Of course, we lose contact with the physical and all that this entails--relationships, physical skills, appreciation of Nature's physical beauty, etc.   But that is not what I mean.  I'm starting this topic in response to Kathy's question about Peter Novak's theory.  I think his theory is seriously flawed, but he draws attention to a serious issue that needs further exploration.--what mental functions can be lost at death.  My earlier thread on astral memory loss is clearly relevant here, but I want to broaden my exploration of this issue.  

Let me begin with Robert Monroe's definition of Focus 23 [= the biblical Sheol]:

"A level inhabited by those who have recently left physical existence but who either have not been able to recognize and accept this or are unable to free themselves from the ties to the Earth Life Sustem.  It includes those from all periods of time ("Ultimate Journey"  240)."

Any normal human with the equivalent of his earthly brain should be able to recognize in just a few minutes after death that he is neither dreaming nor still in physical reality.  The failure of so many to recognize their own death indicates a radically diminished mental capacity.  According to Monroe, this diminished capacity seems to be virtually permanent for many souls.  Many souls trapped in Focus 23 even seem to be insane.  I find this widespread condition depressing and wonder how and for whom it might be reversible.

By analogy, I recently realized that, even in my most lucid dreams, my mental capacity in more limited than in my waking state.  True, I see the dream scene in great detail and my 5 senses can be intensely engaged in the experience.  I know that I am dreaming and that my body is "back there" in bed.  I can even argue with my dream characters that I am God in this dream universe and that they are mere figments of my imagination.   But I am never sufficiently lucid to control the reactions of my dream people.   Nor is my memory as focused on the events and agendas of my waking reality as when I'm awake.   If this lucid dream consciousness is the equivalent of what many deceased souls experience in Focus 23, then I can see why they have trouble even discerning that they are dead.    

What part of mental functioning do various categories of the newly dead at least initially lose (memories, intellectual astuteness, critical thinking, spiritual perception, etc.)?   For Focus 23, what distinctions can be drawn between earthbound souls (e. g. alcoholics), those who don't realize they're dead, and those who are insane?  What categories of people only lose these functions temporarily?  What categories lose them indefinitely?  Do we lose other parts of our earthly mental functioning as we "ascend" to higher planes?    

I have been rereading what Presbyterian minister Howell Vincent has discovered about these questions in "Lighted Passage" and how this issue impacts his astral efforts at soul retrievals.  I normally establish a detailed agenda for threads I initiate.  But I am eager to learn from your own reading and astral experiences on this issue, and so, this time I will postpone my discussion of Rev. Vincent's astral insights until I see what you have to share.  

Don  

It is clear from most near death experiences that they have a very different flavor than a lucid dream or dream.  Some characteristics which are mentioned frequently include the "crystal clarity" of perception and thought.  In depth conversations are often encountered, and in many cases, memory appears to actually be enhanced (i.e. acces to memories in the life review).  

In contrast, the vast majority of us (most probably 99+%) have significantly decreased abilities while dreaming in sleep.  Yet, I would not extrapolate much from this fact.  The number of sous stuck in the earthbound planes, I would argue is much smaller than the number who progress on.  We are told by numerous sources that there are deceased relatives, religious figures and others who try to attract our attention from the earliest stages - if we are only open to the experience.  We have been told that this attempt is virtually universal, and that as soon as a person dies, the process is always initiated, automatically.

Those who are unloving/destructive/hateful to others,  may truly initially find themselves in darkness, like Howard Storm did initially.  In thier instances, I think getting stuck in an earthbound plane may be much easier, as they may be unable to see the helpers/loved ones who would normally meet them.  

Swedenborg states that upon death, man is present is his complete human form, with memories intact.  He does mention that those who turn away from God's truth and indulge their own falsities may have problems at this stage:

(from HH chapter 47):

"That which has now been said can be understood by the rational man, for he can see it from the connection of causes and from truths in their order; but it is not understood by a man who is not rational, and for several reasons, the chief of which is that he has no desire to understand it because it is opposed to the falsities that he has made his truths; and he that is unwilling to understand for this reason has closed to his rational faculty the way to heaven, although that way can still be opened whenever the will's resistance ceases (see above, n. 424). That man is able to understand truths and be rational whenever he so wishes has been made clear to me by much experience. Evil spirits that have become irrational in the world by rejecting the Divine and the truths of the church, and confirming themselves against them, have frequently been turned by Divine power towards those who were in the light of truth, and they then comprehended all things as the angels did, and acknowledged them to be true, and also that they comprehended them all. But the moment these spirits relapsed into themselves, and turned back to the love of their will, they had no comprehension of truths and affirmed the opposite. [2] I have also heard certain dwellers in hell saying that they knew and perceived that which they did to be evil and that which they thought to be false; but that they were unable to resist the delight of their love, that is, their will, and that it is their will that drives their thought to see evil as good and falsity as truth. Evidently, then, those that are in falsity from evil have the ability to understand and be rational, but have no wish to; and they have no wish to for the reason that they have loved falsities more than truths, because these agree with the evils in which they are."

So, I would imagine that the vast majority of average people keep their mental faculties intact enough to see loved ones and not become stuck in the earth plane - unless they embraced such values as embraced evil and destructive tendencies.


Matthew

Don,

"A level inhabited by those who have recently left physical existence but who either have not been able to recognize and accept this or are unable to free themselves from the ties to the Earth Life Sustem.  It includes those from all periods of time ("Ultimate Journey"  240)."

>> Any normal human with the equivalent of his earthly brain should be able to recognize in just a few minutes after death that he is neither dreaming nor still in physical reality.  The failure of so many to recognize their own death indicates a radically diminished mental capacity. <<

From my experience what you are saying is no different than saying that any normal human . . . should be able to recognize in just a few minutes after falling asleep and starting to dream that he is dreaming.  The experience of those "souls trapped in Focus 23" is exactly the same as someone who is asleep and dreaming but unaware of that fact.  While you could call it the result of "diminished capacity" it is exactly the same experience for the "trapped soul" as a physically alive person being asleep and dreaming.  All it takes to escape "this widespread condition" is for that "trapped" person to realize that they are dreaming.  For some "trapped souls" this condition may persist for a very long time indeed.  So "how and for whom it might be reversible"?

From my experience I'd say it is reversible for every person who is "trapped."  It is usually reversed in one of three ways:

1.  Much as is often the case with triggering events that cause the shift from ordinary dreaming to lucid dreaming, some incongruity within that person's experience causes them to question whether or not they are "awake" or "dreaming."  Questioning the reality of their situation can cause the deceased person to become more lucid, realize they've died, and escape their "entrapment."

2.  A nonphysical Helper manages to make their presence known to the "trapped person" and that Helper guides them out of their entrapment.

3.  A physically living Helper like you or me takes on the role of the Helper and either assists another Helper in the guiding process or does it ourself.

Number 3 is why I teach the Art of Retrieval.  We can be involved in ending the deceased person's entrapment by taking part in the process of retrieval.  In Ultimate Journey Monroe describes this process and the Lifeline program he and others at The Monroe Institute developed to teach retrieval.

>>   I can even argue with my dream characters that I am God in this dream universe and that they are mere figments of my imagination.  But I am never sufficiently lucid to control the reactions of my dream people.<<

An alternate possibility might be that the reason you can't control your "dream people" is that they are not "mere figments" of your imagination.  What if they are real people whose existence if independent of yours?  Maybe no matter how lucid you become you won't be able to control these people because their actions are under their own control?

Bruce

In the physical World we have our belief systems and we have our physical sense organs.  This enables us to maintain contact with each other even when we have differing belief systems.

In the spirit World we don't have sense organs and rely on our minds to make contact with others. Therefore, our belief systems play a much bigger role in keeping us seperated from others.

In the physical World the circumstances of our lives determine where our bodies are located.

In the spirit World the state of our mind determines where we are located.

#3 also describes the work of Rev Vincent during WWII when he helped soldiers killed on the battlefield to find their way to the light.  As he explained in his book written in the 1940s, the vibrations of a physically alive person made it easier for the soldiers to perceive his presence.  I would guess that sooner or later a Helper would have done the same thing given the number of casualties vs. the number of trained retrievers.  

A larger question is raised by Don-  "What part of mental functioning do various categories of the newly dead at least initially lose (memories, intellectual astuteness, critical thinking, spiritual perception, etc.)?"

I remember the movie Three Faces of Eve, a true story about a schizophrenic.  She had 3 separate, unique and very distinct personalities.  These personalities had no conscious recognition of the existence of the others.  I wonder, when she died, which personality emerged?  All of them?  Or maybe none.  Maybe her spiritual identity absorbed all of the experiences of the 3 earthly personalities?

I don't recall any of Bruce's books discussing the whole question of identity (or in any other materials come to think of it).  Any ideas on this?  

Regarding what Rondelle asked:

I would think that the predominant personality takes over. Or perhaps they'll fluctuate just as they did while a person was in the physical.

I don't believe everybody gets stuck. I would guess that most people don't. Consider all the near death experiences where people go to the light or meet a being of light, even when their lives haven't been positive. This matches up with how I was able to experience heaven one night even though I was an atheist at the time. I was still a loving person. Perhaps this is what made the difference for me.

