>>42462219
Reality itself doesn't make sense. Is this your strong point here? That you dun undestan? The whole discourse about reality and truth became nothing more than recreation.

>>42462219
Bro... you literally proved yourself wrong. The reincarnation IS your clone

>>42462239
Ah sorry, flip that around, I didn't proofread that. The clone IS your reincarnation

There’s a bunch of logical problems with reincarnation that require infinite numbers of realities to solve which also make the possibility of everyone escaping the cycle impossible.

Population increase also means new “souls” are being formed constantly. You should just be able to wipe out all life on the planet to end the cycle but of course there’s now these dimensions to conveniently stop you from doing that because we will just get reborn there.

There’s also no real reason why you won’t just eventually “fall” back down separating from the source considering we did that in the first place.

If I granted that the cycle of reincarnation is real I still think Buddhism is a cope.

Not really if you take the theory of soul splitting and that the reason one person has multiple "soul mates" is that what they truly were the other half of a half of a half of they're soul that they were seeking out, but who says all the time you lose all your previous memories. To many theories too this and not enough conclusion

>>42462219
In your example you’re playing with clinical death, which isn’t really death, so the person never died.

>>42462219
I remember when intelligent people would sometimes post here. I miss that.

>>42462219
what if the human body is an antenna (with limited RAM/ROM) that tunes in to consciousness? information gained by the antenna is "downloaded" then uploaded" & archived in the greater, shared consciousness. the antenna is a curious one, collecting data for 80+ years, storing memory and uploading discoveries until finally it's circuitry fails and it ceases to function. the knowledge, lessons learned, memories and experiences died at the user's ROM level, no?. is it reasonable to posit a newly created, replacement antenna would be able to access this historical data with enough clarity to realize the cyclic pattern of reincarnation?

>>42462219
>In the cosmological model developed by astral projection pioneer Robert Monroe (founder of the Monroe Institute), the concept of a "split soul" is explained through the structure of the "I-There" and the mechanics of reincarnation. Monroe did not view the soul as a singular, fragile entity that breaks under trauma, but rather as a vast, multidimensional collective that simultaneously sends out "fragments" or personalities to experience different lifetimes

>The Division: Your total soul does not reincarnate all at once. It splits its energy, keeping the core cluster in the non-physical realm while projecting smaller facets of consciousness into different physical human lifetimes—simultaneously and across different eras of time

>The Interaction: These split personas can sometimes interact. For example, Monroe wrote about how a past-life aspect of himself (a medieval jester) bubbled up from his cluster to emotionally support him during a difficult out-of-body exploration.

>When a human dies with severe sudden trauma, intense guilt, or an obsessive addiction to physical reality, a fragment of their soul can split off and become "stuck"

>Souls in this state are fragmented; part of their energy is trapped in a rigid, repetitive loop of their death or their earthly obsession, unaware that they have passed away

>>42462219

>>>And Hindus and Buddhists think this is a good thing?

No. Nirvana and Moksha are literally to break the cycle of eternal rebirth. The goal is to leave because it sucks so hard.


Also bringing people back from the dead isn’t possible. Even if it was, why would the originals consciousness have to return? None of this has to work like you said it does.

>>42462219
>hindus and buddhist believe this is a good thing
Can people really be that ignorant? It seems they haven't even read a wikipedia article about the teachings of the buddha, but think they can have an opinion about it. It's pathetic.
>When you die, you enter the void of nothingness
Also complete nonsense. No teaching of buddhism or hinduism says that. Aren't people able to do basic studies any more?

>>42462219
>Imagine a world where it’s possible to bring people back to life months (or even years) after they die.
Doing this would involve putting the same consciousness back. Which would require that it not be in some other body.
Thought experiment disproven.

>>42462219
The image is just
>reincarnation makes me feel bad, therefore I despise it
Also they are also fucking retarded as both Hinduism and Buddhism don’t think the cycle of samsara is a good thing. The fact you saved it and posted it, is very telling of your retarddom
Your text assumes physicalism and rejects all other models, it assumes that we will be able to bring people back after they are medically dead (even then, I can grant that we can: how do you know it’s not just a clone and is in fact the same “person”), it assumes that this is the only form reincarnation.

