In another thread i replied it sounded like recycled people, it sounded good and was half joking but doesnt it sound like it? On furhter examination i behan to ascertain as to what the purpose of reincarnation would be. Then i thought: Does reincarnation take into account population growth?

How, why and at what point would a new 'being' come to be? I am sure there is an explanation, and why would people keep going through the same system over and over? Is there an end?

I know i can Google it and find out all about it but that is too easy and i cant read all of the hits that would relate to these specific questions. As such these are merely questions and not meant to incite a religious competition.:p

I am sure there is an explanation, and why would people keep going through the same system over and over? Is there an end?

They come back over and over until they get it right. They are trying to

achieve enlightenment which comes from many ways, those mainly being to

do good things to everyone and everything during your lifetime. If you don't

get through it without doing so you reincarnate over and over until you do.

If you don't get through it without doing so you reincarnate over and over until you do.

If you do get through it and do not reincarnate then where do you go?

You are in a constant loop in which you can never escape.

Didn'y you imply that enlightenment at some point stops this loop.

In another thread i replied it sounded like recycled people, it sounded good and was half joking but doesnt it sound like it? On furhter examination i behan to ascertain as to what the purpose of reincarnation would be. Then i thought: Does reincarnation take into account population growth?

That was in response to my reincarnation post, I think. If so, my belief is just a personal belief, one of many opinions on reincarnation, so there will be no "one" answer to your questions. Cosmictraveler is giving the essence of the Hindu and Buddhist and other related religions take on reincarnation.

For my view it was basically that parts of our character can also exist in others, and the same is true for whatever part of our character we think is essential. So it is not a transfer of soul to a new person--there would be multiple people with the same character essence at once.

How, why and at what point would a new 'being' come to be? I am sure there is an explanation, and why would people keep going through the same system over and over? Is there an end?


As I understand it, the Hindu method believes in a eternal cycle where the entire world is destroyed and recreated. So reincarnated people that count as population growth in this world could be from the other cycle of the world.

There are multiple ways to explain away the math, but I don't know if they are correct. Like whatever the maximum population is for this run of the world, some people get to go multiple times, but there are only one of each at the period of maximum population.

I should of said animals, or souls, instead of people since that is part of it as well.

My problem with reincarnation is that you don't remember it. The hindus don't claim to recall their past lives, do they? So what's the difference between living only once and having lived a past life you have no recollection of?

Didn'y you imply that enlightenment at some point stops this loop.

Yes, but you asked if they never became enlightened and that answer is an endless loop.

My problem with reincarnation is that you don't remember it. The hindus don't claim to recall their past lives, do they? So what's the difference between living only once and having lived a past life you have no recollection of?

That's a problem with ALL religions, they have big flaws in them that make

them very difficult to adhere to let alone follow.

My problem with reincarnation is that you don't remember it. The hindus don't claim to recall their past lives, do they? So what's the difference between living only once and having lived a past life you have no recollection of?
I think you can find Hindus who claim to remember past life, but I doubt it is officially endorsed. So I've heard, anyway. I think some interpretations claim that when you reach enlightenment you do remember, or something.

I think you make a good point. It lessens the appeal, comparatively.

However, if you believed that the memory of past lives/continuity does not matter... it has interesting implications. I do wonder if it really does from time to time. If it doesn't than it affirms my personal belief in reincarnation.

Sure can't hurt you to believe in anything that makes you feel better about

yourself and life. I just hope that you're not caught up in a never ending

loop for not being able to remember or become enlightened. ;)

Thanks :)

My problem with reincarnation is that you don't remember it. The hindus don't claim to recall their past lives, do they? So what's the difference between living only once and having lived a past life you have no recollection of?

actually they do. Though most who do remember have put some effort into meditation or other spiritual practices. They can also consult astrologers or gurus and be told about past lives and get a sense of why they are suffering this or that and what they need to work on. Other traditions have similar experiences where people remember.

ok i did sum research bout the origins of reincarnation
and it came from the gypsies they have a spell many years ago to bring loved ones back
its a curse so not many people would have this ability to be reincarnated only cursed ones so count your blessings ur not cursed

My problem with reincarnation is that you don't remember it. The hindus don't claim to recall their past lives, do they? So what's the difference between living only once and having lived a past life you have no recollection of?

