This Dark Age

A manual for life in the modern world.

By Daniel Schwindt

NOTICE:
This Dark Age is now available in paperback on Amazon. The print version is MUCH cleaner than this online version, which is largely unedited and has fallen by the wayside as the project has grown. If you’ve appreciated my writing, please consider leaving a review on the relevant paperback volumes. The print edition also includes new sections (Military History, War Psychology, Dogmatic Theology).

Volume 1 | Volume 2 | Volume 3| Volume 4 | Volume 5 | Volume 6

Modern ideology as a possible explanation for reincarnationist confusions

We suggested that reincarnation is a modern invention, but we have not suggested why the modern world would invent it. If it was invented, it was as a result of a certain need, which is the driving force of so many modern ideas. Taking an honest look at the justifications offered for reincarnation, the motivation becomes quite easy to see. Most of the time its apologists cite the inequality of human beings. How could God create such a social order, rife with inequality, and still be just? Therefore, the idea of inequality as a consequences of actions taken in a previous life is introduced in order for these people to justify their idea of God to themselves and their followers. The very statement of the problem–that inequality between individuals is manifestly unjust–is nonsense. There are animals born unequal before us at all times, and this does not cause us to question the justice of the creator. The fact that we see some inequalities as unjust while others are not shows the emotional need to see everywhere that false doctrine which the modern world so worships: equality. It is the fever for equality which gives birth to reincarnation, and the energies spent justifying the theory seem far too often to boil down to the idea that all souls must necessarily be considered absolutely equal, at least originally, and all inequalities found in the world must be a result of actions taken by those souls in previous lives. That is to say, inequality is a moral outcome, and not simply a fact of the universe as it is. This insistence that all souls be equal in every way is simply the spiritual projection of the equality so sought by modern men in the social sphere, an inability to accept hierarchy in any form. At any rate, the theories of reincarnationists, which vary all too drastically between one another, all fall flat when subjected to basic reason. If all were equal at some theoretical point, when was this point? And there is further the difficulty that if moral failing were possible, then it was possible, even if only potentially, from the very beginning of the soul’s existence. If one man sins ‘in act,’ this possibility was present ‘in potency,’ from the beginning, which again leaves us with a situation of ‘original inequality.’ The whole subject turns out to be but another confusion created simply by the fact of a metaphysical question being formulated from a purely moral standpoint, making it truly insoluble. And once the metaphysical standpoint is adopted, it becomes clear that reincarnation is an absurdity. The question comes down to asking why a being is itself and not another, and when an answer is not found it is claimed that this variation is an outrage. But the alternative, the absolute equality of beings, were to be realized, then there would not be multiple beings but only one, since absolutely equality between two things amounts to identity, and so you have not two but one only.

Share This