fhgyap@cs.vu.nl (Yap FHG) (09/14/90)
G'day Hugh! In article <1990Sep13.000952.27231@nas.nasa.gov> hugh@cs.adelaide.edu.au (Hugh Garsden) writes: > >A question. > >Suppose we accept that there is a soul, and that we are reincarnated. At >some time, therefore, the soul must enter the body (since it comes >intact from a previous life). When does it do this? Before we are born? >After? At the same time? Are there any references in religious texts (please >give them) on this? You may find the `Tibetan Book of the Dead' interesting reading. The Buddhists believe that the `soul' enters the body upon conception. The Chinese also believe this. There are some interesting consequences of this belief to the application of feng shui in bedrooms. Let me know if you are interested in hearing about this. >---- >Hugh Garsden >University of Adelaide >hugh@cs.adelaide.edu.au Felix Yap.
jbarber@pravda.gatech.edu (John R. Barber) (09/14/90)
In article <1990Sep13.000952.27231@nas.nasa.gov> hugh@cs.adelaide.edu.au (Hugh Garsden) writes: > >A question. > >Suppose we accept that there is a soul, and that we are reincarnated. At >some time, therefore, the soul must enter the body (since it comes >intact from a previous life). When does it do this? Before we are born? >After? At the same time? Are there any references in religious texts (please >give them) on this? > > [lines deleted] > >Hugh Garsden >University of Adelaide Both Tibetan Buddhism and Taoism hold that the soul becomes associated with the fetus/body at the time of conception. In this view of reincarnation, an energy "glow" is emitted by partners in a sex act at or around the time of conception which attracts a soul that "jumps in". The Tibetan Book of the Dead (Bardo Thodol), translated by Evans-Wentz and others, goes into great detail describing the process of death, existence in the spiritual realm, and re-entry to life for those in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, and particularly suggests that a developed one can choose appropriate rebirth based on the type of energy emanation. Other Buddhist traditions hold similar views, but I am less familiar with them. In _8000 Years of Wisdom: Conversations with Taoist Master Ni, Hua-Ching, book II_ and other books, Master Ni offers corresponding guidance for prospective parents on how to attract and nurture a spiritually achieved soul. His tradition holds, as well, that the process described in the Bardo occurs, but is less optimistic about the prospects for choice in rebirth by most people. The basic scenario that both traditions suppose is: life, death, existence in the spiritual realm(s), and eventual re-birth through association with a body at conception for those souls who must be reborn, in a repetitive cycle until it is transcended or the soul becomes "anchored" at some point within it. ----- John R. Barber, AI Group, School of Information and Computer Science Georgia Tech, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0280 (404)-853-9381,-9382 uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ihnp4,linus,rutgers}!gatech!pravda!jbarber Internet: jbarber@cc.gatech.edu
mrsvr.chandra@uwm.edu (B. Chandramouli) (09/14/90)
>From article <1990Sep13.000952.27231@nas.nasa.gov>, by hugh@cs.adelaide.edu.au (Hugh Garsden): > > Suppose we accept that there is a soul, and that we are reincarnated. At > some time, therefore, the soul must enter the body (since it comes > intact from a previous life). When does it do this? Before we are born? > After? At the same time? Are there any references in religious texts (please > give them) on this? > > If we accept there is a soul, but no reincarnation, then this problem > can be explained away. We can (as one line of argument) say that the soul > ``grows with'' the body during gestation, in accordance with those who believe > that all matter has some form of consciousness; so the developing foetus has > developing consciousness, which could lead to the soul. > > Hugh Garsden Let me try to give a pseudo-scientific explanation for the first belief using the reasoning you have given for the second one. Let us hypothesize that since all matter has some form of consciousness, that gene (or whatever lower level sub component of it) has this consciousness programmed into it. ( To me this hypothesis is not too big a jump from the belief that all matter has some form of consciousness). This consciousness is the soul. So in a particular gene (population) pool, there are a different number of "souls" simultaneously existing. Hence soul basically does not die away with just the death of one person. For a soul to be extinct, then all the people with that soul shold die. Thus reincarnation is just a special case of MultiIncarnation according to this "soul is hereditary" argument. This brings in questions like "How do you identify two people with the same soul?" etc. which is left as an excercise to the reader. :=) This is purely a philosophical argument and is not necessarily the one I believe as a faith. chandra
gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us (Gary S. Trujillo) (09/14/90)
In <1990Sep13.000952.27231@nas.nasa.gov> hugh@cs.adelaide.edu.au (Hugh Garsden) writes: > Suppose we accept that there is a soul, and that we are reincarnated... I have a related question. I am wondering how such knowledge comes about, particularly in traditions which are not based on notions of believing the elements of some canon of doctrine to be essential items of "faith" and where the doctrine is developed from essentially rational analysis of "revealed" scripture (as seems to be the case in Christianity). Are understandings about before- after- and between-life the sorts of things that come about as the product of a certain form of meditation, or are they developed even in these traditions as the product of thinking about how things must be (or, somewhat cynically, how we might like them to be)? I ask these things as sincere questions. I have been puzzling about such matters lately, and don't know how to go about getting answers. On a re- lated note, do readers of this newsgroup have any opinions on the flurry of books on the subject of near-death experiences? Do the phenomena being described in these books (like Raymond Moody's now-classic _Life_After_Life_, or Kenneth Ring's _Life_at_Death_) have anything to do with the subject of souls and reincarnation? (I also read a paperback called _Life_Between_Life_, written by a Canadian psychiatrist, who describes accounts of patients under hypnosis who talked about "remembering" disembodied states prior to entering a new body. Comments? -- Gary S. Trujillo gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us Somerville, Massachusetts {wjh12,bu.edu,spdcc,ima,cdp}!gnosys!gst
zenith-steven@CS.YALE.EDU (Steven Ericsson Zenith) (09/19/90)
[Two occurences of the s-word in this article have been changed by me to a more innocuous "mess". I have not changed any other words in the article. Please keep your articles "clean" (no offensive words). - Dinesh] In article <1990Sep14.002702.11511@nas.nasa.gov> jbarber@pravda.gatech.edu (John R. Barber) writes: >Both Tibetan Buddhism and Taoism hold that the soul becomes associated >with the fetus/body at the time of conception. In this view of reincarnation, Well ... > [stuff about the Book of the Dead deleted] >In _8000 Years of Wisdom: Conversations with Taoist Master Ni, Hua-Ching, >book II_ and other books, Master Ni offers corresponding guidance for [...] >The basic scenario that both traditions suppose is: life, death, existence in >the spiritual realm(s), and eventual re-birth through association with a body >at conception for those souls who must be reborn, in a repetitive cycle until >it is transcended or the soul becomes "anchored" at some point within it. It should be pointed out that this teaching is counter to the more usual teachings of Taoism. The Hua Teh Ching as presented by Ni is an old Chinese spoof which makes out that Lao Tzu taught the Buddha all he knew. The history of Taoism and Buddhism is fraught with politics - as with most human endevour. If the above teaching corresponds to the Taoist teaching of Ni then it manifests a strong Buddhist influence. The "pure"(sic) Taoist teaching(again sic) does not teach reincarnation. As a rough outline: All returns to the one. When you die, that's it Zap! Goodbye. You are gone - you become dead meat, manure, ash, and a good job too ha! ha! However, there are practices which enable the spirit to grow strong such that though the body may die, you (your spiritual body) do not perish - this is the concept of immortality found in most unfettered forms of Taoist teaching. So, no reincarnation, rather an immortality which too returns to the one. And incidently - "the soul" is just another politic. Birth is a perfect oneness - forget this entering business! Unguarded perfect oneness becomes chaotic "mess" scattered on the path of life - build your "mess" in neat piles, and build 'em high! That is the teaching of tao. *Taoism* is a trademark of Lao Tzu & Co. Beware imitations :-) -- Steven Ericsson Zenith * email: zenith@cs.yale.edu Fax: (203) 466 2768 | voice: (203) 432 1278 "The tower should warn the people not to believe in it." - P.D.Ouspensky Yale University Dept of Computer Science 51 Prospect St New Haven CT 06520 USA
stephens@latcs1.oz.au (Philip J Stephens) (10/16/90)