IMO, the thrust of the reincarnation/rebirth concept is in it's moral component. Namely, in that scheme, considering that one's actions will determine what sort of rebirth one will take (whether a good one or a bad one) can give the person some guidelines on how to behave in the present.

Simply put, for example, if you don't want to be reborn as a victim of robbery, don't rob anyone.
(The traditions of religions like Buddhism have elaborated lists of what actions lead to what sort of rebirth.)

IMO, the thrust of the reincarnation/rebirth concept is in it's moral component. Namely, in that scheme, considering that one's actions will determine what sort of rebirth one will take (whether a good one or a bad one) can give the person some guidelines on how to behave in the present.

Exactly, it's a crowd control exercise. Be good in this life, and you might get to eat more in the next. It limits people's expectations and aspirations in their real life, and so averts social upset, and stops revolt.

But then all religion is about social control, ultimately. The Ten Commandments aren't exactly spiritual guidelines, but definite laws, and cleverly in both cases, the reward is never a tangible one in this life. It's always a deferred unproveable. Brilliant, an invisible carrot on the end of the stick.

reincarnation is an absolute truth.

On furhter examination i behan to ascertain as to what the purpose of reincarnation would be.
the purpose of reincarnation is to live forever and experience new things.

How, why and at what point would a new 'being' come to be?
a being does not come into being any point. we are eternal beings. we are actually The Being (life, existence) itself.

Then i thought: Does reincarnation take into account population growth?
i don't see a problem.

I am sure there is an explanation, and why would people keep going through the same system over and over?
what system?

My problem with reincarnation is that you don't remember it. The hindus don't claim to recall their past lives, do they? So what's the difference between living only once and having lived a past life you have no recollection of?
the difference is that you live forever instead of just once. would you really want to remember if you were hitler in your past life?

it wouldn't be good for humans to remember their past lives. but later when we become more enlightened, we can access memories of our past lives.

In another thread i replied it sounded like recycled people, it sounded good and was half joking but doesnt it sound like it? On furhter examination i behan to ascertain as to what the purpose of reincarnation would be.

Ancient egyptians (there is even a temple dedicated to reincarnation) and on the other hand Hindus have believed in reincarnation for thousands of years. Gautam Buddha spoke plenty of reincarnation, and many other Buddhas have done the same.
I don´t personally consider reincarnation as a fact of life, but I do think it is a very probable scenario, I mean, Buddha knew better :cool:.
The purpose of reincarnation is the same as the purpose of evolution. In fact, the 2 concepts go hand by hand; without reincarnation there wouldn´t be evolution.
According to the teachings about reincarnation, every being has to pass through the different stages of life from being a mineral, a plant, an animal, and in this world the top of the chain is to reincarnate as a human being. But in order to be a human being you had to evolve from rock, then to plant, then different animals until you reincarnate as a human.
So, in other words, each of our souls is as ancient as this world is, or even more.
If you live as an animal, then you learn certain things that allow you to reincarnate as a more conscious animal than before, and so the chain goes on. If you reincarnate as a human, there is another thing, most of us don´t learn our lesson, so we will continue reincarnating as a human being until we learn what we are supposed to learn in this encarnation (according to Buddha, the lesson to be learned is that of true compassion).

Then i thought: Does reincarnation take into account population growth?

How, why and at what point would a new 'being' come to be? I am sure there is an explanation, and why would people keep going through the same system over and over? Is there an end?

If you take in consideration that the vast mayority of human beings don´t reach their point or realization, they are going to continue reincarnating as humans until they do. So more animals continue their journey in evolution, until they reach the state of a human being; but humans continue doing stupid things for wordly desires that they can´t move on further on evolution so they reincarnate as human beings again and again...

Allegedly, the only way out of the cycle of birth and rebirth is to realize your true nature, it is just a change in your perception.

The main thing I think about life and dead is that is similar to the concept of day and night. From being active all day long, you need to sleep for the night, and then wake up again the next day. The same goes for reincarnation, you are born, grow up (action) and die (sleep), only to be born (wake up) again the next life.
You see this pattern in all nature, day and night, the cycle of evolution, and the same principles of life apply to our individual soul.

Exactly, it's a crowd control exercise.

"Crowd control exercise" is not necessarily bad.
If people don't control their consumption, they cause heavy damage to the planet, damage even beyond recovery.
Those interested in survival will limit their consumption so that also tomorrow, and next generations, will have clean air to breathe, good food to eat and clean water to drink.


