Why I pick Buddhism over Religion, and achieve a higher level of serenity over religious people

i will post it again and see if you bother to read it. i'm sure you wont, but anyway...

Reincarnation: Fact or fiction?

What is Reincarnation? Before the 1960s, it was called "Transmigration of the Soul". This belief is rooted in Eastern religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism.

What does "Transmigraton of the Soul" teach? Basically it taught that at death the soul would be reborn into another animal, human, plant, or god. According to this teaching, the lowest life form was a clod of dirt. There was only one thing worse than that...being reborn as a woman.

This "sexist" belief did not sit well with Western society, so the belief was modified into what we now know as "Reincarnation".

Easterners who believed in "Transmigration of the Soul" would often refuse to kill a cockroach because of their belief that the roach could have been one of their ancestors.

Westerners who believe in "Reincarnation" don't have this same regard for the animal and plant kingdom. Basically, their belief is that we only come back as someone else.

What the belief in Reincarnation does do is that it denies any form of judgment after death.

[link to www.anunseenworld.com]

PLAIN AND SIMPLE LOGIC AND REASON - Non-Biblical

I. Reincarnation is Unworkable

The goal of reincarnation is to work off all bad karma until the "sound of silence" (the primordial state of the universe) returns once more. But there is a problem here. To believe that souls are working off their bad karma and gathering good karma, assumes that people are learning and improving. Things are getting better and each succeeding life is more enriched. By every rotation of the wheel, souls are getting closer to Nirvana. That is false.

To forever disprove that theory, all we have to do is visit India. That is the nation where reincarnation has been taught so forcefully for the longest period of time. There is where bad karma has been worked off and good karma has been building for centuries. Millions of people should be living easier and easier lives as they climb to higher life forms. Are they? No. India bears tragic witness to the failure of such a philosophy. Instead of being a glowing light for the world, India agonizes in rampant poverty, starvation, suffering and chaos. Its suffering increases daily. Millions of poor souls quietly despair and prepare to die, hoping that something better will be found in the next life.

Hindu followers defend the failure in India. They say that we should not "equate reincarnation with progress." They argue that reincarnation "only provides the opportunity for progress." That is disappointing. The very religion that calls for progress toward Nirvana does not guarantee progress? Why? Because there is no incentive to improve.

One cannot improve on a mistake he can't remember. If a person doesn't have any recollection of his past in the next life, he has no reason whatever to improve. Reincarnation sends you around again and again, but teaches you nothing. You remember nothing and improve none at all. Also, if you believe you are going around again and again, there is no motivation to change or improve anything right now. Generations come and go without progression in such a system. That is why the social order of most Hindu nations is below standard. The poor and uneducated languish in misery, generation after generation.

Karma can work only if people are getting better. And the truth is, people are not. If I do evil in life number one, I must pay for my bad Karma when I reincarnate. But if, in life number two, I do more wickedness when I am supposed to be burning off the bad from my first life -- then I have to pay for that new evil in life number three. But there I do more wickedness -- the cycle is endless and degenerates as it turns. I get further and further away from perfection, not closer.

Reincarnation is Illogical

A young man proudly announced to an older man, "I am a firm believer in reincarnation. It has all the answers for me." "Really?" asked the older man. "Tell me about it so I can believe it too. How many times have you been reincarnated?" "Uh, I don't know," stammered the youth. "What were you before you got to this point?" "I don't know." "What will you be next time?" "I don't know." How many more times must you go around before you are perfected?" "I don't know." "Where can you go to get the answers?" "I don't know." "Then how can you say it has all the answers?" asked the older man. "It doesn't have any answers. I will just stay with the Bible. Its truth is clear, plain and invites investigation. It has all the answers for everyone."

In reincarnation there are no answers. And where is the proof? The explanations that it offers us are totally lacking. The brain just cannot logically accept some of the things it teaches. For example, reincarnationists teach:

*That the world's population is basically stable. One Hindu writer said, "As one dies, another is born to take his place."

*Even when war or natural disaster reduces the population in one place, other places are experiencing prosperity and population growth. Thus overall, the world's population remains stable.

