What makes you feel someone's FPL is real?

[Petrichor]

I'm sorry for the length.

I know this discussion could turn heated, but my intention is not to start a debate of any sort. There are no right or wrong answers to this question. I'm simply interested in people's subjective perception. What is it that makes some cases feel more believable to you than others? Is it simply the amount of hard evidence or do other things factor into it?

This question was inspired by considering my own bias, and I'm sort of inviting other people to do the same if you'd like to.

Whenever I have met someone outside this forum, elsewhere online or irl, who had past life memories, it was always of a famous one. As has often been discussed on this forum, it's not believable that everyone had a famous past life, or that the famous one is the one everyone remembers. Especially since there are many people out there who claim the same FPL.

I realized that for me the simple fact that these people wanted to announce their famous past life to the world, made them seem not believable to me. And another thing that made me immediately disregard someone as a probable impostor was lack of depth. Not necessarily a lack of concrete hard memories, but a lack of depth.

None of the people I've run into have had irrefutable evidence, none of them have remembered something that wasn't in a history book, and confirmed it to be true. So, out of those people the ones who were humble and critical of themselves, and had insight into that past life, were more believable to me.

However, reflecting upon these things, I have realized that this is my personal bias. I'm a shy person, and I seek depth, but not everyone has insight into their emotions or mistakes in their current life, so why would they have insight into their past life? Also, some famous people were indeed famous at least partially because they yearned to be. Why couldn't they still yearn for it in this life?

This reflection got me thinking that sometimes, people also dismiss a FPL claim because it seems too convenient. Let's say someone claimed to be a famous musician, but that person also happened to have listened to said musician's work a lot since childhood because their parents were fans, and so that person had heard a lot about that musician's life before getting their memories. Then another person who claims to be the same musician, has remembered a lot of things before reading anything about them. Even so, the first one could still be the real one, and the other one could be a fan of theirs, from a past life. It has been pointed out in this forum a lot, I'm sure, but my point is that the real one might not even be the one that seems more believable, because when people start getting past life memories, they are most likely not trying to make a "case" of it that would seem believable to an outsider's eye.

My point with this is not to come to the simple conclusion that "only cold hard facts count" because yes, that is true, but the way we determine cold hard facts is not always good, and we might miss a lot of things because of our personal bias. And that's my point in a nutshell. I simply think it's good for anyone to be aware of their own bias, that we are critical of ourselves when we are faced with a FPL claim, and not only ciritcal of the person who claims it. I'm not accusing anyone of not doing this in forum, I simply thought maybe someone could gain something from my reflection.

It has been acknowledged that a lot of people with FPL memories are afraid to discuss them because of all this. Kind of like the MBTI theory were everyone wants to be an INFJ so the real INFJs leave INFJ spaces and start to think maybe they're not one. Weird comparison maybe, but I kind of really hate when this kind of thing happens. Because people go like "Oh another INFJ" and "Oh another famous person" in a really similar way and I wish people had more patience, even though it is hard to take everyone seriously.

I just wanted to:
1) Be critical of how I think.
2) Say to everyone with FPL memories out there that I'm on your side and you deserve to be taken seriously, and if your memories turn out to be of something else than you originally thought, that's FINE, and you shouldn't feel shame about it.

I'm not saying there aren't people who are in it just for attention, but for the sake of the ones who really have something to share, who are suffering because they can't do it, and from whom we could gain something, I just thought to write my thoughts out. Maybe if they felt like all the criticism wasn't always put upon just them, they'd feel more safe. I'm not saying this is how they feel, but it could be. Even if there ARE already a lot of people who do think critically of themselves, I just thought maybe if a lot of people wrote those thoughts out in the same thread, someone might gain confidence from it.

Sorry, this is getting convoluted. I really hope no one takes anything I said personally or as an accusation, because none of it was inspired by anyone on this forum.

Thank you if you read all of this!

-Petrichor

 

[SeekerOfKnowledge]

My usual attitude towards people with FPLs is "in dubio pro reo" as "famous" people reincarnate, too and someone WILL have been them. As for who is most "convncing", it's not just hard facts. Some things are hard to impossible to verify. Personally, I'd rather believe a Napoleon or Cleopatra who remembers details that aren't in the history books, too, but who knows who is the "real deal"?
It's also how a person comes across. More gut feeling here.

Totally possible that the "real" incarnation is none of the "claimants" but either doesn't talk or doesn't remember. Or isn't aware of their past ID or doesn't believe it and dimisses it immediately.

Interesting comparison with the INFJ. What I sometimes find hard to understand is why people would actually WANT to be an INFJ or have a FPL... just because it is "special" in a way? Wouldn't someone who has had such an experience and has reincarnated as someone not so famous understand that there is nothing special about it? Maybe this is my own bias here.

The only personal reason I see why I would WANT to have a FPL would be that in that case I would have already had this experience and won't have to go through it in a future life.

 

[Eva1942]

I’ll write a better, longer reply later, but for the FPL memories I have of being Queen Nefertiti, I have memories and know things about her that not even the most esteemed Egyptologist knows about.

Like for the fact that she never really agreed to her husband’s religion change and still worshipped the old religion as well as Atenism. That she raised her surviving daughters to have a dual religion knowledge and never once pushed Atenism onto her daughters. I even found validation for a memory I had where I told my surviving daughters that when we died, and they were Pharaoh and Queen, they were free to make their own decisions whether they continued the worship of Atenism, or to return to Thebes and continue worship of the ‘old religion’. I actually found out that my surviving daughters DID RETURN TO THEBES and lived in Malkata Palace (Amenhotep III/my first husband)’s Palace.

Why don’t I talk about my FPL’s? Because I don’t want attention. I don’t want to be treated any differently, and I have had my fair share of ‘boring’ lives too. I just consider them another life I have lived, and it doesn’t matter whether I lived a life of royalty or I lived a life as the average girl on the street, a life is a life and the lessons I learned have made me who I am today.

By the way, last time I did a personality test, my results were INFP-T.

