Just what on earth is "Eternity"?

[Native Son]

Since I am not as fortunate as some seem to be when it comes to remembering past lives, or better still, the Astral realm in-between lives, which it is claimed that there time is non-existent by those that have recollection of it, or by wise spirits that are conjured up by reliable and authentic mediums, such as Silver Birch, or Spirit Guide Sparrow, just as examples. We are told that our Astral World is eternal.

Now, to me eternal means no beginning, no middle, and no end. And although it is difficult, if not downright impossible, to relate "time" to something that is supposed to be timeless, still an effort must be made in order that we can assess just what reincarnation is all about. Because frankly, I'm not at all convinced about reincarnation being about learning and growing spirituality. AND although I'm more inclined to consider Karma as a more plausible motive for reincarnation, this also does not satisfy my curiosity completely, as I cannot see Karma as the main purpose for reincarnation, although I can see it as being a supporting event. Or as I would phrase it, Karma is a side effect and a concomitant of the process of reincarnation. But back to eternity,

Just for fun, let us consider eternity as it relates to timed events, such as the main academic Scientific accepted event of the Big Bang. We are told, approximately, that the observable universe is 14 billion years old. OK, now let us take this figure and try to see where it fits in eternity, again, just for fun. Where in eternity would we place this time interval of 14 billion years? What I mean is, where and at what point in eternity would we find ourselves now, as compared to where and at what point in eternity would the instant the big bang began, 14 billion years ago? If we were to visualize in a physical representation, such as in a measurement of a straight line, where eternity, just for fun, represents a line one mile long, what would the span of 14 billion years represent, like perhaps an inch long?

What I'm trying to conceptualize is just where in eternity we happen to be, if, as some claim, the immortal souls are here in this physical and time driven world of the physical senses, to learn and grow spiritually. The question really comes down to this. How long has an immortal soul existed in eternity, if we can assign some type of time interval, just for fun and for comparative purposes, just to understand why a being, any one soul, that exists in eternity does not "already" understand all and everything? I realize and have heard some arguments about old and new souls, but that does not cut the muster, as the eternal realm, being eternal does not allow any beginnings, middles, or endings, otherwise if it did, then it would not be timeless, nor eternal. For souls to be of different "ages" requires existence in a realm where linear time also exists, precisely as we have in our physical universe, where time and space is a necessity, if we are to have young and old, and everything in-between. This is as far as I can comprehend and also able to recollect, if I have soul, and if it is immortal, and I came down here to our physical earth, like everyone else, but I cannot recall just what the truth is about our Astral and eternal realm.

Needless to say, I'm a hard-headed person, and I find it difficult to accept most of what these wise spirit guides seem to teach about the afterlife. Not having seen or heard any of them myself, personally, other than what other physical and living persons relate to us, as they claim, I tend to place most of my eggs in the baskets of other, once living, wise men and women who happened to leave to posterity, in writing, some of their wisdom and insight into these matters. But perhaps I tend to be old fashioned, and have not bought into the new age awakening. Although what I read in the ancients is nothing new age about it, as the same concepts and ideas were contemplated and explored many centuries ago. The new age has, in my opinion, greatly embellished these same ideas and concepts. But perhaps it's supposed to happen this way, as I strongly believe that the "times" are ripe for a rude awakening for all of us, and the time is coming, soon, and that all of us will, easily, fully remember all our past lives, even without PLR. Following is an excerpt from Plato's Gorgias.

.......CALLICLES: Very well, proceed; and then we shall have done.
SOCRATES: Listen, then, as story-tellers say, to a very pretty tale, which
I dare say that you may be disposed to regard as a fable only, but which, as I
believe, is a true tale, for I mean to speak the truth. Homer tells us (Il.), how
Zeus and Poseidon and Pluto divided the empire which they inherited from their
father. Now in the days of Cronos there existed a law respecting the destiny of
man, which has always been, and still continues to be in Heaven,–that he who
has lived all his life in justice and holiness shall go, when he is dead, to the
Islands of the Blessed, and dwell there in perfect happiness out of the reach of
evil; but that he who has lived unjustly and impiously shall go to the house of
vengeance and punishment, which is called Tartarus. And in the time of Cronos,
and even quite lately in the reign of Zeus, the judgment was given on the very
day on which the men were to die; the judges were alive, and the men were
alive; and the consequence was that the judgments were not well given. Then
Pluto and the authorities from the Islands of the Blessed came to Zeus, and
said that the souls found their way to the wrong places. Zeus said: ’I shall put
a stop to this; the judgments are not well given, because the persons who are
judged have their clothes on, for they are alive; and there are many who, having
evil souls, are apparelled in fair bodies, or encased in wealth or rank, and, when
the day of judgment arrives, numerous witnesses come forward and testify on
their behalf that they have lived righteously. The judges are awed by them, and
they themselves too have their clothes on when judging; their eyes and ears and
their whole bodies are interposed as a veil before their own souls. All this is a
hindrance to them; there are the clothes of the judges and the clothes of the
judged.–What is to be done? I will tell you:–In the first place, I will deprive
men of the foreknowledge of death, which they possess at present: this power
which they have Prometheus has already received my orders to take from them:
in the second place, they shall be entirely stripped before they are judged, for
they shall be judged when they are dead; and the judge too shall be naked, that
is to say, dead–he with his naked soul shall pierce into the other naked souls;
and they shall die suddenly and be deprived of all their kindred, and leave their
brave attire strewn upon the earth–conducted in this manner, the judgment
will be just. I knew all about the matter before any of you, and therefore I
have made my sons judges; two from Asia, Minos and Rhadamanthus, and one
from Europe, Aeacus. And these, when they are dead, shall give judgment in
the meadow at the parting of the ways, whence the two roads lead, one to the
Islands of the Blessed, and the other to Tartarus. Rhadamanthus shall judge
those who come from Asia, and Aeacus those who come from Europe. And
to Minos I shall give the primacy, and he shall hold a court of appeal, in case
either of the two others are in any doubt:–then the judgment respecting the last
journey of men will be as just as possible.’.........................

 

[Native Son]

