Fluidology

[plouton6]

I understand Shipwright was a long-term acquaintance of the medium, but even in this case, how did they establish that Shipwright was to be trusted?

I can speak for my family's experience and why we chose to believe it.

The medium dropped school when he was around 8 years old because of the hardship imposed by rural life in the arid interior of Bahia, in the Northeast (an arguably poor State in the arguably poorest region of Brazil). There's no way he could come up with such complex concepts on his own. When we talked to the medium (and not the spirit), there wasn't any complexity going on.

Besides, the spirit knew things about our lives that the medium didn't and couldn't possibly know.

 

[plouton6]

Without reference to the Shipwright medium in particular, imo the fact of having psychic or fortune-telling or spirit-medium abilities doesn't make a person 'spiritual' or spiritually pure? It's like having ability to play tennis or get languages -- it's just a gift that where a person goes with it depends.

Perhaps a bit more complicated than that, but in essence having a psychic gift doesn't make the possessor pure or good, and there are many malignant or malign or just mischevious 'lesser' spirits around?

I mean: because it comes through a medium doesn't make it 'higher truth'?

EDIT
But I suppose that's obvious

Definitely. Mediums are tools. Tools can be used for good or for evil.

Good people and bad people may have gifts, and how they use such gifts comes down to free will.

 

[plouton6]

Would it mean repetitive reincarnation as a human being, or perhaps as a squirrel or a beetle?

Human souls incarnate human bodies, squirrel souls incarnate squirrel bodies, and so on.

The planet's human population is now around 8.5 billion, increased and still increasing since the stone age? Are we the same bunch of souls, going around and around?

There are "old" souls and "new" souls. I don't know if we'll ever be allowed to know why God creates new souls, or why God created the first souls for that matter.

 

[plouton6]

Makes sense. Is it common to provide details on such a "background check" along with the received communication?

Telling Shipwright's story was my personal decision, maybe influenced by my liking of knowing the story behind the story in general.

Maybe he told us his story because that's what humans do when we get to know each other.

 

[muhammad_isa]

There are "old" souls and "new" souls. I don't know if we'll ever be allowed to know why God creates new souls, or why God created the first souls for that matter.

Hi .. hope you are settling in OK

How do we know that G-d actually "creates" souls?
What are they "created" from? Bits of G-d material?
I understand that G-d is infinite. That would mean that there is no limit to the amount of souls than can exist.

I have no idea where my soul came from, or where it will go to.
I can only theorize based on scripture.
One thing I feel sure of, is that souls are of an eternal nature, as is G-d.

 

[Paulus]

Would it mean repetitive reincarnation as a human being, or perhaps as a squirrel or a beetle?

Human / humanoid only. I assume the spiritist version of reincarnation, as defined by Allan Kardec.

(Don't you find it funny by the way that 'reincarnation' is a latin word based on the catholic/christian 'incarnation'. Contrary to popular belief, reincarnation it is not a concept that originates from the east. The term 'reborn' is typically eastern. But in practise the terms have become interchangeable).

- Souls (or 'spirits' in Kardecs terminology) are created once by God. New ones are still created.

- You incarnate as human only, not as animal or plant. You can swap between male and female.

- You incarnate multiple times, on earth and/or on one of the many other inhabited planets.

- In between incarnation you reside in one of many spirit (astral-) places. You could see these as 'heavens' (or sometimes worse ), as mentioned in many religions.

The planet's human population is now around 8.5 billion, increased and still increasing since the stone age? Are we the same bunch of souls, going around and around?

According to this scenario: both. But it makes sense to incarnate on the same planet multiple times, because you possibly have created some (good/bad) karma there.

 

[Paulus]

Makes sense. Is it common to provide details on such a "background check" along with the received communication?

Not that I know of. It's typically up to the receiver to asses the message.

Great thread this. Lots to discuss!

 

[Cino]

Great thread this. Lots to discuss!

I agree. Glad you like it here, btw, good to have you. It would be lovely if you wrote an intro post in the relevant forum section.

 

[plouton6]

Perhaps a bit more complicated than that, but in essence having a psychic gift doesn't make the possessor pure or good, and there are many malignant or malign or just mischevious 'lesser' spirits around?

Shipwright had the gift of foresight. He used it for piracy, but maybe he could have found a better use for it. Maybe that's part of why he got such a heavy penalty.

Makes sense. Is it common to provide details on such a "background check" along with the received communication?

If you read Shipwright's story bearing his teachings in mind, there are lessons to be learned there. We can learn from other people's mistakes.

 

[plouton6]

Hi .. hope you are settling in OK

Hi! Thanks! It's been very interesting.

Welcome to the thread.

How do we know that G-d actually "creates" souls?
What are they "created" from? Bits of G-d material?
I understand that G-d is infinite. That would mean that there is no limit to the amount of souls than can exist.

