My search into past lives started with channeling who I believe to be my social memory and asking them the name of my previous life... Through my innocent insistence and naive assumption they would answer, they broke the Law of Confusion in love and spelled the name out letter-by-letter.: Caroline Malik
http://www.ancientfaces.com/person/carol...k/68001961
Born in 1906 and died in 1986, 8 years before I was born. Lived and died in Texas, the state I live in today. Knowing this life has only given me flashbacks of me being alone in my very feminine home and a desire to chain smoke once again. I was wealthy due to my entrepreneurial spirit and married nobody although I had casual partners throughout my life.
My search continued today as I came upon the name Oscar Wilde in the comments section of a website. I had never heard of this man but coming upon his picture I was in awe. I was enchanted but for no clear reason. In fact, I found the man very homely yet he was admirable in his demeanor and choice of dress -- it was something I would like to wear given the money and confidence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Wilde
I came upon the same comment a second time and suddenly a idea randomly popped into my head: Could I have been this man in a previous life? Immediately I dismissed this random thought as ridiculous, narcissistic but I felt an inner dissonance, something that acknowledged this as a possibility. I proceeded to channel... I asked... Was I this man? The answer came as a resolute yes. I did not believe it. I cleared my mind and restated the question, I cleared my mind and restated the question... I asked my higher self, I challenged, I took breaks and asked again... And resolutely the answer was yes.
I looked up Mr. Wilde's date of death and it was 1900, 6 years before my date of birth in my most previous life on this planet.
I still was not convinced...
Before this, I had many heated discussions with my fiancee about my homosexuality which will remain physically-closeted indefinitely. She had fears that I would leave her for a man.
I looked into Mr. Wilde's history and he did just that... He left his wife alone in her home with his children, while he lived in hotels as he had affairs with other men.
So one similarity was clear... We were both very bisexual people and open in our sexuality. Then other things started matching up: We were both anarchists, rebels against the status-quo in art culture and a huge love for luxury and decadence. We both saw absolutely no use for government and saw even private property as immoral in many respects. Our mutual flamboyance and arrogance was unequivocal.
I started reading this man's works and I felt like I was reading my own thoughts.... The more I read on this man, the more I was assured despite many of the naive mistakes this man made.
I apparently sued a woman for a overstated charge of libel and ended up uncovering evidence of my own homosexuality, landing two years of hard prison labor. Oh karma... My prison sentence ended up with me apparently identifying with Jesus Christ. In this short life, it appears I learned a lesson that seeps into my life as it stands today... That suffering is bliss. That all is bliss.
There are a lot of lessons in this life that I will need to revisit in this one especially in regards to humility. It seems I am given information like this once more to fully discover myself.
"The second part of the letter traces Wilde's spiritual growth through the physical and emotional hardships of his imprisonment. Wilde introduces the greater context, making a typically grandiose claim: "I was one who stood in symbolic relations to the art and culture of my age," though he later writes, in a more humble vein, "I have said of myself that I was one who stood in symbolic relations to the art and culture of my age. There is not a single wretched man in this wretched place along with me who does not stand in symbolic relation to the very secret of life. For the secret of life is suffering." Briefly sketching his ascendancy and dominance of the literary and social scenes in London, he contrasts his past position and the attendant pleasure with his current position and the pain it brings. Pleasure and success are an artifice, he says, while pain wears no mask. He turns to humility as a remedy, and identifies with the other prisoners.
Wilde uses a quotation from Isaiah to introduce his Christian theme: "He is despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief and we hid our faces from him." Though Peter Raby acknowledges the "obvious relevance" of this quotation to Wilde's situation, he argues that the line does not necessitate the comparison with Christ implicit in his description of Robert Ross doffing his hat to Wilde after his conviction.Wilde adopts Jesus of Nazareth as a symbol of western kindness and eastern serenity and as a rebel-hero of mind, body and soul. Though other romantics had discussed Jesus in artistic terms, Wilde's conception is the most radical. He moves methodically toward this conclusion: his earlier antinomian attitude is re-iterated and he finds no recompense in traditional morality. Though Wilde loved the beauty of religion, he dismissed it now as a source of solace, saying "My Gods dwell in temples made with hands". Reason was similarly lacking: Wilde felt that the law had convicted him unjustly. Instead Wilde reworked his earlier doctrine of the appreciation of experience, all of it must be accepted and transformed, whatever its origin. Wilde declared he would actively accept sorrow and discover humility, be happy and appreciate developments in art and life." - Wikipedia
I understand well the self-controversy that arises when encountering your past lives and having them verified, especially when they are "known" or even famous individuals. For this reason I generally do not share my past lives except the ones which have no traceable context.
