Hi Nje-

Think about an expanding helix. It does both. So do we.

We cycle through the repetitive days, but we grow linearly. We swap bodies repetitively in cycles of reincarnation as we evolve spiritually.

d

Hi Nje-

OK - forgive me for rambling, but I suggest that it's kinda like this. We had a Beginning in which there was set apart the "is" from the "isn't", or we had an Infinte Regression in which concepts suggesting a prior and succeeding state recede infintely into the distance, and with rspect to which today's "is" corresponds to yesterday's "isn't yet", giving us the same dichotomous logic extnding into logical space orthogonally to the Infinite Regression.

Any dichotomy has two parts, the parts differ, thus they also define a mediating relationship, so that after a dichotomy we get an implied triple, with "is and was", "isn't but is becoming" and "something in common relating the two", that readily breaks down to the Hindu trisgunas (see Shankara's Crest Jewel of Discrimination for example). In modern terms, this is a 3-space model of reality, hence in modern terms, process, substantive structure, and relationals.

From this level we have the same inferred extension into a new relational space etc, giving all compbinations of 3-space elements, and thus a 7-space:
  Process(a,b,c)=>(a,b,c,ab,ac,bc,abc)
This is set formation with replacement because it's all logical stuff, nothing material.

The next implied level is all combinations of 7-space elements to form a 127-space. It's like a hall of mirrors that echoes infinitely. (You can do this one yourself - it's messy.)

Each level of change corresponds to a new cycle in which all the old values are accumulated, restated, related in all ways to one another, and then put forth anew as the combinatoric complexion (the set of all subsets). So we have reality extending as an iterated complexion. (It makes a fun model if you like problems of symbolic logic.) At present we live in a space that is approximately the 4.3 complexion iterations of the initial dichotomy. Aztec mythology says we are in the "fifth cosmic cycle", which means about the same thing, I'd guess. Also, if you look at cosmic density charts, we can see ripples in star formation densities  that suggest four prior epochs.

Given these ideas, we both are moving forward by accretion of information etc, and at the same time we are in a cosmic cycle, a helical progression, iterating our existence as cycles of change.

The problem with these ideas is that they define a dynamic universe in which the only thing that exists is the dynamic, and in which the idea of "matter" is an epiphenomenon - just an appearance. That's great for quantum mechanics who are used to observables being defined only in the changes of state of their systems, and being otherwise invisible. But  most people believe in "things", and by projecting a notion of materiality onto their experiences, in which there actually are no "things",  we screw up our logic.

All that you know is known as a series of interpretations of changes in your sensory system. Constancy is not perceivable - stare at a black wall for a moment and your vision saturates and greys out.. You need change in order to perceive.  Further, because you perceive only through changes, and because you have no other contact with the world, your ideas about how and with what you peceive is only a projection based on what seems to make the most sense, a dream. "Row, row, row your boat, life is but a dream"

Every time we pass through a cosmic cycle we summarize the past, just as your entry into adult life at puberty was a sort of summary of all you had learned in childhood, plus a new experience into which you were projected, and which allowed you to create new childhoods in others by repeating the initial dichotomous union with someone else. The same is true for the idea of merging into "oneness", in the sense that it summarizes your life in the world and allows you to create new lives and worlds. Edgar Cayce used the term "co-creators with God" to express this.

The idea of a helix is thus appropriate, in the sense that we cycle round and round, actually repeating bits and pieces of prior experiences as we extend them forward into new experiences. So, as I suggested in the beginning, we go in cycles that lead to a linear accumulation of wisdom etc until we get to do it all for ourselves, giving forth others from ourselves who are like ourselves, and then we go on to some other level etc.

whew!

dave

We cycle because everything keeps circulating around and interacting with itself - that's true on the smallest levels, and it just slows down as we get bigger. This isn't a matter of choice or specific kind of situation, but rather it's the way things grow by repeated interactions under various circumstances.  It's like saying that all triangles have 3 sides. because that's the nature of triangles. We go through cycles because there is nothing that operates on an exclusively linear basis. And when you get through with this level of reality, perhaps going into some exotic place, you'll still be involved in cycles.

That helix comparison is interesting, but if what cycles is both evolution and experience/memories, what's left to keep progressing?

What's the whole point of it all?

Do we do this for ourselves, or are we all ultimately tools being used by some "god" being?

If the source of all consciousness was an original consciousness that came from natural elements(where else could it come from?), who's to say it doesn't suffer from some mental disorder?  This would explain a lot about this universe and all of it's flaws, especially if one believes everything is subjective(or everything but consciousness itself).

I'd really like to know why people believe what they do.  An archive forum where everyone here interested could post their own profiles of what their beliefs are, why they believe that, and how their belief system works(like for a belief system with reincarnation, how and why they believe we incarnate) would be very helpful in discussions- you'd know where they stand, and possibly better understand their point of view on the issue being discussed.

Hi Nje-
Years back I did doctoral research on the nature of knowledge.  The way it works is that we learn something, then add to that whatever else we know, and then we try to make sense of it. Then we learn something else, and to that we add whatever sense we made of prior knowledge, and so on indefinitely. Information is additive with replacement, so we can reuse the same ideas many times over. That way, everything gets related to everything else. It is possible (but awkward) to express this as either a straight line of accretion of data, or as a circular rehashing that steadily recycles. Better is the idea of a helix, like a spring that uncurls into larger and larger loops as we gain more and more knowledge, until we finally reach a plateau, such as discovery that it's all a big charade, a chimera, a mirage, and actually we are just puppets of some big god-thing.

By the way, if you want to take a peek at the god-thing, just look into a mirror.

I tend to have fuin here. But, as for what is the real and ultimate sense of doing all this, I suggest that I really don't know. If you want to check out, it's up to you. Just hold your breath. Ciao, baby.

dave

Nje,

By the way, I don't think anyone here has a definite answer to your last questions about "why."  The New Age dogma is that we voluntarily wipe our memory to learn certain things.  I suppose if we had memory of our failures, we might do the right thing for the wrong reason.  In other words, the New Agers believe that if you want to learn selfless love, in order to progress, it must come naturally, not because you are aware of the cosmic game and wish to spiritually progress. 

I'm not sure what my take is on New Age thinking about past lives and karma.  As I said in my past posts, memory is a key part of wisdom.  Can my "soul," become wise without past memories?  Yes and no.  I can have tendencies to do the right thing in the right situation.  I can have a gut level feeling that love is the true path.  But I will always act in the physical world as a result of my experiences too and memory.

So, I'm not sure if we have countless incarnations, how my soul would progress without the voluntary memory being intact.  Unless after we pass, each time, all the memories are reintegrated.

My own belief is that reincarnation is not nearly as frequent as some have let on.  If you read George Anderson (the medium) website, he says basically the same thing.  It may be a possible choice for all, with specific goals, but by no means is going back to the drawing board a done deal.

Matthew

NJE,

One thing I'm more and more sure of, is that the decision to "merge" (ascend, etc)  is all yours.  No one will force you back into a sea or void kicking and screaming.  None of the communication or NDEs speaks of this, although Chumley sometimes does.

M