reincarnation question

[IowaGuy]

Hi IowaGuy,
　
reincarnation/rebirth makes absolute sense to me. I can find no flaw in the concept whatsoever. In addition, reincarnation/rebirth resolves inequities that I see in belief systems such as Christianity.......I have arrived at every part of my belief system via a logical route

Hi Nick, would you be willing to elaborate on how you arrived at your logical belief in reincarnation? I'm not trying to attack your viewpoint, I just have not been able to find the logic in rebirth as I was not born into the buddhist faith and therefore am looking at rebirth with a critical eye...

Also, what inequities in Christianity (which is where I originally came from) do you think rebirth resolves?

 

[IowaGuy]

Hi IowaGuy.....What is your definition of faith-based?

Belief that is not based on evidence.

 

[Nick the Pilot]

IG,
　
You asked,
　
"Who determined this and what evidence did they use?"
　
--> They present the child with a collection of toys and items that belonged to the previous Dalai Lama, along with items that did not belong to him. If he selects enough items that belonged to the previous Dalai Lama, it is considered ‘proof’ he is the returned Dalai Lama.
　
Now to reincarnation/rebirth. I am impressed that you are willing to take a look at a belief system that is so completely different than your own personal belief system. And you are willing to do it in an open-minded way. Most people would not be willing to do this, you are, and I commend you for taking this attitude towards reincarnation/rebirth.

Let’s begin with an example. True story. A friend of a friend’s six-year-old daughter died not too long ago. (You should have seen the funeral. There were over a thousand people.) So that’s it? The girl had one chance and it’s over? She’ll never have a chance to grow up, go to her senior prom, never experience her first kiss, never get married, and never have children? Never learn to receive injury but return kindness? Never have the joy of seeing her own grandchildren?
　
To me, this is very unfair. One thing about reincarnation/rebirth is that it is 100% fair.　

 

[earl]

Dr. Ian Stevenson was a well respected researcher into the possibilities of reincarnation and came up with some highly suggestive cases:
Scientific Proof of Reincarnation: Dr. Ian Stevenson earl

 

[IowaGuy]

To me, this is very unfair. One thing about reincarnation/rebirth is that it is 100% fair.　

Hi Nick, I agree your example is very unfair, it's one reason I don't believe in an omnipotent "God" that is pulling our puppet strings and it sounds like you don't either.

But as my 5-year-old reminded me the other day as she beat me to the last ear of sweet corn on the grill, "Daddy, life isn't fair."

Why do you think a belief system needs to be fair?

Here's an example from nature. It's mid-summer here in the northern hemisphere and most critters now have little ones they are taking care of. The wolf needs to feed its young, and the moose needs to feed its young. The wolf goes hunting for a moose; if the wolf kills a moose the wolf pups will survive but the moose calves will die. If the wolf doesn't kill a moose the wolf pups will starve but the moose calves live on. Which is more fair?

Back to your story. Assuming the girl was of a Christian family, my sister (Southern Baptist Christian) would argue that the little girl is now in heaven with all the other "believers" including some of her long-lost relatives. She would also argue that the little girl's Christian parents and loved ones will once again see her someday in heaven. This belief system might help to ease the suffering of those she left behind and could be viewed as fair since the girl's soul ends up in heaven whether she dies at 6 or 96.

You seem to insinuate that the little girl will instead experience rebirth.

To an independent observer, not born into either belief system, why should they believe in rebirth or heaven or neither?

If you believe in rebirth for humans, how about for other sentient beings such as the moose calves that starve when their mama is eaten by a wolf?

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste all,

the Buddhadharma does not teach reincarnation. this is a view which can be found in other Dharma traditions and some of the meleccha traditions as well.

the Buddha taught rebirth and whilst it may seem that the difference is simply semantic it actually is not.

reincarnation requires something to have been incarnated in the first place. the Buddhadharma flatly denies this happens and posits, in it's stead, the idea of rebirth.

one of the most frequently used analogies is that of a candle burning out and using the flame from the old candle to light the wick of a new candle. the actual chemical composition of the initial candle is present when the new wick bursts into flame however it is not the same as the new flame and, indeed, the chemical composition of the new flame is different than the old, yet, without the previous flame the new flame would not have arisen.

