what can a soul reincarnate into?

[croak]

i mean just as i said.

most animals are still functioning on the instinctive plane of consciousness.
- the seat of consciousness in humans is mostly on the intelect plane of consciousness. and even higher in more advanced souls who take on the human form.

I'm not following. What is this 'plane' of consciousness? Most of animal life is unconscious: you don't think about how to walk or eat. A part of it is conscious, where you make a decision whether to run away from a potential danger, for example. Instinct is unconscious, and serves both humans and animals. By intellect, if you mean problem-solving, socializing, and other things that require a conscious brain, humans are by no means on a pedestal by themselves.

some of the higher animals are merging onto the plane of intellect such as dogs , horses, crows etc. - some remote human tribes are almost as low as the higher animals , and function more on the instinctive level.

Maybe it's just me, but I find that rather insulting. Those remote human tribes, without the benefit of 'civilization', are somehow lesser beings compared to yourself? Why not head out into the forest and see? Since you are human as well, you still have those instincts that enable them to survive. You know, like what plants are edible, how to build shelter, what to eat if you have a stomachache.... Because, really, a mind isn't really needed to do those things.

Something that comes to mind: lions have to be taught how to hunt. Sure, the killing bite is instinctual, but they have to learn how to take down prey, and even before that have to learn what is prey, among other things.

you who are now functioning in a human body can not loose what you have gained after aeons of evolution. the soul who is functioning in the body of a crow has yet to experience all that you already have done.

How do you know I have a human body? How do you know I am not a raven? Take my word for it.

And how is a crow less evolved than a human? That doesn't really make sense to me....

we, who have progressed further, already have within our being all the experiences of the lower animal forms we once functioned through. and it we are off our guard that instinctive part sometimes asserts itself and we become the fox, the parrot , the donkey etc ( but only temporarily)

i hope you can get the gist of what i'm saying there.

I couldn't say if I was once a donkey or a fox, but are you talking about accumulative past lives or the evolution of the brain and lower parts (like emotion) superseding higher parts (like reason)?

as for the part about the body desintigrating and being taken up by other organsims. you dont have to wait till you r body finally perishes for that to happen. it is going on continuouslly , we are currently absorbing and discarding cells. and its a medical fact that it is only a mater of months before every cell in our body has been replaced ( but that is not reincarnation)

I know, but I meant my body as a whole, after it ceases repairing itself. I know it is not reincarnation the concept, but I just wanted to bring up the idea of the circle of life, everything being apart of everything else, and fun stuff like that.

If you want to learn a little more about ravens and how they are actually rather intelligence, watch Video: Full Episode - Ravens | Nature Might not work in your location due to rights restrictions (like mine).

 

[Herr Heinrich]

After studying psychology for awhile, I'm not too convinced we are much higher than any other animal. We just happen to be very intelligent, have imposable thumbs, and walk upright. And because our daily lives usually aren't a struggle for survival and having to watch every nook and cranny lest a hungry predator lurk near, we have more leisure time than most other animals. But we are instinct driven from day one of our existence.

I agree with the above for the most part. Especially when it involves finding a mate. Sometimes it is just hard to see it underneath the pretty covering we put over it. I think humans do have the ability to ignore their instinct as well as do things completely against normal animal instincts however. We are not 100% ruled by instinct in my opinion.

 

[alizantil]

I'm not following. What is this 'plane' of consciousness? Most of animal life is unconscious: (thats instinctive mind)

are somehow lesser beings ' (where did i say that ? - i didnt and i was not meaning it )

How do you know I have a human body? How do you know I am not a raven? Take my word for it. i dont understand this

And how is a crow less evolved than a human? That doesn't really make sense to me.... ( if you dont like my use of 'evolved' try 'advanced' etc)

like i said try and get the 'gist' of what i was trying to say..

i do not have the materialistic view of evolution.

my understanding is that the multitude of forms we have are the expression of what is behind them, that is the soul which is unfolding in consciousness, the more unfloded soul will inhabit more refined forms, and on this planet the most evolved/advanced form is the human form

there is a free online book you can read if you want to know how i think as i do , it will explain things better than i can called :
FOURTEEN LESSONS in Yogi Philosophy and Oriental Occultism - its worth exploring IMHO

arfalpha.com/YogiPhilosphy/YogiPhilosophy.pdf

- i cant do links yet put www in first if you want to read it

 

[croak]

(thats instinctive mind)

Instincts are a part of the unconscious mind, all right.

