Driving the car to work this morning I was precariously involved in thought regarding reincarnation and evolution. For a while I've become comfortable with the idea that reincarnation is a force of evolution, in that when a creature dies, it is reborn and placed higher on the chain of beings, i.e. that single cell being dies and becomes a bug that might die and become a bird, that bird becomes a cat, the cat becomes human. In some philosophies the law of karma plays a role in this process. For instance, if a human commits murder, he/she might go in reverse during reincarnation and come back as a dog. (Stick with me here, these are just ideas, even though they may sound strange.) Over time this process has progressed, pushing evolution forward. In the past, it might have been that the Australopithecus afarensis was the most enlightened being, and then the Homo habilis, next the Homo erectus and the Homo sapiens. (Sorry Mr. Chimpanzee!).
Each era our ancestors died, and were born into the next stage of their evolution. For humans, what's next? Are we to be ancestors to residents of another era, another species? Or after our death are we reborn into something that we cannot presently see, like a spirit or body-less soul? Or do we just work our way back into the Brahman goo, signaling the end of evolution on this planet? (Or, maybe we evolve into some alien species, or creature that reside in another dimension!) OK, I'm getting too "out there" for most people's comfort levels, but you get my idea. I'm just curious about what comes after the human, and well, I won't really get to be around to witness that!
If there is no karma, then perhaps we are just randomly born into any creature in our world, or in the universe or multiverse, going backwards and forwards over and over again forevermore, Brahma recycling itself continuously in an everlasting state of change.
I don't know. I'm just thinking... wondering. It's not like I'll stumble on the answer. Not even nonduality can tell me exactly what is going on!
23 comments:
Here is yet another view.
Some people think that "humanity" in general is not evolving but the opposite, de-evolving.
In what ways would you say that humanity has evolved? or not?
I agree that there is a popular theory that man evolved from apes or less intellegent men but it is possible that this is incorrect.
What about other information that we have? I have seen cave paintings that are 10s of thousands of years old that seem as emotionally sophisticated as anything that has been done since.
In recent history it seems to me that people have beome more interested in comfort, entertainment, and television. In the past it seems that they were more interested in people, ideals, religion and fine arts.
There are also rumors that ancient civilizations were more advanced than ours and lasted much longer than ours is likely to last.
In the end I really do not know if man is evolving or not. I do hope that it is possible for an individual to evolve.
I have some clearer thoughts on this subject now, I will make a post of them and let you know when, too lengthy to post here.
I sure enjoy your posts Sophia, and your commentors, like mossy and sigurd and anon, Goatman, and all the rest of them, you run a great blog Sophia, always did, always will, you are a giver Sophia, with a lot to give. Thanks Love.
Welcome to "the wheel of life and death", the wheel of karma. These thoughts are WITHIN the system but don't examine WHERE or WHAT the system is. Endless musings will provide endless life and death.
"Am I separate from everything else or not"? That's the only question that needs to be answered. If I am a separate, encapsulated entity, then I'm a victim of all that I look upon. If I'm not separate, then all I look upon is me.
There is also the question is there a "THEN", a "NOW" and a "WHEN"? Does time exist?
The way your post reads seems to have has an implied bias built in that we are separate and that time exists.
Thinking and wondering is what we do here on this planet.
One problem I have with reincarnation is how to account for so many more people now than originally. Are souls subdivided into more beings? If so, seems as if quality would be lost in the process.
I do like the idea of something continuing after death even if we are not aware of it at the time, or even later.
Careful girl, don't get too drifty in thought and drive thru that stop sign!
Hi Mossy,
Homo erectus didn't have science, medicine, knowledge, technology, and a million other things. Were they aware that they were aware? Overall I see more evolution than devolution!
Some early pieces of artwork come from around 300,000 to 500,000 years ago and possibly 200,000 to 800,000 years ago. (It's a figurine called "Venus of Tan Tan" and another by the name of "Venus of Berekhat Ram".) That means Homo erectus could have been creating art! Before humans? Wow! But these Venuses are no Monets or Picassos.
The people in the past who were more interested in ideals and religion found their own forms of entertainment, like drinking in the bars or saloons. They didn't have antibiotics or catscan machines, Hubble telescopes or international space stations.