What I find most intriguing about my past lives is not just the way there have been influences seeded in this life, but the way in which my current personality is reflected off of those lives and my opportunity to make different choices and grow and learn from my mistakes made in other lives.
I have always been interested in past lives but never gone through with doing a proper 'regression'. I sense an eagerness for most people to think big and think someone famous from history was them, but i'm somewhat skeptical. Your resonance with the works of Oscar Wilde, I feel somewhat the same with Herman Hesse. Hence, my username. When I read the novel Steppenwolf it was like every word I could have written, and also his other novel Siddharta.
What I also sense in the grand unity of all things, is that every one that has ever, or will ever exist is a past life. All of you, as you are now in this time could be a past life of mine. Or a future life can also technically be past life. We are one remember!
One of the things that bothers me about the attitudes of most people towards "famous" past lives is the way people seem to be skeptical because of the fame of the individual, as though that individual intentionally got famous so as to have credit for later lives. Not to mention the fact that most famous individuals became famous only after their death, and that the idea of someone being historically known is a simple fact of encountering the works of other selves. I think the real controversy with claiming famous past lives is because our society puts fame on a pedestal and there are social suggestions that famous individuals are in some way "larger than life" and so when people suggest any claim to that socially recognizable activity that usually surrounds famous individuals there is an automatic ego rebuttal because of an expectation as to how that individual should be, and many assumptions are made about how famous people are.
Many people I have seen with issues towards such claims usually cite that they think it is arrogant, unfair, egotistical, simply unlikely, narcissistic, etc for any individual to claim credit for work done in other lives because that would apprently mean some kind of authority for those works. It is either that, or there is skepticism because of no empirical verification. Regardless, it seems to come down to some argument of "likelihood" which results in a subjective standstill.
To me, I do not see why it is any more likely for someone to have a past life as an individual with no historical record than to have a past life as someone who was historically recorded. I also do not understand why there seems to be this attitude that famous people are special in terms of reincarnation and why it is treated as such a phenomenal thing that a historical personage should be reincarnated. This is partly a western attitude, but it is all over the world.
Then I think of the Dalai Lama, who is said to be the exact same individual reincarnating over and over to be the Dalai Lama (although this one is the last one). In Tibetan culture the idea that someone may be born and be discovered to be a Lamas, or Rinpoche, or the Master of a particular ashram or school, is commonplace. I, personally, find it incredibly intriguing to consider that every individual who has incarnated on this planet is an entity, a body/mind/spirit complex, and so the story of all of us, of our lives and of our relationships, extend well beyond just what occurs in one incarnative life.
The story of you is limited only by what you accept as part of your story, and everyone has a story. Everything is energy and energy is never created or destroyed, but it journies, it travels, it experiences a story that is never ending and there are no gaps in the story, infinity is seamless.
I would add that I retain a rather strong belief that everyone will have at least one famous incarnation, at least one life which will be a major contribution to the collective process of humanity, so I do not see why it should be treated as something which is exceptional. Some entities have already had such an incarnation, for some it will be in the future, but everyone gets a chance in the spotlight to do their thing and show themselves to the world throughout time and history, that is my sincere belief.
Makes me think of this quote:
"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure.
It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us. We ask ourselves, 'Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous?' Actually, who are you not to be?
You are a child of God. Your playing small does not serve the world. There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you.
We are all meant to shine, as children do. We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us. It's not just in some of us; it's in everyone. And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same.
As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others." - Marianna Williamson
(10-14-2013, 05:26 PM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ]To me, I do not see why it is any more likely for someone to have a past life as an individual with no historical record than to have a past life as someone who was historically recorded.
Now take a look at how many people make claim to the same historically recorded past life and a different story unfolds.
(10-14-2013, 08:56 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2013, 05:26 PM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ]To me, I do not see why it is any more likely for someone to have a past life as an individual with no historical record than to have a past life as someone who was historically recorded.