*There will, therefore, always be just enough souls to be reborn into all infant bodies, for there is a corresponding number of deaths and births.

*The human soul is not created but is eternal. Thus no new souls are being created to enter the cycle of rebirths.

*When a soul is sufficiently purified, it is absorbed back into "being" (out of our world into Nirvana).

The problems in such teaching are obvious: First, if no new souls are being created, yet the number of old souls are being absorbed back into "being," it should follow that the world population is decreasing. This is not true. Instead there are more people alive in this present generation than in any previous one.

Consider the following statistics of growth in the world:

A.D. 1575 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500 Million people

1825 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Billion people

1925 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Billion people

1975 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Almost 4 Billion People

Second, since the world's population is increasing so rapidly, it is only obvious that there are not enough old souls to fit these new bodies. Where are they to come from? Does that mean that there are bodies walking around with no souls?

To answer this dilemma, many Hindu devotees claim that Karma is changing -- sending the needed souls up from insects and animals, evolving them into humans. They agree the world has more humans today, but claim we have less insects. However, that is not true either. And even if it were, why should the law of Karma change to accommodate the need for extra souls? And if karma changed, it cannot be a law at all. Personalities change, laws don't.

[link to www.churches-of-christ.net]

Salt I read it twice now.

If you choose to form your understanding of this concept based on the misguided interpretations of some organized belief system and misunderstanding about the nature of the phenomena itself, I don't know what to tell you. I choose to look at tangible experiences of individuals who were studied and experienced circumstances/occurrences that modern science cannot explain with traditional 'reasoning'. You seem to want to avoid the more concrete evidence for the phenomena. That's your choice though and I respect it.

I trust being on a conspiracy forum that you at least understand why the 'churches' do not want their followers subscribing to the idea of reincarnation? Once a person contemplates on that for a bit it's understood why that interpretation is hosted on the website that you linked to. How do you control a person who believes he/she will be reborn again?

Last Edited by ANHEDONIC on 10/07/2012 09:04 PM

lol... look we are friends. we agree to disagree.
but, the logic is unmistakable. it cannot be.

what you are calling tangible - testimonies of people who claim to be reincarnated - seems to be silly.

there is mountains of data that show how these people are deluded, or if you want to go the Christian route - deceived.

either way, reincarnation CANNOT pass the logical argument.

reincarnation is the deception and control method. not the other way around.

Last Edited by Salt on 10/07/2012 09:04 PM

You need to understand where 'logic' derives from so you can see the limitations of using that vantage point as your determination of what is and is not 'possible'. How do scientists ever make any ground breaking discoveries if they only rely on what's 'logical' to guide them? Logic is a reflection of the understanding from the past & present moment. It is no indication of the 'truths' which will be realized & acknowledged in the future. In 1812 it was not 'logical' that there could be a electrical network connecting all corners of the Earth by which to share communication & information instantly. Does this make sense in principle?

We are on different wavelengths and that is why we can't find common ground.

P.S. I linked you to information about children's recollections about past life memories. In many cases the parents do not support such an ideology. The information the children provided could be researched, corroborated, and validated through the efforts of their parents and the Doctors who researched their cases. This is not about adults making outrageous claims in the conscious state.

If you want to rely on your church inspired links that only look at this subject on the surface level and from a left-brain perspective, that's up to you. But don't ignore the real substantive evidence for the phenomena in the process if you are genuinely interested in exploring the truth of the matter.



Last Edited by ANHEDONIC on 10/07/2012 09:19 PM

Hello Salt,

You are correct that Reincarnation cannot pass the logical argument, however it would be wise not to deify " logic. "

[link to thesixthperspective.com]

As any reputable quantum physicist would have to admit.

The whole concept of objectivity is subjective.

Have fun ......

Best

validated - okay. well two of the criterion for evidence of demon possession in the eyes of the roman catholic church is the ability to speak unknown foreign languages and knowing information that is unknowable by the individual.

it proves nothing.

2 + 2 always equals four.
at the end of the day, there can be only one absolute truth.

