An apparent dichotomy?

by Goran Tue Jun 24, 2014 1:49 am

If anyone here accepts the existence of both reincarnation and ghosts (earthbound human spirits), can you tell me how you feel the two can coexist? I was firmly fixed in the Indian occultism sphere until I experienced a ghost (the intelligent sort), and now my outlook is severely shaken.

by hiorta Tue Jun 24, 2014 5:57 am

A complex question, Goran and a warm welcome tae ye.
We would first need to try to establish what we currently are, what aspects of us dies - if any - and what might reincarnate.
And of course, what is a 'ghost'?
The term 'earthbound human spirit' helps a little, but how do we establish this?

by mac Tue Jun 24, 2014 11:30 am

The 'ghost' debate is one currently active elsewhere and to which I've been a recent contributor. The terms mentioned - 'ghost' and 'earthbound' - were brought up there too with a discussion about the customary confusion experienced without there being a clear and widely-accepted definition of the words/terms.

In response to Goran, I'm firmly in the reincarnation camp but do not see it has any relevance to ghosts or eathbounds.... A major stumbling block (I've found) is the holding of rigid - and probably misleading - notions concerning reincarnation. Sadly there's not a lot of guidance from Spiritualist philosophy about it.

by obiwan Wed Jun 25, 2014 10:18 pm

Hm the reincarnation question isn't simply an on/off thing if I read correctly. I quite like using the teachings of Silver Birch as a reference point and he was definitely in the reincarnation camp, but not everybody and not continuously so I guess in that case there is room for reincarnation and 'earthbound' spirits.

by Goran Sun Jun 29, 2014 10:13 pm

obiwan wrote:Hm the reincarnation question isn't simply an on/off thing if I read correctly. I quite like using the teachings of Silver Birch as a reference point and he was definitely in the reincarnation camp, but not everybody and not continuously so I guess in that case there is room for reincarnation and 'earthbound' spirits.

I was taught that reincarnation occurs almost always (like 99% of the time). Exceptions were for those that practiced Yoga-paravidya, Ghuyavidya, sorcery, etc., or had some other means to avoid the 'tunnel' (perhaps the interference of some god or asura or whatever. The more I read up on this, the more it appears ghosts are much more frequent than I was told.

by obiwan Sun Jun 29, 2014 11:03 pm

Goran wrote:
obiwan wrote:Hm the reincarnation question isn't simply an on/off thing if I read correctly. I quite like using the teachings of Silver Birch as a reference point and he was definitely in the reincarnation camp, but not everybody and not continuously so I guess in that case there is room for reincarnation and 'earthbound' spirits.

I was taught that reincarnation occurs almost always (like 99% of the time). Exceptions were for those that practiced Yoga-paravidya, Ghuyavidya, sorcery, etc., or had some other means to avoid the 'tunnel' (perhaps the interference of some god or asura or whatever. The more I read up on this, the more it appears ghosts are much more frequent than I was told.

Taught by whom? And by the way welcome Very Happy

by Wes Mon Jun 30, 2014 6:09 am

I recall Silver Birch saying that there are spirits that choose to remain bound to this plane, and that he has tried to convince some to "head to the light" but due to their own misguided belief systems, they have declined, much to his dismay. Which reinforces his mission to educate as many of us as possible about the simplicity of life: It continues ever onwards and upwards.

Back on topic, it would seem that earthbound spirits (ghosts?) have chosen not to embrace reincarnation, and may not even be aware that it exists. Assuming that it does exist Twisted Evil

by mac Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:07 am

We Spiritualists emphasise that freewill obtains in the etheric (well I do) and that we were not coerced into coming here in the first place. Logically, then, we're hardly likely to be forced to return. When we do it's because we choose to.

Those who pass over in the 'ordinary' way do not, then, have to return for a further incarnation. Assuming that reincarnation may happen in the way we believe it is still a matter of choice.

Even if there are discarnates who remain close to the physical dimension (but not so-called ghosts) I don't see how it would suggest they have chosen not to embrace reincarnation. We simply don't know why they have not moved on in the way we are taught is usual for most of us.

by hiorta Mon Jun 30, 2014 12:34 pm

SB elaborates on this mac, pointing out that we who regard ourselves as 'individuals' are currently 'personalities' of an 'individual', which alters our definitions of many things, reincarnation included.
If we agree, of course.

by mac Mon Jun 30, 2014 2:16 pm

hiorta wrote:SB elaborates on this mac, pointing out that we who regard ourselves as 'individuals' are currently 'personalities' of an 'individual', which alters our definitions of many things, reincarnation included. If we agree, of course.

