>
>Which leaves reason. I posted a hypothetical case to which,
>disappointingly, I did not receive any rational replies.

I thought my reply was rational. The sort of objection you raise
(about the 'delicate synchronization' involved in a rebirth occuring
over great distance) has been anticipated and answered. To spell out
the point of the response, I don't see any obvious reason to assume
that thoughts (citta) are bound by the same space/time constraints as
physical objects. The propogation of thought (for those who believe
in telepathy) might be independant of physical distance.

This was exemplified by asking the doubter to think of a distant
city. 'Sending his mind' there took no time at all. This was supposed
to show how the mind can travel great distances without intervening
time. You may not find this argument convincing, but it is a rational
response to your question.

I'm not taking sides on the question of antarabhava or the existence
of telepathy, only pointing out why I thought bringing the speed of
light into your argument wasn't especially compelling. First you
would need to show why the propogation of cittas is constrained by
the speed of light, which would involve describing their physical
characteristics. To be able to do that, you would need to measure
cittas objectively with physical instruments, and there hence would
no longer be any scientific doubts as to their existence. However,
afaik, cittas can't be measured and their physical characteristics
haven't been formally described. So bringing them into relation to
theories of physics is like trying to play tennis with a ball made of
smoke.

best regards,

/Rett