Thread: DO YOU BELIEVE IN REINCARNATION? why or why not?

Originally Posted by Denziloe

What is the difference between a reality which is split into frames and a reality which is not split into frames? And I'm not asking for further definitions, I'm asking for a specific, tangible distinction.

Lovely photo, by the way.

LOL the term "frame" is simply an analogy. Reality is not split into frames, but rather it seems to be a gradient or spectrum of interconnected yet different dimensional realms of experience, each existing at a different rate of energetic vibration. Each different level of experience, whether it is the physical world, a dream, or the various dimensions experienced during OBEs, is being considered a "reality frame," as we seem to experience the greater reality one frame or one dimension at a time, although again, reality is not split in this way. It is just a convenient way to describe something that we have no proper words to define.

And thank you for the kind words.

Perception is grossly overlooked. My friend accused me of having flawed perception of an event I clearly memorized. I'm fine with flawed perception of a memory but saying the event never had any basis in reality in the first place is taking it one step too far. In the same way, I always wonder how people must view someone that explains a near death experience when the listener presumes the NDE-experiencer is full of shit. Must not be very nice for the storyteller.

I'm open-minded. I'm into shamanism and the spiritual shebang. I believe our best bet for understanding reincarnation is talking to recently deceased dead people. They are contacted in altered states. Subjective experience is all we have to work with but if you can take two independent parties to produce the same myths from going into altered states and talking to dead people. You have some really solid evidence.. This evidence could antagonize reincarnation altogether. But there is no denying the possiblity before excluding every possible angle. I believe we conscious beings have the pMind and the means to unconver deep mysteries like these.

I've thought it through before the scientific method is just as applicable to subjective experience. Measure and repeatability are just as prominent in any subjective experience.

Still not conclusive. And even if consciousness is tied to the brain it doesn't have to mean that it is glued to it.

Originally Posted by IHadADreamWhere

I do because of the scientific theory "Energy can not be created nor destroyed" and our souls are energy. That makes me think of life after death.
and how do we explain ghosts and spirits ? their energy and people have constantly had experiences with them. I think that
the 'light' we see during death is the light we see coming out of our new mothers womb. I really do believe in reincarnation and think that in the future more people will too (:

Yes

The light at the end of the tunnel is not seen at death that we know of. It is reported by those who did not die in the final sense. They see the light just before coming back to the physical world. The light is only experienced by the mind, the mind forms in the brain. They are perhaps floating outside of physical reality and then get pulled back here. Then they see that light. It is because they did not die. We will never get first hand reports of true death (for obvious reasons).

Originally Posted by Alric

That said, there is two scenarios that I think reincarnation is possible, though I still don't think it is very likely.

1. We live in some kind of simulation. If true, they could basically save your brain pattern as data and then even after you die you can come back. This would allow for all sort of crazy reincarnation stuff.


Considering those two things though, neither seem to happen, at least on earth. There isn't evidence that people die and come back in the next generation or anything like that.

Well there you have it. This world is a simulation (wait, IMO) and that makes pretty much everything imaginable with in the realms of science. What? You say neither seems to happen, at least on Earth, well based on what? There is no physical plane in reality, so all physical worlds are simulations. This one is not a simulation of a 'real' one. How could you possibly tell if it is not what is happening on Earth? Luckly gab moved this in the religion section, so I feel ok talking about my belief system here. Hinduism is the primary source where you find reincarnation (Buddhism is branched off of this) and it is probably not a coincidence that we believe both in reincarnation AND that the world is composed of dream matter. Seriously, seeing this as a simulation truly opens up one's mind as far as what makes sense and what is possible. In fact all experience realms will be simulations where the closest metaphor would be "a dream some powerful entity is having in which we are DCs." This includes Heavenly realms and our own dreams. Reincarnation is not the only option, remembering that all realms are simulations, then any religion's expectations for after life are possible. Christians can experience the Heaven they expect and atheists may be given the choice of non-existence (but when they realize it is a choice, I bet they pick something else most of the time).


