Thread: DO YOU BELIEVE IN REINCARNATION? why or why not?

Originally Posted by Descensus

It's certainly not a theory in scientific terms, and "out of body explorers" sounds about as rigorously defined and supported as reincarnation does, which is to say, not at all.

If subjective evidence (by which I assume you mean person anecdotes) is taken to be evidence at all (it usually isn't; the plural of anecdote is not data), then it is the weakest form of evidence possible. Probably so weak that it's not even worth considering.

These are the definitions I am using:

Theory: a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation.

Evidence: ground for belief or disbelief.

Subjective evidence: evidence that one cannot evaluate; personal experience.

Out of body explorers: individuals who engage in the practice of projecting their consciousness into nonphysical dimensions of experience.

Hope that clears things up.

If those are your definitions, then your posts contain generally useless information (ex. evidence one cannot evaluate; projecting consciousness into nonphysical dimensions). Thanks for clearing it up, though.

Originally Posted by Descensus

If those are your definitions, then your posts contain generally useless information (ex. evidence one cannot evaluate; projecting consciousness into nonphysical dimensions). Thanks for clearing it up, though.

Well aren't you just a sweetheart!

My post does exactly what it was meant to do, just as it was meant to do it. That is, it serves as a reminder that there are individuals who have had personal experiences which may indicate that reincarnation is more than just a myth.

There is a reason why personal testimony is an acceptable form of evidence in the court of law. It is far from useless. It would be dishonest and closed-minded to write off an experience as false or delusion simply because it takes place in another reality frame, especially when the findings have been corroborated with the experiences of many others.

Again, I'm not saying that any of this proves reincarnation in any way. I'm simply saying that in the very least it demands that the theory be taken into consideration as a possibility. I disagree that it is useless to encourage others to be open-minded by sharing information that would logically necessitate a degree of open-mindedness. What seems useless is making a point to label the information that I've shared as useless, particularly when one lacks personal experience and insight into the subject matter.

The reality is that the brain IS like a reducing valve for whatever is out there. This is undeniable, it is limited by the senses.

There is more to reality. And 'science' is the measuring of what is 'out there' by using nothing mroe than the brain's senses and some extension of it. That and intuition of consciousness.

Outer body experiences may experience a vaster world than science hence is out of this realm.

What does "it takes place in another reality frame" even mean?

My belief now on reincarnation is that it cannot happen because there are no new bodies to incarnate into. Instead, if you want to experience something new, you organize to merge with the embryo of a lifeform that lived the experience you want to have.

Originally Posted by EbbTide000

My belief now on reincarnation is that it cannot happen because there are no new bodies to incarnate into. Instead, if you want to experience something new, you organize to merge with the embryo of a lifeform that lived the experience you want to have.

What evidence or data do you have that indicates "there are no new bodies to incarnate into?" There are over 300,000 new births per day!

Originally Posted by VinceField

What evidence or data do you have that indicates "there are no new bodies to incarnate into?"

There are over 300,000 new births per day!

VinceField

I came online on Saturday 1-March-2008 after waking from an astonishing dream. Dr Robert Van De Castle (my signature) began emailing, phoning, and skiping with me. I was brand-spanking-new to the online international dream community on Saturday 1-March-2008. As a result of being brand-spanking-new to the dream community and working with the legendary BobV, I took for granted that what was happening between us was the norm for all dreamers, everywhere.

In short

Psi-dreaming happens because ... it's all over. You and I are one being and based in the deep future, where oganic life is ancient history.

So

When people like you and I try to dream together, we merge and come into contact with what came into being at the end of time.

From the perspective of the end of time, what's happening, in the world now, is fully known, as ancient history. Causing precognitive dreaming, remote viewing dreaming, share and mutual dreaming and finaly, astonishing waking-life synchronicities.

The waking-life synchronicities are, when we (you and I) of the deep-future, comunicate, through waking-life coincidences.

Those

300,000 new births per day!

Lived there lives billions of years before the BigBeing was born. The explosion of the Big Being's birth gave all bodies from Big Bang till the BigBeing's birth, eternal life. Before the BigBeing exploded into being (at the end of time), life was just biological (soulless) machinery. And when we died we were totally gone. There was no soul or after life.

The only way this can be proven is by (continually) collecting data from experiments like this.

***
http://www.dreamviews.com/beyond-dre...-reloaded.html

***

Our waking-life is the BigBeing's (and our deep-future Selves) Lucid Dream .

The reason no one will play my dream game is because I have a mental illness (Discociative Disorder with Imaginative Reconstruction and Borderline Personality) and they fear that if they participate, I'll go crazy and have to go to hospital or something. And they don't want that on there conscience.

That wouldn't happen (I won't go crazy). I hope, one day, folks will be brave and give it a try.

Originally Posted by Descensus

What does "it takes place in another reality frame" even mean?

Learn to read between the words my brother

Why should I have to read between words? Just speak plainly.

