Am I dying and becoming a Body?

Well said. Our world has become dangerously self-confident in its academic talents. Like a much improved long-jumper convinced he will one day learn to fly, the "great minds" of our time seem to operate under the notion that every aspect of the universe and human existence can be studied and eventually understood. Thus, the mysteries of our world are no longer amazing, but rather, TBD.

Thanks Jonathan.
I have no issue with the "great minds" trying to understand everything. My question is: is there a way of doing this without dismantling the spiritual-emotional world-view of life? Of course, the scientist would say: "I am doing my job of showing the scientific truths. You do your job of ensuring that the spiritual-emotional truths are sustained.

This is where perhaps another kind of Truth-seekers have a role. The poets, philosophers, religious men, psychologists and social thinkers need to play their part in sustaining the sense of beauty in a world which is becoming too bare.

Good morning Dogra,
Nice expression of what I to see and struggle with in this world. I ask you do you live in the city where the wonders of natural creation are not much to be seen? I live in the country where many forms of creation in their beauty and complexity surround me going in and out of form seasonally. If one accepts that man's abilities are finite and cannot possibly even create a blade of grass one realizes that mans reflection we call science cannot write formulas or design experiments to isolate all variables. Just look at the complexity of any natural creation and realize that it is made to be beautiful in its inpercievable complexity that works as part of a larger whole incredibly. Check out Lynn McTaggarts book The Field. Science is showing what you are seeking.

George, I agree. Nature carries out billions of wonders all around us every billionth of a second. The other day I was reading about the chemistry of how neural impulses are transmitted. It is unimaginable how complex these seemingly simple biological processes are --- the way millions of charged particles move around to carry the nerve impulse from one part to the other!

Satish: What a brilliant, compelling article!!! I was breathtaken at the sincerity and clarity of thought with which you presented your intellingent questioning.

This is why I subscribe to your work. I would not want to miss having found something of this caliber from such a heart of sincerity and a mind of such intelligence. May I request your permission to print this off and frame it. I will leave the full page intact so that you may be seen and named from your avatar as its author

Barbara,
I am overwhelmed by your praise. Your good and gentle heart is written over every word that you have said. I'll feel privileged if you find any good use for my poem. Please go ahead and use it whichever way you feel like.

Thanks for remarks.

We have no such power to change our natures. We just think things.

John,
Your comment is short and somewhat enigmatic. What do you mean by "we just think things"? Do you mean that reality does not exist except in our minds? If that is what you mean, I would agree with you and say that is exactly what I wish to say through the poem. If what matters is how we perceive things, then it is necessary that the spiritual-emotional way of perceiving, which has come to us through the generations, should not be lost. For, in my opinion, that will deprive life of its worth. As I have said in the poem, it will either remove life away from us into a telescopic vision or atomise it, making it difficult to have a holistic view. Spiritualism-emotion is the fabric that holds life together for what it is.

Satish,

Sorry, I didn't really think through what I wrote, I was sort of responding to the final question of the poem.

I believe we have the potential to ignore, or "camouflage" our nature with various forms of reactive thinking, but have little ability to actually alter the fundamental aspects of our consciousness. Essentially, we can go insane, but cannot "create" an alternate form of sanity.

Science is nowhere even near understanding thought or consciousness. The vast majority of these things are barely understandable to we who experience them intimately on a moment to moment basis. Our minds ARE thought receiving and decoding instruments, and that thought is absolutely customized to that minds nature. Basically, I believe altering our nature in a fundamental way is very much like lifting ourselves up by pulling on our shoestrings, there is simply no place to "get a purchase" for such movement.

I certainly agree that consciousness is itself a "spiritual" phenomenon, almost by definition. We, the conscious beings are in fact not physical. If one is speaking of the "loss" of vital sensitivities within our thinking, of course I see that happening all the time, but no "new" thing takes the place of what is lost. We simply become less intelligent and insightful. The flame is dimmed, but it can only be fire.

