home | what's new | other sitescontact | about



Word Gems 

exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity


Reincarnation On Trial

Is reincarnation an option, a right to choose?



return to Reincarnation main-page


In other writings, I've argued that one's right to choose is part of our heritage as souls "made in the image"; that, "the universe is plastic in our hands" and must eventually conform to our sacred intentions.

The question arises then, if one desires to reincarnate, will this be allowed or possible?

The general "rule of law" here, I think, is no.

The following is spoken by Tim, in the afterlife, channeled information, as he communicated with his mortal friend, a New York psychiatrist; documented in the book, "The Risen," by August Goforth.

The idea of reincarnation and pre-existence were part of a belief system I brought into my [afterlife] existence. I kept expecting the subjects to crop up but they never did. When I asked about them I was met with varied responses. But some… including a few I knew from my earth life, seemed to believe as I did and we spent a lot of energy discussing and debating, wondering and worrying. ‘What should we be doing to get ready for our next life on the earth? Who are the teachers to help me with this? Where and when should we start?’

Someone suggested that maybe there was a special learning center with a library that dealt solely with the subject, but nobody knew how to get there. Usually, if we desire something strongly enough here, it will manifest within our reach. But perhaps we didn’t know enough about what to desire in the way of a learning center or library on this particular subject, because nothing of the kind appeared. And nobody seemed to know how to direct us...


The universe may be plastic in our hands, required to conform to our intentions - but, only to sacred intentions, only those intentions independent of the Small Ego.

Quantum Physicist, Dr. Amit Goswami, in his books and lectures on quantum reality and consciousness, offers a striking everyday-example of this principle:


"We create our own reality, but there is a subtlety in consciousness. We do not create reality in our ordinary state of consciousness, but in a non-ordinary state of consciousness. This becomes clear when you ponder the paradox of Wigner's friend. Eugene Wigner was the Nobel laureate physicist who first thought of the paradox.

"Imagine that Wigner is approaching a quantum traffic light with two possibilities, red and green; at the same time his friend is approaching the same light from the perpendicular road. Being busy Americans, they both choose green. Unfortunately, their choices are contradictory; if both choices materialize at the same time, there would be pandemonium. Obviously, only one of their choices counts, but whose?"


When two Egos collide, each seeking private and narrow interests, someone will be disappointed.

Only the choices of the "non-ordinary state of consciousness" create reality; only the higher-self choices, the sacred intentions, those of one's better nature - not that of the Small Ego - will prevail and mold the universe.


natural law

A closely related principle concerns natural law. Father Benson has much to say about this. If our prayers are egoically based and do not conform to the way things really are - that is, natural law - the Spirit Guides cannot deal with this. They cannot effect "miracles" which countermand natural law.

  • Father Benson: "What precisely is a miracle, or rather, how would one define the term? According to earthly language, a miracle is the occurrence or performance of some wonderful event or act by supernatural means or agency. That introduces another word which requires elucidation. Supernatural would be defined, I think, as being above the forces of nature, or beyond the realm of natural laws. That is an utter impossibility. The laws of nature are preeminent. What appears to be a miracle is not so at all. It is solely the employment of natural forces according to natural laws. The whole functioning of the Spirit World is based upon natural laws. No one, either in these realms in which I live, or in any realms higher or lower in spiritual status, can move one fraction of an inch beyond any spiritual law. The seeming miracles which Jesus is reputed to have performed are in reality, therefore, not miracles at all, in the generally accepted sense of the term, but the utilizing of natural forces."


Could reincarnation be one's personal choice?

I think not. The theory of reincarnation, as I intend to make clear, lies outside of natural law. Further, as I will explain, a desire to reincarnate is likely to be a choice of the Small Ego, not the Higher Self.

As such, we have no ability to choose reincarnation as a future life-option; just as we have no power to choose to become Peter Pan or the Easter Bunny.

One possible exception: Abu the Egyptian suggests that advanced souls, on the higher levels, sometimes come back to the Earth for purely humanitarian and selfless reasons - like an Albert Schweitzer. But these "Christ-figures," we take it, are "one in a million" and not part of normal modus operandi of John and Mary Citizen of Summerland.


Editor's note: I've called this an exception, but it's not really an exception. This would be a choice of the Higher Self, and the Little Me would have nothing to do with it. But, even to say that the Higher Self "chooses" is not true. See "Krishnamurti" below.


The Small Ego lurks behind the vast majority of intentions to reincarnate. In its neediness of "I don't have enough" because "I am not enough" it will wish for another go-round on Earth.

These wishes and "choices" will not be honored. Similarly, the Dark Realms are filled with hundreds of millions or billions of wretched persons who would love to "choose" to reincarnate or otherwise leave their sordid estates, but these intentions of the Small Ego will not be brought into reality - and these hapless ones will remain where they are until they "go within," in humility and repentance, discovering their status as having been "made in the image," with a willingness to become what is their destiny to become - a mature and clear-eyed son or daughter of God.

Ultimately, this is the only real choice we have. The wheat seed cannot "choose" to be a plum-tree, and we cannot choose to be other than what God meant for us to be.

Reincarnation is but one more religious or quasi-religious belief of this world, the profession of faith concerning which - that is, a personal choice - will avail nothing. Consider the following words of Father Benson, speaking here of the errant belief in "resurrection," that despite a profession of faith, a choice, such intention will, by no means, be honored in the astral realms as it violates natural law

  • "The whole conception [of resurrection], of course, is fantastic. Once dissolution has taken place, the physical body is finished with as far as its former owner is concerned. It has no place whatever in the spirit world. It cannot enter there. And there is no magical process in existence that can so alter its constituents or form or mode of being as to be able to penetrate into spirit realms of any degree of weight or lowness, of light or darkness, whatsoever. A profession of faith that such a thing is possible is of no avail; it simply cannot happen because it is against the laws of the spirit world. And these are natural laws, not laws that have been enacted by someone and can therefore be suspended or annulled at will."