Now take a look at how many people make claim to the same historically recorded past life and a different story unfolds.
Well, if you're open to a theory of infinite multiple intersecting timeline universes, it should be theoretically possible for multiple people to have the same incarnation in different timelines.
(10-14-2013, 09:05 PM)xise Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2013, 08:56 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2013, 05:26 PM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ]To me, I do not see why it is any more likely for someone to have a past life as an individual with no historical record than to have a past life as someone who was historically recorded.
Now take a look at how many people make claim to the same historically recorded past life and a different story unfolds.
Well, if you're open to a theory of infinite multiple intersecting timeline universes, it should be theoretically possible for multiple people to have the same incarnation in different timelines.
Sometimes people elevate a vague notion to the status of a theory. This overextension is commonplace because you get the semblance of answer for no invested effort. Everything is possible if everything is entertained, merely because we do not care to know better. However, without investigation of supporting principles and mechanisms there is nothing to learn from it - the idea just points towards another idea which suggests a possibility without any accountability whatsoever.
I can one up you and say that since "all is one", we've all shared everyone's past lives. And in elevating the situation to that absurdity of infinity we've just explained everything and nothing at all.
(10-14-2013, 09:20 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]Sometimes people elevate a vague notion to the status of a theory. This overextension is commonplace because you get the semblance of answer for no invested effort. Everything is possible if everything is entertained, merely because we do not care to know better. However, without investigation of supporting principles and mechanisms there is nothing to learn from it - the idea just points towards another idea which suggests a possibility without any accountability whatsoever.
I can one up you and say that since "all is one", we've all shared everyone's past lives. And in elevating the situation to that absurdity of infinity we've just explained everything and nothing at all.
You're quite correct that I don't use the word theory as per its actual (scientific?) definition. The word notion is a much better word for it. I don't rule out notions, nor do I let them replace actual responsibility for learning (or at least I try not to). Many notions are in practice untestable, and thus are only useful as curiosities. I only commented because it's common to hear talk of simultaneous incarnations, in multiple universes, along with multiple timelines, at least in new age circles, and so I think for some people, there is an open question as to whether multiple people can have the same incarnation. Personally, for me, I don't think it matters to me whether multiple people claimed to be the same person in a previous life, since the whole previous lives thing is so hard to objectively verify. It's something subjective, and who am I to determine whether a subjective experience for someone else is true or not true?
However, I do think there is a real danger to get carried away and use notions in place of real learning about our experiences in this world. I agree with your note of caution!
(10-14-2013, 09:32 PM)xise Wrote: [ -> ]It's something subjective, and who am I to determine whether a subjective experience for someone else is true or not true?
"Everything is subjective" is yet another appeal to an infinity where any objective aspect is conveniently dismissed.
(10-14-2013, 09:51 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2013, 09:32 PM)xise Wrote: [ -> ]It's something subjective, and who am I to determine whether a subjective experience for someone else is true or not true?
"Everything is subjective" is yet another appeal to an infinity where any objective aspect is conveniently dismissed.
I agree with your statement, but who said anything about everything is subjective?
For me, I think at this point, it's hard to objectively examine another's past lives since I don't have the current skillset to verify them, so I treat them as if they are subjective matters, but with an open mind.
That being said, if past lives was a primary interest of mine, I would take great efforts to find some method of objective verification. As is, it's not central to my current evolution. But I do think that trying to quantify and be objective about what we do even in spiritual matters is important.
So, any proposed methods of objective verification of a past life? What do you all think is the practical purpose of examining past lives?
After having been "blocked" to the nature of my own past lives for the entirety of my seeking, and having lost any real interest in them at all, a spark was lit again after a moving visit to a psychic. The information she shared with me is dubious at best; I'll only rely on her information so far as I can relate to it and grow from it.
However, the idea seemed to open up something inside of me that made possible an experience I had a couple weeks ago regarding past lives. As I was riding in a car through some beautiful Kentucky countryside, and particularly beautiful area moved my consciousness in such a way that I felt I was being pulled to remember something. Riding as a passenger I was able to just let go and allow myself to be taken away on a current of thought that became one of the most intense streams of thought I've ever experienced, all relating to a past life I supposedly lived in this area during the Civil War. It was the closest thing I've ever experienced to a real 'download' that people sometimes talk about.