When it comes to a person like Danion Brinkley who was able to make contact with a light being during his NDE even though he wasn't a positive person at the time, perhaps he didn't have a predominant belief system that caused him to be overly influenced. Perhaps some people get bogged down because they have a belief system or a pattern of thought that influences them so strongly they lose the ability to think consciously and make choices.

Perhaps this is what happened to the man who killed all those people at Virginia Tech yesterday. Negative thought patterns got the best of him and he stopped making use of his conscious mind. It is hard to imagine one could do what he did, if one was making use of one's ability to think consciously.  



rondele wrote on Apr 17^th, 2007 at 12:42pm:

I remember the movie Three Faces of Eve, a true story about a schizophrenic.  She had 3 separate, unique and very distinct personalities.  These personalities had no conscious recognition of the existence of the others.  I wonder, when she died, which personality emerged?  All of them?  Or maybe none.  Maybe her spiritual identity absorbed all of the experiences of the 3 earthly personalities? I don't recall any of Bruce's books discussing the whole question of identity (or in any other materials come to think of it).  Any ideas on this?

Rondele said:
'I remember the movie Three Faces of Eve, a true story about a schizophrenic.  She had 3 separate, unique and very distinct personalities. '

Aren't the 'split' personalities of a schizophrenic all aspects of one person that the therapist then tries to reunite?  So as Eve moved into the afterlife, her total self would go, or the parts that were too frantic etc might require a partial retrieval. But there would still be the core who is the true Eve. Maybe for dramatic effect and 'tension', the author didn't show Eve reunified.

Bets

There is a qualitative and quantitative change in the mode of awareness and processing as one abandons the usual experiences of reality and goes into either deep meditation, a hallucinatory drug experience (or intoxication at that general level), or the state of dreaming, or psychosis, and evidently, death.  

We normally operate with what is termed "Secondary Process", which includes the ability to handle multiple threads of abstraction, and to deal with similes, resting in a static posture from which to view them. Relative goodness of options is judged from behavioral reinforcers.

When the physical mechanisms the maintain these multiple operations are gone, we are left with only a dynamic system. That system operates on associative functioning only. This is called Primary Process. The good and bad values we had previously become absolutes, black and white, much as a child reasons.

Primary Process objects, actions and experiences are evaluated against the contents of memory which is intact. Memory remains intact because memory is the basis for the dynamic state we exhibit as we attempt to cope. There is no option for stasis, as this would negate the operation of the life force which is, of itself, dynamic. (Maybe this is where Werner von Heisenberg got the idea for the uncertainty principle, in the sense of the instant of reality existing half a Planck bit in the past and half a bit into the future. Hence vacuum energy etc.) Just as the world is necessarily dynamic, we too must be.

As a dynamic operation in which our reality is held in memory, the sum of all experiences up to the point, we operate by associative logic. That which carries similar attribution to something else is equal to it. In this way the schizophrenic sees a typewriter and identifies it as equal to all prior experiences of typewriters.

In this state, a person whose beliefs do not allow forward motion without an association that includes some form of logical self negation (eg. a murderer) will attempt to "tread water" by retaining an attachment to the outside world as an anchor.  This offsets existential dread. To abandon that grip would require an existential negation of some part of the personality.  Hence people get stuck. Bruce's notes on their release are precisely to this point, and his methods offer an alternative association that was not previously accessible, thus allowing motion to a new viewpoint in which associations lead to a better future and bypass existential destruction.

In past life therapy or work with entities we use the same methods as Bruce just stated, the difference being that we use slightly different methods to access the problem states.

All mental health issues seem to arise because of conflicts on a Primary Process level that cannot be resolved through rational thinking because they are "emotional" in nature. Emotions are the dynamic operators of Primary Process. This is the reason that we can't "talk them out of it" when someone is psychotic.

There is remarkably little information about Primary Process because most people talk about what other people said when they talked about what other people say about it etc. However, this is the state in which we enter meditation, and meditators who carefully examine their functions will be able to observe how it works. Unfortunately, we tend to cling to Secondary Process in the same waywe cling to anything familiar, because we don;t understand the alternatives. To understand them requires becoming to that degree insane, dead or whatever. Given this caveat, meditators can filter out secondary phenomena and notice the manner in which their inner functions take on an "absolute" associative quality.

dave

Thanks Don!  I don't want to get too far off topic but could you explain the meanings of soul and spirit in the old and new testaments?

Good posts from everyone.  I need to read them more carefully.  Dave mentions association and Albert mentions mind and belief.  I only have time for a quick comment.

We use our energy field to sense the world around us in the physical.  At least the consciousness of the higher spiritual levels remain after death, the lower ones disappear.  What happens to the consciousness of the lower levels?  Do we continue to use our energy field to sense the afterlife?  Or is it mind only?

Sorry gotta run out the door.

K

Hi Lights-
I suggest Don can do better with "soul" and "spirit" etc in the Old Testament.

The New Age interpretation often equates soul with the collection of traits that define someone, and spirit with the dynamics that are observed in the behavior of the soul. (This is from Cayce.)

In both this and the afterlife, energy fields can be cited as effective, although it's an oblique reference.

Energy is a derivative concept related to the ability to cause change. It analyzes into force times the range over which the force is effective. (Force in the abstract is the probability for the occurrence of something, usually within a context of other probabilities and tendencies. For distance, think "amount of dimensional change" where "dimension" means any measurable or sensible attribute.) Force causes acceleration attached to some part of our definition by which this dimension is altered. In the physical, that means that some part of our sensory system is accelerated (like wiggling the little hairs in the semicircular canal for music) and we perceive a sensation.

In the abstract, such as when we are not "extended" as an embodiment, a change in energy means that some part of the definition of our state is altered. (A Bell Labs engineer, Claude Shannon, used thermodynamic theory to demonstrate that information change, or change in entropy, is equivalent to physical change.) We sense the change with respect to our present definitions, and especially with respect to those definitions of state that we wish to retain, such as "I am lovable," or "I am one with God," or the most major issue, "I exist".

With a body we use changes in the body as the receptors. Without a body (or when thinking in Primary Process mode) we use changes in definition of self-state as the receptor system. The "embodiment" of self in the abstract is derived from the collection of states of other stuff in context, since our proper embodiment is lacking. So long as we are in accord with those states, we can extract our own definition from them by attaching to those portions of contextual states that support our definition of self-state.

Life is a dynamic, we exist in the crack between yesterday and tomorrow, which is the nebulous moment of "Now". Thus we are perpetually driven forward. When we can find no available place to move our identification that agrees with our self-state definition, we lose the parts of our definition that are incompatible.

One way out for those of us who are highly discordant with the natural world is to cling to phenomena of the material world we knew, hence we have earthbound spirits in existential crisis.  We also can cling to cycles of definition, and become "stuck". Or we can cling to another person's psyche, and become "entities".

The other way out is to come into global accord with everything, which means that we can go anywhere in creation, and we merge into the general nature of God.

Consciousness through this process remains as a Primary Process phenomenon, in which we move our identity from one "place" to the next, where "place" means subset of universal attributes. We are defined much as we are in dreams, by emotional tendencies, attachments and associations - so we still "think", but in limited and fundamental terms only.

(It's actually possible to express this in symbolic terms as a proof.)

Hope that is more clarifying than obscuring-
dave

recoverer wrote on Apr 17^th, 2007 at 1:21pm:

Regarding what Rondelle asked: I would think that the predominant personality takes over. Or perhaps they'll fluctuate just as they did while a person was in the physical. I don't believe everybody gets stuck. I would guess that most people don't. Consider all the near death experiences where people go to the light or meet a being of light, even when their lives haven't been positive. This matches up with how I was able to experience heaven one night even though I was an atheist at the time. I was still a loving person. Perhaps this is what made the difference for me. When it comes to a person like Danion Brinkley who was able to make contact with a light being during his NDE even though he wasn't a positive person at the time, perhaps he didn't have a predominant belief system that caused him to be overly influenced. Perhaps some people get bogged down because they have a belief system or a pattern of thought that influences them so strongly they lose the ability to think consciously and make choices. Perhaps this is what happened to the man who killed all those people at Virginia Tech yesterday. Negative thought patterns got the best of him and he stopped making use of his conscious mind. It is hard to imagine one could do what he did, if one was making use of one's ability to think consciously.   rondele wrote on Apr 17th, 2007 at 12:42pm: I remember the movie Three Faces of Eve, a true story about a schizophrenic.  She had 3 separate, unique and very distinct personalities.  These personalities had no conscious recognition of the existence of the others.  I wonder, when she died, which personality emerged?  All of them?  Or maybe none.  Maybe her spiritual identity absorbed all of the experiences of the 3 earthly personalities? I don't recall any of Bruce's books discussing the whole question of identity (or in any other materials come to think of it).  Any ideas on this?

Great post recoverer!! I'd like to say alittle more though.. Yes, people who have strong religious concepts of heaven/hell will have quite a difficult experience with getting beyond their illusions of what happens after death..



People there really is no hell.. God never created it.. Man has created hell with mans' own free will..

I got this from a great site.. About heaven and hell.. Read it below please..