this analogy is useful but not exhaustive and may not actually resonate with beings that are not used to candles and all the rest of those ideas.

of course it makes it extraordinarily more helpful to understand how the idea of flame and, indeed, *anything* can arise within the Buddhist paradigm. essentially it's a matter of potential and this potential is diffused equally throughout the multiverse such that when the right causes and conditions prevail the potential manifests and when those causes and conditions change the potential does not manifest.

the Buddhist idea of rebirth is not focused on humans rather it is focused on sentient beings. all sentient beings are subject to karma and vipaka and their current arising and potentially next arising are conditioned by these factors as well. there are, naturally, key differences between the various Dharma ideas of karma and vipaka with the most obvious being that within the Buddhist context a being can alter and mitigate their vipaka through their practice.

even this teaching, as foundational as it is and as important as it is to understand for a Buddhist, is one which need not be adhered to if the being practicing the Buddhadharma cannot verify it for themselves. the Buddha makes quite plain that with practice a being will be able to verify it for themselves and, until such time, they can accept it provisionally or reject it out of hand.

i would say that, once again, this is a teaching which is very important for a great many beings in their practice yet, for others, it has no significance at all and both, either, none or more than these, are all acceptable within the Buddhadharma as i would venture to say that most modern beings are similar to the Kalaamas in this respect.

metta,

~v

 

[Nick the Pilot]

IG,

You asked,

"Why do you think a belief system needs to be fair?"

--> I cannot imagine having a belief system which is unfair. But my belief system is 100% fair, so I do not have to grapple with such a dilemma.

"If the wolf doesn't kill a moose the wolf pups will starve but the moose calves live on. Which is more fair?"

--> I have to give a similar example from the 70’s TV show Kung-Fu. Master asks, "Where is evil? Is in the rat who steals food, or in the cat which kills the rat? The rat does not steal, the cat does not kill."

But to answer your question, the question of fairness does not apply here, because all inequities are eventually made up for. But let me answer another question of yours first, then I’ll return to your example.

You asked,

"If you believe in rebirth for humans, how about for other sentient beings such as the moose calves that starve when their mama is eaten by a wolf?"

--> I definitely believe in reincarnation for animals, but the mechanism of reincarnation for animals is quite different than the mechanism for reincarnation for humans. (By the way, I believe in reincarnation, not rebirth.) This difference between the mechanisms is why I believe humans cannot reincarnate as animals. (Which is why I disagree with the Dalai Lama — he says humans can be reborn as animals and I say they cannot.)

Now back to your question. Both animals are trying to spend as much time ‘reincarnating’ on the earth as possible. But there will be an unequal amount of time that the moose and the wolf spend on earth. But this is a process that goes on for billions of years, and I think that, if in your example, the wolf lives and the moose dies, the moose’s ‘soul’ will be given plenty of time in later ‘reincarnations’ to ‘make up for lost time.’ The unfairness of reincarnating, whether humans or animals, is always made up. There is no inequality in my belief system at all.

"Assuming the girl was of a Christian family, my sister (Southern Baptist Christian) would argue that the little girl is now in heaven with all the other "believers" including some of her long-lost relatives."

--> In my belief system, now that is unfair. It doesn’t make any sense to me that one person can die and go heaven as a child or baby after practically no effort, while other people must suffer for decades into old age, and still take a chance to commit a ‘sin’ at age 65 and go to hell. What could possibly be more unfair than this?

"You seem to insinuate that the little girl will instead experience rebirth."

--> I don’t insinuate it, I say that, according to my belief system, that is exactly what will happen. (But if you are saying I am doing such insinuating in an offending way, I apologize. Is that what you are saying?)

"To an independent observer, not born into either belief system, why should they believe in rebirth or heaven or neither?"

--> Why do you say rebirth OR heaven? In my belief system, both happen, and I see no conflict between the two ideas at all.

 

[IowaGuy]

I cannot imagine having a belief system which is unfair.

Do you think the truth is always fair? I strive to find truth with my belief system, whether it is fair or not. Personally I'm not so concerned with fairness, I don't think it justifies a belief system. Nature isn't fair as we both agree.

Both animals are trying to spend as much time ‘reincarnating’ on the earth as possible.....But this is a process that goes on for billions of years.

