Reincarnation and Richard

thumbnail
D Justine J, modified 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 6:12 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 3:39 AM

Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 120 Join Date: 1/15/12 Recent Posts
Dear All,

My humble respects, to the 'god-like' Genitor, Founder and Funder, of DhO, Dr. Daniel Ingram, M.D.

This is a small note on Reincarnation, and Richard - the world-renowned Progenitor of Actual Freedom Web Site.

Well.

1) Is reincarnation true or false? Richard nowhere says either reincarnation is true, or false.

2) Most of the world religions, including Buddhism believes in rebirth/reincarnation. In a way, Buddhism is the most powerful advocate of reincarnation. Though Buddhism does not believe in God, in believes in the transmigration of the souls.

3) I personally, was born into a Christian family. I was taught from my very younger days (as I was educated in a Christian Institution for all my high school studies), that I have ONLY ONE BIRTH - and I should be faithful to Christ the Savior, the 'ONLY SON OF GOD' ?! - and if I commit a sin, I will go to ETERNAL HELL, and if am faithful to Jesus Christ, and don't commit a single SIN, God the Father of Jesus Christ, will be pleased with me, and will send me to ETERNAL HEAVEN?!. Now, even the kids don't believe this.

4) Very soon, I lost all faith in Christianity, and followed Hinduism, that is more tolerant for all types of people. Hinduism like Buddhism, believes in Reincarnation. When I practiced Hinduism, under an authentic Guru, I got revived of my past lives. They were so real. For instance, I saw in my meditations, that I was a Sivacharya (A respectable Temple Priest of high Order in Hinduism), in my recent, just one past birth back. I saw that Temple, (where I served in that past life), in my visions, and the form that I had. I physically went to that place, (in this birth and body), and saw that temple in a dilapidated condition ( where I served 200 years ago). In that birth, I had a tuft of hair, in my head style. Even now, many of my friends say having seen me in their dreams with a tuft of hair on my head. I have clear cut memory, of four more past births, and beyond that - everything is vague and dark.

5) From my 14th year onwards, I became psychically active. The first incident started like this. I was studying 8th standard. One evening,I was doing my home task given by my class teacher, at the small house front (It was a railway colony, as my father worked for the Railways). My daddy was sitting beside me, and was reading some newspaper. In the road in front of me, a gentleman called Mr. White, 35, (He was a Christian), a neighbor of ours, was walking on some errand. I felt an urge in me, to tell my daddy, something. I told him, 'Daddy, please look at this man walking. This is his last walk. He will die tonight.' My daddy was shocked. He asked me how did I know that? I said I didn't know, but he was sure to die. And to my own amazement, that man died that very night. This kind of predictions, followed for another ten or more years, which I noted in a diary, that marked about more than 10,000 cases. (These things I burnt when i became enlightened at 34). My remarkable feats were, to talk about other people's past lives. At one time, I saw Richard's own, past, powerful, two births, as a sage in India. (In both, I was associated with him). For me, it was like looking at my own life. Of course, there was no way to prove these things. Presently, I have lost this obsession. I ask this one question to myself and with others - Yesterday morning I ate idly. Richard would have eaten something in his place.- what significance has all this? NOTHING. That is how I see things now.

6) Well. Richard says: 'WHETHER PAST LIFE IS TRUE OR NOT, THIS LIFE IS THE FIRST AND LAST'.

7) These magic words, released me from lot of tensions and confusions. Actually, these words opened to me, the wide doors of Actual Freedom. I developed my intuitions to further realms, where things fell in their right places. I did not need to master the whole web site of Richard. Yes. REBIRTH IS TRUE AS WELL AS FALSE. Spirituality is true as well as false. And ACTUALITY stems endlessly. Why do we hesitate to take this blessing, Sirs?!

8) Why are we delighted in endless discussions, instead of enjoying this moment in full?

9) Life is a one way traffic - you will never be here again, at least in this miserable shape. Life is EVER FRESH. ENDLESS PURITY, STEMS ENDLESSLY, IN THIS ETERNAL, INFINITE, BENEVOLENT UNIVERSE, OUT OF BLITHESOME PRISTINE ACTUALITY. Ahhhhhhhhh .... what a freedom, what a felicity, what a LUXURY !!!

Enjoy Friends!

