Question about Reincarnation

[Kismet]

There is no beginning for this superimposition. But it is not endless, it is beginningless. Because it is superimposition. If we take the example of rope and snake. Snake is superimposed on rope. Now if you ask if that snake, which is superimposed, bites, then that is not logic. Of course, until we don't know it's rope, our question remains. But there is no answer other than this. It is a superimposed thing. It does not exist.

This is precisely the one issue in particular that I find so hard to accept. How could it be beginningless?

Anyway, I feel that I should move on to some new issue as this one problem is giving me too much of a headache.

[SOV]

This is precisely the one issue in particular that I find so hard to accept. How could it be beginningless?

We can't consider a superimposed thing like snake independently without the rope. The snake is only an appearance. Still, to explain the beginning less of snake, it can be said that, the rope which was always there was beginning less. And this beginning less state can be explained only with the ultimate plane.
The biggest flaw in contending that the snake(or the births as in our discussion) has a beginning is that, It has to end too, naturally. This goes against the theory of re-birth(the law of karma).That which has no end has no beginning too. That which has a beginning has an end. That is why, understanding from a scriptural POV is very important.

Anyway, I feel that I should move on to some new issue as this one problem is giving me too much of a headache.

Good Idea.