Do you agree that the sun will engulf the earth in a few billion years? What happens then to the reincarnation/rebirth cycle?

It doesn’t make any sense to me that one person can die and go heaven as a child or baby after practically no effort, while other people must suffer for decades into old age, and still take a chance to commit a ‘sin’ at age 65 and go to hell. What could possibly be more unfair than this?

OK, I agree with you on this point but I know many people who believe in heaven that don't agree with us.

I don’t insinuate it, I say that, according to my belief system, that is exactly what will happen. (But if you are saying I am doing such insinuating in an offending way, I apologize. Is that what you are saying?)

No offense, I just didn't want to put words into your mouth.

Why do you say rebirth OR heaven? In my belief system, both happen, and I see no conflict between the two ideas at all.

Most people I know that believe in heaven don't believe in rebirth as their "soul" is in heaven when they die, not in another human body somewhere. Is your concept of heaven different than the traditional Christian version?

 

[IowaGuy]

the Buddhist idea of rebirth is not focused on humans rather it is focused on sentient beings. all sentient beings are subject to karma and vipaka and their current arising and potentially next arising are conditioned by these factors as well. there are, naturally, key differences between the various Dharma ideas of karma and vipaka with the most obvious being that within the Buddhist context a being can alter and mitigate their vipaka through their practice.

Thanks V for your post, this is very interesting.

If all sentient beings have rebirth and beings can alter their future rebirths through their present life how does this work for moose and wolves?

One part of Christianity that always left me empty was the separation between humans and other sentient beings. Humans were viewed as bound for heaven, I never heard a good explanation of what happens to sentient animals with regard to heaven/hell.

I really dig buddhism's respect for all sentient beings, but don't understand how karma applies to a wolf or moose.

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste iowaguy,

thank you for the post.

Thanks V for your post, this is very interesting.

If all sentient beings have rebirth and beings can alter their future rebirths through their present life how does this work for moose and wolves?

the same as it does for hawks and mice

i'll give you the most oft quoted bit about Karma and then proceed to be heretical

the Buddha claims that the "full workings of karma" cannot be fathomed until we attain a certain stage in the process of becoming Awake so please do not think my thoughts are anything other than representative of my understanding of this subject.

karma is one of the most misunderstood concepts in the Buddhadharma, imo, especially amongst Western hemisphere beings that have been exposed to various, non-Buddhist, ideas of it. why this is so is still somewhat of a mystery to me as the Buddha makes it quite clear what karma is and it is, in fact, very simple.

intentional actions, thoughts and words = karma.
the consequence or fruit of intentional actions, thoughts and words (karma) is called vipaka. many people, Buddhists included, conflate these ideas into something which isn't.

so...the question becomes, in this light, do non-human sentient beings have intentional thoughts, actions or words?

i would submit that, with a rare few exceptions, they do not and thus most sentient animals do not generate karma of any sort. for those that do, the same basic criterion would apply, in my estimation.

that said, being reborn as an animal is considered to be a negative rebirth since most animals are not capable of generating karma they cannot deliberately effect their vipaka.

I really dig buddhism's respect for all sentient beings, but don't understand how karma applies to a wolf or moose.

one of the least known aspects of the Buddhas teaching on karma is the fact that a being can experience vipaka from up to seven previous arisings which explains why newly arisen beings may experience positive or negative aspects of vipaka when, clearly, they have not had a chance to generate any karma or vipaka in their current arising.

with the case of non-human animals, then, they are experiencing the vipaka of one of their previous arisings. when the karmic energy which gave rise to the current being has been expended, the being will cease to arise and be reborn based on 6+1 (most recent) arisings.

all of that said it is imperative to recall that *all* of the Buddha's teachings are provisional, to be set aside and put down when they are no longer needed. the Buddha specifically likens them to a raft used to cross a river to reach the Other Shore. once there, we no longer have any need of the raft.

there are, of course, some beings that purport to do away with any teachings which they disagree with or have transcended and encourage others to do the same...and whilst it may be the case that one being has no further need of, say, Buddhist ethical considerations it is inappropriate to suggest that others should follow suit.

metta,

~v

 

[Nick the Pilot]

