What is life? - it seems to me that one of the problems we face in discussing it is in how we define it, is it to be seen as an 'energy' which animates us, and then disappears when we die? - or does it exist whether or not we do? that is : is it an intrinsic part of the cosmos, or does it only exist temporarily?

Another of the problems is where it comes from, if it's not intrinsic to the cosmos, then it must - presumably - be unique to ourselves (living things), and that it is somehow created by our bodies in order to animate and enliven them. To assume this to be true is to assume that a mixture of inanmate chemicals are capable of somehow 'creating' it.

In my opinion, it's an intrinsic part of the cosmos, as intrinsic to the cosmos as is gravity, the strong and weak nuclear forces, et cetera.


How do you think of it?


Peace, Love, & Light

__________________
"An object is perceived, or not perceived, according as the mind is, or is not, tinged with the colour of the object. "
Patanjali - Sutra 4:17

Aged Hippy, I have a question: You state you believe that life is a part of the cosmos. What is the cosmos? What is the difference between the universe and the cosmos?

Do you believe that when a human being dies that his/her life separates from the body, but stays in the cosmos? Not disputing anything (at least not yet LOL) Just want to understand how your beliefs fit together : )

__________________
May your awareness be perfection

LOL .... I was half expecting it....

"Aged Hippy, I have a question: You state you believe that life is a part of the cosmos. What is the cosmos? What is the difference between the universe and the cosmos?"
I tend to use the word "cosmos" because it seems to me to be more descriptive, - "Universe" suggests to me all that we can see through telescopes, whether optical or radio, it has a 'scientific', 'observable', 'measureable', un-living sense to it -- "cosmos" i tend to use in preference because it is a less 'cold', 'scientific' word, to me.

"Do you believe that when a human being dies that his/her life separates from the body, but stays in the cosmos? Not disputing anything (at least not yet LOL) Just want to understand how your beliefs fit together : )"
The body dies, i don't see how anything can leave the cosmos.


Peace, Love, & Light

__________________
"An object is perceived, or not perceived, according as the mind is, or is not, tinged with the colour of the object. "
Patanjali - Sutra 4:17

O.K. I see...I think LOL

In the book I am reading "I am that" by Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj, Maharaj states that Life is Love and Love is Life. I agree fully with him. Without Love there is no Life and without Life there is no Love. It is one and the same.

I believe that the universe is a manifested idea based on the belief in a separation.

__________________
May your awareness be perfection

How do you explain that there are so many planets, moons, stars, etc. that have no life on them. If the Universe gives life, then why is there so much of it without life.

As for the life of a human. I thought about a person who has severe brain damage. That person could be considered alive, but doesn't really have life, because he/she isn't capable of doing anything. So, is the brain like a radio receiver or does it function on it's own.

There would be no life without the sun, water or oxygen, etc. So in effect the Universe does at least sustain life.

__________________
InterfaithForums.com-Where your ideas and beliefs count.

Life 101: God is Life. All of Creation, eternally, is God. There is no body or particle of one, no matter how miniscual, if composed of "flesh and blood", of rock, or gas, of light or dark, that falls outside Creation. Everything is ONE with God. God is omnipresent, Life is omnipresent. Our physical perception is so shallow and one-dimensional the only thing we see as "life" is that which we percieve as growing and contributing. Life is quite literally Eternal, it never stops, it never rests, it simply changes form but continues on growing spiritually so that the physical aspects can continue evolving.

There's a test following this lesson, in fact fellow students, this IS the test.

__________________
Only Love Prevails,
Don

Lightkeeper, with all due respect, i'm not explaining anything.

I was rather hoping that others (yourself included ) would explain their thoughts on the matter, which is why i asked: "How do you think of it?"


Peace, Love, & Light

__________________
"An object is perceived, or not perceived, according as the mind is, or is not, tinged with the colour of the object. "
Patanjali - Sutra 4:17

One can't help but read some confusion of definition into this thread. Life, after all, is a condition of matter, in which some matter is organized into systems which are autopoietic: i.e. self-constructing, self-maintaining, energy-transducing and autocatalytic.” (From the Standford Enclopedia of Philosophy).

In that sense, life is terminal, since all such autopoietic systems of which we are aware (so far) have a limited existence for any individual entity. Still, when they are "self-reproducing systems capable of evolving by variation and natural selection" (SEP), life in that sense is not limited, and as long as conditions permit, can continue indefinitely.

But I gather from the overall sense of the original question that we are not talking about life as a biologist would, but about whether there is some feature of humans (and further, we must ask, of any system that we would call living) which can continue beyond the biological change from living to non-living that we call death.

I guess I believe that because life is "energy-transducing," we cannot think of life as being "energy" in the sense that Aged Hippy seems to mean. Energy is available throughout the cosmos, and living systems use energy. Some of that energy is changed into matter for use within the living system, and after the death of the living system, such energy as is now stored in that matter is available to be transduced back into energy and thus used in another living system. But this transduction of energy does not seem to me to be in any way the same idea as the transference of life.

It is kind of analagous to billiard balls. Energy is imparted to the cue ball by the player and his cue, and the cue ball transfers that energy to a target ball. But the target ball takes on nothing other of the cue ball except the energy transfered. The cue ball, devoid of the energy it once had, simply stops but remains the cue ball.

Thus, we must look to something other than "energy" if we're looking for some continuation of what is here being referred to as "life," which I rather suspect has more to do with consciousness, the sense of "self" than it does with anything else.

That's a whole other argument, that I don't think will fit in this thread (although it continues apace elsewhere in the Forums).

__________________
evangelicalhumanist: Greek "eu"=good and "angelos"=messenger. Spreading the good news of Humanism.

With respect, i didn't say that "the Universe gives life", i said that "In my opinion, [life is] an intrinsic part of the cosmos, as intrinsic to the cosmos as is gravity, the strong and weak nuclear forces, et cetera." - which is a very different thing, i think you'll agree.

"That person could be considered alive, but doesn't really have life," - it seems to me that - so long as they are living they must - by definition - have "life" -- even if that life is sustained by machinery.

"So, is the brain like a radio receiver or does it function on it's own." - i don't think that the brain endows us with life, i think that it's an interface between our consciousness and other aspects of consciousness (our soul, etc.).


Peace, Love, & Light

__________________
"An object is perceived, or not perceived, according as the mind is, or is not, tinged with the colour of the object. "
Patanjali - Sutra 4:17

You have it in one, E.H., the energy we receive from food, etc., is obviously used to sustain our life, but i don't think that life is somehow "transferred", i think that it exists independently of living organisms.
.... You're correct, E.H., i see "life" as a medium through which consciousness expresses itself, but i can't think of a word more apt than "energy".


Peace, Love, & Light

__________________
"An object is perceived, or not perceived, according as the mind is, or is not, tinged with the colour of the object. "
Patanjali - Sutra 4:17