Thoughts on reincarnation

[rubberdoor]

Biological reincarnation, perhaps.

I think hallucinogens had a larger impact on human consciousness and evolution than some choose to believe. I anticipate that the advent of animal husbandry around 9000 B.C. brought our ancestors attention to the strange organisms protruding from the animal dung. Shamanism and ancient-Brahmanism followed soon after. I would imagine this first occurred in what is now modern Nepal.

[Ahldagor]

Originally Posted by rubberdoor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Biological reincarnation, perhaps.

I think hallucinogens had a larger impact on human consciousness and evolution than some choose to believe. I anticipate that the advent of animal husbandry around 9000 B.C. brought our ancestors attention to the strange organisms protruding from the animal dung. Shamanism and ancient-Brahmanism followed soon after. I would imagine this first occurred in what is now modern Nepal.

Proly before. Random growings in the forests. Some ergot on wild wheat.

[Ahldagor]

Originally Posted by Ahldagor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Proly before. Random growings in the forests. Some ergot on wild wheat.

Humans eat stuff and wander. Some kid around 12, middle aged, proly ate some one day, started speaking about black cubes (Daywolf incorporation), or about the animals on the hunt, or the plants in the vicinity, or banking on the subconscious understanding that its small tribe was indeed small and tnat since there's a vast ignorance in their part they manifested an idea of a deity during a severe rapid thunder storm (nature's fucking cool), or aliens (enough dosaging will have you seeing aliens), and recalling their experiences they shared with their tribe sprouting spirits into the human mind. But when you're conversing with a dragon, you know shit got real.

[skarlorn]

Originally Posted by rubberdoor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Biological reincarnation, perhaps.

I think hallucinogens had a larger impact on human consciousness and evolution than some choose to believe. I anticipate that the advent of animal husbandry around 9000 B.C. brought our ancestors attention to the strange organisms protruding from the animal dung. Shamanism and ancient-Brahmanism followed soon after. I would imagine this first occurred in what is now modern Nepal.

Shamanism has been prevalent in a variety of places. Russia. North America. South America. Africa. Scandinavia.

Nepal definitely didn't get the first psycilocybin mushrooms though lol. And they didn't make Buddhism, or Brahmanism. Brahma is a Hindu God. Hinduism originated in India. Buddhism is an off-shoot of Hinduism, as Budda was the reincarnation of Krishna. After being a successful warmongering civilization, the Tibetan Warlords hung up their swords and took up the pen. They developed Tibetan Buddhism, which the Dalai Lama is the leader of.

[rubberdoor]

Originally Posted by skarlorn [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Shamanism has been prevalent in a variety of places. Russia. North America. South America. Africa. Scandinavia.

Nepal definitely didn't get the first psycilocybin mushrooms though lol. And they didn't make Buddhism, or Brahmanism. Brahma is a Hindu God. Hinduism originated in India. Buddhism is an off-shoot of Hinduism, as Budda was the reincarnation of Krishna. After being a successful warmongering civilization, the Tibetan Warlords hung up their swords and took up the pen. They developed Tibetan Buddhism, which the Dalai Lama is the leader of.

I don't know about all of that. Can you list your sources? I'm aware of shamanism's historical prevalence in other geological locations, the latter seems pseudointellectual though. Nepal was just a rough geological reference to the area in which I believe this particular instance occurred. Perhaps I should have said modern-day Northeast India? The Himalayan region?

This was way before Buddhism, Hinduism, and modern Brahmanism. I stated ancient Brahmanism specifically. This Neolithic culture's ideology likely evolved into Hinduism.

Perhaps these people chose to worship the beast who's defecation produced these fruits of peculiarity.

[skarlorn]

Originally Posted by rubberdoor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't know about all of that. Can you list your sources? I'm aware of shamanism's historical prevalence in other geological locations, the latter seems pseudointellectual though. Nepal was just a rough geological reference to the area in which I believe this particular instance occurred. Perhaps I should have said modern-day Northeast India? The Himalayan region?