IG,
　
You asked,
　
"Do you think the truth is always fair?"
　
--> Yes.
　
"Personally I'm not so concerned with fairness, I don't think it justifies a belief system."
　
--> I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this one
　
"Do you agree that the sun will engulf the earth in a few billion years?"
　
--> Yes.
　
"What happens then to the reincarnation/rebirth cycle?"
　
--> We are allotted only a certain amount of time in this cycle on this earth to achieve enlightenment. At the end of this allotted time, those of us who have achieved enlightenment will move onto nirvana. Those who have not (the ‘laggards’) will be held back until the next reincarnation cycle begins on another planet. At that time, the animals on present-day earth will be ‘promoted’ to humans, and the laggards will join that new crop of humans, to finally finish their quest for enlightenment and nirvana. (By the way, this also explains how the mistaken idea of an eternal hell got into the Bible, but this is a whole different topic.)
　
"…I agree with you on this point but I know many people who believe in heaven that don't agree with us."
　
--> Hopefully, they will take another look at their belief systems. This is the value of Internet forums such as this one.
　
"Is your concept of heaven different than the traditional Christian version?"
　
--> It is very similar. Heaven is a wonderful illusion that we construct for ourselves between incarnations. We need a time of rest and healing between very painful incarnations, and heaven gives us these things.
　
"I never heard a good explanation of what happens to sentient animals with regard to heaven/hell."

--> Animals belong to a group soul, so their heaven is quite different. When an animal dies, its ‘soul’ is blended back into its group soul. When a new animal is subsequently born, a new portion of ‘soul’ is ‘scooped’ out of the group soul and a new ‘soul’ is fashioned for the new animal. But it is not the exact same amount of ‘soul’ that the previous animal had. Think of the group soul as a bucket of ‘soul’ material. When the animal dies, its ‘soul’ essence is poured back into the bucket, stirred, and then a ‘scoop’ of ‘soul’ material is then ladled out for the next animal’s birth. But the new portion is not the exact same portion of ‘soul’ material as it is for humans. This also explains how animal instinct work. They all share the same experiences and knowledge via the stirring and sharing of ‘soul’ material 'inside the bucket' between incarnations.

This 'bucket of soul' idea also explains how animals do not need a time of rest and healing between incarnations. Animals are also not capable of the high level of thinking that would be required to reap the full benefits of time in a heaven. Once their 'soul' essence is 'poured back into the bucket and restirred,' they are ready for their next reincarnation.

"I really dig buddhism's respect for all sentient beings, but don't understand how karma applies to a wolf or moose."　

--> Karma does not apply to animals. A ‘bad’ dog or cat will not ‘suffer bad karma’ in its next birth. Karma only applies to humans, and does not apply to beings below the human level (animals) or beings above the human level. (Humans in nirvana cannot and do not build good and bad karma, as humans on earth do. There is no need to keep track of karma in nirvana.)
　
~~~

It is time for a new question about reincarnation. Some people say they can remember things, and bring talents and abilities with them from previous reincarnations. What do you think of this?

 

[IowaGuy]

"Do you think the truth is always fair?"
--> Yes.

Why do you think the truth is always fair when you agree that nature isn't always fair? Do you think there is no truth in nature?

"I never heard a good explanation of what happens to sentient animals with regard to heaven/hell."

--> Animals belong to a group soul, so their heaven is quite different. When an animal dies, its ‘soul’ is blended back into its group soul. When a new animal is subsequently born, a new portion of ‘soul’ is ‘scooped’ out of the group soul and a new ‘soul’ is fashioned for the new animal. But it is not the exact same amount of ‘soul’ that the previous animal had. Think of the group soul as a bucket of ‘soul’ material. When the animal dies, its ‘soul’ essence is poured back into the bucket, stirred, and then a ‘scoop’ of ‘soul’ material is then ladled out for the next animal’s birth. But the new portion is not the exact same portion of ‘soul’ material as it is for humans. This also explains how animal instinct work. They all share the same experiences and knowledge via the stirring and sharing of ‘soul’ material 'inside the bucket' between incarnations.

This 'bucket of soul' idea also explains how animals do not need a time of rest and healing between incarnations. Animals are also not capable of the high level of thinking that would be required to reap the full benefits of time in a heaven. Once their 'soul' essence is 'poured back into the bucket and restirred,' they are ready for their next reincarnation.

I tend to side with Occam's Razor that the simplest answer is most often correct, or Einstein's "make everything as simple as possible but not simpler." No offense, but your theory on animal souls and rebirth seems overly complex to me.

Regarding animal instincts, I believe animal instincts are a result of millions of years of evolution and natural selection, not result of a group soul.

IG, It is time for a new question about reincarnation. Some people say they can remember things, and bring talents and abilities with them from previous reincarnations. What do you think of this?

I like your new question. How do you propose that we could test for this in a scientific manner?

 

[Nick the Pilot]

IG,

Nature is always fair, but we are not always able to observe it from this physical world. When a bad accident happens to someone, if it was truly an accident, that person's bad karma is automatically adjusted, so the 'fairness' is maintained. (We just can't see it from down here.)

Regarding the scientific testing of past-life memories, that has already been done many, many times. Here is one site you may find interesting.

Carol Bowman - Past Life Center

This site includes a past-life forum.

http://www.childpastlives.org/vBulletin/index.php?

This forum focuses on documenting past-life memories of young children. (But many adults also share memories of previous deaths and previous lifetimes.) If you need a link to a particularly compelling story, feel free to ask.

 

[Nick the Pilot]

Here is one of my favorite reincarnation stories. According to the story, a fighter pilot was shot down during WWII, he was reborn, and is now a little boy growing up. Take a look at the web page for photos of both the fighter pilot and the present-day little boy. (I particularly like the part where the little boy says, "I knew you would be a good daddy, that's why I picked you.")