Most religions preach about heaven and hell, and how those who either do or do not believe in one thing or another will inevitably end up in one of these two places. What are hell and heaven? Are they real? Where are they? And who gets to go where? Christianized hell is portrayed as such a real and frightening place filled with monsters and Satan, where one is punished for their sins and suffers eternally. There is no way out. Oh, you know the pictures that have been painted by Dali and other artists depicting the burning pit where those not worthy of being recognized or loved by God are tossed, abandoned and tortured. Damned for eternity.
Heaven, on the other hand, is supposed to be eternal bliss. And only the very worthy end up in heaven, and are showered with flowers, angelic music, and peace. Beauty is all one's sees in heaven. With the stringent demands made on humans to be everything but human, (never mind seeing human as divine) while being constantly reminded that they are sinful and unworthy of heaven, heaven must be very under-populated. In fact, with all those rules to be met, I can't imagine one person being successfully led through those pearly gates! Can you? (No, not even Mother Theresa - she believed that she was less than divine, herself.)

Hell and heaven are very dramatically presented, aren't they? But do we even know what these words mean? Could it be we have all been fed non-sequiturs for centuries to the point where we no longer remember what these words really mean, therefore we live in constant confusion (like the Tower of Babel) because we don't properly use our language? Wow - just imagine what that does to our communcations on all levels with one another!

Hell: Prepare yourselves for a possible shock: The word 'hel' means 'light.' It also means 'earth.' Check your Germanic dictionaries if you don't believe me. In fact, check many languages and find the meaning of the word 'hell.' Some will say it means 'cover.' If hell is such a negative place, then why do we refer to the sun, who gives us life, warmth and nurtures us, as 'helios?" Perhaps the thought of diving into the sun would be hell, itself. Maybe that's how it all originated? But, realistically, you wouldn't even make it that close without first disintegrating. Ah, but then you'd become pure energy, pure light, just like the sun, itself! Your real essence, in other words. Why, we even used to worship* gods representing the sun's energy - Ra, Apollo, for example. So, why would it be something to be feared and avoided, at all costs?

A 'demon in hell' can also be called a 'genius in the light.' Demon, or daemon, has conflicting meanings. It can mean our inner genius, divinity or genie. It is a word sharing the same root thing as 'diamond!' Some dictionaries say demons are inferior divinity or evil spirits. How can they be both? Both divine, genius and evil? Think about it. Do they not cancel one another out? Or, can we put all under one divine umbrella? What definitions have you been taught?

The horns on the devil are also used to depict great divine light emanating through the individual. Same thing was shown with Hathor, Moses, White Buffalo Woman. It is a positive symbol of higher consciousness and knowledge, not evil.

Devil comes from the Sanskrit world meaning 'deva,' which relates to the good angels of the Hindu pantheon. Were you taught that Satan means adversary or plotter? 'Adverse' meaning 'to turn towards?' After Zoroaster and the Persians conquered Hindu territory the conquerers miraculously transformed the Hindu gods into devils! So, the Hindu devas became the Persians devils.

If we look at the pattern of religious manipulation through language, the word "daemon" was changed into having a evil implication. "It was just more Christian propaganda used to brainwash the followers of the Greek and Roman religions into rejecting their old gods in favor of the newly created Christian character," as one scholar explains. This old ploy cunningly used good timing to coincide with the burning of millions of books; books which had they not been burned would have allowed people to see the truth of how they were being lied to. And the word 'evil' probably comes from the same root as the word 'apple,' which is 'upfel.' Who decided that apples were evil? The apple itself isn't evil.

Rabbi Ahron Lopiansky explains that Judaism talks of "Satan/devil," but it sees Satan as "...an agent of God, testing the sincerity of man's deeds, the strength of his convictions, and the stamina of his moral fiber. Although this so-called devil seems to entice man to do wrong, he is not inherently an evil being. Rather, he is conducting a "sting" operation; overtly enticing to bad, but in reality working for God. A cursory reading of the beginning of Job conveys that message: God sends out Satan to test Job's righteousness. Just as a dentist or doctor tests the firmness of a bone or flesh by probing it, just as the army tests the integrity and trustworthiness of its intelligence agents by tempting them, so too does God test man. A test reveals the inner worthiness of a person's deeds, demonstrating what they are really made of."

Heaven: Could this word come from 'heave' - meaning to toss, lift or raise? Those lofty ideas. No doubt it does. And what about 'heavy,' meaning 'weighty.' This can get to be lots of fun, eh? 'Ven' means 'air.' 'Ven' can also be 'van,' which means 'sail,' 'wing,' 'basket,' and it can be a shovel used in testing ore; and of course, it now means a type of large vehicle capable of transporting many people. The more accurate root of "heaven" comes from "haven." The word "heaven" also has its roots in Hebrew in "ha'shamayim," which means "the skies," " high places." Maybe you can come up with some other meanings for it. See the conflicts over and over in modern language?

Worship...another interesting word. "Wor" means literally "war," or "where," and "ship" meaning a "state" or "condition." The word religion is interesting, too. "Re" means "back," or "again," or even "in reference to." "Legion" is "a body of infantry in the ancient Roman army"; or "vast host." Re-legion. Armies of God in a war ship? Is religion about war? Or hosts of God?

Now that the brief etymology portion is over, let's get into the other areas of what these words have come to mean to a great many people in the religious and social sense. In fact, they have come to dictate and control much of our beliefs and lives.





Both heaven and hell are places, dimensions, and overlapping dimensions, created with those of like mind and emotions - thoughts and feelings so intense that it creates a vortex of bioelectomagnetic energy so concentrated that it densifies and materializes. This material form can be ectoplasmic or physical. It takes on the form of the creator's beliefs. This form resonates with like energies, drawing them to one another. (Like attracts like.) This, then, creates a larger vortex of the same energy. And it keeps growing and building and desiring it's life to be continually fed. This, then, becomes a real gathering place.

Hell, as that place of suffering and damnation, stems from a belief that becomes real through the energy we give it by our feelings of being anything less than holy or divine, directly related to guilt, shame, anger, pain, separation, sadness, blame, martyrdom, need for punishment, victimhood, fear. Ironically, the fear of being in what people believe to be hell may actually create that kind of hell, itself.

In the case of hell, the only way these energies can be nourished is by having more of the same energy filling it up, adding more fuel to the fire. In order to stay alive it seeks out its food in many ways. Finding a weakness, such as addiction or anger within a person to attach itself to is one way: Attaching to the little bit of belief in that individual it can use for its own survival. And it can also be utilized by people as in the practice of voodoo to get a life force that can be manipulated and directed. You see, the life force, the energy, never dies. It changes form, and its form can be intentionally changed. These energies will seek out others and build on itself unless we become conscious of them and choose to release them through other avenues.

Going back to Dave's comment,

Dave, how does Primary Process relate to the more generic meaning of  'soul'?
Would someone outside your field see them as same or similiar? Are you saying that in the afterlife we can expect primary process to take over?

Do the emotions that are generated from primary process come from conflicts when love is shortchanged, and primary process then reacts to this lack? Much as soul might measure events by how much love is involved?

I realize that in your field you probably cannot define soul, but you're among friends here, Dave.  :) ;)  Can you speak alittle more 'afterlifische' and keep all your content too?

Bets

Hi Bets-
Afterlife-ish? - Actually, the part of psychology in which I specialize is primary process phenomena in pathology and creativity.  I've known several people who would cheerfully have made me more afterlife-ish but I escaped.

Primary process is the operational description for emotional thinking.  It's difficult for me to express verbally because I always use symbols working at home. I'll try to condense.

Very generally, we have a self-definition that includes whatever we feel important, including our existence. To continue being ourselves, we must maintain those attributes by which we define ourselves. Thus, going from moment to moment, we must find a reality in which our self definition is supported.

Attitude is the tendency, or inclination, to make a certain kind of choice given a certain stimulating event. We adopt an attitude that presumably guides us through reality frames (instants of experience) that keep us defined. Emotion is the pressure toward that attitude, so that eg. rage inclines us to batter our adversary, fear inclines us to flee, and so on.

Without a body, our definition is the sum of all the relationships associated with being who we were in the past. Thus, without a body, we are just history, plus a dynamic tendency for interaction. Emotion arises as the logical projection of our history, and manifests as the dynamic. Were the available realityinto which to next move our existence to not support all of our definitions, then those fall off. This is sensed as some kind of suffering.

Within the range of our experiences carried in our history, which is the entropic definition of the soul, more or less in Edgar Cayce's terms, we can move about, and thus we can "think" to some degree. This is how a meditator "thinks" while in deep trance. But this is absolute, black and white, dichotomous thinking that either fits us into some future option, or does not. Thinking in this sense, is an emotional activity, in that it carries our entire attitude toward life, the universe, and everything.*  With this kind of thinking, we more or less "live the thought", as opposed to abstract thought and rational knowing. Thus, the thought is, of itself, also the motivating factors normally sensed when we have an "emotional experience".

The reason that we "live the thought" in primary processing is that the mechanism by which it is handled is our collection of attributive relationships with the world, so that these are altered as we alter our attitudes. In this way, the physical body is involved in emotions when we have one, and when we don't, our definition as an historically supported event is altered.

Were we to be able to exist as a static structure, matters might be different, but our existence is in the dynamic between instants of external definition. Thus, as we "live the thought" we also alter attitudes and the choices made. The options for participation in some of the other available future states are more likely in some cases, less so in others. But we are forced, willy nilly, to participate, because only in the dynamic do we exist. (Tha's why Freud said that we have two dynamic goals - total pleasure in our actions, "eros", like Juditha having sex with a succubus, or we can gravitate toward placidity and minimal effort, "thanatos", the state that Chumley seems to be seeking, so that he doesn't get drafted into some unspeakable spirituality.)

