Search the Community

Nothing disappear after all. Just the form changed. But then, the change = dead because the previous form is no longer there and will never be there again. The nature is impermanent. The reincarnation is real. But it just not the same as most people think.

this is only another concept, but it might shed some insight into the nature of reincarnation. I think we as humans really underestimate our power. With the help of religion we are taught that we are simple beings under the control of a higher power which we have no chance of replicating. This entire existence is because of the contrast of nothing and something. The nothingness that makes up consciousness creates everything that we know. We are a creator. There was a study done in which people were told to think about a certain phenomenon (aliens, angels, god) before entering sleep paralysis. Of course the people that believed in UFOs and alien encounters were abducted and probed in a hyperrealistic experience. The people who strongly believed in God had a spiritual experience involving angels and heaven, or an image of Jesus. They all felt this was real, and that it really took place in real space. This is why there are so many different truths that are fought over, because something is real to everyone but not everyone can believe that everything is real. People become addicted to this world and their ego so much that if they leave too soon that attachment/manifestation has so much momentum that it doesn't end with the physical body. This is why suicide doesn't help people, the pain theyre experiencing doesn't end with the body. I think one of the benefits of enlightement allows you to break free of the physical and to experience it finally without attachment, which allows you to leave this existence when your body dies. In conclusion, we experience what we believe and create. These concepts might make sense and make me feel like I know these answers, but they are only that: concepts. I think reincarnation is just as real/not real as anything else you've created. All I know is it's fascinating to think about.

@LateBloomer hey your question was kinda answered at the top of this page! As a beginner in sds Just moove as much as necessary to continue the practice, but as few as possible! Just make shure the enlightenment-police isn´t watching while you moove thou, otherwise they might sentence you to reincarnation as hitler or smth ...not fun!

@Khin Thanks for clarifying, I need to read more about reincarnation. I have the Tibetan book of the dead to read as soon as I finish other book I am reading, thanks!

@abrakamowse The idea of reincarnation is very different in Buddhism. But not many understand it. Reincarnation in Buddhism doesn't mean you fly out of your body and possess another body. Reincarnation is all based on Cause and Effect nature. Everything that are existing in present moment are simply causes for the Future. So the future is always caused by now or past. However because this present moment disappear as another present moment appears (Impermanence nature), there is no future or past. Only present moment. That is simply a reincarnation. So we came to be alive because something in the past caused us to be alive. Doesn't mean our souls jumping from a body to another.

I don't get the idea of reincarnation if there's no self, what is it going to reincarnate? There's nothing to reincarnate.

Recently I came across the definition of the term, Samskara, which is defined as: Every action, intent or preparation by an individual leaves a sanskara (impression, impact, imprint) in the deeper structure of his or her mind. These impressions then await volitional fruition in that individual's future, in the form of hidden expectations, circumstances or unconscious sense of self-worth. When I think of karma, I get a sense that our actions leave a 'cosmic' impression, in the 'ether' of the universe, which is to say ourselves. Our actions augment the universal patterns of energy that determine all of causation, analogous to what David Hawkins identified as attractor patterns. They leave imprints on consciousness itself, that are irreversible. What goes around, comes around. I always thought this was true from a young age, and again there is a term Saṃsāra, which is the repeating cycle of birth, life and death (reincarnation) as well as one's actions and consequences in the past. Karma is a law of consciousness, so to speak, it is to say that nothing is ever forgotten or dismissed, and as a result, there isn't one grain of sand that is out of place, as Alan Watts would say.

Well... I'm Theravada. I think of Nirvana as Enlightenment. Maybe my translation is a little off. After reach, I kind of thought Nirvana and Enlightenment are a little different in some people mind. When they say Enlightenment, it's more like realization of truth. Ya know... realizing the real nature. For Nirvana, one must pass through the state of realization and being one with the nature which is nothingness. Not many talk about Nirvana in this western country though. But......... I don't think that is a problem. Once one knows the true nature, one sure will accept the teachings of Buddha automatically because they are exactly what you see in your enlightenment experiences. In Theravada, every words of Buddha was kept and learned. All about Hell, heaven, reincarnation things are not the same as what most people believe. They are actually very different. Soooooooooo different. The annoying part maybe tons of rules. Don't worry, you won't go to hell if you don't follow all those rules. I don't even think of Buddhism as religion because it's not believing. All Buddha taught was reality. You believe it or not doesn't matter. Whatever happening around you will still be happening whether you notice it or agree with it or like it or not. That is why life is suffering because we are pitiful. We are pitiful because we think we have control over many things but ............... We actually don't.

