|
Word Gems
exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity
Reincarnation On Trial
|
Restatement:
In a world of competing voices, how shall we discern the truth concerning reincarnation?
|
return to Reincarnation main-page
|
Restatement: In a world of competing voices, how shall we discern the truth concerning reincarnation?
Let us condense and summarize, one more time, this entire contentious issue.
On this page we might review 50+ articles presenting views, and counter-views, regarding the question of “R.” Each side offers its testimonies, arguments, philosophies, and experiences.
They debate this even on the other side!
However, we also know that if we go looking for evidence to support a pre-conceived conclusion, we shall surely find it. It’s easy, and quite self-deceiving, to paint a bulls-eye around an arrow in the wall.
|
Nearly 30 years ago, when I first began to learn of the “scientific evidence for the afterlife,” I would thrill to learn of the reports of Summerland’s congeniality.
However, among this good news, I felt dismayed to discover, what seemed to be a majority opinion among the “new age” movement, a sturdy belief in reincarnation (“R”).
It just didn’t seem right to me. And yet, the evidence supplied by people like Weiss and Stevenson appeared to be insurmountable. Reluctantly, I went along with it.
Later, having discovered James Webster’s research, “R” began to suffer diminishment. Other thinkers, too, added to my knowledge. And now I witnessed “R” reeling under an onslaught of better views, deeper insights, wider perspicacities.
This was my new perception. But others were unimpressed.
And I wondered, why do the party-faithful of “R” not appreciate this more comprehensive assessment? In my naiveté as a newcomer to the field, I would correspond with notable personages, supporters of “R”, in the arena of afterlife research, asking pointed questions based upon the more comprehensive view.
I was surprised at their reactions. In their public writings, they put forward a demeanor of mental equanimity and scientific objectivity – and I suspect that, in the main, they are this way; however – when it comes to “R”, the cool detached view crumbled, and I received from them, to various degrees, a hostile response. It reminded me of heated debates, unwisely entered into during my youth and young adulthood, concerning religious topics, such as the authenticity of the so-called Virgin Mary as Queen of Heaven, and similar religious illusions.
Why did these well known afterlife researchers respond to me, a then-novice in the field, with less than amicable sentiment? Over time, I began to realize that “R” was part of their “religion” now, and I had insulted their particular “Virgin Mary,” even to pose a doubting question.
Editor’s note: Why is the “R” question a form of “religion” to its adherents? The answer is, like pretty much all religious dogma, it’s fear-of-death based. This, of course, will not be discerned by true-believers. However, for “R,” it works like this. In “the 500 tape-recorded messages from the other side” writing, I presented nine different ways that the dysfunctional ego attempts to be rid of itself; it does this because it suffers from self-loathing. And “R” is a perfect method of being rid of oneself: one jumps into the existential hopper, enjoying dissolution of the former failed self, with hopes of coming out better this time. This is the fantasy. And if you tell an ego that there is no “R”, well then, they will tend to hate you for this, just as they will hate you if you say there is no Virgin Mary as Queen of Heaven. They will hate you because you’re attempting to take away their ticket to salvation, the “new perfect version of me,” just waiting for its debut, after the present “spoiled self” is flushed away.
I must strive for brevity in this “restatement,” lest I speak, once again, to the dozens of issues swirling about the contentious “R.” But allow me to move directly to the heart of the matter.
We are headed for Summerland. And if we entertain mental deceptions in this world, this lack of clear sightedness will automatically be transferred to our Summerland selves. As we discussed in “the 500 tape-recorded messages from the other side” writing, there are multiple millions in Summerland living in a psychological off-kilter state. Essentially, though they’ve shed the mortal body, they’ve retained many of their materialistic perceptions of the Earth-life.
This is a big problem. Summerland is replete with offerings of pleasant living environment, and we all look forward to it; however, if that’s all Summerland is to us, we will drift into a materialistic, non-spiritual mindset.
What does this really mean?
Our advancement comes to us in stages. The Earth is only our “kindergarten” of individualization, a mere beginning in terms of becoming a person in our own right. But, to what end? - merely to live in an upgraded “Disneyworld” of enhanced material benefit? All that is fine, but if we fail to move on toward a development of our “made in the image” capacities, we will slide into dysfunction.
