Other Metempsýchōsis (μετεμψύχωσις)

Greetings,

We don't know what Plato and Pythagoras believed but only their exoteric writings.

If they really believed that humans can reincarnate into animals, this could be outdated knowledge. We know now from hypnotherapists who do past life and life between lives regression that we humans have grown past the animal stage so we don't reincarnate into animals. Animals are in a previous stage of the evolution of the soul. They are not compatible with our souls because animals don't have individual souls, only a collective oversoul for each species. So, practical experience from modern hypnotherapists overrides what ancient people believed. Plato and Pythagoras did not have the tools that we have now.

This belief is not a past one, but modern. Anyone from HP Blavatsky and 19th century Theosophy onwards says that animals's souls are in a previous stage of evolution and we cannot reincarnate into animals because we have grown past that stage spiritually.

Greetings,

We don't know what Plato and Pythagoras believed but only their exoteric writings.

If they really believed that humans can reincarnate into animals, this could be outdated knowledge. We know now from hypnotherapists who do past life and life between lives regression that we humans have grown past the animal stage so we don't reincarnate into animals. Animals are in a previous stage of the evolution of the soul. They are not compatible with our souls because animals don't have individual souls, only a collective oversoul for each species. So, practical experience from modern hypnotherapists overrides what ancient people believed. Plato and Pythagoras did not have the tools that we have now.

Show more...Show less...Show more...

I believe that ancient knowledge is the most truthful, since all new systems are merely a rearrangement of ancient spiritual material. Most of today’s knowledge is a flawed reinterpretation, because it attempts to fill a gap with logical assumptions based on premises that constitute general knowledge about the ancient spiritual tradition.
As for not knowing for certain what Plato and Pythagoras thought, that is true to a certain extent. We have preserved writings and accounts. The corpus speaks for itself; there are things that are clear and others that are more obscure. What few know is the esoteric part. I believe that Xenophanes’ Humorous Account carries some weight. Of course, I do not rely entirely on that.

I'm gonna be honest I don't know much about this topic but you can research this topic and see what the ancients have to say. The soul and spiritual stuff is definitely more fluid than what we thought.

About that quote, HPZM said he probably meant that the dog might be his human friend in the future, meaning the dog can ascend to become a human. (note that translation a lot of times don't capture the original meaning correctly)

I'm gonna be honest I don't know much about this topic but you can research this topic and see what the ancients have to say. The soul and spiritual stuff is definitely more fluid than what we thought.

About that quote, HPZM said he probably meant that the dog might be his human friend in the future, meaning the dog can ascend to become a human. (note that translation a lot of times don't capture the original meaning correctly)

So, does the HPZM think that souls from other realms—like the mineral or animal realms Iamblichus described—can rise up to the human realm? That's cool.

Reading the writings of ancient philosophers requires close attention and careful analysis of concepts, as it is well established that they often speak by analogy.

Let’s start from scratch.
The etymology of the term “metempsychosis” derives from the Greek meta- (transfer), en (within), and psyche (soul); we can translate it as “the passage of souls.”

According to Pythagoras, the soul is confined within a body in order to purify itself; in fact, he asserts that it is only when the soul frees itself from the body that it can perceive and live in a higher world (that of ideas, to quote Plato).
Philosophers debate extensively about the soul’s ignorance; therefore, they often state in their writings that for a soul to purify itself, it must know, grow, and expand.
Pythagoras further asserts that this process of the transmigration of souls applies not only to humans but also to animals and plants, which follow their own cycle.
“Do not ruin or harm a domestic plant, nor even an animal that does no harm to human beings” (“Lives and Doctrines of the Most Famous Philosophers,” VIII, 23).

To break free from this chain, one must return to the state of original purity by devoting oneself to the selfless contemplation of truth and practicing esoteric rituals of initiation and purification (catharsis).

As for Plato, he draws upon the writings discovered by Pythagoras, including the myth of Er, a soldier who died in battle and was resurrected to recount what he saw in the afterlife. (Book X, The
Republic).

In the "Phaedo", Plato argues that the soul survives the body; if it has lived wisely, it will ascend to the divine realm, otherwise it will remain bound to the material world.

In the myth of the winged chariot in the "Phaedrus", he also describes the cycle of reincarnation linked to the soul’s ability to contemplate the hyperuranion.