JUSTINE
thumbnail
Yadid dee, modified 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 4:21 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 4:17 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 258 Join Date: 9/11/09 Recent Posts
Justine:
In a way, Buddhism is the most powerful advocate of reincarnation. Though Buddhism does not believe in God, in believes in the transmigration of the souls.


Hi Justine,

Where did you get the notion that Buddhism advocates the transmigration of souls and reincarnation?

According to all texts I've read, Buddhism as a whole advocates the inexistence of souls, and no reincarnation, but rather Rebirth, which is quite a different paradigm than reincarnation. While reincarnation means that there is a soul that keeps being reborn, rebirth means that the consciousness in the new person is neither identical nor entirely different from that in the deceased but the two form a causal continuum or stream.

Rebirth - Buddhism (Wikipedia)
thumbnail
Nikolai , modified 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 5:42 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 4:26 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 1648 Join Date: 1/23/10 Recent Posts
D. Justine J:
2) Most of the world religions, including Buddhism believes in rebirth/reincarnation. In a way, Buddhism is the most powerful advocate of reincarnation. Though Buddhism does not believe in God, in believes in the transmigration of the souls.



Hi Justine,

Are you talking about 'Buddhism' from the viewpoint of how Gotoma Buddha is seen and represented in Hinduism? Such an idea of transmigration of a 'soul' might be present in such a context but Gotoma's teachings for example in the pali suttas kind of refutes the transmigration of a 'soul'. I recommend getting a better idea on Buddhism as it seems you have pre-conceived ideas on what Buddhism is and should be and this may be influencing how you communicate your ideas here. Your view of it differs greatly to many here I'd say including myself. In fact there are probably a number of differing views taken of it here a the DhO. Have a read of the following article, The Paradox Of Becoming. It may help you get a better idea of Buddhism divorced of any Hindu (and other) influence and be able to then talk about it with a bit more relevance to how it may be talked of and taken around here by some (maybe not all) at the DhO and other places.

Does it really help calling oneself a 'lover of buddhism' if one really has no clue as to how it is seen and practiced by those one is addressing?

Sincerely,

Nick

Edit: relevant sutta:
Cula-Malunkyovada sutta

Edit: I agree fully with the following statement and think it should be taken up and seriously considered and allowed to influence how one conducts themselves for practice purposes and the end of of all mental suffering in this very lifetime (if this is one's objective) for those practicing even in a non-actualist context.

'WHETHER PAST LIFE IS TRUE OR NOT, THIS LIFE IS THE FIRST AND LAST'.
thumbnail
D Justine J, modified 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 5:43 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 5:43 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 120 Join Date: 1/15/12 Recent Posts
Yadid dee:
Justine:
In a way, Buddhism is the most powerful advocate of reincarnation. Though Buddhism does not believe in God, in believes in the transmigration of the souls.


Hi Justine,

Where did you get the notion that Buddhism advocates the transmigration of souls and reincarnation?

According to all texts I've read, Buddhism as a whole advocates the inexistence of souls, and no reincarnation, but rather Rebirth, which is quite a different paradigm than reincarnation. While reincarnation means that there is a soul that keeps being reborn, rebirth means that the consciousness in the new person is neither identical nor entirely different from that in the deceased but the two form a causal continuum or stream.

Rebirth - Buddhism (Wikipedia)


Hi Yadid Dee,

Well. Since I considered 'Rebirth', is a loosely held word, I used the word reincarnation. Modern 'quick-fix' meditations promise rebirthing in this body,in a day or two, or a week. Don't literally take my using the word 'reincarnation', as is seen in the Top Ten Best Sellers in the market place. One thing I feel sorry to see in DhO is 'word-obsession', than the direct passion for freedom. In a way it is good, but another way it keeps one at the intellectual level, and an impediment to transcend the intellect. Do you see what I mean? Why can't you see that - when I can see Buddhism not even believes in a Oversoul, God, it cannot believe in a soul?. I can see the rebirth in Buddhism as a different paradigm than reincarnation. Yes, rebirth means that the consciousness in the new person is neither identical nor entirely different from that in the deceased but the two form a casual continuum or stream.