This means that we are to “attune” our spirits to the Great Spirit, to Source, in order to be taught directly by Mother-Father God. As we learn to “open a channel” to divine influence, then, over time – actually, over our eternal lives – we will align ourselves, more and more, with the energies and mind of God.
This is “the Spirit of truth” of which Jesus spoke, designed to lead us into all aspects of reality. No one, no external teaching authority, can give this benefit to us. With it, however, over time, we become more and more sane, more and more like God, in our thoughts and mode of living.
And how does this affect our view of “R”? It will be affected just as any other perception will be affected. As we “attune” our minds to divine influence, we begin to perceive what is true, what is reality, and what is illusion.
Here is what I’ve now personally discovered - what I didn't know 30 years ago when I began this journey.
In the article on “mind as quantum energy field,” I suggested that, as we “attune” ourselves to the greater mind of God, we experience a “disturbance in the force,” so to speak, if a negative or discordant element wanders into the field.
Allow me to be specific. As one learns how to “discern the spirits,” as the Bible uses the phrase, we receive a sense of the authenticity, or the rightness - or lack thereof - concerning certain propositions. For example, as we silence the mind, and if we pose the question – central to the teaching of “R” – “Does more experience have the power to make us more spiritual?”, and when we allow this question to be evaluated by the “quantum energy field” of the mind, having been attuned to God, we will be offered a perception of answer. And it will issue in the following manner. We will be given a sense that, “Experience, per se, while beneficial to other purposes, cannot advance or evolve us spiritually.” That's not what experience is for.
|
True spirituality is gained only by accessing the 'inner life'. Spirituality is about burgeoning life, blossoming life, unfolding life, and this life comes only from God; life comes only from life. Experience can prune, direct, and mold life, but it cannot impart life. This is the crux of the error and where the believers in "R" go wrong.
READ MORE
|
Now, I realize that, unless one has actually entered into this process, what I’ve just outlined here will strike one as nonsensical. But this is just the materialistic mindset defending itself. The higher reality is different. When we set to task the question “Does more experience have the power to make us more spiritual?” we will discern that “experience” becomes a kind of foreign element in the “quantum energy field.”
To make this more confusing to the uninitiated, I will say that one will be able to “see” the item of experience as something separate from one’s true self. It’s as if “experience” were “over there” and the “true self” is “here” with “me,” my “authentic self,” and it will be very clear – at least, to the "true self" -- that experience stands as interloper to the heart of the matter.
Again, I offer this example knowing that one who is yet stranger to this process will find nothing here to be convincing. It’s not meant to convince, because nothing external to the soul has power to convince, but, at best, will serve merely as signpost. When you “see” this within your deepest self, it will be gift for you, alone. Mystical “visions” are non-transferable.
But the point is this. If we go looking for evidence to support what we want to believe; if we "paint the bulls-eye around the arrow"; if we reduce the debate concerning "R" to "my favorite PhD authority can beat up your PhD"; then we will never find the reality behind the "R" contention.
We learn what is true and real, in a dispositive manner, only within the energy field of “the Spirit of truth.” Outside that realm, we must rely on arguments, testimonies, scientific evidence, or other external sources, but none of these will offer conclusive sense of certainty. Only “the Spirit of truth” can do that.
And this is why “R” is still debated on the other side. And it will continue to be debated for the next million years, but only by those who are trapped in a materialistic mindset, one of not having entered the “attunement” process, that of, aligning one’s spirit to Source.
postscript:
The following inset-box was written for the "Krishnamurti" page but also speaks to the "R" issue - why do people become so angry when a contrary opinion is put forward?
|
Why is it that many people will hate you just for disagreeing with them? They cannot hear you – even if reasonings are cogent and information is accurate.
Many are so identified with an ideal that, if you disagree with it, they will hate you, and some, if they could, would try to kill you.
Why the vitriol? Why not just believe what you want to believe and turn away and not say anything? But today, more and more, we see the venomous political attacks, the vicious statements on social media, the hate-filled rhetoric of those who disagree -- and with an air of moral superiority.
the inability of true-believers to hear you is an expression of allegiance to Dear Leader
When we thoroughly identify with a thought-form, an ideal, a mental picture of utopia – especially, a vision promoted by a Dear Leader, who wears a “mask of piety” claiming moral superiority, stoking the anger of a purported victim class – then the true-believer followers will feel justified to commit any atrocity in support of said utopian vision. The great psychologists call this sense of permission the "divine numen", ie, the approving "nod" from on high.