~~~

Reincarnated! Our son is a World War II pilot come back to life | Mail Online

It sounds totally beyond belief. But read the tantalising evidence from this boy's family and you may start to wonder...The agonised screams pierced the air. 'Plane on fire! Airplane crash.' In the dark, a two-year-old boy was just visible, writhing on his bed in the grip of horror. 'He was lying there on his back, kicking and clawing at the covers like he was trying to kick his way out of a coffin,' remembers the boy's father.


'I thought, this looks like The Exorcist. I half expected his head to spin around like that little girl in the movie. But then I heard what James was saying.'


Over and over again, the tiny child screamed: 'Plane on fire! Little man can't get out.'


Vivid recollections: James Leininger, pictured aged four had nightmares about being a WWII pilot who died after his plane crashed into the ocean


For his shocked parents, these nightly scenes were traumatic.


For experts, they were baffling.


As the nightmares became more terrifying, the child started screaming the name of the 'little man' who couldn't get out of the plane. It was James - like his own name. He also talked in his dreams of 'Jack Larsen', 'Natoma' and 'Corsair'.


James Leininger's father, Bruce, was flummoxed. In a desperate attempt to find an answer to his son's troubled nights, he embarked on an obsessive three-year research project, armed only with the outbursts and names his son had been shouting in his disturbed sleep.


What he discovered astonished and perplexed him, and drove him to an extraordinary conclusion.


A lifelong Christian, it was not the answer he had sought for his son's behaviour. But he came to believe James was the reincarnation of a World War II fighter pilot; a man who had been shot down in his plane and struggled to escape as it caught fire; a hero.


The idea seems so preposterous as to be unbelievable. Yet in their new book, Soul Survivor: The Reincarnation Of A World War II Fighter Pilot, Bruce and his wife, Andrea, lay out some compelling evidence.


It all began on May 1, 2000. James, just three weeks past his second birthday, was a happy, playful toddler living in an idyllic home in southern Louisiana. That night, his mother was woken by his screams. She held him in her arms as he thrashed around.


Soon, however, James was having five nightmares a week. Andrea was worried. Her little boy began to talk during his bad dreams, screaming about an airplane crash and writhing as if he were trapped in a burning aircraft.


At a toy shop, they admired some model planes. 'Look,' said Andrea. 'There's a bomb on the bottom.'


'That's not a bomb, Mummy,' he replied. 'That's a drop tank.' Just a toddler, he was talking like a military historian. How had he known about the gas tank used by aircraft to extend their range?


As the nightmares continued, she asked him: 'Who is the little man?'


'Me,' he answered. His father asked: 'What happened to your plane?'


James replied: 'It crashed on fire.'


'Why did your plane crash?'


'It got shot,' he said.


'Who shot your plane?'


