this post was submitted on 26 Dec 2023

56 points (77.5% liked)

Asklemmy

43908 readers

994 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

If you believe in reincarnation, do you suppose at some point everyone gets to experience the very best life imaginable? (lemmy.world)

submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

55 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Edit: Goddamnit will one of you please comprehend my question and give a relevant response.

I didn't ask whether or not you think souls are real or what you think about Buddha

This is not a creative writing prompt nor a place for you to pontificate your religious ponderings! 🙄

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Sabre363@sh.itjust.works 23 points 10 months ago (5 children)

I know your looking for a straight answer, but questions like this don't really have satisfactory answers due to them not being scientific questions. The definition of "best life" will be fundimentally different for everyone and the actual best life for each person will be consequently unique. You might define your best life as having lots of money or cars, while I define mine as acquiring and sharing knowledge and skills. Neither life is superior, just yours might suck for me and mine might seem tedious to you.

That being said, given hypothetically infinite time, then everyone would logically get to live their defined best life at some point. However, because time has a definitive beginning (at least as we currently understand it) and is therefore not infinite, we would never be able to empirically know if we had reached peak life experience or if one of the infinite possibilities that never happened would have been better.

[–] neidu2@feddit.nl 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Seconding this. "Best life" is highly subjective. My dad, for example, was a very simple man (simple in a positive way, for the record). Sure, looking at cool cars were neat and all, but the happiest I ever saw him was when he was sitting on the balcony of the vacation home in the norwegian mountains, as a break from everyday life. His "best life possible" would probably be filled with days like that.

I, on the other hand, would probably want something more. Sure, it was nice and all, but I get bored too easily, to the point where I brought my PC up there in the 90's so I could study Turbo Padcal, and bringing tech back then was pretty much considered sacrilege. I have yet to find out what is considered my "best life possible". I just hope my kids will one day be able to see me as truly happy.

[–] Sabre363@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago

I thinks ultimately a massive waste of time to chase the dragon of a "best life", it's neigh unattainable and you'll never know if you've reached it or not. Instead, focus on finding your own personal Norwegian balcony and fully enjoy those brief moments for what they truly are. Though I'll be the first to admit that the last part can be really fucking hard sometimes.

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago (1 children)

In case the reincarnations go on forever, then yes, I think the best life is inevitable. I'm amazed. I've thought about this concept in the past, but I always imagined the negative consequences - everyone would have to experience the very worst suffering there is. The fact that you took it from the positive side is mindblowing to me. Good for you!

[–] LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Yes, you get it! 😍 I thought of it from the positive angle because I know a man who is living this idyllic life right now, He was born into the best possible circumstances with the best family and the best education and the best wealth and love and opportunities and lives in the most beautiful place in the world, and I've told him a few times, he is living the best life known to human potential.

And he's humble too so he hasn't fully embraced my lofty assessment of him 😄

But I think his circumstances are one in a billion and I've told him he is living his peak incarnation right now!

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

I love your optimistic take. You were born with a brain capable of positive thinking, which, unfortunately, doesn't happen to everyone. Enjoy your stay in this body 😊

[–] Katrisia@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If that's true, will his next life inevitably be a little worse than now? Average, perhaps? Even bad? Then it would not be about reincarnating for the better each time but a lottery, in which eventually you'll get a relatively better life than the others, right?

Or is the best life the last one before crossing to somewhere else? Will Earth become emptier and emptier then, as we all cross? Then why the number of beings keeps increasing instead of decreasing? Who are these new souls?

Do you believe his humbleness is part of why he has those circumstances? Will he keep the good life because he deserves it? Some systems talk about merits, about reincarnating into what one deserves. Then, every orphan and every Palestinian and every pig deserve what they have suffered? If so, those systems often invite us to compassion, but is there space to absolute compassion when the Universe itself is punishing them for terrible deeds in the past? It would be similar to watching children being spanked; on one hand, you feel bad for them because they need to learn this painful lesson; on the other, you feel good because they deserve them, especially if the harm was against you, you may even feel a spark of joy from something similar to revenge. So are we supposed to feel this mix of feelings for beings who have it worse than us? Happy that they're getting to learn, happy that they're been punished, happy that they won't be doing it again? Because that's not how I feel, and I would feel sadistic to feel it based only on this theory we're imagining. Then there's the question: is this kind of cruel punishing the only way for souls to learn? If so, why such a primitive system? We do not even use it for our children anymore, and psychologists have found it is detrimental instead of constructive. Is this the best way the Universe can help us grow? If it is, it seems suspicious, who is behind? If it is not, then it is needlessly cruel as there would be more peaceful ways, and we should be questioning this instead of embracing it just because it is the thing we've been given.