Eva x

 

[Petrichor]

My usual attitude towards people with FPLs is "in dubio pro reo" as "famous" people reincarnate, too and someone WILL have been them. As for who is most "convncing", it's not just hard facts. Some things are hard to impossible to verify. Personally, I'd rather believe a Napoleon or Cleopatra who remembers details that aren't in the history books, too, but who knows who is the "real deal"?
It's also how a person comes across. More gut feeling here.

Totally possible that the "real" incarnation is none of the "claimants" but either doesn't talk or doesn't remember. Or isn't aware of their past ID or doesn't believe it and dimisses it immediately.

Interesting comparison with the INFJ. What I sometimes find hard to understand is why people would actually WANT to be an INFJ or have a FPL... just because it is "special" in a way? Wouldn't someone who has had such an experience and has reincarnated as someone not so famous understand that there is nothing special about it? Maybe this is my own bias here.

The only personal reason I see why I would WANT to have a FPL would be that in that case I would have already had this experience and won't have to go through it in a future life.

I probably thought of this INFJ drama because I'm an INFJ (which people will atutomatically question lol) and I too think it's silly to want to be one. I guess it is indeed the label people crave, being "special". It's the popular narrative that people want to be a part of, I suppose, which doesn't have much to do with real normal average persons who happen to be INFJ. But I think some people also just read the type description somewhere and relate to it, or they take a test that tells them they're INFJ and they believe it without any further research. And no, I'm not going to turn this into a talk about typology, I'm saying this because I think it's the same for some people who think they had a famous past life. They relate to a famous person strongly, so they think they must have been them, and don't really think about it through. Or they have a vague memory of some event and when they research it they identify with a historical figure mostly just because they are the only person who was there that the world paid any attention to so there isn't another clear figure to indentify with. Some people just don't really do their research, and it isn't really a call for attention but rather results from just being a little naive that leads them to believe certain things. I think it's understandable and innocent in nature, and I hope that when this happens, and those people find out that they weren't who they thought they were, it would be because other people helped them on the way to finding the truth themselves, not because other people were immediately throwing stones at that person.

I admit I'm also inclined to think a person who was famous would understand it's not necessarily a good or more meaningful experience than a more unkown life. But maybe that could also be why someone, in some cases, who was previously famous would want to be famous again. If they were naive enough to think being famous would be glorious, and then they became famous and it wasn't, but in the next life they still didn't stop believing that it could be. Maybe they became even more adamant to make a good famous life for themselves in the next life. People's motivations are so different and all FPLs are so different as well. I'm sure people's experiences of fame vary greatly, not only because there are different kinds of fame, but also because our individual dispositions vary so greatly.

 

[Petrichor]

I’ll write a better, longer reply later, but for the FPL memories I have of being Queen Nefertiti, I have memories and know things about her that not even the most esteemed Egyptologist knows about.

Like for the fact that she never really agreed to her husband’s religion change and still worshipped the old religion as well as Atenism. That she raised her surviving daughters to have a dual religion knowledge and never once pushed Atenism onto her daughters. I even found validation for a memory I had where I told my surviving daughters that when we died, and they were Pharaoh and Queen, they were free to make their own decisions whether they continued the worship of Atenism, or to return to Thebes and continue worship of the ‘old religion’. I actually found out that my surviving daughters DID RETURN TO THEBES and lived in Malkata Palace (Amenhotep III/my first husband)’s Palace.

Why don’t I talk about my FPL’s? Because I don’t want attention. I don’t want to be treated any differently, and I have had my fair share of ‘boring’ lives too. I just consider them another life I have lived, and it doesn’t matter whether I lived a life of royalty or I lived a life as the average girl on the street, a life is a life and the lessons I learned have made me who I am today.

By the way, last time I did a personality test, my results were INFP-T.

Eva x

I appreciate your perspective! Can I ask, does the way your own memories have come to you, influence the way you think about other people's FPL memories?

 

[Speedwell]

I did have to look up the abbreviations used here. I got FPL = famous past life. The other stuff, it kind of lost me, even after I'd looked up the abbreviations MBTI and INFJ, I was still not any clearer.

Other than the jargon, I thought the first post from Petrichor was thoughtful and balanced. Definitely some good sense there. Though in the end I tend towards a view that most of this stuff is meaningful on a personal level, demonstrating it to others is usually not the important part.

While I think it's important that reincarnation cases are studied scientifically in order to broaden acceptance in the academic and scientific fields of human beings not as mere machines made of chemicals, but having a real inner existence, deserving to be accepted as genuine and not just an illusion. Some scientists hold that consciousness itself doesn't exist, but is a mere illusion. And they say that with a straight face, while denying their own existence. Placed in that context, we, society as a whole, need all the counterbalancing evidence we can get, to bring some practical common-sense into the rarefied and bizarre world occupied by such academics.

In that context, the famous ones have a sort of mid-ground. On the one hand, it is often said rather glibly, and without much thought, that famous cases don't count, as the information is too readily come by in other ways. On the other hand, there may be quantities of documentation of minor, trivial details, which are simply not recorded and preserved in the case of ordinary past lives. Some of these obscure and trivial details would certainly not be well-known, not even to an obsessive fan or researcher. It can take the passage of time for hidden details to be brought into the light, for example locked away in some dusty archive which no-one has visited for a long time, or turning up during archaeological excavations and so on.

Personally though, I take the view that much of the evidence is not visible and cannot be demonstrated or shared with others. That is, the emotional feelings or inner state of mind. This is something which may constitute the most significant part of the evidence. And one is left with the difficulty of trying to match this hidden interior life, against a presumed or inferred inner life of the supposed past-life person.

In the latter case, though there is nothing to show, no hard evidence to produce and put on display, it may be that it does not match the usual expectations. Sometimes I read biographies of famous people, and each one gives a different version, a different interpretation of the inner self of that person. For example I've long been fascinated by Joan of Arc, and there are many accounts of her life. I came across one in recent years which, because of modern-day belief systems, was unable to give any real credence to the spiritual descriptions which Joan herself gave, but instead attempted to use modern psychological theories. It seemed to me that the author was simply incapable of putting him/herself into the time-period and thought-processes of the original era, and was instead re-imagining it viewed through 21st-century eyes. The result seemed to be lacking, it didn't really do justice to the nature or character of Joan.