SB would (for me) have had to very clearly define where the individual is to be found if what's observed - and considered to be the individual himself - is actually just one personality (facet?) of that individual. We can go only on what he said in earlier decades.

I admit I'm not as widely read as other contributors here and elsewhere, and nowadays rely on overall impressions gained some time back, but I can't remember his giving a really definitive explanation about the purpose and mechanism of reincarnation. Am I wrong? Did he in fact provide clear and unambiguous guidance?

I do remember (if memory serves) that he said that some of his peers declared they had never met a single individual who had reincarnated yet SB was convinced it happens. Maybe it's semantics, 'the individual' neither incarnating nor reincarnating and only one or other of our personalities taking part in life's activities?

Or is there an alternative teacher with an explanation that appeals to the reason of others here?

by Waller Mon Jun 30, 2014 6:15 pm

by Waller Mon Jun 30, 2014 6:19 pm

by Wes Mon Jun 30, 2014 11:05 pm

I don't see how it is possible to prove that reincarnation exists, as that would require showing that someone living shares the same soul as someone from the past. That's not something you can find out from a birth certificate or census.

Having memories of another life isn't sufficient evidence to my mind as those memories could be obtained from other means, such as by coming into contact with someone's spirit and experiencing moments of their life in a way that's similar to what a medium does.

One thing I do accept is that we only have one life in the body we are born into, and based on my life so far, why would anyone want to come back for another go?

"More Philosophy of Silver Birch" devotes a chapter to reincarnation, and says that it is voluntary and many other things that are less succinct like:

You become, as you progress, more of an individual but less of a person.

An apparent dichotomy? 166519

by Waller Mon Jun 30, 2014 11:31 pm

by obiwan Tue Jul 01, 2014 12:02 am

I think there are definitely examples of experiences which are a good fit for reincarnation. For most of them, assuming they are genuine, obsession or latent mediumistic abilities could also be cited as the cause, however for a few reincarnation seems to be the simplest explanation. My jury is out on this one.

by obiwan Tue Jul 01, 2014 12:03 am

Waller wrote:
Yes, however the soul and its progress are holographic; as the individual (piece) is transformed spiritually so does the connection to One, the Source.

That's simply an assertion isn't it?

by hiorta Tue Jul 01, 2014 8:00 am

Perhaps our difficulty is having to express spiritual matters in a restricted physical language?
Two examples would be Leonardo da Vinci and Gordon Smith. Both were/are endowed with abilities beyond the 'normal' and both repeatedly and consistently demonstrated this.

Leonardo made complex engineering drawings far ahead of his day - even designing a submarine - which, when 'normal' knowledge caught up three centuries later, was shown to work.

Gordon consistently shows that he is in contact with a future world.

If knowledge must be learned before it can be possessed, where /when/ how did these two learn their amazing skills? If the info was not even present on our planet, what alternative explanations might exist?
A possibility may be in our everyday assumptions being badly off the mark, like the earth being once seen as flat, but surely every effect must have its cause, or perhaps such 'rules' only apply to our environment with quite different circumstances operating elsewhere?

Reincarnation could be an answer in the two examples, which then leads us back to the point - who/ what are we really? Does our learning out live us?

It doesn't look as though Mediumship will be of much help beyond its marvellous work of providing evidence of personal, individual survival through the death process.

We have yet to understand more of our ephemeral nature, its possibilities and capabilities, its potentials.
In the meantime we are likely to just continue developing bigger and better ways of destroying each other, retarding our beckoning potential.
Aren't we in the classical position of not being able to extract our hands from the material sweetie jar until we let go of the 'prize'?

by Waller Tue Jul 01, 2014 9:06 pm

by obiwan Tue Jul 01, 2014 9:29 pm

Waller wrote:
obiwan wrote:
Waller wrote:
Yes, however the soul and its progress are holographic; as the individual (piece) is transformed spiritually so does the connection to One, the Source.

That's simply an assertion isn't it?
It's a conclusion, a partial observation and one that is shared among many so in a way you could say I nicked it. I am not eternally tethered to it but the further I investigate spiritual progress, the more I realize my connection to Source is intact and active. How do I know that?

My change from a less loving, less patient, less compassionate soul to one that is more of these traits. You should have seen me 25 years ago, I was a freaking mess.