Friend, why do you pull my legs for scholarly discussions? In every way, what I want to share is, rebirth, reincarnation, transmigration, past life, future life, mono-life, multiple-soul life, one unit energy in multiple bodies (as happened in Tibetan Buddhist Master Milarepa's life), these are all defunct in ACTUALITY, and there is a vast freedom to enjoy and delight.
I am not a competent Buddhist scholar for tacit scholarly discussions. Please spare me from that area. I am a hard core Actualist sharing my things with friends. I have no animosity for Buddhism. I may be less informed, but I know what I am aiming to share. Please make my path easy to convey. Anyway, thanks for your indicating, errors in my expression. But don't miss what I mainly convey here. OK, friend?

Regards,

Justine
thumbnail
D Justine J, modified 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 5:48 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 5:47 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 120 Join Date: 1/15/12 Recent Posts
Nikolai .:
D. Justine J:
2) Most of the world religions, including Buddhism believes in rebirth/reincarnation. In a way, Buddhism is the most powerful advocate of reincarnation. Though Buddhism does not believe in God, in believes in the transmigration of the souls.



Hi Justine,

Are you talking about 'Buddhism' from the viewpoint of how Gotoma Buddha is seen and represented in Hinduism? Such an idea of transmigration of a 'soul' might be present in such a context but Gotoma's teachings for example in the pali suttas kind of refutes the transmigration of a 'soul'. I recommend getting a better idea on Buddhism as it seems you have pre-conceived ideas on what Buddhism is and should be and this may be influencing how you communicate your ideas here. Your view of it differs greatly to many here I'd say including myself. In fact there are probably a number of differing views taken of it here a the DhO. Have a read of the following article, The Paradox Of Becoming. It may help you get a better idea of Buddhism divorced of any Hindu (and other) influence and be able to then talk about it with a bit more relevance to how it may be talked of and taken around here by some (maybe not all) at the DhO and other places.

Does it really help calling oneself a 'lover of buddhism' if one really has no clue as to how it is seen and practiced by those one is addressing?

Sincerely,

Nick

Edit: relevant sutta:
Cula-Malunkyovada sutta

Edit: I agree fully with the following statement and think it should be taken up and seriously considered and allowed to influence how one conducts themselves for practice purposes and the end of of all mental suffering in this very lifetime (if this is one's objective) for those practicing even in a non-actualist context.

'WHETHER PAST LIFE IS TRUE OR NOT, THIS LIFE IS THE FIRST AND LAST'.


Hi Nick,

Well. Since I considered 'Rebirth', is a loosely held word, I used the word reincarnation. Modern 'quick-fix' meditations promise rebirthing in this body,in a day or two, or a week. Don't literally take my using the word 'reincarnation', as is seen in the Top Ten Best Sellers in the market place. One thing I feel sorry to see in DhO is 'word-obsession', than the direct passion for freedom. In a way it is good, but another way it keeps one at the intellectual level, and an impediment to transcend the intellect. Do you see what I mean? Why can't you see that - when I can see Buddhism not even believes in a Oversoul, God, it cannot believe in a soul?. I can see the rebirth in Buddhism as a different paradigm than reincarnation. Yes, rebirth means that the consciousness in the new person is neither identical nor entirely different from that in the deceased but the two form a casual continuum or stream.

Friend, why do you pull my legs for scholarly discussions? In every way, what I want to share is, rebirth, reincarnation, transmigration, past life, future life, mono-life, multiple-soul life, one unit energy in multiple bodies (as happened in Tibetan Buddhist Master Milarepa's life), these are all defunct in ACTUALITY, and there is a vast freedom to enjoy and delight.
I am not a competent Buddhist scholar for tacit scholarly discussions. Please spare me from that area. I am a hard core Actualist sharing my things with friends. I have no animosity for Buddhism. I may be less informed, but I know what I am aiming to share. Please make my path easy to convey. Anyway, thanks for your indicating, errors in my expression. But don't miss what I mainly convey here. OK, friend?

Regards,

Justine
thumbnail
D Justine J, modified 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 6:22 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 5:51 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 120 Join Date: 1/15/12 Recent Posts
Hi Nick,

I agree fully with the following statement and think it should be taken up and seriously considered and allowed to influence how one conducts themselves for practice purposes and the end of of all mental suffering in this very lifetime (if this is one's objective) for those practicing even in a non-actualist context.

'WHETHER PAST LIFE IS TRUE OR NOT, THIS LIFE IS THE FIRST AND LAST'.