VinceField said "What evidence or data do you have that indicates "there are no new bodies to incarnate into?" There are over 300,000 new births per day!"

...and that's before we take into consideration the fact that we don't neccessarily have to reincarnate back to this planet...there are billions out there and, given the possibility of infinite Universes, the sky could well be the limit.

IMO there are 3 main possibilities
1. We die...that's it. Maybe that is it...
2. We die and go to heaven (not for me really)
3.The Buddhist approach...we die (or rather our body does) and we shed our current persona and revert to our skylike mind...and we are reborn. I've been mulling this question for most of my 70 years and last year I latched onto lucid dreaming (not very well and not very often) I heard about melatonin etc and then I heard about the pineal gland and DMT.

I watched the Rick Strassman video https://youtu.be/QIlZWFYGgGc about DMT and I consider it potentially mindblowing. Although there still has to be much more research, I really don't think that his theories can be dismissed out of hand. Certainly the Buddhists have our attention when it comes to Lucid dreams and meditation so we ought to pay some attention when they posit reincarnation as the experience that follows death.

I suppose it really depends what we're doing here at Dream views...are some of us here just for the entertainment value of LD? Surely there are many who see deeper meaning within what we experience during sleep? I've had many mundane fairly meaningless dream...but I've had a few thought-provoking ones that hint at something deeper.

For now at least my money's on reincarnation...and, at 70 I'm studying Buddhist practice to maybe try and prepare for the possibility because I've ingested enough science and astronomy (plus a large spread of other knowledge) to know that the Universe is far, far, far stranger than we can even begin to imagine.

Just holding up for Vince with this really. You seemed to be fixated on finding flaws in his sentence rather than content of his post.

Originally Posted by Descensus

Why should I have to read between words? Just speak plainly.

You asked

"it takes place in another reality frame"

"reality frame" in this case seems like a strange word I admit.

But when following the conversation it is quite obvious he meant the personal anecdotal area that is not touched by science but actively used in court. the one that deals with objective evidence and frowns upon personal data. Apperantly in this field there is no room for data produced solely by consciousness. I'm not putting words in ur mouth u never quite said that. You actually said it is a lower form of evidence which is fine by me.

I don't mean to get into the discussion so i wanted to let vince answer but the question you asked seemed kind of dull! evoking a response rather than an actual discussion.

Originally Posted by Dthoughts

You seemed to be fixated on finding flaws in his sentence rather than content of his post.

Conversations related to topics like this are always filled with vague mumbo-jumbo. You'll have to excuse me if I'm trying to decipher what he says before I can understand what he means.

Originally Posted by Descensus

Conversations related to topics like this are always filled with vague mumbo-jumbo. You'll have to excuse me if I'm trying to decipher what he says before I can understand what he means.

I agree, there's a lot of vague skitter-billing when discussing these kinds of topics. It is a vague subject though. I can't imagine anyone who actually grasps reincarnation. There's actually some subjective evidence that points to it but it's vague. So anyone claiming to be in the know is especially prone to be deluded.

Excuse me for being a little carried away sometimes or lost in detail. I tend to ^^

"Reality frame" is a term that I've picked up from Thomas Campbell, who uses it to describe the various dimensions of reality. The physical dimension is one reality frame or dimension of reality/experience. Dreams take place in another reality frame. OBEs are yet another reality frame/dimension of experience. And there are undoubtedly many many more.

I didn't respond initially because I detected a degree of passive aggressiveness from Descensus and don't care much to engage with that. But it seemed some others didn't quite get what I meant either so I hope that clears it up. I suppose I thought the term was a bit more explanatory than it seems it is, probably because I knew what it meant the first time I heard it. My apologies.

I don't believe anything I've said is unnecessarily vague or "mumbo-jumbo." I always make it a point to be as clear and concise as possible.

What is the difference between a reality which is split into frames and a reality which is not split into frames? And I'm not asking for further definitions, I'm asking for a specific, tangible distinction.

Lovely photo, by the way.

Originally Posted by VinceField

I don't believe anything I've said is unnecessarily vague or "mumbo-jumbo." I always make it a point to be as clear and concise as possible.

For what it's worth I can definetely see from ur posts that you do this

Originally Posted by Denziloe

What is the difference between a reality which is split into frames and a reality which is not split into frames? And I'm not asking for further definitions, I'm asking for a specific, tangible distinction.

Lovely photo, by the way.

LOL the term "frame" is simply an analogy. Reality is not split into frames, but rather it seems to be a gradient or spectrum of interconnected yet different dimensional realms of experience, each existing at a different rate of energetic vibration. Each different level of experience, whether it is the physical world, a dream, or the various dimensions experienced during OBEs, is being considered a "reality frame," as we seem to experience the greater reality one frame or one dimension at a time, although again, reality is not split in this way. It is just a convenient way to describe something that we have no proper words to define.

And thank you for the kind words.

