Do you believe in reincarnation or rebirth?

[Baladas]

I'm unsure if it is considered reincarnation but, I think we are all a part of one entity (God/universe) and never separate from it. So the only thing different in death is the animation that controlled the body ceases to be. If you consider that separateness from God is an illusion, you could say that death is just disillusionment. We are all ONE soul. Many bodies.

I'm hoping for some reincarnation believers to answer a quick question: How is reincarnation significantly different than nonexistence after death? If we are unaware of the process itself?

My thoughts are around these lines. I have considered also the existence of souls of some sort, "separate" in a way similar to our bodies.

Intuitively, I believe that I will "rejoin" a "source" on death. I am unclear on what would happen from their...further incarnations? Possible. Intellectually, I retain an agnostic perspective regarding both reincarnation and any afterlife.
Now, if my intuition proves wrong and there is no form of soul, then I will still return to the earth. That thought gives me peace enough. I don't need to know for sure.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Levite is knowledgeable wrt reincarnation and the Jewish tradition, .you can read what he has to say on this thread....
reincarnation in judaism | ReligiousForums.com

 

[NulliuSINverba]

Do you believe in reincarnation or rebirth?

No.

 

[BSM1]

My take on the matter is I believe in reincarnation and detailed my understanding and beliefs in post #20.

I am very interested in this subject and to this day I have never even heard a clear explanation of rebirth as different than reincarnation. Many Rebirth proponents believe the mind stream continues on without a soul but then I question by what mechanism can such a thing take place and nobody to this date has claimed to really know.

(btw; as advaita, I believe in an impermanent soul that lasts for many, many lower plane experiences but eventually merges into its source)

My take is Rebirth=Reincarnation

Basically my understanding is that a re-incarnated soul would be instantly aware of it's previous existence as it occupies it's next body. A re-born soul is not usually truly aware of it's earlier incarnation(s). In other word a re-incarnated soul could say, "Today I occupy George-ananda, but yesterday I occupied Joe Smith who lived at 240 Elm Street, etc." A re-born soul could only guess at this (thus a thread that can only ask for speculation). I think most people mean re-birth when they say re-incarnation.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Indeed. It always made the most logical sense to me. I never was able to believe in the idea that there's one life and then you go on to some eternal destination, even while Catholic. Similarly, the idea that we cease to exist after brain death is equally ludicrous, imo.

I've personally seen people change so much from purely physical causes that I couldn't rightly say that they were the same person they started as. If I can't say for sure that the "self" persists through life, why would I presume that it can survive death? In every measurable way, everything we see suggests that we're purely physical... no?

 

[Koldo]

The erudite Hindu understanding wrt reincarnation is that the personal identity does not reincarnate...it is the spiritual soul that has the synthesized evolved awareness resulting from the experience of all previous lifetimes that reincarnates.

Your admission of not having any real understanding of what the concept of reincarnation means is an honest acknowledgement...admirable.

Since the situation presents itself: How to evaluate such a reincarnation when constrasted to the natural decay of our bodies ?
How is it different from the atoms that now form our bodies being used to give rise to other lifeforms in the future?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Actually, there is some credible reincarnation research that has been conducted.

After reading the criticisms of that research in the article you linked to, you still consider the research to be credible? Why?

 

[DragonHawk1959]

Do you believe in reincarnation or rebirth?

They are basically the same concept, unless you toss in transmigration of souls. Even then there is little to differentiate the concepts.

 

[BSM1]

They are basically the same concept, unless you toss in transmigration of souls. Even then there is little to differentiate the concepts.

Read my post #64 and tell me what you think.

 

[viole]

Do you believe in reincarnation or rebirth?

Nope.

Even if I believed in it, it would be useless, since I cannot recollect anything about my past I.

Ciao

- viole

 

[George-ananda]

Basically my understanding is that a re-incarnated soul would be instantly aware of it's previous existence as it occupies it's next body. A re-born soul is not usually truly aware of it's earlier incarnation(s). In other word a re-incarnated soul could say, "Today I occupy George-ananda, but yesterday I occupied Joe Smith who lived at 240 Elm Street, etc." A re-born soul could only guess at this (thus a thread that can only ask for speculation). I think most people mean re-birth when they say re-incarnation.

From what you are saying we could completely consider reincarnation as false because we obviously don't have that kind of memory. But in Hinduish understanding, it is not the previous incarnation that reincarnates but the soul of that previous incarnation that reincarnates. The soul remembers all incarnations but each incarnation itself starts as a blank slate.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

From what you are saying we could completely consider reincarnation as false because we obviously don't have that kind of memory. But in Hinduish understanding, it is not the previous incarnation that reincarnates but the soul of that previous incarnation that reincarnates. The soul remembers all incarnations but each incarnation itself starts as a blank slate.

... and I'm sure you can provide us with a soul that can be measured and examined so that we can confirm your claims about them... right?

 

[George-ananda]

... and I'm sure you can provide us with a soul that can be measured and examined so that we can confirm your claims about them... right?

No, because souls are not part of the physical realm.

Hindu thought believes many sages/masters perceive beyond the physical realm using senses of their super-physical bodies (astral/mental/causal). And my study of the paranormal has led me to believe there is more than the physical realm. The masters teach us of these things.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No, because souls are not part of the physical realm.