Be good in this life, and you might get to eat more in the next. It limits people's expectations and aspirations in their real life, and so averts social upset, and stops revolt.

It limits greed, hatred, indulging in delusions, it lessens attachment.

And it heightens one's expectations and aspirations in real life to the extreme.
Believing in rebirth, one won't content oneself with the fleeting pleasures that the fortunes of the world lend. Instead, one will seek for a true, lasting happiness that is not endangered by people dying, getting old and ill, natural catastrophes, oblivion or boredom.
Belief in rebirth makes a person extremely ambitious.

If people want to argue about whether reincarnation is true or not take it to the Religion Forum.

Here's a chunk from the guidelines of this forum.

Things that are not welcome in this forum (beside things that have been stated in General Rules):

* Propaganda (pro and/or contra certain religion, belief, theism, atheism)

my emphasis

"Crowd control exercise" is not necessarily bad.
If people don't control their consumption, they cause heavy damage to the planet, damage even beyond recovery.
Those interested in survival will limit their consumption so that also tomorrow, and next generations, will have clean air to breathe, good food to eat and clean water to drink.

I agree with the sentiment, but disagree vehemently with the method. People should be given the facts, and make decisions based on those. People should be nice to each other and consume less because it makes sense, not because of a religious myth.


And it heightens one's expectations and aspirations in real life to the extreme.
Believing in rebirth, ...
Belief in rebirth makes a person extremely ambitious.

Hmm, no, here I disagree. The Hindu religion is based on re-incarnation, and had a rigid caste system, and it was pretty unlikely that anyone would change from the caste they were born into. This limits aspirations rather, if you were born an 'untouchable' you are never going to get a better life. Literally people would not touch this caste, so becoming a servant even would be difficult. Of course the top level of the cast system were priests. Religion in control, and subjugating people yet again.

I agree with the sentiment, but disagree vehemently with the method. People should be given the facts, and make decisions based on those. People should be nice to each other and consume less because it makes sense, not because of a religious myth.

In order for something to be considered to make sense, a system of knowledge or beliefs or values, is necessary in relation to which that something can be evaluated.
On its own, nothing makes sense.


Hmm, no, here I disagree. The Hindu religion is based on re-incarnation, and had a rigid caste system, and it was pretty unlikely that anyone would change from the caste they were born into. This limits aspirations rather, if you were born an 'untouchable' you are never going to get a better life. Literally people would not touch this caste, so becoming a servant even would be difficult. Of course the top level of the cast system were priests. Religion in control, and subjugating people yet again.

I was referring to rebirth, which is a Buddhist notion. The OP and the thrust of the thread at first didn't distinguish between the two.

In order for something to be considered to make sense, a system of knowledge or beliefs or values, is necessary in relation to which that something can be evaluated.
On its own, nothing makes sense.

I agree, and that framework should be factual, scientific, and ethical. Not mythical.


I was referring to rebirth, which is a Buddhist notion. The OP and the thrust of the thread at first didn't distinguish between the two.

Doesn't matter if it's re-incarnation of rebirth, as both are notions used to limit people's expectations.

I agree, and that framework should be factual, scientific, and ethical. Not mythical.

It's "mythical" only in reference to a particular system of thought, namely that of Western Science.


Doesn't matter if it's re-incarnation of rebirth, as both are notions used to limit people's expectations.

Limiting one's expectations isn't negative per se. Science, too, limits people's expectations.

Thread cleaned up a bit. Sorry, I was away for 3 days.

It's "mythical" only in reference to a particular system of thought, namely that of Western Science.

The 'western' part was superfluous, but it's telling. Look kid, there's science, and there's esoteric bullshit. Neither are restricted to one hemisphere or the other.

Limiting one's expectations isn't negative per se. Science, too, limits people's expectations.

Only to what is possible, probable, rational and ethical. You want the converse of these things, well, why yes, indulge in some religion.

[QUOTE=phlogistician;1605508]

The most sensible response I've read so far. I never cease to be amazed at human credulity. People can believe anything; and they do. Asked to explain why they believe something, religious people invariably respond by giving vague answers, none of which can be supported by verifiable , objective evidence.

I once asked a young woman who believed in reincarnation where all the extra souls were coming from as the world population continues to grow. Her answer was enlightening. She told me that waves of spiritual energy were continuously striking the earth. I gave up at that point.

Myles

Please stick to the anthropological side of reincarnation or I'll close this thread.
Personal beliefs are for Religion or Philosophy subforum.