So there you have it. The culture that believes in reincarnation also believes in every other option and that this world does not exist in the traditional sense to begin with.

Originally Posted by sivason

Yes

The light at the end of the tunnel is not seen at death that we know of. It is reported by those who did not die in the final sense. They see the light just before coming back to the physical world. The light is only experienced by the mind, the mind forms in the brain. They are perhaps floating outside of physical reality and then get pulled back here. Then they see that light. It is because they did not die. We will never get first hand reports of true death (for obvious reasons).






Well there you have it. This world is a simulation (wait, IMO) and that makes pretty much everything imaginable with in the realms of science. What? You say neither seems to happen, at least on Earth, well based on what? There is no physical plane in reality, so all physical worlds are simulations. This one is not a simulation of a 'real' one. How could you possibly tell if it is not what is happening on Earth? Luckly gab moved this in the religion section, so I feel ok talking about my belief system here. Hinduism is the primary source where you find reincarnation (Buddhism is branched off of this) and it is probably not a coincidence that we believe both in reincarnation AND that the world is composed of dream matter. Seriously, seeing this as a simulation truly opens up one's mind as far as what makes sense and what is possible. In fact all experience realms will be simulations where the closest metaphor would be "a dream some powerful entity is having in which we are DCs." This includes Heavenly realms and our own dreams. Reincarnation is not the only option, remembering that all realms are simulations, then any religion's expectations for after life are possible. Christians can experience the Heaven they expect and atheists may be given the choice of non-existence (but when they realize it is a choice, I bet they pick something else most of the time).


So there you have it. The culture that believes in reincarnation also believes in every other option and that this world does not exist in the traditional sense to begin with.

In this ghost of the city of pyramids one will find everything in the real city of pyramids, except in this so called city, one realizes that their world is temporal unlike the real city where those who inhabit there do not realize that there is no city of pyramids.

Originally Posted by Descensus

You've listed all things that can be debunked or at the very least placed in the "unreliable testimony" bin.

Observe patients with brain damage and tell me their consciousness isn't affected.

If you throw your radio on the ground ,you will no longer be able to hear the show but that doesn't mean the radio host is dead.

I just saw a show in which a noted astrophysicist state we should not try to apply scientific law to that which can not be proven either to exist or not. While fun for debating the process takes away from science.

Either accept certain claims for your own involvent or do not, I have endless info on how such things and the cosmo works, BUT, it is all going to start with my claim that life is like a dream, or even more so like a video game. Think video game: When we agree to play we know we will get killed in the end, but we keep doing it. You do not keep the power-ups, but maybe you remember who you get them. You do not keep the increased attributes you have earned, but you now remember how to best manage such traits and where to get them.

The Catch22 in this whole discussion is that reincarnation may or may not exist but, if the Buddhists are right, all one's past life and humanity is stripped away and the slate seems to be wiped clean ready for the next incarnation so (except for a few unproven claims of past-life) what exists to provide proof one way or the other? So it's really only down to personal beliefs...and Snoop is right...the question was do we believe or not, so IMO is really superfluous to this debate I suppose.

P.S. Strassman's recorded venous DMT trips also talk about the "stripping away" of one's humanity, a layer at a time.

P.P.S. If Strassman is right about the importance of the pineal gland's DMT role at the point of death, the gland first appears in the developing fetus at around 49 days...the ancient Tibetan Book of the Dead records that the period between death and reincarnation is around 49 days...

As I said before, I'll stick with that line of research for a while...




...

I think that in order to answer this question we will first need to know exactly where consciousness comes from.
The way I see it, there is no real reason for a brain to make someone feel alive and conscious, it could have easily been a working organ without causing consciousness to an individual.
So where did this consciousness originally come from?
Why does an active brain result in someone feeling aware of the environment?