On a similar line, do you believe we somehow learn virtues that we inherit for the next life? If so, are we all collectively better people than in the 19th century (because some of us would have surely learnt something)? Is humanity walking towards an utopia then? How do we explain the centuries in which we seem to devolve, in which irrationality, wars, hate, and more increased? Today, are we really that advanced and far away from Ancient Rome or Ancient Egypt?

The person you were talking with was happy you have a mind that lets you consider things from positive sides, and said that many do not have that chance. If reincarnation has a purpose in each life, how are we supposed to learn, grow, change, or whatever we are supposed to do (in case there is something to do) if we are partially limited by our brains and many other things? Why would we judge those negative thinkers as if they decided their current life?

...Unless we decide our current life, as some systems propose. Then many things we do are determined already because we knew which were our limits and which were our base characteristics (e.g. our temperament, which is innate). This contradicts a lot of the things we were thinking and makes the scenario more similar to a game than to a learning path. But it poses a lot of new questions such as who or what are we when we're not humans but beings deciding where to be born? Why do we do this? Is it ethical to embrace an identity who has no memory of the deal and impose a life onto it full of things that identity did not consent to? Because maybe the being decided to live as a woman who would be hurt, develop PTSD and learn to live through it all. It sounds dramatic and interesting. But the woman is a new consciousness, a new identity, then is it right to make her suffer all that just because another consciousness, a previous consciousness agreed to? The same question might be asked for whatever case of reincarnation in which we reincarnate in very different identities. If it is possible and a cruel murderer reincarnates in a sweet person, why should a sweet person pay for the crimes of a cruel murderer?

So many questions still in the air that I haven't written down... But all different variations of reincarnation seem problematic at some point already. Do you agree? Because many people who find these metaphysical problems in different postulates (not necessarily reincarnation) tend to say that we are judging high ideas with mundane ideas. How can I say it is an unfair system if whoever designed it is much wiser than us, so it knows better to be fair and good, and we cannot understand such elevated balance so we think it is unfair. Yet, at the same time, the system that they propose is full of explanations, promises, and consequences based on our human values and morality, not higher ones. The Universe gives 'good' things for 'good' deeds or 'good' personality, then it does work with our frames at some point, huh? Then, all our questions are indeed valid. All this paragraph to say that, if you agree that indeed there are things that seem weird, suspicious, or wrong when thinking about reincarnation (or metaphysical beliefs in general), how do we keep our belief in reincarnation?

I'm not saying it does not exist just because it does not entirely "click". I'm asking why to believe in it when we realize this, instead of taking a more skeptical and distant approach, maybe curious, maybe excited, but cautious?

[–] Katrisia@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

Sorry, I'm answering myself because I forgot to post my own opinion.

I clearly have problems with any metaphysical explanation, because every one of them tells us to accept this Universe as it is, which seems arbitrary and, depending on the ideology, even cruel, and because we have no good reason to prefer an idea over the others. Do I believe in a god, gods, only matter; reincarnation, ascension, definitive death; simulation, real thing...? I do not know. Why would I pick one at random? If there's something more to this existence, I'll perhaps know when I die, and I will fight for our right to be better than we are right now because, come on, here on Lemmy we tend to be leftists, right? We do not like bigotry, exploitation, or unhappiness. We fight in our own ways against this. Then why would I stop when I die? If the ones controlling this reality are messed up, are we to accept the status quo and thank the tyrants that, at least, we were to experience smelling flowers although children were literally bombed next door? No. If they're tyrants, heads must roll. Let's be fucking spiritual punks! Not yet, just if we confirm this suspicion, lol.