And I am going to assume that you are a shitskin retread

>>42462219
Understand that Dalai lama experience is real, extrapolate from there.

>>42462256
Majority of the population don't have souls, hence the NPC/hylic meme throughout the ages.

>>42462219
>>42462219
Yeah because it’s retarded. God creates your soul ex nihilo. It persists after death as an intellectual substance that is either oriented to and united with being (heaven), or in privation and opposition to it (hell/damnation)

>>42462219
What if the spirit stayed in your “void” until it got recalled by your tech magic reviver?

>>42462219
>I see a lot of people posting this theory that 2+2=4, but imagine a world where 2+2=3. This simple thought experiment completely disproves the 2+2=4 theory.
/x/ is by far the lowest IQ board on this site and that's saying a lot.

>>42462892
What you believe is far, far more "retarded"

>>42462290
This is the shit that pisses me off, our essence could literally be anywhere else and yet it's forced to experience *this*, because SUICIDE BAD or whatever. There is nothing to learn or experience here that warrants a guaranteed 70-100 years time in our human perception. (even if the truth is that time is an illusion, i'm just talking about the human experience)
There is the possibility of infinite experiences happening all at once for us, but how can I tune into one of these instead of being in this one? It's gay as fuck.

>>42462219
If you develop enough ability to perceive accurately while out of body you will eventually gather observation of the situation. Your physical body has a short term existence. Your consciousness is long term to the point of permanent from human perspectives of time.

The forgetting part is due to a deliberate technology.. so advanced that it is difficult to evaluate as beneficial or harmful. The containment is purposeful. I suspect we would be grateful for it if we truly knew why.

>>42462219
How are you even supposed to escape the cycle if cant recall anything about your previous life? What was the point of your previous life if you cant recall it? Reincarnation is such a stupid idea.

>>42463866
It's all occurring simultaneously.
we don't perceive it from that perspective yet.
What exactly is the meaning of the terminology interdimensional? We don't correctly perceive ourselves in this material reality nor the passing of time

>>42462219

1/2

Your argument against reincarnation is small-brained, as well as the premise posed by the anon in the image you posted. Let's address both real quick


Image anon says he hates the reincarnation concept because you are forced to forget between lives.

>Hindus and Buddhists somehow believe this is a good thing

I can't speak for Hinduism or later branches of Buddhism that believe in reincarnating as trees and animals and shit (you can incarnate as animals, dogs and horses are the most common, but it's not really a normal course of action for an individual soul, and most animals do not have souls) but the goal Buddhism as originated by Gautama Siddhartha was to escape the reincarnation cycle including including the forgetting between lives.
The idea of reincarnation being punishment for karma or necessary to learn lessons and evolve your consciousness came later. The whole trap of reincarnation and forgetting was designed on purpose to keep us believing we only live once, we can never escape, etc. because this is a prison planet and the bodies of ours are our prison uniforms. there is no such thing as karma either. There are no life lessons to learn because we have already learned, we are experienced, we have simply forgotten everything. The goal of original Gnosticism, Buddhism and a few other religions is to be your "higher self" as a normal every day thing. Even in the dumbed down and chopped up version of Christianity today Jesus tells us to "live your life as though in prayer" this is basic meditation, keeping your mind clear of thoughts and consulting your higher self in every day life. This is the postulated path to Nirvana, the Christ consciousness, enlightenment, etc. of these old religions.

>Buddhists somehow believe this is a good thing
Its funny as fuck to get literally the most important thing buddhists believe, competely wrong, like 100% polarly wrong

>>42462219

2/2

>Imagine a world where it’s possible to bring people back to life months (or even years) after they die

Ok this is basically the same thought experiment as "if you clone someone do they have a soul"

The answer is actually a bit complicated. There are several possibilities for this scenario.

