Do you believe in Reincarnation?

[SilentMute]

I believe in reincarnation. While I'm not afraid of dying or death, I'm trying to live as long as possible because I do not want to do puberty again anytime soon.

I also believe in other planes--which may inspire the belief of heaven and hell. I don't believe they are permenant, though.

I believe there are a lot of options for a soul. You don't have to reincarnate right away--you can travel to different planes. You can even be a ghost. I believe, though, that personal growth is always the purpose of souls--and whatever they do, they choose to go where they will learn whatever they need to learn next.

I also believe that souls break apart and reform--so it really is possible that three people could have been Cleopatra.

I, however, was never anyone famous.

Do I have proof that it exists? Nope. I believe in it because I like to believe in it. It helps me get through life. In the end, I think that is the primary function of religion. If people find strength in scientific beliefs--I'm very happy for them. As long as your beliefs don't cause harm to anyone else, more power to you. I have no problem believing in science and the paranormal simultaneously. One gives me facts, the others give me meaning.

[dizzydoll]

Do I have proof that it exists? Nope. I believe in it because I like to believe in it. It helps me get through life. In the end, I think that is the primary function of religion. If people find strength in scientific beliefs--I'm very happy for them. As long as your beliefs don't cause harm to anyone else, more power to you. I have no problem believing in science and the paranormal simultaneously. One gives me facts, the others give me meaning.

Well said Silent Mute, and like you I believe some souls remain earth bound until they are willing to cross over completely. Perhaps they do this because their partner is having difficulty accepting their death but there could be a host of other reasons too.

I believe as we grow we move up to new planes of spiritual growth. So too I believe some souls will delay their progress to their next level if their partner/soul mate has not advanced, via necessary experience, to join them on a higher plane. Only a selfless soul would consider delaying their spiritual progress.

[Paulclem]

Haha now whose fault do you think that is?

Anyway, I do see your point, especially about the ethical systems and 'tricks' of Buddhism. I wouldn't have a problem with religion as ethical system, what bothers me is that it is often accompagnied by a huge amount of irrational side effects (indoctrinating children, fighting valid science, terrorism, 'pro-life' fundamentalism, 'thinking Africans deserve their misery' etc etc).

For the reasons you stated, I do respect beliefs that are based on personal evidence. I can't challenge them for I have not experienced what these people claim. In the same way, and as you have stated, they can argue their beliefs to others, for their evidence is personal.

The main feature of buddhism is that it is very rational within the worldview it has. It doesn't challenge scientific views in favour of religious ones, and in fact was talking about moments of time - 66 moments in a finger snap - and minute particles before physics was invented.

As for the tricks of Buddhism - i'm not sure what you mean. if you are referring to the acompanying list then:

fighting valid science - I've addressed

terrorism - I'm not aware that there are any Buddhist terrorists, in fact HH The Dalai Lama was awarded the Peace Prize for the peaceful conduct of his oppostiton to Chinese rule, and has led by example in this

Pro-life fundamentalism is not a Buddhist concept. In this case Buddhism says that all life - especially human life is precious. But when it was realised in Thailand that abortions would be sought whatever the rules laid down, it was considered that it would be better to save the Mother by providing abortions rather than lose the Mother in ubnhygenic backstreet abortions. It does have a realistic approach to practical problems.

As for the karma view of starving people - this is fundamentally wrong. The fact that we are born on earth means we are subject to the suffering inherent in humans -war, famine, earthquake, floods, etc etc. it is just the fact of being human. It is the same with regard to disbled people etc - it is not the view of Buddhists that they desrve their fate due to their bad karma. It is more that they are born into a fragile human body which is susceptible to illness, damage, external influences like smoking etc. Karma is not deterministic in this sense. The most virtuous person can die in an accident. It is more a state of being human, rather than the karma of the individual.

I've left the indoctrination of children to last, as there was a tradition of sending children to monasteries. Certainly there has been a historical change, and this was a cultural phenomenon, perhaps concerned with economics, as it was in Western Europe. It does still go on, but this again may be linked to economics as they provide schools.