Myles if you are curious I think people can give you reasonable explanations, but I guess we are not supposed to in this forum. So make a thread in a different religious forum if you are interested. The population "problem" you mentioned I already answered. (Though if you wish to debate it it's not supposed to be in this forum.)

Reincarnation is not restricted to Eastern Religions.
Some Native American groups believed in it. Sufis, some Christian groups, even Orthodox Jews.
My sense is that these various groups do not see reincarnation in the same structured way the Eastern Religions do and also have different notions of Karma. The caste system which plays a role in Hindu interpretations of reincarnation would be a point of difference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reincarnation

The population "problem" you mentioned I already answered. (Though if you wish to debate it it's not supposed to be in this forum.)

Was this that explanation;

For my view it was basically that parts of our character can also exist in others, and the same is true for whatever part of our character we think is essential. So it is not a transfer of soul to a new person--there would be multiple people with the same character essence at once.

So, if the population doubles, people have half as much character?

It was no part of my intention to offend religious sensibilities or to depart from this thread. It's simply that the numerous references to reincarnation I have come across have invariably been in a religious context.

My understanding is that we are said to reincarnate until we have reached a point where we achieve liberation from the cycle of birth and rebirth. If this is so, then it is reasonable to expect a decline in the population as some people achieve release. I have yet to hear an explanation of reincarnation supported by objective evidence rather than what I regard as wild speculation based on subjective belief.

Comparative Religion doesn't deal with whether there really was a garden of eden or if there really is reincarnation, it's left to religious faith and metaphors. It's mythology not history.
As a part of Anthropology CR looks where and for what reasons do people believe in and do certain things.

[QUOTE]My understanding is that we are said to reincarnate until we have reached a point where we achieve liberation from the cycle of birth and rebirth. If this is so, then it is reasonable to expect a decline in the population as some people achieve release.

If one goes on certain assumptions: for example, that we started with all the souls. Or we built up to the maximum at some point in the past and at that point it should have been dropping.

Even within the Eastern traditions I have caught hints that one can choose to fall out of enlightenment and restart the process. Or that pieces of the whole are breaking off and restarting from basic levels. So this would allow for more new souls. Also we could be building up to the actual maximum - God, I hope so.

I have also heard theories based on the idea that souls are fragmenting into pieces, hence the greater numbers and that at some point there will be reassembling or that this is part of coming to enlightenment.

Further, I believe the Buddhists and Hindus focus on the developmental stages toward perfection, while other groups do not have this focus and do not need to explain growing numbers in the face of what should be enlightened drop outs reducing to totals.

A few things -

(1) Beings don't necessarily reincarnate or are reborn as the same species. In one lifetime, one can be a goat, in another a rat, in another a human and so on.

(2) Beings don't necessarily reincarnate or are reborn right after they die. Some time may elapse before a being becomes reincarnated or reborn.

(3) There are different realms in which beings are reincarnated or reborn.

That accounts for the variations in the numbers of beings (of a particular species) respective to time and space.

[QUOTE=greenberg;1615861]A few things -

(1) Beings don't necessarily reincarnate or are reborn as the same species. In one lifetime, one can be a goat, in another a rat, in another a human and so on.

(2) Beings don't necessarily reincarnate or are reborn right after they die. Some time may elapse before a being becomes reincarnated or reborn.

(3) There are different realms in which beings are reincarnated or reborn.

If one accepts the commonly held view that advancement and eventual liberation from the cycle of birth and rebirth are achieved through merit, in what sense could a rat be considered meritorious ? Are rats' fleas also reborn ?

What explanation is offered for a possible delay in being reborn ?

[QUOTE=Myles;1615334]



Even within the Eastern traditions I have caught hints that one can choose to fall out of enlightenment and restart the process. Or that pieces of the whole are breaking off and restarting from basic levels. So this would allow for more new souls. Also we could be building up to the actual maximum - God, I hope so.

I have also heard theories based on the idea that souls are fragmenting into pieces, hence the greater numbers and that at some point there will be reassembling or that this is part of coming to enlightenment.

Further, I believe the Buddhists and Hindus focus on the developmental stages toward perfection, while other groups do not have this focus and do not need to explain growing numbers in the face of what should be enlightened drop outs reducing to totals.

