Reincarnation

[leov]

Definition: "Reincarnation, a major tenet of Hinduism, is when the soul, which is seen as eternal and part of a spiritual realm, returns to the physical realm in a new body. The belief is that a soul will complete this cycle many times - even hundreds of times, learning new things each time and working through its karma. This cycle of reincarnation is called samsara."

Analysis: From a Biblical standpoint, reincarnation is a false doctrine: “It is appointed for man to die ONCE, and after that to face the judgment” (Hebrews 9:27).

In some Hindu teachings, if a person is "bad" in the present life, they may well wind up as a protected 'temple rat" in the next life. Which begs the question: If one is a 'bad' temple rat in that life, do they further regress to a temple cockroach, with an infinite regression back to an ill-mannered amoeba? What's more, who was the first person on earth reincarnated from, and which power on earth or in heaven facilitates those supposed rebirths?

Reincarnation voids the necessity of Christ for salvation and eternal life. If one can simply 'live again,' then what is the need to believe in Jesus? Therefore, Biblically speaking, the idea of reincarnation is Satanic.

The Bible makes it clear that Satan has been around since before the Garden of Eden. He knows what occurred in the lives of such people as Alexander the Great, Cleopatra, Hitler, and every other person who has lived since the creation of mankind. It is certainly not a “reach” then to believe that he and / or his demonic spirits can impart false memories of “prior lives” into the unregenerate minds of men, especially when those individuals are making an effort – such as in a seance – to establish “contact” with a former self or higher spiritual power.

Finally, there has never been any credible evidence that I've ever seen that reincarnation exists. If anyone has a good example of an individual who purported to have reincarnated, I'd like to see it.

Christianity was purged by political church leaders, by those who Paul called 'natural': 14"But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised."

 

[Salvador]

No.

Life could of emerged from nonlife in multiple locations seperated by millions of light years and billions of years throughout the Universe. We would expect this too, since if it has happened once i t's likely to of happened multiple times.

No doubt, of course, but there could have been an earliest point where life emerged. From this point, life naturally descended. Right?

At each point where life emerges from non-life, life could have naturally descend from a commonly shared initial ancestor. Right?

 

[Kapalika]

I'm also aware you could not demonstrate anything from the Gospels being shown to be fictitious.

Not directed at me, but that thing about Yahweh loving the world and sending Yeshua to save us seemed pretty fictious to me, as is their concept of sin. Yahweh is pretty wrathful yo

 

[Kapalika]

No doubt, of course, but there could have been an earliest point were life emerged. From this point, life naturally descended. Right?

At each point where life emerges from non-life, life could naturally descend. Right?

Yes but reincarnation doesn't address how life was created. That's been my point. Neither does reincarnation nessisitate a supernatural deity, not that they are mutually exclusive.

 

[Jainarayan]

Hinduism is no more based on science than Abrahamic faiths

Which is as it should be. As the Dalai Lama said, if science were to prove some tenets of Buddhism to be incorrect, Buddhism would have t be re-examined. The same to be said for Hinduism. If science somehow proved the Krishna and/or any of the gods, reincarnation, or any other matter of Hindu faith don't exist, I'd have to re-examine. However, I think it more likely that science (any discipline) would prove the validity.

Of course I don't want to see science disprove the beliefs I have. If we're talking about needing proof of something I believe in, then no, I don't require it. I'm working purely on faith. However, modern theoretical physics is beginning to line up with, or discover some truth in what Hinduism has held about the nature of existence and cosmology for 5,000 years, and even support it.

Maybe the rishis were more in tune with the natural world, or maybe because they devoted their lives to meditation, they had plenty of time to mentally masturbate on it. If it turns out that our gods really are blue-skinned benevolent extraterrestrials, hey, that's cool too. And maybe the rishis did get their knowledge from some blue dude with multiple arms. Who knows?

 

[Salvador]

Yes but reincarnation doesn't address how life was created. That's been my point. Neither does reincarnation nessisitate a supernatural deity, not that they are mutually exclusive.

Yes, we both agree reincarnation neither explains anything nor needs to exist at all whatsoever.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Consciousness might only be able to exist as embodied. There might not be any disembodied consciousness at some point. At the earliest point in our universe, the number of bodies with minds of consciousness in our universe was zero at which point there was no consciousness. Right? So then, consciousness could have emerged from the natural evolution of the body and mind. Right?

Certainly a plausible theory. Since I have no objective evidence to the contrary, you’ll have no argument from me.

 

[SalixIncendium]

You did make a claim -

*smiles* Just because @Shadow Wolf and I are not you doesn’t make us the same person...

...at least in relative reality. ​

 

[Jainarayan]

The point is that if all life could possibly have descended naturally from an earliest common universal ancestor which came into being from non-life having been within the limits of the physical realm of possibilities , , then nothing limitless ( i.e.-Brahman reincanation) is needed to explain how life comes into being.