I guess what I'm saying, is that we may not be in any position to assess the validity or otherwise of a presumed past life, since the inner world of the current person cannot be readily shared, and the inner world of the past-life may be unimaginable.

 

[Eva1942]

I appreciate your perspective! Can I ask, does the way your own memories have come to you, influence the way you think about other people's FPL memories?

I think that everyone is entitled to be believed about their own FPL’s, and the way people express them or ‘tell them’ influences me a lot on whether to believe them or not.

But what I do have a problem with is that people that FPL’s or Royalty, think they were easy lives. I’ve had at least three FPL’s that I am aware of and/or had memories for/to and they were by no means easy. I could go on and on, but I don’t want to send the thread off topic.

Eva x

 

[Jim78]

Even if a person has memories not in the history books how does that prove to others the reality of their claim? If its not recorded it can't be validated. At best it can be viewed as a logical extrapolation of behaviour and character that an outside observer ASSUMES to be possible. It can only be subjective interpretation.

There really is no way to prove to others one has an FPL. It simply comes down to others opinions. I have talked about things not recorded by history but I can't prove that to anyone. I simply know...

Also I don't know what INFJ means.

 

[Petrichor]

Sorry to everyone who isn't familiar with MBTI. It's not a very important part of my reflection.

 

[Eva1942]

Sorry to everyone who isn't familiar with MBTI. It's not a very important part of my reflection.

Actually I find the Myer-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) very interesting.

Eva x

For those who don’t know, here’s a video about the MBTI:

 

[Speedwell]

I tend to resist such classification systems. I might make an analogy with the Ptolemaic system of astronomy. It was a system which had its uses. But once one becomes familiar with such a way of thinking, it may become harder to conceive of other ways of viewing reality. I don't mean that as a perfect analogy, such things never are, sooner or later the comparison breaks down.

 

[Klaud]

If there's tangible evidence to their FPL claim, I'll believe it. If it's just something they feel, I'm a little skeptical. That's not to say I'm completely dismissive, just skeptical. Jim made an excellent point in saying that if it's not recorded, it isn't provable.

I've seen two different people on this forum claim with conviction to be Julius Caesar. Which one is credible?

Personally I do have an INFJ personality type and being special means nothing to me. I want to make the world better, even if I don't get acknowledged for it.

 

[Jim78]

Hi Klaud.

I know what you mean about multiple claimants and who to believe.

I myself know of many claimants to one of my lives and two claimants to another.

Personally I want to utterly destroy and humiliate them. When I read their 'memories' I get insulted because they subscribe such banal, mediocre thought processes to what my past selves were thinking and what was motivating them.

For me personally they come across as being jokes.

That's just my impulses though and considering I was a conqueror in both of those lives hardly surprising.

As for who to believe in multiple claimants I tend to believe the one who can stand their ground, point and laugh....at least when it comes to aggressive lives.

All the other claimants to my lives I've read have been shrinking violets, delusional, insecure cowards. That wouldn't be expected from those lives therefore they are mistaken IMO.

 

[Scavenger]

Sometimes I wonder where's the line where an unknown life becomes famous. What's the exact amount of information that makes a life famous? If having a wikipedia page and short appearances in books counts, then yes, my WWII life can be called famous. But I can walk around Budapest (where my PL self served for months and had visible impact on people's lives), ask people if they know this officer and I won't be able to find a single one (except for WWII geeks maybe). So was it a famous life or not? Good question. My luck is that even though there's enough data to read, they're mostly raw data with big gaps. And there's always space for personal memories to fill up those gaps and connect dots. But as Jim said, if something is not recorded, it isn't provable. I won't be able to use those scenes if I want to validate my life to somebody.

The time period can be problematic too. If an FPL is from the 20th century and you recalled a memory not present in the history books, you can still try to describe the place where the event happened and if you're enough lucky, photos or videos would prove you were right. But if I try to decsribe the look of - for example - a long disappeared monastery's library, I don't know where to start with validations, since the place is in ruins, there were no photos back then and chances are high that the room didn't appear on paintings either. Due to the lack of accurate data, lives in medieval/ancient/prehistoric times have more space for personal, unwritten memories and feelings, but on the other hand, it is what makes it harder to validate such a life. More like, harder to convince others.

When it comes to descriptions of a famous person from a certain era, it can be influenced by many circumstances. Medieval chroniclers, the people around the famous person, the historians of the 19th century and then a contemporary historian would describe the same person in several different ways. And there's a chance the famous person him/herself would laugh at those descriptions and say "You don't even know me!". However, contemporary historians try to use new methods to be less subjective and biased. But there will always be gaps that only the famous person and his/her reincarnation can fill up. There were several historical figures in my country who left behind tons of letters, but every single letter was about formal subjects and it's impossible to get the pesronality of that historical person. So there are endless data, but no "soul" in these researchable documents. But again, the unwritten memories would not convince strangers, but they would give the right emotional support and feedback to the researcher who had that exact FPL. And after all, it shouldn't be a competition for approvals by as many strangers as possible. It must be about the personal growth, but it's something we all know.

 

[Cat1965]

I adore Eva And i envy her super clear memories when i grapple with all the haze that surrounds my pl's. On another note I am sure there are many fake FPL claimers. Hell it is not easy to remember the past and I am sure some people just get confused. Some of my lives are clear and some are NOT. I was never famous although i think i may have been the child of someone famous more than once. Which of course is certainly possible. I firmly believe that some lives end too painfully for our souls to remember. And sure lots of people want to claim they are a fpl for who knows what reasons.
But than there are people like Eva who remembers thing so above and beyond. Eva did you use any particular regression techniques? i can't remember what i ate last week for dinner never mind the details from a life from ancient eqypt . It is rather funny that twice in my life older woman have come up to me telling me i was Egyptian royalty. Mind you i am blonde with blue eyes. I will never forget these strangers. The randomness of it all. I have no memories of being a queen like they said, But a daughter of one sure. However short that life was.
Guys i have attempted listening to self hypnosis youtube videos but i got nowhere. I think the key is zero interruptions which is impossible these days. Hopefully in 2021..lol

 

[Eva1942]

I adore Eva And i envy her super clear memories when i grapple with all the haze that surrounds my pl's.