Who said the Roman Catholic church or any church for that matter should be a reliable source of ideology???? To me that is blasphemy to allow a church to think for you. Takes away your power.

Did you watch the video that I posted? It's only 10 minutes. I bet you were too lazy to watch it.

Last Edited by ANHEDONIC on 10/07/2012 09:22 PM

they aren't. that's the point.
i am writing a paper for school. when i get it done, i will view the vid. but i have already seen tons just like it.

2 + 2 = 4

2 x 2 = 4

1 + 0 = 1

1 x 0 = 0

Absolutely ......

Enough for today.

Best

Well good... I look forward to your personal opinion on how these investigated and corroborated cases of children's past life memories can be explained away through conventional means.

P.S. When writing your paper don't forget to change the font to Courrier New to get a boosted page count.

Last Edited by ANHEDONIC on 10/07/2012 09:29 PM

this professor insists on times roman, 12 pt. and the topic of the essay is boring as hell. thus the GLP distraction...

i will tell you, as a 17 year theology student (informal) and 2 yr (formal), my leanings will be toward biblical and apocryphal historical and archaelogical ideals.

so....
you know...
reminder: i am a former buddhist.

Last Edited by Salt on 10/07/2012 09:35 PM

Yeah but when I hear from you I want to hear from Salt and not a regurgitation of the ideologies that you studied.

When you were an atheist I bet you thought you had it all figured out for a period of time right? When you switched to Buddhism did you again also feel for a period of time that you had it all figured out? Well now that you are onto your next ideology, do you feel like you've got the truth cornered and figured out again? Have you ever wondered if you will reach a point where you are ready to part ways with your current field of interest the way you have done with the previous ones? I think it's inevitable and part of your journey of greater awareness, but that's just my opinion.

it's not that simple. there were pivotal events along with strong teachings that curved my thinking.

buddhism has some beautiful, practical aspects, some of which i still incorporate. but the core of the teaching is false. period, end of sentence.

Why identify with the core of any formal/organized belief system? I don't align myself with them. Sitting through a catholic mass up until the age of 13 was enough for me to know that I didn't need to be told what to believe by people who subscribe to set ideologies. Recipe for limited awareness and understanding.

I would feel the same way with regards to what you are currently studying.



Last Edited by ANHEDONIC on 10/07/2012 10:13 PM

i thought this might be a Firefly fan thead

what a disapointment

well, obviously i don't view my belief system as an organized, set, ideology. i view it as truth.

it is hard to understand this without in-depth comprehension.

I am skeptical of any version or brand of 'truth' that is administered within the confines of a public or private institution and under the oversight of a governing body.

well, that is the common idea of the mainstream.
i would welcome you to not adhere to the reformists and the ones who mixed church and government.

they are far from the mark.

you can practice all sorts of religions to understand a focus upon there foundations without having one religion as a whole. To practice it and allow the information to undergo a transformation in the human will then, you and everyone else will make dramatic change. Its upon to humanity to want to experience what the capitulation of what they want to undergo or do they not want to perform or demonstrate it. Merely practicing is an act, but the human being itself can study and perform anything as it wants. We are all good and bad, like karma, the balance will transcend itself. Everyone is unique in there own way and i am glad to take part of the journey.

Ian Stevenson

Ian Stevenson was a psychiatrist who gave up scientific medicine to collect past-life experience stories (PLEs) that he thought provided evidence for reincarnation. He graduated at the top of his class with a medical degree from McGill University (Montreal) in 1943. He also did advanced work in psychoanalysis, though he came to reject Freudian psychology. He preferred the concepts of the unconscious mind developed by the likes of William James, Carl Jung, and Frederic Myers, which "allowed for unconscious mental processes to be the sources or the conduits of man's higher creative achievements (as well as some of his pathological aberrations); they allowed also for the experiences we call paranormal and even for a soul" (Stevenson 1989). One thing he agreed with the Freudians on was their "awareness of the importance of mental processes in human disease. This element is minimized or openly denied by most investigators in psychology, genetics, and neurobiology. For them mind is a byproduct of cerebral processes and free will an illusion" (Stevenson 1989). Stevenson's recurring self-portrait was that of a maverick bucking the mainstream.