James made a disgusted face. 'The Japanese!' he said, with indignation. He said he knew it was the Japanese, because of 'the big red sun'. Was he describing the Japanese symbol of the rising sun, painted on their warplanes, called 'meatballs' by American pilots?


Tentatively, Andrea began to suggest reincarnation; perhaps James had lived a past life? Bruce reacted angrily. There must be a rational explanation for all this.


He questioned his son further. 'Do you remember what kind of plane the little man flew?'

'A Corsair,' replied the two-year-old without hesitation - repeating the word he shouted in his dreams.


Bruce knew this was a World War II fighter plane.


'Do you remember where your airplane took off from?' he asked.


'A boat,' said James. How did he know that these planes were launched from aircraft carriers? He asked the name of the boat.


His son replied with certainty: 'The Natoma.'


After James was in bed, Bruce researched what he had heard. A naturally sceptical man, he was amazed to find the Natoma Bay was a World War II aircraft carrier.


James even began to don an imaginary pilot's headset when his mother strapped him into his car seat. And when Bruce ordered a book for his father's Christmas present - The Battle Of Iwo Jima - James pointed to the picture and said: 'Daddy, that's when my plane was shot down.'


Bruce, who works in the oil industry, rushed into his office, where he had a dictionary of American naval fighting ships. Natoma Bay had supported the U.S. Marines' invasion of Iwo Jima in 1945.


Bruce was mystified - what was coming out of the mouth of his two-year- old? Next, the little boy named his nightmare alter-ego's best friend. He was Jack Larsen.


'He was a pilot, too,' he said. Bruce decided that he had to find Jack Larsen to prove his point to his wife - Larsen would tell him that James had invented the whole thing, and there was no such thing as reincarnation.


He decided to go to a reunion of veterans of Natoma Bay, pretending he was writing a book.


Andrea, meanwhile, was convinced James had been reincarnated. She contacted Carol Bowman, the author of a book on reincarnation called Children's Past Lives. Bowman confirmed Andrea's views.


'The common threads were there with James,' she said. 'The age the nightmares began, the remembered death. These are all consistent with children experiencing past lives.'


She advised Andrea to tell James that he was safe, and that his bad experiences were over now. Apart from his night terrors, he was an ordinary child living an ordinary life, turning three in April 2001.


He liked to play war games with his GI Joe action figures, Billy, Walter and Leon. He also liked to draw - battle scenes, with bullets, bombs and planes. He drew Wildcats and Corsairs, and named the Japanese planes Zekes or Bettys.

Pointing to one plane, he said: 'That's a Corsair. They used to get flat tyres all the time. And they always wanted to turn left when they took off.'


He would play a game of pilots, constructing a make-shift cockpit out of a toy phone and old car seat. He would call: 'Roger. Zero at six o'clock. Hit him!', then throw himself on the floor, saying: 'My plane was hit, I'm parachuting.' At an airshow, he told everyone: 'I want to be an F18 Super Hornet pilot.'


James's nightmares continued until he was eight, but were gentler than his early terrors

In the meantime, Bruce finally managed to find Jack Larsen - and uncovered an awful secret. It turned out Larsen's friend James Huston Jnr died when his plane was shot in the engine and caught fire, exactly as described by two-year-old James.


Bruce found Huston's name on the list of 18 men killed in action on the Natoma. The discovery finally made him ask: Could this be the man who inhabits my son's soul?


He sifted through a thousand combat mission reports to find where Huston had been killed.


Larsen told Bruce: 'James was a real good man. It was a very dangerous place. But James volunteered to go.'


He also said that it was aboard the Natoma that the first crude napalm bombs had been improvised, mixing napalm powder with petrol. 'It looked like we were making jelly,' he said.


His account brought home the full horror of battle - the flimsy planes flying to attack the Japanese. Huston was flying 'tail-end Charlie' - the last plane in - so Larsen had not seen him go down.


The veterans' association reported that James Huston's father had even attended their reunions. But the old man died in 1973, never learning any specifics of his son's death.


Next, little James unnerved his father by telling him: 'I knew you would be a good daddy, that's why I picked you.'


'Where did you find us?' asked a shaken Bruce.


'In Hawaii, at the pink hotel, on the beach,' he replied. Eerily, he described his parents' fifth wedding anniversary - five weeks before Andrea got pregnant - saying it was when he 'chose' them to bring him back into the world.