Aww shucks... You have to got remember that I’ve been researching all my past lives for years. And my Ancient Egyptian lifetimes I do remember very little, it just seems like I’ve remembered a lot because I’ve pieced it all together over the years

But than there are people like Eva who remembers thing so above and beyond. Eva did you use any particular regression techniques?

..... It is rather funny that twice in my life older woman have come up to me telling me i was Egyptian royalty. Mind you i am blonde with blue eyes. I will never forget these strangers. The randomness of it all. I have no memories of being a queen like they said, But a daughter of one sure.

There was one I used, and it was very vague. All it literally told me was this: “get in a comfortable position. Tell your conscious mind you’re going to sleep. Then call on your Guides.” That was all it said.

It helps to have a good connection with your Guides and your chakras are healthy. Even I have periods where I don’t remember anything. I even had to ask what day it was yesterday! *facepalm* I’m not a vegan/vegetarian, I’m not a hippy, I’m just a girl who has a thin veil and connection with her Guides. Really, it all depends what you and Guides chose for you, and if you don’t remember any FPL’s then obviously the lessons learned in that lifetime have been taught and you don’t need ‘revision’.

Eva x

 

[Klaud]

I adore Eva And i envy her super clear memories when i grapple with all the haze that surrounds my pl's.

Honestly same. I wish I had that kind of clarity. Mine always come in bits and pieces that I have to string together, but Eva's seem pretty clear.

Most of my PL were like yours though. I haven't seen a single one that's even remotely well known. They've all been lost to time due to a lack of record keeping. My English one might be traceable through baptism records if I could ever get his name, but he certainly wasn't famous.

Self hypnosis doesn't work for me either. My body isn't having it lol. Meditating and thinking of historical places and times that interested me on a deep level was a lot more effective.

 

[Elle C.]

I rarely claim any of them, much less known people. On here is the first time I've mentioned most in one place, and I left one out because everyone knows her and there is someone famous for claiming to be her, and frankly, she is welcome to it. Usually if I do talk about them, I talk about being a seamstress in the 1700s. Total nobody. But I liked her, and it's more then I can say for some of them. And there are a couple I claim that were famous and have on here, but they both threw me for a loop...and not really in a good way. Mostly, I try to forget that they happened.

I do know a few people who claim to be who I remember being in a past life, and I go, Oh, cool. But like Jim I have issues with the fact that they are so opposite of the person in question it's often something that makes me want to stab them in the eye with a spork and scream at them there is no way they were so and so. It is also possible I was not that person, but a friend or a maid or someone who knew them.

In the end, I have a few that were well known (one for a video game and nothing to do with the person at all), and a whole lot that weren't. I don't really talk about them, and no one I know believe in past lives, so there is no reason in mentioning any of it, normal or not.

 

[Speedwell]

When it comes to descriptions of a famous person from a certain era, it can be influenced by many circumstances. Medieval chroniclers, the people around the famous person, the historians of the 19th century and then a contemporary historian would describe the same person in several different ways. And there's a chance the famous person him/herself would laugh at those descriptions and say "You don't even know me!". However, contemporary historians try to use new methods to be less subjective and biased. But there will always be gaps that only the famous person and his/her reincarnation can fill up.

I don't disagree, your ideas make a lot of sense.

Though there is some ambiguity in the term 'contemporary historian'. Is it referring to the time period of the original person, or our present-day time period?

What I've found is that descriptions of famous people tend to acquire a certain mythology, what we might say as describing the characteristics of a life 'in a nutshell', a brief, phrase or concept to characterise a person's life. I've found these mythologies change with time, but do not become any more objective. One bias is replaced with another different bias. There really isn't any definitive version, there are just shifting fashions.

One thing, unrelated to past lives or reincarnation, with regard to changing fashions, much present day broadcast media is encrusted with the attachments of present-day beliefs and popular ideas. That's all well and good, and entirely to be expected. However, what seems very shallow and naive to me is the assumption that 'this time we've got it right, all our predecessors were wrong'. Not realising that in say thirty or fifty years, present day ideals will be considered to be folly by our successors.

That comment seems like a side-track from this topic, but it is very relevant to past-life research, since views and ideas of historical figures are subject to present-day errors, every bit as problematic as errors of previous generations.

 

[Petrichor]

I don't disagree, your ideas make a lot of sense.

Though there is some ambiguity in the term 'contemporary historian'. Is it referring to the time period of the original person, or our present-day time period?

What I've found is that descriptions of famous people tend to acquire a certain mythology, what we might say as describing the characteristics of a life 'in a nutshell', a brief, phrase or concept to characterise a person's life. I've found these mythologies change with time, but do not become any more objective. One bias is replaced with another different bias. There really isn't any definitive version, there are just shifting fashions.

One thing, unrelated to past lives or reincarnation, with regard to changing fashions, much present day broadcast media is encrusted with the attachments of present-day beliefs and popular ideas. That's all well and good, and entirely to be expected. However, what seems very shallow and naive to me is the assumption that 'this time we've got it right, all our predecessors were wrong'. Not realising that in say thirty or fifty years, present day ideals will be considered to be folly by our successors.

That comment seems like a side-track from this topic, but it is very relevant to past-life research, since views and ideas of historical figures are subject to present-day errors, every bit as problematic as errors of previous generations.

You're so right. "Summaries" are simply never accurate. Heck, people can't sometimes even summarize a book in a meaningful way, much less a life, which I think tells something. (Maybe this comparison will be more intelligible for everyone than MBTI, ehee.) As an avid reader I can't help but notice that when people try to summarize books they often make it sound like an overly-simplified version of what that book is trying to say and sometimes their summary can even make it sound like the exact opposite of what that book's point was. And especially when the person doesn't like the book and tries to criticize it! This is true of something as "short" as a book, which is also accessible; it's there for anyone to read and people still misunderstand the author completely sometimes, even though they can read the author's exact words... If that's true of something as short and accessible as a book, I think one can imagine, just based on that, what kind of gross simplification and misinterpretation happens when people try to put a historical figure in a nutshell over a long period of time. Whether they worship that person or hate that person, or don't care about that person at all, the result will almost certainly be wildly inaccurate.