[Looks like inews finally works at my site. My apologies for the delay in getting this article out -- Dinesh Prabhu] Hugh Garsden writes: > > Suppose we accept that there is a soul, and that we are reincarnated. At > some time, therefore, the soul must enter the body (since it comes > intact from a previous life). When does it do this? Before we are born? > After? At the same time? Are there any references in religious texts (please > give them) on this? This is not from any eastern religious text, but I believe it is applicable to the discussion. From "Seth Speaks: The Eternal Validity of the Soul" by Jane Roberts, the time at which the soul 'enters the body' is completely up to the individual, and can occur anytime between conception and birth, or even afterwards. The reason for this is that the body has it's own consciousness, and is able to develop and grow on it's own accord. Likewise, when we sleep our soul is apt to 'leave' the body, which is perfectly capable of looking after itself. I'm talking about astral projection and OBE's here, of course. I put 'enters the body' in quotes, since Seth also says that the body is a physical representation of the soul, and as such the soul does not have a location in time and space (being non-physical). < Philip J. Stephens >< "Many views yield the truth." > < Hons. student, Computer Science >< "Therefore, be not alone." > < La Trobe University, Melbourne >< - Prime Song of the viggies, from > < AUSTRALIA >< THE ENGIMA SCORE by Sheri S Tepper >
mayne@nu.cs.fsu.edu (William (Bill) Mayne) (10/16/90)
[The next few articles are actually old ones that were held up due to inews being off at my site (at least on my machine). My apologies for the delay -- Dinesh Prabhu] In article <1990Sep13.000952.27231@nas.nasa.gov> you write: > >A question. > >Suppose we accept that there is a soul, and that we are reincarnated. At >some time, therefore, the soul must enter the body (since it comes >intact from a previous life). When does it do this? Before we are born? >After? At the same time? Are there any references in religious texts (please >give them) on this? The short Buddhist answer is that the rebirth consciousness ("soul", if you will, though we reject that term) doesn't enter a pre-existing body but rather is necessary to the arising of a body and is present from and actually a condition for conception. A bit more explanation follows: Orthodox Buddhists accept half of this, namely reincarnation (actually preferring "rebirth"), but not a soul. Even though I have been a Buddhist for years and have studied and discussed this with learned monks I confess that the distinction about "soul" is subtle. The actual word in the texts is "atta" (Pali) or "atman" (Sanskrit). The soul-denying doctrine is "anatta", literally "not soul", and is one of the fundamental doctrines of Buddhism. (The other two are "anicca" or impermanence and "dukkha" or unsatisfactoriness.) The usual explanation of annata hinges upon a clearer and more obvious truth "anicca" or impermanence. Apparently the Brahmanical belief in a soul prevalent at the time of the Buddha required a permanent, unchanging something, and this the Buddha denied. I am not so sure that permanence in this sense is a necessary attribute of the the western concept of soul. That is I don't think "soul" is an exact translation of "atta" or "atman". Hence there are subtleties to this which go beyond the immediate question. I conservative enough to be uncomfortable with using the word "soul" in connection with Buddhism. Having said that, I will attempt to give the traditional Buddhist answer with a minimum of complicating outside considerations. I do not have specific sources in front of me, but will try to find them if requested to do so. (I can pretty quickly look up some secondary sources, Ven. Narada'a "A Manual of Abhidhamma" comes to mind.) Although as noted we do not call it a "soul" Buddhists believe in something called "rebirth consciousness" (Pali "patisandhi vinnana"). This is a sort of connecting link between the last thought moment of one life and the first thought moment of the next. It is essentially like the continuous process of instantaneous rebirth which happens at every moment, even within one lifetime, whereby one thought moment disappears and is followed by another which is causally related but not identitical to the first. But this is getting far afield from the simple question posed. According to the Buddhist Abhidhamma texts this rebirth conciousness is present at the moment of conception. It is in fact a necessary ingredient of conception, along with the sperm and egg which form the physical base. This applies not only to humans, but to other forms of life as well, though it is recognized that not all physical life forms arise through sexual reproduction, hence it is modified for some lower life forms. So it is more accurate to say that the body arises dependent upon the rebirth consciousness than to say that at some point rebirth consciousness enters the body. >[stuff omitted] >Hugh Garsden >University of Adelaide >hugh@cs.adelaide.edu.au Bill Mayne Florida State University mayne@nu.cs.fsu.edu
