Do you believe in Reincarnation?

[Gray_Fox]

---

Consider, for example, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, the world famous eighteenth century composer. At the age of four he wrote a piano concerto, a sonata and several minuets. His compositions were anything but simple, but were nevertheless technically accurate. Think about that for a moment....four years old! By the age of seven, he had composed a full length opera. So what has your child been doing lately?

How does one explain Mozart’s genius, particularly at such an early age? Genetics? Do we carry genes that determine how well we can compose or play the piano or violin. Do genes carry the “blueprints” via DNA for a myriad of other talents? Or is there a source of intelligence, skills and knowledge, from which someone like Mozart can tap?

Reincarnation might suggest Mozart in a prior life was a musician and a composer. This type of reasoning would say that Mozart had already accomplished much of the necessary groundwork for his skills and his genius and when he was born Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, he was well primed to begin work at a very early age.

Hey! that was easy! Reincarnation thus explains or offers a theory to justify this musical phenomenon. It may or may not be true, but the theory does have more appeal than to simply dismiss the existence of this child prodigy by merely saying he (or she) had been blessed with innate genius or natural ability. Why, for example, should anyone be “blessed” prior to her or his birth?

even if you believe in reincarnation, you don't surely believe that DNA is part of it right? i mean... DNA is written in your biological parent's genes. LOL.

[regnauld]

even if you believe in reincarnation, you don't surely believe that DNA is part of it right? i mean... DNA is written in your biological parent's genes. LOL.

And how do you explain Dejavu and XenoglossY? Don't tell me it has something to do with your DNA.! Please study deeper!

[necrotic freak]

Consider, for example, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, the world famous eighteenth century composer. At the age of four he wrote a piano concerto, a sonata and several minuets. His compositions were anything but simple, but were nevertheless technically accurate. Think about that for a moment....four years old! By the age of seven, he had composed a full length opera. So what has your child been doing lately?

How does one explain Mozart’s genius, particularly at such an early age? Genetics? Do we carry genes that determine how well we can compose or play the piano or violin. Do genes carry the “blueprints” via DNA for a myriad of other talents? Or is there a source of intelligence, skills and knowledge, from which someone like Mozart can tap?

Reincarnation might suggest Mozart in a prior life was a musician and a composer. This type of reasoning would say that Mozart had already accomplished much of the necessary groundwork for his skills and his genius and when he was born Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, he was well primed to begin work at a very early age.

Hey! that was easy! Reincarnation thus explains or offers a theory to justify this musical phenomenon. It may or may not be true, but the theory does have more appeal than to simply dismiss the existence of this child prodigy by merely saying he (or she) had been blessed with innate genius or natural ability. Why, for example, should anyone be “blessed” prior to her or his birth?

Does Mozart past life was BAD? Was he an EVIL musician then? as you said only BAD people will reincarnate to correct their past life for the GOOD people will go straight to heaven no need to reincarnate.

[regnauld]

Does Mozart past life was BAD? Was he an EVIL musician then? as you said only BAD people will reincarnate to correct their past life for the GOOD people will go straight to heaven no need to reincarnate.

You might want to ask GOD if Mozart was EVIL. How do I know his past life? Maybe he was a great musician in his past life who committed sins. But I don't know what were those sins. I am not GOD! Peace!

[regnauld]

And how do you explain Dejavu and XenoglossY? Don't tell me it has something to do with your DNA.! Please study deeper!

Cases subjected to scientific investigation

Scientific research into xenoglossy is quite rare and Ian Stevenson, a psychiatrist at the University of Virginia, had just a handful of suggestive cases. These included two hypnotic regression cases where the subject could converse with people speaking the foreign language, instead of merely being able to recite foreign words. Sarah Thomason, a linguist at the University of Michigan, reanalysed these cases.

• Swarnlatta Mishra:[2] A girl in India who lived entirely among Hindi-speaking people but was able to sing songs in Bengali, as identified by Professor P. Pal of Itachuna College in West Bengal, who studied the case after Professor Stevenson and transcribed some of the songs.

• Sharada: Uttara Huddar was a woman in India who normally spoke Marathi. While in hospital undergoing psychiatric treatment, she began manifesting a personality called Sharada, who spoke in Bengali. Stevenson had recordings analysed by Bengali speakers, who disagreed among themselves about the subject's fluency.[3] It cannot be ruled out that the subject may have learned Bengali earlier in life: both she and her father had a long-standing interest in Bengal, her home city had 1% native Bengali speakers, she had read Bengali novels in translation, and she herself had taken lessons in reading Bengali.[4]

• Jensen[5][6], an American woman who presented the character of a Swedish farmer while under hypnosis conducted by her physician husband. Stevenson reported that the subject was able to converse in Swedish, albeit not fluently. However Thomason's reanalysis concluded that Jensen could not convincingly be claimed to speak Swedish; in the interview Stevenson studied in depth, though Jensen had a total vocabulary of about 100 words, only about 60 were used before interlocutors used them, and, as one of Stevenson's consultants pointed out, this reduced to 31 after eliminating cognates. Jensen also gave no complex sentences, mostly gave one or two word answers, and - as acknowledged by Stevenson - the subject's poor pronunciation was covered by correct spelling in the transcripts. Thomason mentions, however, that two of Stevenson's consultants praised Jensen's Swedish accent, and one claimed that only a native speaker could pronounce the word 'seven' correctly as Jensen does. Furthermore, she says that Stevenson's efforts to rule out fraud are convincing. Jensen's lack of understanding of Swedish was such that he answers ‘my wife’ to a question about what he would pay for some item at the market.[7] Linguist William Samarin drew the same conclusion as Thomason.