(where did i say that ? - i didnt and i was not meaning it )

It's implied. To requote:

some remote human tribes are almost as low as the higher animals , and function more on the instinctive level.

i dont understand this

How do you know I'm not a bird pecking at a keyboard? I understand nearly everyone would say I'm not, but hey, they don't have proof.

if you dont like my use of 'evolved' try 'advanced' etc)

Advanced in what sense, though? Ravens can fly; humans can't. My flying capabilities are clearly much more advanced. A human can't hide thousands of seeds and remember where they cached them all. A human can't find its way home after migrating thousands of miles away. Then again, humans create machines that help them do all that. A human might be more advanced in its problem-solving skills, I could give you that. But its memory, endurance, speed, and other capabilities (sans the mechanical solutions) pale in comparison.

like i said try and get the 'gist' of what i was trying to say..

i do not have the materialistic view of evolution.

my understanding is that the multitude of forms we have are the expression of what is behind them, that is the soul which is unfolding in consciousness, the more unfloded soul will inhabit more refined forms, and on this planet the most evolved/advanced form is the human form

there is a free online book you can read if you want to know how i think as i do , it will explain things better than i can called :
FOURTEEN LESSONS in Yogi Philosophy and Oriental Occultism - its worth exploring IMHO

arfalpha.com/YogiPhilosphy/YogiPhilosophy.pdf

- i cant do links yet put www in first if you want to read it

Ah, now I understand what point of view you're approaching from. (At least the fact that there's a philosophy you adhere to). I can't argue with your beliefs, except for the part about humans being the most advanced. I suppose we can agree to disagree there.

 

[LuisDantas]

There ain't no such thing as reincarnation. People are way too dependent on environment and even on social interactions to really "be who they are".

There IS rebirth, but it is something else entirely; it doesn't happen neatly from one person to another in "another life", as if we had souls that represented what we "really are".

Actually, rebirth may well be an obsolete word, and we might be better off talking about sociological and psychological concepts instead.

 

[Midnight Pete]

A human soul can reincarnate into a the body of a Good Guy doll, as seen here.

For proof of this phenomenon, go to Child's Play (1988)

 

[St Giordano Bruno]

I think the term "soul'" is a little dated in these enlightened times. I prefer to use the term "the self" Can the self be reincarnated? well I am not sure, but if the self is an illusion and is not an incarnation in the first place then it was make no sense to believe in "re"incarnation

 

[YmirGF]

The beauty of reincarnation is that it doesn't really matter if you believe in it or not. Just enjoy yourself while you are here, learn as much as you can and leave folks wishing you could have stayed longer. Expecting more is a bit ludicrous.

 

[talal hail]

I did not understand the question, but I'm not talking english
But thank you

 

[Surya Deva]

Somebody said earlier that the soul only can incarnate in living matter but not non-living matter. I think this distinction is arbitraty how do we separate living matter from non living matter when all matter is made out of exactly the same stuff(molecules, atoms, subatomic particles) It is known that the first living matter like bacteria evolved from an abiogenitic process where inert and non-living matter suddenly reached a level of complexity to becoming living. If it is true that the soul only started incarnating from living matter, then where was the soul before non-living matter arose.

There are only two logical answers to this that the soul either was created by the chemical process of matter and therefore the soul is nothing more than a material phenomenon or that the soul pre-existed in the inert matter as well. The first option cannot be true because then there would be no such thing as a soul, it would just be matter and once the body dies then so does the person. The only way to maintain there is a soul is to accept that the soul preexists in so-called non-living or inert matter as well.

In the Samkhya philosophy of Hinduism it says very clearly that the soul transmigrates through a continuum going from a blade of grass to Brahma itself. So the soul can take on any material body from grass to the universe itself. Although Hinduism says the soul evolves gradually from one species to the other, going through hundreds of thousands of species, it does say that it is possible to regress in your evolution. It is not necessary that you will always evolve upwards, depending on your current karma you can even cause devolution to happen. Ideally, you will evolve and the nexts stage up from a human being is an angel.

 

[Sunstone]

According to the Supreme Court, a corporation is a person. According to fundamentalists, a person has a soul. Therefore, can't a soul reincarnate into a corporation?

 

[TheQueenCat]

"humans, animals, plants, microorganisms, and "non-living" entities (rock, river, mountain)"

 

[Surya Deva]

According to the Supreme Court, a corporation is a person. According to fundamentalists, a person has a soul. Therefore, can't a soul reincarnate into a corporation?

A corporation is not a material substance. It exists only in human language. So the answer is a veritable no.

 

[bhaktajan]

can't a soul reincarnate into a corporation?

But by extention, I have perpetually pondered "mass-Karma".
harking to the old saying that, "Schools of Fish that fly together, flock together" ---'birds of a feather, flock together' . . . 'The fish must seperate from the schooling stream'

When a homegenic group of comrades that had virtually identical social/ethnic/religious/worldview/gender/intelligence/cultural/geographical/historical upbrings ---that are later also annihilated simultaniously (death) ---are they destined to the same grouping of future birth?

AS PER KARMA:
I do lean toward the concept that a national dead war hero has first claim to the best births that his society has; that future babies are those souls that are one or two (or 3) scenarios:
a] depleted Yogic merit that was expended in celetrial abodes;
b] national dead war hero has first claim;
and
aside from ideal canidancy, there is of course:
c] common transfer (transmigration of the soul to a new birth) in myraids of possible species
d] Those exceptionally Sinful canidates that Yama-raja takes hold of to sort out.

Then there is the question that I may have known and forgotten:
Why are only(?) "exceptionally Sinful person's" souls summonsed to Yama-raj?
While others are just processed without any face-time with anyone?