His interest in the paranormal derived from the influence of his mother, a devotee of theosophy. He was quite fond of the Society for Psychical Research, even though one of its early leaders, Richard Hodgson, had thoroughly debunked Madam Blavatsky, the creator of theosophy. (The Hodgson report has been disputed, but the facts of Blavatsky's deceptions remain.)


Philosophically, Stevenson was a naive dualist. He believed that bodies and souls have separate evolutions and existences, and he seemed not to be concerned or aware of the philosophical problems that ensue from such claims about mind and body.


<snip>

There are several problems with Stevenson's method. He often worked with translators in countries about which he knew very little. Questioning anybody is tricky, but questioning children is especially tricky. "Interviewer bias is the central driving force in the creation of suggestive interviews" (Bruck, Ceci, and Helmsbrooke 1998; quoted in Mills and Lyon: 303). Questioning children and adults via a translator introduces another element of uncertainty regarding the bias of the questioning technique. Most of the interviews took place in countries where reincarnation is an accepted belief. So, the translator would be "typically imbued with the cultural expectations that past-life recall is a valid phenomenon" (Mills and Lynn: 303). Stevenson, being non-fluent in the language and the culture, was in no position to assess the reliability of the questioning by the translator.

There is also the obvious problem of confirmation bias. The ideal, according to Stevenson, was to seek out PLE stories and then try to confirm them. Failure to confirm, however, did not count against the reincarnation hypothesis. In fact, nothing could be discovered using Stevenson's methods that could ever disconfirm the reincarnation hypothesis. Many scientists would consider this a fatal flaw in his methodology.

Another problem is that there seem to be alternative, non-paranormal, explanations for all of his data. Stevenson was aware of the fact that many of the features he was detailing were culturally driven. He wrote:

Critics of the cases have therefore suggested that a child's fantasies, perhaps of an imaginary playmate, may become shaped by its parents and peers, through their questions and suggestions, until the child assumes an identification with a deceased person. In this way the child becomes the subject of a factitious case suggestive of reincarnation.

This argument has considerable force, and its cogency can hardly be denied when we consider the numerous cases in which the subject of a case and the deceased person with whom he or she identifies belong to the same family or same village. However, it will not suffice to explain the smaller, but not negligible number of cases in which the two families live widely separated and, from all the evidence, have had no acquaintance with each other before the case developed. Moreover, in the stronger of such cases the child has furnished specific details (sometimes written down before verification) about the deceased person; there can be no question in such cases of imaginings, confused memories, and pseudo-identification. In examining the cases of this group we are almost forced to believe that the child has somehow acquired knowledge about a deceased person by other than normal means. If this be granted, one has still a choice among several explanations all of which suppose some paranormal process; and reincarnation is only one of these. (Stevenson 1989).

We need not grant that these cases can only be solved by appealing to a paranormal explanation, however. Coincidence, faulty investigation, deception, and other normal explanations are available.

<snip>

There are several problems with Stevenson's method. He often worked with translators in countries about which he knew very little. Questioning anybody is tricky, but questioning children is especially tricky. "Interviewer bias is the central driving force in the creation of suggestive interviews" (Bruck, Ceci, and Helmsbrooke 1998; quoted in Mills and Lyon: 303). Questioning children and adults via a translator introduces another element of uncertainty regarding the bias of the questioning technique. Most of the interviews took place in countries where reincarnation is an accepted belief. So, the translator would be "typically imbued with the cultural expectations that past-life recall is a valid phenomenon" (Mills and Lynn: 303). Stevenson, being non-fluent in the language and the culture, was in no position to assess the reliability of the questioning by the translator.

There is also the obvious problem of confirmation bias. The ideal, according to Stevenson, was to seek out PLE stories and then try to confirm them. Failure to confirm, however, did not count against the reincarnation hypothesis. In fact, nothing could be discovered using Stevenson's methods that could ever disconfirm the reincarnation hypothesis. Many scientists would consider this a fatal flaw in his methodology.

