Inquiry

The ability of those choosing to be locked into passed down religious traditions full of errors that are somehow considered ultimate truth are not likely to budge on their version of non-empiracal considerations. This would tend to drive them further into the fear that already obscures the truth that is all about them. Madam Blavatsky appears profoundly aware of this in her works appearing more than 120 years ago. Edgar Cayces' life appears to embody someone who although a devout Sunday school Bible teacher encountered aspects of his own being that rather demanded he seriously consider that something like reincarnation was always in effect but this has yet to have any significant acceptance by masses of "born again evangelicals" who continue to buy into the theological dupery of certain religious authority who still perceive great profit in keeping millions in the dark about the profound depths of truth that their brand of worship tends to deride as "pantheism" or paganism. This is quite ironic since the early church writers including some of the ancient Hebrews plagerized much of the pre existing "pagan" doctrines then demonized them as being of the "devil". These "pagan" beliefs included the idea of immaculate conception, casting out demons, and rising from the dead. It does appear that fear is a weapon still skillfully used to keep the spiritually naive from asking too many questions that may cause a loss of market share in their particular versions of cornering "Gods" favor. There is of course those whose mind although confounded has not been completly obliterated asks for some kind of Truth that will set them free from the falsehoods that passes for truth. These with some devotion will find books, movements, other religions that will tend to satisfy their spiritual curiosity if it hasn't been put to sleep by the droning of semiconscious zealots who tend to kill off those who don't fit their flocks. The fairly popular; A Course In Miracles  strongly implies that the God of the Christ cannot create anything that is not eternal and it further indicates that most beliefs eventually obscure the truth and that a belief in reincarnation is still an illusion from the view point of the Formless. For the most part the current "theistic" tradition will have to die out or evolve in order to allow such considerations as "reincarnation" any room in their view of the universe. Dr. David Hawkins has written some very interesting books on the levels of conciousness that generally concludes that only about four percent of the current world's population actually have the consciousness to effectively and sanely teach on the subject of God, Deity, or Transrational "facts". Many of these beings keep silent with the idea that the effect of the "Guru's grace"which is something like a morphogenetic field raises consciousness without speech.  Very Fortunately for those who tend to go along with KW's considerations. He is well within the top level of that 4 percent. 

Warner

I find the terra incognita  that this thread suggests rather fascinating. There is a DVD being advertised on the Integral Life site called "The Future of Christianity." When I saw this in the weekly update a week or so ago it really peaked my curiosity. I grew up in a household that was as dysfunctionally amber as it was Christian so as you might imagine I've had very little use or regard for conventional Christian views and practices in my adult life. Having been involved in the Integral dialog for some time now my capacity to "hold space" for amber outlooks, viewpoints and behaviors has increased markedly - rather than being so inclined to alienate myself from that segment of humanity.

I've struggled as well in dealing with notion of re-incarnation. Realizing, I think, that the notion that re-incarnation is something that one "believes in" is misleading. You must be capable of a level of realization that is beyond the conventional (orange) rational mind in order to deal with the truth of what the notion of re-incarnation has to offer. It is not something to be believed in. That being said I sincerely wonder if their might be a more enlightened future for Christianity ahead. The fact that KW, Thomas Keating and the rest of us are having this dialog is significant in and of itself. Mostly because we're involved in a process that is in fact integral. All of us who are involved in this dialog are very much done with theologies that control, distort or seek to limit our experience of the truth. So now what?

Thomas Keating can perhaps be said to be a person who, while still connected to a particular brand of cultural/spiritual transmission, is capable of playing in a sandbox that is much deeper or broader than amber. What does that say about the future of spiritual traditions such as Christianity and Islam? Or maybe the question should be why should the future of such institutions matter to the relatively small segment of the world population that is capable of and interested in functioning in an integral fashion?

Its a good question I think. Compassion goes a long way.

When considering whether or not it is possible to adopt the concept of reincarnation into western theistic traditions, I think we should first step back and consider the benefits and risks of doing so.  I think the concept of reincarnation can be an entirely healthy and useful one at centers of gravity orange or higher but at amber, I think it could be a very dangerous tool. 

Look at India and see how grossly misused the concept has helped the caste system endure (I recognize it is not the only factor at play but I think it does support it).  I think the last thing we need is fundamental ministers in Western traditions receiving even added authority from misuse of the concept in this, or similar manners.