............
From this tale, Callicles, which I have heard and believe, I draw the following
inferences:–Death, if I am right, is in the first place the separation from one
another of two things, soul and body; nothing else. And after they are separated
they retain their several natures, as in life; the body keeps the same habit, and
the results of treatment or accident are distinctly visible in it: for example, he
who by nature or training or both, was a tall man while he was alive, will remain
as he was, after he is dead; and the fat man will remain fat; and so on; and
the dead man, who in life had a fancy to have flowing hair, will have flowing
hair. And if he was marked with the whip and had the prints of the scourge,
or of wounds in him when he was alive, you might see the same in the dead
body; and if his limbs were broken or misshapen when he was alive, the same
appearance would be visible in the dead. And in a word, whatever was the habit
of the body during life would be distinguishable after death, either perfectly, or
in a great measure and for a certain time. And I should imagine that this is
equally true of the soul, Callicles; when a man is stripped of the body, all the
natural or acquired affections of the soul are laid open to view.– And when they
come to the judge, as those from Asia come to Rhadamanthus, he places them
near him and inspects them quite impartially, not knowing whose the soul is:
perhaps he may lay hands on the soul of the great king, or of some other king
or potentate, who has no soundness in him, but his soul is marked with the
whip, and is full of the prints and scars of perjuries and crimes with which each
action has stained him, and he is all crooked with falsehood and imposture, and
has no straightness, because he has lived without truth. Him Rhadamanthus
beholds, full of all deformity and disproportion, which is caused by licence and
luxury and insolence and incontinence, and despatches him ignominiously to his
prison, and there he undergoes the punishment which he deserves.
Now the proper office of punishment is twofold: he who is rightly punished
ought either to become better and profit by it, or he ought to be made an
example to his fellows, that they may see what he suffers, and fear and become
better. Those who are improved when they are punished by gods and men, are
those whose sins are curable; and they are improved, as in this world so also in
another, by pain and suffering; for there is no other way in which they can be
delivered from their evil. But they who have been guilty of the worst crimes,
and are incurable by reason of their crimes, are made examples; for, as they are
incurable, the time has passed at which they can receive any benefit. They get
no good themselves, but others get good when they behold them enduring for
ever the most terrible and painful and fearful sufferings as the penalty of their
sins–there they are, hanging up as examples, in the prison-house of the world
below, a spectacle and a warning to all unrighteous men who come thither.
And among them, as I confidently affirm, will be found Archelaus, if Polus truly
reports of him, and any other tyrant who is like him. Of these fearful examples,
most, as I believe, are taken from the class of tyrants and kings and potentates
and public men, for they are the authors of the greatest and most impious
crimes, because they have the power. And Homer witnesses to the truth of this;
for they are always kings and potentates whom he has described as suffering
everlasting punishment in the world below: such were Tantalus and Sisyphus
and Tityus. But no one ever described Thersites, or any private person who was
a villain, as suffering everlasting punishment, or as incurable. For to commit
the worst crimes, as I am inclined to think, was not in his power, and he was
happier than those who had the power. No, Callicles, the very bad men come
from the class of those who have power. And yet in that
very class there may arise good men, and worthy of all admiration they are, for
where there is great power to do wrong, to live and to die justly is a hard thing,
and greatly to be praised, and few there are who attain to this. Such good and
true men, however, there have been, and will be again, at Athens and in other
states, who have fulfilled their trust righteously; and there is one who is quite
famous all over Hellas, Aristeides, the son of Lysimachus. But, in general, great
men are also bad, my friend.
As I was saying, Rhadamanthus, when he gets a soul of the bad kind, knows
nothing about him, neither who he is, nor who his parents are; he knows only
that he has got hold of a villain; and seeing this, he stamps him as curable or
incurable, and sends him away to Tartarus, whither he goes and receives his
proper recompense. Or, again, he looks with admiration on the soul of some
just one who has lived in holiness and truth; he may have been a private man or
not; and I should say, Callicles, that he is most likely to have been a philosopher
who has done his own work, and not troubled himself with the doings of other
men in his lifetime; him Rhadamanthus sends to the Islands of the Blessed.
Aeacus does the same; and they both have sceptres, and judge; but Minos alone
has a golden sceptre and is seated looking on, as Odysseus in Homer declares
that he saw him:
’Holding a sceptre of gold, and giving laws to the dead.’
Now I, Callicles, am persuaded of the truth of these things, and I consider
how I shall present my soul whole and undefiled before the judge in that day.
Renouncing the honours at which the world aims, I desire only to know the
truth, and to live as well as I can, and, when I die, to die as well as I can. And,
to the utmost of my power, I exhort all other men to do the same. And, in return
for your exhortation of me, I exhort you also to take part in the great combat,
which is the combat of life, and greater than every other earthly conflict.....

 

[Native Son]

When we speak of the immortality of the soul, we must ask further what
we mean by the word immortality. For of the duration of a living being in
countless ages we can form no conception; far less than a three years’ old child
of the whole of life. The naked eye might as well try to see the furthest star
in the infinity of heaven. Whether time and space really exist when we take
away the limits of them may be doubted; at any rate the thought of them when
unlimited it is so overwhelming to us as to lose all distinctness. Philosophers
have spoken of them as forms of the human mind, but what is the mind without
them? As then infinite time, or an existence out of time, which are the only
possible explanations of eternal duration, are equally inconceivable to us, let us
substitute for them a hundred or a thousand years after death, and ask not what
will be our employment in eternity, but what will happen to us in that definite
portion of time; or what is now happening to those who passed out of life a
hundred or a thousand years ago. Do we imagine that the wicked are suffering
torments, or that the good are singing the praises of God, during a period longer
than that of a whole life, or of ten lives of men? Is the suffering physical or
mental? And does the worship of God consist only of praise, or of many forms
of service? Who are the wicked, and who are the good, whom we venture to
divide by a hard and fast line; and in which of the two classes should we place
ourselves and our friends? May we not suspect that we are making differences of
kind, because we are unable to imagine differences of degree?– putting the whole
human race into heaven or hell for the greater convenience of logical division?
Are we not at the same time describing them both in superlatives, only that
we may satisfy the demands of rhetoric? What is that pain which does not
become deadened after a thousand years? or what is the nature of that pleasure
or happiness which never wearies by monotony? Earthly pleasures and pains
are short in proportion as they are keen; of any others which are both intense
and lasting we have no experience, and can form no idea. The words or figures
of speech which we use are not consistent with themselves. For are we not
imagining Heaven under the similitude of a church, and Hell as a prison, or
perhaps a madhouse or chamber of horrors? And yet to beings constituted as
we are, the monotony of singing psalms would be as great an infliction as the
pains of hell, and might be even pleasantly interrupted by them. Where are the
actions worthy of rewards greater than those which are conferred on the greatest
benefactors of mankind? And where are the crimes which according to Plato’s
merciful reckoning,–more merciful, at any rate, than the eternal damnation of
so-called Christian teachers,–for every ten years in this life deserve a hundred of
punishment in the life to come? We should be ready to die of pity if we could
see the least of the sufferings which the writers of Infernos and Purgatorios have
attributed to the damned. Yet these joys and terrors seem hardly to exercise an
appreciable influence over the lives of men.

 

[Native Son]