Another problem is that there seem to be alternative, non-paranormal, explanations for all of his data. Stevenson was aware of the fact that many of the features he was detailing were culturally driven. He wrote:

Critics of the cases have therefore suggested that a child's fantasies, perhaps of an imaginary playmate, may become shaped by its parents and peers, through their questions and suggestions, until the child assumes an identification with a deceased person. In this way the child becomes the subject of a factitious case suggestive of reincarnation.

This argument has considerable force, and its cogency can hardly be denied when we consider the numerous cases in which the subject of a case and the deceased person with whom he or she identifies belong to the same family or same village. However, it will not suffice to explain the smaller, but not negligible number of cases in which the two families live widely separated and, from all the evidence, have had no acquaintance with each other before the case developed. Moreover, in the stronger of such cases the child has furnished specific details (sometimes written down before verification) about the deceased person; there can be no question in such cases of imaginings, confused memories, and pseudo-identification. In examining the cases of this group we are almost forced to believe that the child has somehow acquired knowledge about a deceased person by other than normal means. If this be granted, one has still a choice among several explanations all of which suppose some paranormal process; and reincarnation is only one of these. (Stevenson 1989).

We need not grant that these cases can only be solved by appealing to a paranormal explanation, however. Coincidence, faulty investigation, deception, and other normal explanations are available.

[link to www.skepdic.com]
His dualism became stronger after he experimented with mescaline and LSD.

The whole of Buddhism forms a dharana - a method to concentrate the mind into a single focus in order to enter meditation.

The purpose of all of its philosophy and teachings is to enable and support that dharana.

The purpose of the dharana itself, is to practice the dharana.

The practice of the dharana leads to samadhi - the conscious experience of pure Being, beyond the experiences of time, space, body or mind.

You make it sound like a never ending bicycle ride...

Pro 19:5 A false witness shall not be unpunished, and [he that] speaketh lies shall not escape.

Well said. Im even betting OP is one of the morons who buys buddha statues that look trendy.. its highly offensive to true buddhists.

I mean, you dont put a jesus bust in the garden do you?

lies are concepts,we are spirit, we existed before we created concepts..there will be no punishment for the spirit...i will not punish myself nor will any religious concept punish the spirit either...i have overcome the world and i am free as i have always been and will always be...creations have no authority over the spirit..there is life on other planets and the dual earths in this same orbit are the duality testing grounds for then moving through the universe freely...if you live as a beast following the creation instead of the spirit,you slide back and forth being born again until you defeat the creations...Venus will be my next incarnation instead of being a slider..the other earth which cant be seen behind the sun in this same orbit also has duality but the male /female roles are in reverse...the women still give birth but all other roles are reversed..gays are gay because of sliding back and forth so much...a beast is a creation,we are spirit, we have always existed, we am not a creation...if the creation fools you ,you have become a subdued beast..i subdued the creation instead,i suggest you do too...

Last Edited by T Ceti H.C. Radnarg on 10/08/2012 09:18 AM

Oh brother.

there is only the creations and the spirit that created them..our arks dont move without its spirit causing it too..our arks are a creation which one day we as co-creator spirits will leave our creation behind and incarnate somewhere else..your stuck sliding between the dual earths of duality if you dont defeat duality concepts and the other creations...the creations do not defeat our shared spirit unless you choose to lose..this co-creator spirit has won here and will win on all the other worlds i choose to incarnate upon..i suggest you do the same unless you like dragging chains around sliding back and forth instead of advancing towards the sun/nearest star..

Last Edited by T Ceti H.C. Radnarg on 10/08/2012 09:33 AM

also in your pic, the little boy symbolizes the spirit which causes the ark to move it...the boy hasn't been cluttered up with as many concepts as the ark can be..religious and other concepts are chains to drag around.. i have no chains ,i take all concepts in with a grain of salt then lay them back down with the creation..the grain of salt is potassium iodide salt,lol..created concepts cant describe what its like to have the spirit free from its former calcified pineal gland..

Last Edited by T Ceti H.C. Radnarg on 10/08/2012 09:41 AM