/lit/ - Literature

reincarnation is some advanced level cope

Afterlife is some astronomical level cope

>>17265845
>>17265852
clearly, neither of you do acid

>>17266087
>dude drugs lmao
I remember being in my early 20s too, OP.

>>17265492
I can only believe in a futile reincarnation, meaning, I will be recreated but It’s not going to be a continuation of my current consciousness, just one identical to mine, when when my year of birth reaches after the universe begins anew with a big bang , after ending. (See Cyclic models of the universe like CCC)

>>17266087
I've done acid and shrooms (acid far more times than shrooms) but I'm not stupid enough to mix reality with drug induced hallucinations

>>17266896
What's the point of doing hallucinogens if you dismiss the effects they provide?

>>17266087
Did LSD, NBOME, Ayahuasca and read Kant. It is just a trip, anon. What are you talking about?

>>17266087
How the fuck do you conclude that you'll reincarnate from an LSD trip

>>17265492
nigger

>>17266896
I’m surprised idiots like joe rogain don’t catch onto that. He and his shill have really fucked things up.

>>17266117
>thinks people stop using drugs in their early 20s

>>17266913
Personal introspection or fun with friends I wasn’t raised religiously but I did have “spiritual” experiences on acid but I did not take that to be reality.

>>17267392
it very well could be. it's not without reason that a many physicists have flirted with Advaita Vedanta.

>>17267265
He is assuming you are smarter than you really are.

>>17267392
I did have some, and they were pleasant and scary. But even so.

>>17267392
Just because the experiences are abstract or intangible doesn't mean they are not real.

Lol you can speculate on reincarnation but I'm jumping on a singularity in a few decades

>>17265492
>using a wojak
>thinking he made a point

>>using a wojak
>>thinking he made a point

>>17268203
>using a basedjack
>thinking he made a point

>>17267392
>Now whoever has once understood the ideality of the world sees that the statement that such a world would still exist even if it were not the representation or mental picture of anyone, is really meaningless, since it states a contradiction. For the fact of its being in existence means simply that it is represented or becomes a mental picture; its existence itself resides in the representation or mental picture of the subject. This is precisely what is stated by the expression ‘it is object’. If I behold some object such as a view of a landscape and think to myself that, if at this moment my head were chopped off, I know that the object would still be there unmoved and undisturbed, then this implies fundamentally and at bottom that I too would still exist. This will be obvious to a few, but let it be said for these.

>>17268178
I saw millions of faces of people in the sky like a yearbook floating like a tapestry, that was not reality

>>17267265
>thinking that if you still think drugs provide great insight you aren’t automatically still in your twenties on an intellectual level

There are more than 3.000 scientifically confirmed cases of reincarnation. It is not a fringe belief anymore. Read Dr. Ian Stevenson

I don't understand how reincarnation is not a self-contradiction. You are assuming that the "you" who is reincarnated is identical to you now. Why the hell would that be? That reincarnated "you" is a completely different biological organism, with a completely different brain structure, and completely different life-experiences. How is that "you" in any way? If you could take the reincarnated "you" from the future and bring it to the present and meet up with it, wouldn't it be just the same as meeting up with a different person? In that case, the reincarnated "you" is just a different person, not actually you.

>>17268827
>You are assuming that the "you" who is reincarnated is identical to you now.
no
Why the hell would that be? That reincarnated "you" is a completely different biological organism, with a completely different brain structure, and completely different life-experiences. How is that "you" in any way? If you could take the reincarnated "you" from the future and bring it to the present and meet up with it, wouldn't it be just the same as meeting up with a different person? In that case, the reincarnated "you" is just a different person, not actually you.
It's two different incarnations from the same You. Imagine you wire into a simulation you get a certain set of memories (the others temporarily blocked) and a body you identify with. In one you would feel a medieval knight in the other a Vietnam soldier who lost his parents.
How would it not be the same You going into the simulation just because you don't currently remember it? Are you not the same person if you forget things?

Reincarnation is obvious. No one really thinks life ends, I seriously doubt anyone actually believes it.

>>17268827
You are Buddha. So is a dog, so is a snake, so is a rock. You never stop being Buddha.

>>17268827
Because it's the same conscious experiencer.

I can look at a person next to me but I can't see out of his eyes, I would be seeing out of the eyes of the person I reincarnated into though, even though he's a "different" person. Who the hell says that reincarnation makes an identical you? I don't think anyone says that.

>>17269161
Lankavataras get the bullet. Praise Amitabha

>>17265852
>>17265845
More like there being nothing after death is the ultimate cope. You're afraid of facing the consequences of your actions, which you inherently know you will face, deep down inside. It's why you're so angry about something you supposedly don't believe in.

>>17269280
and what's the inverse of this? The cope that the evil are always punished in then end even if they escape prosecution on this earth, that the good and innocent are always rewarded with nirvana or similar after a cruel or early death?

>>17269299
>evil are always punished in then end even if they escape prosecution on this earth, that the good and innocent are always rewarded with nirvana or similar after a cruel or early death?
Who even claims this? not buddhists

>he thinks time is finite

>>17269694
>he thinks time exists

>>17265492

>>17266087
I've done Acid, Mushrooms, Truffles and Salvia Divinorum. Reincarnation is not real. Get over yourself.
>>17265492
Like others have pointed out, its a massive cope. There's zero reason to believe in reincarnation other than the thought giving you some comfort or way to block out the pain you experience from existential dread (Just embrace it)

>>17269280
But reincarnation isn't a just system of consequences. The person who comes after you will have no memory or knowledge of what you have done wrong, and therefore cannot learn from your mistakes. If you happen to be unlucky with an immoral person's soul you will ostensibly be punished for something someone else did.

Reincarnation has been used to justify hierarchal societies because the upper classes/castes are free to abuse the lower classes/castes because "they must have deserved it for what they did in a past life"

>>17270161
how are you alive then how are the odds of your current life happening different than the odds of you happening again, the truth is outside of time the odds converge into all happening at once you've been always alive you've been always death there's no escape the soul is eternal

>>17268827
if someone gave you amnesia and implanted memories you would think you were other person but thats still you anyway

>>17270170
most people have never seen a snake yet they fear instinctively fear it, how can that be when they have no memories of being in contact with a snake, same thing on a different level

>>17270161
>Reincarnation isn't real because I took some drugs. Based brainlet frying his brain with drugs. Reincarnation is scientifically proven and I have cited proof.

>>17270228

>>17270268

>>17270281
I never claimed to not be a brainlet, but I am much less of a brainlet than you

>>17270292
i thought you were a based retard but you're the cringe onions in the middle