This was way before Buddhism, Hinduism, and modern Brahmanism. I stated ancient Brahmanism specifically.

Perhaps these people chose to worship the beast who's defecation produced these fruit's of peculiarity.

Originally Posted by rubberdoor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't know about all of that. Can you list your sources?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bardo_Thodol

The Tibetan history was laid out by a historian in an Introduction to a widely used English version of that book, The Tibetan Book of the Dead. That's about as confirmed as it gets.

Originally Posted by rubberdoor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm aware of shamanism's historical prevalence in other geological locations, the latter seems pseudointellectual though. Nepal was just a rough geological reference to the area in which I believe this particular instance occurred. Perhaps I should have said modern-day Northeast India? The Himalayan region?

So you want to generalize Tibet, Nepal, and Northeast India as one and the same culturally, espouse that the non-existent cohesive culture who lived in this "rough geographical area" were the first people to eat pscilocybin mushrooms and call my point about shamanism pseudo intellectual? Before China conquered Tibet, the people of the Tibetan plateaus shared very little in common other than some common peasant food and love of the Dalai Lama.

We have documentation and evidence of various cultures performing shamanic rituals while using pyschoactive plants like pscilocybin mushrooms, amanita cap mushrooms, peyote (mescaline cacti), and Iowaska root.

Vedic scriptures definitely preach against intoxication, even against the use of marijuana as the inhalation of smoke brings you close to death.

Originally Posted by rubberdoor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This was way before Buddhism, Hinduism, and modern Brahmanism. I stated ancient Brahmanism specifically.

Perhaps these people chose to worship the beast who's defecation produced these fruit's of peculiarity.

I just don't get how you can get off on saying Brahmanism developed out of Tibet. Or Nepal. Or Northeast India. The Indians created Brahmanism. I'm upset because you're saying that these cultures are the same thing, which they are not.

Please consider reading this before continuing. It's a fair summary of what I learned by reading ancient literature, which is accessible to everyone.

http://www.lhasa-apso.org/articles/g...anhistory.html

Here is an excerpt which proves your theory and conjectures wrong

"In the early seventh century, an emperor named Songzen Gambo reached the militaristic empire's natural limits. Unity among warlords is always tenuous, and the high *altitude Tibetans had no interest in further expansion outward into the lowlands. He began transforming the civilization from feudal militarism to something more peaceful and spiritual, based on the people's cultivated moral outlook. In working on this transformation, Songzen Gambo investigated the major civilizations of outer (from his perspective) Asia, and noted that Universalist (Mahayana) Buddhism provided the cultural backbone of the dynasties of India, the silk route city states of central Asia, and the Tang dynasty of China. So he began a systematic process of cultural adaptation."

[rubberdoor]

Originally Posted by skarlorn [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bardo_Thodol

The Tibetan history was laid out by a historian in an Introduction to a widely used English version of that book, The Tibetan Book of the Dead. That's about as confirmed as it gets.



So you want to generalize Tibet, Nepal, and Northeast India as one and the same culturally, espouse that the non-existent cohesive culture who lived in this "rough geographical area" were the first people to eat pscilocybin mushrooms and call my point about shamanism pseudo intellectual? Before China conquered Tibet, the people of the Tibetan plateaus shared very little in common other than some common peasant food and love of the Dalai Lama.

We have documentation and evidence of various cultures performing shamanic rituals while using pyschoactive plants like pscilocybin mushrooms, amanita cap mushrooms, peyote (mescaline cacti), and Iowaska root.

Vedic scriptures definitely preach against intoxication, even against the use of marijuana as the inhalation of smoke brings you close to death.



I just don't get how you can get off on saying Brahmanism developed out of Tibet. Or Nepal. Or Northeast India. The Indians created Brahmanism. I'm upset because you're saying that these cultures are the same thing, which they are not.