Also, one pretty interesting point is this:
what is it that says that our current life is a "first and last time" we became alive?
What were we doing until our birth?
The natural answer would be "nothing, since we weren't alive".
But couldn't this happen again at some point in the future, so that after we have died, we might enter another body and be born the same way again?
I see no problems in that, but it would be cool to learn more about this.

Reincarnation? Well, I don't believe in it.
You can talk all the "consciousness is something transcendental that would stay the same after death and go live again in another body" like you've actually got any clue, but this seems like shooting in the dark. It's especially funny that not understanding consciousness means the proposed transcendental suggestion would be true. Even if it can't be physical, and must be transcendental, what then? We don't know what that means. We can't just say it means spirits or god or realms or what not. We can't even be sure we can logic it anyways. Forget about this being speculations, you don't even know if you can use common sense on something that doesn't work using physical laws that our logic only understands. Yeah, c'mon, say "prove that logic only works in the real world" like you've tried it in transcendental matters then tested it and got similar results. Untested logic barely even work with science and the real world! Put a scientists in a volt for years and he'll come up with nothing. He needs to test to even confirm his steps are right. And speculations like these come along with people flying banners of gap arguments and speculative hypothesis shouting as if they're talking proven stuff. At most, this should just be "what would you imagine the ToE might be?"

I hope I'm not coming out as rude. I just want to point out this, that's all.

I feel like some of it may be directed at me. Which I would find unpleasurable. Considering I want to make a new thread of my thoughts on Reincarnation and would appreciate not to be ridiculed for my ideas.

Originally Posted by Dthoughts

I feel like some of it may be directed at me. Which I would find unpleasurable. Considering I want to make a new thread of my thoughts on Reincarnation and would appreciate not to be ridiculed for my ideas.

Wait, I'm sorry. I shouldn't have been so disrespectful. I'm sure you only meant to share and receive regarding reincarnation, and not be putting it as a scientific statement or something to receive scientific criticism. (I think you're not proposing it as fact)

But if I got it wrong, and you are proposing it as a fact, then my statement still stands but o/c I don't mean any ridiculing or anything like that. I'm just criticizing the idea of reincarnation's plausibility given the evidence for it.

Again though, I'm sorry if I was rude, please forgive me.

I'm probably being oversensitive ^^

Forget about this being speculations, you don't even know if you can use common sense on something that doesn't work using physical laws that our logic only understands. Yeah, c'mon, say "prove that logic only works in the real world" like you've tried it in transcendental matters then tested it and got similar results. Untested logic barely even work with science and the real world! Put a scientists in a volt for years and he'll come up with nothing. He needs to test to even confirm his steps are right.

You say that about a scientist that needs to do tests to confirm his steps. As if his logic is bound to be flawed and need to be tested but Einstein did his work solely in his messy office and only got verified years after he died. And a lot of it got verified. You see, logic works here if you can apply it. In the same way we can apply logic to the transcendental. It woulden't be a fact without testing it but the possibility is there.

Simply put. Admitting that consciousness is an unsolved problem is required to admit that the possibility of a spiritual solution is an open book. When discussing consciousness this seems at the least fair.

Well in most cases experiments show a step is wrong, then the scientist needs to work it out again until he gets to the right step. Experimenting is very important.

Well o/c us being able to logic the trancendental is a possibility, if we ever find it exists. And since there are still gaps when it comes to the science of human consciousness, we can't claim for sure that it's surely materialistic. Though even if it turns out to be the first time we actually conclude that there must be more than material to it, if such transcendence occurs, then that would open a whole new world of possibilities. I would imagine that it would bring facts we never even imagined before. I mean, forget about spirits or souls or whatever, much more amazing things might be discovered, things we couldn't even imagine.

