Casting reincarnation as 'pure theory' is probably wrong. I almost typed 'puerile' rather than pure! One can have reincarnation as metaphysical speculation but given the often dull, repetitive (copying) nature of the accounts and what is known of cases of therapists making them up (etc.), there must follow a sociological account. This is unlikely to be sympathetic - yet it could be if oriented towards human inventions and their role.
On 7 Mar, 01:15, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > I could even be Albert Einstein in my next life. Or Helen of Troy. Or > my own grand-dad. <<<fran > > No fran, that is not how it works, you cannot commandeer the soul of > someone else. You can only be "you" forever, from here in on out or > from then on. Even in space time, would you challenge the possibility > that the soul could retain its integrity? Soul is your being, your > essence in life, you are who you are because of your soul. You, fran, > can see the difference when you go out and about in the world around > you. There is obviously a huge difference between you and many other > people, and when you ask why is that, which you have at times, you can > simply attribute it all to the fact that your soul has accumulated > knowledge and understanding throughout many lifetimes. It's rather > simple really. As I said earlier, in this day and age when we have > microwaves and space travel, computers, cell phones, dvd, cd, etc, I > find it hard to believe the disbelief in this theory is so difficult. > In other words, we can store gobs of information on a piece of plastic > but we can't have a soul? Fran! You do have a soul, and a good soul > at that! If I personally had to rate your soul I would put it at 258 > BC origin. Think about it! > > > > On Mar 6, 12:54 pm, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Speaking purely theoretically - I accept Orn's point completely, that > > discussions about reincarnation are pure theory - I don't see the > > problem. If there is a soul (theoretically speaking, since I have no > > idea what a soul IS), upon disincarnation it (presumably) leaves space- > > time. That's space-TIME. So, theoretically, there's no reason not to > > assume that a soul experiencing disincarnation in 2009 might not be > > reincarnated in 1909. Wow, I could even be Albert Einstein in my next > > life. Or Helen of Troy. Or my own grand-dad. > > > Personally, I have never found speculation about reincarnation > > particularly useful for living in the here-and-now. > > > Francis > > > On 6 Mrz., 16:36, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > As to theory when it comes to things like reincarnation....theories > > > are like comic books. Entertaining, and keep one distracted. > > > As to proof...the only proof would be if one remembers experiencing > > > it. I have nothing against those who make such a claim. > > > > On Mar 6, 4:32 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 4 Mar, 16:04, Michael Berkovits <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > This may be a silly question that has already been answered by those > > > > > who posit reincarnation, or you may have an answer, Slip. > > > > > > But it just occurred to me that the world population keeps growing, > > > > > over time. So let's begin to flesh out the mechanics of reincarnation > > > > > theory. Since the world population keeps growing, new souls must be > > > > > coming into being (on the starting premise that souls exist, of > > > > > course). What is your belief as to whether all souls reincarnate? Is > > > > > it that, each year, of the 300 million people who die (I'm guessing > > > > > here, not bothering to look up how many people actually die each > > > > > year), those 300 million souls immediately reincarnate? Is there some > > > > > lag time? Given that the world population grows by, say, 200 million > > > > > a year, does this mean that 200 million entirely new, non-reincarnated > > > > > souls are generated each year? > > > > > > More importantly, when a new baby is born, how is it decided whether > > > > > that new baby gets a reincarnated soul, or an entirely new soul? > > > > > > The basic premise of my e-mail is that the number of people dying > > > > > falls short of the number of people being born, so not every new birth > > > > > can have a reincarnated soul. How does reincarnation theory think > > > > > about this? > > > > > Firstly, whose theory? There are theories that don't limit > > > > reincarnation to only human form. If you count ALL the lifeforms in > > > > existence (and, not just Earthbound ones), THEN you'll see how full > > > > the pool of souls, as it were, is. Whilst I take your point, an Earth- > > > > limited view must be thrown out. Odds are that there's a huge > > > > whopping amount of life out there that could re-incarnate (or re- > > > > invegetate, for that matter!). > > > > Although there IS the Jewish view of 'The Guph', or 'Hall of Souls' > > > > where souls wait for (re-)incarnation. There is also a belief that > > > > the Guph can be emptied and soulless individuals born. This is > > > > explored in the Juergen Prochnow/Demi Moore film "The Seventh > > > > Sign" (Great film!). > > > > > > On Mar 3, 10:51 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Slip, can you clarify what you mean by saying "Thought, as I see > > > > > > > it, is not physical or tangible<<<<<MB > > > > > > > Simply for me thought is not something that you can put in a box and > > > > > > ship out or place in a zip lock bag for storage. I feel thought > > > > > > and > > > > > > imagination are homologous but not identical in that thought itself > > > > > > may be considered more of a process, which imagination uses to > > > > > > create > > > > > > ideas, concepts, theories etc. > > > > > > > though it is the subject of multiple scientific experiments." > > > > > > ?