The wicked man when old, is not more agitated by the terrors of another world when
he is nearer to them, nor the good in an ecstasy at the joys of which he is soon
to be the partaker. Age numbs the sense of both worlds; and the habit of life is
strongest in death. Even the dying mother is dreaming of her lost children as
they were forty or fifty years before, ’pattering over the boards,’ not of reunion
with them in another state of being. Most persons when the last hour comes
are resigned to the order of nature and the will of God. They are not thinking
of Dante’s Inferno or Paradiso, or of the Pilgrim’s Progress. Heaven and hell
are not realities to them, but words or ideas; the outward symbols of some great
mystery, they hardly know what. Many noble poems and pictures have been
suggested by the traditional representations of them, which have been fixed in
forms of art and can no longer be altered. Many sermons have been filled with
descriptions of celestial or infernal mansions. But hardly even in childhood did
the thought of heaven and hell supply the motives of our actions, or at any time
seriously affect the substance of our belief.
Another life must be described, if at all, in forms of thought and not of
sense. To draw pictures of heaven and hell, whether in the language of Scripture
or any other, adds nothing to our real knowledge, but may perhaps disguise our
ignorance. The truest conception which we can form of a future life is a state of
progress or education–a progress from evil to good, from ignorance to knowledge.
To this we are led by the analogy of the present life, in which we see different
races and nations of men, and different men and women of the same nation, in
various states or stages of cultivation; some more and some less developed, and
all of them capable of improvement under favourable circumstances. There are
punishments too of children when they are growing up inflicted by their parents,
of elder offenders which are imposed by the law of the land, of all men at all
times of life, which are attached by the laws of nature to the performance of
certain actions. All these punishments are really educational; that is to say, they
are not intended to retaliate on the offender, but to teach him a lesson. Also
there is an element of chance in them, which is another name for our ignorance
of the laws of nature. There is evil too inseparable from good
not always punished here, as good is not always rewarded. It is capable of being
indefinitely diminished; and as knowledge increases, the element of chance may
more and more disappear.
For we do not argue merely from the analogy of the present state of this world
to another, but from the analogy of a probable future to which we are tending.
The greatest changes of which we have had experience as yet are due to our
increasing knowledge of history and of nature. They have been produced by a
few minds appearing in three or four favoured nations, in a comparatively short
period of time. May we be allowed to imagine the minds of men everywhere
working together during many ages for the completion of our knowledge? May
not the science of physiology transform the world? Again, the majority of
mankind have really experienced some moral improvement; almost every one
feels that he has tendencies to good, and is capable of becoming better. And
these germs of good are often found to be developed by new circumstances,
like stunted trees when transplanted to a better soil. The differences between
the savage and the civilized man, or between the civilized man in old and new
countries, may be indefinitely increased. The first difference is the effect of a
few thousand, the second of a few hundred years. We congratulate ourselves
that slavery has become industry; that law and constitutional government have
superseded despotism and violence; that an ethical religion has taken the place
of Fetichism. There may yet come a time when the many may be as well off as
the few; when no one will be weighed down by excessive toil; when the necessity
of providing for the body will not interfere with mental improvement; when the
physical frame may be strengthened and developed; and the religion of all men
may become a reasonable service.
Nothing therefore, either in the present state of man or in the tendencies
of the future, as far as we can entertain conjecture of them, would lead us to
suppose that God governs us vindictively in this world, and therefore we have no
reason to infer that he will govern us vindictively in another. The true argument
from analogy is not, ’This life is a mixed state of justice and injustice, of great
waste, of sudden casualties, of disproportionate punishments, and therefore the
like inconsistencies, irregularities, injustices are to be expected in another;’ but
’This life is subject to law, and is in a state of progress, and therefore law
and progress may be believed to be the governing principles of another.’ All
the analogies of this world would be against unmeaning punishments inflicted
a hundred or a thousand years after an offence had been committed. Suffering
there might be as a part of education, but not hopeless or protracted; as there
might be a retrogression of individuals or of bodies of men, yet not such as to
interfere with a plan for the improvement of the whole.
But some one will say: That we cannot reason from the seen to the
unseen, and that we are creating another world after the image of this, just as
men in former ages have created gods in their own likeness. And we, like the
companions of Socrates, may feel discouraged at hearing our favourite ’argument
from analogy’ thus summarily disposed of. Like himself, too, we may adduce
other arguments in which he seems to have anticipated us, though he expresses
them in different language. For we feel that the soul partakes of the ideal and
invisible; and can never fall into the error of confusing the external circumstances
of man with his higher self; or his origin with his nature. It is as repugnant to
us as it was to him to imagine that our moral ideas are to be attributed only
to cerebral forces. The value of a human soul, like the value of a man’s life to
himself, is inestimable, and cannot be reckoned in earthly or material things.
The human being alone has the consciousness of truth and justice and love,
which is the consciousness of God. And the soul becoming more conscious of
these, becomes more conscious of her own immortality.

 

[Native Son]

The last ground of our belief in immortality, and the strongest, is the
perfection of the divine nature. The mere fact of the existence of God does not
tend to show the continued existence of man. An evil God or an indifferent
God might have had the power, but not the will, to preserve us. He might have
regarded us as fitted to minister to his service by a succession of existences,–like
the animals, without attributing to each soul an incomparable value. But if he
is perfect, he must will that all rational beings should partake of that perfection
which he himself is. In the words of the Timaeus, he is good, and therefore
he desires that all other things should be as like himself as possible. And the
manner in which he accomplishes this is by permitting evil, or rather degrees
of good, which are otherwise called evil. For all progress is good relatively
to the past, and yet may be comparatively evil when regarded in the light of
the future. Good and evil are relative terms, and degrees of evil are merely
the negative aspect of degrees of good. Of the absolute goodness of any finite
nature we can form no conception; we are all of us in process of transition from
one degree of good or evil to another. The difficulties which are urged about
the origin or existence of evil are mere dialectical puzzles, standing in the same
relation to Christian philosophy as the puzzles of the Cynics and Megarians to
the philosophy of Plato. They arise out of the tendency of the human mind to
regard good and evil both as relative and absolute; just as the riddles about
motion are to be explained by the double conception of space or matter, which
the human mind has the power of regarding either as continuous or discrete.
In speaking of divine perfection, we mean to say that God is just and true
and loving, the author of order and not of disorder, of good and not of evil. Or
rather, that he is justice, that he is truth, that he is love, that he is order, that he
is the very progress of which we were speaking; and that wherever these qualities
are present, whether in the human soul or in the order of nature, there is God.
We might still see him everywhere, if we had not been mistakenly seeking for
him apart from us, instead of in us; away from the laws of nature, instead of
in them. And we become united to him not by mystical absorption, but by
partaking, whether consciously or unconsciously, of that truth and justice and
love which he himself is.
Thus the belief in the immortality of the soul rests at last on the belief in
God. If there is a good and wise God, then there is a progress of mankind
towards perfection; and if there is no progress of men towards perfection, then
there is no good and wise God. We cannot suppose that the moral government
of God of which we see the beginnings in the world and in ourselves will cease
when we pass out of life.
Considering the ’feebleness of the human faculties and the uncertainty
of the subject,’ we are inclined to believe that the fewer our words the better.
At the approach of death there is not much said; good men are too honest
to go out of the world professing more than they know. There is perhaps no
important subject about which, at any time, even religious people speak so little
to one another. In the fulness of life the thought of death is mostly awakened
by the sight or recollection of the death of others rather than by the prospect
of our own. We must also acknowledge that there are degrees of the belief in
immortality, and many forms in which it presents itself to the mind. Some
persons will say no more than that they trust in God, and that they leave all
to Him. It is a great part of true religion not to pretend to know more than
we do. Others when they quit this world are comforted with the hope ’That
they will see and know their friends in heaven.’ But it is better to leave them
in the hands of God and to be assured that ’no evil shall touch them.’ There
are others again to whom the belief in a divine personality has ceased to have
any longer a meaning; yet they are satisfied that the end of all is not here, but
that something still remains to us, ’and some better thing for the good than
for the evil.’ They are persuaded, in spite of their theological nihilism, that the
ideas of justice and truth and holiness and love are realities. They cherish an
enthusiastic devotion to the first principles of morality. Through these they see,
or seem to see, darkly, and in a figure, that the soul is immortal.
But besides differences of theological opinion which must ever prevail about
things unseen, the hope of immortality is weaker or stronger in men at one time
of life than at another; it even varies from day to day. It comes and goes; the
mind, like the sky, is apt to be overclouded. Other generations of men may have
sometimes lived under an ’eclipse of faith,’ to us the total disappearance of it
might be compared to the ’sun falling from heaven.’ And we may sometimes
have to begin again and acquire the belief for ourselves; or to win it back again
when it is lost. It is really weakest in the hour of death. For Nature, like a kind
mother or nurse, lays us to sleep without frightening us; physicians, who are the
witnesses of such scenes, say that under ordinary circumstances there is no fear
of the future. Often, as Plato tells us, death is accompanied ’with pleasure.’
(Tim.) When the end is still uncertain, the cry of many a one has been, ’Pray,
that I may be taken.’ The last thoughts even of the best men depend chiefly
on the accidents of their bodily state. Pain soon overpowers the desire of life;
old age, like the child, is laid to sleep almost in a moment. The long experience
of life will often destroy the interest which mankind have in it. So various are
the feelings with which different persons draw near to death; and still more
various the forms in which imagination clothes it.
When we think of God and of man in his relation to God; of the im-
perfection of our present state and yet of the progress which is observable in
the history of the world and of the human mind; of the depth and power of our
moral ideas which seem to partake of the very nature of God Himself; when we
consider the contrast between the physical laws to which we are subject and
the higher law which raises us above them and is yet a part of them; when we
reflect on our capacity of becoming the ’spectators of all time and all existence,’
and of framing in our own minds the ideal of a perfect Being; when we see how
the human mind in all the higher religions of the world, including Buddhism,
notwithstanding some aberrations, has tended towards such a belief–we have
reason to think that our destiny is different from that of animals; and though
we cannot altogether shut out the childish fear that the soul upon leaving the
body may ’vanish into thin air,’ we have still, so far as the nature of the subject
admits, a hope of immortality with which we comfort ourselves on sufficient
grounds. The denial of the belief takes the heart out of human life; it lowers
men to the level of the material. As Goethe also says, ’He is dead even in this
world who has no belief in another.’