hugh@cs.adelaide.edu.au (Hugh Garsden) (10/16/90)
In article <1990Sep13.000952.27231@nas.nasa.gov> I write: > >A question. > >Suppose we accept that there is a soul, and that we are reincarnated. At >some time, therefore, the soul must enter the body (since it comes >intact from a previous life). When does it do this? Before we are born? etc... I want to thank those who replied to this via news and e-mail. I got a lot of responses, all interesting. I'm still digesting them. Good stuff. The general consensus is that the soul (or your own interpretation of "soul") enters the "body" at conception, and further that the soul is in some way the prerequisite for conception. Again, I'm just presenting a general impression. I have noted those responses that were different to this. ----- Hugh Garsden University of Adelaide hugh@cs.adelaide.edu.au
courtney@inmet.inmet.com (10/16/90)
I would rather speak of rebirth instead of reincarnation. Reincarnation presupposes some 'thing' that gets passed around. This point of view is, I think, the hindu atman notion. The Tibetan buddhist point of view is that there is a stream of consciousness or a continuity between lives that continues - but there is no essential core. The analogy that Alexander Berzin has used is to a movie film where there is a meaningfull continuity (explains karma, cause and effect) but there is no-thing that passes between picture in the film. It is not a nihilistic view nor is it an eternalistic (atman) stance - it is a middle 'view'. I heard a talk by Lati Rinpoche (A very high tibetan lama) who described the moment of conception as where the consciousness comes out of a bardo state and conjoins with the mother and father. I have no certainty about this - but their point of view is that all these little babies are really very old beings (actually we all are). It is interesting to hear them discuss also that memories from the previous life can be easily tapped into up to the age of 3-5. After that it gets really difficult. As for consciousness 'coming out of matter'. This is considered a diseased view. They always stress that like causes like and that it is impossible that mind/consciousness/awareness can be caused by matter (or the brain). They of course will agree that states of consciousness (gross ones) are effected by the body/brain but the innate mind cannot be caused or originate from matter. Now - this is a view - and one I don't necessarily hold - but it is convincing enough where I think I can base some actions of my life! The important issue I think is that if a person believes that consciousness arises from matter - that is going to have an enormous impact on how one lives a life. On the contrary if you believe that this is one life out of a beginningless past - this could have a significant effect on how one lives as well. regards D.C. Dxx
sandrock@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu (Mark Sandrock) (10/16/90)
In article <1990Sep13.000952.27231@nas.nasa.gov> hugh@cs.adelaide.edu.au (Hugh Garsden) writes: > >Suppose we accept that there is a soul, and that we are reincarnated. At >some time, therefore, the soul must enter the body (since it comes >intact from a previous life). When does it do this? Before we are born? >After? At the same time? Are there any references in religious texts (please >give them) on this? > The soul typically incarnates into the new body during the middle, i.e., the fifth month, of the pregnancy. The event gives rise to the first move- ments of the unborn child. I am happy to provide a reference for this assertion: "In the Light of Truth", the Grail Message, by Abd-ru-shin. Best regards, Mark Sandrock
pgd@bbt.se (10/18/90)
In article <1990Sep13.000952.27231@nas.nasa.gov> hugh@cs.adelaide.edu.au (Hugh Garsden) writes: > >A question. > >Suppose we accept that there is a soul, and that we are reincarnated. At >some time, therefore, the soul must enter the body (since it comes >intact from a previous life). When does it do this? Before we are born? > etc... Here is what the Srimad Bhagavatam (canto 4, chapter 31) says about the subject matter: "The Personality of Godhead said: Under the supervision of the Supreme Lord and according to the result of his work, the living entity, the soul, is made to enter into the womb of a woman through the particle of male semen to assume a particular type of body." That is, during sexual intercourse, the soul is transferred through the semen of the father into the mother's womb in order to produce a particular