Oh! Reincarnation, right. If reincarnation was real and it would make us cycle at random from one life to another, without anything else (no merits, no punishments, no learning, just cycling), I guess some lives would be better than others, yeah? But then, why? Is there a purpose? If not, what happens to souls that are tired of cycling? Can we opt out? If not, who or what is holding us against our will? Can we escape? Again, many questions, lol. But I finally answered!

[–] Froyn@kbin.social 13 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Ahh, I remember when I posted this.

Egg Theory

[–] neidu2@feddit.nl 1 points 10 months ago

Love that short story

[–] Neil@lemmy.ml 8 points 10 months ago (4 children)

I'm atheist so my understanding may be slightly off, but from what I've gathered. Reincarnation is a bad thing. Reaching enlightenment is the end goal and breaks the process of Reincarnation. The goal is not a perfect life. It's breaking the cycle.

[–] pragmakist@kbin.social 6 points 10 months ago

In Buddhism, yes.

For Hindus, well, it's complicated.

For other people who happen to believe in reincarnation?
That would be anybodys guess, I guess.

[–] DrRatso@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago

I have also heard buddhist view of reincarnation as simply the act of identifying with yourself in each new moment. Since enlightenment involves disillusionment with self, this is how enlightenment stops the process of reincarnation.

[–] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

I think it depends on what religion we’re talking about. OP didn’t specify one so, in general, if there was an actual process that put “you” into another body, assuming it’s human, then would it be random or “good?” Theoretically, life is what you make of it, so no “good” is really guaranteed if you mess it up. But starting out with more options than another person would give you an advantage.

I think if it was real, it would be random. Like, you die and you pop into whatever baby was next in line and that’s the gamble.

Of course, none of that is real. There is no god, no afterlife, nothing but atoms in an amazingly random configuration to produce “life,” as we know it.

[–] grasshopper_mouse@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

I think this is correct. Had a friend ages ago who was Buddhist and I remember her saying something like the best thing to be reincarnated as was a butterfly because their lives are so short and that reincarnation was undesirable because enlightenment was the real goal. If you attained enlightenment you won the game, so to speak.

[–] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That would also imply everyone gets to live the very worst life imaginable too

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] WeeSheep@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

I don't think there is a single best life. No one's life is perfect, and there is certainly a lot of bad luck that a single person can experience. Everyone lives their own life. Sometimes it's a wonderful adventure, sometimes on easy mode, sometimes life sucks and you have few if any choices to change it. Reincarnation is just pressing play, again.

[–] Rixster@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

How will you know if this life is better, it not as if you know right know, so how will you tell? Don't overthink, live! PS: i do not believe

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] orgrinrt@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Boiling it down to its bare essentials, I think the question is really whether or not it’s plausible to claim that getting potentially unlimited resets, but still tracking each entity from a finite pool, with the ideal goal of any one given entity changing on each reset in a non-deterministic way, there would eventually come a state, in which each and every single entity has, at some point, encountered their then active ideal goal.

If we don’t track the entities and/or the pool is not finite, then I would say it’s simply impossible. But even then there are boundaries and variables that need further defining.

But if we assume the initial scenario I described, then sure, I think it is inevitable that a finite set of beings will eventually have all experienced their ideal goal, at some point, assuming the goals are, too, finite. And even then the one limiting boundary — time — would have to be infinite. If not, then we’d also have to define the entire thing further.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 2 points 10 months ago

The best life? Probably not.

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 2 points 10 months ago

What's the best life possible?

Honestly, if you have a pretty good life, and you are wired for happiness, that's about as good as it gets. Wealth, ability, fame, respect... Those all have an aspect of continuous struggle. And ultimately, it'll be subjective

But someone with a happy childhood, low stress, satisfying relationships, and an enjoyable, stable daily life? Coupled with a brain wired to enjoy life? I'm not sure it gets much better than that, and there's people like that everywhere.

So I'd say yeah, probably

[–] nitefox@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago

You mean a sort of Pathfinder/dnd?