To make a really long story short, I received information about being a man in Kentucky that was torn by the war. Fighting for the Confederacy, I felt an intense internal struggle because I realized the mentality of both sides of the war and saw two sides, seemingly irreconcilable, yet I was somehow able to agree with both ideas and fighting against brothers who I agreed with was intensely traumatic for me. Being in Kentucky was supposedly no accident for the incarnation, as it was symbolic of the struggle between North and South, being highly contentious, the state almost representing my own mentality at the time. An internal struggle in my mind, played out in the state that I was in.
I then "received" information relating this supposed past lifetime to my present one, shedding light on my own struggle in this lifetime with usually being able to see both sides of an issue, and making sense of some of my own intense and often painful struggles I suffer in my mind due to a schism of two viewpoints that are seemingly irreconcilable yet somehow both existing simultaneously in my mind. I received information about how this might be used as a tool for growth and hints on how to approach this struggle in myself so I could bridge certain gaps, which in return would allow bridges to be built within the planetary mind and, consequently, possible within our space/time reality. I got a sense of the real power I had as an individual to offer my personal harmony and understanding to the planetary mind and understand how this really could make a difference in the real world. It was an extremely intense and moving experience for me.
Who knows if the lifetime was real, or if it was a convenient metaphor to help me grasp my own nature? Could be both. Surely we create allegory and myth in order to make sense of what we are offered from the mysterious origins of our mind, but I believe that we live out these stories inevitably. I think it's totally possible that this was a real lifetime of mine. To lend some support of this fact, I was oddly obsessed with the Civil War as a child. As soon as I learned about it I felt drawn to it and it felt familiar to me.
Either way, whether it was real or not is not really important as I am able to use the experience of knowing about this past life as a mechanism for growth in my current life. I think that's the most important part about exploring past lives: how can this be of use to us now?
The reality of the mechanism by which you grow is unimportant if the results are real.
(10-15-2013, 12:00 AM)Karl Wrote: [ -> ]The reality of the mechanism by which you grow is unimportant if the results are real.
So then if the results are not real, the reality of the mechanism by which you grow is important? (not holding my breath as usual)
Have you learned the importance of being earnest? lol
Quote:Before this, I had many heated discussions with my fiancee about my homosexuality which will remain physically-closeted indefinitely. She had fears that I would leave her for a man.
Quote:In fact, I found the man very homely yet he was admirable in his demeanor and choice of dress -- it was something I would like to wear given the money and confidence.
One thing I'd say you do have in common with Oscar Wilde is that I'm sure you're serious at times but I still find you hilarious lol.
As for the whole "reading their work and it's like reading my own mind" I had this with Carl Jung and for a time I thought maybe I was him in a past life, there was stuff I had written on my own and at times there was word for word congruency with his work...but then this happened with the Ra material, Marshall Mcluhan, Aleister Crowley and Percy Shelley lol.
It's not that hard to travel on a personal train of thought and arrive at the same station/conclusion as someone else, happens all the time even with people that are processing vastly different experiences, doesn't mean we were/are that person.
Quote:To me, I do not see why it is any more likely for someone to have a past life as an individual with no historical record than to have a past life as someone who was historically recorded.
To be honest a lot of the wishing that we were someone famous in a previous lifetime often stems from some insecurity and a desire to validate ourselves in the thought that we were at one time "important". This forms a bias of interpretation through which we "filter"/entertain possible previous lives. I'm not saying it's a useless thing to ponder, but c'mon.
Steppenwolf: My previous identity on this site was "Ludi" from Hesse's "Magister Ludi/ The Glass Bead Game", good to see another fan around.
So is all such memory entirely due to wishing it so?
I am just confused, would famous people just not reincarnate? Aha
The biggest bulk of my evidence is in my consistent channeling, the dates and the similar political viewpoints plus what I believe to be my intuition and "higher self." I would not buy into this just by the literature alone, as I acknowledge Aloysius.
I plan to dive into deeper methods all in good time. The greatest of all being the trance state.
What in the trance state do you feel offers the grounds for objective evidence?
(10-15-2013, 02:21 AM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ]What in the trance state do you feel offers the grounds for objective evidence?