Krishnamurti: only those who are not free attempt to choose

As a young man, James Webster heard a lecture in London by Jiddu Krishnamurti and found himself deeply moved by the wisdom of this Indian mystic. I share this assessment.

James sent to me a quotation (below), which strikes me as among the most profound. Let me warn you, however, the insights therein, concerning free will and choice, might seem so counter-intuitive to what we, in the West, esteem as humanistic ideal that one's immediate reaction is to balk.

We think we are free when we choose; but we are not, are we? Where there is choice, there is no freedom because that very choice springs from our conditioned state. We think we have a will of our own, and we exercise that will through choice. But, if you observe, you will see that will is the outcome of innumerable desires, of many forms of frustration, fears; and these frustrations, fears, desires are the outcome of our conditioning, of our background; so when we choose, we are never free. Choice in itself indicates the lack of freedom. A man who is really free has no choice; he is free, not to do this or that, but to be. As long as we have choice, we are really not free and we are not really individuals [i.e., "divided" from the whole].

It is very important to understand this, because most of us live with choice - choosing a virtue, a person, an action - and choice invariably leads to misery; there is no good choice and bad choice. Only the mind that is free from choice is capable of perceiving what is true. Truth does not come through choice. Truth does not come with analysis, with the capacity to choose between this and that, right and wrong; on the contrary, all choice is the outcome of our conditioning which is based on fear and acquisitiveness. We, you and I, call ourselves individuals but we are really not individuals [i.e., "divided" from the whole] at all. It is only when we are free from the background, from our conditioning, that there is real individuality; and that requires a great deal of thought, enquiry.

I wrestled with these precepts for a while, wondering if Krishnamurti could be correct. Finally, I saw that he speaks with Amit Goswami, Eckhart Tolle, and others who understand that it is the Small Ego that attempts to "choose." When we align ourselves with the True Self, the "inner riches," the heritage of having been "made in the image," in a very real sense, there is no "choice" for us; rather, we move toward our destiny, not by "choosing," but by accessing the inner wisdom, that "secret pipeline" to Universal Intelligence; and when we do, our actions do not represent a "choice" so much but a realization, an inner resonance, concerning what God wants for us, and has prepared for us.

Krishnamurti is more than correct to asset that our "choices" in the world represent cultural conditioning. Instead of heeding the "still small voice" of the True Self, we convince ourselves that we want something because of neurotic identification with fashion or peer-group demands; or a teacher in second grade said it was a good idea; or because grandmother or local priest advocated such. But, "truth does not come through choice" or consensus opinion. We don't get to vote on what's real.

Notice Krishnamurti's particular example of the Small Ego's domain - we choose a person to marry. And what's wrong with this? The Small Ego cannot hope to get it right. It will choose a mate based on psychological/biological neediness. Eventually, when you find your Twin-Soul - more likely, in the next world - you will be together, not because you choose him or her - that won't be necessary; instead, your deepest inner-person will so resonate with the beloved - an overwhelming confirmation from the depths of being - that it will be unthinkable for you to be with any other.

We don't choose our eternal mates; that choice was made on a higher level a very long time ago. Our part is to clear away the influence of the Small Ego, allowing for recognition and realization when Spirit Guides bring the beloved near and into one's life.

Likewise, we cannot choose reincarnation as it represents just one more craving of the Small Ego. As we access the "true self," a recognition and realization of sacred destiny will inform us of another path.



a restatement on this issue of "choice"

Much of this discussion of “choice” strikes us as contrary to common sense. This is because the Ego has taken over this subject.

As we mature and grow spiritually, we will come to see that “choice” is no longer part of our decision-making process. Instead, as we access “the true self,” wisdom percolates upward, from the depths of being, and we’re given answers seemingly from nowhere.

But the Ego, knowing nothing of “the true self,” still believes in “choice” as the way forward.

Let’s state this another way: As our “eyes open,” we’ll stop making “choices” and simply allow the answer to come to us. It is only the Ego that wants to “choose.” It will attempt this in all aspects of life, in this world and the next, until we get our heads right, including the area of “R.”

The Ego wants to choose “R” as it desires, in its neediness, any option that might artificially enhance itself or grant to itself “more time.” But the Ego, in reality, doesn’t get to choose anything; except among various options for suffering. That’s what it chooses, and that’s what it’s good at creating. The Ego fancies itself "in control," able to choose, but this is gross illusion. The Ego's little wishes have no power to craft and mold reality.

Why is this so? See the inset box on “The Jungle Always Wins” for a discussion of how all civilizations, all societies, cultures, and social contracts – expressions of the Little Me Ego -- are “passing away,” as the apostle John used the phrase.

Everything the Ego touches eventually turns to tears, brings no satisfaction, comes to nothing, but for the chaos it creates. The Higher Self does not “choose,” in any area of life, in this world or the next. Regarding those very rare instances of certain ones returning to the Earth as a mortal for a special service-mission, this is not a “choice,” as such, but an alignment with Universal Intelligence, which directs the endeavor.

Editor's note: See my essay on "Prayer," which activity, in essence, is not meant to be "gimmee-gimmee," that is, a "choice," but, in its sanctified expression, an atunement of one's spirit with Universal Intelligence.