 

[Owl]

Let's start with MBTI and work the way up to the subject.

It has been acknowledged that a lot of people with FPL memories are afraid to discuss them because of all this. Kind of like the MBTI theory were everyone wants to be an INFJ so the real INFJs leave INFJ spaces and start to think maybe they're not one. Weird comparison maybe, but I kind of really hate when this kind of thing happens. Because people go like "Oh another INFJ" and "Oh another famous person" in a really similar way and I wish people had more patience, even though it is hard to take everyone seriously.

Do they? In my observation at least, people just want to know what they themselves are, usually this is based on stereotypes about the different personalities, whatever internet test, not enough study about the functions, very silly information about themselves, and unwillingness to put the time into determining what personality they resemble the most, relying on others to do the work for them. I haven't particularly encountered (or perhaps I just did not pay attention) many people claiming to be INFJs, while some of them who took the test and got the result may very well be, the test that you usually can take online is not accurate, frequently falling into misconceptions of extroverted/introverted and considering the letters instead of the functions. Every MBTI test I ever take gives me INTP as a result, it wasn't until I started reading about MBTI seriously, realizing what the different functions are about, roaming about the different subforums for different types (every personality has actually a different vibe, and while some people may be mistyped, you can still get a sense of what the personality is about by interacting with their users), and reflecting about the matter in general, that I realized I was probably mistyped. I' m an ENTP, not an INTP, and my Ne is more prevalent in my decision making and life in general than my Ti. Most MBTI tests make the mistake of considering introversion vs extroversion in relation to people, not in relation to the world, while originally that was the intention. For an introvert, excitement and motivation comes from their inner world, for an extrovert, comes from their outer world. Something involving the outer world does not necessarily mean a social activity. Having said that, do I get energized by hanging around with people? if the people are interesting and motivating YES, the thing is, most people are not, so when the cheap MBTI test asks me if I like parties or working in groups, of course my answer will be "no", classifying me as an introvert, which in the MBTI sense, I' m not.

Now let's extrapolate all this MBTI talk into FLPs. Where do most FPL claimants stand? In the same place where MBTI noobs do. They have very little information, they are jumping into conclusions based on stereotypes, and they are looking for reassurance from others. The person claiming to be Winston Churchill because they like bulldogs and brandy is the same person who claims to be an INTJ because they are "such a baddie". Clearly they have not payed enough attention to the issue, they are not serious enough. That is where 70% of cases stand.

On the other hand, you have those who are TOO serious. You encounter threads with paragraphs and paragraphs debating whether a fictional character is an ENFP or an ESFP. A... fictional... character. That would be comparable with those who defend their FPL claim with cape and sword, leaving no room for self doubt, and with the intent of convincing others more than performing a true self reflection and analysis. They are actually a bit laughable. You will never be 100% sure of any past life. You will also never be 100% sure of your MBTI. And you know what? it may not even matter.

What is the purpose of MBTI? fun, and to be able to understand how you operate, and perhaps how others operate (which is really weird, Ni and Fi still surprise me). What is the purpose of paying any sort of attention to past lives? fun, getting a high from metaphysics, and to perhaps understand where you are coming from and why you do things the way you do.

While there are many factors that come into play when believing someone's claim or not, perhaps their level of "maturity" regarding the subject is what I consider most relevant. Do they seem fanatically attached to their past life? What are they gaining from it? Do they question their memories? Do they question everything? What would happen if they are mistaken? Are they willing to consider the possibility they could be mistaken?

None of the people I've run into have had irrefutable evidence

We are talking about past lives, what is irrefutable evidence? There are just levels of credibility, which are also incredibly subjective. Back on MBTI, what is irrefutable evidence someone is an INFJ?

In the end, everyone believes or disbelieves others for their own reasons. Many times those reasons are just feelings. In these 14 years of online reincarnation wandering, I've had many people believing my story, only knowing a little part of it, just because of how I make them feel (these are people who may have known me in the past). Cold hard facts, while they could be provided, weren't even part of their decision making. Also, most of the times, people do not even read cold hard facts, they get bored.

 

[Petrichor]

Let's start with MBTI and work the way up to the subject.



Do they? In my observation at least, people just want to know what they themselves are, usually this is based on stereotypes about the different personalities, whatever internet test, not enough study about the functions, very silly information about themselves, and unwillingness to put the time into determining what personality they resemble the most, relying on others to do the work for them. I haven't particularly encountered (or perhaps I just did not pay attention) many people claiming to be INFJs...

Now let's extrapolate all this MBTI talk into FLPs. Where do most FPL claimants stand? In the same place where MBTI noobs do. They have very little information... ... That is where 70% of cases stand.

On the other hand, you have those who are TOO serious. You encounter threads with paragraphs and paragraphs debating whether a fictional character is an ENFP or an ESFP...

What is the purpose of MBTI? fun, and to be able to understand how you operate, and perhaps how others operate (which is really weird, Ni and Fi still surprise me). What is the purpose of paying any sort of attention to past lives? fun, getting a high from metaphysics, and to perhaps understand where you are coming from and why you do things the way you do.

While there are many factors that come into play when believing someone's claim or not, perhaps their level of "maturity" regarding the subject is what I consider most relevant. Do they seem fanatically attached to their past life? What are they gaining from it? Do they question their memories? Do they question everything? What would happen if they are mistaken? Are they willing to consider the possibility they could be mistaken?



We are talking about past lives, what is irrefutable evidence?... ...Back on MBTI, what is irrefutable evidence someone is an INFJ?

I didn't mean that literally everyone wants to be an INFJ, it was just a kinda stupid simplified rhetoric I used, that MBTI geeks tend to use, especially on YouTube, because there is indeed a trend. Most people think it's specifically INFPs who tend to identify as INFJs and INFJs start thinking they're INFPs instead because of that, but I have no proof of that and haven't actually gone too far speculating about that myself.

Pretty much everything else you say about MBTI is spot on, and kind of what I was trying to get at a tiny bit too in my later post, I just didn't want to get too specific... I seem to have been needlessly afraid of getting too off topic.