This is here you shine as a SUPER STAR Nick!

EXTRAORDINARY WORDS.

Kudos to you!

Regards,

Justine

P.S. Just give a little thrust, WITH THIS, to this exclusive Moment. You are done with all kinds of FREEDOMS.
thumbnail
Nikolai , modified 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 6:36 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 6:19 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 1648 Join Date: 1/23/10 Recent Posts
Friend, why do you pull my legs for scholarly discussions? In every way, what I want to share is, rebirth, reincarnation, transmigration, past life, future life, mono-life, multiple-soul life, one unit energy in multiple bodies (as happened in Tibetan Buddhist Master Milarepa's life), these are all defunct in ACTUALITY, and there is a vast freedom to enjoy and delight.
I am not a competent Buddhist scholar for tacit scholarly discussions. Please spare me from that area. I am a hard core Actualist sharing my things with friends. I have no animosity for Buddhism. I may be less informed, but I know what I am aiming to share. Please make my path easy to convey. Anyway, thanks for your indicating, errors in my expression. But don't miss what I mainly convey here. OK, friend?


Hi Justine,

I had no intention of having a 'scholarly debate'. I do though see a bigger picture being supported through these exchanges we have. Lots of cause and effect in play. Motivation, clues to how one acts, displays of communication, differing personalities shining through, phenomenological explanations (more are needed), all factors that can influence the reader into seeking (or not seeking) the end to their own misery.

You are one of very few proclaimed 'actual free' according to Richard and your means of communication and what you communicate sheds light on this little known result of such a practice not described by many people at all. The more data the better. You are providing such data for all readers with every post and response you give. That way a clearer picture presents for people to make the decision of a lifetime. So I will continue to be me and ask you questions. If no-one does, then how does one get more info that could be vital for one's objective? Does one expect everyone here to accept what one communicates as the gospel?

Do you wish to simply post your ideas and thoughts on the DhO without anyone asking for clarification and elaboration? Or do you wish to simply talk with those who do not question nor ask for validation of your ideas and statements? Your own blog would be a great idea if you wish not to be asked for clarifications and elaborations. Then you cpould declare whatever as truth and not be questioned. Have you considered that an option?

Perhaps using more precise language is something one should consider as a skill to develop? Imprecise language can be very confusing for others for practice and motivational reasons.I consider it a skill to develop for myself as well. Have you thought about whether or not your manner of communicating your ideas (some of them needing clarification to understand them better as well as needing validation) is truly attracting all the 'feeling beings' you wish to possibly guide and help?

You are posting on the DhO, not a pure actualist forum where most posters may not be convinced of the actualist practice context. If one is simply left to spout one's ideas and opinions unquestioned, then the risk is that they will confuse others who may take what you right as validated truth when it may simply not be. Is that what you wish to do?

This conversation is about communicating clearly and being open to being asked for clarifications. Your responses of dismay at being questioned do not seem in the spirit of the DhO. Do you not wish to contribute to this spirit?

Sincerely and respectfully,

Nick

Edited x 2
thumbnail
D Justine J, modified 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 6:43 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 6:43 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 120 Join Date: 1/15/12 Recent Posts
Lots of cause and effect in play


That is your personal problem, Nick.

So I will continue to be me and ask you questions. If no-one does, then how does one get more info that could be vital for one's objective? Does one expect everyone here to accept what one communicates as the gospel?


BE YOURSELF, Nick. Don't worry about others. Destiny takes care of them. You are not God.

Do you wish to simply post your ideas and thoughts on the DhO without anyone asking for clarification and elaboration?


No. I will reply within my ability and experience. Beyond that I will express my ineptitude.

Your own blog would be a great idea if you wish not to be asked for clarifications and elaborations. Then you cpould declare whatever as truth and not be questioned. Have you considered that an option?


In whatever position I am blessed to be with, there is no way for me to be autocratic, because ACTUALITY sees no disparity

Perhaps using more precise language is something one should consider as a skill to develop? Imprecise language can be very confusing for others for practice and motivational reasons.I consider it a skill to develop for myself as well. Have you thought about whether or not your manner of communicating your ideas (some of them needing clarification to understand them better as well as needing validation) is truly attracting all the 'feeling beings' you wish to possibly guide and help?


What mother Nature has endowed with me, is my maximum capability.