Originally Posted by VinceField

What evidence or data do you have that indicates "there are no new bodies to incarnate into?" There are over 300,000 new births per day!

Reincarnation doesnt happen. One lifetime is more than enough. When you die God will raise you from the dead and carry you to heaven or hell, so try to live a righteous life filled with Jesus.

Originally Posted by calielizabeth

Reincarnation doesnt happen. One lifetime is more than enough. When you die God will raise you from the dead and carry you to heaven or hell, so try to live a righteous life filled with Jesus.

It's a point of view calielizabeth. It's just a pity when we don't preface bald statements like that with the magic abbreviation IMO because that's all it ever is...unless there's sigma 5 scientific proof and God, reincarnation and all other spiritual events are definitely outside that standard, so are mainly down to our personal beliefs and observations. So could I recomend that we all do that to avoid irritating each other? Are we all agreed? IMO from now on?

smiley-happy020.gif

Originally Posted by LukeSid

It's a point of view calielizabeth. It's just a pity when we don't preface bald statements like that with the magic abbreviation IMO because that's all it ever is...unless there's sigma 5 scientific proof and God, reincarnation and all other spiritual events are definitely outside that standard, so are mainly down to our personal beliefs and observations. So could I recomend that we all do that to avoid irritating each other? Are we all agreed? IMO from now on?

smiley-happy020.gif

It's great that you're mediating conflicts troublesome to the discussion, but "IMO" not only should be implied but understood considering the topic is "DO YOU BELIEVE IN REINCARNATION? why or why not?" There is no mention of needing to provide an in-depth scientific (or something of a similar nature) explanation to prove what it is that you believe, so it should really be a given that generally nearly everyone that posts is responding with their opinionated belief and that there is going to be a lot of disagreement.

Originally Posted by VinceField

There is a reason why personal testimony is an acceptable form of evidence in the court of law. It is far from useless.

There is a very big difference between testimony about things we all experience any day or could experience any day, or for that matter has been verified to be able to experienced any day. We're talking about things that are plausible and we know that we are capable of, like murder, rape, or assault. You can't use this as total justification for anecdotal evidence. I agree somewhat that you can't simply dismiss it altogether because it's all there is to go by at the moment, but that is far from placing it in the same category as testimony in court. There is a reason why anything not experienced first-hand is known as hearsay in the court of law, and I'm willing to bet that testimony of paranormal experiences or altered states of consciousness isn't likely to be used to pin somebody down for murder, hit and run, assault, or anything else for that matter (if it is even considered at all). I'm not going to say you are flat out wrong and reincarnation is impossible just because of this, but you picked a really bad example man.

Originally Posted by snoop

There is a very big difference between testimony about things we all experience any day or could experience any day, or for that matter has been verified to be able to experienced any day. We're talking about things that are plausible and we know that we are capable of, like murder, rape, or assault. You can't use this as total justification for anecdotal evidence. I agree somewhat that you can't simply dismiss it altogether because it's all there is to go by at the moment, but that is far from placing it in the same category as testimony in court. There is a reason why anything not experienced first-hand is known as hearsay in the court of law, and I'm willing to bet that testimony of paranormal experiences or altered states of consciousness isn't likely to be used to pin somebody down for murder, hit and run, assault, or anything else for that matter (if it is even considered at all). I'm not going to say you are flat out wrong and reincarnation is impossible just because of this, but you picked a really bad example man.

Yes, I agree that there is a difference between witnessing a murder and having a nonphysical experience like an OBE or LD, although hallucinations and false perceptions do occur in the physical dimension of experience as well. We probably cannot be absolutely sure if our experiences out of body are valid or simply vivid hallucinations. But my point remains the same that there is a degree of credibility given to perception, and the fact of the possibility of OBEs and LDs being valid experiences in a legitimate greater reality necessitates consideration of these personal testimonies in the out of body state as potential evidence.

Perception is grossly overlooked. My friend accused me of having flawed perception of an event I clearly memorized. I'm fine with flawed perception of a memory but saying the event never had any basis in reality in the first place is taking it one step too far. In the same way, I always wonder how people must view someone that explains a near death experience when the listener presumes the NDE-experiencer is full of shit. Must not be very nice for the storyteller.

I'm open-minded. I'm into shamanism and the spiritual shebang. I believe our best bet for understanding reincarnation is talking to recently deceased dead people. They are contacted in altered states. Subjective experience is all we have to work with but if you can take two independent parties to produce the same myths from going into altered states and talking to dead people. You have some really solid evidence.. This evidence could antagonize reincarnation altogether. But there is no denying the possiblity before excluding every possible angle. I believe we conscious beings have the pMind and the means to unconver deep mysteries like these.

I've thought it through before the scientific method is just as applicable to subjective experience. Measure and repeatability are just as prominent in any subjective experience.

Originally Posted by Descensus

What does "it takes place in another reality frame" even mean?

different levels of conscious, dimensions planes of existence. Like where your conscious goes when you dream