There is a specific kind of logic associated with emotional "thinking" which is most conveniently reduced to three interdefinitive aspects (as compared to the everyday world in which the relationships of the parts are rarely important). These three aspects are process, relationals, and substantives, They are the same as in quantum analysis of events.

Egyptian lore (eg. Papyrus of Ani) emphasized the necessity for the dead soul to be at peace with all three of these aspects, and with their seven logical products, and their 127 logical products as well, where is why there is a "negative confession" in Maati of 42 traits that would be destructive. (42 actve traits, 84 relational and substantive traits ignored, plus being Osiris, gives 127. - The same theme is echoed inside tombs where we often see it as 127 serpents.)

This is a lousy description because it's abstract, while the topic is any but abstract. I suggest that to "get the feeling" you imagine placing yourself in various states of existence in the world, noticing the physical and emotional changes that are implied. Tibetans seem to use this type of "thinking" to accomplish all manner of worldly tasks while in unbroken meditation. All that is needed is to be "in accord" with everything around us, so that everything serves. I think Catholics call this a "state of grace.

* that's 42 according to the Hitchhiker's Guide:-)

Hope this is useful-
dave

Wow, Dave!  I feel like a freshman that just stepped into a post-grad class.  I know I want to take the course, but I sure hope you’ll bear with me while I try to formulate a question.

A dynamic system implies to me that change is the primary element as opposed to any static state.  Without a body, awareness of changes in self-state is the means by which we our identity.  Then, history plus change or interaction sort of becomes our mode of operation.  If I haven’t garbled it too much, then any primary process action would subsequently result in a newly created history that reflects that new action or change?  If this is correct, wouldn’t there be some significant degree of autonomy beyond either getting stuck or clinging to another psyche?  Perhaps I don’t understand what you meant by “cling to another psyche”.

Your discussion of primary process was an eye opener.  And 42 is a nice summary.   Many thanks.

Rob

berserk,

The true man is the soul, comprised of matter, very fine matter, and, formed out of etheric energy. At the physical term called death, the spirit, made from the same energy, that the soul is in cased in, both leave the physical body with all if its Earthly mental functions, memories, emotions, feelings, and the ego.

The brain is merely a biological organ, that the soul transmits electric pluses to the brain, to allow stimulation, and for the thought process to exist, along with triggering nerve pulses to animate the muscles and the body, and it's various fuctions to experience this physical enviorment..

The purpose of the spirit body, is to create indviduality of the soul, as it grows within the body, to create the duplicate you in spirit form. This idenity, and your soul energy is what separates you from others in the spirit world, this is your spiritual signature.

Once we all leave this physical existance, by way of the endless ways we all exit this world into the next, along with our beliefs, determines our place in the spirit world. Although not a permanent condition, we all come to light eventually.

Those that have near death experiences, are not the same as true death, and are having an sprirtual experience, and of created illusion by the brain being forced to evaluate two worlds at once, thus experiences everything by way of their beliefs.
This wher they encounter highly evloved spirit; the being of light, that knows them completely, and explains to them there weaknesses, and stengths.

This where they see their life for what it really is, and what it means, or doesn't mean to all those that they are conected to. The only thing a near death experience is used for, is to reaffirm ones life plan, and to get them back on track. There are no coincidences, these indviduals have these experiences for this very reason.

Dimensionally Yours,
Rick

Before discussing Howell Vincent's retrieval insights, I will present this consensus of Classical Channeling, Swedenborg {ES], and some NDEs and OBEs as to what is permanently or temporarily "lost" during postmortem transitions.  Somne of this material is reposted from my ADC memory thread.

CLASSICAL CHANNELING: WHAT IS LOST IN THE TRANSITION FROM THE SUMMERLAND [FOCUS 24-26] TO THE FIRST HEAVEN?

“The usual picture of life after death as a passage from one sphere to another, each more refined than the preceding one [is inaccurate]....It is more accurate to think of the process of passing through a mumber of layers of consciousness, and of man as not yet fully aware of himself as a many-levelled being, and who at these early stages is much less than his full self (Paul Beard, "Living On."
108).”

“...The former consciousness will gradually melt away as irrelevant.  This is an aspect of the putting away of childish things of which St. Paul  speaks.  To a certain degree the traveler can move up and down within these layers of consciousness.  As he progresses, more and more of his attention rests in his more refined levels.  But a part of him may still belong to a lower level of
himself which he may not yet have shaken off (Paul Beard, 110)."

WHAT IS LOST IN THE TRANSITION FROM THE FIRST TO THE SECOND HEAVEN?

“Now he has to get ready to shed a large part of this more familiar self....The traveller must face the...demise of the personal self, because it is becoming no longer tenable to live within its limitations...What is meant by the `personal self?’  It is the sum of all the person’s memories of the experiences, thoughts, and feelings which made up his sense of himself...during his past life on
earth...It is a kind of oblivion, but a conscious oblivion...The man leaves his desire body.  He is perfectly conscious.  He passes into a great stillness...He cannot think.  No faculty is alive, yet  he knows that he is...and his soul is filled with a wonderful peace (Paul Beard, 123, 130-31).”

Independent corroboration from Swedenborg’s astral trevels challenges the assumption that discarnate spirits have access to their full earth memory in higher planes. The  reader must ask himself how ADCs and channeling from these planes remains possible in light of this problem.  Certainly these troubling insights shed light on why our deceased loved ones so rarely contact us
in an impressively paranormal and verifiable way.   I am not trying to discredit ADCs.  But integrity requires us to come to terms with evidence that contradicts our preferred astral explorers and their comforting insights.   We must come to terms with the incoherence of the overall evidence from astral exploration and seek a fresh synthesis.   Here is a sampling os some ES quotes about the status of memory in “the World of Spirits,” a realm “below” the Heavens:

“We have two memories, an inner and an outer, or a natural one and a spiritual one. We are not aware that we have this inner memory.  How much better the inner memory is than the outer one!  The contents of our outer memory are in the world’s light, while the contents of our inner memory are in heaven’s light.  It is because of our inner memory that we can think and talk intelligently and rationally.  Absolutely everything we have thought, said, done, seen, and heard is inscribed on our inner memory....Things that have become second nature to us and part of our life and therefore have been erased from our outer memory are in our inner memory (HH #463, note b)."

After death, adult memory “stays fixed and then goes dormant; but it still serves their thinking after death as an outmost plane because their thought flows into it.  This is why the nature of this plane and the way their rational activity answers to its contents determines the nature of the individual after death (HH #345)."

".All that remain are the rational abilities that now serve as a basis for thinking and talking.   We actually take with us our entire natural memory, but its contents are not open to our inspection and do not enter into our thought as when we were living in this world...To the extent that our spirit has become rational by means of our insights and learning in this world, we are rational after
our departure from the body (HH #355).”
 
“The reason our outer memory goes dormant as far as material things are concerned is that they cannot be recreated.  Spirits and angels [= discarnate people] actually talk from the affections and consequent thoughts of their minds, so they cannot utter anything that does not square with these...I have talked with any number of people who were regarded as learned in the world
because of their knowledge of such ancient languages as Hebrew and Greek and Latin, but had not developed their rational functioning by means of the things that were written in thos  languages. Some of them seemed as simple as people who did not know anything about those languages; some of them seemed dense, though there still remained a pride as though they were
wiser than other people (HH #464).”

“I have also talked with some people who had believed in the world that wisdom depends on how much we have in our memory and who have therefore filled their memories to bursting.  They talked almost exclusively from those items, which meant that they were not talking for themselves, but for others; and they had not developed any rational functioning by means of these
matters of memory.   Some of them were dense, some silly, with no grasp of truth whatever (HH #464).”

“Our rational faculty is like a garden or flower bed, like newly tilled land.  Our memory is the soil, information and experiential learning are the seeds, while heaven’s light and warmth make them productive...There is no germination unless heaven’s light, which is divine truth, and heaven’s warmth, which is divine love, are let in.  They are the only source of rationality (HH #464).”    

“One particular spirit lamented the fact that he could not remember much of what he had known during his physical life.  He was grieving over the pleasure he had lost because it had been his chief delight.  He was told, though, that he had not lost anything at all and that he knew absolutely everything.  In the world where he was now living, he was not allowed to retrieve things like that.
It should satisfy him that he could now think and talk much better and more perfectly without immersing his rational functioning in dense clouds, in material and physical concerns, the way he had before, in concerns that were useless in the kingdom he had now reached (HH #465).”

“Since the natural objects that reside in our memory cannot be reproduced in a spiritual world, they become dormant the way they do when we are not thinking about them.  Even so, they can be reproduced when it so pleases the Lord (HH #461).”  

Consider, then, how George Ritchie's NDE and ES's astral insights challenge common New Age perspectives about the ease of contacting our deceased loved ones in higher planes and finding them with their earth memories intact.  Christ takes Ritchie on a tour of an astral educational plane below Heaven:

“WHATEVER ELSE THESE PEOPLE MIGHT BE, THEY APPEARED UTTERLY AND
SUPREMELY SELF-FORGETFUL--ABSORBED IN SOME VAST PURPOSE BEYOND
THEMSELVES.  Through open doors I glimpsed enormous rooms filled with complex equipment.  In several of the rooms hooded figures bent over intricate charts and diagrams, or sat at the controls of elaborate consoles flickering with lights....I felt that some vast experiment was being pursued, perhaps dozens and dozens of such experiments [69-70] .”