You are posting on the DhO, not a pure actualist forum where most posters may not be convinced of the actualist practice context. If one is simply left to spout one's ideas and opinions unquestioned, then the risk is that they will confuse others who may take what you right as validated truth when it may simply not be. Is that what you wish to do?


Risk is part of earthly life. I have no intention to change anyone consciously or unconsciously. And I trust each one has his/her own brain to think, decide, and act.

This conversation is about communicating clearly and being open to being asked for clarifications. Your responses of dismay at being questioned do not seem in the spirit of the DhO. Do you not wish to contribute to this spirit?


What mother Nature has endowed with me, is my maximum capability.

Thanks a lot Nick,

Regards,

JUSTINE
thumbnail
Nikolai , modified 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 6:49 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 6:47 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 1648 Join Date: 1/23/10 Recent Posts
Hi Justine,

D. Justine J:

BE YOURSELF, Nick. Don't worry about others. Destiny takes care of them. You are not God.


What does destiny mean to you? Could you elaborate within your maximum capabilities? Do you believe in 'destiny'? How could such a notion aid one on the path to freedom from all mental misery? Hehe, my wife also agrees that I am no god.

Nick
thumbnail
D Justine J, modified 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 7:27 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 7:27 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 120 Join Date: 1/15/12 Recent Posts
Nikolai .:
Hi Justine,

D. Justine J:

BE YOURSELF, Nick. Don't worry about others. Destiny takes care of them. You are not God.


What does destiny mean to you? Could you elaborate within your maximum capabilities? Do you believe in 'destiny'? How could such a notion aid one on the path to freedom from all mental misery? Hehe, my wife also agrees that I am no god.

Nick


Destiny is that which brings me to life on this earth, make me live, and erases me at its own will and pleasure, in its own time.

Yes. I elaborate within my maximum capabilities.

Yes. I believe in destiny.

This notion gives you accepting your life as it comes, which is beyond control/within control - and that acceptance is an important aid on the path to freedom from SOME mental misery (not all).

Nice. Your wife also agrees that you are no god.

Regards,

Justine
thumbnail
Bagpuss The Gnome, modified 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 7:35 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 7:35 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 704 Join Date: 11/2/11 Recent Posts
D. Justine J:
Lots of cause and effect in play


That is your personal problem, Nick.

So I will continue to be me and ask you questions. If no-one does, then how does one get more info that could be vital for one's objective? Does one expect everyone here to accept what one communicates as the gospel?


BE YOURSELF, Nick. Don't worry about others. Destiny takes care of them. You are not God.

Do you wish to simply post your ideas and thoughts on the DhO without anyone asking for clarification and elaboration?


No. I will reply within my ability and experience. Beyond that I will express my ineptitude.

Your own blog would be a great idea if you wish not to be asked for clarifications and elaborations. Then you cpould declare whatever as truth and not be questioned. Have you considered that an option?


In whatever position I am blessed to be with, there is no way for me to be autocratic, because ACTUALITY sees no disparity

Perhaps using more precise language is something one should consider as a skill to develop? Imprecise language can be very confusing for others for practice and motivational reasons.I consider it a skill to develop for myself as well. Have you thought about whether or not your manner of communicating your ideas (some of them needing clarification to understand them better as well as needing validation) is truly attracting all the 'feeling beings' you wish to possibly guide and help?


What mother Nature has endowed with me, is my maximum capability.

You are posting on the DhO, not a pure actualist forum where most posters may not be convinced of the actualist practice context. If one is simply left to spout one's ideas and opinions unquestioned, then the risk is that they will confuse others who may take what you right as validated truth when it may simply not be. Is that what you wish to do?


Risk is part of earthly life. I have no intention to change anyone consciously or unconsciously. And I trust each one has his/her own brain to think, decide, and act.

This conversation is about communicating clearly and being open to being asked for clarifications. Your responses of dismay at being questioned do not seem in the spirit of the DhO. Do you not wish to contribute to this spirit?


What mother Nature has endowed with me, is my maximum capability.

Thanks a lot Nick,

Regards,

JUSTINE


I've been following these compelling, yet tedious posts for a little while. Im not enlightened to any degree, nor do I practice any kind of ACTUALISM™ but I feel moved to comment...