If not being "part of the physical realm" implies that we can't investigate a thing, then how can you be sure that your claims are correct?

Hindu thought believes many sages/masters perceive beyond the physical realm using senses of their super-physical bodies (astral/mental/causal). And my study of the paranormal has led me to believe there is more than the physical realm. The masters teach us of these things.

That's all fine and good, but even if we assume the existence of this mysterious, investigation-proof realm, claims about this realm aren't necessarily true. How do you differentiate between true and false claims about the non-physical? How do you tell a real "master" from a fake one, and how do you determine whether a "master's" claims are correct? After all, you aren't claiming that these "masters" are infallible, are you?

 

[outhouse]

No, because souls are not part of the physical realm.

Can we also say with certainty, they don't exist in reality if they do not exist in the physical?

 

[George-ananda]

If not being "part of the physical realm" implies that we can't investigate a thing, then how can you be sure that your claims are correct?

It can't be objectively investigated the way physical beings can investigate physical things. We can't know with the same rigorousness as physical experiments.

That's all fine and good, but even if we assume the existence of this mysterious, investigation-proof realm, claims about this realm aren't necessarily true. How do you differentiate between true and false claims about the non-physical? How do you tell a real "master" from a fake one, and how do you determine whether a "master's" claims are correct? After all, you aren't claiming that these "masters" are infallible, are you?

It comes from the quantity and quality of masters saying things on the same page. In the end, yes, it is for us laymen to form our own opinion about what is most reasonable to believe.

 

[George-ananda]

Can we also say with certainty, they don't exist in reality if they do not exist in the physical?

No. In fact in Hindu/Advaita thought, the physical realm is the most removed from reality which is Brahman. It is Maya (Illusion in Hinduism) that makes beings of a realm believe that it is the only real.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It can't be objectively investigated the way physical beings can investigate physical things. We can't know with the same rigorousness as physical experiments.

Does this mean that your conclusions about souls (e.g. that they go through rebirth, and that they retain memories of past lives) are also not rigorous? How much doubt should we give your conclusions?

It comes from the quantity and quality of masters saying things on the same page. In the end, yes, it is for us laymen to form our own opinion about what is most reasonable to believe.

... and when a line of "masters" who are immersed in a particular religious tradition all say things that are consistent with their religion and with each other, you think it's more reasonable to attribute this consistency to them all having seen the same "non-physical" things and not to the fact that they're all products of the same religion?

What do you make of, say, Christians and Muslims who also claim religious experiences, but say that they support views incompatible with the conclusions you're drawing (i.e. that there's no reincarnation at all and souls go straight to Heaven after death)? How did you decide that Hindu mystics are more trustworthy than Christian mystics?

 

[George-ananda]

Does this mean that your conclusions about souls (e.g. that they go through rebirth, and that they retain memories of past lives) are also not rigorous?

To me I have enough evidence to now believe these things beyond reasonable doubt. It comes from my study of the paranormal and the teachings of the eastern masters. To me, the strongest competing theory, materialism, is not tenable in the face of all the paranormal evidence I have reviewed.

How much doubt should we give your conclusions?

Everybody should do their own investigation and form their own opinion.

... and when a line of "masters" who are immersed in a particular religious tradition all say things that are consistent with their religion and with each other, you think it's more reasonable to attribute this consistency to them all having seen the same "non-physical" things and not to the fact that they're all products of the same religion?

I have studied many of these masters and their lives and believe they are legitimately experience beyond the physical. and that many are old souls that return to physical incarnation to teach. On a more touch/feel level these masters often exhibit siddhi powers (paranormal abilities) that help evidence they are in touch with more than the physical. Study them and form your opinion.

What do you make of, say, Christians and Muslims who also claim religious experiences, but say that they support views incompatible with the conclusions you're drawing (i.e. that there's no reincarnation at all and souls go straight to Heaven after death)? How did you decide that Hindu mystics are more trustworthy than Christian mystics?

I think that in the highest mystical traditions of these western faiths that things start sounding very eastern. I do believe that the culture of India has delved the deepest in understanding the nature of reality.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Since the situation presents itself: How to evaluate such a reincarnation when constrasted to the natural decay of our bodies ?
How is it different from the atoms that now form our bodies being used to give rise to other lifeforms in the future?

The atoms that form our bodies are continuously being exchanged as cells are replaced,....,perhaps in a relative sense, they too, at that elemental level, offer opportunity for some sort of evolutionary unfoldment? Actually this is Theosophical understanding....consciousness evolves and flows through the elemental kingdoms, to the mineral, plant, animal, human, angelic, etc...

And apparently the Sufis, though Rumi started with the mineral instead of the elements....

I died as a mineral and became a plant;
I died as a plant and rose to animal;
I died as an animal and I was a man.
Why should I fear?
When was I less by dying?
Yet once more I shall die as man to soar...
With angels blest.
But even from an angel I must pass on:
All except God must perish.
When I have sacrificed my angel soul,
I shall become what no mind ever conceived. -Jalaluddin Rumi

So all the kingdoms of nature are permanent, in principle someways like the classes in the school system, but as the consciousness/student awareness unfolds, it seamlessly passes through all the grades until graduation....