Your Last Incarnation

[jimwell]

@Water by the River Could you verify the accuracy of the claims in this video? Do you even believe in reincarnation?

I think that the type of person who experiences the phenomena described in this video is somebody who is highly spiritual or who possesses a high state of consciousness. I don't consider reincarnation to be truth, but I'm open to the possibility that it's real.

[theleelajoker]

Watched it an wondered about the source. "Buddhist teaching" is very broad, there are many buddhist master, teachings, schools etc.

Anyone with background knowledge? Is there a real buddhist background or is it flavored with new age stuff?

[Breakingthewall]

It's impossible to understand the issue of reincarnation from the perspective of the self, which returns again and again. The only thing that can be reincarnated is a pattern of existence. The self that passes from one life to another is unreal. The one looking through your eyes is reality. Reality is looking through all eyes. Therefore, you, as reality, are not going to be reincarnated. Reality is not someone; it is totality, the absolute. It is not jumping from life to life; it is already infinite lives. The self that seems to jump from life to life is just another structure that reality takes, a form that, without the substance that reality gives it, is nothing.

[theleelajoker]

@Breakingthewall

Yeah everything is nothing.

But who cares if you call it self or structure, or energy pattern, or fractal or pattern of existence? Just different words?

Or am I missing the point you're making? 

[Breakingthewall]

32 minutes ago, theleelajoker said:

Yeah everything is nothing.

 everything is the totality. What is nothing is the form without the infinite depth that is behind, but the depth is behind everything . That of nothing is impossible, the infinity is absolutely expanded by default, it's not infinite potential. Potential means something that could be, and the totality is total, it's already done. I mean that saying that the reality is potential is focusing in the form, if you focus in the essence, there is not potential, it's totally done since always 

32 minutes ago, theleelajoker said:

who cares if you call it self or structure, or energy pattern, or fractal or pattern of existence? Just different words?

Because in the other hand the form is, always there is form, it's impossible being without any expression, and expression is always the case, but the expression by itself is just a form, a pattern of existence. It's a pattern, a fractal, because it's the results of infinite relative movements of the whole, it's not a dream. A dream implies someone creating something, it's not that , it's the reality adopting a pattern created by infinite patterns. Everything is infinite, and in its essence it's infinitely alive. The fact of infinity makes that. The reality is absolute plenitude, because it's infinite. That of nothing, emptiness, potential, is absolutely wrong, it's impossible. The very fact of infinitude means that always the reality is total, absolutely done to infinite power, flowing in itself absolutely alive, always. 

Edited May 19 by Breakingthewall

[theleelajoker]

3 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

 everything is the totality. What is nothing is the form without the infinite depth that is behind, but the depth is behind everything . That of nothing is impossible, the infinity is absolutely expanded by default, it's not infinite potential. Potential means something that could be, and the totality is total, it's already done. I mean that saying that the reality is potential is focusing in the form, if you focus in the essence, there is not potential, it's totally done since always 

👍

I agree and important for practical life bc language sucks here in my opinion. "Could have, should have etc" is talk about potential, but it's fiction. It's is what it is, here and now, and if you "could" have done it, why not do it? Hence, everybody is always doing the best he/she can. Marc Aurel said sth like this (stoicism) but took me long time to get this 

6 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

 Because in the other hand the form is, always there is form, it's impossible being without any expression, and expression is always the case, but the expression by itself is just a form, a pattern of existence. It's a pattern, a fractal, because it's the results of infinite relative movements of the whole, it's not a dream. A dream implies someone creating something, it's not that , it's the reality adopting a pattern created by infinite patterns. Everything is infinite, and in its essence it's infinitely alive. The fact of infinity makes that. The reality is absolute plenitude, because it's infinite. That of nothing, emptiness, potential, is absolutely wrong, it's impossible. The very fact of infinitude means that always the reality is total, absolutely done to infinite power, flowing in itself absolutely alive, always. 

I follow more or less.

