When we speak of this entity referred to as an 'individual', and its re-emergence. It seems reasonable that it should be known the 'true nature' of such a thing prior any discourse of "reincarnation"; otherwise would be akin to putting the cart before the horse.
What constitutes the 'essence' of an "individual" personality to be preserved that would allow this re-emergence to qualify as the same "entity"? Whether it be body, soul, or some combination thereof?
Perhaps this "individuality" that is 'experienced' is nothing more than some short-lived illusion where any discourse delving reincarnation becomes meaningless.
The Mysteries of Death;
Re: The Mysteries of Death;
Neither here nor there
Re: The Mysteries of Death;
In any event, I'm not looking forward to it. It's certainly no joke what old age is capable of doing to a person if you're 'lucky enough' to live that long which was reiterated again yesterday when I saw a recent photo of Jimmy Carter the peanut farmer.
Neither here nor there
Re: The Mysteries of Death;
Is it obvious that the human has physical, emotional and mental bodies/functions?
Some humans obviously have heart/buddhic functionality and some even use atma - higher will.
That is not the limit of what is called human. There is also the yechida/monad
So it seems that the human persona/mask generates attributes/skills/qualities that are stored in between incarnations so that the new born human does not have to start from zero again.
For example, where claimed past lives have been identified by name, place and date, there is often a direct relationship between fatal wounds and current birth marks.
Some study is being made, for example
"In cases in which a deceased person was identified the details of whose
life unmistakably matched the child's statements, a close correspondence was
nearly always found between the birthmarks and/or birth defects on the child
and the wounds on the deceased person. In 43 of 49 cases in which a medical
document (usually a postmortem report) was obtained, it confirmed the correspondence between wounds and birthmarks (or birth defects)."
https://med.virginia.edu/perceptual-stu ... nson-1.pdf
The mechanism of transfer is said by some to be by "permanent atoms"
https://www.academia.edu/44778918/Human ... _Spirillae
Re: The Mysteries of Death;
I did click the link but too much jumping through hoops to see the paper.
Anyway, that actually makes sense; maybe as much sense as something like this can make. I'd say there are at least a couple reasons why. First, this would establish a material link, or, a permanence of consciousness that transcends the physical vessel.
And second, I did have an OBE(decades ago) during a hypnagogic state that was quite vivid, lucid, and absolutely not a dream(at first). My consciousness slowly ascended from my body(from the head), and there was lots of swirling and swishing as these tiny particles rapidly orbited around me(my consciousness), but eventually slowed and dissipated as the last one passed my line of sight and vanished. After that, all was quiet and I looked down and could see my body laying there.
The experience then transformed into a lucid astral travel type scenario and then on to a normal dream state from there.
I perceived these particles that were swirling about me to be electrons which would put my consciousness at the center, or, the nucleus of this "atom". I then later went on about thinking and commenting that "consciousness" could be composed of a single atom of a special element. The "atom" aspect though was only perceptible during the separation phase of the mind and body.
And that's actually the abbreviated version of that occurrence.
Neither here nor there
Re: The Mysteries of Death;
That principle of an "atom" at the center of a body on a plane, seems to be common across a variety of higher plane entities
Re: The Mysteries of Death;
It seems reasonable on a few levels. The 'scale factor' explains why "consciousness" and possibly other entities are/would be imperceptible to the visual mechanism in the same way as other aerial "atoms", i.e. a veil of "scale".
Neither here nor there