 

[Eowyn]

Native Son, replying to your first post: you're not old-fashioned, you're someone sensible who thinks for himself. You said it right: saying that time doesn't exist in the afterlife, that is eternal, or that we all are living our lives simultaneously (and other similar ideas) are just BELIEFS and they often make no sense, even including modern accounts from people who have had NDEs, OBEs and of course past life recall. Karma also falls into this category. If I were you, I'd forget about karma. But for some reason people love to be stuck in beliefs. That's why I'm so glad when now and then I meet people like you. I also love Plato!

 

[Native Son]

Native Son, replying to your first post: you're not old-fashioned, you're someone sensible who thinks for himself. You said it right: saying that time doesn't exist in the afterlife, that is eternal, or that we all are living our lives simultaneously (and other similar ideas) are just BELIEFS and they often make no sense, even including modern accounts from people who have had NDEs, OBEs and of course past life recall. Karma also falls into this category. If I were you, I'd forget about karma. But for some reason people love to be stuck in beliefs. That's why I'm so glad when now and then I meet people like you. I also love Plato!

Eowyn,
Glad to hear your comments, as any friend of Socrates/Plato is a friend of mind too. I mean that universal and absolute mind that we all are always attempting to understand, and from which all comes to us. As you know, Socrates' motto was; only God knows, and man can only have opinions. To be stuck in beliefs is just another way of saying that, people stick by their opinions. This is perfectly acceptable to me, and much appreciated, otherwise life here would be a boring experience for all of us, if we were to be all the same and of the same opinions and all good. Socrates also gave us this: there must needs be always an antagonist to good. Meaning an opposite, as we see that the physical universe if full of opposites, and opposites in equal force balance the All.

Regarding Karma, and seeing this concept as a by-product of reincarnation, and looking at it from Socrates' perspective of justice and injustice, I see it as part of the "game" of life, from my own perspective to better understand Plato/Socrates, Karma is generally accepted as a theme of receiving good for good and bad for bad in onother life, for our actions in this one, and of course, for previous lives the same is said to have occurred. Christianity it seems has the concept of Karma, although it varies somewhat from the usual way, as according to it, we are still paying the debt of the original sin of Adam and Eve.

For me Karma is basically what Socrates referred to, cleverly, and very profoundly, as the prizes we gather, much like the participants of the "games." Socrates was indicating, superficially, the Olympic games, but I believe that he wanted us to really understand that, like the cave of shadows allegory, our physical world is not reality, and, basically, life here is a sort of game. And I'm convinced by Socrates/Plato that life here is best understood and makes much more sense as being a game, rather than being a place we come to get education, especially spiritual. This seems rather obvious to me, since we are supposed to be spiritual beings to "begin" with and come down here from a spirutual realm that has existed in eternity and "long" before the physical world and time came to be created. Sorry for using terms such as, begin and long before, along with eternity, where such words are meaningless and inappropriate. Plato had the same difficulty, as shown in his Timaeus.

Now the nature of the ideal being was everlasting, but to bestow this attribute in its
fulness upon a creature was impossible. Wherefore he resolved to have a moving
image of eternity, and when he set in order the heaven, he made this image eternal
but moving according to number, while eternity itself rests in unity; and this image
we call time. For there were no days and nights and months and years before
the heaven was created, but when he constructed the heaven he created them
also. They are all parts of time, and the past and future are created species
of time, which we unconsciously but wrongly transfer to the eternal essence;
for we say that he ’was,’ he ’is,’ he ’will be,’ but the truth is that ’is’ alone is
properly attributed to him, and that ’was’ and ’will be’ are only to be spoken
of becoming in time, for they are motions, but that which is immovably the
same cannot become older or younger by time, nor ever did or has become, or
hereafter will be, older or younger, nor is subject at all to any of those states
which affect moving and sensible things and of which generation is the cause.
These are the forms of time, which imitates eternity and revolves according to
a law of number. Moreover, when we say that what has become IS become and
what becomes IS becoming, and that what will become IS about to become
and that the non-existent IS non-existent–all these are inaccurate modes of
expression. But perhaps this whole subject will be more suitably discussed on some other occasion.

But perhaps I'm repeating my quotes from Plato's dialogues unnecessarily, especially to you, since you say that you love Plato, and anyone that loves Plato will be very familiar with his work.

I believe that, unconsciously, I may be trying to make a point on this forum that, anyone who has an attraction to reincarnation and wanted a logical explanation of the immortality of the soul, I would have thought that Plato would be a main source to go to and become familiar with. As there one will find not only that but so much more. As someone cleverly put it once; To understand Plato is to "UNDSERSTAND".

To conclude this reply, I am glad to meet a fellow Platonist, especially one who is also interested in the afterlife seriously, I Presume?

 

[Eowyn]

I'm not that familiar with Plato, as I stopped reading his works when I left school. I only know I always loved his ideas about the transmigration of souls and when I studied philosophy I always thought he was the best of all philosophers, the only one who really knew what life (and the afterlife) was about. I'm really surprised when I read excerpts like the ones you used and I keep thinking the same, my own ideas are very similar to his and somehow I feel he's quite close to the Truth.

As you know, Socrates' motto was; only God knows, and man can only have opinions.

I use to say the same: we can't really know until we die, and even when we die, we don't know everything, we will keep searching for the Truth, as we don't meet God straight away when we die.

Regarding Karma, and seeing this concept as a by-product of reincarnation, and looking at it from Socrates' perspective of justice and injustice, I see it as part of the "game" of life, from my own perspective to better understand Plato/Socrates, Karma is generally accepted as a theme of receiving good for good and bad for bad in onother life, for our actions in this one, and of course, for previous lives the same is said to have occurred. Christianity it seems has the concept of Karma, although it varies somewhat from the usual way, as according to it, we are still paying the debt of the original sin of Adam and Eve.

Yes, this is the widespread notion of karma, conceived as a system of punishment and reward. But when you remember multiples lives, as is my case, you realize it isn't true. There are things that undoubtedly are transferred from one life to the next, but they are mainly the results of your past experiences on your soul: traumas, mental patterns, unresolved emotions. What you did doesn't have a direct effect on the new events. We are not here to receive punishment or reward for our actions, I've always thought that is quite a childish way to see life. Besides, we don't learn through punishment or reward, we just learn living and seeing the consequences of our decisions, and according to those things you learned, you will behave one way or the other in your next life.

Socrates was indicating, superficially, the Olympic games, but I believe that he wanted us to really understand that, like the cave of shadows allegory, our physical world is not reality, and, basically, life here is a sort of game. And I'm convinced by Socrates/Plato that life here is best understood and makes much more sense as being a game, rather than being a place we come to get education, especially spiritual. This seems rather obvious to me, since we are supposed to be spiritual beings to "begin" with and come down here from a spirutual realm that has existed in eternity and "long" before the physical world and time came to be created.