The concious mind is pushed away and focus on the intent at hand is made paramount. Of course there is still room for error.
The fact is there is nothing objective working alone in a veiled, primitive reality.
If all past lives are invented then are not all past moments invented and thus the definition of memory invented and your very existence in my existence an invention too?
Anyway. More to the point.
Some people seem to believe that there are by definition no past lives possible due to the invention of self effect and some people believe that there is no self possible only the past lives by the same matrix. I choose to believe that this matrix can be used to create a multidimensional being that depending to location and energy can be used to generate both the perception of past lives and the perception of only one life. Anyway. If you really think about past lives, I'm relatively sure you can understand the principle and generate past life content for yourself that is accurate to approaching infinity.
Pick the dominant attributes that you see in yourself, say, leadership. Pick a situation that you have used that attribute in the negative towards someone else, I'm sure you can find a case, its quite easy. Then ask that they, in all their negative self aware of the harm you have done state, program a, alone or with others, presentation of all the harm you have done to them and in reverse program you to ask for and receive forgiveness. This will drive away most memories as you know the people would not agree to it. Those that would, will have an "near infinite" time due to the nature of the communication to build what ever setting they need to project a same but in reverse memory to you.
Then you approach in a trance or approaching trance state any media source such as a book or theater play or TV show etc and ask for a what I described above to play out. That way you can bring the entirety of the karma to your attention and see a played out true life, as it is done by them in "shadow land" if one might call trance state that to the worst/best of their ability, aka, "life performance". At its end you can do as you wish with the spirit but you will have received a single long length technically legitimate past life experience.
But only when done in trance and with the accepted associated costs of positive polarity gain which can be damaging to most ego structures.
Anyway, from that standpoint I have done sufficient past life work to have a wide general variety of experiences to lean on when necessary. Every time I lean onto an experience the experience itself builds up and the associated work load is increased. Aka, when I believe in a past life that past life is made more manifest as a way of increasing positive polarization with simple thought work if the past life is sufficiently polarized upon construction of the past life assumption.
So, what past lives I have, I would assume in the grand scheme, all of them, but in the actuality, none of them. Active at the moment, hard to say, I would say if I had to write out all that I think I've been that I can remember on any concious level, probably a few hundred and at most to a thousand.
(10-15-2013, 02:46 AM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ] (10-15-2013, 02:21 AM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ]What in the trance state do you feel offers the grounds for objective evidence?
The concious mind is pushed away and focus on the intent at hand is made paramount. Of course there is still room for error.
The fact is there is nothing objective working alone in a veiled, primitive reality.
That everything is absolutely based only on repetition of past intent is whats good about the trance state.
(10-15-2013, 01:52 AM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ]I am just confused, would famous people just not reincarnate? Aha
What you are confused about is the merely possible always being the actual case because you want it to be so. Aha
I had no initial attraction to this man. His works are of no particular interest to me at this moment. I have only considered this because I was pointed towards such. Although I am now rediscovering my self-repressed interest in fiction and theatre...
The irony is I look at this man and his actions and I feel I am looking at myself.
I find this man ugly and androgynous and that's, funnily, one of the reasons why I believe I was him.
If I were to pick an ideal past life, it would not be the one of Oscar Wilde.
(10-15-2013, 12:37 AM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ] (10-15-2013, 12:00 AM)Karl Wrote: [ -> ]The reality of the mechanism by which you grow is unimportant if the results are real.
So then if the results are not real, the reality of the mechanism by which you grow is important? (not holding my breath as usual)
It would seem, that in this particular case, if one felt strong attraction and similarity to a life lived by a historical person, including patterns of thinking, strengths, and flaws, one could indeed learn from said historical life and grow from it, independent of the assertion of whether this was an actual past life or not.
In general, we can learn from many different sources, without needing to determine our relationship to the source of learning, as long as we are not strongly attached to characterizing the relationship to that source. Many of us do it through the hardships our friends go through and share with us. Doing it with a historical life does not need to be so different. In this sense, if the growth is real, the only objectivity that matters is that our issues correspond in some actual manner to the set of information gathered from the source. It does not matter in these sorts of learning situations whether the source is a character in a play, a historical figure, a friend, or a "past life."