Something new emerged every day. On a map, he pointed out the exact location where James's plane went down. Asked why he called his action figures Billy, Leon and Walter, he replied: 'Because that's who met me when I got to heaven.'


Reunited? James Huston's sister Anne met James Leininger and believes he is a reincarnation of her brother


Sure enough, on the list of the Natoma dead, alongside James Huston, were Billie Peeler, Leon Conner and Walter Devlin. Uncannily, photos of the men showed their hair colour matched those of their GI Joe dolls.


Finally, Bruce and Andrea located James Huston's last surviving relative - his 84-year-old sister, Anne.


She told them: 'Mom and Dad never talked about Jimmy's death, but Dad went to several reunions to see if he could get any details. He never could.'


And so they were able to tell her where her brother died. After so many years, they were even able to send her a picture of the harbour.


She responded: 'It is so much more personal than anything I have. The picture of the bay is beautiful and so peaceful. A lovely resting place.'


In return, she sent Bruce and Andrea a picture of James with his squadron - a cluster of smiling young men. In the background was a Corsair - confirming that little James had been right about the plane Huston flew.


Bruce says: 'My purpose for researching what was happening to my son was to establish that this was all a coincidence. But I was getting closer and closer to something dangerous. It was like putting my hand in a fire.'


Not long after, the family had a phone call from a veteran who had seen Huston's plane being hit. He kept his knowledge to himself for more than 50 years. He described seeing the aftermath of Huston's crash on the sea below.


'He took a direct hit on the nose. All I could see were pieces falling into the bay. We pulled out of the dive and headed for open sea. I saw the place where the fighter had hit. The rings were still expanding near a huge rock at the harbour entrance.'


Huston's plane was hit in the engine and the front exploded in a ball of flames - exactly like James's account. It explained why he always knocked the propeller off his toy planes.


Another veteran had been even closer. John Richardson explained: 'The Japs began firing at us. We formed up for the attack. A plane startled me. It was a fighter. He was firing his machine guns, strafing what was below. We were no more than 30 yards apart when the pilot deliberately turned his head and looked at me.


Spooky: Little James would describe a Corsair plane in his nightmares. His father found out that pilot James Huston had flown the same plane in the war

'I caught his eye and we connected with each other. No sooner had we connected than his plane was hit in the engine by what seemed to be a fairly large shell. There was an instantaneous flash of flames that engulfed the plane. It almost immediately disappeared below me.'


Richardson began to sob, saying: 'I have lived with that pilot's face as his eyes fixed on me every day since it happened. But I never knew who he was. I was the last guy who saw him alive. I was the last person he saw before he was killed. His face has haunted me.'


The family showed him a photograph of James Huston.


He said: 'I recognise his face. I could never forget it. As we retired from the harbour, I could see where Huston went in. He hit near a large rock right near the opening.'


Encouraged by the Leiningers, Richardson told Anne what he had seen - half a decade after her brother was lost without trace.


Poignantly, she said: 'I'm relieved to know Jimmy didn't suffer, and a little sad that my father died before he learned what happened.'


For his part, Bruce has found peace after his exhaustive search for answers. He says: 'God gives us a spirit. It lives for ever. James Huston's spirit had come back to us. Why? I'll never know. There are things that are unexplainable and unknowable.'


Meeting Huston's veteran brothers in arms, little James was disappointed, saying: 'I'm sad that everyone is so old.' Did he truly remember them as dashing young pilots?


Finally, the Leiningers gingerly broke the explosive news of the real reason behind their questions to Anne. They mapped out the story, the terrible nightmares, the vivid descriptions of battle, naming the ship and the pilots.


She told them: 'Jimmy was due home in March 1945 and I was cleaning, anticipating his arrival. I sensed that he was in the room with me. A couple of days later I got the news that Jimmy had gone missing. I was devastated.


'When my father told me the date Jimmy was lost, I realised it was the day I felt his presence. We never knew what happened to him. I want you to know that I believe the story.'


The Leiningers eventually went to drop a bouquet of flowers at Huston's ocean grave, making the long voyage to Japan.


James's nightmares continued until he was eight, but they were gentler than his early terrors - he woke sobbing softly. Whatever the truth behind the young boy's extraordinary dreams, James Huston now seems able to rest in peace.