I laughed a little about your answer to what the purpose of MBTI is. (In all the good sense.) xD Because it's such an Ne+Ti answer! (As well as your answer about PLs). If I was asked that question, I'm sure my answer would be similar in essence, but I would probably choose different kind of words as my focus points, so since we're talking about MBTI it was just great that your answer happened to reflect your type so clearly. ^^

I can't help but mention now how much I love typing fictional characters! I don't want to get into debates about them, because I acknowledge that it's okay for people to interpret them in different ways and that fictional characters are not always so consistent that their type can be determined in a meaningful way, but when it comes to my own favourite characters I do get a little obsessive about typing them correctly, just for myself. It's because their thought processes are there out in the open, especially in books, and in that way it's sometimes a welcome change to typing other people because you can't read their minds. It's different, it's refreshing, and less intrusive in a way, so it gives me balance. But, I 100% agree that there are people who take typing fictional characters (or anyone) way too seriously. The first concern should be accurate understanding of cognitive functions and adamant convictions about characters because you "need" to have this character on "your side" don't leave any room for growth, but, I digress.

My guess is also that more FPL claimants would do it out of ignorance than out of a desperate cry to be special or famous. I'm interested if your 70% guess is based on your understanding of human nature/behaviour in general, or if you've also been faced with a lot of FPL claimants and if that's where it's coming from as well?

"Irrefutable" was a bad choice of a word from my part. I actually just meant how it seems to be the common idea on this forum that when someone has memories they've confirmed to be accurate their case seems believable and worth looking into (assuming the person is honest of course). I meant that none of the FPL claimants I've met, had that kind of "proof" for their memories or feelings. Irrefutable evidence indeed does not exist, so I meant something like "as irrefutable as one can usually expect in this context" which may not make a lot of sense, but you know, in this context I just meant that I hadn't heard anything from these people that most people who aim for intellectual honesty and scientific methods would take as evidence that would be hard to prove false. Sorry I didn't break it down.

As for "irrefutable evidence" for being an INFJ, the question seems purely philosophical to me. For me there's enough evidence that MBTI (not the popularized letter dichotomies version but cognitive functions) describes reality well. And if one has a correct understanding of the functions it's pretty easy to tell if one uses Introverted Intuition as their dominant function, so, for me personally I don't need "irrefutable" evidence, since such a thing doesn't exist in general and all science is based on just getting as close to it as possible.

"While there are many factors that come into play when believing someone's claim or not, perhaps their level of "maturity" regarding the subject is what I consider most relevant. Do they seem fanatically attached to their past life? What are they gaining from it? Do they question their memories? Do they question everything? What would happen if they are mistaken? Are they willing to consider the possibility they could be mistaken?"

I also always took being fanatic and not accepting the possiblity that your memories could also be incorrect as a sing that someone was not who they believed. This is definitely a part of what I always perceived as lack of depth, but maturity is definitely just as good a word for it. It's hard to believe that someone's reaction to themselves would be fanatisim. But now that I've been thinking about it, if their past life self was narcissistic enough, they might be narcissistic enough now to be their own "fan". But certainly in most cases there has been no reason to believe that the historical figure someone I met claimed to be, was like that.

I suppose the questions you're asking here would be the basic questions someone would ask to see if a person is mature about their beliefs in general. And for me a mature person claiming something would be by far more alluring to accept than an immature person claiming something. But in the end, just because you're mature about a belief doesn't mean it's true and being immature about a belief doesn't mean it isn't true. However, the mature person is more likely to discover if their belief is true or not, so I would still be more interested in talking about any belief, an FPL claim as well, if the person in question was mature, in the way your questions describe.

 

[Elle C.]

Well, on the MB scale I fall into ENTP. Nor do I want to be INFJ...rather dislike being an introvert at all. (And yes, this is random and not really much to do with much.)

I figure past lives are like the MB personalities: we all are all over the place...and are we. You can't grow without change.

 

[Owl]

Pretty much everything else you say about MBTI is spot on, and kind of what I was trying to get at a tiny bit too in my later post, I just didn't want to get too specific... I seem to have been needlessly afraid of getting too off topic.

I actually find a lot of parallels between the MBTI world and the reincarnation world, and it's not the first time that I compare them either, although perhaps not in this forum. As I was saying earlier, with both you learn aspects about yourself, both require introspection, although of a different kind, MBTI being more "cerebral" introspection. They are a never ending journey of self discovery. Both, for good or for bad, categorize people into groups, while it can be a little bit more blurry in the PL community, cliques certainly exist. Both require analysis, and there are chances that you could be mistaken in your evaluation. People seem to be as proud of their type as they are of their past, even if they lived through harsh circumstances, and not necessarily if they were famous, you can be proud of being an unknown Victorian the same way in this life you can be proud of being from X city, even if X city sucks in many aspects.

I laughed a little about your answer to what the purpose of MBTI is. (In all the good sense.) xD Because it's such an Ne+Ti answer! (As well as your answer about PLs). If I was asked that question, I'm sure my answer would be similar in essence, but I would probably choose different kind of words as my focus points, so since we're talking about MBTI it was just great that your answer happened to reflect your type so clearly. ^^

I think it's probably because I used the words "Fun", "debate", and I said one or two funny things. I think in general I write seriously but not overly seriously, and there is some sarcasm and some jokes here and there to lighten up the mood. I was told that initially it comes out as a shock in forums dealing with spirituality (different audience? FJ crowd?). This raises up an interesting point though, and perhaps a whole new topic of debate also dealing with FPL. Was I conscious that the use of the word "fun" would come out as very ENTP stereotypical? Yes. Was I lying when I used it? No. Could I have refrained myself from using it? Perhaps, if I wanted to give my speech a different tone, but why should I be stealthy?. The same dichotomy happens a lot of times with FPLs as well, sometimes you want to say something that you are aware that sounds very stereotypical, your options are two, either you say it nevertheless at the risk of sounding ridiculous or like a poser, or you play it stealthy and refrain from saying it. Ultimately what defines my action in this case ends up being the audience. Are you doing a disservice to yourself by refraining? Perhaps. I found this "quote" yesterday: "True happiness is when you become the person you were always meant to be, when you stop fighting and just accept it, when you throw off the illusions, the masks, and just be yourself".

