Where do past-life memories come from?

If our own behaviour is a function of our soul, then why should animals be different? If our own behaviour is not a function of our soul, then what are souls for?

Click to expand...

For reasons of my own, I have suspected that animals show spiritual qualities, which seem to have nothing at all to do with basic animal instincts or evolution. Behavior, I think, can be more a function of the soul in some cases more than others.

OK, this sounds like the soul as puppet-master, where physical damage is akin to cutting a string... ?

Click to expand...

Yes, but not in a strict sense. Sometimes, it seems that physical damage can also enhance a person's soul awareness in some cases.

For example, if you stimulated someone's brain and the subject felt burning heat, or freezing cold, or great isolation, etc., would you say those sensations are externally real (the subject really is too cold or too hot, etc.), or that they are internal and subjective (i.e. purely an effect of the stimulation) ?

Click to expand...

I think that much depends upon what part of the brain is being stimulated and how. There is so much that we don't understand about the brain, and scientific experiments have only begun to scratch the surface. This may sound like a "cop-out", but I don't think any of us can determine why subjects experience what they do -- suffice to say that many people have reported sensing identical things that don't appear in our "real" world.

That's a key question I'd really like to know the answer to - what difference would it (or does it) make? How can we tell?

Click to expand...

I think Deborah's recommendation of Fred Alan Wolf's book, "The Spiritual Universe", will provide some excellent "Scientific" insights worth considering. Or, it will bring up even more serious questions. I agree, ahead of time, that the word "Scientific" may be somewhat overused, but I would ask everyone to bear in mind that the Sun orbiting the Earth was once considered a Scientific fact, because it was a repeatable observation; while the belief that the Earth orbited the Sun was a theory that could only be indirectly indicated. I have good reason to believe that we will find enough indirect evidence of spirituality by reading what is available now, and that much more will become available in the near future. We cannot determine the whole picture with only one piece of the jigsaw puzzle.

Thanks Nightrain1 & Deborah, I'll check out Fred Alan Wolf.

An interesting thread, with many good points raised.


May I offer the following:


Dlorde #6


There is a concept whereby souls coming newly into the earth sphere may gain 'experience' on how to behave and react with their new surroundings by 'living' one or more 'lives' in the same way we may witness a documentary or watch a movie of something we wish to learn about. The actual physical life has been lived by a physical entity and stored away in the akashic records and may be used by any number of other newly arrived souls as a training exercise. They experience this as though they themselves have lived that life, and hence more than one person may report having been this or that historical figure. Eventually the newly arrived soul incarnates in the physical and begins its own journey.


Nightrain1 #15


you're right. This 3 dimensional world is not the only one in existence.


Souls come to the earth plane, experience a series of lifetimes, learn all there is to learn about the earth – as male and female, as every nationality, and many variations of circumstance. After they no longer have to incarnate in the physical, they may choose to stay in the spirit plane to help their fellow man, or move on to another plane.


By staying to help, they enhance their own journey and spiritual progress. They become guides and greeters of the newly deceased. Many choose to do this to stay within the soul group they are helping. They may even incarnate again even though they are not required to. They do so to assist fellow souls. Eventually their entire soul group will 'graduate' and they will all move on.


BTW: Your comments in #20 are impressive. My compliments.


ChrisR #17


According to Edgar Cayce, souls have been coming to the earth sphere for about 18 ½ million years, first as spirit then gradually forcing spirit into matter. We have undergone many evolutionary changes to arrive where we are today, and you're right – the earth experience IS just a blip in the journey a soul makes.


All souls were created in the beginning, it is not a continuing process. By reason of this, all souls may be said to be 'old' souls. A 'new' soul being in the context of being new to the earth experience only.


The soul does not have a 'lifespan' as such. It is immortal. It was never born and can never die. It is a part of God. You have endless eternities to play in all of creation. What are you planning on doing after morning tea? The earth is no more important to your overall soul journey than any other spec of dust in the cosmos. You will most probably visit them all. You will certainly have time to.


Dlorde #18


If you haven't already got it, get hold of a copy of Edgar Cayce's story of


'The Origin and Destiny of Man. (pages 29 – 41). (Author- Lytle Robinson)


It gives a good acount of how souls came about, and may answer your question 'what is a soul'.