The human body doesn't need a soul to operate. It is like a computer, it has hardware (the body) software (the mind) firmware (the automatic systems of the body like breathing, temperature regulation, heart rate) and a user (you, an individual soul)

Without a soul the body will probably be very animal like, it could also be running a very standard stimulus response behavior to get by in life. It MIGHT be that if you cloned someone or resurrected a body whose soul has departed, the soul might all of a sudden focus on that body and his attention becomes split on his new body and his old body at once. He might jump back and forth between the bodies, or most likely he will have detached from that body at death, and embraced his new life as a kid in another part of the world.

The idea that one can only be in control of one body at a time is also a limited way of thinking which comes from existing in this hyper materialist world view. It's not true. You as a being unfettered by a body can do many things at once, like we have two hands that play treble and bass notes on a piano independently, we can control more than one body with attention of different things, but the vast majority of people on earth are not in a state of consciousness to do that, in my opinion.

Another possibility, and this has been studied in reincarnation circles is the case of a "walk-in", is a soul departing a body and another coming in to take over, this is often due to someone receiving an injury and believing they are dead, but they're not. Usually though, they have their "life flash before their eyes" and come back

>>42463102
What OP is getting at is that a person does seem to be connected to their brain. Which is true in a sense. When you learn, the knowledge is in the brain as physical structures. So people's memories and experiences are in their physical brains. It does make intuitive sense that if you revive a dead body, they would be the same person, not have some blank newborn baby soul.

If there's a soul separate from the body, it would have to be something other than memories and experiences, even other than emotions and thoughts because those also correspond to brain parts. Maybe the soul still experiences all that, but it can't be the same thing as that.

>>42464357
>they would be the same person
the "new" eternal soul would accept itself as that same material body and mind, yes.
>it would have to be something other than memories and experiences
Existence, awareness, and enjoyment.
Sat-cit-ananda.
The one aware of the experience, and enjoyed or suffered due to it. that is you, the soul.

>>42464374
So it would be a different consciousness, but that consciousness would perceive themself to be the person whose body it was, along with all the memories? I can take that explanation.

It would also mean we won't have memories in the afterlife.

>>42462219
What if you don't enter a void, rather you "shead" your body.

>>42464463
I'm trying to stay within the hypothetical given.
My understanding is usually the mental body goes with the soul during transmigration, but it is "blanked" and warped to fit the new physical body. The "blank" is not complete and will influence "inherent" tendencies and yearnings, but generally not to the point of keeping any past memory.
>It would also mean we won't have memories in the afterlife.
What do you mean by "afterlife"? As in when we are out of samsara? Depends on the belief. Dvaitists (you are not God, and remain your own individual out of samsara) say you have spiritual memories that you have temporarily forgotten. Like a brief dream during a daynap.

>>42464357
>It does make intuitive sense that if you revive a dead body
This is a meaningless impossibility so no, it doesn't "make sense". Telling me to imagine a dead body being revived with its memories intact and then attempting to use that fantasy as the basis for some sort of argument is just as ridiculous as telling me to imagine that 2+2=3.

It's not real, the world doesn't work that way, and if your argument only functions in the context of this sort of fantasy then it doesn't function at all. Putting that aside, you guys desperately need to go read some philosophy instead of trying to reinvent the wheel with these clumsy attempts at tackling the mind body problem. People much smarter than you have already spent centuries debating this to death and you could save yourself a lot of time by just reading what they thought instead of trying to stumble through it yourself.

>>42462219
We don't have authority over reality to simply declare what is possible and what is not.
Reality exists as it is whether we correctly comprehend it or not.
Until we are able to measure and track the presence of consciousness we will not have definitive absolute certainty of our knowledge of how it functions. The possibility that it is capable of interactions that engage functions of quantum properties are not entirely out of the question.
Perception of what exists beyond the linear physical context is available to those who have developed cognitive perception abilities and aptitudes. The indication is that the functions of consciousness are engaged in quantum properties that are only recently being detected within the scope of scientific means.

>>42464508
A moment of perception can outweigh a century of debate

>>42462219
I don't believe in forced reincarnation.

But in your scenario where the 'body is brought back' , it'd just be a husk for the consciousness has already depossessed that body.