Ritche's NDE description seems incompatible with the chatty ease with which mediums interrupt the lives of discarnates and seek confirmation from their memories of their earthly lives.  His description hints at the insight thst the inhabitants of this educational plane have an altered state of consciousness that cuts them off from their normal earthly memories.  His reports cohere nicely
with Robert Bruce’s OBE insights into memory problems created by shifts in focus from one astral plane to another.  

In "Astral Dynamics." OBE adept, Robert Bruce, claims to have discovered a reason for this  troublesome memory loss:

“When present, the base level.. replaces any higher levels of consciousness and overwrites any memories gained independently by those levels of consciousness on higher planes.  ..The higher level memories still exist after the event, but they are driven into inaccessible levels of the subconsicious mind and memory.  The overall effect is that a projection continues from that moment on as if it had just started.  ...The lowest level of consciousness always replaces and overwrites any higher level of consciusness and effectively wipes out all trace of its memories at the moment of reintegration (75).”.

‘Memories from higher levels of consciousness may not even be in sync with what the physical brain is capable of recognizing and storing as viable memories. ...The only parts of high-level experiences that are storable as recallable memories are those parts the physical brain is capable of recognizng and converting inot base-level format...The above factor accounts for the...symbols, images, and feelings that are sometimes remembered after high-lveel OBEsand dreams, instead of more recognziable OBE and dream memories.  This, if true, goes a long way toward explaining the...metaphorical nature of prophetic OBEs, visions, and dreams, and why these areso difficult to
understand and interpret (77).”

This theory fits well with Robert’s observations about the memory problems of discarnate spirits who "descend” to the Healing Center to be with their loved ones.  In my view the need for such a “descent” already implies the imadequacy of the implied Monroe reduction of “Heaven” to Focus
27.  On the other hand, these descending spirits must have some ongoing memory contact with their loved ones on Earth.  Otherwise, why would the former be prompted to descend for a visit?   And how elsde do they discover the new arrival of their loved ones to the Healing Center?   Robert’s OBE observations about spirits descending to the Healing Center seem most significant.  He reports:

“Many of the people/ spirits I have met there seem to be quite real.  All are visiting or waiting for a patient in the hospital...Spirits I have spoken to in this situation do not seem to be aware of the length of time that has elapsed since they passed over, or of many details concerning the afterlife since that  time. MEMORIES OF THEIR EARTHLY LIFE ALSO SEEM VAGUE, MUCH LIKE HOW A HALF-FORGOTTEN DREAM IS REMEMBERED  BY A LIVING PERSON."

“Many spirits only seem to be aware of their present reality, that of being in only the hospital scenario for an indeterminate length of  time.  Some spirits, however, do have vague memories of their earthly life, and of coming from other dimensional areas; but have so far given only very sketchy details.  Often they will speak of a warm, brightly-lit, interesting place where they have
many friends and loved ones, but with little more details than this.  The most common response I get from asking spirits what it’s like where they come from is: `It’s really lovely there and everyone is so nice.  I don’t understand this.  I’m very sorry.  I know it well and can picture it in my head, but I just can’t describe it to you.’”

Evidently, descending spirits encounter the same memory problems that earthly astral explorers do upon returning from higher astral planes.   So here is my queston for readers?  Are not these memory problems inconsistent with ADCs from higher planes and especially with the chatty ease mediums have in channeling deceased loved ones on demand from higher planes?   Perhaps, we
need a mew model for understanding ADC and channled contacts.  Perhaps, the mmories of discarnatel loved ones can be tapped and experienced as direct communication, when in fact these loved ones are unaware of the contact.  

Don

Don,

Your suppositions are based upon the astral experiences of Ritchie and Robert Bruce in specific.  Swedenborg, however, leaves the door open for full memory of earthly events "when it so pleases the lord."  Let us say, for a moment that Bruce or Ritchie's ability to communicate with the deceased spirits was somehow affected by their own belief system or astral connection.  Perhaps then, their reports of memory loss are specific to their encounters - yet you generalize them to include all spirits (or at least you put forth their experiences as evidence in favor of memory loss in a generalized manner).

I have said in another post that I believe there are two overwhelming or universal concepts which go against the "memory loss hypothesis;" they are: the notions of free will in the universe and that of love being the driving force of heaven.  The bonds which forge our connectedness to our loved ones are quite real to us.  Ultimately, our "inner mind" may not be too concerned with the soap opera of events that occur in our families on planet earth, when we understand a higher love, however the idea that in spirit we would be oblivious to the sufferings of our loved ones rings false to me.  Why then, do loved ones meet us in NDEs, specifically deceased loved ones?  If it were a hallucination, my still-living mother could meet me and give me comforting words of wisdom and love.  Yet it seems, that the chain of love is there - unbroken in the spirit world.  

How would your theory of memory loss explain the memory and learning centers of Focus 27?  Would Focus 27 be experienced only at an early stage of death?  If not, how does the memory loss theory account for Monroe/Moen's learning/memory centers found there?

Swedenborg is a verified explorer.  There are some mediums, such as George Anderson who have had amazing verifications from many different people/sources.  Do Robert Bruce and Ritchie have verifications of their astral experiences?  If not, could there impressions of memory loss be caused by their own filters/beliefs?

While I believe that there are plenty of confused spirits out there, I believe the weight of the evidence from NDE visits with family members, the concept of love as the driving force of heaven, and the issue of free will in choosing to love and remember our families and loved ones, all go against the mandatory memory loss theory.  

Matthew

Don:

Does this mean if a person dies and tries to share memories with a former beloved grand parent, his or her grand parent won't be able to remember he or she? Would the grand parent ask: "Who in heaven are you? We don't remember nuttin around here? What's this World you keep talking about? What have you been smoking? Smoking? What's smoking? Man I'm losing it. My memory doesn't work like it used to. Used to? What do I mean by used to?"

And this is how it goes in the land of dementia.

Or on the other hand  ;), perhaps spirits take care of memories in a manner that supports their spiritual development. Their earth based memories are a means to an end, not an end in themselves.

You wrote the below about George Ritchie:
'WHATEVER ELSE THESE PEOPLE MIGHT BE, THEY APPEARED UTTERLY AND SUPREMELY SELF-FORGETFUL--ABSORBED IN SOME VAST PURPOSE BEYOND THEMSELVES."

I read George Ritchies's book and didn't get the same impression. "Forgetul" doesn't mean they couldn't remember their former lives as humans. It simply means that they were completely engrossed in their work. People in the physical can do the same thing when they really dedicate themselves to something. Certainly they can remember about the rest of their lives when they change their focus of attention. The fact of how you're using the above statement as a basis for your argument makes me wonder how objective you're being about this issue.

Albert,

If discarnate souls retain the same consciousness and sensibilities that they had on earth, they would repeatedly and unmistakably communicate with their earthly loved ones.   Their failure to do so is one of the best arguments AGAINST an afterlife--unless they are prevented from doing so by loss of memory (temporary or permenant), by a limited astral consciousness that prevents such contacts, by a lack of knowledge about how to make such a contact, or by strong spirit teaching that such contact is ill-advised.  Matthew's DOCTRINAL rejection of this problem just begs the question, though I sympathize with his motives.   I don't know what the solution is, but we must acknowledge the importance of this problem and we must not cop out by trivializating the multiple confirmation of postmortem memory loss, whether temporary or permanent.  Such problems certainly call channeled communications into  question and also bring us back to the topic of this thread--what our mind loses or suppresses after death.

Don

DocM wrote on Apr 19^th, 2007 at 6:03pm:

Don, Your suppositions are based upon the astral experiences of Ritchie and Robert Bruce in specific.  Swedenborg, however, leaves the door open for full memory of earthly events "when it so pleases the lord."  Let us say, for a moment that Bruce or Ritchie's ability to communicate with the deceased spirits was somehow affected by their own belief system or astral connection.  Perhaps then, their reports of memory loss are specific to their encounters - yet you generalize them to include all spirits (or at least you put forth their experiences as evidence in favor of memory loss in a generalized manner). I have said in another post that I believe there are two overwhelming or universal concepts which go against the "memory loss hypothesis;" they are: the notions of free will in the universe and that of love being the driving force of heaven.  The bonds which forge our connectedness to our loved ones are quite real to us.  Ultimately, our "inner mind" may not be too concerned with the soap opera of events that occur in our families on planet earth, when we understand a higher love, however the idea that in spirit we would be oblivious to the sufferings of our loved ones rings false to me.  Why then, do loved ones meet us in NDEs, specifically deceased loved ones?  If it were a hallucination, my still-living mother could meet me and give me comforting words of wisdom and love.  Yet it seems, that the chain of love is there - unbroken in the spirit world.   How would your theory of memory loss explain the memory and learning centers of Focus 27?  Would Focus 27 be experienced only at an early stage of death?  If not, how does the memory loss theory account for Monroe/Moen's learning/memory centers found there? Swedenborg is a verified explorer.  There are some mediums, such as George Anderson who have had amazing verifications from many different people/sources.  Do Robert Bruce and Ritchie have verifications of their astral experiences?  If not, could there impressions of memory loss be caused by their own filters/beliefs? While I believe that there are plenty of confused spirits out there, I believe the weight of the evidence from NDE visits with family members, the concept of love as the driving force of heaven, and the issue of free will in choosing to love and remember our families and loved ones, all go against the mandatory memory loss theory.   Matthew

The memory loss theory is B.S. I agree, with you Matthew..