For the first 10 months on my own path I was really against looking deeper into Buddhism and study its principles because I just didn't want do become a religious person. I was really scared of that. I'm learning to become a scientist and my whole life I laughed about religious people so I had this limiting belief all set. Then, after enough pealing away the layers of bullshit belief I learned a lot about Zen. First from Alan Watts' lectures and books and then researching it on my own. What I like about Zen is that even Zen masters wouldn't probably call themselves Zen masters, not even Zen students. Probably they would call them self ordinary people. They don't belief in anything and don't want you to believe in something. Even if you look into reincarnation, they don't believe that you have a soul that is reincarnated. They just watched for hundreds of hours and came to the realization that as one center of consciousness fades away another wakes up. So as long as this goes on, there always will be creatures who "know themselves". And as you are everything you the self will manifest in one of these centers of consciousness having the experience of being limited. That's basically it. Just an observation. So, now I tend to look very deeply into Zen Buddhism because they have such sharp knifes to cut bullshit belief and don't want you to belief anything. The basic idea of the Soto school - if I got it right - is just to sit down erectly and see all of this for yourself. The only books they have like Shobogenzo basically give you pointers in which direction to look. That's why I really fell in love w/ Zen and had to get rid of my limiting belief. Do you have to do the same? Fuck no. You can chose whatever framework you like for you own journey. Or you don't pick any framework and just do any practice. For me personally I try to look into a lot of things and then get the methods and ideas that make me realize the most and I go crazy on them. Cheers,

@Cuzzo Thanks for your reply. I think to facilitate the enlightenment journey, I may follow Buddhism, dismissing the mystical/ supernatural aspects and following more on the aspects more pertinent to true spiritual development. I'm not quite sure how they manage to reconcile the ideas of no self and the void with karma and reincarnation. Also, I'm not quite familiar with their take on morality, as I would suspect that they would ultimately see morals as fictitious, perhaps abiding by a particular code only to facilitate self-realization, not due to some intrinsically proper ideal.

I think learning the story of the Buddha and his journey is very valuable. I am not a Buddhist because I am not 100% on the dogmatic parts of the religion (reincarnation being a big one). Any religion assumes that it knows more than it actually knows in my eyes.

idk shit man past lives what happens after death anything man I heard sadguru discuss reincarnation once with someone in a video, but immediately stopped himself and said "but this isn't good to talk about because the mind makes up all kinds of stories" So I'm going to take his wisdom and not let my mind wander about this...

No, But I have heard stories that Christ traveled the world collecting different teachings in his missing years... which is why "I am the son of god" is not so "crazy" when you look at if from the Eastern point of view (because in their POV so is everyone else, you just have to realize this), but is a big "departure" from the Judaic roots that support Christianity. I know the Early Christian Gnostics were also very similar to yogies. And Early Judaism and Christianity had threads of reincarnation in it: -- Judaism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgul Gilgul/Gilgul neshamot/Gilgulei describes a Kabbalistic concept of reincarnation. In Hebrew, the word gilgul means "cycle" or "wheel" and neshamot is the plural for "souls." Souls are seen to "cycle" through "lives" or "incarnations", being attached to different human bodies over time. Christianity: http://www.near-death.com/reincarnation/history/early-christianity.html These writings affirmed the existence of the doctrine of reincarnation being taught among the early Jews and Christians. These Christian mystics, referred to as Christian Gnostics, were ultimately destroyed by the orthodox Church for being heretics. -- Most people that follow either religion ignore these because it does not fit the egoic sense of self they want to go on after death.

Reincarnation and rebirth are different propositions. Reincarnation, as in Hinduism is akin to water in a glass. The glass being a body, water being the "ego" or "soul", which moves to another glasse after death. Rebith, as in Buddhism is akin to a candle lighting another candle, passing on its flame. The candle being the body, and the fire being the cause and effect of the person (Karma). The Buddha did not teach the survival of the egoic self. In my opinion, dabbling in some forms of channeling and @Sarah_Flagg please correct me if I'm wrong, mediumship is channeling the stream of the grater self (essentially the energy/consciousness/essence) which uses the mediums own experience to re-construct a memory of the "dead" ego. It's not actually the ego of the dead, but a reconstruction. This is why sometimes the memory is interpreted incorrectly.