It's a bit lengthy to reproduce here, and might violate some the the forum guidelines.


Chrisr #21


The exercise of free will is what makes each of us different. One person chooses to punch you on the nose. Another person chooses to walk away. Which one would grow in spirituality because of the choice made?


Regards


Merlin6

Thanks for the comments and reading suggestions Merlin6.

Merlin6 said:

...
There is a concept whereby souls coming newly into the earth sphere may gain 'experience' on how to behave and react with their new surroundings by 'living' one or more 'lives' in the same way we may witness a documentary or watch a movie of something we wish to learn about.

Click to expand...

There are many concepts of life and existence... how do you suggest we (I) should choose?

If you haven't already got it, get hold of a copy of Edgar Cayce's story of
'The Origin and Destiny of Man. (pages 29 – 41). (Author- Lytle Robinson)


It gives a good acount of how souls came about, and may answer your question 'what is a soul'.

Click to expand...

I've heard about Edgar Cayce, but haven't yet read his output. He's going on the list


You may be aware that I have a sceptical approach to explanations - so far I have only been able to make a leap of faith from the well-established and consolidated ground of natural science, and then only if there appears to be solid ground to land on. I've found several paths that claim to have foundations on solid ground, but turn out to be built on damp sand.


Given what I've read about Cayce (which may not be acurate), and what you posted above in a confident and authoritative tone, I'm looking for the solid ground from which your beliefs spring, and I can't see it. So my first question is 'how do you know?'


What I mean is, is there anything you can point me to and say "That, that is why you should take what I describe seriously. That is why it is different. That is how I know it is true" ?


There are many religions, beliefs, and prophets; there are many books purporting to hold or tell the truth. How can someone like me decide between them?

Hi Dlorde,


How you choose is up to you.


“How do I know?” . . . you want a money back guarantee? I can't give you one. Only you can bring yourself to a position of 'knowing', as opposed to 'choosing to believe'. It took me a long lifetime. Consider the following quote:

“Throughout all ages men and women, seeking to solve the mysteries of life, have submitted themselves to the training necessary to awaken from latency into activity these slumbering powers with which every man is endowed. Generations of seers, having awakened these faculties into controlled activity, have carried out researches into the normally invisible aspects of
Nature and of man.The fruits of their investigations are all preserved and have been continually extended, checked and counter-checked. As a result, there is available to the student of today a vast treasury of knowledge on every subject to which the mind of man can be turned. The Greeks named this


wisdom of the ages Theosophia, Divine Wisdom, and modern man


possesses a fragment of it in what today is called Theosophy.”

Click to expand...

From Geoffrey Hodson's 'Through The Gateway Of Death'. Adyar press.


The short version is – This stuff has been known forever and is still to be found lying around all over this planet. 'Seek and thou shalt find' I think would be the best advice I could give you.


Have fun.


Merlin6

Hi dlorde,

There are many religions, beliefs, and prophets; there are many books purporting to hold or tell the truth. How can someone like me decide between them?

Click to expand...

Excellent question. For me I research ancient texts and look for the common thread that rans through them. I read as many new scientific books, articles and papers I can regarding consciousness studies. I love researching different cultures and was amazed at how may believe in PL's and have rituals and stories of rebirth -- across continents.


Lace this with personal experiences (which came first) and many many personal validations; I found my own truth. That is after all......all we can do.

Merlin6 said:

How you choose is up to you.
“How do I know?” . . . you want a money back guarantee? I can't give you one. Only you can bring yourself to a position of 'knowing', as opposed to 'choosing to believe'.


...


The short version is – This stuff has been known forever and is still to be found lying around all over this planet. 'Seek and thou shalt find' I think would be the best advice I could give you.

Click to expand...

So you haven't any particular experience or source you can point me to and say "That, that is why you should take what I describe seriously. That is why it is different. That is how I know my interpretation is true" ?


OK. I'll keep exploring

Hello Diorde...My advice is to stop looking outside yourself. The Divine spark of Spirit is within every human being. You want to look for God??? Look within....Practice meditation for a few minutes every day and you will find God and many of the answers you are searching for. No one can tell you....it is a personal experience..


Besides that...meditation is healthy for the body as it lowers your blood prssure and increases the blood flow to your brain. Don't meditate on a full stomach as the blood flow is trying to help the body digest .