O/c IF such thing happened, but I would bet it'll turn out materialistic. I'm just weary of saying it would be transcendental since we only hear about that in religious stories or philosophy.
O/c I'm open to it, but I wouldn't put much hope on it. Don't get me wrong, the idea of transcendence and afterlife appeals to me. I really wish there would be much more to our existence. I mean I love my life, but more is better. But I can only hope. These things seriously only lead to disappointments, they never turn out to be more than stories

Originally Posted by LouaiB

Don't get me wrong, the idea of transcendence and afterlife appeals to me. I really wish there would be much more to our existence. I mean I love my life, but more is better. But I can only hope. These things seriously only lead to disappointments, they never turn out to be more than stories

It's not helped by the fact so little research seems to be done. Rick Strassman's DMT experiment ended in 1995 and I can't currently find anyone who seems to be really pushing it forward. Mind you, I get the same feeling about Stephen LaBerge and dream research.

Anyone here ever read Dr. Ian Stevenson reincarnation research? It's really stunning and surprised not many people know about it.

Ian Stevenson, MD Child Reincarnation Stories, Walter Semkiw, MD Reincarnation Expert & Ian Stevenson Advocate

NeverOnce, thank you

This months Australian Readers Digest's cover story is titled "Unlocking the mystery of Past Lives. What children can tell us about reincarnation". Page 32 to 38.

Paragraph 2 on page 35 reads:

"For more 45 years, a team at the Division of Perceptual Studies at the University of Virginia (UVA) has been collecting stories of people who can recall their past lives. (...)"

I only mention the artical in this months Reader's Digest (May 2015) because it is a synchronicity. I havn't bought Reader's Digest in years. I don't usually even notice it but two weeks ago I did and parted with nearly $7.

Originally Posted by NeverOnce

Anyone here ever read Dr. Ian Stevenson reincarnation research? It's really stunning and surprised not many people know about it.

♡

Ian Stevenson, MD Child Reincarnation Stories, Walter Semkiw, MD Reincarnation Expert & Ian Stevenson Advocate

♡

Here is the article in NeverOnce's link:


The Reincarnation Research of*Ian Stevenson, MD


of the University of Virginia Division of Perceptual Studies

Advances in Reincarnation Research: A Tribute to Ian Stevenson, MD, by Walter Semkiw, MD

A Presentation for the Society for Scientific Exploration (SSE)


Dr. Ian Stevenson, MD, who died in 2007, served as Chairman of the Department of Psychiatry at the*University of Virginia, School of Medicine. *He was also honored as the Carlson Professor of Psychiatry at that institution.* For forty years, Dr. Stevenson investigated children who spontaneously remember past lives that could be factually validated. *He chose to only study children as he reasoned that children were unlikely to fabricate past life memories.* In total, Dr. Stevenson studied almost 2500 children who reported past life memories.* In approximately 1200 of these cases, Dr. Stevenson was able to objectively validate the child's past life memories.

Most of*Stevenson's cases come from Asia, India or other areas where the doctrine of reincarnation is accepted. In locations where reincarnation is not an accepted belief system, it is thought that parents inhibit a child’s expression of past-life memories. The childhood cases studied by Ian Stevenson have a common pattern, marked by the following features:

1.*As soon as the child can communicate, the child starts to describe a previous lifetime. Often, the child declares that his or her name is different from the name given to the child by its biologic parents. The child insists that the current family is not its true family, but that his or her real family lives in a different village or town. The child remembers the names of various family members and geographic locations from the past lifetime. Physical features of the past life house and neighborhood may be recalled.

2. The child remembers details of its death in the prior lifetime. In approximately 50 percent of Dr. Stevenson’s childhood reincarnation cases, a violent or premature death occurred in the previous lifetime. Dr. Stevenson has found that individuals who died of traumatic wounds, such as bullet or knife wounds, often are born in a subsequent incarnation with birthmarks or scars that mirror the wounds incurred in the past lifetime. In the contemporary lifetime, the child may have a phobia related to the cause of death in the past life.

3. Based on information provided by the child to the biologic family, the child’s family from the prior incarnation is eventually identified. When the child meets this family for the first time, the child is able to identify family members by name or by relationship. The child often knows family secrets that only members of the prior family would know. As a result, the family from the past lifetime often accepts the child as the reincarnation of their deceased relative.