I have no idea where my soul came from, or where it will go to.
I can only theorize based on scripture.
One thing I feel sure of, is that souls are of an eternal nature, as is G-d.

There are boundaries to what we are allowed to learn. There are things that we'll never know, only guess.

I agree that there is no limit to how many souls can exist. Why would God put a limit to God's own power of creation?

I also agree that God is infinite and both God and souls are eternal, and I think that everything is made of bits of God material.

 

[RJM]

It seems that every religion or faith or group since the crucifixion needs to include and try to explain Jesus in terms of its own take

 

[RJM]

Jesus works for everybody?

 

[plouton6]

It seems that every religion or faith or group since the crucifixion needs to include and try to explain Jesus in terms of its own take

That's probably a testament to his legacy. I guess people just can't ignore him.

He did great things. He taught great things. People like that usually are remembered by history.

Had he been a physicist with a seminal theory, he would be in every physics book published since after his theory became known.

I guess this topic would be a great thread on its own.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Thanks. Yes, I do accept rebirth in the Buddhist sense amongst many, perhaps infinite different worlds and levels and dimensions of existence. My Father's house has many mansions.
But I have a problem accepting the idea of repetitive 'reincarnation' back onto the planet Earth, if you think it through?
It seems to be one of the differences between Hindu and Buddhist belief?

Ah, I missed that bit about only human birth. Not sure that's the Hindu view, though? @Aupmanyav?

Buddha's position: There is no reincarnation. Once I am gone even Brahma and Indra would not find me. I will be completely and finally gone. There is no soul, so what will reincarnate? Living beings do not have any substance (Anatta). Karma's reincarnate not any non-existent human soul. You cannot put your feet in the same river again.
(This is irrespective of what Theravada or Mahayana Buddhist scholars opined later)

General Hindu/Sikh position: Soul is a part of / emanation of Brahman / this God or that God. It may go through many births and many forms (of which there are 8.4 million, close to what science also maintains) unless by grace of deity, by austerities, by knowledge, by actions, the soul attains nirvana (enlightenment), jnana (knowledge), mukti (release). If that happens then the soul has five kinds of release depending upon the views of the person (from a nice post from another forum):

1. sAlokya = mukta jIva (soul of the living being) being in the same loka (world) as VishNu, Shiva or Devi.
2. sAmIpya = mukta jIva in close proximity (sAnidhya) of Ishwara, IshTa (Chosen deity) - VishNu, Shiva or Devi.
3. sArUpya = mukta jIva is graced with the rUpa (form) like the IshTa - e.g. VishNu's pArshads (courtiers) look like Him.
4. sAyujya = muka jIva merges with the Ishwar, IshTa.
5. kaivalya = There is no trace of the previous individual and this is more about the impersonal, nirguNa Brahman remains, as if the jIva never existed.
Now kaivalya is a loaded word and it stems from keval = ONLY. One only, indivisible.

My views align with Buddha's views or that of Kaivalya (since I believe in non-duality, Advaita).

My difference with Buddha:
Buddha: This contemplation is useless. It does not help in removal of sorrow. I agree that Buddha had a practical position.
My position: This is a valid question - 'what exists'. You cannot sweep it under the rug. What exists is 'physical energy', which constitutes all things in the universe (this is not any 'divine' energy).

 

[RJM]

Buddha's position: There is no reincarnation. Once I am gone even Brahma and Indra would not find me. I will be completely and finally gone. There is no soul, so what will reincarnate? Living beings do not have any substance (Anatta). Karma's reincarnate not any non-existent human soul. You cannot put your feet in the same river again.
(This is irrespective of what Theravada or Mahayana Buddhist scholars opined later)

General Hindu/Sikh position: Soul is a part of / emanation of Brahman / this God or that God. It may go through many births and many forms (of which there are 8.4 million, close to what science also maintains) unless by grace of deity, by austerities, by knowledge, by actions, the soul attains nirvana (enlightenment), jnana (knowledge), mukti (release). If that happens then the soul has five kinds of release depending upon the views of the person (from a nice post from another forum):

1. sAlokya = mukta jIva (soul of the living being) being in the same loka (world) as VishNu, Shiva or Devi.
2. sAmIpya = mukta jIva in close proximity (sAnidhya) of Ishwara, IshTa (Chosen deity) - VishNu, Shiva or Devi.
3. sArUpya = mukta jIva is graced with the rUpa like the IshTa - e.g. VishNu's pArshads (courtiers) look like Him.
4. sAyujya = muka jIva merges with the Ishwar, IshTa.
5. kaivalya = There is no trace of the previous individual and this is more about the impersonal, nirguNa Brahman remains, as if the jIva never existed.
Now kaivalya is a loaded word and it stems from keval = ONLY. One only, indivisible.