In the Bible in Matt 11:14 Jesus was talking about John the Baptist and he said "If you are willing to accept what I say, He (John the Baptist) is Elijah, one of the prophets said would come" Elijah had been dead for many many years


In another verse John 8, 56 - 58


"Your ancestor Abraham rejoiced as he looked toward my coming. He saw it and he was glad." The people said "you are not even 50 years old. How can you say you have seen Abraham?" Jesus answered "The truth is, I existed before Abraham was even born"


Jesus is referring to the pre-existence if the spirit and I don't argue with what Jesus had to say.. There are other statements made but these are just a few


Meditation is your answer.....Hugs!!

Florence said:

....Practice meditation for a few minutes every day and you will find God and many of the answers you are searching for.
...


Meditation is your answer.....Hugs!!

Click to expand...

Hi FLorence, I've been meditating for many years now. I find it very relaxing and refreshing. It reduces anxiety and boosts positivity - but no sign of God yet

Merlin6 said:

I would like to reproduce here, several pages from the book 'Edgar Cayce's Story of The Origin And Destiny Of Man' by Lytle Robinson.
[large excerpt cut]

Click to expand...

OK. It reads as an imaginative elaboration of the Christian mythology with a 'New Age' twist.


In the few places where potentially verifiable assertions are made (e.g. development of solar system, planets, structure of the atom, development & origins of man, origin of 'races', etc.), it is generally contradicted by the physical evidence - although, to be fair, some of that wasn't established at the time Cayce was writing. Contradictions of this kind don't really help it. Perhaps they were not meant to be taken literally, but if so, it seems rather pointless to include them.

Hmmm. I didn't mean for that to come across as '...an imaginative elaboration of the Christian mythology with a 'New Age' twist.' That's just the way it is. However, it is not for me to attempt to convert anyone to my own opinion. I just wish to share what I believe and perhaps help others to realise that the doctrine of reincarnation is a complete system which has many of the answers the world seems to be seeking. I have encountered no other system, theory or doctrine that offers the same promise. In essence, it speaks of souls (which is what we are) coming to the earth, becoming trapped in matter, and having to grow back to our original state of spirituality through a succession of lives. As is also mentioned by Cayce 'you don't GO to heaven, you GROW to heaven'. Once we have achieved that, we will be free to continue our sojourns throughout all of creation and eventually rejoin our creator. This is not the preserve of Christianity, it is the common ground of all religions. This is not about religion, it's about reincarnation. This is not just about Cayce either, Victor the shepherd boy, Andrew Jackson Davis, Blavatsky and others were sprouting this stuff before he was. It's universal, and eternal.


As to being 'contradicted by the physical evidence'... could you elaborate please. What evidence do you speak of?


As to the technological claims attributed to past civilisations, there is evidence of nuclear war having been waged on a global scale. Google: 'Ancient nuclear war' for further reading.


Further to this, the opening of a 3000 year old egyptian tomb at Abydos has revealed images of machine technology not usually attributed to an ancient people. Google 'ancient aircraft' for further reading. Many current day scientists simply refuse to accept that this may have been the norm in those past times. They are choking on the meat instead of enjoying the sandwich.


Regards


Merlin6

Merlin6 said:

As to being 'contradicted by the physical evidence'... could you elaborate please. What evidence do you speak of?

Click to expand...

Physical evidence from observation and experiment. The topics in the text I listed previously contained descriptions that appear to contradict what has been learned from observation of the real world. Unfortunately, the text you posted has disappeared without explanation, so I am unable to be more specific at present.

As to the technological claims attributed to past civilisations, there is evidence of nuclear war having been waged on a global scale. Google: 'Ancient nuclear war' for further reading.
Further to this, the opening of a 3000 year old egyptian tomb at Abydos has revealed images of machine technology not usually attributed to an ancient people. Google 'ancient aircraft' for further reading. Many current day scientists simply refuse to accept that this may have been the norm in those past times. They are choking on the meat instead of enjoying the sandwich.

Click to expand...

I haven't encountered the ancient nuclear war claims, so I'll check them out. As for the ancient aircraft, pre-Columbian figurines have been found that look like a delta-wing aircraft, and were described by some as indications of advanced technology. However, reference to informed sources showed them to be stylised representations of flying fish.