I can't help but mention now how much I love typing fictional characters! I don't want to get into debates about them, because I acknowledge that it's okay for people to interpret them in different ways and that fictional characters are not always so consistent that their type can be determined in a meaningful way, but when it comes to my own favourite characters I do get a little obsessive about typing them correctly, just for myself.

I agree that it's easier to understand a type if you have a character reference, even more when you don't really know any person with that personality type. They could also serve as better mirrors than when typing for example historical people. However, as you say, characters are not really consistent.

My guess is also that more FPL claimants would do it out of ignorance than out of a desperate cry to be special or famous. I'm interested if your 70% guess is based on your understanding of human nature/behaviour in general, or if you've also been faced with a lot of FPL claimants and if that's where it's coming from as well?

I' ve been around the reincarnation world off an on for 14 years, while my 70% is just a non-scientific made up number, the number of Romanovs I've seen makes me think that the communists killed them at least 4 times in 5 different universes.

"Irrefutable" was a bad choice of a word from my part. I actually just meant how it seems to be the common idea on this forum that when someone has memories they've confirmed to be accurate their case seems believable and worth looking into (assuming the person is honest of course).

As for "irrefutable evidence" for being an INFJ, the question seems purely philosophical to me. For me there's enough evidence that MBTI (not the popularized letter dichotomies version but cognitive functions) describes reality well. And if one has a correct understanding of the functions it's pretty easy to tell if one uses Introverted Intuition as their dominant function, so, for me personally I don't need "irrefutable" evidence, since such a thing doesn't exist in general and all science is based on just getting as close to it as possible.

Someone honest validating an obscure memory tends to indicate the the person is "in the right path", but I think there should be something else, some sort of "unique spark", that gives away somebody. HOWEVER, I don't think that us commoners can identify that spark, that aura, if we didn't know them personally back then. Would I be able to identify in my future life the reincarnation of David Beckham? probably not. The public persona may not be the private one, and I don't think the masses possess enough information about a character to make an informed verdict.
In the case of MBTI, the whole system is made up anyway, so nobody really IS anything, we just sort of fit in boxes more or less.

I also always took being fanatic and not accepting the possibility that your memories could also be incorrect as a sing that someone was not who they believed. This is definitely a part of what I always perceived as lack of depth, but maturity is definitely just as good a word for it. It's hard to believe that someone's reaction to themselves would be fanatisim. But now that I've been thinking about it, if their past life self was narcissistic enough, they might be narcissistic enough now to be their own "fan". But certainly in most cases there has been no reason to believe that the historical figure someone I met claimed to be, was like that.

I see narcissism as nothing else but a social disguise for their own insecurities. Could they be carrying that into this life? Maybe. But if they are that thick that after reincarnating they want to keep hiding behind a mask I' m not gonna waste my time to consider their case.

I suppose the questions you're asking here would be the basic questions someone would ask to see if a person is mature about their beliefs in general. And for me a mature person claiming something would be by far more alluring to accept than an immature person claiming something. But in the end, just because you're mature about a belief doesn't mean it's true and being immature about a belief doesn't mean it isn't true. However, the mature person is more likely to discover if their belief is true or not, so I would still be more interested in talking about any belief, an FPL claim as well, if the person in question was mature, in the way your questions describe.

I don't intrinsically believe in an objective truth, to believe in that would mean to believe in an objective reality, a reality that nobody is ever going to be able to grasp in case it exists because we are all subjective. I play the game of life because I haven't figured out how to "exit the matrix", so I will still say "this is/this is not" (and I would also refer to time as linear, although I don't really think it is, but things get too complicated otherwise and everyone's brain hurt). Will be ever able to find with irrefutable evidence who we were? no. In the same way we cannot find irrefutable evidence that things and people actually exist and we are not simply making them up. We have "levels of reality", and things we are willing to incorporate in them or not depending on our own mental framework. Would I still question myself and others in matters of past lives even though nothing matters and nothing may even exist? Yes, I am playing the game of life after all, I better enjoy it. At heart I am nihilistic and solipsistic, which is very XNTP.

Coming down from the clouds into more practical territory, if someone wants me to believe their FPL it's actually pretty easy: No dogmas, be able to question yourself, be willing to look for validations, don't be overly weird (if you also see aliens in your yard, chances are I won't believe you were Queen Victoria). With that and one or two validated memories, I have no trouble believing that you were Edouard Monet. However, at the same time, I have zero personal investment in Monet. So Monet or Fred the Baker from Avignon, to me it's the same. If you wanna claim that we were buddies drinking Dunkelbier in 1938, I would probably ask myself in addition to feel something about you, which actually, most times I do.

 

[Elle C.]

I'm a Romanov claimant, but largely I generalize since it is easier then going through the details. Was I? Dunno. I know I have some very strange memories of Alexander Palace, Ipatiev House and some memories of ill children in a hospital (among others)...but I also concede that I could have been a servant, lesser nobility or any number of someones who was so enamored of the Romanov's in that life to the point I wanted to BE one and that crossed over into this memory of it.

That I died sometime in summer of the latter 19 teens from a painful attack and gunshot is not the question in my mind, I recall that moment of pain and fear clearly. Was it 1918? 1919? 1920? One date is true and one is not...it is entirely possible that I was a girl who treated the Romanov's as we do celebrities today and death was so common during Russia at that time as to be a question of validity. Houses of Special Purpose were not unheard of, the fate of the Romanov's was not entirely unique. My name was also not an uncommon one in Russia then or now, and the one I feel most drawn toward was known for being down to earth...a trait a commoner could well have emulated then successfully, or even someone so jaded that they wished they were like that. The possibility of it does not escape me.

I know SOMETHING happened to me and my memories of that time period. I also am well aware that the likelihood is not in my favor, and that type death is not uncommon during that time period. I also know PL memories are odd, and such whoever it was grasps onto the Romanov's very heavily may do so because Russia is home to her, someone they admired in life and the closest thing they can pull from this life to let me know I was a part of that timeline.