There is a Buddhist belief that a being who achieves enlightenment and release, an Arhant, may choose to return and help others. This would argue a faster reduction in the population than if beings were left to their own devices, as it were. But we know that the population is growing.

I have not previously heard of fragmenting souls, so am moved to ask in what sense a non-physical object can fragment and whether the fragments are of a uniform size.

You are discussing mythology as if it were physics. :rolleyes:

There is a Buddhist belief that a being who achieves enlightenment and release, an Arhant, may choose to return and help others. This would argue a faster reduction in the population than if beings were left to their own devices, as it were. But we know that the population is growing.

I'm not a Buddhist. I don't want to defend their math. I think Greenberg offered some possible solutions to this above. We don't know the number of souls. We don't know all the realms they may spend time in or shift between. I don't think you have found a contradiction.

I have not previously heard of fragmenting souls, so am moved to ask in what sense a non-physical object can fragment and whether the fragments are of a uniform size.

1) I think our notions of and distinctions between physical and energetic __________ (I am not sure what the noun should be) come from a very Newtonian perspective. I think this fuels some of the skepticism about such things. We see a Newtonian world, even if we have read Einstein and QM and beyond.
2) There are animals that can be broken in half and each half regrows a whole being.
3) I don't think the fragments are the same size. And a look around at people shows a variety of depths, breadths, richness etc.

[QUOTE=Grantywanty;1616393] We don't know all the realms they may spend time in or shift between. I don't think you have found a contradiction.

You have told me what you don't know. Can you now please tell me what you do know and how you know it, as I'm trying to understand reincarnation.

I accept your point about animals being broken and regenerated, earthworms come to mind, but such animals are surely special cases. I suggest you are arguing from the particular to the general without discussing possible intermediate phases. You also seem to assume that animals and souls are in the same category, something that many would deny.


I also accept your point about our Newtonian ( mechanistic ) view of things ,because that is all we have to go on. I am not aware that QM or Einstein suggest there is anything other than a physical universe. Both represent attempts to explain how " matter " behaves.

[QUOTE=Grantywanty;1616393] You have told me what you don't know. Can you now please tell me what you do know and how you know it, as I'm trying to understand reincarnation.

In my close association with Hindus about twenty years ago I was never told that there was a limit to the source of new souls. Some talked about new souls, versus old souls - ie. souls that had been through many incarnations. The impression I got was that the universe was breaking into souls and these would often start at the beginning and work their way back to 'getting it'. I never got the impression any of them thought their was some limit on the number of souls.

I believe in reincarnation and not in the same way they tended to. I also abhor the caste system and the way it and notions of entitlement and blame (karma) get mingled with reincarnation theories for a lot of Hindus. My version is different, but my sense is that would be better placed on the religion forum.

I accept your point about animals being broken and regenerated, earthworms come to mind, but such animals are surely special cases. I suggest you are arguing from the particular to the general without discussing possible intermediate phases. You also seem to assume that animals and souls are in the same category, something that many would deny.


I also accept your point about our Newtonian ( mechanistic ) view of things ,because that is all we have to go on. I am not aware that QM or Einstein suggest there is anything other than a physical universe. Both represent attempts to explain how " matter " behaves.

I doubt many physicists would say that Newton's view is all we have to go on things or that mechanistic views of the universe are all we have to go on. Words like physical and matter take on very different qualities in both QM and Einstein's theories as does the boundary between energy and matter. I think the Newtonian model, which we have not outrgrown as metaphysics, gives us a map of the world as distinct objects with hard boundaries acted on by forces. Energies and matter are different things. Local effects are the only possible ones. Stability is the norm affected by forces on these discrete objects. The QM universe is not like this. It would be a challenge for me to go into this and show how one can find transformations of patterns like reincarnation as less strange once you start seeing the world from a more QM perspective. Fortunately it would be off topic.

Perhaps a better metaphor than the animals being split would be from information technology. Oddly enough large numbers of scientists and lay science groupies are fascinated by notions of being uploaded and copied and a great many of them seem to see this as not being a loss of identity, or at least that there might be a way to do this without identity loss - not simply pattern recreation but actual transformation of the self.

Rupert Sheldrake's work comes to mind where life forms are fields as well as objects. Perhaps the fields collect the bodies around them. I think that would be closer to how I think of it.

I'm locking this thread, because now it's a terrible mix of anthropology, pseudoscience, religion and maybe some physics.

If you want to start another thread on reincarnation here, but not from physics or a faith position, please do so.