The term labyrinth is often used interchangeably with maze, but modern scholars of the subject use a stricter definition. For them, a maze is a tour puzzle in the form of a complex branching passage with choices of path and direction; while a single-path (unicursal) labyrinth has only a single Eulerian path to the center. A labyrinth has an unambiguous through-route to the center and back and is not designed to be difficult to navigate.
This unicursal design was widespread in artistic depictions of the Minotaur’s Labyrinth, even though both logic and literary descriptions of it make it clear that the Minotaur was trapped in a multicursal maze.
A labyrinth can be represented both symbolically and physically. Symbolically, it is represented in art or designs on pottery, as body art, etched on walls of caves, etc. Physical representations are common throughout the world and are generally constructed on the ground so they may be walked along from entry point to center and back again. They have historically been used in both group ritual and for private meditation.
This has been brewing in the back of my mind for some time now. AS you can see with my previous post entitled,”What are Memories made up of ?,” I am going after the “scientific validation” that is needed in my view with which to grant substance to the depth of persons life, as if thought held to an reincarnate perspective.
Some things that are held in mind are much as if one were a tracker and what evidence allows one to see such an impression set as a footprint indeed, leaves us some information about what had existed before. I think this is significant when I think about what passes to earth as LIGO operation are measured, in the ligo arms.
This is why I reference KIp Thorne and all those who study gravitational waves are trackers of a sort in my mind, as to what existed before, has indeed left an impression for us to measure now. Thusly to say “the bulk,” then is to say that such evidence exists all around us in this way.
Now what makes this different is something that I had found in my own life, so yes, how can I say that this is there for others as well? Subjectively, we understand that the mind requires a science validation process that would account for some kind of verification as to something that passes from one life to another?
If a sceptic then of course where is one’s proof. While it is required for them, it is not so important to me, that while venturing to be much like a scientist, that I am happy to say these things hold meaning that exist without out that need.
According to the scriptures, the Buddha taught a concept of rebirth that was distinct from that of any known contemporary Indian teacher. This concept was consistent with the common notion of a sequence of related lives stretching over a very long time, but was constrained by two core Buddhist concepts: anattā, that there is no irreducible ātman or “self” tying these lives together; and anicca, that all compounded things are subject to dissolution, including all the components of the human person and personality. At the death of one personality, a new one comes into being, much as the flame of a dying candle can serve to light the flame of another.
Since, according to Buddhism, there is no permanent and unchanging self (identity) there can be no transmigration in the strict sense. Buddhism teaches that what is reborn is not the person but that one moment gives rise to another and that this momentum continues, even after death. It is a more subtle concept than the usual notion of reincarnation, reflecting the Buddhist concept of personality existing (even within one’s lifetime) without a “Self”. Instead of a fixed entity, what is reborn is an “evolving consciousness” (M.1.256) or “stream of consciousness” (D.3.105), whose quality has been conditioned by karma.
Buddhism suggests that samsara, the process of rebirth, occurs across five or six realms of existence. It is actually said in Tibetan Buddhism that it is very rare for a person to be reborn in the immediate next life as a human. This depends on the karmic potentialities (or “seeds”) they have created with their actions and upon their state of mind at the time of death. If we die with a peaceful mind, this will stimulate a virtuous seed and we shall experience a fortunate rebirth; but if we die with a disturbed mind, in a state of anger, say, this will stimulate a non-virtuous seed and we shall experience an unfortunate rebirth. This is similar to the way in which nightmares are triggered by our being in an agitated state of mind just before falling asleep.
How many examples here then shown in link above, only as one, that I can say that my views are and coincide with this perspective, or that belief? This does not invalidate these views at all, just that I am struggling to explain myself within context of the subject, yet personal, in the way I came about my own view.
This runs contrary to many aspects of the beliefs in reincarnation, that anything of the personality could survive let alone “some mandala symbol that is transferable” from one life to another “as an model of perspective.” This was troubling in my mind that if I can experience facets of my consciousnesses in the idea of “containment of experience,” then how can such symbolisms not be seen “as seeds” if you might, as to what transpires in another future mind from earlier time?
I can say, that intuitively such constructions were familiar to me. That such a process was developed, as I sought to understand my relation with the world. These experiences had a tremendous impact, as time moved on as if the writing just seem to follow from one question in mind, to the next. This is why questions seem to be so prevalent in my writing, that a question mark, could set the stage for what is to come next.
It is as if then, you lay out all the evidence before you, and in this containment of probables, what question will rise in mind that really brings all this evidence together? It’s a troubling time in mind, that being inundated and gathering research material, you wonder what it all means, and only by setting the stage for such incubation, will any egg transpire out of the “deliberate mind to facilitate” the emergence of the modelling.
Sure it will all sound familiar in a scientific concept kind of way. How can you then go backward when one must move forward according to some arrow of time. Time set forth as some evolutionary cause for the idea of a soul perfecting itself, after trials and tribulations, to make sense and mature through growth. Moving “around the wheel of life” one might say?
So you see then this is a problem for me in that a description given by Buddhism might immediately disqualify such a notion as I prepare for the enquiring mind as to “a method by which such models are built” and finally lived as life is breathed into.
How did this come to be?
Is an affinity with somethings in your life an adequate measure of some unseen bond that is struck between you and the object of your perception? Is there such a time as if in the state of mind that chaos could harbour a nightmare that one may also say that such a life work can spark some remembrance of things too, in such a state? It is in such a moment that certain events have strikingly force myself to consider some evidence to exist to support such a vision to see that such examples were plenty as I roamed the hall of our records to see that such perspective were held relevant in my mind. Mandalas a plenty then, and even conceptually, an liminocentric structure of you like. Mathematically appealing, as to a basis of an “geometric equatorial design” that rests at the basis of ones psychology.