There is a lot of "dancing around" with politeness and odd language on your part Justine. The politeness and language reads to me often like poorly disguised aggression. There is a lot of evasion, defensiveness and possessiveness in your words. It just sounds all wrong.

I won't pick apart individual sentences because frankly, I can't be arsed. I will point out that all this bowing to the genitals of DhO etc is a bit silly as well though. And really quite unnecessary. Unless of course your point is to continue this insidious theme of inferring that DhO folks are somehow being disloyal to Dan Ingram by not fawning at some odd chap called RICHARD's every word when doing practices inspired by ACTUALISM™

Really. This is all ACTUALLY SILLY™

Please note: I am currently dark nighting and may very well be projecting all of this from my own scrambled little mind. I don't think so though. Somebody should point out the patently bloody obvious.
thumbnail
D Justine J, modified 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 8:04 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 8:04 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 120 Join Date: 1/15/12 Recent Posts
Hi Bagpuss,

Thanks for your views.

J.
Tom Tom, modified 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 2:23 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 2:22 PM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 466 Join Date: 9/19/09 Recent Posts
I personally, was born into a Christian family. I was taught from my very younger days (as I was educated in a Christian Institution for all my high school studies), that I have ONLY ONE BIRTH - and I should be faithful to Christ the Savior, the 'ONLY SON OF GOD' ?! - and if I commit a sin, I will go to ETERNAL HELL, and if am faithful to Jesus Christ, and don't commit a single SIN, God the Father of Jesus Christ, will be pleased with me, and will send me to ETERNAL HEAVEN?!. Now, even the kids don't believe this.


If you broaden your definition of "eternal" (is millions-billions of years eternal enough?) and "hell," then this is true for all other religious models too. Except maybe "atheism." Christ the savior is 'you' - 'you' are the only son of god and only 'you' can save your-'self' from your 'self-making' (your cruci-'fiction').
thumbnail
Brian Eleven, modified 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 7:28 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/19/12 7:27 PM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 221 Join Date: 9/14/10 Recent Posts
[\quote]I've been following these compelling, yet tedious posts for a little while. Im not enlightened to any degree, nor do I practice any kind of ACTUALISM™ but I feel moved to comment...

There is a lot of "dancing around" with politeness and odd language on your part Justine. The politeness and language reads to me often like poorly disguised aggression. There is a lot of evasion, defensiveness and possessiveness in your words. It just sounds all wrong.

I won't pick apart individual sentences because frankly, I can't be arsed. I will point out that all this bowing to the genitals of DhO etc is a bit silly as well though. And really quite unnecessary. Unless of course your point is to continue this insidious theme of inferring that DhO folks are somehow being disloyal to Dan Ingram by not fawning at some odd chap called RICHARD's every word when doing practices inspired by ACTUALISM™

Really. This is all ACTUALLY SILLY™

Please note: I am currently dark nighting and may very well be projecting all of this from my own scrambled little mind. I don't think so though. Somebody should point out the patently bloody obvious.


Bagpuss:

I salute you sir for the above post!! Pure gold, from every angle. Pardon if I refrain from bowing to your genitals (that's something I save for the wife). All the best.

Metta,

Brian.\
An Eternal Now, modified 10 Years ago at 7/20/12 12:20 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/20/12 12:14 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 638 Join Date: 9/15/09 Recent Posts
Lots of people I personally know also have very vivid, clear memories of past lives.

In Buddhism, rebirth happens Without a soul... This is the difference between Hinduism's reincarnation of a soul, and Buddhism's soul-less rebirth due to its doctrine of anatta.

In my comparison between Actual Freedom, Buddhism, and Thusness's (as well as my) experience here: http://www.box.net/shared/sbyi64jrms

I wrote (see especially bolded part):

And lest you ask me how can rebirth happen without a self or a soul from the Buddhist POV: it simply happens due to conditions and tendencies, just as standing up, talking, writing happens according to conditions but without a need for a soul. (And anyway the Dependent Origination/Emptiness Realization, aka Thusness Stage 6 seems to be missing in AF) When the afflictions and the conceit of ‘I AM’ persist – rebirth will inevitably happen because the ‘fuel’ for birth is still present.