- Is there really no one in control? Your argument is logical but it feels different for me. For now:)

- Don't get the "nothing, emptiness....is wrong" part. Can you give a concrete example pls? Might help me get your point 

 

 

[Breakingthewall]

2 hours ago, theleelajoker said:

Don't get the "nothing, emptiness....is wrong" part. Can you give a concrete example pls? Might help me get your point

The absence of limits implies that infinity is infinitely expanded. It is not something that begins and develops; it is always total. The apparent development of reality is an internal flow, since nothing is external, nor is any real expansion possible. No real change or movement, it is already total. But equally, the absence of limits makes constant relative movement inevitable, the apparent division into infinite perspectives. They don't go anywhere and they have no purpose; they are inevitable. So, the essence of reality, what lies behind form, its source, is total infinity. To say that this is nothing is absolutely absurd; it is everything. You could say it's nothing that you can define with a limited mind, but that doesn't mean "nothing." All that "nothing" stuff is Buddhist stories meant to seem mysterious. Or perhaps they're primitives, and for them, what you can't touch and see is "nothing." From a modern perspective, that "nothing" stuff is out of place.

2 hours ago, theleelajoker said:

Is there really no one in control? Your argument is logical but it feels different for me. For now:)

It's impossible. There is relative control, consciousness and intelligence are infinite, since they are, but ultimately what can arise arises. From an infinite perspective any control would be a limit, and limits are local but not absolute since absence of limits is a fact. The only possible control is synchronicity, since no change is absolute, any change is relative, that means that must be synchronized with anything else. "Anything else" means everything else, the whole of the infinity manifested, in absolute perfect synchrony, if not that movement just doesn't appears, because it's not absolute, it's just a reflection. Anything that appears are reflections. Again, you could say that a reflection is nothing, but it's confusing, a reflection is a reflection. Then you could say that it doesn't exist because it's a dream, or not material, or anything. Material is made of energy and energy is made or relations, information, relative changes of states between infinite fields, and a field is just the reality, and the reality is the unlimited that is because it's unlimitation. Break your limits and you will see what you are. 

[theleelajoker]

 For first part:

• Ok, got the "nothing is wrong" part now. Thanks. 
• "But equally, the absence of limits makes constant relative movement inevitable, the apparent division into infinite perspectives"
• Why does absence of limits  make relative movement inevitable? Why has there to be movement?

For the second part:

• Ok, I am following re synchronicities, and movement is relative. Up until the sentence ending with "it's just a reflection"
• And then you make a difference between relative movements and reflections?  Here I got lost
• I am following with the rest - reality as relations, as information, as changes of state 

[Breakingthewall]

1 hour ago, theleelajoker said:

Why does absence of limits  make relative movement inevitable? Why has there to be movement?

That's simple, because the absence of movement is non existence, reality in non existent state. Then In absence of limitations is some moment any fluctuation will happen, so "in some moment" is always, because stillness is "never". Then another fluctuation will happen. As there are no limits, there will happen infinite fluctuations .

1 hour ago, theleelajoker said:

And then you make a difference between relative movements and reflections? 

Relative and reflection means the same, it's a change from the perspective of anything else that is in different state, without that perspective there is no change, then any change it's the absolute reflecting in itself. 

[ChrisZoZo]

Last in this universe you got an infinite number of universes to explore!

 

[theleelajoker]

40 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

That's simple, because the absence of movement is non existence, reality in non existent state. Then In absence of limitations is some moment any fluctuation will happen, so "in some moment" is always, because stillness is "never". Then another fluctuation will happen. As there are no limits, there will happen infinite fluctuations .

Relative and reflection means the same, it's a change from the perspective of anything else that is in different state, without that perspective there is no change, then any change it's the absolute reflecting in itself. 

First part:

Ok get the idea. I once became unconscious, step by step everything became darker and darker before my eyes. Then it was all black and then the "blackness" disappeared, turning into  "         "

( "    " meaning--> nothing, non-experience)

Second part:

Lost in words. Lost in abstraction and definitions.

If you still have the patience - can you give a concrete example? For instance, "I walk down the street and this and that happening is the change, the reflection, perspective..."

 

[Breakingthewall]

5 hours ago, theleelajoker said:

walk down the street and this and that happening is the change, the reflection, perspective..."

Everything that happens is change; without change, nothing happens, then no change doesn't exist, because existing is change. Existence is the manifestation of reality. Reality still is unmanifested. 

Absolutely everything that exists is in constant motion by definition; static doesn't exist. It may seem that in meditation you are in a static state, but you are a relational node resulting from infinite relationships or relative state changes occurring at infinite levels. The power of infinity is, precisely, infinite. Everything that appears is raised to the infinite power. You walking down the street, if you begin to isolate all the relative movements that are taking place, from the air around you, to your body composed of trillions of cells in perfect coordination, which are composed of quadrillions of molecules placed in exact positions composed of atoms, in turn composed of stable and perfect energetic vibrations. If you zoomed in, they would be revealed as an infinitely unfolding flow of information, opening doors to inaccessible dimensions that in turn would house infinite dimensions, all in constant vibration, never still, since still = never. It is infinity, which as its name indicates, is infinite, and it's flowing without pause, because pause is not. 

