Not to be contrary here, but only for informational purposes...

That logic would necessarily have to be based on the premise that "consciousness" is a function of the body. That is, each separate life consitutes a separate consciousness, which I personally don't agree with.

In my view, there is only one "consciousness", which experiences multiple lives.

In other words, the memories of a past life are recalled while in this life. So it is reasonable to assume that the same "consciousness" is looking at both the memories - from "this" life and from the "past" life.

I have heard that this phenomenon is fairly common in Dianetic and Scientology auditing, with the subject being fully alert and congnizant.

Living more than one life at a time? No wonder I am always so tired.

Not to be contrary here, but you seem to be confusing apples with oranges:
WE MIGHT BE "ATTACHED" TO A SINGLE SPIRIT, which experiences various manifestations. But each manifestation possesses it's own consciousness.*******
The most common equivalent of consciousness is the sense of I AM! That's why those, who experience many consciousnesses simultaneously, are said to be suffering from the Multi-Personality Disorder (or schizophrenia)! Therefore, we're schielded from experiencing our past consciousnesses (and maybe even future ones)! No wonder recalling one's past consciousness is possible ONLY under certain controlled conditions -- be that hypnososis, dianetics, etc. (although the latter isn't considered a science -- more like a "popular science" for laymen -- thanks god you didn't mention the Scientology!!!)

In my view, there is only one "SPIRIT", which experiences multiple consciousnesses (i.e. lifes).

Well then that points out our differences in beliefs. I am not "attached to" a spirit. I am a spirit. All the other stuff (body, mind, memories, personalities, etc.) is attached to me.

I am Buddha and Jesus reincarnated

I BEG YOUR PARDON -- bad choice of words on my part:
Of course, we ARE Spirits -- rather than being "Attached" to one...

(THAT'S WHY I QUOTED THE VERB!!! - the propper word escaped me at the moment... ) * * *

Nevertheless, the point remains:

there is only one "SPIRIT", which experiences multiple consciousnesses (i.e. lifes).

Ok, I guess I misinterpreted. I don't equate "a consciousness" with "a life". I've always thought of "consciousness" as a property of a spirit, not a property of a life. But now that you've clarified I think I understand your view. And from the view of Jeannie's "simultaneous lives" it does make sense. In fact, from that viewpoint, that's the only way it could be.

The way I attempt to describe it (consciousness) where it relates to 'a life' or 'a living thing' is that it is the property of awareness that exists in degrees, depending upon the life form.

A life form is a vehicle for awareness or consciousness. It is unclear whether the ultimate goal (of the whole) is to "be more conscious" or just to "live" and survive.

I do not think every living creature has a burning desire to be "all knowing." They don't know enough to desire that. The primary instinct is simply to live and survive.

The reason people use the term "God" I think, is because when you get down to it, there is no way to describe IT. It is not "spirit", it is not an entity or supreme being, It is not "consciousness." It is more of a life giving force.

But how does this non-thing manage to be intelligent? You could ask the same thing of yourself. How do you, as a human, manage to be intelligent?

Thoughts.

Thoughts can effect the way we live, how we grow, our health, everything. Thoughts are things. I like the way Wallace D. Wattles calls it "The thinking center."

I believe we live in a thought created universe. When we respond to stimuli, we are responding to thought signals.

A baby may not be able to talk but he listens. He listens and listens and observes until he understands and all the while he is processing that information. Then one day he says his first word.

Receiving external signals is a form of thinking. A single cell in your body receives signals from your brain and it responds the way it is programed to respond. In its own capacity, it is alive and aware and thinking.

It is unclear whether the ultimate goal (of the whole) is to "be more conscious" or just to "live" and survive.


I think the goal is to contribute to the gene pool, to ensure survival of the species.

Which species are you referring to?

Sorry---it's mindless crap! get a grip--

all of them flora and fauna , alike.

But the question remains, why would they care about the survival of their species? Once they die, they are dead. Why would ANY individual care or worry about the survival of their own species?

A flower or an animal does not even think about death, why would they think about passing on their genes? Is this a conscious effort? OR are they 'designed and programed' to survive and to do things that insure the survival of their species?

So for what reason should reincarnation be important?

Okay let us say we become wisier spirits and have more knowledge in understanding this paradox of space, time, or infinity.

but for what reason?

Here we are reincarnating hundreds or thousands of times to go somewhere else perhaps.

For what?

If it is all planned out already then there is no reason.

Does life have reason?

Some say yes others say no. Some use religion others use spiritualism and then we have those who say no.


In the end what purpose is reincarnation, unless space needs it to survive then I have no other logical conclusion.

Perhaps to live on other planets being a different species? What does that bring but entertainment for those who created us?

Perhaps in reality as many neglect around the world and only few agree that when we pass away it is the end. That is it. Could you live with that if it was true that nothing happens. There is no reincarnation, there is no extra experience or life. Many have a hard time grasping that, but why.

Anyway Jeannie everyone will surely have different perspectives of what they believe is true. In the end that individual has to be happy with that conclusion. That is what is important.

You think this is mindless? You should hear about what some other people believe! Some people actually think that our 'souls' are created at birth, yet when we die those 'souls' go on to an afterlife.

How silly is that?

If a person can believe that souls can 'continue on' after the body is dead, then what's preventing those souls from having 'continued on' from a previous life before they got here?

It's the 'one-way' thinking is the "mindless crap" (to use your own phrase).

Our true essence is either spiritual or it's not.

If our true essence is spiritual then we've always been eternal.

If it's not spiritual, then the atheists are right.

It's actually those religions that only accept sprituality 'half-way' that need to get a grip.

Either we're spiritual beings, or we're not.

The idea that life is a 'dead end' at only one end and not the other is actually quite silly if you stop and think about it.

You could ask that question about life. For what reason do we live or exist at all?




We live because we chose to live. There is no reason other than that. There are but two choices. To be or not to be. To live or not to live. You can chose.




The conscious spirit is infinite. Bodies are not. Bodies are finite. Incarnation into bodies is finite.

The universe expands. That is what it is all about.

You answered this yourself in your very next question:



Those who created us?

Why think of it that way? Perhaps we are the creators? That would make more sense, no?

Think about it. What's the only reason you could come up with?

Entertainment?

When you go to a movie who's being entertained?

When you go to an amusement park who's being entertained?

It's the participant in the events that is enjoying the entertainment. (not some imagined external observers)

Think about reincarnation as a kind of spiritual amusement part (or interactive movie).

You're here for entertainment. You look around you and see "Others"
that appear to be suffering. But maybe they're into HORROR MOVIES! And your not!

So from your perspective they are suffering. But from their perspective they are enjoying a HORROR MOVIE!

When all is said and done the only true "suffering" that you can genuinely address is your OWN.

The only meaningful question you can truly ask is, "Are YOU enjoying this movie?"

Trying to consider what's going on in the minds of the other actors will drive you bananas! You can't know.

Perhaps you are right Jeannie and maybe you are wrong. In the end everyone has a different conclusion that works best for them.

I hold no grudges for Atheists or Agnostic people. They could be right!

I hold no grudges for religous folks. Perhaps they are right even if some of the stories sound very absurd.

I hold no grudges for spiritual folks. I enjoy many of their philosophies. Perhaps they are wrong and perhaps they are right.

In the end like I say, that individual has to be happy with what they believe in.