In hearing there is always only interdependently originated (along with the ear, stick, bell, hitting, air, ears, etc, i.e. the entire universe coming together as this very manifestation) sound which is of itself vividly present and clear, without a hearer/feeler – hence there is no denial of sound, only that the “I hear sound” is an illusion. Similarly, there is no denial of the process/phenomena of rebirth in Buddhism, but the notion that a self/Self/soul is being reborn is an illusion. Rebirth is simply any kind other kind of phenomena, like sound, sight, thoughts, etc. All are happening according to Dependent Origination without a need for a Soul.

Hence, the issue of ‘soul’ and the issue of ‘rebirth’ are two separate things: you can believe in Soul + Reincarnation (Hinduism), you can believe in Rebirth BUT No Soul (the insight and experience of Buddha/Buddhism), you can believe that there is No Rebirth and No Soul (Richard/Actual Freedom).

Any of these combinations can take place. However, Buddha’s experience with remembering past lives and his insight of Anatta allowed him to conclude that there is indeed rebirth, but no soul. Richard’s error is not simply that he did not remember his past lives and therefore did not believe in rebirth, but it is that he is completely mixing up two separate issues: rebirth, and soul – he thinks that rebirth automatically implies the necessity of soul, but this is *Not Necessarily The Case* (at least not in Buddhism).

Due to his error, he wrongly accused Buddhism of believing that Buddhism teaches that a soul reincarnates, which is totally false, against the countless articles by many Buddhist masters explaining how the “soulless rebirth” of Buddhism is totally different from Hinduism’s “soul-reincarnation”. He then criticizes that although Buddhism does not believe in an unchanging or substantial soul, they believed that karma survives and therefore karma is the soul. How can karma be a soul or fixed self or identity when karma is simply a stream of insubstantial volitional phenomena rolling on in the very same way as thoughts and sounds and sights are a stream of insubstantial and impermanent sensations rolling on according to dependent origination without a doer/recipient/feeler and does not even stay the same for even a moment? Just because you can remember an event yesterday, does that imply that there is a soul? No! Just because you have a habit to smoke and this habit continues day by day, does that mean that there is a continuous soul? The fact that you can remember yesterday means there are some imprints and tendencies and these karmic tendencies and propensities continue to play and affect our lives moment to moment, but none of them implies a soul or a self!

In Buddhism, you cannot say that you are the same person/soul you are one hour ago, one day ago, or one year ago, and neither can you say that you are a different person. Both ‘same’ and ‘different’ implies that there is an entity: a self/Self/soul that can remain the same or different. In Buddhism, there is no eternality, only timeless continuity (timeless as in vividness in present moment but change and continue like a wave pattern). There is no changing thing, only change. In actuality, there is simply an ever-changing stream of ever-fresh (Heraclitus: you cannot step into the same river twice, for fresh waters are ever flowing in upon you.) action and sensation showing up moment by moment without a doer nor a soul/feeler. That there are seemingly predictable patterns that keep showing up simply means (karmic) tendencies and nothing else.

In short: Rebirth is simply a stream of arisings (the meaning of ‘re-birth’) that is the continuity of a process but not the continuity or passing on of a self-entity – in the same way that the fact that when I wake up today I still remember what ‘I’ did yesterday is a testimony to a continuity of a selfless process, and not the passing on of a self-entity or soul.

I shall also disgress from the main focus (Pali suttas, Theravada) of comparison with AF in this paragraph and also state that what I just explained is the case understood not only in Theravada Buddhism but also in Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism – which means that all traditions of Buddhism does not teach a ‘soul’ being reborn – for example in Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism, it is the alaya-vijnana (storehouse consciousness) or the 8th Consciousness that functions as a kind of receptacle for so-called “seeds” or elementary units of past experiences, which then project into various experiences, as well as the illusions of there being inherently existing empirical subjects and corresponding objects (prior to transforming ‘consciousness’ into ‘wisdom’ through realizations). All memories, habits, tendencies, karma, are ‘stored’ therein. Now, the point to be understood here is that even though the alaya-vijnana is prior and above subject-object duality, it is also not a kind of Absolute mind: rather, alaya-vijnana is considered momentary and insubstantial, simply part of the mind-stream – nothing unchanging or independent or ‘Self’ unlike the views of non-Buddhist traditions. The term ‘store-house’ is not literally talking about a location, a place, an inherent Self/Soul, it is simply a convention for a process of consciousness. And there is no other Self or Absolute apart from the 8 consciousness-es – the only job Buddhists need to do with is to transform the 8 existing impure state of consciousness (which comes with the illusion of self/Self and subject-object duality) into ‘pure consciousness experience’ (though in Buddhism we call it wisdom/awareness instead of ‘consciousness’) ridded of the illusion of self/Self and all illusions of inherency through the insight into Anatta and Emptiness.