So while it is important to be objective, I think the benefit of learning from other people, in general, need not extend the objectivity to whether the past life is real for a given individual. The objectivity only need to extend to such an extent that there is a genuine correspondence of imbalances and issues and a potential for learning outside of an egoic desire to associate oneself with a famous or infamous or otherwise noteworthy past life. However, a strong need or attachment to declare that a particularly historical life was in fact one's past life can result from two things, (1) the life was in fact a past life or (2) an imbalanced desire to be associated with the person, for whatever reason. Careful consideration of such a declaration is important in order to not piggyback an additional imbalance upon the initially useful learning opportunity presented by similarity to the historical person's life.
In conclusion, one need not be objective about "everything", but it is important to be objective about our own imbalances, desire for learning, and potential for learning, in all aspects of our lives.
(10-15-2013, 03:12 AM)Not Sure Wrote: [ -> ]But only when done in trance and with the accepted associated costs of positive polarity gain which can be damaging to most ego structures.
How can positive polarity gain be damaging to most ego structures? Is that a bad thing? Does the ego desire separation by default?
During a week or so I started sitting in front of the mirror, asking to see my last incarnation. I only got so far as to see my forehead be covered in a greyish bang(as seen in picture 2). Two weeks later during a substance-induced experience, I again asked the mirror about my last(earthly) incarnation. The image changed at a much higher rate and presented before me an older woman with very thick gray hair. I couldn't fully make out the face.. But she was winking one of her fingers laying on her lap(even though I didn't) I got the impression she lived a few hundred years ago..
The following part is only speculation, and I don't take it so seriously.. But could I have been Queen Christina of Sweden? I found a portrait of her and the hair could be a good match, I remember it was abnormally wide laterally, but greyish.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/co...n_stor.jpg
Another picture of her where the hairstyle is completely identical:
http://i.imgur.com/TDkQG2Q.jpg
She took the name Christina Alexandra when she arrived in Rome, after some pope named Alexander. My name is Alexander.
"She learned Swedish as well as German, Dutch, Danish, French and Italian; her talent for languages was nothing short of unique."
I've been told I have great ease with language.
Also, apparently she was into hermeticism, alchemy and all that jazz. Could explain the LAST earthly incarnation. I stated my question in many ways but I'm pretty sure the former was the first one.
Again, only speculation. I have next to no evidence for it.. But the older woman with wide and thick hair I am sure of. So I can't really be sure since I didn't get a clear view of her face. Also paintings from that era tend to look very weird.
Still fun to speculate.
In a past life I was native american. Then in another I was a woman holding onto her two children next to a rock, hiding while invaders came into the town.
Within infinity, before that I could have been a cartoon character for all I know. That'd be rad.
(10-15-2013, 12:05 PM)Gemini Wolf Wrote: [ -> ] (10-15-2013, 03:12 AM)Not Sure Wrote: [ -> ]But only when done in trance and with the accepted associated costs of positive polarity gain which can be damaging to most ego structures.
How can positive polarity gain be damaging to most ego structures? Is that a bad thing? Does the ego desire separation by default?
Perhaps I was inaccurate in my description, if so, I apologize.
I mean that it is damaging to the self for most egos that do it, but not to the egos of people outside of it. Unless they are crossed specifically which is one of the primary dangers of solo channeling
I respect the dangers of solo channeling, which is why I don't do it. However I do like to tune in energetically to the Ra complex. I hope that's not bringing me some negative attention. I also focus on intelligent infinity.
(10-15-2013, 07:00 AM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ] (10-15-2013, 01:52 AM)Tanner Wrote: [ -> ]I am just confused, would famous people just not reincarnate? Aha
What you are confused about is the merely possible always being the actual case because you want it to be so. Aha
No I am confused because the "merely possible" is frequently discounted because it is "merely possible". Why is the finger always pointed towards grandiose seeking suggesting every such individual has some ego void to fill? Why are the unlikely situations always scoffed at?
I just don't understand how exactly people external to the individual can claim an individual is running off of "ego desire" without actually just projecting their own ego. How exactly could one know whether or not another is genuinely in the truth of themselves? Everyone judges genuinity differently. For some people they won't accept a "true self" notion unless it is devoid of personality, and the "high truth of voidness", but that to me still seems like an ego projection. A depersonalized ego is still an ego.