion, which I have not noticed before. Think about why in our physical reality, it is very clear that we - as a number of different people - are clearly not the one? Because we all dwell inside our individual brains, different person dwells in a different brain, when we need to communicate, our ego (or our identity) must first organize a sentence within our brain, and then more or less embellishes it (perhaps adds exaggerated words to emphasize one's meaning or hides parts which are not benefitial to pour out, etcetera) before speaking it out, and the "sound wave" transfers a short distance to reach our audience's ears, and then, our audience must take some short time to comprehend our meaning and then responds. In this kind of process, we and our audience are clearly separate by the fact that different person's ego dwells within a different brain and brains can't communicate mind to mind directly.
Consider if our egos move out of our brains and all register on a spider-web-like structure, different person takes a different segment of this web but since web spreads out seamlessly, one can not figure out which person is composed by which part of this web, and the communications between every parts and every corners of this web are happening instantly and accurately, and without the need to follow the process of "organize in one's own brain -> embellish and filter -> speak out -> sound wave propagating -> audience's ears receive -> fathom the meaning -> start to make a response", when one person starts to think a sentence, the others know immediately, when that person think the first word of that sentence, the others know that first word, when that person has thought halfway of that sentence, the others also have followed the same halfway of that sentence. What this kind of communication would feel like? It would feel like you are thinking the others' thinkings and simultaneously the others also are thinking what you are thinking and you could not consider the others are out of your brain since you don't have a brain, so it would feel like the others are inside you and you are inside the others, thus, make a oneness, but simultaneously different people still hold their different identities and personalities.
Wow, thanks to this account's author, his elaborate written made me fathom something I could not imagine to fathom out before.
Our brain truly alters our ego drastically, for example, damage to part of our brain could alter or remove part of our ego, but this influence imbued by our brain to our ego, is the same as our hands to our ego, just not that drastic, if we feel severe and unbearable pain in our hands, we could not think things freely, it's no difference with that if our head be beaten and we be knocked out of consciousness and then we could not think of things at all.
So our brain's influence on our ego, is no difference with our hands' influence on our ego, if someone has gotten amnesia, thus loses part of his ego, but one day if he would be cured, that's just like a long sleep, his ego would be back and not be lost. And the same even applys to Alzheimer and other vegetation damages to human brains, it's just we currently are unable to cure those diseases before the patients' demise, if they could be cured, making the lose of ego not be permanent within the patients' lifetime, that period of not being aware of ego would have been a sleep-like experience, just as simple as the pain in our hands could also be considered as an experience. So our brain's influence on our ego, only suggests brain can cause some experiences of our ego, just like our hands can, it doesn't necessarily rule out the possibility that our ego could exist without brain. In case those Alzheimer patients died and found their consciousness came back, and that period of living with Alzheimer was just like a period of sleep?
Our science currently has no idea where our ego dwells, it seems our ego dwells in large compounds in our brain like organs, cells, neurons, molecules, etcetera, our reason is that by altering these large compounds we could feel drastic alter on our ego like dazzle, amnesia, mood's fluctuation, but these can also happen by stimulating our hands and the fact is that by amputating our hands we would still be ourselves. So our brain's influence on our ego doesn't rule out the possibility that our ego's existence is essentially accommodated by something subatomic like microtube, quantum, superstring etcetera or something of a higher dimension which overlaps with the same spatial temporal domain occupied by something in our brain.
Please don't take my above musing seriously, I am a true neutral skeptic, and I strongly incline to disbelieve afterlife, or consciousness beyond brain, and the nde account I recommend to read could have a pound of other possible explanations which could still be some of brain's mechanisms, although maybe nouveau and tend to be the direction of human evolution. And after all, all the things written by the author are his feelings, no matter how strong he feels what he feels, every human beings are innately easy to be deceived by environment and even their own sensations without a notice from themselves, but at least I think that account is very profound, not too much like a normal brain's fabrication, and worth a research.
And ndes are possibly truly something beyond simple hallucination alike. I don't mean any to rule out this possibility.
Very very grateful to Peter N who elaborately wrote his experience to a level of detailfulness that hasn't been expressed by many other nders.
Also very very grateful to anyone who would read this thread and think and/or also leave his or her thoughts here, I'm very interested in the other's opinions but it's very difficult for me to read and write English sentences so I would not respond when I would have not been able to weave a constructive idea of agreement or disagreement discussion. That nde account is very hard for me to read through and there are still a lot of sentences I do not completely understand but maybe it's not any problem to others.
http://www.nderf.org/NDERF/NDE_Experiences/peter_n_nde_6584.htm
This nde account is very long, and is meticulously written and elaborately written, one thing aroused my interest is its narration about that "communication system". Briefly speaking, in his nde, he found he was in a vast universe space strewed with stars, and the stars were all beings and were all communicating mutually concurrently, and because the communications were all mind to mind directly without inaccuracy or misunderstanding, it felt like all the communications just happened in himself but simultaneously be being between his identity and the others' identities.