File: rust.png (927 KB, 871x609)

927 KB PNG

>>42462219
you are reborn into the same life. over and over. nothing matters.

>>42462219
Kill yourself, kike filth.

>>42462219
Nope. That void, that absolute blackness is where atheists and those attached to the material go. And they find themselves trapped by their own beliefs really. Some others simply stuck here on earth in never ending loops but the majority of people go back to the fifth dimension

>>42462219
one consciousness. you are reborn to live as someone who you recognise as not you in your current life. until you have lived all lives. this is also why the temporal dimension is experienced sequentially and not more holistically like the spatial ones, I think.
further extension of this idea: wheeler's one electron universe.

File: 813fMOUx3ZL._SL1500_.jpg (165 KB, 1125x1500)

165 KB JPG

>>42462219
It's not impossible, a person can be incarnated in multiple bodies at the same time. Shaar HaGilgulim explains this in detail.

>>42463361
We are forced to experience this because the body is a veil that blocks out the other experiences
Something is keeping us ignorant of who we really are, because as long as we stay ignorant we're stuck here

>>42462219
>However, this doesn't make any sense.
It seems like you are attempting to define/make sense of something that we don't even have the framework within the mechanism of reality itself to comprehend... We will understand the entirety of "reincarnation" on God, The Fathers' time, Not ours.

you can try to gymnastic away but reincarnation will always much more evidence than any other soteriology

>>42462219
>When you die, you enter the same void of nothingness that you existed in before your birth.
>Therefore, after death, you must eventually re-emerge from that void of nothingness to be born again (reincarnation)
This doesn't prove that reincarnation is necessarily true, but it does prove that eternal nothingness cannot be true.

File: 1710714317015555.png (147 KB, 775x849)

147 KB PNG

Reincarnation is false because the Bible is true.

>>42464638
>A moment of perception can outweigh a century of debate
Complete nonsense. If you were interested in mathematics, you wouldn't sit around attempting to reinvent algebra, you'd learn from the work of the people who came before you and pick up where they left off.

Philosophy and theology are not amorphous, subjective fields of study. Every thought you could possibly have about this subject has already been fleshed out and debated to death literal centuries ago. If you actually cared, actually had an interest in these topics rather than wanting to use them as a vehicle to masturbate over your own "insights", you would learn from those who came before you - literally the primary strength of mankind - and only then start trying to come up with your own ideas.

>>42462256
I'd estimate probably 90-95% of "humanity" don't have souls.

File: 1761658660815597.png (228 KB, 1170x1163)

228 KB PNG

>>42462219
>I can disprove reincarnation
>so what if you like... die
>but then are reincar-I MEAN BROUGHT BACK TO LIFE???
>checkmate retards
Actual sub-Saharan level IQ post

>>42462219
This conundrum is solved by substance dualism. That is, the physical body is temporary, but the soul is separate from the body and eternal. When you die, the soul (i.e. consciousness) doesn't disappear, it becomes disembodied, ready to become reembodied again when the correct conditions are present. Resurrection would reembody the soul in the old body, not create a new soul that's also the old soul for the old body. So it would be more accurate to say that it's the SAME consciousness inhabiting the same body twice.
>What if they bring your old body back to life but the original soul has become reembodied elsewhere?
There are two possibilities. A) your body gets inhabited by a different soul. Or B) your body lives as a soulless NPC.

>>42462219
Purely karma-based reincarnation, where God doesn't give grace, also makes no sense, for the following reason: imagine a person commits sin throughout his life, and dies, and gets reborn in another body, under worse circumstances. Lacking knowledge of his metaphysical state, and assuming he has free will, so that he can reverse course, how is he to change? Since people born in worse circumstances will generally tend to be worse than others, who are born in better circumstances, don't you see how in such a system, there will be a great bifurcation, where some souls will tend downwards non-stop, towards worse and worse lives, and others will tend upwards, towards more a more heavenly existence? What does this say about God?

>>42467013
UNLESS, maybe just as things in the material world don't just "fall downward" through space by default, but rather are attracted to masses, and if souls, deeds, thoughts, and grace, exist as subtle bodies in a kind-of Platonic space, whereby they attract and repulse another, maybe that is how one can affect rebirth?