From your list I presume that you are lumping certain religions together. I didn't find that particularly useful in a thread on reincarnation.

I believe in reincarnation. While I'm not afraid of dying or death, I'm trying to live as long as possible because I do not want to do puberty again anytime soon.

I also believe in other planes--which may inspire the belief of heaven and hell. I don't believe they are permenant, though.

I believe there are a lot of options for a soul. You don't have to reincarnate right away--you can travel to different planes. You can even be a ghost. I believe, though, that personal growth is always the purpose of souls--and whatever they do, they choose to go where they will learn whatever they need to learn next.

I also believe that souls break apart and reform--so it really is possible that three people could have been Cleopatra.

I, however, was never anyone famous.

Do I have proof that it exists? Nope. I believe in it because I like to believe in it. It helps me get through life. In the end, I think that is the primary function of religion. If people find strength in scientific beliefs--I'm very happy for them. As long as your beliefs don't cause harm to anyone else, more power to you. I have no problem believing in science and the paranormal simultaneously. One gives me facts, the others give me meaning.

How did you develop your ideas Silent?

[JuniperWoolf]

Since no one really knows anything about this subject, I'll just say this: reincarnation would be friggin' cool if it were true. That would be WAY better than the christian "heaven" idea, much less boring. I hope I come back as a sea anemone.

[Dodo25]

From your list I presume that you are lumping certain religions together. I didn't find that particularly useful in a thread on reincarnation.

Indeed I lumped all religions together. I did that on purpose, because the issue I was addressing had not much to do with reincarnation, I was talking about religion in general, more specificially, whether it would be a good thing to base one's ethics in religious concepts. After looking at my post again, I admit that it was unclearly phrased on my part.

And by 'Buddhist tricks' I meant things like meditation, or in certain forms of Buddhism, martial arts. That too was terribly phrased, I apologize.

Anyway, here's one more (for once well-phrased) thing to think about. If I believed in karma, I would go seek investors with cash and try to convince them of the following idea: Set up a large-scale study that compares things like 'amount of money donated to charity, percentually to income of course' to 'odds of getting cancer', 'odds of unnatural death (like car crash)', 'odds of winning the lottery' etc. Many variables on both sides. Of course, the technicalities would be difficult, there would have to be some math and statistics, and the study would cost money and time.

However, if you do accomplish the goal, and karma actually exists, then the benefit would most likely be the following:

1) A Physics Nobel Prize for discovering a new kind of 'force'
2) A Nobel Peace Prize for making the world a better place by motivating people to do good.

Of course the whole idea is ridiculous, for one reason because 'souls' or karma don't have any selective advantages in biological evolution. I was just making the point that you can demonstrate effects scientifically, even if the phenomen itself may not be open to scientific investigation. And again, lack of evidence in these cases serves as negative evidence.

[Paulclem]

Indeed I lumped all religions together. I did that on purpose, because the issue I was addressing had not much to do with reincarnation, I was talking about religion in general, more specificially, whether it would be a good thing to base one's ethics in religious concepts. After looking at my post again, I admit that it was unclearly phrased on my part.

And by 'Buddhist tricks' I meant things like meditation, or in certain forms of Buddhism, martial arts. That too was terribly phrased, I apologize.

Anyway, here's one more (for once well-phrased) thing to think about. If I believed in karma, I would go seek investors with cash and try to convince them of the following idea: Set up a large-scale study that compares things like 'amount of money donated to charity, percentually to income of course' to 'odds of getting cancer', 'odds of unnatural death (like car crash)', 'odds of winning the lottery' etc. Many variables on both sides. Of course, the technicalities would be difficult, there would have to be some math and statistics, and the study would cost money and time.

However, if you do accomplish the goal, and karma actually exists, then the benefit would most likely be the following:

1) A Physics Nobel Prize for discovering a new kind of 'force'
2) A Nobel Peace Prize for making the world a better place by motivating people to do good.

Of course the whole idea is ridiculous, for one reason because 'souls' or karma don't have any selective advantages in biological evolution. I was just making the point that you can demonstrate effects scientifically, even if the phenomen itself may not be open to scientific investigation. And again, lack of evidence in these cases serves as negative evidence.