If I’m not mistaken, if you behave badly in life you are sent to one of the evil/chaotic planes; otherwise to the good ones. If you die there you die tho, no more reincarnation. And if you go to one of the bad planes, you will “die” in a way as to survive cause unless you are very special you are doomed to be eaten (literally).

Dunno how the actual religions behave on the matter.

Personally, while I hope that reincarnation is a thing it is mostly to not be afraid to die… after all, even if it were a thing I wouldn’t remember a thing about this life no? If I did, I would know right now that actual reincarnation is a thing. Since I can’t possibly know that reincarnation is a thing, and I don’t know cause I don’t remember a previous life that means it either exists but I don’t remember a thing or it doesn’t exist and when I die light’s out it’s over. In any case, for the living me it leads to the same problem(s).

Going back to your original question: assuming that we indeed reincarnate, with or without memories, then yes given an infinite amount of lives we will experience both the worst and the best

[–] kromem@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Best as defined by whom?

What if the best life was someone so into Coprophilia that they get more happiness out of being surrounded by and even eating shit than anyone else in the universe has experienced happiness about anything? And then they got a job for 40 years cleaning porta potties and even when they could retire don't in order to keep it up?

Is it just maximal dopamine and serotonin? Maybe then the best life is a drug addict with a gambling addiction but a lot of luck?

Or maybe happiness is more a matter of perspective than external circumstance once past the bottom layers of Maslow's pyramid, and there's many lives that could be a best life to the right mindset.

I'm not even sure it takes living multiple lives to end up living the best life, and potentially pushing the pursuit of living one's best life off onto the next one is a damaging prospect in and of itself.

What if you spend every life waiting for the next attempt rather than maximizing the life you have?

[–] Spesknight@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

We live to learn, to learn you must suffer. Buddah lived in a palace without knowing illness, old age and death and only when he discovered them went into a path of suffering and learning until he became enlightened. Plus ultimately if you have the right mindset any life can be the perfect life for your soul.

[–] UdeRecife@literature.cafe 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Philosophically, the premise is flawed. Best life... according to whom?

I mean, the best life for a slug or a fly won't cut it for you. I can imagine a fly being born in such conditions that from that fly's perspective it would be 'the best life' imaginable... for a fly.

There's this passage from Roger Crisp's Mill on Utilitarianism, where he proposes this thought experiment. There one reads:

"You are a soul in heaven waiting to be allocated a life on Earth. It is late Friday afternoon, and you watch anxiously as the supply of available lives dwindles. When your turn comes, the angel in charge offers you a choice between two lives, that of the composer Joseph Haydn and that of an oyster. Besides composing some wonderful music and influencing the evolution of the symphony, Haydn will meet with success and honour in his own lifetime, be cheerful and popular, travel and gain much enjoyment from field sports. The oyster's life is far less exciting. Though this is rather a sophisticated oyster, its life will consist only of mild sensual pleasure, rather like that experienced by humans when floating very drunk in a warm bath. When you request the life of Haydn, the angel sighs, ‘I'll never get rid of this oyster life. It's been hanging around for ages. Look, I'll offer you a special deal. Haydn will die at the age of seventy-seven. But I'll make the oyster life as long as you like...’"

So, a pig or Haydn? A fly or your own life right now?

[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

Everyone ? but it's just me. A few reincarnations from now I might be you, or a lemur from Madagascar. It's just me, bro ! you're me ! I am you !

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (5 children)

No. Even if reincarnation exists, time is finite in the universe. You wouldn't have an unlimited amount of tries to guarantee the best outcome.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You assume reincarnation follows linear time. If reincarnation is true, I assume it works like in The Egg, and everyone experiences every life across all of time.

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I have no reason to believe anything else. I only experience this one life.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Okay, but OP's prompt specifically addressed people who believe in reincarnation.

That's like responding to "People who like potatoes, what's your favorite way to cook them?" with "None, I don't like potatoes." Isn't really relevant to the topic.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] Sasha@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There are 8 billion peope alive right now, we've got 5 billion years until the sun dies. Compared to the length of a single human life, that might as well be an infinite number of tries.