Yes, that's quite a interesting viewpoint. The problem is we really think death is the end. Once you realize death is just a change, the end of a chapter but not the end of a book, you start to see it all differently. People use to get a bit upset when you say life is a game, because they think you are comparing it to a superficial game, when it's not. It's a really serious game, where everything feels too realistic to be a game, where blood and suffering are real, but yes, it's still a game, because in the end, no one dies. Of course, it's hard to see it this way while we're here, but I'm convinced it's different when we're on the other side. There we quickly forget about the bad things of being alive and we just miss the emotions and the feelings that being alive entails. We quickly want to return again.

They are all parts of time, and the past and future are created species
of time, which we unconsciously but wrongly transfer to the eternal essence;
for we say that he ’was,’ he ’is,’ he ’will be,’ but the truth is that ’is’ alone is
properly attributed to him, and that ’was’ and ’will be’ are only to be spoken
of becoming in time, for they are motions, but that which is immovably the
same cannot become older or younger by time, nor ever did or has become, or
hereafter will be, older or younger, nor is subject at all to any of those states
which affect moving and sensible things and of which generation is the cause.

This almost sounds as my own words . I always say that the phrase "Time doesn't exist in the afterlife" can't be accurate. Time is just change. Are we immutable spiritual beings while we're in the spiritual realms? I don't think so. We are always moving, becoming something else, changing, supposedly getting "better" or "wiser" or whatever we wish. As long as there is a "before" and an "after", there will always be time. Are we somehow "eternal" because we are immortal? Yes, that might be. But that doesn't mean we stop evolving once we're dead.

 

[Native Son]

It seems that only Eowyn is interested in exchanging thoughts on the subject of "eternity", looked at it from a personal experience of those who may have recall to previous lives and that thing we call time for the intervals of where souls are said to await the next incarnation. Even though the process of reincarnation is fascinating in itself, I am of opinion that if we have more "eyewitness" accounts of the periods and place(s) of where the soul migrates to after leaving the body upon death, and where it dwells, either in the prospect of obtaining another physical body, or where it elects to remain for an unspecified interval, a more uniform and logical purpose for why there is reincarnation would enlighten the general public and make it more easily accepted that we do have a soul to begin with, and further, that it appears to be immortal besides. Also if we can establish with more certainty the purpose of reincarnation, we could also justify why we should consider previous lives as far as the effect they have, and as they relate to living this present one, or whether it would be best to not remember any previous ones. Because the vast and overwhelming majority of people do not recall any previous lives, even those that believe in reincarnation, and it would seem that nature intended it to be this way.

I am trying to make sense for the scope of reincarnation, and as to why an immortal soul, as reported by some, who lives in a perfect and eternal realm, would ever consider, voluntarily, leaving such a perfect environment, and coming down to the physical realm in the first place. Therefore, it becomes a necessity to obtain as much truth possible about our eternal realm, so as to make "heads and tails" of this physical one, which could also explain better why we have reincarnation. I realize that there are many opinions about the purpose of reincarnation, and one of the major ones is that reincarnation is all about learning and growing, and some will even qualify the learning as spiritual growth. But why would a soul, living in a spiritual realm to begin with, need to come down to a place where spiritually is an exception and not the rule, since here we are ruled by physical laws and materialism?

And as far as time goes here, how long has eternity existed? Sorry for asking such an absurd question, but it is just as absurd to think that an immortal soul, which lives in the eternal realm, would, by now, need time to learn anything which it does not already know in eternity!

Although a soul, any soul, does not recall any previous lives, in the same way that I do not recall any, still it should have the "feeling" that, somehow, being convinced of the existence of the soul, and its immortality, that this very point should also convice us that we must, of necessity, already knows everything.

For example, if I were to recall having been René Descartes in a previous Life, but was unable to remember much about that life, and in this life I were rather ignorant in mathematics, still, I should have the feeling of being a really great mathematician, having been Descartes once. This I can deduce from the current life by looking up Descartes. Of course having the privilege of having been a famous and historically known person in a past life has its advantages. But, nevertheless, reasoning on these terms, and if we can accept the very possibility of having lived many, many lives, although some may only recall one or two, or a few more, it's easy to realize that we have accumulated an infinite amount of knowledge, even though we may not recall it.

Therefore the question for all of us to ask is: why do we not recall previous lives, if the scope of reincarnation is to learn? And even for those that do recall a previous Life, why cannot they recall everything about It? I would like to see a soul claiming to be the reincarnation of Albert Einstein, and at the same time demonstrate all those unique qualities and full knowledge belonging to Einstein in this new reincarnation of his soul. Or better still, the reincarnation of Plato's soul, having the same talent and genius, but most of all, the knowledge of where and when was our dear Atlantis still under the sun. This last to me, would put the "cherry on top" in my belief in reincarnation, at least. I say cherry-on-top, because I'm pretty much convinced in the immortality of the soul already, although I cannot recall neither a past life, nor of having been in that place of where a soul goes to in-between lives. My conviction is one based on reason; "I think, therefore I am. And I think that I am that which I am. I am a lost soul, lost in a lost world of opinions, knowing only that I alone am, and for the rest, I'm of opinion that you all exist too. However, sometimes I'm of opinion that you all are not real, and are only a figment of my imagination. And that is the problem inherent of opinion, no one knows for sure, except God. And who is to say that I'm not God? Does God incarnate too? But if we are all souls and are all immortal and live in the realm of eternity, are we not all gods? Are we not all an image of the being we refer to as God?

There is thread here that was discussing whether or not the Bible has references to reincarnation, and that perhaps some of the original passages may have been modified or perhaps even deleted, which may have been adressing reincarnation. In the thread some scripture was cited, which appears to make a case for reincarnation being taught by Jesus. However, I do not recall anyone citing the one passage that it still there, and it is as powerful as an atom bomb in proving the immortality of the soul. And I'm not preaching here, but only pointing out what sounds like an endorsement for the immortality of the soul.

We are not stoning You for any good work,” said the Jews, “but for blasphemy, because You, who are a man, declare Yourself to be God.” Jesus replied, “Is it not written in your Law: ‘I have said you are gods’? If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken—…

Cross References
Psalm 82:6
I said, "You are gods, And all of you are sons of the Most High.

John 12:34
The crowd replied, "We have heard from the Law that Christ will remain forever. So how can you say that the Son of Man must be lifted up? Who is this Son of Man?

1 Corinthians 14:21
It is written in the Law: "By strange tongues and foreign lips I will speak to this people, but even then they will not listen to Me, says the Lord.

 

[KenJ]

I am trying to make sense for the scope of reincarnation, and as to why an immortal soul, as reported by some, who lives in a perfect and eternal realm, would ever consider, voluntarily, leaving such a perfect environment, and coming down to the physical realm in the first place.

I have wondered that in the past, but then see people jumping out of perfectly good airplanes for the "thrill of it". The recent eclipse is another example where people traveled hundreds of miles to "experience" something just a little different than what happens every day with clouds/ birds/airplanes casting shadows. So, I think that it is more about "experience" than "learning", or perhaps "testing" to see if we have truly learned something we understand the concept of without truly understanding how difficult it is to do under some specific circumstance.

Or better still, the reincarnation of Plato's soul, having the same talent and genius, but most of all, the knowledge of where and when was our dear Atlantis still under the sun.