The biologic parents of the child in the current incarnation often fear that the child will leave them for the family from the prior incarnation, as the mutual bond between the child and past life family becomes so strong. This fear turns out to be unwarranted, as the bond between the child and the contemporary parents endures. A long-term relationship, though, typically ensues between the child and family from the prior lifetime.

4. Personality traits, personal preferences, and habits often persist from one incarnation to another.

5. Gender*usually stays the same.* In 90 percent of Dr. Stevenson’s cases, the child returns assuming the same sex as in the past lifetime. Thus, in ten percent of cases, gender is reversed from one lifetime to another. The observation that gender only changes in 10 percent of*reincarnation cases can bring insights on homosexuality, transsexuallism and gender identity problems.

6.*Physical appearance is similar from one lifetime to another

Stevenson cases show that physical appearance can remain the same from one incarnation to another. Two cases in particular dramatically demonstrate how facial*features can remain consistent from one lifetime to another.**Ian Stevenson studied*Suzanne Ghanem*and*Daniel Jurdiin the late 1960's,*when they were small children.* Photographs of these individuals from their prior incarnations were available.* Stevenson revisited Suzanne and Daniel in 1998 and found that*these two people, now full grown adults, had the same facial features as in their past incarnations.**These cases were published in Tom Shroder's book,*Old Souls. Two other Ian Stevenson reincarnation cases, in which photo comparison's are available (and provided to the right) that demonstrate similar facial features involve:*Burmese Twins

In his book,*Where Reincarnation and Biology Intersect, Dr. Stevenson advised that researchers*systematically study “facial resemblances between subjects and previous personalities.”

To review other Stevenson case with similar appearance, go to:*Ian Stevenson, MD Reincarnation Cases with Physical Resemblance

7.*Relationships are renewed through reincarnation

As noted above, Stevenson cases that demonstrate physical resemblance involves*Burmese twins, who were sisters in their past lifetimes.* They were part of astudy involving 31 sets of twins, whose past lives were objectively validated. In 100% of these cases, the twins had significant past life relationships, concretely demonstrating that souls plan lifetimes to be reunited with loved ones through reincarnation.

Society for Scientific Exploration

I also would like to share that I had the opportunity to visit Dr. Stevenson at the Univeristy of Virginia at Charlottesville in the year 2001.* He was a very gracious host and he*spent an entire day with me.* I was very honored that at the conclusion of my visit, he offered to sponsor me for membership in the*Society for Scientific Exploration, an academic organization that he co-founded. I did join the SSE and I highly recommend this organization.

The world owes a great debt to Dr. Stevenson for the important work he did over his long career.* IISIS hopes to build upon his contributions and as a gesture of respect and acknowledgement, a posthumous**IISIS Award*has been given to Dr. Stevenson.*Reincarnation research continues at the University of Virginia under the guidance of*Jim Tucker, MD.

It should be noted that Dr. Stevenson wrote in a very academic style as his target audience was fellow scientists.* On the IISIS website, his past life cases are presented as*reincarnation stories*to make his academic work easier to understand. For those interested in appreciating the*scientific rigor of his research, such as his use of multiple witnesses to establish corroborated testimony, please refer to the original reports written by Dr. Ian Stevenson.

Web Site:*University of Virginia, Division of Perceptual Studies

To be honest this is the only thing I "believe" that is related to religion/spirituality. I have this blind faith about soul/consciousness continuing after life and I could swear reincarnation exists. Even for me it is funny to read what I just typed, I can't help but think it is stupid to "claim" knowledge. But I just "know" and I can't help it.