The first link I found in Google for 'ancient aircraft egyptian tomb' says:

Is the Saqqara artifact meant to represent an airplane? This seems unlikely especially in view of the absence of any evidence of the considerable support technology that would of necessity be associated with flight industry (such as wheels, engine machinery, parts manufacture, fuel production, etc.) It would seem strange indeed if the Egyptians flew around in high-tech aircraft and left only a single wooden model (and, some would claim, a few glyphs carved above a temple doorway) as evidence of their airborne activities. What, then, might the model actually represent?
Most Egyptologists think that the artifact is a bird with outstretched wings, though the tail is quite dissimilar to any known bird's tail. Though it is not apparent in the accompanying photographs, painted details of the eyes and beak are still observable on the model. There also remains a bit of paint on the upper edge of the tail, and it is possible that more detail was originally provided but has worn away over time. There is also a graceful curve on the bottom of the model delineating the anatomical transition of the body to the head and the tail, very much in the manner of a bird in flight.


...


In any case, of the two theories that the artifact is intended to represent either a bird or an aircraft, the former is the only one tenable based on the corpus of evidence that is known to exist.

Click to expand...

This suggests that in this example, the ancient aircraft interpretation is at best open to serious doubt, and at worst, untenable. The most plausible explanation to me is that it's a model of a bird and I found another link that supports this interpretation - unless you have more supporting evidence to add. I haven't yet looked at any other examples.

I think the only thing we can agree on here is to disagree, but just as a parting comment, have a read of the Mahabharata.


It's been a good discussion, but let's get back to reincarnation.


Regards


merlin6

Merlin6 said:

I think the only thing we can agree on here is to disagree

Click to expand...

OK - I thought you might be able to point me to some decent evidence for the 'ancient aircraft' hypothesis - Google returns lots of results, but there's no quality filter...

just as a parting comment, have a read of the Mahabharata.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid I simply won't have the time - it's three times longer than the bible! I'll try to find a decent synopsis.

It's been a good discussion, but let's get back to reincarnation.

Click to expand...

OK, so be it

Unfortunately, the text you posted has disappeared without explanation

Click to expand...

The staff has removed it since we don't approve of posting entire chapters in the forum. We have requested that Merlin should post a link instead


One of my personal problems with the 'new age theories' (even if they chronologically appear old, such as Cayce) is the definitive manner in which the suggestions are put forward. To me, every theory concerning reincarnation is a suggestion, some more plausible than others, but I think that overall what turns me off is the assumed authority into spritual matters that these new age-theorists have. Afterall their experiences are subjective - all our experiences are subjective - and it's just general good (scientific) manner to always be aware that you might actually be wrong. That there might be another plausible explanation. In this case it's worth wondering if we are all on the same spiritual journey (although on different levels of it) orchestrated by a divine being upstairs or whether all spiritual experiences are highly individual and can't be generalized into a grand theory. Or perhaps whether reincarnation is really a 'natural' phenomena and not spiritual at all. At this point we don't know and so it's wise to keep the door open in my opinion.

Many current day scientists simply refuse to accept that this may have been the norm in those past times. They are choking on the meat instead of enjoying the sandwich.

Click to expand...

Just a comment since I am possible one of those scientists you refer too ( ). The generally accepted truth of today is merely the most plausible explanation based on the currently available evidence.

Sunniva said:

The staff has removed it since we don't approve of posting entire chapters in the forum. We have requested that Merlin should post a link instead

Click to expand...

Thanks - I thought so - I was kind of prompting for confirmation

One of my personal problems with the 'new age theories' (even if they chronologically appear old, such as Cayce) is the definitive manner in which the suggestions are put forward. To me, every theory concerning reincarnation is a suggestion, some more plausible than others, but I think that overall what turns me off is the assumed authority into spritual matters that these new age-theorists have. Afterall their experiences are subjective - all our experiences are subjective - and it's just general good (scientific) manner to always be aware that you might actually be wrong. That there might be another plausible explanation.
...


Just a comment since I am possible one of those scientists you refer too ( ). The generally accepted truth of today is merely the most plausible explanation based on the currently available evidence.

Click to expand...

Amen to that!