Could it be that the smallest bits of piety halts anyone proceeding to Hell; so that the hell-bound-canidate has the option to choose which to experience first?

IE: Yamaraj: "According to the record [Book-of-Life --now with new & improved karmic accounting software] you are exceptionally Sinful with nothing but 'de-mirits' to your credit; and I must pass sentencing . . . but the record shows a minicule amount of karmic merit.
Which you prefer to experience first?

PS: Multi-national Corporations must carefully choose/screen their name-proper ---lest if spell or be pronounced as some naughty or nasty slang word in another language.

 

[mitchellmckain]

None. I find the whole idea to be completely obsene. Like old men lusting after children.

 

[Madhuri]

None. I find the whole idea to be completely obsene. Like old men lusting after children.

You equate reincarnation to sexual perversion?

Why do you consider it an 'obscene' concept, as opposed to simply being incorrect?

 

[mitchellmckain]

You equate reincarnation to sexual perversion?

It does indeed seem to me like a perversion that is very similar. Old people thrusting themselves into the lives of the young. That is just how I feel about it.

Why do you consider it an 'obscene' concept, as opposed to simply being incorrect?

Well my honest opinion is that it is incorrect. But I am not incapable of imagining such a thing and that is how I would feel about it when I imagine something like that happening -- like demonic possession or something. It is just like I can imagine the existence of the pretty nasty gods described by some religions, which I would defy with every intension of clinging to the faith in the God of love I believe in, to continue praising Him in the fires of hell if need be.

What makes a great deal more sense to me is something like spiritual companionship, so that so called "past lives" are simply the lives of those spiritual companions. I am not saying I believe in it, but that would not repulse me.

 

[paolops181]

"And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment." -Heb.9:27

 

[Madhuri]

Well my honest opinion is that it is incorrect. But I am not incapable of imagining such a thing and that is how I would feel about it when I imagine something like that happening -- like demonic possession or something. It is just like I can imagine the existence of the pretty nasty gods described by some religions, which I would defy with every intension of clinging to the faith in the God of love I believe in, to continue praising Him in the fires of hell if need be.

I guess I just can't relate to your emotional feeling. I think your imagination of the concept is quite inaccurate. It is nothing like demonic possession, and nothing to do with an old person thrusting them self into a young person. It's kind of strange that you see it that way.

I am not sure if you understand the concept accurately either. In philosophies that teach reincarnation as a reality, the Soul is the actual Self. You are a soul. I am a soul. All reincarnation is, is the Self (life-force) taking on a new body (at conception, so this 'body' is but a couple of cells) and giving it life. The soul IS life, according to these philosophies. And it is eternal. There's no 'old thrusting into the new'.

 

[mitchellmckain]

I guess I just can't relate to your emotional feeling. I think your imagination of the concept is quite inaccurate. It is nothing like demonic possession, and nothing to do with an old person thrusting them self into a young person. It's kind of strange that you see it that way.

You can see it as the limitations of my metaphysics if you like. I don't believe in souls or spirits animating living things so much as living things creating spirits by the choices they make. I see the physical universe as a womb in which we develop and are born from. To go back into a womb in that way makes no sense to me. Reincarnation for me equates with taking away the promise of new life from a child and imposing someone elses sin (or karma if you like) upon them. I find that very repellent.

I am not sure if you understand the concept accurately either.

I am sure I do not understand it like you do at all.

In philosophies that teach reincarnation as a reality, the Soul is the actual Self. You are a soul. I am a soul.

Yes but I prefer the word spirit because the word "soul" seems to have more confused origins to me. The spirit is the actual Self. You are a spirit. I am a spirit. The spirit simply means a non-physical aspect of reality that is what it is by its own nature and choices.

I find meaning and value in religions and philosophies only starting from the scientific worldview and it is difficult for me to see any meaning and value in these from outside of that context.

All reincarnation is, is the Self (life-force) taking on a new body (at conception, so this 'body' is but a couple of cells) and giving it life. The soul IS life, according to these philosophies.

Yeah I don't believe in that. Life is a physical process that can be described and modeled mathematically. Living organisms are self-organizing dynamic structures and form in a far from equillibrium environment as a consequence of nonlinear mathematics.

And it is eternal.

The spirit is eternal because as I said it exists and develops by its own nature and choices. Physical things are temporary because they are what they are by the mathematical relationships they have within the whole universe and so external events can come along and erase fragile things like our body and minds.

There's no 'old thrusting into the new'.

Not in my belief. In my belief a child is a completely new creation in the world with all the possibilites of the future open to it. What comes from the past is certainly real but is circumstantial only but definitely not the child himself. That is my basic objection. You are saying that the child himself is this old thing with baggage from the past and that is what I find obscene. I will tell the child that that there are no limitations and his life is his to make as he chooses and not something made before he was born and bound by some hopeless karmic destiny. The obsenity I see is in the opressiveness of this fatalistic worldview that robs the child of his freedom. Even though I don't really believe it is true, the philosophy itself is still like a demonic possession even if there is no demon.

I guess I am just too western world in that way.