It is also a fairly new revelation (as in I knew I was Russian and died during WWI since I was a child and was captive with wooden fences) but nothing else until about 18 months ago when something hit me very hard about the Romanovs. The fact some of the memories cleared and then I felt settled and got the feeling of "no more to see here, move along" is also questionable in one way, and another more of a sign of I found my answer.

 

[Speedwell]

From my perspective, fame is a kind of random thing, it is sprinkled amongst the population at random. Sometimes a person acquires fame for spurious reasons, just being in the wrong place at the wrong time, getting caught in the glare of the spotlight of history or popular culture. I don't take it seriously, it isn't a defining characteristic, on the contrary, it may fall upon mundane and otherwise uninteresting people. There are those who are famous for nothing other than being famous.

When it comes to reincarnation, often memories resurface because of trauma or distress either during a life, or more especially during the process of death. This unresolved trauma can force its way to the surface, asking to be dealt with. Dealing with trauma does not necessarily involve delving into the details of a past life. On the other hand, it may involve bringing the pain to the surface, feeling and experiencing it. This is a practical process, but can be inexplicable unless the possibility of a past-life origin is allowed.

The overlap between random sprinklings of fame and unresolved trauma demanding to be recognised can result in (some) occurrences of so-called FPL. All of this is independent of the characteristics of either the present personality or of the supposed past-life.

As to the question posed in the title of the thread, how we feel about someone else's life, that's a whole other ball game. It isn't something I'm overly concerned about. I am concerned about the well-being of other people. Caring for others doesn't necessarily involve reaching any particular conclusion on their ideas.

 

[Jim78]

I'd like to know how one would define 'overly weird'. I've plenty of validated memories I dispassionately analysed yet have, in the past, had my entire claim dismissed simply because I said I had dealings with people of a comparable social status and sometimes the same souls as I have in my past lives.

To me thats idiotic. Why wouldn't a PL civil servant who dealt with the powerful have done comparable stuff in his current life?

PL memories themselves could be considered weird. To the best of my knowledge my past lives didn't experience such a paranormal occurrence, does the fact that I have PL memories currently invalidate my claim also?

Personally I believe that the only reason I experienced fame in my past lives was so that I could have the veil of perceived heroism torn down in my current life. For my money I don't believe fame is a random occurrence anymore than anything else is. Its simply a manifestation that puts souls in a certain position to learn much like everything else IMO.

 

[Petrichor]

As to the question posed in the title of the thread, how we feel about someone else's life, that's a whole other ball game. It isn't something I'm overly concerned about. I am concerned about the well-being of other people. Caring for others doesn't necessarily involve reaching any particular conclusion on their ideas.

That's definitely a healthy way of looking at it, and I agree!

My interest behind creating this thread is indeed not to determine who's right and whose ways are the best, but to simply understand different ways of thinking, how people have grown in their own thinking, and where they are coming from when certain things make them more skeptical than others. I love to read people's self-reflections, so more than anything I was interested in people's views on their own views rather the views themselves, if that makes sense. The reason the subject of the question was famous past lives is simply because I've come accross so many claimants in my resent research, and it seemed like a fruitful subject for this kind of conversation. I don't think I was wrong there, this has been very interesting so far!

 

[Scavenger]

Though there is some ambiguity in the term 'contemporary historian'. Is it referring to the time period of the original person, or our present-day time period?

What I've found is that descriptions of famous people tend to acquire a certain mythology, what we might say as describing the characteristics of a life 'in a nutshell', a brief, phrase or concept to characterise a person's life. I've found these mythologies change with time, but do not become any more objective. One bias is replaced with another different bias. There really isn't any definitive version, there are just shifting fashions.

Sorry, I'm a bit late with my reply but I feel the need to clarify myself. My English can be kitchen spoon-simple and I thought the term I used was clear, but I can see what was the problem.

I meant present-time historians. A close friend of mine is a historian and I often hear this and that from him. That a book he wrote 10-15 years ago is already outdated because some methods historians use have changed a lot. I don't know too much about how historians try to get "better", I don't know historians from a professional point of view. Even though my own great-grandfather was a graduated historian and he wrote some of the Hungarian history books for secondary schools during the 1930-40s. I read one of his early work from the 1900s and what I can say is that it was very, very racist. He presented the city where he grew up in an essay and it was so evident that he (more like, everybody from his generation and from his country) looked down on a certain nation and adored an other one (I don't want to name these nations, to avoid conflict. And I'm going slightly off-topic too ).

So historians do change, that's true. And they usually write under the influence of the moral norms of their own time period. It was "okay" to write racist essays 100 years ago but no historian would write down the same thoughts now. In fact, our time tends to be overly politically correct and sensitive, and it' s just yet another "filter" we need to deal with when we read about historical figures and time periods nowadays. For example, once I wanted to buy a book about the Gestapo activites in Hungary, but after I realized the writer was absolutely not objective and the text was full of "terrible Nazis" "heartless Gestapo acts" or "beast-like Germans", I put back the book. We all know the Nazis did terrible acts, but I prefer objectivity if the book is not based on personal memories of any kind (PL ones or old memories from the current life).

But I'm going off-topic again! So I close this post with a question: how do you people with FPLs feel about the autobiographies/private letters written by your own famous past selves? Do they help you recognize your own self in them? Do they help you with lots of validations?

 

[Eva1942]

Honestly same. I wish I had that kind of clarity. Mine always come in bits and pieces that I have to string together, but Eva's seem pretty clear.

Klaud, I have had my fair share of dead ends and rabbit holes. If I could show you the amount of paper I’ve printed out from websites and stuff about my WWII lifetime, you would be gobsmacked I haven’t needed ANY of it (excluding the copies of archive files from the Bundesarchiv) for over three years.

I’ve asked my guides to put books and information in my path that is relevant to me specifically, but that is because we made that way. That they would drop clues and I would have to work them out. I don’t know what arrangement you and your Guides made regarding the discovery of your own past lives, and I feel very strongly that we all have our different paths.

As for clarity, some of these memories, I’ve seen over and over. Every time I’ve picked up something different, and I’ve often said to my guides in frustration, “why are you showing me this again? I’ve seen it!” But there is always something importnant to note. If you see the same scene over and over, it obviously means your Guides want you to notice something else.

All the best!
Eva x