|
Almir Del Prette |
|
|
Reincarnation
and
fear
to
freedom |
Recently,
I
went
through
the
pages
of a
Spiritist
romance,
those
in
which
the
dramas
are
anchored
in
different
periods:
the
past,
a
detailed
description
of
lives,
full
of
beauty,
wealth
and
power;
and
the
present,
in
the
opposite
situation,
with
the
characters
embittering
setbacks
over
and
over.
These
novels
certainly
contribute
in
spreading
the
reincarnation
idea,
but
often
induce
mistaken
beliefs,
strengthening
the
notion
that
God
uses
it
as a
punitive
and
corrective
instrument.
Although
there
are
historical
and
philosophical
studies
and
research
reports
about
reincarnation,
I
could
not
help
but
think
on
the
need
to
address
it,
for
example,
within
a
social-psychological
perspective.
It
is
this
vision
that
will
be
considered
in
this
article.
How
do
we
define
reincarnation?
Making
it
simple,
but
without
forgetting
Kardec,1
we
can
say
that
reincarnation
assumes
a
mechanism
of
successive
existences
of
the
Spirit,
over
the
centuries,
until
it
reaches
a
spiritual
condition
when
there
is
no
need
for
its
return,
except
if
in a
voluntary
mission.
The
notion
of
reincarnation
is
quite
old
in
various
cultures.
For
example,
we
find
it
in
the
Vedas,
Hinduism,
Judaism,
between
the
Egyptians
and
in
many
Greek
philosophers
such
as
Pythagoras,
Socrates
and
Plato2
and,
more
recently,
in
research
reports.
3
The
premises
of
the
reincarnation
idea
The
idea
of
reincarnation
is
based
on
two
premises:
(a)
the
soul
is
immortal
and
(b)
the
soul
progresses
continuously.
In
Christianity,
the
notion
of a
single
life
is
also
based
on
immortality;
however,
the
personal
evolutionary
condition
is
already
determined
since
birth
and
it
is
forever.
Both
dogmas,
reincarnation
and
the
oneness
of
existence,
explain
the
ultimate
destination
of
the
Spirit,
or
soul.
In
the
first
case,
it
is a
continuous
progress,
with
different
experiences
and
acquisitions.
In
the
second
case,
the
soul
can
be
intended
for
the
Beatitudes
(Heaven),
for
a
relative
situation
of
suffering
(Purgatory)
and
for
eternal
punishment
(Hell).
Why
does
Christianity
adopt
the
doctrine
of
one
single
life?
What
are
the
underlying
concepts
to
these
doctrines?
Following,
is
the
discussion
of
these
issues.
Parte
superior
do
formulário
We
begin
by
thinking
about
the
dissemination
of
these
doctrines
through
time.
If
the
idea
of
reincarnation
was
already
present
in
the
world,
many
centuries
before
the
Christian
movement
appeared,
and
was
maintained
in
some
cultures,
it
is
logical
to
think
that,
in a
certain
way,
it
is
part
of
the
understanding
of
the
world
by
the
thinkers
of
the
newborn
Church.
Let
us
remember
that
Christianity
was
born
in
the
Jewish
culture,
whose
population,
in
general,
had
a
vague
notion
of
reincarnation.
This
did
not
happen,
however,
within
the
sphere
of
the
rabbinate,
4
with
few
exceptions.
Judaism
before
the
external
influence
Moreover,
Judaism
has
never
been
a
truly
closed
system,
and
on
several
historical
moments,
it
was
quite
permeable
to
the
influence
of
other
cultures.
Even
during
the
flight
from
Egypt,
which
should
have
apparently
strengthened
the
Jewish
culture,
there
was
a
constant
concern
of
leaders
regarding
religious
"deviations"
by
the
people.
And
this
took
place
just
a
few
hours
before
Moses
appeared
with
the
"Stones
of
Law"
(see
Exodus
32:
4-9).
The
same
happened
during
the
domination
period
in
Babylon,
from
where
the
Jews
brought
the
code
of
law
of
reciprocity
between
crime
and
punishment
("an
eye
for
an
eye...").
A
similar
fact
was
repeated
during
the
Roman
occupation,
when
the
Council
acts
with
tolerance
to
death
by
crucifixion.
Considering,
however,
that
the
leaders
of
the
Path
struggled
to
maintain
a
friendly
relationship
with
the
authorities
of
the
country,
one
might
think
that,
for
a
while,
the
early
Christianity
lived
with
two
doctrinal
alternatives
-
the
one
of a
sole
life
and
the
other
of
multiple
lives,
reproducing,
in a
way,
the
Jewish
culture.
Either
one
could
have
prevailed?
It
is
assumed
that,
for
a
while,
the
reincarnation
doctrine
was
accepted
and
that
the
Empress
Theodora
influenced
the
Emperor
Justinian
(527-565
AD)
to
eliminate
this
belief
from
the
Church.
However,
the
story
does
not
happen
by
accident
or
individual
whim,
without
an
underlying
ideology
to
support
it.