Hi Rob-
The "fine matter" that Rick mentions is sometimes called akasha, which is Sanskrit for what we might call emptiness plus space-time. It's entropy in any case - the late physicist Archibald Wheeler wound up with this general idea in the latter part of his life.  

You're correct Rob, each decision we make redefines us. We are essentially re-created from one event frame to the next. However, the essence of the "creation" is to attach to the set of attributes by which we were defined in the prior moment, and transit to the next event frame as part of the dynamic.

To "stick to another psyche" is the manner in which entities attach to people. They can co-exist with kindred thought patterns, just as we globally co-exist with the dynamic of the universe's patterns of definition by finding patterns with which our definition coincides.

The only reason this seems to bizarre and tricky is that we're used to think of "matter", and in fact there isn't any matter. It's just relationships in a dynamic evolution.

In proof: we have three aspects, Process, Relationals and Substantives.  Anything that seems to stick around, like a pattern of relationals, we term substantive, giving it a material essence that it actually doesn't have.

Snce the world is fully described by these three aspects (as is QM) we have a closed system with three variables, but only two degrees of freedom. We are dynamic, and we know that things relate, so we have Process and Relationals, and the Substantive nature of what we call matter is thus a poor second cousin that gets defined after the fact. QED

You can refer to matter, but the only matter that we can find is that something alters the nature of our relationships when we undergo processes, which can only be identified because it is the set of relationships formed in the prior instant - and it turns the circle again. The best definition of matter is probably "the ashes of burnt out situations". Our history is made of this. We don't need to be "material".

I'm quite certain that lots of people will object to this, and I'm open to being flamed a bit. This is simply the way logic decrees it. To those who really think I'm in error, go there and take a look for yourself at that level, which is one level up from the "primal dyad" in which God (the dynamic) sets off spacetime (the relational).

dave

[Duh Bears:] "The memory loss theory is B.S. I agree, with you Matthew."

It seems like most of yoiur replies are mindless echoes of views that reinforce your prejudices.  The consensus of Swedenborg's astral insights, Classical Channeling, Robert Bruce's OBEs, and some NDEs will not be routed by your dngmatic posturing.   But let's press you to actually frame an orignal thought.
Why are ADCs so rare are the first year of a loved one's passing?  

Don

Rev. Howell Vincent was both a Presbyterian minister and an astral adept.  His book "Lighted Passage" (1943) was published before the modern New Age movement and is not polluted by New Age jargon and dogma.   The book is not primarily about astral exploration and soul retrievals; it deals with the tragic death of Rea (his daughter) and her new husband Herbert on their honeymoon.  So Howell's is a freshingly original older voice in describing this couple's NDE and their family's asistance in transporting them to Heaven.  

His family's verification of their astral vision is more impressive to me than anything reported on this site, and both Roger (Rondele) and I find their reported soul retrievals more convincing than what can be read here.  For example, just read Howell's description of an astral visit from his ex-wife Nellie before Rea's fatal auto accident:

"On at least two occasions this radiant mother (Nellie) had come to Rea in visible, tangible form and talked with her.  In 1933, I was privileged to be present at one of these heavenly visits by Mother Nellie.  Together with Rea I talked with Nellie, fully recognizing her face and form and voice.  I saw her place he hand on Rea's head in blessing, and I saw her give Rea a flower, a calendula, which we pressed and kept.  At that time three other members of our family were present, including Rea's second mother, Agnes, and they all saw Nellie and talked with her, as Rea and I did.  We were all wide awake and walked about the room with Nellie (p. 25)."

Here is Howell's  intriguing but enigmatic description of the problem of loss of soul during the dying process:  

"During earth life the spirit of man acting upon the brain and body...produces a reaction which we call mind.  the mind builds a mental body in which the mind lives and demonstrates.  If the hour of transition overtakes the spirit of man...without the spirit body being built up in which he can live and pass over and demonstrate in realms of light--then that unprepared spirit must take refuge in the mental body which man's mind has built.  The spirit that has never differentiated itself from its mind may be quite at home and even happy in the mental body.  That mental body, however, is inadequate for the spirit of man to live and to progress in beyond the mental plane.  In it he cannot travel to, or enter, the higher planes of spirit in Heavenly Light.  In it he cannot find his soul or fuse with it (106-107)."

In future posts I will relate this description to the way Howell's family assists Rea and Herbert in their transition to the next life.

Don
.  

Don,


Berserk wrote on Apr 19^th, 2007 at 7:57pm:

If discarnate souls retain the same consciousness and sensibilities that they had on earth, they would repeatedly and unmistakably communicate with their earthly loved ones.   Their failure to do so is one of the best arguments AGAINST an afterlife--unless they are prevented from doing so by loss of memory (temporary or permenant), by a limited astral consciousness that prevents such contacts, by a lack of knowledge about how to make such a contact, or by strong spirit teaching that such contact is ill-advised.

  I don't see how the lack of repeated and unmistakable communication from a deceased person to an earthy loved one demonstrates anything that could be described as "one of the best arguments AGAINST an afterlife."  Lack of such communication only demonstrates that one of the two people involved in such communication, the dead person OR the physically living person, is for some reason unable to participate, but, it doesn't "prove" which of the two participants lost the ability.  It could be as simple as something about our existence within physical reality makes it extremely difficult for us to be aware of the deceased person's attempt to communicate.   What could that thing be?

Perhaps someone on the other side of the Afterlife/No Afterlife debate could say:

If incarnate souls retain the same consciousness and sensibilities that they had when they existed in the Afterlife/Prelife, they would repeatedly and unmistakably communicate with their departed loved ones.   Their failure to do so is one of the best arguments AGAINST the possibility of maintaining the same consciousness and sensibilities during incarnation within physical reality --unless they are prevented from doing so by loss of memory (temporary or permenant), by a limited astral consciousness that prevents such contacts, by a lack of knowledge about how to make such a contact, or by strong spirit teaching that such contact is ill-advised.  

Maybe it is we the physically living who have lost something at birth Here?  

Maybe which hypothesis we side with says more about how our own beliefs color and distort the meaning of whatever the evidence might prove?  

Bruce

Berserk wrote on Apr 19^th, 2007 at 11:24pm:

[Duh Bears:] "The memory loss theory is B.S. I agree, with you Matthew." It seems like most of yoiur replies are mindless echoes of views that reinforce your prejudices.  The consensus of Sweenborg's astral insights, Classical Channeling, Robert Bruce's OBEs, and some NDEs will not be routed by your dngmatic posturing.   But let's press you to actually frame an orignal thought. Why are ADCs so rare are the first year of a loved one's passing?   Don

Yeah, I admit I don't know much about this topic.. So what I stated my opinion on what seemed more plausible to my belief.. I just think since our consciousness survives after death we should be able to have our memory still intact of our loved ones and be able to watch over them as well..

Don:

You make it sound like they would have no choice in the manner. If you crossed over would you continually try to make contact with the people you used to know, or would you allow them to live their lives while you continued with your own?

Even when they do try to make contact not everybody is able to communicate with them. I didn't always have the ability. It wasn''t until my energetic system and chakras were developed  that I obtained the ability.  

Does Flushing New York mean anything to you? These words might be a random occurence.


Berserk wrote on Apr 19^th, 2007 at 7:57pm:

Albert, If discarnate souls retain the same consciousness and sensibilities that they had on earth, they would repeatedly and unmistakably communicate with their earthly loved ones.   Their failure to do so is one of the best arguments AGAINST an afterlife--unless they are prevented from doing so by loss of memory (temporary or permenant), by a limited astral consciousness that prevents such contacts, by a lack of knowledge about how to make such a contact, or by strong spirit teaching that such contact is ill-advised.  Matthew's DOCTRINAL rejection of this problem just begs the question, though I sympathize with his motives.   I don't know what the solution is, but we must acknowledge the importance of this problem and we must not cop out by trivializating the multiple confirmation of postmortem memory loss, whether temporary or permanent.  Such problems certainly call channeled communications into  question and also bring us back to the topic of this thread--what our mind loses or suppresses after death. Don

It's always encouraging when Bruce says what I wanted to say but didn't.  Thanks, Bruce.

In regression work we always discover what we seek. This is direct experience, and can be verified by everyone wo does this stuff. That doesn't mean that it isn't the way it seems, but rather that we force the impressions to fit our expectations so that in this way we can make sense of them.

Thus I see my father, dead for decades, just as I expect to see him. It's doubtless him, but his actual nature is not as a lump of ectoplasmic glop floating in front of my retinas. He is actually present in an abstract manner that needs this interpretation to make me perceive him.

Michael Newton's boks all take the attitude that the afterlife is a quasi-physical place in which people go through certain procedures, classes etc. He uses a directive method and finds this true of everyone. In my hundreds of cases, using totally non-directive methods I have only had two or three people (literally) tomention any kind of preparation or decision to return to embodiment.