Here’s what a wise and experienced forummer ‘rizenfenix’ wrote:

Continuing consciousness after death is, in most religions, a matter of revealed truth. In Buddhism, the evidence comes from the contemplative experience of people who are certainly not ordinary but who are sufficiently numerous that what they say about it is worth taking seriously into account. Indeed, such testimonies begin with those of the Buddha himself.

Nevertheless, it’s important to understand that what’s called reincarnation in Buddhism has nothing to do with the transmigration of some ‘entity’ or other. It’s not a process of metempsychosis because there is no ‘soul’. As long as one thinks in terms of entities rather than function and continuity, it’s impossible to understand the Buddhist concept of rebirth. As it’s said, ‘There is no thread passing through the beads of the necklace of rebirths.’ Over successive rebirths, what is maintained is not the identity of a ‘person’, but the conditioning of a stream of consciousness.

Additionally, Buddhism speaks of successive states of existence; in other words, everything isn’t limited to just one lifetime. We’ve experienced other states of existence before our birth in this lifetime, and we’ll experience others after death. This, of course, leads to a fundamental question: is there a nonmaterial consciousness distinct from the body? It would be virtually impossible to talk about reincarnation without first examining the relationship between body and mind. Moreover, since Buddhism denies the existence of any self that could be seen as a separate entity capable of transmigrating from one existence to another by passing from one body to another, one might well wonder what it could be that links those successive states of existence together.

One could possibly understand it better by considering it as a continuum, a stream of consciousness that continues to flow without there being any fixed or autonomous entity running through it… Rather it could be likened to a river without a boat, or to a lamp flame that lights a second lamp, which in-turn lights a third lamp, and so on and so forth; the flame at the end of the process is neither the same flame as at the outset, nor a completely different one…

But as if the experiential accounts of rebirth from countless practitioners in the world dating back to Buddha and contemplatives prior to him, as well as the ability and techniques to be able to remember past lives through deep meditation *on your own* in Buddhism weren’t enough to substantiate ‘karma’ and ‘rebirth’, there are actually substantial scientific evidence that proves for rebirth. Search, for example, Dr. Ian Stevenson’s research and case studies of young children on their past lives memories (tracing and proving them to be accurate remembrance of a past life) and reincarnation and you may yield incredible results and information. His work has been published in well-known scientific and medical journals (and is therefore generally accepted as credible, even the skeptics do give him benefit of doubt, saying things like ‘ok maybe it does prove that rebirth happens to some people but maybe not all’, etc, but I shall not go into that). There are many other scientists who have done similar research, equally interesting. But I shall digress.
thumbnail
#1 - 0, modified 10 Years ago at 7/20/12 5:45 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/20/12 5:45 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 104 Join Date: 8/8/10 Recent Posts
I like this guy. Seems sincere. And he has a different way of expressing things from the others. It's nice when new AF people show up because it proves that they don't all end up talking like Rich. His advice also seems sound from any perspective, be it AF or otherwise.
thumbnail
D Justine J, modified 10 Years ago at 7/20/12 7:58 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/20/12 7:57 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 120 Join Date: 1/15/12 Recent Posts
#1 - 0:
I like this guy. Seems sincere. And he has a different way of expressing things from the others. It's nice when new AF people show up because it proves that they don't all end up talking like Rich. His advice also seems sound from any perspective, be it AF or otherwise.



Thanks.I have resigned from DhO friend. I may announce my blog soon.

J.
thumbnail
#1 - 0, modified 10 Years ago at 7/20/12 10:17 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/20/12 10:17 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 104 Join Date: 8/8/10 Recent Posts
Make sure to drop by with the link. I would definitely like to read it.
thumbnail
D Justine J, modified 10 Years ago at 7/21/12 3:01 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 7/21/12 3:01 AM

RE: Reincarnation and Richard

Posts: 120 Join Date: 1/15/12 Recent Posts
#1 - 0:
Make sure to drop by with the link. I would definitely like to read it.


Sure, friiend!