I don't know what to think about reincarnation and all this stuff, but i see way to many people here taking it way to seriously. If so many of enlightened people think something is true, does that mean they are right?. What they think as true may depend on their conditioning from society they came from. And we must not forget that the world was not that long ago mostly in mythical stages of development. And only recently teachings from the east came into our society. So no wonder that even so many very intelligent western people believe such things, because source from where they get information is to a large extent mythical. And we humans are known to be very gullible. By hearing something repeatedly, after awhile almost anything could start to appear as true, so we start to believe it, and it starts to make a lot of sense. If you have some crazy first hand experiences, that convince you almost 100% that something is true, does that mean that you are not deceived? You can never be completely sure about anything. Mind makes anything into anything, sure experience is true, but after all it is just an experience. It would make sense that life itself goes on somehow after death, but that you, your thoughts, your wisdom , your memories reincarnate? that just does not make sense. But if only being somehow reincarnates, than there is new body, new mind, you are put in new environment and it shapes you in a different person. Well is that then even you? In a sense yes, but as a person you are somebody completely else. Awareness is the same, but everything else is different. Well that would mean that this is your only life, nothing is left of you after death, only life itself goes on.

@DizIzMikey Don't think reincarnation is true. Even if it is, you won't remember it probably. Just assume you have only one life. @Truth said it wonderfully. Don't be lazy and play MMOS all day like me lol.

If reincarnation is true, I'll get another one It's not like I will miss out on any experience now, that I will probably have later I'm eternal.. right?

Here is my opinion on reincarnation: When you go to sleep at night there is a definite ending to your awareness of your consciousness. A few hours pass and you wake up. Since you are unaware for that time you do not notice it. There is never really a gap in awareness subjectively. All you remember is the last thing before sleeping and then immediately you are awake again even though 8 hours have passed. When you die you lose your awareness also but 14 billion years may pass without your* notice before you are born again. Again there is no gap in your subjective awareness of consciousness. It's just that this time you do not have neural structures left functioning from 14 billion years ago telling you who you are. So you do not remember the time before you** were born. For the same reason you** will not remember death, you will just find yourself awake somewhere in some universe in some point in time reading some weird alienated forum post covering the same topic. Or you will be completely non-physical in a way we do not understand trying to talk through a channel to answer someones questions, who knows? What I mean is, from the perspective of awareness there is no such thing as death, all you will ever know is life. But at the same time from the perspective of a person death is a real phenomena. An enlightened person holds the perspective of self as awareness and so understands that awareness will prevail after death, even if it takes eons for life to form again. When they try to communicate this to individuals identified as "people" they were misinterpreted giving rise to the idea of a person dying, going up somewhere and coming back as themselves in some way. * when I say (your) here i mean if you as awareness not as an individual person with habits and memories etc. ** when I say you here I mean you as a person with you own memories and idiosyncrasies Inspiration:

In the West people are happy with the idea of reincarnation;`Great to have many lives`. In the East they have a different opinion about it, they see it as failure to be born again. It means one is having left some karma and got to deal with it in an other, new life. This karma exists also in being born as a baby where one has to develop both body and mind first (!), before even be able to start with burning the old karma. Being born is karma and before getting rid of ones ego one must first suffer in creating a developed ego. Life in this existence is all about karma.