type of body. This process is applicable to all embodied living entities. The above quoted sanskrit verse indicates that it is not the semen of the man that creates life within the womb of a woman; rather, the living entity, the soul, takes shelter in a particle of semen and is then pushed into the womb of a woman. Then the body develops. "On the first night, the sperm and ovum mix, and on the fifth night the mixture ferments into a bubble. On the tenth night it develops into a form like a plum, and after that, it gradually turns into a lumb of flesh or an egg, as the case may be." The body of the soul develops in four different ways according to its different sources. One kind of body, that of the trees and plants, sprouts from the earth; the second kind of body grows from perspiration, as with flies, germs and bugs; the third kind of body develops from eggs; and the fourth develops from an embryo. .... "Owing to the mother's eating bitter, pungent foodstuffs, or food which is too salty or too sour, the body of the child incassantly suffers pains which are almost intolerable". .... "Thus endowed with the development of consciousness from the seventh month after the conception, the child is tossed downward by the airs that press the embryo during the weeks preceeding delivery. Like the worms born of the same filthy abdominal cavity, he cannot remain in one place." So far, the child has been unconscious, but from the seventh month, the soul wakes up to consciousness again. .... "Pushed downward all of a sudden by the wind, the child comes out with great trouble, head downward, breathless and deprived of memory due to severe agony." The wind referred to is one of the bodily airs. This verse describes the birth of a human as a very painful experience. So painful, that the child is loosing its memories from the previous lifetime. ------------------ Srimad Bhagavatam is part of the vedic scriptures, one of the puranas (Bhagavat Purana). Together with the Bhagavad Gita, it is the most important scripture for the theist Vaisnava-faith (of India). The purpose of Srimad Bhagavatam is to teach the "complete science of Godhead", but it also covers a lot of knowledge about the material world, and it's construction. It is maybe not so well known, outside India, because it is so strongly theistic, and thus not favoured by the atheistic schools. It is very volumous. It consist of 12 cantos, each with has many chapters of verses. All in all around 18000 sanskrit verses (slokas). There are translations in many languages.
pingali@umvlsi.ecs.umass.edu (Sridhar Pingali) (10/19/90)
In article <1990Oct16.052640.4686@nas.nasa.gov> courtney@inmet.inmet.com writes: > >I would rather speak of rebirth instead of reincarnation. >Reincarnation presupposes some 'thing' that gets passed around. >This point of view is, I think, the hindu atman notion. This is not necessarily what is meant by the Upanishadic Atman. Those interested in a comparison of the Vedantic and Buddhist views might wish to look at Dr Ananda Coomaraswamy's book "Buddha and the Gospel of Buddhism". The Buddha would doubtless have termed all speculation/comparison unbecoming. While I am on the net let me recommend a book that has little to do with this particular topic. It is "Seeking the Heart of Wisdom" by Joseph Goldstein and Jack Kornfield. Another book is "The Heart of Buddhist Meditation" by an author whose exact name escapes me (N(?) Thera)."Thera" is the Pali word for Brother (as in monk) or Elder (as in Theravada - the way/speech of the Elders). -- Sridhar Pingali
asanders@decwrl.dec.com (10/21/90)
| The general consensus is that the soul (or your own interpretation of "soul") | enters the "body" at conception, and further that the soul is in some way | the prerequisite for conception... -Hugh Garsden This is an interesting line of inquiry, but I can't help thinking that one of the most basic teaching of Eastern religion is that we live in a state of Ignorance--that we do not know the truth about our existence and cannot know this Truth until WE OURSELVES change. Thus Practice rather than Study becomes the basis for the search for Truth. >From this point of view, whatever "general consensus" we reach about any difficult question is bound to be flawed, because the instrument of inquiry is flawed. Clearly, the road to self-perfection is far more trecherous than the road to intellectual knowledge. But the rewards must be correspondingly greater as well. Alan ********************* Man does not learn unless he is thrashed. -Goethe
courtney@inmet.inmet.com (10/25/90)
thank you for the reference to Coomaraswamy's book discussing the Atman vis a vis the Buddhist tradtion. I have access to some good book stores in the Boston area so I will be sure to find it. Don