That's true, but it doesn't negate the concept of Brahman. To fully grasp the concept of Brahman you have to divorce yourself from the duality that is the Abrahamic paradigm. To fully grasp the concept of Brahman you have to embrace both pantheism and panentheism. The Mahāvākyam (lit. Great Sayings) of the upanishads clearly state this, but it's a hard concept for the non-Hindu mind to grasp:

• aham brahmāsmi - "I am Brahman", or "I am Divine"[7] (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.10 of the Yajur Veda)
• tat tvam asi - "Thou art That" (Chandogya Upanishad 6.8.7 of the Sama Veda), meaning "you are Brahman".
• ayam ātmā brahma - "This Self (Atman) is Brahman" (Mandukya Upanishad 1.2 of the Atharva Veda)
• brahma satyam jagan mithyā - Brahman is real; the world is illusory - Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Vivekachudamani
• sarvam khalvidam brahma - All of this is brahman - Chāndogya Upaniṣad 3.14.1 (we already discussed)

Heck, it's a hard concept for Hindus to grasp. When we do, we obtain moksha, liberation from the cycle of rebirth.

 

[ajay0]

A theosophy article by Geoffrey Hodson on the doctrine of reincarnation in Christianity...

https://www.theosophical.org/files/resources/articles/ReincarnationChristianity.pdf

 

[Shadow Wolf]

*smiles* Just because @Shadow Wolf and I are not you doesn’t make us the same person...

...at least in relative reality. ​

What? I haven't got being one person figured out and now you're implying I have to do more than that? I'm not adopting your fashion style, however and btw.

 

[Kapalika]

It seems a lot of the people including the OP are trying to "debunk" reincarnation on this thread are arguing from ignorance on the topic. Reincarnation is about how streams of conciousness / atma transfer from different bodies. It doesn't have anything to do with gods or the origin of life. Neither is there a "first" to be reincarnated, since conciousness precedes the physical universe and is eternal (speaking from a Hindu perspective here).

People need to stop treating Hinduism like it's Christanity. Our gods did not create atma or reincarnation, for those of us who believe in them (there are atheist sects of Hinduism). Atma precedes all the gods, precedes any living being, and precedes the creation of the physical universe. It's always existed. Reincarnation is just it's journey through the universe with the bodies as the foundation. It existed before any life or even any god came into being.

Neither is reincarnation about always improving, since often the act of incarnating itself after moksha brings the atma back to a lower state of conciousness.

 

[SalixIncendium]

The point is that if all life could possibly have descended naturally from an earliest common universal ancestor which came into being from non-life having been within the limits of the physical realm of possibilities , , then nothing limitless ( i.e.-Brahman reincanation) is needed to explain how life comes into being.

Unless our perceived reality is illusory...a manifestation of pure consciousness.

 

[Fool]

Here are two good examples in both the west and east...

Reincarnated! Our son is a World War II pilot come back to life | Daily Mail Online

The Case of Shanti Devi — Carol Bowman, Past Life Therapy

you might find the following of interest. they do research in past lives; focusing on children around the world.


Children Who Report Memories of Previous Lives | Division of Perceptual Studies

 

[SalixIncendium]

Neither is reincarnation about always improving...

^^THIS bears repeating.

It is my understanding that purpose of reincarnation is to experience. There is nothing about the Atman that needs improvement. Atman is Brahman.*

*Check local listings.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Evidence of the Exodus from Egypt

That's not very impressive when it comes from a pro-Bible source. What about Egyptian sources that record the plagues? A massive loss in slaves and life? But, as the story is told, we can't even find evidence they were pursued. All my source does is speculate and then use the Bible to support those speculations. Why would the Egyptians give a damn about Jewish things in such a way as to make Egyptian things resemble Jewish things and not Egyptian? Those able probably referred to what they wrote, not Jewish icons and stories.

I'm also aware you could not demonstrate anything from the Gospels being shown to be fictitious.

So? I intentionally kept my list brief.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

you might find the following of interest. they do research in past lives; focusing on children around the world.


Children Who Report Memories of Previous Lives | Division of Perceptual Studies

Those kids are known for failing to impress those with the knowledge to know if they are reporting accurate details or making things up. Turns out, historians and such are pretty good at pointing out how their stories cannot be true, and it often revolves around details such as dietary choices, animals in the area, and other culture thimgs these kids get wrong because they dont know and most people dont know enough to pick out erroneous details like thay.

 

[Fool]

Those kids are known for failing to impress those with the knowledge to know if they are reporting accurate details or making things up. Turns out, historians and such are pretty good at pointing out how their stories cannot be true, and it often revolves around details such as dietary choices, animals in the area, and other culture thimgs these kids get wrong because they dont know and most people dont know enough to pick out erroneous details like thay.

children shouldn't be having any kind of memories apart from their experience. that is part of the consciousness studies issues. people shouldn't be dreaming about things they have never experienced; if the brain creates consciousness solely from experience.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Also there would be no "first" person to be reincarnated since the Universe is eternal with no beginning or end.

The universe most definitely had a beginning and one day will end. An eternal universe without either is a fundamental violation of the laws of physics. And of course there would have to, by necessity, be a first person as life itself ultimately requires a first.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

children shouldn't be having any kind of memories apart from their experience. that is part of the consciousness studies issues. people shouldn't be dreaming about things they have never experienced; if the brain creates consciousness solely from experience.

We have books, tv, radio, documentaries, how can these kids not have some inkling of an awareness of at least some culture that existed in times past? As for consciousness, it is the result of complex brain and neuron activity, not experience.