Thank you for sharing this, I watched it today. I think it is really interesting, and they make a lot of good points. I too share their point on looking only at the early texts. (The Pali Canon). A few points that I found interesting, in that I thought it was a bit odd. They made a really good point that the Buddha did not like extremes. Pure Atheism is an extreme. (And I say that as an Agnostic Atheist). The Buddha did talk, in the early texts, about Kamma, Rebirth, and different extra sensory powers you get via meditation. Those were not put in by Tibetans, Zen, etc... He also spoke about "gods"(or devas) that were also stuck in Samsara. (They were from his point of view, begins with a higher sense of consciousness who were once living beings.) The other thing is that in (Nepal)/India Kamma, rebirth, etc, were not the "traditional" point of view. They had a huge mix of different philosophies. For Instance the teachers that were known by the Buddha and society of the time: Pūraṇa Kassapa: Amoralism: denies any reward or punishment for either good or bad deeds. Makkhali Gosāla (Ajivika): Fatalism: we are powerless; suffering is pre-destined. Ajita Kesakambalī: Materialism: with death, all is annihilated. Pakudha Kaccāyana: Sassatavada (Eternalism): Matter, pleasure, pain and the soul are eternal and do not interact. Nigaṇṭha Nātaputta (Jainism): Restraint: be endowed with, cleansed by and suffused with the avoidance of all evil. Sañjaya Belaṭṭhiputta: Agnosticism: "I don't think so. I don't think in that way or otherwise. I don't think not or not not." Suspension of judgement. Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.02.0.than.html The Buddha did not teach Eternalism, or Materialism, but something in between. (As both are extremes). Rebirth is different from reincarnation, for instance; Rebirth is akin to a candle lighting another candle; passing the "grasping fire" to another "life". Reincarnation is akin to moving water from one glass to another. Where the glass is the body, and the water is the "soul". The Buddha himself seemed to me, was pretty much an Non-theistic Agnostic when it comes to "god". Now, I do not think what the people in the video are saying is "invalid", I just think it is painted with their own pre-existing worldview(Atheism/Materialism). There is nothing wrong with that, it makes living interesting, and the nice thing with Buddhism is that it can adapt that way. My own "version" of Buddhism is likewise painted with "agnosticism", which is tempered with faith, and wisdom(the Buddhist versions of these words). Who is "right"? I think that is irrelevant. If their ideas works for them, makes them enlightened, happy, free from suffering, etc, it should not matter. Everyone is on their own path; so ultimately, as long as people are striving to better themselves I think "how" is not as important as if it's working for them personally.

I don't know what happens after you die, but there are some interesting ideas, and some interested studies done in relation to NDE's, OBE's, rebirth, etc... Probably the most "sound" study is this one: Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation: Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged http://www.amazon.com/Twenty-Cases-Suggestive-Reincarnation-Enlarged/dp/0813908728 Ultimately it is a matter of faith. Personally I am "agnostic" on these topics... they could be "true" but there is no clear cut evidence that would pass the purely "materialistic" sceptic test.

Having been seriously depressed for a bunch of years, I can relate to that side of things. I remember the day I decided to not take a painful path to enlightnement (or whatever it is), and decided instead to work everyday to unearth ick bits, rethink them into harmony, and let them go. Here's what worked for me to get to key thoughts that released attachments rather quickly. I used some ancient, mostly not-used advice. I began to look at the meanings of words that troubled me. For me, those included, especially, 'worth', 'me', and 'Baltimore', and also, especially, 'sexuality', 'important', and 'necessary'. I would write down the words and their societal meanings and write out flaws in those meanings. I looked from as many angles as possible, until the word--at least on that day--had much less pain associated with it for me. I removed or syphoned-out the pain within meanings of words like 'should'. Or whatever got in the way of freedom-in-joy, serenity, joy, energy, excitement, whatever. I also gave myself permission to do it, well, cheerfully! Even and especially when, I sure didn't feel cheerful. If it helped, I completely skipped thinking about myself and thought about the words that harmed me (interfered with emotions I loved, blocked motivation, whatever). Hope that helps. To be more clear, say I decided that 'worth' hurt me, and it did, hugely. I'd look at worth--even in a dictionary--to see its assumptions, and see the logic of the idea of worth, maybe consider its history, such as when ancient or more recent kings belittled others as a way to puff themselves up and to control populations. I did a whole load of writing about the screwy bits in meanings of words. I'd ask questions. Is 'worth' worth it? No, the meaning of worth was definitely not worth it. Once I 'got' this, I was off to the races improving (for myself on my terms) the meaning of worth. By looking at the keywords of my pain in this, that, and the other way, I saw pain-words (like 'young') increasingly as impractical, and of course, as mind-bits and not-me. Word-viruses. I don't need their infections. I've had a good deal of trouble with 'young' (Not that I'm past it now!!!!!) But here's what I do: I disprove the meaning in no uncertain terms. Repeatedly and reminding myself that 'young' is not 'me', so I can have fun disproving the very concept. Young, how? Do I believe in potential reincarnation? Ok, then maybe young is relative, and maybe I'm fairly old (or not) I don't know. Suddenly, I don't know if I've ever been young in this life. Do I think of myself as young, but almost not young? What about compared to the age of a rock--or, well what about the mountains? Then I might try to think through some way of imagining the age of something ten thousand years old, then older, and so forth, realizing that the youngest mountains are really old compared to me. If that line of disproof didn't work, I'd use another. For instance, this: When I was a kid I feared older kids sometimes. Or adults. Am I now living in some remnant of that fear? Fear of older people traslated into fear of oldness? I'd do this sort of playful analysis with seriousness of intent, with feeling, connected to feeling, and not all-in-my-head. I prioritized love, including love of how-I-want-to-feel. On a relevant note, I am stunned by your insight. Thanks again so much.