If my memory serves me correctly, Plato knew nothing about Atlantis other than hearing an ancient story that had been handed down by someone's old relative without any usable location, mainly to the West of Gibraltar.
It seems as though each of us have experienced various Pieces of reality about which we each try to construct the Whole. I personally recall being separate from my body as a youngster and feeling the loss of ability to come-and-go as I had previously been able to do. That very early understanding/memory did not lead me to reincarnation, nor did my knowledge of my "guide" looking after me. For me, it was things that I "knew" without having learned them from anything in this lifetime. I'm not talking about a Gestalt type of understanding, it is more "always-been-there" kind of thing. So - for me, it is down to either reincarnation or tapping "universal consciousness" with reincarnation fitting better with those "pieces" that I have encountered.

Most of the time I wish that I could recall a prior lifetime while at other times I realize that if it is really a "test", having a cheat sheet would reduce it.

 

[Native Son]

@KenJ,

We are both believers in reincarnation, but not from personal experiences of recalling previous lives, since we both admit of not having any recollection of any. But that does not mean that we just may recall one or two in the future.

I like your views on why a soul would want to leave a perfect place to come to such an imperfect place. But if this were so, then it would seem that at least all human souls that have come down to the physical realm must have elected to do so. Which means that we must all be adventurous souls, whether we recall our previous lives or not. We all have only opinions, as to really know is not given to us, at least not while here in the physical realm. And just what is the heavenly plan, it seems that we all must come to that conclusion on our very own. Although we are, seemingly, guided by wiser souls, whether living on earth or elsewhere, no one is given any information that is 100% certain. And perhaps this is meant so, as a part of the heavenly plan. And perhaps the game is to get as close to 100% certainty, as humanly possible, and then live our current lives based on the best possible understanding as our current wisdom allows us. But no matter how we view life here, surely there must be a reason for anyone of us being hereon earth, or better still, there must, of necessity, be a reason for just existing.

And this was the nature of my question for starting this thread. Because if we can better understand eternity, and the concept of no beginning and no ending, it would shed more light as to the purpose of reincarnation. But more still, as to just what are we to do with our life, or lives, if we have more than one. Because we either have a purpose, or everything is just random nonsense, as the skeptics declare. They say life happened by mere chance and not by planning by a universal mind. If the soul is immortal, then it has existed from always, and we cannot even begin to imagine just how "old" we all are if we can even make sense of the term, "old". And understanding this concept would make it clear that we are not to learn anything, as we already must know everything, based on having existed in eternity.

It makes more sense to look at the matter this way. Some wise person tells us that before reincarnating we all drink the waters of forgetfulness. Some of us who happen to drink a little less than the other souls, may be those that are able to recall parts of a previous Life. And apparently it is better that we do not remember, just like going to see a good movie that we really liked for the second or more times, as it is infinitely better to seem to have seen it as the first time. And this is how I was led to believe that we all must have lived every possible life possible already, and not only once, but an infinite number of times already. If we understand the concept of infinity, this is the only possible explanations, if eternity and infinity is a reality, and the soul is really immortal.

And as far as Atlantis and Plato, it would take too long for me to explain how things really stand, and it would involve some going off topic, and even violating a rule or two on this forum. But I can tell you that you have the wrong information. And further, I can tell you that what Plato gave us about Atlantis has much more to do about understanding existense, reincarnation, and that universal mind, or better known as the Father and Creator of the All. If you should ever be interested, and have the time, read 3 of Plato's dialogues; Republic, Timaeus, and Critias.

Would you belive me if I told you that the Atlantis tale was never completed on Purpose? And the purpose is that, in wanting to prove reincarnation, both Socrates and Plato embedded information in the dialogues, with the plan that at the right time in the future, one or the other, or both, hoping to reincarnate at the opportune time, would prove the immortality of the soul and also the existence of that universal mind; the absolute Good. When Atlantis is revealed beyond any shadow of doubt, then know that the time to reveal the universal mind is near-at-hand, or as we say in formal language, imminent!

I may not recall any specific previous lives, but my long and strenuous OBE told me that I have been this way before, and sure to be this way again, just one more time. I also got a glimpse at those eyes of the Beautiful, and my reflection in them.

 

[KenJ]

...my long and strenuous OBE told me that I have been this way before, and sure to be this way again...

Care to elaborate? I have read some interesting stories about OOB experiences although I do not recall having my own, although I probably do since I have always required an abnormally long sleep-period.

And the purpose is that, in wanting to prove reincarnation, both Socrates and Plato embedded information in the dialogues, with the plan that at the right time in the future, one or the other, or both, hoping to reincarnate at the opportune time, would prove the immortality of the soul and also the existence of that universal mind; the absolute Good.

Not to make light of your thoughts about those writings, but that makes it sound somewhat like the Da Vinci Code, is there a link to that line of thought? I always enjoyed the thinking involved with those dialogues but, like Edgar Cayce's pronouncements, laborious to read.

It does seem that we are given just enough clues to make the search interesting, but always keeping it out of reach, tantalizing and not quite rewarding. Although there are those that claim to have it all figured out and often look down on the rest of us as if we are a bunch of lab-rats.

 

[Native Son]

Care to elaborate? I have read some interesting stories about OOB experiences although I do not recall having my own, although I probably do since I have always required an abnormally long sleep-period.

It is very difficult for me elaborate my OBE, and it is totally unbelievable, even to myself, who actually experienced it. Believe me, I would if I could, and this is not just an excuse.


Not to make light of your thoughts about those writings, but that makes it sound somewhat like the Da Vinci Code, is there a link to that line of thought? I always enjoyed the thinking involved with those dialogues but, like Edgar Cayce's pronouncements, laborious to read.

Getting at the truth is always laborious, and not only, as it will kill some of those that persist about what is truth. You must sweat and suffer to gain it. Being spoon fed by others won't get us there.

And it's not anything like the fictitious Da Vinci Code. I'm contemplating writing a long essay on it, or a short book. But the task is still up in the air, as I have not resolved everything that needs to be pointed out and explained from all the dialogues, and not just the ones mentioning and dealing with Atlantis. Also making my task very difficult is that I'm not a writer, and apart of having experience in writing very brief technical reports for my job, I have not written anything else, and I'm also prone to grammatical errors, which need outside eyes to edit my writing.

It does seem that we are given just enough clues to make the search interesting, but always keeping it out of reach, tantalizing and not quite rewarding. Although there are those that claim to have it all figured out and often look down on the rest of us as if we are a bunch of lab-rats.

Here you are right on cue, as many of those who think they know more and better things than others, do happen to look down on us guinea pigs. But the truth is more like that only the Creator and universal mind is looking down on all of us. Am I an hypocrite in claiming that I know something exceptional, which no one else does? Perhaps, but only if I' m wrong. Time will tell, as they say.

 

[KenJ]

Am I an hypocrite in claiming that I know something exceptional, which no one else does? Perhaps, but only if I' m wrong.

I was not implying that you were one looking down at those of us that were still searching and scrambling about for rewards because you previously stated that you still had questions. As for what it is that you have that no one else has, I guess I missed that somehow.

 

[Native Son]

I was not implying that you were one looking down at those of us that were still searching and scrambling about for rewards because you previously stated that you still had questions. As for what it is that you have that no one else has, I guess I missed that somehow.

KenJ, I know that you were not implying that. However, in that passage you qouted me on, it's obvious that I am the one that was making the self assessment, since it's also obvious that I was making a claim which alludes to my having sole knowledge above all others. My intent was also to agree with your statement that there are some who claim to know above all others, and they become conceited by it, and then they remain locked in their own personally created dogma, refusing to be open-minded about any other proposed alternative which does not coincides with their own views. In other words, using an old simile, the earth remains flat and immovable to them, no matter how many logical arguments one offers for a spherical earth, and even seeing is not believing for them, as they always come up with an argument, no matter how illogical, to explain why it has to be flat, and which is usually based on their physical senses, and not on any intellectual basis.