My views align with Buddha's views or that of Kaivalya (since I believe in non-duality, Advaita).

My difference with Buddha:
Buddha: This contemplation is useless. It does not help in removal of sorrow. I agree that Buddha had a practical position.
My position: This is a valid question - 'what exists'. You cannot sweep it under the rug. What exists is 'physical energy', which constitutes all things in the universe (this is not any 'divine' energy).

Thanks. I remember now you have already written about the Buddha's view that karmas but not souls may be reborn, and how it was subverted by later teachers.

Do the 8.4 million possible states of Hindu rebirth include rebirth as a non-human creature and perhaps as a ghost?

 

[Thomas]

Just to chip in, I have often quoted a Tibetan Buddhist – Marco Pallis (a Traditionalist of the Sophia Perennis) – critique of the populist and later western distortion of the doctrine of reincarnation. As @Cino has said, the human state is 'unique' and not repeated.

And again, as @Aupmanyav has cited, what is it that reincarnates? There always seems to be the discreet belief that somehow 'I' continue and the doctrine is interpreted in that light. Or that chimera ...

Interestingly, if we accept Traditional doctrines that the human state is a special state, and not one to be treated lightly, then there is some accord between Eastern doctrines, and the Christian belief, founded on the words of the anonymous author of the Letter to the Hebrews: "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment" (9:27). It could be argued here that the scribe asserts the Eastern Traditions – we get one shot at this life, and the speciality of this life is that it opens a way out of the eternal round ...

 

[Thomas]

(Don't you find it funny by the way that 'reincarnation' is a latin word based on the catholic/christian 'incarnation'. Contrary to popular belief, reincarnation it is not a concept that originates from the east. The term 'reborn' is typically eastern. But in practise the terms have become interchangeable).

A bit of context here.

The noun incarnation does not appear in Scripture. The noun derives from the verb incarno, the prefix in 'in' and caro 'flesh', thus "to make flesh" or "to be made flesh".

The term derives from the Gospel of John 1:14:
Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο
Kai ho logos ginomai sarx (Gk)
et Verbum caro factum est (Lt)
And the Word was made flesh (En)

And, of course, 'the Incarnation' refers to a specific person and event, and in that sense has no correspondence with the east.

The closest Greek term to reincarnation is metempsychosis (Gk) or transmigration (Lt).

 

[Aupmanyav]

Thanks. I remember now you have already written about the Buddha's view that karmas but not souls may be reborn, and how it was subverted by later teachers.
Do the 8.4 million possible states of Hindu rebirth include rebirth as a non-human creature and perhaps as a ghost?

As per general Hindu belief (don't count me with them, I am an atheist Hindu), all people do not become ghosts. They go to heaven and/or* hell according to their deeds. People with strong unfulfilled desires become ghosts. It is mostly a temporary situation. The worship of Gods by their progeny can relieve them of this condition. But yes, people certainly get born as other life-forms. Only the good people can hope for a human-form again. That again is a reason to keep away from evil deeds and engage in good deeds.

* In Hindu belief, there is no mixing of good and bad deeds to find an average. The reward for good deeds and the punishment for evil deeds comes separately. So, one may have to spend a year in hell and six months in heaven, depending on their deeds. It is all fair and crystal clear.

 

[Paulus]

Hebrews: "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment" (9:27). It could be argued here that the scribe asserts the Eastern Traditions – we get one shot at this life, and the speciality of this life is that it opens a way out of the eternal round ...

Jan Erik Sigdell has debunked that phrase. I can't verify it as I don't speak Greek, but I take it for granted. Quote below:

--------- 8< ---------
What does «once» mean here? We have to go back to the ancient Greek text to investigate it.
Greek dictionaries offer a variety of possible translations of the word hapax that is used here:

1. «once, one (single) time»,
2. «at some time»,
3. «once for all» [1], but also
4. «at once» and
5. «once (in relation to repetition)», i.e.: «once more, once again» [2,3].

Thus this objection is untenable! The verse can even be seen as a possible allusion to re-embodiment…
--------- 8< ---------

As far as I am concerned: from a christian perspective I refuse to believe that we only have one life on earth. It doesn't make sense. Jesus portrays God as good and righteous. Yet we live in a world where some lead very short and/or pitiful lives, and others benefit extensively from all the good stuff. How is that justice if we would have only one life to live here? A righteous God wouldn't allow such harsh scenario.

 

[muhammad_isa]

..Yet we live in a world where some lead very short and/or pitiful lives, and others benefit extensively from all the good stuff. How is that justice if we would have only one life to live here? A righteous God wouldn't allow such harsh scenario.

I don't think so.
This life is as "a blink of an eye" compared to eternity.
Who knows what lies in store for any of us, after we die?