>>42462219
>This is plainly not possible
Why not? It was already true. And will continue to be true quite a while longer. You are several people on the earth right this very now.

An in regards to your image's complaint about forgetting, consider that the forgetting only happens when the soul is linked up to a new physical brain in material reality. Outside of material reality, the core eternal spirit you remember everything.

It's like a Rogue-lite. You start a new run, but the consequences of the previous runs aren't totally dust in the wind, the experiences improve the overall quality of your soul.

>>42464491
>but it is "blanked" and warped to fit the new physical body. The "blank" is not complete and will influence "inherent" tendencies and yearnings, but generally not to the point of keeping any past memory.
It's not even all that complicated really.

Baby brains aren't terribly complex. They're basically like a macaque or something. There's only so much it can hold, especially with very few neuron path patterns constructed yet, only those manifested by genetics which is why personality traits can be inherited from parent.

So for any memory to be retained into childhood much less adulthood from another life, you would have to think about it a LOT as a baby.

Or be born into a brain with very fast pattern inscription, which is why Gifted children often have what neuroscientists call intuitive leaps. But it's no special additional property of Gifted brains, it's just something they thought about as a baby with their old life's memories, so the engram was strengthened, they didn't have to learn it again because thinking about it while they still knew it made them retain the information entirely or have it easily rememberable with minor stimulation.

>>42462219
wtf? idk where you are getting multiple consciousnesses from but when your brain has decayed to mud then there's none of it left because consciousness is directly tied to a brain. show me consciousness that is not tied to a brain. you can't. then new consciousness arises and everything inbetween was a blink of an eye. obviously there is some inexplicable "veil of forgetting effect" but non-existence cannot be empirically demonstrated and is a completely made up concept

>>42462219
retarded image. Hindus and Buddhists are literally trying to escape reincarnation. It's not a good thing, it's the worst thing because it entails suffering.

>>42466793
Maybe, but if so, how can you tell who has a soul and who doesn't?

>>42465221
EXACTLY. Smart anon, you get it. Humanity is one giant experiment or livestock

>>42465516
>basedjak poster
Not shocked

>>42462219
reincarnation is the way the universe lets us experience time and space over and over until heat death and collapse, at which point this stage will emd and the next will begin
>>42462256
everyone's soul is a piece of a larger soul that humanity shares, it is vast and can account for our population growing to fill the milky way. buddhism has the wrong idea, as do most reincarnationists

>>42467349
its not that we have souls. we are souls/consciousness pieces in the same way that filling a cup with seawater leaves you with the sea inside the cup. i personally think those you see as npcs are just super low frequency ppl guided by their instincts like animals

>>42462219
>imagine if you changed the rules of reincarnation so that they didn't make sense
>then reincarnation wouldn't make sense
>QED

The trouble is a thought error concerning the "existence" of two states: i.e. nonexistence/nothingness and existence/consciousness. The thinking error assumes that both of these constitute essentially some kind of "presence", that nothingness is a "thing" and existence is a "thing". In reality it is not like this at all. Consciousness does not "come" from any place. It is simply a process that begins and terminates like a boot cycle of a computer. When you turn your computer on, the interface doesn't emerge from some place "nonexistence". The physical hardware is just has a current flowing through it that makes the machine work, when that ends the process stops. Life is like this

File: Wernher_von_Braun_in_fron(...).jpg (128 KB, 739x918)

128 KB JPG

Its genuinely beautiful that OP image thinks buddhists believe that reincarnation is good. Buddhists think reincarnation is bad. Its like, the main thing they believe. Its arguably the most important thing. I'd go so far as to say that, if you could sum up buddhism in three words, its "reincarnation is bad."
Its beautiful because it proves that despite anything, whether it be a simple google search, 2600 years of tradition, or even just the evidence of your own eyes and ears, none of it matters if you are stupid enough. That is genuinely humbling and moving, to me at least. We have so much to learn from OP

>>42463102
>/x/ is by far the lowest IQ board on this site and that's saying a lot.
It really is disappointing.