Finally, to highlight the concept of mind and psyche that transcends the animal spirit, and thus confirm that it is impossible for a human to be reincarnated as an animal, I will cite Aristotle’s concept regarding the classification of the soul.
The philosopher divides souls into:

Obviously, these are broad concepts, but I have tried to summarize them as best I could.
Humans are destined for the evolution of the soul and the psyche.
Humans, animals, and plants exist at different levels of the soul, since wisdom and the higher psyche are unique to humans.

So, does the HPZM think that souls from other realms—like the mineral or animal realms Iamblichus described—can rise up to the human realm? That's cool.

Yes he said in an AMA that animals can ascend to be Humans in a same way Humans can ascend to be Gods. There is actually a much larger gap between Humans and Gods than between animals and Humans in my humble opinion.

Does Toz aim to redefine the concept of the Renaissance?
Plato and Pythagoras believed that a psychḗ (ψυχή) It was not limited to a single world or species.
Metempsychosis (μετεμψύχωσις) suggests that we potentially have the chance to be reborn in many worlds and states.

In the past, it was believed that we were always reborn into the same world and the same species. This is an earthly conception that views the soul as something secondary, since everything takes place within the same fixed dimension.

There are also other phenomena, such as Po'wa, which involves the transfer of consciousness to wherever and however one wishes, at any time.

Show more...Show less...Show more...

Personally I believe that is true, but it's like a process of +10000 years or more of advancement per specie, it's not like ours, but about the spheres of existence and advancement of said specie. After one, you move to the next. This perhaps would give to the notion of Pantomysteia a more universal meaning, estending it to all life forms.

The above may be wrong, it's just an idea of mine, it will be clarified in the future probably, and corrected.

Mythologically, there are characters that were transformed into animals via spells, like in the Mahabharata.
It's an allegory of some kind in the poem, but potentially everything is possible.

Personally I believe that is true, but it's like a process of +10000 years or more of advancement per specie, it's not like ours, but about the spheres of existence and advancement of said specie. After one, you move to the next. This perhaps would give to the notion of Pantomysteia a more universal meaning, estending it to all life forms.

The above may be wrong, it's just an idea of mine, it will be clarified in the future probably, and corrected.

Mythologically, there are characters that were transformed into animals via spells, like in the Mahabharata.
It's an allegory of some kind in the poem, but potentially everything is possible.

Maybe it's a wrong statement, I also want to understand more.

But if all life came from the 1 (Ether/Akasha), through divisions, unions of groups, and increasing complexity of life. Would make sense that you start from the bottom, and you climb the staircase of life.
From microcosm tier life forms, up to plants, trees, animals, ecc...

Like, the start is the same, then you move on by merit, by advancing step by step.

Why starting as human in the universe, and not as something else?
Would be unjust if one being is a bird, a bear, a tree or a human randomly?
By design it can't be random or unjust, as universe is based on logic and justice.

I hope we can discuss and clarify any eventual errors in this topic.

Does Toz aim to redefine the concept of the Renaissance?
Plato and Pythagoras believed that a psychḗ (ψυχή) It was not limited to a single world or species.
Metempsychosis (μετεμψύχωσις) suggests that we potentially have the chance to be reborn in many worlds and states.

In the past, it was believed that we were always reborn into the same world and the same species. This is an earthly conception that views the soul as something secondary, since everything takes place within the same fixed dimension.

There are also other phenomena, such as Po'wa, which involves the transfer of consciousness to wherever and however one wishes, at any time.

Show more...Show less...Show more...

It is not impossible to be reincarnated to another world, but in this post of High Priestess mentions ''Only some souls can be incarnated on other planets, as most of us need this specific planet, with the other planets in our solar system that affect us; and most of us need the civilization we have here, as it relates to our karma and soul groups. So chances are very slim anyone would be incarnated on another planet.''

On the other hand, we know it is possible and happened for certain here in this post of High Priest, ''Not long ago, I did "by accident" astrally project on another planet. A very important and renown scientist of recent history is there now, fully alive and well.''

I'm not thinking Plato and Pythagoras were wrong but we don't lack people who think they are mermaids and star seeds as is. So, yes. It is possible but we need to be realistic and not let people fall into delusion, proceed with caution in these topics.

So, does the HPZM think that souls from other realms—like the mineral or animal realms Iamblichus described—can rise up to the human realm? That's cool.

It was on an AMA. I don't have the link, I joined the live session. Maybe it is in one of the videos uploaded on Youtube.