 

[IowaGuy]

Here is one of my favorite reincarnation stories.

I lived in L.A. for year in the late 90's, and my biggest take-away was that you can't believe everything you hear. Plam readers, tarot cards, psychic healers, astrologers, religious prophets, doomsdayers, etc on seemingly every street corner (not to mention all the Elvis reincarnations ).

Do you think all their stories are legit? How do you propose these claims could be tested in a scientific manner to separate the wheat (if any) from the chaff?

Regarding the story you referenced, do you think there are any other explanations for this besides reincarnation?

 

[Nick the Pilot]

IG,

There are legitimate as well as bogus fortune tellers. (I know a few of each.) Each type tells their respective legitimate or bogus stories.

I do not think these stories will ever be tested in a scientific manner that satisifies most doubters. There are plenty of people who refuse to believe these things even when presented with evidence. Here is a scientist saying, "I wouldn't believe it even if were true" when presented with 'proof' about a psychic phenomena:

http://stagevu.com/video/ainlxfpbcmbx

(This video is about people trying to provide scientific evidence of psychic happenings. I find the story in the video about Saddam Hussein to be very compelling.)

I personally think the little boy was telling the truth, that he is the reincarnated pilot, so no, I don't think there is another explanation. But some people will always say the little boy saw the whole thing on TV. I have even heard doubters say things like the boy may have picked up the story telepathically from someone else. There will always be doubters, and I do not try to persuade them otherwise.

There is a saying: For those who believe, no proof is required. For those who do not believe, no proof is possible.

 

[IowaGuy]

Regarding the scientific testing of past-life memories, that has already been done many, many times.

I am not aware of any such studies that have held up to scientific scrutiny. Please provide reference information for any of these studies that have been published in a peer-reviewed, scientific journal using the scientific method and not pseudoscience.

Pseudoscience - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[IowaGuy]

I personally think the little boy was telling the truth, that he is the reincarnated pilot, so no, I don't think there is another explanation.

Nick - do you think HHDL the 14th is the reincarnation of HHDL the 13th? After all, he apparently chose some of the same toys of his predecessor?

There is a saying: For those who believe, no proof is required. For those who do not believe, no proof is possible.

But doesn't everyone "not believe" when they are not born into that particular religion and is coming from the "outside"?

We may have to agree to disagree whether reincarnation is "proved" by scientific studies.

It seems to me that reincarnation is more easily "believed" if one is born into buddhism. I wonder what percentage of buddhism converts (i.e. Snoopy, etc) believe in reincarnation vs. what percentage of folks born into buddhism believe in it? i.e. seems to me that it is more faith-based like heaven/hell in Christianity.

I likely will never believe in it since my mind is very rational and I need scientific explanations for most of my beliefs. But I do think there are some great teachings in Buddhism that I can apply to my daily life without having to believe in reincarnation.

How much do you think your belief in reincarnation after death affects your day-to-day life in the present moment?

 

[earl]

I lived in L.A. for year in the late 90's, and my biggest take-away was that you can't believe everything you hear. Plam readers, tarot cards, psychic healers, astrologers, religious prophets, doomsdayers, etc on seemingly every street corner (not to mention all the Elvis reincarnations ).

Do you think all their stories are legit? How do you propose these claims could be tested in a scientific manner to separate the wheat (if any) from the chaff?

Regarding the story you referenced, do you think there are any other explanations for this besides reincarnation?

Well, Iowaguy, as to other explanations, Erwin Lazlo has theorized a form of what the ancients referred to as the "Akashic Record" as an explanatory model for such recollections-a field that contains the "information" from every human who ever lived that some folks can tap into. Of course, I would suspect that that would be as hard to swallow for hard-core materialists as reincarnation. But there are many human experiences that simply defy the materialist word-view to properly explain. So, where in Iowa do you hail from? I was born and bred a South Dakota boy. earl

 

[Vajradhara]

can we please not refer to Buddhist teachings of rebirth as reincarnation?

perhaps it would be better, Nick, if you were to expound the Theosophical view of reincarnation in the areas which are appropriate for that rather than in the Buddhist area?

i can only imagine using the terms interchangeably, when they don't mean the same thing, is confusing.

metta,

~v