No worries.

It's an interesting idea. I've often thought that if insurance or loans companies get onto reincarnation then you could have cross incarnation policies.

From the Buddhist perspective, Karma is not a simple cause and effect force. It propels the being into a particular life, but it is said that actions done in a particular life won't ripen until later, unless it is a very negative or very positive action - like murder or saving someones life. This means that a being wont necessarily see the results of their actions for a long time. So the experiment would serve to disproove karma, when in fact it can't be proven this way.

The other thing is that there is no idea of a soul. This is a common assumption. Instead the teachings say that it is the energy from one life which causes the next - the classical example is of one candle lighting a second, and then the first being blown out. The second candle is not the first, but it is linked by the energy created.

Another thing is that creating good Karma depends upon the motivation of the giver. A giver to charity won't accrue much credit if their motivation is self aggrandizement. Motivation, as we can observe from our politicians, is difficult to discern, and requires the ability to know others minds, which few people have apparently.
(Unless everyone else knows this and they're not telling me!)

Since no one really knows anything about this subject, I'll just say this: reincarnation would be friggin' cool if it were true. That would be WAY better than the christian "heaven" idea, much less boring. I hope I come back as a sea anemone.

Why a sea anenome?

[OrphanPip]

Studies on giving to charity have actually shown that the poorer someone is the more likely they are to give a greater percentage of their income. Turns out happy, content people tend to think less about the well being of others. The caveat to this is the outrageously rich, like Bill Gates, who sometimes give something like 10% of their income to charity a year.

I personally don't believe in reincarnation, or anything supernatural really. Although, I've visited the Vietnamese Pagoda here in Montreal, and the monks were quite nice.

[SilentMute]

My beliefs came about from what I've read, my own experiences, my interpretations, and my dreams. I never offer any of it as proof to those that demand it--because if you are determined to find a flaw, you will probably find it. There could be another explanation certainly.

I believe in the soul--and my belief in it actually comes from an interpretation of an Einstein theory. Einstein said that energy isn't created or destroyed, it merely changes from one form to another. The difference between a corpse and a living person is energy. So if energy isn't created or destroyed and merely changes form--I think that is a good scientific argument for the afterlife and for the soul.

The belief in other planes--that comes mainly from my reading. There were some people's accounts that I did believe, and so I included it into my belief system. I don't want to believe in permenant damnation, since I am all too aware of my own flaws. I want redemption to always be possible for everyone--even the worst of humanity. I believe I have seen ghosts--though they aren't nearly as interesting as they are in movies. That is actually why I believe they are real. If my mind made it up--with my imagination--the experience would be more interesting. Bumping into a ghost is like bumping into someone at the grocery store. And they aren't sad souls usually--I don't think they are stuck here. They have a life--they go about their business. They aren't even that particularly interested in the living.

Other things can split--cells and such--so I don't think it is unreasonable to think a soul can't. I believe some time ago there were some Buddhists monks searching for the reincarnation of one of their elders. They decided that three children all had different parts of this person's soul.

I also believe too that souls don't travel chronologically. You can be in the year 3010, and then jump back to 1895. I'm even beginning to believe you can relive other lives--I constantly have feelings of deja-vu these days. The time jumping is because I've had vivid, detailed dreams about being someone else in a different time--but some of the times clash. I believe these dreams are past life memories because they often have details that I'm not aware of knowing--I wouldn't want to be these people. I dreamed about being a Vietnam soldier--I know nobody who was in the war, and I have always avoided the topic. The reliving lives--these days I often feel like I've had conversations with people before, but I haven't. I really do feel like I'm reliving my life these days.

Of course, I have no proof--and I'm sure my arguments can be torn to pieces.

As far as I know, scientists have not been able to prove definitely that ghosts, God, etc., don't exist. I personally think that considering how wonderfully complex life is, how it is interwoven--I just can't believe all of this came about by chance. I do believe there has to be an intelligence behind it--though it may not be what we think it is.