And what does it mean to “thoroughly identify with a thought-form”?
The dysfunctional ego is led by dark perceptions of “I don’t have enough” because “I am not enough.” And because it feels itself as “not enough,” it will seek for a “strong father figure,” a Dear Leader, under whose mantle the ego seeks for safety and shelter in a hostile world. The ego will “identify” with this external authority, that is, it will “make itself equal to” this faux authority, will psychologically attach itself to it.
And this is why we meet so many people who are so angry when they’re disagreed with. To them, it’s not just an argument to be lost, but it feels like they’re fighting for their lives. They’ve attached their existential sense of worth, and of life itself, to precepts issued by Dear Leader. It is the sought-for security of the little child finding refuge in the shadow of a godlike parent.
'I can't hear you'
Children play the game of "I can't hear you" with a mock, sing-song voice, and then pretend to create a barrier of noise with "la, la, la, la..."
Adults do this, too, when they block you out and can't hear you. It happens when they fully identify with some external authority.
ownlife
In his seminal and prophetic work, 1984 (published 1949), George Orwell coins a term, “ownlife.” Totalitarians encourage their subjects toward a servile docility, an identification and psychological attachment. Those who resist such sublimation of autonomy are accused of clinging to “ownlife,” an insistence on individualization - and as such are deemed to be “dangerous,” “insurrectionists,” “domestic terrorists” by the dystopian autocrats.
a terrorized mind is incapable of listening
This state of total identification with an external source of salvation, a surrendering of self and critical faculties, is fueled by a terrorized mind – a dysfunction which believes “I don’t have enough” because “I am not enough.” This fearful mental state makes one incapable of living freely, incapable of listening, incapable of opening oneself to the messages of life.
a terrorized mind will block anything that threatens its security and safety
This is why, when you meet a true-believer such as this, you cannot talk to them; no matter how cogent your reasonings, they are incapable of listening. The fearful true-believer did not accept his or her beliefs on the basis of rational argument and careful weighing of evidence, and so they won’t be “argued out of” their mental positions by careful reasoning, either. More information, more content of the mind, will not help them, but only an upward shift in consciousness will solve this problem.
they can't hear you
The terrorized mind of the "inner child" blocks out anything that might threaten safety and security, which they believe will be secured by obediently following the dictates of Dear Leader as "strong father figure".
READ MORE on the "true self" page.
|
The following was written for the "evolution" page:
|
virtual reality, 'it from bit,' and the central mystery of quantum mechanics, even all science
In one of the first articles on this page, quantum mechanics professor Dr. Amit Goswami was quoted, to the effect, all fields of science must undergo revision in light of discoveries in quantum physics. This includes the domain of biological evolution.
The “double-slit” experiment, along with its kin, “delayed choice” and “eraser” studies, offers microcosm concerning the undergirding of "what is." It’s not what it appears to be. People like Elon Musk assert, there’s a “one in billions” chance that reality is not a simulation.
The following articles, written for the “quantum mechanics” page, might serve as primer for what we need to know concerning the deep architectonic reality of biological evolution.
Elon Musk, along with Tom Campbell and others, suggests that we are living in a virtual reality: He says there’s a ‘one in billions’ chance reality is not a simulation.
Physicist Tom Campbell: “The next big cultural and scientific paradigm shift is virtual reality.”
Tom Campbell: attributes of virtual reality
The Double Slit Experiment: "interference" versus "clumping" pattern is affected by knowledge of the “which way” data of the particles.
John Wheeler invented the terms and phrases "black hole", "wormhole", "there is no out there out there", but also "it from bit"; that is, the universe ("it") derives from an underlying computer-like information source ("bit").
John Wheeler quotations
A discussion concerning the resemblance between physical reality and a computer simulation.
What is the central mystery of QM?
Virtual Reality: ‘collapse of the wave function’ - consciousness as mediator, as though the universe were a display-screen to the user
Virtual Reality: uncertainty and complementary properties - as though variables were being redefined and results calculated and recalculated according to an underlying formula
Virtual Reality: the identical, interchangeable nature of "particles" and measured properties; as though the "particles" were merely pictures of particles, like computer icons.