That being said, I think reincarnation is an entirely a feasible concept at higher centers of gravity within a contemplative context and if that is what this question is aiming for I certainly think it is something we should explore.  I just thought it would be useful to distinguish that because the question seems to suggest introducing reincarnation into the entire current of Western theistic traditions, which in my opinion would have some undesirable consequences.

I have been a Catholic all my life, and have in some sense stayed practicing (at least involved) often because of music participation and commitments.  I long ago learned to live with the differences, accepting others where they were at as best I could, and trying to stay true to my own perceptions and understandings.  My view of an afterlife has changed much over the years, and for lack of a better explanation leans toward reincarnation.  It seems to answer more questions than other explanations I have run across, but is not really satisfactory in many respects to my mind.

My observation of my fellow Christians is that beyond the ones that ardently believe in the heaven/hell scenario, is that most of them are generally confused or agnostic about an afterlife.  I have met many who believe in heaven, but not hell, others who think reincarnation is the answer, some who think we will just be absorbed back into God, and variations thereof.

To my mind the issue is also greatly muddled by an almost complete loss (to my mind) of the idea of soul.  The abortion issue is a prime example of this: many on this issue have latched on to some ersatz idea that a complete strand of DNA in an embryo equals a human being (but God forgive us, not cloned).  Traditionally, the idea begs the issue of soul, in that Catholic tradition and many of its greatest theologians argued that a human soul is not present until a certain amount of development has occurred (1st trimester to Augustine, quickening to St. Thomas, if I got my sources right) thus baptism for a miscarriage was not generally necessary.  Now this idea to my mind is questionable, but the whole question of what makes a "complete" or "real" human being and what is a soul stands in disarray in the Christian community.  If it comes from somewhere (God or whatever) when does it come and when does it go?  Does it develop or is it just something that can be stained with sin and cleansed with confession?  Theologians don't seem to brouch the issue much any more.  Most beliefs about a soul in the Christian community are the detritus of past thought badly beaten up by the Age of enlightment and science.  So what goes to heaven or hell or what gets reincarnated?

This to me is deeply connected to the loss of a mystical tradition in Christianity and can only be approached thru a revival of that tradition.  A couple of years ago, I heard a local bishop preach that "we should not look within to find God, only evil and sin exist there".  He seems to me to be very traditional without understanding anything of the tradition.  But again it speaks to me how far we have come from an understanding of spirit and spiritual and what it all means within our Christian communties.   Also the answers to question of afterlife and the development of what those answers mean to the different levels in our development have, it seems to me, to have largely been put on hold with that loss.

So could Christianity accept reincarnation?  Unless there is a revival of mysticism with theology and questioning responding to that mysticim and its realizations, just about anything could fill the dearth of understanding currently existing, perhaps even reincarnation.

This question comes up all the time in my Christian circles.  Jesus promises is that we will have everlasting life. Except for certain references to an "end time" when much will be made clear, he says very little about what form that eternal life will take. In our tradition, embodied, earthly life is infused with the divine and holy. As one who is embodied, ensouled and immortal, I see no reason not to believe in reincarnation as a practice and fact of  my spiritual journey.

Carol Luther+

It seems to me that if we continue to hold the ethnocentric /mythical view that Jesus was BORN the Christ and the only Child (Son) of God, then reincarnation can probably never have a place in Christianity.

If, on the other hand, we take the more worldcentric view, as per Edgar Cayce (for example), that Jesus is an exemplar and Elder Brother for us, and that Jesus BECAME the Christ, and that "others will come after me who will do greater things than I have done", and "you are gods", and each of us must become a christed being - that is, there is only one child of God, and all self-conscious beings wherever they are in the universe are it!! - and if we assume that it's pretty difficult to achieve christhood (enlightenment, being fully human, the prayer of union, the non-dual state, moving through the subtle and causal realms horizontally, and through worldcentric and Kosmocentric, etc. vertically) in one lifetime, then reincarnation could, and must, have a place in Christianity.

This could also explain the writings of many mystics, such as John of the Cross, etc. who seem to assume a very advanced state as their starting point for the mystical/spiritual journey.