People act like that religion is responsible for all the world's ills. While it can be, it is because it is abused by people with bad mindsets. I was sexually abused by a preacher--and my grandparents let it happen because they thought I was being blessed by God's son--which he claimed to be. Nobody knows more than I do how religion can be abused. For a long time, I hated religion. I've worked through that. Science can be abused as well. People can look at a culture's gene pool and say they are inferior, and that can lead to genocide. There used to be a respected science where they measured people's skulls, and certain measurements claimed a person was more prone to criminal activity. Some of the greatest minds were responsible for developing the bomb that took out Hiroshima.

I like to believe that souls are learning lessons--and that is why there is suffering. That is why someone is starving in Ethiopia, and I have plenty of food. It does not mean that I shouldn't try to make the world a better place. However, why I like my beliefs is that it gives meaning and hope. The person in Ethiopia is starving now, but in face of eternity--what is the suffering of one life (if the soul exists and is immortal)? Even the worst fate that can happen, in face of eternity, would be even less annoying than a mosquito bite.

I doubt, though, my beliefs are right. I don't think humanity is capable of truly understanding life and everything it encompasses. I am certain that in the end, science and religion are equally ignorant.

[Paulclem]

Thanks Silent - that was interesting.

[BienvenuJDC]

Studies on giving to charity have actually shown that the poorer someone is the more likely they are to give a greater percentage of their income. Turns out happy, content people tend to think less about the well being of others. The caveat to this is the outrageously rich, like Bill Gates, who sometimes give something like 10% of their income to charity a year.

I personally don't believe in reincarnation, or anything supernatural really. Although, I've visited the Vietnamese Pagoda here in Montreal, and the monks were quite nice.

How much do you think the average person gives?

[blazeofglory]

In fact it is very hard not to believe and we love life so much that we want to extend it perpetually and the fact that death mars it dismays us and we love to imagine life beyond death. I am torn between belief and disbelief. I am not resolute about it, in fact no body is under the sun and there is nothing to substantiate the fact that life will not reincarnate itself or the fact that life will after death. Science taught us to be skeptical, to question and never to take things for granted and that is how we have traversed thus far in geological time now and the achievements we have of science and technology are attributable to our reasoning and questioning mind. We loved the whys, the hows and that landed us in a world of sophistication, science, technology and microchips.

I do not want to mystify anybody with doctrinaire garbage. Of course I am always amazed at the mystery of the world and to think in terms of religious theories that there was a benevolent God who created everything and I can not at the same time resist myself from asking an endless string of questions as to who created the God that created the world.

I too can believe in the indestructibility of matter and then life. I have a different idea about it. I do not believe in the soul, for the most part in the individual soul. I believe in the cosmic soul or I believe the fact that everything in the cosmos is interlinked. We all are universally one no matter we look different. All appearances are illusions. We are not different from stones, rocks, rivers, plants, clouds, airs, for we are them in the making of what we appear to be. There is essential difference between what we are and what we appear to be. I look at a small insect and there is total life in that and the whole cycle of life is there. Of course there are degrees of difference in terms of our capacities and sizes and shapes but looking at it from a very subtle standpoint there is no basic difference. I cannot think a bird loves its baby less and the fact that may distinguish us from the bird is the universe or the existence of life does not make it inquisitive. Maybe it is inquisitive but we can never know this subtle truth.

When we die, our body becomes stiff, immobile, but the air that we breathed, the water we stored in our body, the mind we worked with cease to work and they will reintegrate with the universal soul. We will once again live in the universal soul not in bodily forms

[dizzydoll]

The other thing is that there is no idea of a soul. This is a common assumption. Instead the teachings say that it is the energy from one life which causes the next - the classical example is of one candle lighting a second, and then the first being blown out. The second candle is not the first, but it is linked by the energy created.

"Soul" is just another word.... soul, life force, spirit, whatever... one day when proof IS provided I am damn sure they will call it yet ANOTHER WORD. Society just cant help themselves on this score, its called oneupmanship. Nevertheless, the word Soul is convenient for me to express our non-physical self, its the shortest of all words to type also.