Maybe it's a wrong statement, I also want to understand more.

But if all life came from the 1 (Ether/Akasha), through divisions, unions of groups, and increasing complexity of life. Would make sense that you start from the bottom, and you climb the staircase of life.
From microcosm tier life forms, up to plants, trees, animals, ecc...

Like, the start is the same, then you move on by merit, by advancing step by step.

Show more...Show less...Show more...

I believe in the randomness of things. However, this becomes fair when a form of existence is no longer bound to remain at the lowest level forever. What would be the point of its repetitive existence if it could not become something more?

Wealth, skills, intelligence, luck, misfortune, and misery are indiscriminately bestowed by the karmic forces or existence. If everything were justice, evil people could not prosper and be healthy. Thus, their past life must have certainly been full of virtues. This seems contradictory, though, given that moral nature is karmic repetition. How could someone predisposed to evil from a past life be so far beyond justice?
Everything is distributed indiscriminately, and ethics has nothing to do with health, longevity, wealth, or genetics. Thus, all karma is generated in isolation.

Personally I believe that is true, but it's like a process of +10000 years or more of advancement per specie, it's not like ours, but about the spheres of existence and advancement of said specie. After one, you move to the next. This perhaps would give to the notion of Pantomysteia a more universal meaning, estending it to all life forms.
.

The world of Ideas would be like the Form of Akashic creative potential. So, it may be that an evolution was already potentially in place when the time came.

It is clear that the World of Ideas represents something greater than the Akashic Plane. An idea passes through the akashic filter and is transformed, taking on a form in the material world. Most of the pre-Socratics believed in a creative intelligence. The Akasha could not be the first and most subtle; there must be an intelligence capable of transforming potential into actual power. Akasha has no intelligence; in fact, it is intelligences that move Akasha. If Akasha were pure energy without will, from where would consciousness arise? This is equivalent to the Christian question of how evil arises from good or how good creates the conditions for evil. Shouldn’t the created possess only the properties of the creator? Where did the others come from?

The Presocratics agree that the Logos came first.

I believe in the randomness of things. However, this becomes fair when a form of existence is no longer bound to remain at the lowest level forever. What would be the point of its repetitive existence if it could not become something more?

Wealth, skills, intelligence, luck, misfortune, and misery are indiscriminately bestowed by the karmic forces or existence. If everything were justice, evil people could not prosper and be healthy. Thus, their past life must have certainly been full of virtues. This seems contradictory, though, given that moral nature is karmic repetition. How could someone predisposed to evil from a past life be so far beyond justice?
Everything is distributed indiscriminately, and ethics has nothing to do with health, longevity, wealth, or genetics. Thus, all karma is generated in isolation.

Show more...Show less...Show more...

Quite on the contrary. You did not consider the fact of the existence of free will, which accounts for better or worse. Not only that, there has been quite a bit of magick used unethically for a long time on this planet, hence the current situation. Now, we are finally reversing it once and for all.

Quite on the contrary. You did not consider the fact of the existence of free will, which accounts for better or worse. Not only that, there has been quite a bit of magick used unethically for a long time on this planet, hence the current situation. Now, we are finally reversing it once and for all.

Magic is necessary precisely because the universe is amoral.
All energy is a form of divine energy. The energy of the sun, the chakras, and organic chi are all gifts from Zeus. When we direct energy—which ultimately comes from divine intelligence—we are using God's energy. If magic were used to create positive or negative karmic impressions, then God would allow it, and God would also be present in those energies and their use. Logically, energy is amoral. Anyone can use the energy of death to kill an innocent person, just as someone can murder an innocent person for no reason. The fact is, I don't see justice. Note that only the Initiates subject themselves to suffering justice, since before a Ritual of Retribution, we evoke Nemesis and make it clear that if our judgment is wrong, the spell will return upon us.

It is precisely because of this apparent injustice in the world that the ancients created the concept of infallible justice after death, presided over by the gods.

The cause and effect of the universe is not simple. It's not as simple as: "You killed, so you will be killed."

It's more like: "You killed and succeeded. In your next life, you will have a greater chance of succeeding in killing."

Or, "You achieved wealth; in your next life, your chances of achieving and maintaining wealth will be even greater."

"You were moral in this life; in your next life, you will be born with a moral inclination."

Quite on the contrary. You did not .

It's true, I didn't take free will into account.