I had a theory earlier on in this blog where I mentioned that perhaps one day in the future, as part of our evolution, man and machine will merge, which in part we're already doing now with artificial transplants. Just think about micro chips in the brain loaded with complete mathematical algorithms or history encyclopedias or any other kind of information we might need.
One of the civilizations that I think you're talking about is Atlantis, which to date has not been found. I am not a skeptic and therefore I hope there really was such a place, but if there was, it was probably so far removed from other civilizations that the people could have evolved independently of anyone else on the planet. Thus I think it possible that they could have evolved at a much quicker rate, since their theorized technology is so advanced.
I think we as individuals are evolving every day.
Great to talk to you.
Hi Jim,
I will go and see what you've written! Anyway, it's kind of hard to have clear thoughts on this subject!
Glad you think I give, because I always feel like I'm taking.
Peace out.
Good evening, Joe,
I do not think time exists. It is not anything we can grasp, that's for sure! It is not a thing. It is a concept. But I have a good question, there is no future or past, right? Well, where did fossils come from if there is no time or past? They are evidence of something that has happened that is not happening now.
I do not think we are separate, and I know that time does not exist except as a concept that humans have created to explain change.
TGIF! :)
Goatman,
Try and try I have, but I can't get rid o'dem thoughts!
You've asked a very thought provoking question. The only way I can think of answering this is by proposing an analogy. Joe's comment on another post gave me an idea. If you plant one apple seed, how many apples will you get in return? Many from one! How about, Many from One. I think this Brahman is so limitless that it can expand and multiply in ways we can't even imagine.
I'll try to watch out for those stop signs! (When I was 16, I got pulled over for driving through one. Oops! No ticket, though.)
fun discussion! have you ever read ken wilber on the subject - especially "up from eden"? he does a good job at differentiating personal evolution from human evolution... and i think this is a an important first step.
like many of these commentors, i believe in personal evolution - being the best we can be, and literally a transformation of self - but have to step aside when talking about the species. evolution on a species/bio level doesn't just move vertically (cells, plants, cats, humans etc) but also horizontally - ie finding the best way to adapt to this environment right now.
as such, evolution isn't necessarily "bigger and better" you know? cockroaches may be the winners in this regard!
Sophia,
Besides Atlantas there are ancient Egypt, the makers of Stonehenge and Easter Island monuments and ancient China. China has a legend about enlightened Emperors 5,000 years ago. Ancient Greece also had some pretty good art, philosophy, government etc. Perhaps we are only eating the crumbs left behind by the Greeks.
Ryan,
I saw the artical on your blog about the civilized ancient humans 160,000 years ago. Very interesting.
Hi Ryan,
Nice to meet you. Funny you should mention Ken Wilber, as Sigurd and I were just talking about him in another post on this blog. I've only read him briefly, and I came to the conclusion that he was too much of an intellectual for me to actually enjoy, although I have appreciated some snippets of his writings.
I agree with you that there is horizontal evolution. Humans are the best examples of this that I've seen, moreso recently. Personally I'm glad to be living in this era, where I can get antibiotics, vaccinations, lasik eye surgery and more. I think it will only get better. They're on the verge of finding a cure/treatment for alzheimer's disease, and probably before we know it, they'll have the cure for cancer! These are all examples of adaptation by the human being.
Heh... cockroaches never really had a chance! But I can think of a few people who could perceiveably end-up as cockroaches in their next life!
Mossy,
No doubt that ancient civilizations were well developed in many fields. It's just that we now have all that and more! Likewise, the future generations will have all that, all of our advancements and all of their own, and so on into the future.
They better start working on a space colonization program, though, if they want all of this legacy to live on, or else the sun will turn into a red giant and consume everything. When that happens, it will be as though earth never existed. That's hard to imagine!
Sophia said: "I have a good question, there is no future or past, right? Well, where did fossils come from if there is no time or past? They are evidence of something that has happened that is not happening now."
=============
Fossils and history are WITHIN the system. What CONTAINS the system? WHERE does the system exist?
Just look at football fans. Within the football concept, all the individual pieces look "real". If we look at the whole football system, it only has meaning within the minds that made it up. It has no other reality.
I would suggest "life" as we know it is exactly the same. The real issue is finding a platform from which to observe it that is not within the system being observed. This is not a trivial undertaking! Many call this enlightenment or self realization.