John,
You have said a few things which give me the chance to make my point clearer.

You say one cannot create an alternative form of sanity. Also, you say altering our nature is like lifting ourselves up by pulling our shoe-strings.

Consciousness as you say works by a system of coding and decoding. Fair enough, bu I feel that the methods and techniques or, so to say, the framework within which that coding-decoding occurs is determined by what we imbibe from our cultural environment. Some would say that we have a world-view that is imbibed from the Collective Unconscious.

Your last paragraph says exactly what I intended to be the theme of the poem: we are moving towards a time when the values that have sustained human civilisation might disappear and we might become physical beings either devoid of a soul or not aware of it.

My belief is that organisations and groups of people need to make a conscious effort to sustain the spiritual vision that has sustained life but which seems to be gradually slipping off.

Satish,

Well, yes, we are in agreement on most everything here. I suppose my original answer to the poem's final question was intended to express that in an adamant way. We can think we are doing just about anything we wish, but in reality we can only achieve the maturation of the whole being. This undertaking alone itself would keep us busy for a thousand years, at least, I think.

And yes, efforts simply must be made to keep humanity from imagining away its sensitivity to its "spiritual" foundation. While we have "no place else to go", we can certainly do a whole lot of damage pursuing the illusion that we do. As for "organisations and groups of people need[ing] to make a conscious effort to sustain the spiritual vision that has sustained life but which seems to be gradually slipping off" . . . I believe what we call 'religions' are just such attempts. While many get sidetracked into various silliness, they are by and large a response by those who sense this deterioration and feel the urge to forestall just such a future as you here summons to our imaginations.

As you may or may not realize, I have come to the conclusion that there is indeed a God, and that He is indeed presiding over this entire "process" of mankind either coming to understand the intrinsic "spiritual" nature of itself, or deny the very gift of intelligence imparted to us, and become abominations of insensitive cleverness. I do not believe this conundrum is an accident, or a failed attempt to create truly intelligent beings with which to share eternity in meaningful relationship. I believe this is our "kindergarten", perhaps for some the early grades of primary education.

I further believe that what you herein address is the major emphasis of our early learning experience here; To awaken to what we are, by our own capabilities of reason and other insight, and to realize we are destined to love one another, and Him, or become pointless "physical" entities in our own hell of endless attempts at self gratification, and rationalizations for making that the center of our existence.

I would urge you to be very cautious in approaching some basic concepts about how we arrive at our "world views". In particular, the easily committed error in logic that because scripture could be falsely attributed to God, it cannot be otherwise. And the companion false logic of the notion that God would see to it that all scripture is equally His handiwork. Our human notions of "fairness" tend to get in the way of objective analysis and inquiry. We forget that God may not be seeking a truly "fair" situation by human standards, and may actually have included what to us appears as "unfairness" in the lesson plan.

Failure to "depose" this godlike preconception of our sense of what ought to be happening, can easily result in narrow-mindedness.

John,
Thanks for your words of wisdom. You have summed up a lot in very nice and precise words. I would only say this in response: If we are indeed in a kindergarten of moral-spiritual learning, let us each play our role in expediting the leaning process, so that, as I have said in my poem and as you say in your message, we do not "become pointless physical entities in our own hell of endless attempts of self-gratification".

Satish,

Playing such a role can only be rivaled by efforts to relieve needless suffering and gross injustice, if one seeks to be a good student. It is THAT important and worthy of respect.

Thank you my friend, may we enhance each others resolve forever.

Dogra, wonderful poem my friend. This work touches on the "stuff of life". In our attempts to be scientifically relevant are we dismantling our system of civility, morality, faith and more importantly a belief in something higher than ourselves? As we break everything down to its smallest common denominator -- what will be left if we lose our simple, child-like faith in things that appear improbable?

Nice work! I like the way you think!

Thanks Mary. Your words are inspiring as always.

We will once again become athe atoms and neutrons of the cosmos. Only to re-form again into an new shape for another lifetime I think.

I agree.