Time will tell, as used by me, was alluding to truth in general. Because history has shown that when anyone ventures to make a bold statement and affirmation that the whole has it wrong, and if it turns out to also be a true one, it then takes some time before eventually just about everyone comes to accept the novel and unique idea as being, basically, a true one. And along these lines, I wonder how the world will change, if we ever get to the point where just about the whole world will accept the truth about reincarnation, and also that the universe, seen and unseen, was masterminded by a unique and sole being, whether this being is an old man with a beard, or without one. Surely this being must be old, at least as compared to any one of us souls, as logic mandates it, since this being is our Father and Creator, and must needs be in existence before anyone of us, for sure. And this old man must also be the absolute best, if there be such a thing as the best. And he also must be a good old man, because anything bad never lasts long. And since even the skeptics acknowledge the physical and visible universe to be everlasting in one way or another, then the old man, beard or no beard, must be also the absolute Good, would you not agree?

 

[Eowyn]

You are bringing up very interesting topics, Native Son, and I'm always one to exchange opinions with people in the same path, especially when they think by themselves as you clearly do. I will try to give you some of my insights.

Even though the process of reincarnation is fascinating in itself, I am of opinion that if we have more "eyewitness" accounts of the periods and place(s) of where the soul migrates to after leaving the body upon death, and where it dwells, either in the prospect of obtaining another physical body, or where it elects to remain for an unspecified interval, a more uniform and logical purpose for why there is reincarnation would enlighten the general public and make it more easily accepted that we do have a soul to begin with, and further, that it appears to be immortal besides.

Well, there are thousands of accounts already, just take a deep look at reincarnation literature, I don't know how familiar you are with it but I can point you to very interesting books. If we focus on the time between lives, I would recommend you Michael Newton, though there are people who are quick to dismiss his conclusions just because it's based on his regression work. I think you are aware of how people's prejudices can play against us, the seekers of knowledge, when these kind of people just turn their looks somewhere else because what they find doesn't fit in their own beliefs. I've sometimes been guilty of this myself, but I also like to break my own prison walls now and then and build new hypotheses with the things I learn on the way.

Reading Wambach's conclusions, I realized they are not too different from Newton's and other authors who have taken people to the time between lives. I think that at this point though, there is not much of an interest from the part of reincarnation researchers to build a theory (as scientific as possible) that includes everything we have learned in the past decades, in which phenomena like NDEs and OBEs must fit in as well... except me. But usually my opinions are not too well-considered in this forum, it seems.

To answer your questions:

Where does the spirit dwell upon death? I call it "spiritual realm", which is like saying nothing, I know. The way I see it, rather than a "place", it's a state of consciousness. Reality is made up of different layers, when we are incarnated we are living/focused on the physical part of reality, and that is possible because our atoms are somehow "condensed", they have a low frequency of vibration. But that's not our natural state. As soon as we die, we come back to our "original" state of vibration, which is not the same to everyone. That's why there are different "heavens" or different "hells", and it seems we tend to group with people (souls) who are on a similar state of vibration (what is often called in reincarnation literature "soul groups"). In that state we create everything that surrounds us, and we call it "reality", though in that state reality is not as dense as it's here.

I don't think reincarnation is something that is forced on us, but from people's accounts it seems it's highly recommended by higher souls. Why? What is the purpose of reicnarnation? As KenJ was saying, I don't think it's a matter of "learning lessons", but more a matter of experiencing physical life. You learn later, when you are disincarnated, and you discuss with all the people involved the kind of situation you had to live, how everyone reacted, and if there were possibly better choices. I see it as an experiment you do in Natural Sciences, when you set the initial conditions (you chose parents, place of birth, general environment), you reincarnarnate, and then you just try to live to see what comes out of it all.

Of course, we wouldn't do it if we already knew everything, I totally agree with your reasoning here, and that's another reason why I don't believe in simultaneous lives or anything like it. Obviously, I don't know the ultimate purpose, but I suspect many times we just reincarnate for the fun of it, because we just can't experiment anything physical in the spiritual realm. You may live it as you would do with virtual reality, but that's never going to be the same as reincarnating. I also think the matter of death is essential here. If you know death doesn't exist, where is the fun here? We wouldn't have fear of anything, we wouldn't have to make moral choices, and if you can't, you won't learn anything new. I also use the comparison of the theorical/practical side of a profession. You may have heard a lot about a certain disease in the theoretical classes, but you won't really know what that disease is like until you have lived with the patients, touch them, treat them, see them die... It's also about the emotions, I believe. I think only with a physical body you can have such strong emotions as we have here, and I think they're an essential part of the learning process.

Because the vast and overwhelming majority of people do not recall any previous lives, even those that believe in reincarnation, and it would seem that nature intended it to be this way.

That's one of the hardest questions in reincarnation, why we do/don't remember past lives. After reflecting for a few years on this, I've come to the conclusion that it's more natural than we think, only people don't pay enough attention. And besides, it's mainly a question of personal need, choice and possibly, preplanning. I don't think there is an answer to the question whether it's better or worse to remember past lives. But I'm sure that when someone remembers, it's always for the better. Remembering is not useful to prove reincarnation, is not useful to change people's religious beliefs, but I think it has happened since the beginning of time (Pythagoras was for example one who remembered past lives, but of course you won't see that written in his official biographies). But remembering is enormously useful for the person who experiences it. I've talked with lots of people who had NDE's (many of them didn't believe in reincarnation), and I think they didn't believe me when I said remembering past lives is as enlightening or even more than having a NDE. Losing the fear of death? Yes, when you've relived a dozen past deaths you quite lose your fear of death too. And you also understand the nonsense of so many religious notions some of these people still have after living their NDE's, when you've seen you've been a Christian, and a Muslim, and a witch... and the afterlife is always the same for everyone, even for criminals. But apart from that, it serves to understand yourself better than ever before, why you are like you are, and react like you do, and have some mental patterns that shouldn't be there in theory. Why can you live a dozen lives in a row without remembering, and then you have one when you do remember? I don't know, but I suspect sometimes we need some kind of a "break" (between quotations marks because the real break is death), to deal with unresolved emotions from those past lives. It's not to "learn" through karmic debts or anything in the style, as you do learn between lives like I said, it's to come to a closure with some of your past experiences, accept some past deaths, accept some sad events... and possibly because we need the emotional side of things to do it, and that's why we need to be in the physical.

And as far as time goes here, how long has eternity existed? Sorry for asking such an absurd question, but it is just as absurd to think that an immortal soul, which lives in the eternal realm, would, by now, need time to learn anything which it does not already know in eternity!

Well, I think you're realizing the spiritual realms is not "eternal" in the sense that it has no beginning and it has no end, or that being in an eternal realm means we are like omniscient gods. I believe souls are created, I believe we do have a beginning and possibly no end, but since the day we are born as souls we are in an "eternal" path of spiritual evolution, not in the sense of becoming "perfect" as many religions put it, but in the sense of "growing wiser". I don't think spirits know everything, I think we also learn things while we are disincarnated, and have a lot of things to discover, and we're still searching for God there. I don't think anyone meets God as soon as they die, even when people use to call "God" any bright light that welcomes them in the dying process.

 

[Eowyn]

For example, if I were to recall having been René Descartes in a previous Life, but was unable to remember much about that life, and in this life I were rather ignorant in mathematics, still, I should have the feeling of being a really great mathematician, having been Descartes once. This I can deduce from the current life by looking up Descartes. Of course having the privilege of having been a famous and historically known person in a past life has its advantages. But, nevertheless, reasoning on these terms, and if we can accept the very possibility of having lived many, many lives, although some may only recall one or two, or a few more, it's easy to realize that we have accumulated an infinite amount of knowledge, even though we may not recall it.

