reincarnationcafe

Past lives are not "The Highlander".

... in which "there can be only one". Multiple people can and do claim to experience the same identity. The notion that selfhood is exclusively single and unitary is a Western one which is not shared by all people in the world -- or even the West, for that matter. When multiple versions of the same persona show up, they can either squabble over who has the right ticket, or perhaps compare notes, accept each other as possible counterparts and learn from their shared experiences. Identity itself is a fluid and contested notion, as the postmodernists would attest. If this is so even within a single lifetime, one would expect it to be no less so across lifetimes.

Sorry Joyful, I completely disagree with you on this point. While I can discuss and understand why some people believe in parallel lives, and when backed up with evidence, i can accept their points of view, abeit their differences from my own. However, since both myself and others on this forum do not fully subscribe to your concept of archytypical parallel lives as it has been expressed with so little evidence and backing by yourself, I must request that this not be included in the final product as it would be placed on a website to be considered any sort of primer on reincarnation. The above statements are decidedly unsupportive of the traditional linear or circular concept of time and the soul, and therefore to post it as a part of an 'official statement' would be a serious infringement on my beliefs. and most certainly does not work to reflect the views of myself and others on this forum.

Zetascair20086 wrote:I have an idea for a #13 for that list, while we're on the topic. If you were someone really famous your constantly reminded of your past life actions by everything from the history channel to cartoon show parodies of yourself. If someone uses your past personality to pitch some stupid product you have no say in the matter and can't sue anyone over it or receive royalties for use of your image. When you die you basically lose all rights to your image and identity and it's use. Or related to that if you see your things in a museum you really can't just take them. You know your things exist out there but you no longer own them.

Lol, aint that the truth.

I got two words for you... action figures.
But seriously, you do make a good point Zeta.

Wilhelm

From Joyful:

Past lives do not guarantee absolute agreement.

Agreed. Past lives don't suspend disbelief.

Past lives are not "The Highlander".

Okay, but to present such a statement to the public, not everyone's going to know what the movie's about, let alone that it is a movie. Plus, identity needs to have evidence that it is generally fluid and shared among a wide array of individuals. I've known a handful of people who believe such a concept. In my opinion, it may be possible, but if the majority of people aren't inherently experiencing identity fluidity then, using the law of parsimony, it isn't necessary to model the general human reincarnation experience. Such a concept, although hypothetically valid, might not fit a generic reincarnation list. Perhaps word it more generally?

That was a moment of constructive criticism, which is what I was looking for to help make my list better.

This section represents an explicitly anti-recombination viewpoint, which is not shared by everyone here, such as myself and Kris. I'd like to request that this not be included in any "official" statement on the website as it does not reflect the full range of alternative views.

This is not.

The passage I critiqued -- you asked people if they thought any of it was "horsepuckery", although I wouldn't employ that specific term -- sounded a lot to me like it was referring to my own theory of spiritual recombination, and was directed specifically against that viewpoint. Were you referring to something else?

Yes, I was referring to something else. I was referring to manipulative abusers I've come across and my friends have come across who use past lives to entice people into their egocentric fantasy worlds. In some cases, sexual relations.

This-

Past lives don't provide invitation into other people's past lives.

-has nothing to do with you. The reality that there are people who carouse the reincarnation community looking for prey is a heavy issue. The fact that you believed I was using that sentence to directly attack your recombinatory hypothesis simply astounds me. Or that you'd insinuate that I'd write an entire list reflecting years of soul-searching and hard life experience for the sole vindictive purpose of telling you off. That is inviting yourself into the very center of my psychic space. No.

The purpose of this forum for me is my personal construction. I have not seen any constructive reason to converse with you. Thank you for your time.

From Zeta:

That's why I intend to try and leave everything to my future self in my will . Hey it's worth a try!

Man, it'd be like Blackbeard remembering where he buried his lost treasure! I wish I buried some money for my future self if for no other reason than a personal bet.

I got two words for you... action figures.

I wish they would make an action figure of one of my past lives, that would be pretty cool. I could do voodoo on myself lol. As far as I know none of my dead selves were famous enough to be action figures, but a few got their faces on the money and that's not too shaby . On the old forum, I think it was Karen or Pheonix who posted it, but they had action figures of Shakespeare, Alexander, Himmler and I think a few others. The one I remember mainly was the Marie Antionette with the projectile head! Now that was pretty cool. Maybe Karen will repost that picture here if it fits.