This is a possible explanation and interpretation of the term "Oneness" which has been repeated by a lot of nde accounts again and again.
Before I read this nde account, "Oneness" had always seemed a nonsense and philosophic bloat to me, when one said "Oneness", I always thought that was a vain balderdash for showing off one's profoundity.
But this nde account gives a more meaningful explanation and interpretation for "become one" assertion, which I have not noticed before. Think about why in our physical reality, it is very clear that we - as a number of different people - are clearly not the one? Because we all dwell inside our individual brains, different person dwells in a different brain, when we need to communicate, our ego (or our identity) must first organize a sentence within our brain, and then more or less embellishes it (perhaps adds exaggerated words to emphasize one's meaning or hides parts which are not benefitial to pour out, etcetera) before speaking it out, and the "sound wave" transfers a short distance to reach our audience's ears, and then, our audience must take some short time to comprehend our meaning and then responds. In this kind of process, we and our audience are clearly separate by the fact that different person's ego dwells within a different brain and brains can't communicate mind to mind directly.
Consider if our egos move out of our brains and all register on a spider-web-like structure, different person takes a different segment of this web but since web spreads out seamlessly, one can not figure out which person is composed by which part of this web, and the communications between every parts and every corners of this web are happening instantly and accurately, and without the need to follow the process of "organize in one's own brain -> embellish and filter -> speak out -> sound wave propagating -> audience's ears receive -> fathom the meaning -> start to make a response", when one person starts to think a sentence, the others know immediately, when that person think the first word of that sentence, the others know that first word, when that person has thought halfway of that sentence, the others also have followed the same halfway of that sentence. What this kind of communication would feel like? It would feel like you are thinking the others' thinkings and simultaneously the others also are thinking what you are thinking and you could not consider the others are out of your brain since you don't have a brain, so it would feel like the others are inside you and you are inside the others, thus, make a oneness, but simultaneously different people still hold their different identities and personalities.
Wow, thanks to this account's author, his elaborate written made me fathom something I could not imagine to fathom out before.
Our brain truly alters our ego drastically, for example, damage to part of our brain could alter or remove part of our ego, but this influence imbued by our brain to our ego, is the same as our hands to our ego, just not that drastic, if we feel severe and unbearable pain in our hands, we could not think things freely, it's no difference with that if our head be beaten and we be knocked out of consciousness and then we could not think of things at all.
So our brain's influence on our ego, is no difference with our hands' influence on our ego, if someone has gotten amnesia, thus loses part of his ego, but one day if he would be cured, that's just like a long sleep, his ego would be back and not be lost. And the same even applys to Alzheimer and other vegetation damages to human brains, it's just we currently are unable to cure those diseases before the patients' demise, if they could be cured, making the lose of ego not be permanent within the patients' lifetime, that period of not being aware of ego would have been a sleep-like experience, just as simple as the pain in our hands could also be considered as an experience. So our brain's influence on our ego, only suggests brain can cause some experiences of our ego, just like our hands can, it doesn't necessarily rule out the possibility that our ego could exist without brain. In case those Alzheimer patients died and found their consciousness came back, and that period of living with Alzheimer was just like a period of sleep?
Our science currently has no idea where our ego dwells, it seems our ego dwells in large compounds in our brain like organs, cells, neurons, molecules, etcetera, our reason is that by altering these large compounds we could feel drastic alter on our ego like dazzle, amnesia, mood's fluctuation, but these can also happen by stimulating our hands and the fact is that by amputating our hands we would still be ourselves. So our brain's influence on our ego doesn't rule out the possibility that our ego's existence is essentially accommodated by something subatomic like microtube, quantum, superstring etcetera or something of a higher dimension which overlaps with the same spatial temporal domain occupied by something in our brain.
Please don't take my above musing seriously, I am a true neutral skeptic, and I strongly incline to disbelieve afterlife, or consciousness beyond brain, and the nde account I recommend to read could have a pound of other possible explanations which could still be some of brain's mechanisms, although maybe nouveau and tend to be the direction of human evolution. And after all, all the things written by the author are his feelings, no matter how strong he feels what he feels, every human beings are innately easy to be deceived by environment and even their own sensations without a notice from themselves, but at least I think that account is very profound, not too much like a normal brain's fabrication, and worth a research.
And ndes are possibly truly something beyond simple hallucination alike. I don't mean any to rule out this possibility.
Very very grateful to Peter N who elaborately wrote his experience to a level of detailfulness that hasn't been expressed by many other nders.
Also very very grateful to anyone who would read this thread and think and/or also leave his or her thoughts here, I'm very interested in the other's opinions but it's very difficult for me to read and write English sentences so I would not respond when I would have not been able to weave a constructive idea of agreement or disagreement discussion. That nde account is very hard for me to read through and there are still a lot of sentences I do not completely understand but maybe it's not any problem to others.