Anyway everything is Subjective at this stage, not one of us has been to the other side and come back to report the "reality" of our existence.

Here is one to ponder on: If you were God, Creator, Lord Almighty, Designer... words again, so back to the point. If you were God, would you reveal yourself right now to the world? I think not. The reason is pretty obvious. Why? Because we simply dont deserve to know at this time. We would find a way to murder Him/Her/It... "words again". Apart from that we dont have the aptitude to understand yet.

We are not ready to find out the truth yet. Its so obvious to me why. There are many reasons but here is one: Altho DNA has always been right in front of our eyes, we could not see it until society became computerized. So thousand of years went by with DNA right in front of us, yet we couldnt see it. That doesnt mean it didnt exist as we now know. So the same applies to the Creator of all that we know and all we have yet to discover.

In the meantime everything we read and write is subjective. The only reality is our direct personal experience. We have still so much to learn and I believe we are still at the very early stages of humanity's evolution. We know nothing and yet we shoot our mouths off about what we know, even tho that will change as it always has and always will. lol

[OrphanPip]

How much do you think the average person gives?

Apparently, the average in the US is 2.7% for those making over 100,000 a year and the average amongst the less than 25,000 income bracket is 4.2% of their income.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...4/ai_95309979/

Edit: The average amount is $1600 dollars a year apparently, primarily to churches.

[Paulclem]

"Soul" is just another word.... soul, life force, spirit, whatever... one day when proof IS provided I am damn sure they will call it yet ANOTHER WORD. Society just cant help themselves on this score, its called oneupmanship. Nevertheless, the word Soul is convenient for me to express our non-physical self, its the shortest of all words to type also.

Anyway everything is Subjective at this stage, not one of us has been to the other side and come back to report the "reality" of our existence.

Here is one to ponder on: If you were God, Creator, Lord Almighty, Designer... words again, so back to the point. If you were God, would you reveal yourself right now to the world? I think not. The reason is pretty obvious. Why? Because we simply dont deserve to know at this time. We would find a way to murder Him/Her/It... "words again". Apart from that we dont have the aptitude to understand yet.

We are not ready to find out the truth yet. Its so obvious to me why. There are many reasons but here is one: Altho DNA has always been right in front of our eyes, we could not see it until society became computerized. So thousand of years went by with DNA right in front of us, yet we couldnt see it. That doesnt mean it didnt exist as we now know. So the same applies to the Creator of all that we know and all we have yet to discover.

In the meantime everything we read and write is subjective. The only reality is our direct personal experience. We have still so much to learn and I believe we are still at the very early stages of humanity's evolution. We know nothing and yet we shoot our mouths off about what we know, even tho that will change as it always has and always will. lol

There needs to be care with the term soul because it has different connotations for different religions.

Buddhism is different from Hinduism on a fundamental level, and while soul is an appropriate term in Hinduism, it is definately not in Buddhism. Otherwise you get a confusion of meaning. This is important in Buddhism because the idea of no-self and all the implication that has for the practice would be eroded through confusion over the term. It's not just another name but has specific connotations which Buddhism denies. There is enough confusion already.

Studies on giving to charity have actually shown that the poorer someone is the more likely they are to give a greater percentage of their income. Turns out happy, content people tend to think less about the well being of others. The caveat to this is the outrageously rich, like Bill Gates, who sometimes give something like 10% of their income to charity a year.

I personally don't believe in reincarnation, or anything supernatural really. Although, I've visited the Vietnamese Pagoda here in Montreal, and the monks were quite nice.

Do you think it might be because of different attitudes to money - such as an easy-come-easy-go attitude in the poor perhaps? merely speculation I know.

[Musicology]

There are good grounds NOT to believe in reincarnation. Try the lessons of nature. For a start. Every seed brings forth (only) of its own kind. So that rules out a man coming back as a fly or an elephant, for a start. Or vice-versa. I guess the lessons of nature count.

However, there are people in East Germany who believe this giant rabbit (which weighs 23 pounds) was once a carrot -