I wish I buried some money for my future self if for no other reason than a personal bet.

I was actually intrigued by that idea because I was recently looking at old journals from around 10 years ago, shortly before I really started getting past life memories, and I speculated that perhaps in one of my previous lives I also liked to write and possibly left clues to myself to find buried things. Although the first part in retrospect I now realize to be true, I haven't uncovered anything as interesting as leaving myself secret messages or a treasure map. Oh well, maybe I'll try this life. The Dali Llama is able to arrange for his next incarnation in a similar manner, don't see why any of us couldn't do the same. I've seen in progressions of myself immediately after death guiding a pyschic to a message I left and saw myself born into the same family in a possible future life, so that definately ups the odds. In that regard I guess I can leave it all to myself! What, spiritual enlightenment doesn't imply totally abandoning all the material things we amass in a life does it? Just think of the interest on a bank account if your dead for a few decades!

Okay, but to present such a statement to the public, not everyone's going to know what the movie's about, let alone that it is a movie. Plus, identity needs to have evidence that it is generally fluid and shared among a wide array of individuals. I've known a handful of people who believe such a concept. In my opinion, it may be possible, but if the majority of people aren't inherently experiencing identity fluidity then, using the law of parsimony, it isn't necessary to model the general human reincarnation experience. Such a concept, although hypothetically valid, might not fit a generic reincarnation list. Perhaps word it more generally?

The statements I gave were intended as part of my personal list. As for "official" statements intended to represent this forum as a whole -- as I've said, I think that in the case of controversial issues, either both sides should be represented, or neither. I think probably the best course would be to say something like, "Some people believe in linearity and others in nonlinearity", and give brief examples of each.

Yes, I was referring to something else. I was referring to manipulative abusers I've come across and my friends have come across who use past lives to entice people into their egocentric fantasy worlds. In some cases, sexual relations.

Okay, I stand corrected.

Correct me if I'm wrong again, but it seems what you're talking about is people who wish to rekindle romantic or sexual relationships from assumed past lives. I can understand this being an issue -- newcomers to reincarnation study should be alert to the old "we're soulmates, we're meant for each other" line. I should note, however, that your original paragraph says nothing about sex or romance. The terminology about "psychic boundaries" is rather vague and abstract, and readers may not know what it means -- I was confused by it, anyway. I'd suggest making this more clear and concrete.

-has nothing to do with you. The reality that there are people who carouse the reincarnation community looking for prey is a heavy issue. The fact that you believed I was using that sentence to directly attack your recombinatory hypothesis simply astounds me. Or that you'd insinuate that I'd write an entire list reflecting years of soul-searching and hard life experience for the sole vindictive purpose of telling you off. That is inviting yourself into the very center of my psychic space. No.

My comments were only on that one paragraph, not the whole list. Once again, read the paragraph over. Abstractions like "boundary violations" and "psychic space" are easily subject to misinterpretation, especially by people who are not versed in that specific psychotherapeutic terminology. It might get the point across better to use a simple statement like: "People who are just horny sometimes like to imagine that someone else was their PL lover, but don't be fooled -- and if you feel such an infatuation, don't leap before looking."

Ill leave most of this to andy, but I would perhaps suggest that you read his replies a bit more carefully...

Yes, I was referring to something else. I was referring to manipulative abusers I've come across and my friends have come across who use past lives to entice people into their egocentric fantasy worlds. In some cases, sexual relations.

You said

Correct me if I'm wrong again, but it seems what you're talking about is people who wish to rekindle romantic or sexual relationships from assumed past lives. I can understand this being an issue -- newcomers to reincarnation study should be alert to the old "we're soulmates, we're meant for each other" line. I should note, however, that your original paragraph says nothing about sex or romance. The terminology about "psychic boundaries" is rather vague and abstract, and readers may not know what it means -- I was confused by it, anyway. I'd suggest making this more clear and concrete.

