Of course there is no life after death. It is the wrong question. The real question is ‘ is there life before death?
And if there is, what is the nature of it ? Is there ‘consciousness’ that exists outside the complex functions of the brain, and if so why is birth a begining and death the end. Is life then not just a transient phase of consciousness with no begining and no full stop ? How could you die if you did not really exist ?
The battle rages. The scientists (see the latest Time magazine) argue that all of consciousness exists in the brain, and once we understand all the functions of the brain, we will see that there is no existence beyond the interactions between the trillions of neurotransmitters of the brain. remember that the scientists always say ‘once we have understood it all, we will discover that …’.
So the scientists say that we do exist. In the form of thought processes thrown out by neurotransmitters.The scientists agree that we have no physical form. For all matter is just a series of waves or energy particles. So what they (the scientists) are saying is that our reality lies in the thought processes generated by nerotransmitters that reside in our brain. Thats all we are. Thought processes.
The ‘consciousness’ philosophers (and some very eminent scientists) are saying that there is consciousness beyond thought processes. Which you will discover only when you go beyond thought. That thought creates it’s own reality, which really is an illusion, and they call it the Ego.
Problem is that science is based on two distinct entities. The object of observation and the observer. And even science (the Quantum Physicists) are proving that the act of observation distinctly influences the observed. So a particle will not exist in any point of time and space unless it is observed. It is almost as if the observation creates the particle, that was a mere fluid possibility till there is an observer and an act of observation.
And Scientists do not question the existence of the observer. Who created the observer that created the particle in space/time through the act of his/her observation except thought ? In a converse way it could be said that the ‘event’ of observation of the particle co created both the Observer and the observed ! So God (so to speak) in this case was the Event that co created both in that space/time.
But if we human beings are the ‘observers’, then atleast within our lifetimes, we (the scientists) see ourselves as continously existing in linear time/space. Till we die. At which time all time space of our existence simply dissapears. So there are fundamental laws of nature that we are experimenting with, that the scientists claim, are the truth against which we can measure and observe our own existence. And those of the fundamental laws that which we cannot explain we say will be explained by science one day.
But the philosophies of Consciousness’ believe that both the observer and the observed co create each other. That neither actually exist except as consciousness. And the duality or the seperation is cretaed through imagination. Of one or the other.
Now to the idea of the Soul. If we are pure consciousness, and have no induvidual existence except in our own illusions, then why do we say that our individualities exist after death in the form of an Individualistic soul ? And if there is no soul, then how do you explain the very scientifically documented instances of re-incarnation ?
I believe that the soul is not individual, but a collective universal consciousness. Documented instances of reincarnation are merely the tapping into the memories of the vast collective consciousness and edited into the ideas of of a singular lifetime. Once again the act of observation creating the illusion of one particular reincarnation,