Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have never lived on this earth before. Many dead souls who have lived before have passed through me. There is a difference between living your own life and taking on the life of another. It's all part of the circle of life. To understand life, you have to leave any religious beliefs behind to understand spiritual nature of this world. Imagine losing your identity but still knowing who you are.
The truth about this world has been lost in translation and in the fantasies of others.
It should be. I have no idea why those who don't believe in this sort of thing or have no interest in it bother posting here. I never post on forums that I have no interest in--it's a waste of my time. I guess they like wasting their time or perhaps it's just an ego thing.
Also, it amuses me when folks write declarative sentences on threads like this one as if they know everything about the entire universe. They declare that they have never lived before. They declare there is nothing before or after death. It's just as stupid to do that as it is for me to do what they think is stupid--declaring the opposite. Which I know better than to do. I certainly hold a set of beliefs. But unless I'd actually been there or experienced it, I would no more declare my beliefs to be truth than fly to the moon. I guess I'm just smarter than that and don't let my ego get the better of me. I understand that what I believe to be true may or may not reflect actual truth. Too many people do not understand that concept and assume they hold some sort of be-all, end-all information, which they then feel obligated to vomit upon the rest of us. It's nothing new, though--closed minds have been around for a very long time.
I'm not sure. I've been told that we are actually living our "past" lives now, like parallel lives going on since there really is no chronological time for our "energy" selves. I don't know, hard enough time getting ready for the day. Hehe. A well-reputed spiritual teacher told us this in our program. She had an MS in Physics so she might have been on to something.
This is an interesting theory - I can entertain it theoretically, but have a hard time understanding the physics of it all . . .I would love to know more, though.
I'm a bit suss of this regression business. We all have these fantasies we create, the 'what ifs' where we imagine we're different people, living in a different era. Having a 'special affinity' for say, Jewish culture or the English countryside means nothing in itself. I used to fancy I used to fancy I might've lived a past life somewhere in the New England region of the US because I feel a bond with it, but I don't think it's because I had a past life there.
I think the 'collective memory of the species' thing does make sense though. We all share common ancestral memories and these may be somehow passed on genetically.
I'm fairly sure I had a previous life, and even know some details of it, although not through any "past regression" but simply from ordinary memories. Of course, we know that memories can be created, so this is unreliable, even for myself (speaking intellectually -- personally I have few doubts). I was a young man or boy in Dalat (Vietnam) at the beginning of WW2 and died, my guess is of untreated juvenile diabetes. I have of course gone to Dalat to see if there is anything, but found nothing specific beyond general familiarity with the layout.
Yes, perhaps I do, but so do you, and so do all of us.
I'm very happy in THIS life as it evolves until I pass. Very comfortable adjusting to and coping with life's highs and lows. Believing in past lives or even reincarnation takes a leap of faith that I'm not comfortable wasting time on in this life. If you believe otherwise, that is your perogative, but don't get unglued because I don't agree. Doesn't phase me in the least that you don't agree with me.
I find believing in past lives, or a parallel universe, or "ego", or all that other New Age-type nonsense to be about as credible as believing in a pet rock.
I don't think most people would "get unglued by an opposing view." That's not a problem for me, anyway. My problem is when someone decides their opposing view is the unequivocal truth written on a stone tablet on a mountaintop. There is a big difference between "I believe," or "I think," or "my opinion is," or "it seems to me," or "it's probably the case," etc, and "you are a moron, I know that...," or "there is no...," or "you're living in a psychotic fantasy, the truth of the matter is (according to me in my infinite wisdom)...," etc.
I never come unglued when I read an opinion. But as soon as I read a personal insult or a declarative sentence that has no verifiable basis, that's when I come unglued. Because the person who did that was already unglued and descending from the mountaintop with tablet-in-hand. I may as well join in at that point.
Also, if someone wants to believe that there is no such thing as a past life, fine. You believe there isn't. I believe there is. We could leave it at that unless we have some sort of proof one way or the other. Once someone has established that they do not believe in it, there is no point of further comment when the tread is about something they neither believe in nor have any interest in. In my mind (for this thread), the further comments should be from those who have had experiences with past life regression. It makes very interesting reading and it is useful to compare experiences.
This concept is not a subject-dependent one: If I started a thread about how beautiful Carcassi's classical guitar compositions are, I can see someone responding in the thread that they have never heard of Carcassi and would not be interested or that they didn't care for the music. Fine. But would it make sense to you if that person then went on and on about how he'd never heard Carcassi or that he disliked Carcassi when others are trying to discuss the beauty of Carcassi's music? What exactly would be the point?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Excellent post and spot on