In Bruce's recounts of stuck souls he locates them in a manner that he can understand and works with them in that context. I have never seen a "Park" or the "Helpers" who work there because I have never looked for them, and they have never been reported to me by others in regression. That's just a matter of where we place our attention. It does not mean that they are unreal. In the same way, I have never encountered Snidely Whiplash in the astral, but I have no doubt that Bruce's recollections are both accurate and valid. I just don't share his mental space. - Or maybe his sense of humor is more active than mine.

I have asked regressed people to describe the "afterlife world" to me, and have received a huge number of plausible but seemingly conflictiing reports. A few people who are Michael Newton fans reported his scenarios, but nobody else did.

To me, that means that we bring to a spiritual encounter the responsive surface of our intellect by which to sense events, and the predisposition of our attitudes  allows us to fit to the spiritual world in only a few limited ways. A specific example: Bruce uses an analogy of a series of "disks" that have linkages that branch to support the afterlife structure. I use an abstract hierarchy of sets wth attributive relationships. It's the same thing, just a different perspective. And perspective means the BST associated with who we are in the world.

There is an unfortunate tendency for us to get involved with intellectual discourses about who said what about the whichness of whether. This is a poor substitute for experience.

There's a story about a monk who wanted to know how many teeth a horse had. So he read Aristotle, Plato, Plutarch and St Thomas Aquinas' writings But the answer wasn't there. So he finally reported to the Abbott that the problem could not be solved. In the same way, we have some brilliant intellectual giants here, banging one author against another. Unfortunately, what we hear is only the sound of books clashing. Standing back a bit, what we can see is two BSTs in conflict, just as we see in the spirit world. You don't have to be dead to be a stuck soul!

To find out the answer, instead of horsing around, I challenge out intellectual giants to go out to the barn and look.

dave

Oh yes - I forgot to add, that Bruce' Book Five is available. It tells you how to find the barn.

My copy was even autographed!
:-)
d

Dave,

I find this exciting.  You’ve presented a formal structure for thinking about action and being in a non-physical state.  You’re doing this drawing from psychology, physics and it seems like some of Alfred North Whitehead.   That gives me a way to think of how the non-physical might work without so much dependency on the physical images and metaphors that we come up with in efforts to describe non-physical experiences.  My hearty thanks.  

I googled “primary process” and came up with one antiquated Freudian definition and the rest dealing with our election system.  I wonder if there’s a Primary Process for Dummies out there that you could recommend.

I have one or three more questions but I’m constrained for time right now.  Since this is getting a bit off topic I might post them on Betson’s new thread.  I hope that’s all right with her. Thanks again.

Rob

I Just now was going to post up an article somewhat related to this topic I'm reading here. thought it was more than coincidence. I'll call it Emotions and DNA. no, maybe I should call it spiritualized DNA.
this idea to bring the logic of biological science to marry the emotional spiritalized human to see this is a concept of connections of Pantheism. (my new word I have to look up)

love, alysia

Don:

Regarding the below, are you saying that Christ no longer knows that he was Jesus of Nazareth, Mary no longer knows that she was his mother, Paul no longer knows that he was one of the authors of the new testament?

Losing limiting/false psychological thought patterns and losing memories are two different things.  Certainly a spirit can understand that it is no longer a body based being without forgetting that it once made use of one.

If spirits lose their human memories, how can they maintain a basis for having some sort of working relationship with the physical World?

I think you're going too far in your efforts to establish that anybody who communicates with spirits are communicating with imposters. Perhaps a case by case approach is needed.


[quote author=Berserk link=1176784696/15#15 date=1177014499]
“Now he has to get ready to shed a large part of this more familiar self....The traveller must face the...demise of the personal self, because it is becoming no longer tenable to live within its limitations...What is meant by the `personal self?’  It is the sum of all the person’s memories of the experiences, thoughts, and feelings which made up his sense of himself...during his past life on
earth...It is a kind of oblivion, but a conscious oblivion...The man leaves his desire body.  He is perfectly conscious.  He passes into a great stillness...He cannot think.  No faculty is alive, yet  he knows that he is...and his soul is filled with a wonderful peace (Paul Beard, 123, 130-31).”

recoverer wrote on Apr 20^th, 2007 at 6:55pm:

Don: Regarding the below, are you saying that Christ no longer knows that he was Jesus of Nazareth, Mary no longer knows that she was his mother, Paul no longer knows that he was one of the authors of the new testament? Losing limiting/false psychological thought patterns and losing memories are two different things.  Certainly a spirit can understand that it is no longer a body based being without forgetting that it once made use of one. If spirits lose their human memories, how can they maintain a basis for having some sort of working relationship with the physical World? Perhaps a case by case approach is needed. I think you're going too far in your efforts to establish that anybody who communicates with spirits are communicating with imposters. [quote author=Berserk link=1176784696/15#15 date=1177014499] “Now he has to get ready to shed a large part of this more familiar self....The traveller must face the...demise of the personal self, because it is becoming no longer tenable to live within its limitations...What is meant by the `personal self?’  It is the sum of all the person’s memories of the experiences, thoughts, and feelings which made up his sense of himself...during his past life on earth...It is a kind of oblivion, but a conscious oblivion...The man leaves his desire body.  He is perfectly conscious.  He passes into a great stillness...He cannot think.  No faculty is alive, yet  he knows that he is...and his soul is filled with a wonderful peace (Paul Beard, 123, 130-31).”

Nice post, and I agree with you a 100 %.. Because my good ol' deceased gpa tries to get my attention by giving me signs and visiting me in my dreams.. One dream I received PUL, from him!! It was amazing!!!

"During earth life the spirit of man acting upon the brain and body...produces a reaction which we call mind.  the mind builds a mental body in which the mind lives and demonstrates.  If the hour of transition overtakes the spirit of man...without the spirit body being built up in which he can live and pass over and demonstrate in realms of light--then that unprepared spirit must take refuge in the mental body which man's mind has built.  The spirit that has never differentiated itself from its mind may be quite at home and even happy in the mental body.  That mental body, however, is inadequate for the spirit of man to live and to progress in beyond the mental plane.  In it he cannot travel to, or enter, the higher planes of spirit in Heavenly Light.  In it he cannot find his soul or fuse with it (106-107)."


Don-

I wonder what Vincent meant by certain occasions when the spirit body was not built up at the time of death?  Does he describe this body?  Does he say how we can be sure it is built up before we die?  

He clearly is differentiating it from the mental body.  

Can you clarify?  

Thanks,
R

Thanks for the encouragement Rob-Here's some quick ways to experience Primary Process without the use of drugs or becoming dead -

(1) Go dancing. As you dance you stop thinking "right foot, left foot" and  just DO IT. That's primary.
(2) Lift a weight. As you lift, notice that your mind shuts down and everything is focussed on DOING.
(3) Have a really fantastic sexual encounter. Everything dissolves into DOING and BEING.
(4) Meditate - the state in which the "things of the world fall away" leaves a primary residue.
(5) Go rescue a few stuck souls and notice how they are thinking. That's Primary Process, 2nd person.
(6) Or one of my favorites, D T Suzuki told us, "When you drop fart, you don't think. It just come."
(7) (If you are in good health) hold your breath until you suffocate. (Ugh! - but it works.) A healthy body will reset and return to life.
(8) The process of past life regression leads to a primary level of functioning for both the "regresee" and also the spooks encountered in the spirit world.

The problem with trying to do this intellectually is that the experience is not on a level that is intellectually accessible. That's why the Zen people invented koans. I can load myself down with quotations galore, and I can talk about Hindu Koshas, Spiritual levels of the Astral World, how it feels to dream, and how the banks of the river form a "memory" that resembles our own, but in the end they are nothing but  ideas on how life feels, and often only with respect to other people who tried to express them using a language inadequate to the task - and that is most definitely NOT primary. In fact, it usually isn't even good logic or an accurate rendition of the underlying feelings.

Personally, when I start to feel that I really can tell the world how it is, I  recall the tale of the ass laden with textbooks. The brilliant astronomer Eddington suggested that the solution to this is to make certain that we can insert numbers into our ideas and use them to figure something out. If not, all we have is interesting daydreams.

My personal work is to reduce these ideas to a topology of self-arranging, self-originating, points of information in a more or less Riemannian space, using only probability and relational terms. If you really like math, it offers a wonderful problem in dynamic set operations. The resulting model also happens to explain creativity, scientific growth and similar stuff, which is where I started my inquiry. My 1987 PhD thesis in that area is available at University Microfilms, or their successor, but you'd have to dig a bit for it in the "irregular" section. It gives the basic primary mechanisms in detail, but is awfully basic. There's an update in one chapter and Appendix of my "Developmental Psychopathology" (2006 - BookSurge.com, a text for regression hypnotherapists) and I'm working on a far more general version with more of the corners tucked in for past life researchers.

My suggestion is to not go and try to read about it. Instead, meditate. Experience primary process at the level of nirvakalpa samadhi, and be done with the whole issue. Then it makes sense, and all the preceeding bafflegab falls away.

dave

dave

Hi Don  When we go to the spirit world at our death,we forget nothing of our time on earth,nothing is ever forgotten,we are in spirit as we were in physical,i know this as a medium,when spirit come through they bring many memories from there earth life to prove who they are ,so we do not forget,our memories and our personalities go with us to spirit at the time of death and we never lose this.