Nicking it is permitted Smile

I think that the fact that your conclusions have changed you is evidence that you accept them genuinely but not that the conclusions are in themselves correct, wouldn't you agree?

by Waller Tue Jul 01, 2014 10:31 pm

by obiwan Tue Jul 01, 2014 10:36 pm

Waller wrote:
obiwan wrote:
Waller wrote:
obiwan wrote:
Waller wrote:
Yes, however the soul and its progress are holographic; as the individual (piece) is transformed spiritually so does the connection to One, the Source.

That's simply an assertion isn't it?
It's a conclusion, a partial observation and one that is shared among many so in a way you could say I nicked it. I am not eternally tethered to it but the further I investigate spiritual progress, the more I realize my connection to Source is intact and active. How do I know that?

My change from a less loving, less patient, less compassionate soul to one that is more of these traits. You should have seen me 25 years ago, I was a freaking mess.

Nicking it is permitted

I think that the fact that your conclusions have changed you is evidence that you accept them genuinely but not that the conclusions are in themselves correct, wouldn't you agree?

Works for me. Others say it works for them. That's all I know.

The issue is that lots of people say lots of different things worked for them.

by Goran Sun Jul 06, 2014 8:39 pm

mac wrote:The 'ghost' debate is one currently active elsewhere and to which I've been a recent contributor. The terms mentioned - 'ghost' and 'earthbound' - were brought up there too with a discussion about the customary confusion experienced without there being a clear and widely-accepted definition of the words/terms.

In response to Goran, I'm firmly in the reincarnation camp but do not see it has any relevance to ghosts or eathbounds.... A major stumbling block (I've found) is the holding of rigid - and probably misleading - notions concerning reincarnation. Sadly there's not a lot of guidance from Spiritualist philosophy about it.

So if one accepts reincarnation (and the law of karma that powers it) as fact, how does one explain the existence of so many earthbound spirits? Since my face-to-face, I have been delving into the subject of ghosts, and there are simply too many occurrences for what I have been taught about reincarnation to explain. Between the hundreds of books I have read, TV mediums ('Dead Files'), etc., there are just too many ghosts documented for this phenomena to be called a rare event. Reincarnation cannot be the nearly inescapable process that Indian mysticism claims it is.

by Goran Sun Jul 06, 2014 8:53 pm

obiwan wrote:Hm the reincarnation question isn't simply an on/off thing if I read correctly. I quite like using the teachings of Silver Birch as a reference point and he was definitely in the reincarnation camp, but not everybody and not continuously so I guess in that case there is room for reincarnation and 'earthbound' spirits.

In Eastern occultism it mostly is considered an inescapable event, with the few exceptions I already mentioned. Yes, there are earthbound spirits mentioned in the Agamas, Tantras, Samhitas, etc., but as I said, its considered a rare occurrence (usually happening through supernatural intervention or unnatural means), which definitely does not explain the plethora of ghosts being documented.

I have not read A. W. Austen, but will try to get a copy. Thanks for the tip!

by Goran Sun Jul 06, 2014 8:59 pm

obiwan wrote:
Goran wrote:
obiwan wrote:Hm the reincarnation question isn't simply an on/off thing if I read correctly. I quite like using the teachings of Silver Birch as a reference point and he was definitely in the reincarnation camp, but not everybody and not continuously so I guess in that case there is room for reincarnation and 'earthbound' spirits.

I was taught that reincarnation occurs almost always (like 99% of the time). Exceptions were for those that practiced Yoga-paravidya, Ghuyavidya, sorcery, etc., or had some other means to avoid the 'tunnel' (perhaps the interference of some god or asura or whatever. The more I read up on this, the more it appears ghosts are much more frequent than I was told.
Taught by whom? And by the way welcome

I have had various teachers, but the sacred books of Hindus, Nathas, Bonpos, and other Eastern sects are my primary source. Thanks for the welcome.

by Goran Sun Jul 06, 2014 9:11 pm

Waller wrote:
Goran wrote:If anyone here accepts the existence of both reincarnation and ghosts (earthbound human spirits),

Two different energetic beings as commonly termed by intelligent paranormal investigators.

can you tell me how you feel the two can coexist? I was firmly fixed in the Indian occultism sphere until I experienced a ghost (the intelligent sort), and now my outlook is severely shaken.

They are not mutually exclusive.

Please do explain how there can be so many ghosts if reincarnation is the nearly unavoidable process that Eastern occultists say it is. Right now the only explanation I can come up with is that reincarnation and the law of karma is so full of loopholes that it may or may not happen for any given individual....sorta a crapshoot where chance and probability is the prime mover.

by Sponsored content

An apparent dichotomy?

An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?

Re: An apparent dichotomy?