The concept of reincarnation is already available within theistic traditions.  The most prominent example is Spiritism, which grew out of the work of thousands of mediums, working since the 1840's all around the world.  Growing out of the rational (orange) level of consciousness, Spiritism is the rational analysis of channeled texts, written by spirits through human beings.  Hundreds of thousands of messages have been organized according to the partial truths they contain, to create a moral, philosophical, and scientific worldview based on what discarnate spirits, in all their variety, spontaneously present.  This information is then combined with normal human science (external realities), personal experiences and interpretations (internal realities), within the sociocultural context (intersubjective realities), to create a cosmology called Spiritism.  Unlike most theistic religious groups, whose congregations are largely pre-rational, most Spiritists are at the rational (orange) or worldcentric (green) levels of consciousness. 

Growing out of a Christian culture, the concept of God is a very potent force within Spiritism, and most Spiritists also consider themselves to be be followers of Jesus, even though they reject much or all of the fixed Christian dogmas.  But in spite of the Christian background, Spiritists found no difficulty accepting the "Law of Reincarnation" and the "Law of Karma" because the topics were so widely confirmed and clearly explained through mediumistic communications. 

The ease with which Spiritists adopted concepts of reincarnation, and the speed with which Spiritism is spreading in the USA indicate to me that members of traditional theistic traditions with a rational or higher level of consciousness will have little difficulty accepting concepts of reincarnation if they are presented in a clear, rational manner.  What will not spread quickly are murky concepts of reincarnation shrouded in mysticism, often impregnated with pre-rational rituals and explanations that make their verity harder to grasp on a rational level.

For more information on Spiritism, I would suggest reading the E-books available from the Spiritist Group of New York (www.sgny.org).  Or, for those of you in Colorado at the Integral Institute, come visit us at the Caritas Spiritist Center in Boulder!

Regardless, I see much hope for the concepts of reincarnation within the western religious traditions.

First off, no one has defined/stated what "concept of reincarnation" we are talking about.  From reading the blogs though let's say it's a linear progression of the soul through a human historical timeline, i.e. past to present with the end result being the perfection of the individual spirit.  I just want to be clear that we are not speaking about trans-species or trans-element incarnations.  Remember there are a lot more Hindus (trans-species concept) than Buddhists out there. 

As for Western theistic traditions Christianity seems the real concern here so I'll stick with that.

Rajneesh, when he still held that name stated in one of his books "There are two types of people in the world, believers and intellectuals, and, if you have to ask yourself "which one am I?" , you're an intellectual.  "Form follows function" and the function of "believers" is enhanced by if not totally reliant upon some immutable "truth(s)".  Change these, or change one even and the group which goes with the change can no longer be identified by the old brand name.  The followers of Martin Luther did not become, or at least are not known today as "Reformed Catholics", they're Protestants;  Lutherans, Methodists, etc.  And too, is not reincarnation, just as the concept of Heaven primarily a straw that the egoic mind clings to in order to assure itself that the individual identity will survive death somehow?  So, why replace one with the other and confuse the poor congregants when the afterlife in place, though irrational, serves the purpose as well as (indeed better, remember the hell option) the proposed replacement.

So my conclusion is that yes, a great many individual people raised in some western theistic tradition have already and will continue to adopt the concept of reincarnation albeit, proceeded or followed by discarding those same theisms.  And some will hold to their old beliefs while attempting to dovetail these dispirit concepts into their catechism denying the heresey inherent in these attempts.  But, the religions themselves, the priesthoods and the books cannot and will not change though it be the death of them.

-- i think if you take the idea of pergatory (or however it's spelled) then earth could be that middle realm that you're continually born into until you reach heaven which would be the release from the cycle of rebirth.... rebirth could be the everchanging western mind/perspective.... once we reach the ultimate/liberation/heaven the sines and cosines of consciousness settle down...

adam

Theistic evolutionists argue that it is inappropriate to use Genesis as a scientific text, since it was written in a pre-scientific age and originally intended for religious instruction; as such, seemingly chronological aspects of the creation accounts should be thought of in terms of a literary framework.It's awesome to pass 642-901 exam.Theistic evolutionists may believe that creation is not literally a week long process but a process beginning in the time of Genesis and continuing through all of time, including today.I was often visit religious places when I am preparing for 642-812 exam.This view affirms that God created the world and was the primary causation of our being, while scientific changes such as evolution are part of "creatia continua" or continuing creation which is still occurring in the never ending process of creation. Changes such as these caused by science are part of a secondary causation that changes us within the framework of the world God has created with primary causation.It's awesome to have dumps of SY0-201 exam.This is one possible way of interpreting biblical scriptures, such as Genesis, that seem to be in opposition to scientific theories, such as evolution.