Note bolded part. There is a lot more preying in the reincarnation community (and others) than simply sexual. There are people out there who are either (1) so stuck in their own delusions that they want to suck everyone else in or (2) simply roaming the forums to mind F#$K anyone and everyone simply to be a troll or for their own amusement. I have seen this on a number of forums (Including reincarnation forums) and it is a dangerous pitfall indeed, especially for the newbie.

Andy- do you agree or did I miss the target on this one?

Wilhelm

Whatever Andy is talking about, I think it would help to give some concrete examples. What are "boundary violations", exactly? Trying to lure someone away from a relationship partner? Treating someone like you know them when they are still a total stranger? Attempting to hypnotize or regress someone under false pretenses? Telling someone you know what their past lives are, purely from your own feelings?

Flesh it out a bit, and it'll be more useful to people who have not yet heard of this stuff.

Wil said:

Andy- do you agree or did I miss the target on this one?

Pretty much it. Either the person has no clue that what they are doing is wrong, or they do but do it anyway. That's why I say that past lives don't suspend disbelief. It is vital to question anybody you find dubious. Even more so, yourself. It is necessary to keep a skeptical mind in order to avoid delusional absusers. How many of us feel guilted into buying a used car that we *KNOW* is crap but do it anyway because this sweet man in a horseshoe mustache is trying so hard to sell a car? Hopefully none of us! Yet, that's what too often happens in spiritual communities. We desire to keep an open mind, so open, in fact, that our brains can tend to fall out!

Simply being on a spiritual forum does not make a person spiritual or even good.

Joyful wrote:

The statements I gave were intended as part of my personal list.

Whatever Andy is talking about, I think it would help to give some concrete examples. What are "boundary violations", exactly? ....
Flesh it out a bit, and it'll be more useful to people who have not yet heard of this stuff.

Well, "Joyful Strife", boundary violations I didn't make up. They are as simple as trespass and assault. In order to understand them, you'd need to understand boundaries in the first place. Psychopaths, thieves, pathological liars, molesters, freeloaders, internet trolls, and others who have no concept of other people's boundaries I'm not interested in.

It's my personal list as well. It's not public property nor set by committee vote. I'm not obligated to change it because someone passing through in the cyber-world doesn't like it. If Sandra wishes to set it up publicly, she has my full permission.

What started as a community response has quickly degenerated into an argument for argument's sake. Becoming offended by misinterpreting a generic and rather benign statement as a personal slander is bizarre. While in the midst of your argument, you've provided no evidence, aside from dropping Kris's name, why I should change my list to accomodate your soul recombination hypothesis. Let alone why it should be put on a public list for people who barely believe in God in the first place!

We might as well say things like past lives are not chocolate chunk ice cream or past lives are not episodes of Family Guy or past lives don't make you win the Indy 500. They're clearly true. Unless you believe your a character from Family Guy, or incarnated as chocolate chunk ice cream, or that you're also an Indy 500 racer. It's possible that parallel lives exist, or that we can incarnate as inanimate objects, or that we can incarnate as cartoon characters. Without evidence, nobody's obligated to believe it. It's a faith belief. That's fine to have. However, none of those are going to get put onto my list because they lack evidence. Since reincarnation is so often subjective, majority experience counts as evidence in my book.

You claim adherence to the Left Hand Path. By your own law, you are not entitled to my tolerance. I provide it anyway because I don't adhere to the Left Hand Path.

This thread has served its purpose. I asked that it be locked and/or removed (whichever serves the purpose of the forum better) so I can keep this thread my own. Thanks, Karen! [/quote]

Hi Andy:

I don't really want to lock the thread as I see no threat to your work. It's your article. Its final form will be determined by you, and you alone. You may borrow anyone's ideas that are offered -- and you may completely ignore anyone's ideas that are offered, even if they are offered with pressure. You don't have to listen if you think they're full of bunk. You don't have to listen to anyone who says there's another side to the story if you think there isn't. It's not their article, it's YOURS. You have complete editorial control.

If there is someone you don't want to converse with, simply don't -- never respond to their posts. Just answer the one above, the one you would have answered if they hadn't posted. If you weren't going to answer that, don't post on the thread at all. People who find themselves completely isolated and ignored, especially those who live for attention, quickly go away.

Warmly,
Karen