Edited May 19 by Breakingthewall

[PurpleTree]

I think this is my second or third last.

[theleelajoker]

Why should anyone have need for a guru?

There has been a first person having last life if we follow this logic. Who was his guru?

Need for guru, or the believe to do so is for me rather sign that you're still far away

Edited May 21 by theleelajoker

[jimwell]

On 5/19/2025 at 7:09 PM, ChrisZoZo said:

Last in this universe you got an infinite number of universes to explore!

 

How do you know this is true?

 

2 hours ago, Applegarden8 said:

If you get a help from a Guru, you may have a last one, if you are on your own, it's probably not your last one.

This is the opposite of sensibility.

 

1 hour ago, theleelajoker said:

Why should anyone have need for a guru?

There has been a first person having last life if we follow this logic. Who was his guru?

Need for guru, or the believe to do so is for me rather sign that you're still far away

Humans who are genetically and spiritually gifted don't need a spiritual guru. They can learn from others’ insights and experiences, but they don't need a dedicated guru to guide them step by step. But most humans are average; hence, they do need a spiritual guru or guidance.

This resembles my experience as an English teacher. While teaching Japanese students, I wondered in the back of my mind why they needed a dedicated teacher for years. I had an English teacher when I was in college, but that was it. There were 40 other students, and the class was academic and conceptual, not comprehensive or focused. I finally realized after a few years that it's all about genetics. Most people are average; hence, they need a dedicated teacher.

If reincarnation is true, it's obvious that a highly spiritual person who does not need a guru is experiencing his last incarnation.

[theleelajoker]

45 minutes ago, jimwell said:

Humans who are genetically and spiritually gifted don't need a spiritual guru. They can learn from others’ insights and experiences, but they don't need a dedicated guru to guide them step by step. But most humans are average; hence, they do need a spiritual guru or guidance.

This resembles my experience as an English teacher. While teaching Japanese students, I wondered in the back of my mind why they needed a dedicated teacher for years. I had an English teacher when I was in college, but that was it. There were 40 other students, and the class was academic and conceptual, not comprehensive or focused. I finally realized after a few years that it's all about genetics. Most people are average; hence, they need a dedicated teacher.

If reincarnation is true, it's obvious that a highly spiritual person who does not need a guru is experiencing his last incarnation.

I see your point. I would not point to (only) genetics. Whatever it is, it's more concepts and identification. That being said, the most convincing and most likely theory is this:

It depends on the amount of rain drops one has experienced in the body in his lifetime: Even number - you need a teacher. Uneven - you don't need one.

What makes sense re teaching is this:

- You seek out a teacher because u feel like you need one. So you become a student 

- Any teaching from any teacher would then primarily focus on one thing: allowing, promoting experiences that make the student realize that no teacher is needed

- Teach as little as possible, as short as possible, with the ultimate goal to feel others from the believe of need for teaching. Enable others to set themselves free on their own 

Alan Watts said sth similar re psychotherapy: As long as you believe you need therapy, you DO need it.

In this context I also remember him joking about how he tries support people around him by freeing them from the believe that they need to improve 😄

 

[PurpleTree]

8 hours ago, Applegarden8 said:

If you get a help from a Guru, you may have a last one, if you are on your own, it's probably not your last one.

Hihi

There really isn’t right or wrong.

But this here is very very very very wrong.

[Water by the River]

On 18.5.2025 at 6:30 PM, jimwell said:

@Water by the River Could you verify the accuracy of the claims in this video? Do you even believe in reincarnation?

Here are first-hand-experience reports of a life of OBEs:

https://www.youtube.com/@jurgenziewe9125/search?query=reincarnation

And to continue with the bad habit of quoting my own posts : https://www.actualized.org/forum/search/?&q=reincarnation&author=Water by the River

This "taking the last incarnation" sounds a bit like the "escapism" of early Buddhism/Hinayana/Theravada and so on. Why should an experienced/old soul not be able to handle an incarnation even in a physical realm more or less gracefully, without feeling too much out-of-place (been there, done that before), and hence try such an adventure once more? Maybe even be a bit helpful for its fellow incarnated adventurer-heroes?