<<<MB > > > > > > > I may have hastened to use the expression scientific experiments, no > > > > > > intended reference to "thought experiments", but more so leaning > > > > > > towards the nature of thought, it's use as in telekinesis, > > > > > > telepathy, > > > > > > clairvoyance, the overall power of thinking, and the law of > > > > > > attraction, much of which admittedly, is speculative and/or > > > > > > hypothetical. > > > > > > Discovering the physical nature of thought is aside from what I am > > > > > > projecting because once thought takes place it becomes independent > > > > > > of > > > > > > it's originating source as does the light emanating from a dead > > > > > > star. > > > > > > > > As I understand you, you posed that perspective in opposition to > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > contention that "all thought > > > > > > > and consciousness dies with the death of the physical mind." Are > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > arguing that when a person is alive, his thoughts are > > > > > > > extra-physical, > > > > > > > or are you also arguing that consciousness / soul survives > > > > > > > death?<<<MB > > > > > > > I'm not arguing as much as I am suggesting that thoughts are not > > > > > > confined to our physical being. As I posted early on, we do see > > > > > > light > > > > > > from stars that are physically non existent. I believe thoughts, > > > > > > imaginations and subconscious manifestations do continue to exist > > > > > > beyond the physical demise. I feel very strongly that the soul > > > > > > survives physical death and also retains life experiences. I > > > > > > believe > > > > > > that some people have lived past lives but not all, as some people > > > > > > are > > > > > > Old Souls, ie: child prodigies, brilliant scientists etc., while > > > > > > others are New Souls ie: idiots without a clue who are easily > > > > > > identifiable. I would not consider reincarnation in the sense that > > > > > > our soul returns in the form of a different species but contend the > > > > > > soul returns as another human being. A human soul does not return > > > > > > as > > > > > > a cow in my opinion. I think we retain life experiences within our > > > > > > soul and believe that life might be occurring simultaneously within > > > > > > a > > > > > > parallel universe and further that there is a level at which time is > > > > > > of no consequence. > > > > > > Belief in certain aspects of death may give credence to what some > > > > > > know > > > > > > as Heaven and the Immortality of the soul. For atheists, pantheists, > > > > > > materialists and rationalists there would be no question and > > > > > > conversation of such idea would be moot. So what meaning does death > > > > > > have to us as we are living? Perhaps it is a reminder that life is > > > > > > temporary and that we should pay heed to what lies ahead without > > > > > > paying as much attention to amassing materialistic treasures over > > > > > > spiritual values. Is death just a marker between lives? Possibly > > > > > > and for me most likely, no one has ever come back to tell us > > > > > > anything > > > > > > about it. Is there a Karma that carries from one life to the next? > > > > > > I > > > > > > would think that if the soul retains it's accumulated properties > > > > > > then > > > > > > it might also retain the aspects of retribution. Upon new life in > > > > > > the > > > > > > new physical frame is there a clean slate with which to develop? I > > > > > > often wonder why some people are born into extreme poverty and pain > > > > > > while others live wonderful lives. While both will have to commit > > > > > > to > > > > > > death the interim of life seems to have significance in the fact > > > > > > that > > > > > > maybe there is for them a lesson to be learned. I would also have > > > > > > to > > > > > > examine why it is that a person is born and dies within hours of > > > > > > living if there is any significance to life between birth and death. > > > > > > Some believe that what we do in this life influences our lives to > > > > > > come, so I have to wonder what has that person done within it's few > > > > > > hours of life to influence it's future life. Can we lay down a > > > > > > prospective for person's future life based on general observation of > > > > > > the person's current life. IF so then where might be Hitler, > > > > > > Dahmer, > > > > > > Saddam and what are they doing in their future life? Have they > > > > > > returned already and are they living among us as we speak? The > > > > > > question begets more questions which beget even more as the question > > > > > > surrounding the most mysterious aspects of human life remains > > > > > > enigmatic; what of death? > > > > > > > > As for the Noggin article, it's an interested experiment, to be > > > > > > > sure, > > > > > > > but did you have a particular perspective on it? To me, it > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