Justinian
and
the
deification
of
Jesus
In
this
sense,
this
assumption
about
the
influence
of
the
Empress
may
be
only
part
of
the
truth.
On
the
one
hand,
Teodora5
was
driven
by
the
obsessive
ambition
that
Justinian
should
expand
their
dominion
over
the
entire
eastern
Mediterranean.
That
was
her
main
concern.
On
the
other
hand,
the
Emperor
was
very
much
interested
in
theological
matters,
and
this
did
not
apply
to
Theodora.
Historically,
Justinian
was
the
main
articulator
of
the
deification
of
Jesus
by
the
Church.
In
addition,
the
notion
of a
single
life
would
favor
the
power
of
the
clergy
over
the
believers,
and
consequently,
increase
the
inflow
of
funds.
In
Justine’s
view,
such
a
strategy
would
increase
his
control
over
the
Church
property,
facilitating
the
use
of
nest
egg
for
the
conquest
campaigns.
His
motto
"A
State,
a
Law,
a
Church"
is
the
synthesis
of
this
view
and
explains
his
commitment
to
the
convening
of
councils
and
theological
precepts.
Therefore,
the
concept
of
reincarnation
was
excluded,
less
by
the
will
of
Theodora
and
more
as a
political
strategy.
Justinian
died
in
the
year
565
(AD)
and
even
with
the
Empire
in
decadence,
the
Church
continued
to
increase
its
wealth
and
power.
The
spiritual
perspective
on
the
world
is
older
than
the
materialistic
one.
Although
atheists
existed
from
the
time
before
Jesus,
the
materialist
philosophical
ideas
gained
prominence
with
the
pre-Socratic
philosophers
such
as
Democritus,
Leucippus
and
Epicurus.
However,
materialism,
as a
philosophical
school,
gained
followers
and
status
from
the
sixteenth
century
onwards,
with
Leibniz.6
Is
the
Kingdom
of
God
within
each
one
of
us?
There
is
no
doubt
that
by
the
early
Middle
Ages,
it
was
easier
to
accept
the
notion
of
God
and
the
immortality
of
the
soul
than
an
opposing
materialist
view.
And
the
reason
was
that,
on
the
one
hand,
there
was
a
difficulty
of
understanding
the
processes
of
birth
and
death,
and
secondly,
because
the
laws
governing
the
Universe
were
unintelligible,
even
for
the
vast
majority
of
thinkers.
Moreover,
under
these
beliefs
temples
and
priestly
organizations
flourished
and
their
power
went
beyond
the
scope
of
religiosity.
Intimacy
with
the
Creator,
who
granted
the
priests
the
power
of
decision
about
who
should
be
saved,
strengthened
the
religious
power
and
created
a
culture
of
fear
and
submission.
The
idea
of
Jesus
that
the
Kingdom
of
God
is
within
each
one
and
that
this
idea
could
be
disseminated
within
the
world,
and
not
elsewhere,
was
reinterpreted
in
the
light
of a
future
trial.
The
favorable
outcome
in
this
trial
depended
on
the
loyalty
to
the
dogma
and
clerical
mediation,
which
required
little
effort
from
everyone,
believers
and
priests.
Reincarnation,
as a
process,
no
longer
had
the
minimum
condition
to
be
accepted
and
the
doctrine
of
one
only
life
was,
therefore,
consolidated
in
accordance
with
the
notion
of a
“Savior”
Jesus.
As
if
endorsing
this
position,
the
doctrine
was
spread
accepting
the
mediation
of
the
Saints,
or
of
Mary,
dubiously
raised
to
the
position
of
God
himself.
Salvationism
versus
evolutionism
It
can
be
inferred,
therefore,
that
the
doctrines
of
one
sole
existence
and
of
the
plurality
of
existences
are
based
on
two
different
cultural
paradigms.
The
first,
older,
may
be
called
Salvationism.
The
second,
which
opposes
to
the
Salvationist
concept,
can
be
called
Evolutionism.
Cultural
paradigms
are
sets
of
ideas
and
rules
governing
beliefs,
values,
feelings
and
behaviors.
A
paradigm
only
declines
when
another
one
responds
more
adequately
to
the
doubts
and
present
issues.
Throughout
his
journey
on
the
Planet,
man
created
myths
and
beliefs
that
somehow
explained
him
about
Universe,
calmed
his
doubts
about
understanding
difficult
problems
and
softened
his
fears
and
anxieties.
Various
human
emotions
are
put
into
action
with
the
purpose
of
survival
and
evolution.
However,
fear
is
related
to
human
preservation,
and
this
is
the
base
element
of
the
Salvationist
paradigm,
where
fear
is
made
stronger
and
the
pursuit
of
own
safety
prevails,
by
means
of
the
protection
of a
higher
power.
To
abdicate
from
the
power
of
thinking
and
of
making
decisions,
favors
the
practice
of
submission
and
flattery
regarding
the
stronger.
The
history
of
the
human
saga
shows
that
the
leader,
to
get
stronger,
encourages
adulation
to
him
and
to
idols,
which
end
up
by
representing
him.