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think you underestimate the amount of possibilities in life. Even 5 billion tries isn't all that much.

[–] Sasha@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Edit: The below is all wrong, I'm good at abstract maths and really shit at numbers, forgive me.

I think you missed me saying "compared to a single human life." Sure, there's no way literally everyone will get "the best possible life" or something, but a single person has very roughly 5×10^9×10^10÷10^2 is 5×10^17 attempts assuming a 100 year life span.

And you only have to get it once, ultimately the probability depends on whatever the criteria here is, which frankly I don't know, assuming it just means "is a billionaire" that's around a 2×10^-7 chance each time, assuming 2000 ish billionaires in a 10^10 population.

I tried plugging this into a binomial calculator but it couldn't process it, but regardless that's going to be some really good chances.

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

How do you get 5x10^17 attempts with the lifespan of the sun being 5x10^10 years?

Regardless, they said everyone. They also said the best life possible. That postulates some absolute max for a person. Not some random criteria you can think of.

[–] Sasha@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Sorry, I did shower maths and that's always a bad idea. Ignore that whole thing. What I was thinking made sense in one particular way, but not in the way I had intended, so it's completely meaningless.

On the criteria, the absolute maximum implies having a criteria and I just chose the assumption that essentially infinite money would give you the best chance of having "the best possible life." I was just aiming for something order of magnitude so had to choose something arbitrarily.

If you can even define the best possible life in a meaningful way, then I'd say it's absolutely 0% chance because to me, a single day of winter ruins it.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Top intellect, creativity, productivity, wealth, family, friends, deeply satisfying happiness? In my opinion those would be the ingredients of a perfect incarnation.

Reminds me, I know a man who is living this life right now and I've told him a few times, he is living the best life known to human potential.

And he's humble too so he hasn't fully embraced my lofty assessment of him 😄

[–] transientpunk@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 months ago (7 children)

Think of how many people are alive today, and how many people you know that are living the best possible life. Considering the exponential increase in population we've seen, and the rarity of living the best possible life, the only conclusion I can come to is that, if reincarnation exists, you are far more likely to live in abject poverty than live a life of mediocrity, let alone the best possible life.

Make the best of what you have today, for tomorrow isn't guaranteed.

load more comments (7 replies)

[–] ArchAengelus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 10 months ago

Ironically, people who’ve achieved the first four often struggle with the last 3. Being at the top is often lonely because it’s hard to find people to relate to.

If you achieve all 7, that does indeed sound perfect.

[–] Paragone@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago

As AwakeSoul/Buddha tried explaining...

and as Hindu Ramana Maharshi also tried explaining...

WHEN one reaches such fundamental-awareness that there is NO self in it...

it is AWARENESS,

THEN, one only has to dissolve into that OceanOfAllAwakeSouls/OceanOfAWARENESS/OceanOfBuddhas/God.

No self, indestructible bliss, Eternal awareness, watching all unfolding endless-stream-of-Universes, as magical display...

No, not every Souls/CellsOfGod/Continuums get to experience amazingness incarnate.

Elisabeth Haich commented on that, in her book "Initiation".

Some Souls/Continuums, or their natures/characters, chose aversion-therapy reincarnation-cycle, for whatever reason.

It's a Bell curve, probably:

the normal is to have an average "pinnacle", and an average "bottom-of-the-barrel", and an average set-of-between-range incarnations/someones/lives.

Only the more-extreme would inhabit the more-extreme ends of the bell curve.

Same as all Nature...

_ /\ _

[–] mdhughes@lemmy.ml -1 points 10 months ago

Well, I don't believe in reincarnation, so NO.

But suppose that I did. What does that mean? Do you retain your memories and respawn like a videogame character? Get to be a baby who knows everything as an adult? That's a weird life, and probably not "best".

If you don't retain your memories, then what is "you"? Some kind of … virus? Whatever, hopping between bodies, unable to do anything to affect their outcome. So now it's down to random chance.

What's the "very best life imaginable"? Imaginable, not real? The real life you spawn into isn't going to meet that standard, so never.

Like most religious ideas, it doesn't define any of its terms, and they don't make sense when you do.

load more comments