Please consider reading this before continuing. It's a fair summary of what I learned by reading ancient literature, which is accessible to everyone.

http://www.lhasa-apso.org/articles/g...anhistory.html

Here is an excerpt which proves your theory and conjectures wrong

"In the early seventh century, an emperor named Songzen Gambo reached the militaristic empire's natural limits. Unity among warlords is always tenuous, and the high *altitude Tibetans had no interest in further expansion outward into the lowlands. He began transforming the civilization from feudal militarism to something more peaceful and spiritual, based on the people's cultivated moral outlook. In working on this transformation, Songzen Gambo investigated the major civilizations of outer (from his perspective) Asia, and noted that Universalist (Mahayana) Buddhism provided the cultural backbone of the dynasties of India, the silk route city states of central Asia, and the Tang dynasty of China. So he began a systematic process of cultural adaptation."

Everything I previously stated occurred, in theory, during 9th Millennium B.C. I don't see the point you are trying to make. The facts you are stating are mostly true, and occur approximately 7000 years after the period of which I am speaking. Seventh century, meaning 700 B.C.? Perhaps you misunderstood what time period I was referring to when I said 9000 B.C. People were mostly nomadic herders in this region, so for all we know they could have migrated 800 miles over a few generations with their herds of cattle, bringing their ideologies with them.

Also:

1. ayahuasca is a brew made from banisteriopsis caapi vine and the leaves of various plants containing diemethyltryptamine. It's not orally active without a monoamine oxidase inhibitor.

2. Peyote is not the only mescaline containing cacti.

You do realize that humanity did not start recording history until approximately 4th Millennium B.C. right?

Take it with a grain of salt good sir, it's all theory. This is pre-recorded history I am talking about. 11,000 years ago.

I digress.

[renordw]

Originally Posted by Angushjalmur [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I have a theory that reincarnation is a legit thing, though not necessarily in the same way it's traditionally viewed.

See, energy cannot be created or destroyed, but the amount of energy in the universe IS finite. This holds true for all energy, including souls. I believe that most people today are essentially NPCs, because the number of people greatly outweighs the number of souls available. While some people are born with souls, most are not simply because there aren't enough to go around. This explains a lot. From the grossly successful people who have risen the ranks by any degenerate means necessary (they have the compulsion for success but not the soul to act as a governor of their actions) to the fat girls who dress like they weigh 115 and think they're sexy. These people lack souls and are thus lacking self awareness. Hollow if you will.

Ancient civilizations were somehow able to figure out the gist of things like the big bang, quite possibly because early on some souls were reincarnated retaining knowledge of past lives. Following this logic, it's entirely possible for whomever was responsible for the georgia guide stones to have some sort of insider knowledge of how many souls there are available. Perhaps 500,000,000 is in the neighborhood of how many souls are available.

Every culture has had some belief regarding reincarnation, or at least the soul living on after the physical body dies. The viking soul went to one of several ethereal planes depending on how the soul lived (and died) in the physical world. Native americans believed the soul returned to nature with the body. Buddhists believe the soul takes up another body upon death to come back and learn another lesson. It's important to not deny or ignore that which cannot be quantified by trendy current science, and to remember that not all ancient knowledge is the result of drug use or primitive rationalization. Our ancestors knew some stuff that they had no right knowing by today's standards. What are your thoughts on reincarnation?

Energy can't be created or destroyed, but it doesn't really work like how you're saying. The earth loses a lot of energy through convection/radiation to space, and we get radiant energy from the sun. All energy on earth can trace its source back to the sun. The energy that you are using to survive now can trace its origin to the plant that used the sun to make glucose (or other organic molecules). But you are also radiating energy constantly.

What I am saying is that it's not the fact that you have energy that makes you a person, hell a car battery has fucktons more energy than you do.

I think we are basically no more than complicated machines, and trying to understand the sheer complexity of our brains is not really possible, using that same brain. There are 100 trillion synapses (connections between neurons) in the brain, and it's these complexity of these electrical impulses and not the magnitude of electricity that make us subjectively feel human.

As for your question of reincarnation, I think it's just fanciful. But our genes are immortal.

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by renordw [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

...hell a car battery has fucktons more energy than you do.

o rly?

[Ahldagor]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

o rly?

Yup. Matrix is real.