• Gretchen[8][6], an American woman named Dolores Jay who presented the life of a teenage girl in Germany while hypnotized by her Methodist minister husband. Stevenson reported that the subject was able to converse in German. Mrs. Jay did study a German dictionary at one point during the sessions, but Stevenson pointed out that she had already spontaneously produced 206 words before this event. Again Thomason's reanalysis, while acknowledging that the evidence against fraud was convincing, concluded that Gretchen could not converse in German. Her speech was largely the repetition of German questions with different intonation, or utterances of one or two words. Her "German vocabulary is minute, and her pronunciation is spotty".[9] When asked what she had for breakfast, she answers ‘Bettzimmer’, which is a non-existent word made up of the two words for 'bed' and 'room'. Moreover she had some previous exposure to German in TV programmes and a "look at a German book".

[regnauld]

Xenoglossy is the term given to the utterance of a language unknown to the speaker.

The term seems somewhat superfluous, if we quite rationally reject the idea of someone conversing in a language s/he doesn’t know. Unfortunately for our rationality, we are now routinely presented with subjects reliving past lives under hypnosis and speaking in foreign languages -- languages of which they have (allegedly) no knowledge in this lifetime. To further emphasize the inexplicable, some of the languages are now so rare that it takes an exhaustive effort just to find someone (scholar or linguist dealing in very rare languages) to interpret.

Joel Whitton and Joe Fisher, in their book, Life Between Life, state that:

“Over the past one hundred years, xenoglossy has been generally considered to suggest the outpouring of subconscious memory. Cases have been examined by eminent parapsychological researchers ranging from William James to Dr. Ian Stevenson. The growing incidence of past‑life therapy since the early 1970s has produced numerous examples of trance subjects holding forth in foreign tongues to which they have not been exposed in the current life. The range of such hypnotic diction is vast and includes modern European languages, ancient Chinese, and even jungle dialects.”

Perhaps we can challenge such claims by pointing out that extant languages can often be learned very quickly with modern techniques. Furthermore, any interpretation of the long dead languages spoken by subjects may be suspect because the experts are often not accustomed to hearing the language. For example, how many people regularly converse in Old Norse, the language of the Vikings and the precursor to modern Icelandic? Come to think of it, how many people regularly converse in modern Icelandic?

Unfortunately for such doubters, we also have examples of xenography, the writing of a language unknown to the “author.” One of Dr. Whitton’s subjects, for example, while reliving a life in seventh century Mesopotamia, was able to put down on paper what amounted to doodles, which upon close examination was interpreted as an authentic representation of the long‑dead language called Sassanid Pahlavi, which was used in Mesopotamia between A.D. 226 and 651 and which bears no relation to modern Iranian languages.

[regnauld]

Burden of Proof

Some have argued that since reincarnation cannot be proved, it therefore should not be considered as a viable theory. Such a view is also flawed,as there is no reason, a priori, to assume a single life is more likely than multiple lives. To quote Voltaire: “It is no more surprising to be born twice than to be born once.” If we consider the number of the world’s people who accept without question the concept of reincarnation, it would appear that the burden of proof should be placed on those people who insist that only a single life is available to us all. That proof is likely to be far more difficult.

In our discussions above, reincarnation has often been the simpler explanation for various phenomena. The simplicity of the explanation may not appear to carry much weight, but in the history of science the vastly complicated theories have usually been wrong. The Ptolemaic system of cycles and epicycles is a good example of a complicated system being supplanted by the comparatively simple relationship which describes Issac Newton’s gravitational theory. Consequently the simple explanation has some appeal. Whether or not it is the correct explanation is still up for grabs.

[regnauld]

even if you believe in reincarnation, you don't surely believe that DNA is part of it right? i mean... DNA is written in your biological parent's genes. LOL.

Orthodox theory conceives human personality as the product of a person's genetic material inherited from his ancestors through his parents, and the modifying influences of his prenatal and postnatal environment. But I found that some cases cannot be satisfactorily explained by genetics, environmental influences, or a combination of these. I am speaking of such things as early childhood phobias, about uncanny abilities that seem to develop spontaneously, of children convinced that they are the wrong ***, congenital deformities, differences between one-egg twins, and even such matters as irrational food preferences. - Dr. Ian Stevenson

[GrEenOCIDE]

You might want to ask GOD if Mozart was EVIL. How do I know his past life? Maybe he was a great musician in his past life who committed sins. But I don't know what were those sins. I am not GOD! Peace!

para nako Mozart is not evil, he is a great composer, y man naabot man ni ni Mozart oi? reincarnation man ang topic.

[regnauld]

para nako Mozart is not evil, he is a great composer, y man naabot man ni ni Mozart oi? reincarnation man ang topic.

Pls. read and study number 387 of this thread. Ok?