I don't think it would be that infinite. I think most of the knowledge we build in each of our lives is just rubbish we can discard as soon as we die, and anyway it's knowledge only applicable to the physical world. If we talk about "knowledge" of the spiritual realm, I think the spiritual realm is much wider and harder to grasp than our physical world, so I'm sure we'll need a large part of eternity to begin to "know" anything.

Therefore the question for all of us to ask is: why do we not recall previous lives, if the scope of reincarnation is to learn? And even for those that do recall a previous Life, why cannot they recall everything about It? I would like to see a soul claiming to be the reincarnation of Albert Einstein, and at the same time demonstrate all those unique qualities and full knowledge belonging to Einstein in this new reincarnation of his soul. Or better still, the reincarnation of Plato's soul, having the same talent and genius, but most of all, the knowledge of where and when was our dear Atlantis still under the sun.

I think we usually we don't recall past lives because we don't need to, and it's always better for the game to be ignorant of the illusion that death exists. And as to why we don't recall everything from a past life, two things: one, most of the things are not too memorable, and two, memory is not perfect. Another possibility is that our brain filters most of the information, I think we probably can recall everything when we are disincarnated, but while being here all that information would just "occupy" too much space in our hard drive, and most of it would be useless information. Why would I want a whole German dictionary from my German past life, if I'm not going to use this language this time? Also, we change interests from one life to the next. I may have known a lot about the mechanichs of helicopters because I worked as engineer for the U.S. Army in my most recent past life, but in this life I've preferred to study animal phisiology, so why would I want to recall how old helicopters worked in the 60s? Why would the reincarnation of Plato want to remember where Atlantis is located, if it's long since it went down the waters and no one cares much about it?

 

[Eowyn]

Care to elaborate? I have read some interesting stories about OOB experiences although I do not recall having my own, although I probably do since I have always required an abnormally long sleep-period.

I won't get tired to insist: everyone gets "out" of their bodies when they sleep, it's nothing to do with how many hours you sleep or how much rest you need. The trick is being conscious of it. And yes, believe it or not, everyone can be conscious with the approppriate training. For more info, look here (just in case you missed it): http://www.reincarnationforum.com/threads/astral-projection-the-basics.5179/

 

[Native Son]

@Eowyn,

I really appreciate all the time and the many words you have dedicated to my questions. And much of what you are stating can be considered plausible in our world of shadows, as Socrates would say through Plato'so writing. And as far as reading a bit of material such as you pointed out, the first book by Michael Newton, was one of the first past lives regression material that I ran across and read. And this was long before I had my first kind of OBE. Now, at that time I already had embraced reincarnation, thanks to Socrates/Plato. Reading Dr. Newton's patient cases just did not not move me to accept those accounts as factual. This was mainly because they did not make any sense to me logically, but also because of strong emotional feelings told me so. My first brief OBE confirmed my feelings. And I have had only two OBES, the first about two hours, and the other over 12 hours, as nearly as I was able to judge on my own, as the latter and longer one, time wise, was confirmed by those that witnessed it, as both were not during any sleeping state, but while fully awake. And perhaps I may be wrongly classifying them as obes, because when all is assessed by me, it may be closer to visions, rather than obes.

Regarding the loss of fear of dying by many of those that have recall to their past lives, or Because of having experienced episodes of NDE or OBE, it cannot be a complete loss, as far as I can judge from my own ordeals, and certainly this fear of death must surely become greater for those that did not experience a warm, peaceful, and loving state of being during their episodes, as some have reported much less blissful states, if not hellish at best. For these, looking forward to dying, if they believe what they experienced, must be terror in itself, and I perceive that they would want to stick around the physical plane as long as possible, as surely any suffering and terror here is nothing compared to the kind of suffering they themselves experienced on the other side, if we can also accept the negative reports as well as the positive ones from these "messengers" who have traveled to what most of the world accepts as the unknown. My own second episode was of such a horrific nature, and to which I dare not describe it, so as to wanting to recall it, as I'm strongly still trying to supress those visions, by keeping them deep within my memory bank. However, in general, the fear of death keeps us alive in this physical world, because man, also being rash as well as rational, would engage in many situations that are best left alone, otherwise the death rate would be at least ten times greater.

Now the following is clearly only an opinion, and also forms my overall belief in reincarnation. And again, stems from my conviction of true philosophy, Socrates' kind of philosophy. Which is that there is a universal law, and this law is absolute justice. A sort of justice that is uncorruptible and unavoidable, to which all of us are subject to. Let us call it just part of the game of life. And we know that any game that has no rewards and penalties is a no-fun game. And since I am also convinced 99.9999% that the soul is immortal, is able to withstand anything that the game of life can throw at it, even death, which is considered the ultimate evil that can befall the physical body. And since it is evident that this life is all about good and evil, or call it justice and injustice, and the physical man conducts himself justly or injustly, or any variation and degree within these two extremes, it is obvious that there will be consequences to these actions. The only problem is to have assurances as to what actions constitute justice or injustice in the absolute. And I believe that we all have a good idea as to what the absolute criterion is for determing and discerning what is tbe good and evil. We all have this written in our soul. And it will not be any criterion belonging to any one religion. The petty rules, traditions, and customs harbored by any religion are useless ornaments, or as I call them, silly garneshes, meant only for the eyes, and not related to the goodness of the meal being served on the plate by the chef. But as they say, the eye wants its part too!

Therefore, I believe that we all reap what we sow, as some have alluded on this forum, as we truly are the only ones responsible for our welfare through our own free will and actions. And based on this concept of free will, whether eastern religions, or western religions, and even the new age accounts of the afterlife and along the lines of what some call karma, we are subject to the game's rules and consequences for violating any of them. And here, Elowyn, I will cite a particular passage from the man you love, Plato, who is expressing Socrates' thoughts on this very point of the game of life played out in this physical world of shadows. Now keep in mind that I'm inferring ethics, those absolute and universal ethics that we all have written on our soul, in particular.

Yes, Simmias, replied Socrates, that is well said: and I may add that first principles,
even if they appear certain, should be carefully considered; and when they are
satisfactorily ascertained, then, witha sort of hesitating confidence in human reason,
you may, I think, follow the course of the argument; and if that be plain and clear, there will be
no need for any further enquiry. Very true. But then, O my friends, he said, if the soul
is really immortal, what care should be taken of her, not only in respect of the
portion of time which is called life, but of eternity! And the danger of neglecting
her from this point of view does indeed appear to be awful. If death had only
been the end of all, the wicked would have had a good bargain in dying, for
they would have been happily quit not only of their body, but of their own evil
together with their souls. But now, inasmuch as the soul is manifestly immortal,
there is no release or salvation from evil except the attainment of the highest
virtue and wisdom. For the soul when on her progress to the world below
takes nothing with her but nurture and education; and these are said greatly to
benefit or greatly to injure the departed, at the very beginning of his journey
thither. For after death, as they say, the genius of each individual, to whom
he belonged in life, leads him to a certain place in which the dead are gathered
together, whence after judgment has been given they pass into the world below,
following the guide, who is appointed to conduct them from this world to the
other: and when they have there received their due and remained their time,
another guide brings them back again after many revolutions of ages.

And as far as Atlantis, well that is entirely another matter with me. And understanding Socrates/Plato about the purpose of it, would be a matter of understanding existence and, as I had previously hinted, would be a case of proving reincarnation beyond a shadow of doubt, beyond our shadowy world of our soul's cage. But expounding on it, would require the discussion of religion, and it may be considered as a sort of preaching on my part, and therefore not allowed on this forum. By the way, are religious thoughts and subjects prohibited on your forum?