Virtual Reality: continuity and discontinuity in observed behaviors
Is there such a thing as retro-causality or precognition for particles? Can a particle go back in time, or know beforehand, concerning its ‘which way’ path?
like a flight simulator
We touch the hard surface of a table top. It all seems pretty solid. We’re convinced that it is. But this assessment derives from a faulty metaparadigm. We’re all materialists at heart and are convinced that things of the world enjoy an objective existence. But experimental evidence during the last hundred years upends this conceit.
“Perhaps we are in a simulation,” offered Adrian Smith, in which “we are allowed to make mistakes with no lasting consequences, just as a flight simulator lets you crash and burn a thousand times and not truly crash.”
Adrian’s view is supported by thousands of experimental studies performed in almost every university physics lab on the planet. See the results of the “double-slit, delayed choice, eraser.” Also see one of the above-referenced articles, discussing how the universe, physical reality, is a kind of “computer display screen.”
Yes, this sounds fantastic to us, but only because we’re unaware of the empirical findings: the “double-slit, delayed choice, eraser.” When we investigate, we find that everything around us, “the entire set up,” the evidence strongly suggests, “was designed to” operate as a kind of display screen, that is, “to present images to a user,” a viewer or player in the simulation, “as needed by the user.”
This is why tech-geniuses like Elon Musk say there’s a “billions to one chance" that reality is not a simulation. Anyone who considers him or herself an educated person will want to look into this.
What are the practical implications of this reality serving as ‘flight simulator’?
We seem to be living in a world wherein “we are allowed to make mistakes with no lasting consequences, just as a flight simulator lets you crash and burn a thousand times and not truly crash.”
Simulating a plane crash offers valuable experience for a student pilot. But, for the rest of us, too, facsimiles provide high-grade educational value.
What would it be like for a son or daughter of God to suffer a false report, be lied about, hounded by fabricated charges, to lose one’s good name; especially, if this occurred during one’s attempt to offer service and charitable works? What would it be like to lose someone you love more than life itself? What would it be like to be cheated concerning an inheritance, or swindled in a business dealing out of what is justly yours? What would it be like to prepare yourself, for many years, to enter a profession, but then find the doors closed to you due to cronyism, racism, and/or black-listing? What would it be like to live for the truth, to search for and promote it, but then to be marginalized, labeled as a kook, ne’er-do-well, and even a threat to society? What would it be like to suffer pain, physical disability, to be sidelined, confined to a bed or wheelchair? What would it be like to experience betrayal, to be stabbed in the back, vilified and falsely accused, by someone you trusted as a close confidante?
We could go on listing endlessly the sorrows which come to us during our time on planet Earth. And yet, all of this chaos will end in one missed heartbeat – when we leave the “flight simulator,” the endless nightmare, the tortuous experience of mortality.
Our homeworld is a place where none of these evils exist; nor could they ever. They call it “the real world.” And if we never came to the “sorrowful planet,” this domain of the “flight simulator,” we would lack a depth of wisdom and insight concerning the nature of evil. This level of sagacity would escape us in Summerland, as there we could never lose anything that we love. In our homeworld, all good things remain, unchanged, as long as we want them.
Editor’s note: This issue of much experience allowing for wisdom and insight can be misunderstood. On the “reincarnation” page there is discussion concerning the inability of experience, per se, to advance us spiritually. We might enter 100,000 “flight simulations,” 100,000 “computer display-screens,” 100,000 digital movies exhibiting all sorts of situations, but this plethora, of and by itself, cannot change us at the core of being.
After all of these simulations, we will find that the ego’s sense of “I don’t have enough” because “I am not enough” is alive and well and hasn’t changed a bit. This is why egoic human nature, despite all that humanity has gone through, hasn't changed in these last thousands of years of recorded history. Experience alone cannot extirpate the “needy little me” which insanely covets more and more.
Only an elevation of one’s level of consciousness can do this, can fundamentally advance us, and this will occur in one timeless moment of clarity.
Everything that has a beginning is also subject to an ending.
But there exists a domain beyond the reach of time’s degradation. There, things simply exist, eternally, have always been, have no opposite, no duality, and do not suffer loss.
|
|