Just try telling a hard core football fan his life is built on something made up in his mind and nothing more. How much harder is it to tell a person their life is something made up in their mind and nothing more?
The above question asks to be confined within the system of earth history. The question is great within that confine. It is meaningless outside of the earth history system. Within the system, I can say, yes, there are rocks that look like animals and plants. Looking at the whole system, I can also come up with any concept I like and build a system that works for me. I point to creationism as an example. How do I know which is "true". Either may be perfectly acceptable for living a day to day life. My personal preference is that I made it all up in my mind. Each must determine what is "true" for themself. If there is a proof that relies on evidence outside of personal experience, it is by definition within the system.
Hi Joe,
Wouldn't the only platform that exists outside of what is being observed otherwise be known as the Observer?
Edgar Caycey said...
eventually, our soul moves beyond the earth and out into another area beyond the stars into
a 5th dimension form, sort of......
when i dig deep, i have to admit that i'm not really sure about the supremacy of human evolution especially on regards to the idea that "technology is proof of how awesome we are." on the other hand, we are really adaptive creatures and that's one thing i love about being human. culture is amazing, learning is neat trick, and i'm all about how playful we remain as individuals throughout our lives. we're blessed in so many ways. but technology from my perspective is not the answer - it's not gonna "save" us. that's my view anyways. i'm all for modern medicine, and the cure for cancer, etc, but remember that technology is solving problems that we created. cancer rates aren't random.... modern life is much to blame. (and this is coming from the guy who holds a radiation-driven communication device to his head an hour a day).
anyhow - this is just my opinion....
and yeah - wilber can be really ridiculously intellectual... i have to blow that stuff off because he's at his best when he's explaining things simply in everyday language. grace and grit is a beautiful story, for example.
Jon,
That's one way of looking at it.
I wish the Sleeping Prophet was here with us today. I'd have a lot of questions for him!
Hi Ryan,
Of course I'm tempted to ask you about vaccinations. Do you think that we're to blame for our own viruses? I'm sure I could dig up a few more examples, but I'll stick with that one for now! And what about organ transplants! :) Also, the lifespan of the human has increased due to our advancements in technology.
Thanks for putting in your perspective.
This discussion really begs the philosophical question: What things signify that a society is more or less evolved?
This may be the same as asking: What are our highest values and are they being fulfilled or supported by society? What do we value most? Freedom, security, stabiltiy , a good job, good health, and some free time are great. But when these basic neccessities have been met what other, higher values do we have?
A few things come to my mind: Plentiful meaningful connections to my fellow beings, a meaningful occupation, artistic expression and enjoyment of the best art of others, a common or at least mutually tolerant view of spirituality which could be shared, a feeling of each person wanting to support every other person.
It seems that my higher values are mostly about having a more meaningful life.
Hi Mossy,
I think we share some similar higher values. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the people who visit this blog share these, too. I think it's what draws us to each other.
For me, after my basic needs are met, I strive for deep connections with other humans, but also animals. In addition to this I am driven to search for spiritual meaning. Really, those two things are most important to me in this life. It all sums up to spirituality and friendship. I guess it's all about spirituality, really. And part of that spirituality is at least attempting to transform myself as a human being, no matter how many mistakes I make or how often I find myself going backwards.
Now that we have the Internet - which ancient cultures did not have - we can more easily connect with each other all around the world. Do you think many of those in ancient civilizations were driven to bonding with others like this? It would have been impossible for them.
I've heard it said that humans bond with each other as a means of survival. Perhaps it had something to do with hunting in packs in the early days. If this is so, why are many humans so capable of feeling affection for animals? I can't really see where feeling affection for a cat would increase one's chance of survival. So it's not just biological evolution, it's emotional evolution as well.
But Sophia, there is a non-sequitur in your post. Evolution does not acknowledge a rebirthing soul at all. the evolution takes place within the DNA.
Did you not mean to say "the role of evolution in reincarnation"?
Hi Vincent,
It was not a typo! :) It may not be agreed upon by most and is perhaps a very odd idea but I could easily see where a rebirthing soul is involved in evolution. While flesh and matter is fleeting, the soul is everlasting and can easily shed its shell for a new one, just like crabs. Same crab, different shell.
Post a Comment