There are many realms to incarnate, (subtle realms for example, where it is not so easy to die), many evolutionary paths, many Lilas.

Physical realms are just very structured, with clear cause-effect (physical, biological and chemical and higher level consistency of cause-effect, aka "not much magic") and dependend on a quite "breakable" body which follows these rules. Starting in the Astral levels (Afterlife realms), that is changing - already dead, so not much need to work and put bread on the table. Then there are subtle realms and realms beyond these Astral Afterlife-realms altogether, with different evolutionary paths and modes of existence, some more alien multidimensional/higherdimensional and beyond human imagination. Concerning these topics, David Spanglers Subtle Worlds: An Explorer's Field Notes is an interesting work. And his magazin Views from the Borderland (from which all issues are still available).

 

And all of these games are imagined by just One (without a second) Infinite Being, playing with itself in its endless comedies, dramas and tragedies and any other Theatrical style available- Who is that again?

 

 

[Breakingthewall]

36 minutes ago, Water by the River said:

experienced/old soul not be able to handle an incarnation

Is something such a soul possible? What could be? If the form is an expression of the absolute, everything is the same soul, o there is something else, a line of existence that has continuity? Is possible to know that? 

How was china btw

Edited May 25 by Breakingthewall

[Water by the River]

41 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Is something such a soul something? What could be? If the form is an expression of the absolute, everything is the same soul, o there is something else, a line of existence that has continuity? Is possible to know that? 

An appearance. A higher/multidimensional, very durable (survives this life/death) and complex higher dimensional being/apperance (more than 4 dimensions).

Ziewes Out-out-of-body experience of the soul:

"I was fully awake, and suddenly, it was as if I was seeing myself in the totality of us, in a higher state of consciousness. What I saw was myself—not as a human being—but as millions of energy centers. I could focus in on any one of them. Each energy center was a part of me.

Some of these centers held past lives. Others carried unresolved issues problems I hadn’t addressed or had neglected. Some centers represented unfulfilled relationships, experiences that hadn’t been fully lived or resolved.

I realized that some of these energy centers were versions of me living on completely different planets. I could actually zoom in on any center and gain a complete understanding of what that life was about, what it had left behind, and how successful or incomplete it had been.

I could have spent an incredibly long time exploring all these past aspects of myself—each one forming a part of the totality of who I am.

Then, I became intensely aware of the darker aspects—parts of myself that hadn’t yet been resolved. It became clear that there was a kind of mechanism at work. The moment my attention was drawn to one of these energies, something would activate—a process that began aligning other energies or paths with it.

Before I knew it, I began to see possibilities. There were opportunities to heal, to resolve these energies, and to bring everything back into harmony." (ChatGPT time-stamp-removal)

See also similiar experiences at David Spangler (last book quote, and also his biography), and many other (also historic) cases.

 

And what does this evaluating/life-reviewing/new-life structuring? Something like "cosmic" AIs/Intelligences. We already have AIs, so of course Reality holds incredible powerful AIs and/or higher Beings/Intelligences.

 

So basically, the soul is like when you save the game in a Roleplay-game at every moment, but only the character-skills/points/exerpiences/impressions... get saved, and then put into a new adventure/story-line/incarnation afterwards. And then one learns on some more skills/points and so on. Ain't we are having (imagined) drama, tragedy, horror, adventure, comedy&love, and fun?

 

And the Koan de jour: Who is the player of this game, who is all players while forgetting these other player-perspectives real-time, the game-maker, the world-creator, the game-mantainer? Who imagines and contains all these vast appearing/imagined realms and vastly intelligents "AIs"/Beings/Aliens crossed because of copyrights/tm and replaced by: Higher-Dimensional Beings/.... ? And who is maybe also playing completely different games than the soul/reincarnation game? "What" is "that" Reality which can not not be here?

 

Playing a bit with Apeirophobia by the River, and then relaxing (since, you know, assuredly & verifiably always here with nowhere else to go) and going swimming in the warm River...

 

PS: China? Difference to Germany: The trains are on time. But I still prefer my teutonic hometurf. The flight back passes Dunhuang pretty close (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mogao_Caves) and the Silk Road nowadays, since when one flies with the Austrians they are no longer allowed to fly over the Russians. Very interesting track compared to the usual Siberian track.

Edited May 25 by Water by the River