Now overthinking and analyzing myself I came up with these,

I CLAIM KNOWLEDGE ON REINCARNATION BEING THE TRUE AFTERLIFE SCENARIO BECAUSE,

1. It gives my heart a warm, safe, beautiful feeling and it feels like "I'm home".
2. It gives my heart a warm, safe, beautiful feeling and it feels like "I'm home".
3. It gives my heart a warm, safe, beautiful feeling and it feels like "I'm home".

This subject is not open to logical reasoning or experiments. This is a matter of "belief". And if one digs deeper, might get close to finding out why she "prefers" to believe in what she believes in.

Originally Posted by figurefly

To be honest this is the only thing I "believe" that is related to religion/spirituality. I have this blind faith about soul/consciousness continuing after life and I could swear reincarnation exists. Even for me it is funny to read what I just typed, I can't help but think it is stupid to "claim" knowledge. But I just "know" and I can't help it.

Now overthinking and analyzing myself I came up with these,

I CLAIM KNOWLEDGE ON REINCARNATION BEING THE TRUE AFTERLIFE SCENARIO BECAUSE,

1. It gives my heart a warm, safe, beautiful feeling and it feels like "I'm home".
2. It gives my heart a warm, safe, beautiful feeling and it feels like "I'm home".
3. It gives my heart a warm, safe, beautiful feeling and it feels like "I'm home".

This subject is not open to logical reasoning or experiments. This is a matter of "belief". And if one digs deeper, might get close to finding out why she "prefers" to believe in what she believes in.

Not true, there has been credible scientific research that shows that reincarnation exists by Dr. Ian Stevenson, I suggest you read it

Ian Stevenson, MD Child Reincarnation Stories, Walter Semkiw, MD Reincarnation Expert & Ian Stevenson Advocate

Originally Posted by NeverOnce

Not true, there has been credible scientific research that shows that reincarnation exists by Dr. Ian Stevenson, I suggest you read it

Ian Stevenson, MD Child Reincarnation Stories, Walter Semkiw, MD Reincarnation Expert & Ian Stevenson Advocate

Is it peer reviewed?? Cuz there are lots of bs scientists tbh.

Originally Posted by figurefly

I CLAIM KNOWLEDGE ON REINCARNATION BEING THE TRUE AFTERLIFE SCENARIO BECAUSE,

1. It gives my heart a warm, safe, beautiful feeling and it feels like "I'm home".
2. It gives my heart a warm, safe, beautiful feeling and it feels like "I'm home".
3. It gives my heart a warm, safe, beautiful feeling and it feels like "I'm home".

This subject is not open to logical reasoning or experiments. This is a matter of "belief". And if one digs deeper, might get close to finding out why she "prefers" to believe in what she believes in.

One thing that is open to logical reasoning is belief. Beliefs give rise to warm, safe, beautiful feelings generally when they provide comfort to the ego. It has little to do with truth and more to do with the ego's attachments, desires, and aversions. The thought of reincarnation may give another person the complete opposite feeling if they have aversion to the idea of living another life on earth. Again, this feeling has little to do with the truth of the matter.

Originally Posted by VinceField

It has little to do with truth and more to do with the ego's attachments, desires, and aversions.

This is exactly why we call it "belief" and not "knowledge".

Originally Posted by figurefly

This is exactly why we call it "belief" and not "knowledge".

I was commenting on the statement "I claim knowledge on reincarnation...." and your statement that the subject is not open to reasoning. I believe that beliefs should always be held up to the scrutiny of logic and critical reasoning. Otherwise one is simply deluding oneself. In this case, that means accepting both possibilities for and against the existence of reincarnation.

I don't believe in reincarnation because it seems incompatable with the world as I know it, the laws of nature as I know them and I have never seen or heard or read anything that suggested that reïncarnation is possible.

Originally Posted by Ginsan

I don't believe in reincarnation because it seems incompatable with the world as I know it, the laws of nature as I know them and I have never seen or heard or read anything that suggested that reïncarnation is possible.

There is a wide array of evidence which suggests that reincarnation is not just possible, but probable. Some of it is even posted right here in this thread! Education defeats ignorance!