Some
early
idols
were
designed
as
bizarre
figures
that
caused
unconscious
fears,
but
once
bribed
by
rituals,
they
would
become
man’s
protectors.
Ultimately,
this
was
a
power
with
which
man
could
count
against
the
unknown
destructive
forces.
With
Salvationism
the
power
of
the
clergy
increased
Seduction
and
flattery
remain
today,
and
also
our
modern
man
strives
to
entice
his
gods
or
those
who
represent
them,
for
example,
money,
beauty,
strength
...
This
game
is
no
longer
restricted
to
the
field
of
religion:
it
applies
in
general
to
the
media
figures,
politics,
business
and
weapons.
And
it
will
continue
as
long
as
the
Salvationist
paradigm
prevails
in
our
religious
culture.
With
Salvationism,
the
power
of
the
clergy
over
the
consciences
increased
considerably.
Hence,
the
ban
on
contacting
the
spiritual
world
was
a
calculated
and
necessary
action
to
avoid
questioning
the
priests’
authority.
Besides,
the
acceptance
of
communication
with
the
dead
could
question
some
of
the
dogmas
established
by
the
theologians,
for
example,
the
one
of
eternal
punishment.
About
the
year
300
(AD)
the
clergy
was
already
well
organized,
and
the
bishops
strengthened
their
power
in
the
Church
hierarchy.
Consequently,
the
use
of
princely
privileges
by
the
bishops
was
accepted
almost
without
opposition.
The
inner
subservience
of
the
friars
and
priests
and
the
conspiracies
and
alliances
of
the
clergy
in
general,
with
kings
and
emperors
became
a
common
practice.
Therefore,
acceptance
of
the
doctrine
of a
single
existence,
and
the
consequent
rejection
of
the
concept
of
reincarnation,
was
not
due
to
the
whim
of
an
empress,
nor
was
it
the
result
of a
philosophical-theological
option,
but
rather
a
political
strategy,
strengthening
the
established
order
and
power.
Already
in
the
fourth
century,
besides
the
introduction
of
the
dogma
of
the
original
sin,
the
Roman
Empire
converted
to
Catholicism.
It
was
therefore
established
the
supremacy
of a
Church,
a
Catholic
one,
over
the
others
and
its
complicity
with
the
temporal
power.7
The
Evolutionary
paradigm
causes
fear
The
doctrine
of a
single
existence,
even
though
it
leaves
the
notion
of a
Creator
in a
delicate
situation
–
since
it
is
indefensible
in
terms
of
logic
on
some
of
its
attributes
-,
it
favors,
and
very
much,
the
power
of
the
clergy.
By
linking
the
future
of
the
soul
to
its
control,
the
Church
has
developed
two
actions
that
complement
each
other:
the
strengthening
of
its
authority
and
the
purchase/sale
of
salvation.
It
is
unlikely
that
this
could
have
happened
if
the
plurality
of
lives
had
been
accepted,
as
can
be
seen,
for
example,
in
Buddhism.
Within
the
evolutionary
perspective,
Jesus
would
be
accepted
as
an
evolved
model
with
an
educational
mission
in
relation
to
Humankind.
This
mission
was
granted
Him
by
God,
his
Father
and
our
Father.
To
have
someone,
who
helps
man
in
his
evolutionary
walk,
is
very
different
from
having
a
Savior.
The
evolutionary
paradigm
causes
a
difficult
freedom
to
be
accepted,
since
it
requires
another
way
of
looking
at
life.
It
causes
fear
because
man
sees
himself
responsible
for
his
present
and
future
fate.
When,
within
the
process,
the
individual
begins
to
understand
that
he
should
be
assessed
and
overcome
his
present
spiritual
condition,
his
fear
may
increase
to
the
point
of
generating
conflict
between
both
positions.
However,
there
is a
stage
of
development,
in
which
he
can
no
longer
return
to
the
good
times
of
the
belief
in a
Savior.
In
this
case,
he
must
also
face
his
fears
and
needs
to
understand
that
this
is a
solitary
experience,
but
around
him,
he
can
count
on
the
solidarity
of
many
Spirits
(in
both
plans)
that
live
or
have
lived
similar
condition
and
await
an
opportunity
to
help
him.
[1]
Kardec,
Allan.
The
Book
of
Spirits.
IDE:
Araras
(SP),
2002.
[2]
Wikipedia.
Access
on
June
7,
2015.
[3]
See
Stevenson,
I.
Twenty
suggestive
cases
of
reincarnation.
Publisher:
Vida
&
Consciência.
Sao
Paulo
[4]
DovBer
Pinson.
Reincarnation
and
Judaism.
Sao
Paulo
(SP):
Maayanoti,
2015.
[5]
Wikipedia.
Access
on
June
21,
2015
[6]
Wikipedia.
Access
on
June
28,
2015.
[7]
Emmanuel,
Francisco
Candido
Xavier(1939).
The
Path
of
Light.
Brasilia
(DF):
FEB.
|