@Galyna Sorry, if my explanation wasn't clear and of course you really don't need to believe me or trust me here. I just want you to think about it in curiosity like what the hell does that mean. (That doesn't even mean you have to) In most of us mind Past exists. But if we look at it, it doesn't. Past is equal to as Death or none existence. Like it pops up and disappears. That's the past I meant. Your thoughts, they are never the same. Every time you think about the past, that's a new thought. Your thinking is different from actual experience and those thoughts are different from each other. Can you find the past? NO! By looking into past, all you will have is thought. Not the actual one. I used to mention about noticing thoughts and actions. Because........ I want you to see your thoughts disappearing. Your feelings, senses, they all disappear. You will see NOTHING left. Cause and effect I meant here is not related to consciousness or survival instinct or maybe but you don't need to think about them. It is very simple. Ex: to have a sense of hearing, sound frequency must hit your ear drums. The sound frequency must hit strong enough to hear and your eardrums must be working properly. The cause of sound is because two objects hit each other. The sound pops up as an effect. The cause of hearing sense is because eardrums and sound frequency waves hit each other. The hearing sense comes up as an effect. That was all I meant. So when you hear a sound, that sense disappears right away. All you will left with is thought of that sense. We call that "PAST." It already past means, it is gone. You will fully understand it in actual experience. So to understand, you must notice as feelings and senses comes up naturally and notice when it disappear with 'Do nothing' technique. Leo called it do nothing because he didn't want you to put the word "I" creating those thoughts or feelings. This understanding reincarnation thing is totally relating to Enlightenment. Before you are enlightened, everything you are seeing is reality. See it as they come up naturally and disappear naturally. Please don't over think about higher-self or lower-self or consciousness or unconsciousness or ego or etc.... You taking my words or believing it or trusting me, nothing matter. You will think just the way you will.

@Khin Dear Khin, First of all, I have already read similar ideas to yours in another sources of information. Do I have to agree with it? Not necessarily. After pondering and reading about cause&effect theme, I came to a conclusion that it is an element of human psyche. It is a survival mechanism of our consciousness. Would we survive in chaos? No. We have to live in illusion of predetermined order, so deception with, so called, past/present/future could exist in the first place. Past exists because everything that happened are disappearing away. Time never stop, means things never stop changing. (Changing = Reincarnation) = (Death & birth). Karma = Action = Reaction. Past exists only in your current thoughts, as well as future does. Not need to believe here, try to find past on your own? What is it? A place? An object? A point of reference? Thank you.

@Galyna Please read, reread and think carefully. If you want to understand reincarnation, you must know the law of nature which is CAUSE & EFFECT. For example, The smell of a roasted chicken or whatever you like comes into you nose. Suddenly, the smelling sense pops up. You didn't aware of when it comes up. Because of that, it naturally produce (React) generation thought, such as "what is that smell?" and "yummy" and "I want it" or etc... Say all of those thoughts came up. Are they the same? Do you think the first sense of "smelling" and the thought "What is that smell?" are the same? And are they the same with the thought "I want it"? With awareness, you will be able to see that they are not. As soon as first thought is gone, the second thought comes up. And as soon as the second gone, the third comes up. No two thoughts come up at the same time within your awareness. That's how they are happening. That's reincarnation. You are reincarnating every minute and second. Not only when you body's buried under ground. The first thought is always supporting the second thought. Ex: a cell produced daughter cell. First cell is not second cell and second is not first. But they are similar. However, the very first cell and the one-hundredth cell may not be as similar as the first and second. It might be changed depending on external surroundings. It goes the same with your thoughts. The first thought is very similar to the second thought but they are not the same. Actually, whatever that is happening in the nature is happening to you. Both physically and mentally. It just that people don't aware of it. Another thing is most people think they are something special. So they think they have a little different functions. Many think their body and mind is just so unique and there must be someone unique and special who created it. Well, it is just funny after all. Remember? we are part of nature. What is time anyway? If you don't exist, will you die? Or have a past life? If there is no present, will there be the past or future? Present exists because things keep existing. Past exists because everything that happened are disappearing away. Time never stop, means things never stop changing. (Changing = Reincarnation) = (Death & birth). Karma = Action = Reaction.