Love and God bless      Love Juditha

Juditha - a question -

I don't know what trance level you work at, but as a person actively using these skills, you definitely are using "primary processing"when you contact other spirits. Would you be inclined to agree with my general statement that we "live our thoughts when using primary process" as opposed to doing it abstractly in our heads?  I'd expect this to be true of both the medium and the spirits contacted.

To my experience this makes sense, but I'd be interested in your views.
d

thanks Dave for letting us know about primary process. it's a new phrase for me, but I like the way you introduced it. love, alysia

Hi Dave I receive thoughts from spirit ,that are communicating with me and also visions in my mind ,thats how i talk to spirit,i only just read what you wrote me as i would have answered you earlier,spirit give me clues who they are by using there earth memories. Sometimes i actually see the spirit im talking to but i see them from a side way glance mostly and sometimes a front veiw as well. Ive actually had my hair gently pulled and taps on my forehead and sometimes my shirt has been lifted up slightly by spirit.

Its hard sometimes to work out ,whether some are your thoughts and not spirit as every medium goes through this and that is why i write excactly what i receive,i have to trust in spirit,which i do now but i used to have ny doubts sometimes.

I remember when i went on stage the first time ,this woman walked in and straight away i was given the names Rosemary and Daisie and shown this old farm house scene with a swing and animals and i thought "no its me whats thinking this and i said nothing to this woman,then i thought "no i have to trust in spirit" so i told this woman these two names of rosemary and daisie and of the farm scene and she said that rosemary and daisie were her two aunts and they brought her up and she lived on a farm with a swing.So ive learned to trust in myself as a medium.

Love and God bless  Love Juditha

Dave:

Speaking of messages, recently my guidance showed me your name. I believe because they thought it would be a good idea for me to read what you wrote about primary process. Another thing that sort of relates to you. One time they showed me the cover of Michael Newton's third book. I believe the purpose was so I could find how directed his hypnosis is, which is something you have stated before.



wrote on Apr 23^rd, 2007 at 1:54pm:

Hi Dave I receive thoughts from spirit ,that are communicating with me and also visions in my mind ,thats how i talk to spirit,i only just read what you wrote me as i would have answered you earlier,spirit give me clues who they are by using there earth memories. Sometimes i actually see the spirit im talking to but i see them from a side way glance mostly and sometimes a front veiw as well. Love and God bless  Love Juditha

Hi Juditha-  I'll try to be more clear -

The term "primary process" is an ancient Freudian inheritance that sort of vanished when B F Skinner came out with studies in behavioral modification through rewards. What it initially referred to is the level of function of the  inner "self" before there is any thinking or other specific training to get along. In the same way, primary processing is the kind of self directing and orienting operation that we use when we are in a deep meditation in which the body and learned coping mechanisms aren't being used - or when we are wandering about in the astral without a body and responding to the circumstances in which we find ourselves.

Primary process is not a popular concept in modern psychology because almost nobody looks "inside the mind" any more, preferring to use Skinner's idea that the mind is just a "black box" that acts like a computer, and can be programmed. That's where a lot of modern therapy focusses - as well as giving pills to change functioning. The result is that therapy is oriented to learning to cope with a problem, as opposed to getting rid of it, with chemicals to numb us so we don't care, and we can return to work as productive members of society. Thus we are generating a huge army of the "walking wounded" who live on mind-altering medications.

Psychologists who do spiritual work, and psychoanalysts in general (this is where I got caught up in these ideas), are generally "intrapsychic theorists", meaning that we are interested in the inner workings of the mind, and the manner in which mental disorders are explained by conflicts and
circular definitions in the primary process level. We work to totally resolve issues in exactly the same way as Bruce gets souls unstuck. The process takes effort and time, but actually gets rid of the conflicts and so on by working with emotional components, as opposed to thinking. The fact that psychoanalytic therapy turns out to be essentially the same as soul retrieval interests me, since it suggests the way that everything in the spiritual world that involves the life and times of the soul must occur.

I was trying to find a way to express this, and was suggesting that one way to do it would be to think of it as "living the thought", in the sense that in that state we tend to think and act through total involvement of our entire being. The idea that I was toying with was that your access to Spirit must be in a state of meditation, that is, with the "inner voice" quieted so that you can perceive clearly. (Some people call this the "sound of silence".)  When the inner voice, which is the mechanism of abstract thinking, is silent, only the primary level of function remains.

My basic question was whether you would agree with me that the nature of function at this level is not like abstract thought, but rather that "thinking" is the same as acting, and involves a total involvement of our entire "being". - (Bad description, language is inadequate here, but I hope that you can follow my thought.) So I am suggesting that on the primary level of the existence of the soul, thought and action are equivalent, and occur in the face of raw emotion.

If that makes sense, I'm interested in what your feelings are.

PUL
dave

Hi Dave   I hope i get this right for you,the only thing of acting same as the thinking is that you actually feel the symptons of what the spirit died of also the emotions like tears and sadness which you feel whilst talking to spirit,so i agree with you that the thinking is the same as the acting,i'm sorry if i have answered wrong dave, im a little bit slow on the uptake sometimes and i dont always understand the words. i get spirit come to me in meditation and even when im writing on the afterlife.

Love and God bless   love juditha

Rather than debate what has been alleged in this thread, I will focus on the astral vision of Rev. Howell Vincent and his family during their deathbed vigil, first over his daughter Rea and later over her new husband Herbert.  This couple died from wounds sustained in a car crash during their honeymoon in 1941.  In this post I will quote excerpts form Howell's report on Rea's passing.

"Unseen and silent, a lovely procession of joyous brides were always there undergirding her with the power of their triumphant joy as little by little she detached her spirit body from its broken physical counterpart...Little by little the temporal substance was transmuted for her into eternal substance."  

"Three times during those darkest hours of her lonely struggle, Rea turned to me and asked, `Woofus, how much longer has this got to to last?'  I replied, `Just a little while. Walk  bravely, my darling, ...underneath are the everlasting arms.'  At the last she said, `But I cannot see you now; I am trying to see you, Daddy.'  `Yes,' I replied, `you will soon see clearly the beauty that is all around you.'...At that moment of Rea's triumph over mortality the gracious presence or those brides, her celestial escort, was clearly revealed to her..."

"At that time, Rea was standing in the hospital room beside us.  Her physical body lay on the bed still and lifeless, while she stood beside it in her spirit body that had been derived from the physical by transmutation.  These processes of transmutation had been active for years but more especially so since the accident...Brilliant light of many colors poured down upon her and she grew in grace and power and radiance as she absorbed this light..."

"We of earth were permitted to help her.  First we had to release her from the bonds of our fervent desire to keep her with us.  And second, we had to help her faith by lifting her with our faith.  We had to assist her to gain faith-altitude, as it were, from which she could glide over the chasm on this her first celestial flight. ...Across the chasm we could see a group of people watching with joyous interest. ...Foremost in this group stood Nellie, Rea's mother.  There is no describing her radiant beauty..."

"We asked Nellie, `Why don't you come and take hold of Rea and help her start?'  Nellie shook her head; that was not allowed; no help could be given from her side.  Rea had to make her own crossing 'in Light,' with such help as we through love and faith could give her from this side.  The chasm that Rea still had to cross, in part resembled..the barrier of an inferiority complex that has to be attacked and overcome by the person himself."

"She [Rea] turned to us with a childish curtsy, smiled and waved, then turning toward her mother Nellie on those gleaming highlands, she leaned forward as though to take a step and one of her brothers standing just behind her gave her a gentle, loving push, and instantly she was gliding in the rhythm and formation of the bride's ritual dance.  Over the valley now robbed of its shadows, a bride among brides, danced our beautiful Rea into Emmanuel's Land, into the arms of her mother, Nellie ("Lighted Passage," pp. 79-91)."  

In my next planned post, I will report Howell's excerpts about Herbert's passing.

Don

Rea’s new husband, Herbert, lingered on a few days after Rea’s passing.  Rea’s death was initally kept from him, but he soon sensed her passing.  “Herbert was not only stricken with immeasurable grief but also obsessed with the idea that we all surely must blame him, even hate him, for what he considered his bungling in bringing such a catastrophe [= car crash] to Rea and all of us...
Herbert’s second birth was similar to that of Rea.  The difference was due to the undeveloped state of Herbert’s spirit body...because of lack of experience during earth life.   Herbert’s spirit had been engrossed in experiencing practical lessons, and was almost wholly realistic, depending on the physical body to contain and express the motivations of his spirit.”

“Even while the doctors and nurses were doing all they could for Herbert’s physical body, we saw beings of a similar function on the spirit side building up Herbert’s spirit body, more especially the right side.  It was like plastic surgery.  Herbert’s spirit mind responded to all these helpful services
and the color of his spirit body was seen to improve to progressively brighter shades.”

Herbert asked, `Where is Rea?’  We answered, `Rea is here; can’t you see Rea?  She is right here.’  `But I cannot see her.  Rea!  Rea!  Where are you?’  She answered, `I am here.’  Then Herbert said, `I see Rea now.’  But at that time it was only a glimpse now and then.  We told Herbert, `Mother Nellie and Grandmother Nesbit are here; look for them.’  He then saw Rea’s mother Nellie and exclaimed, `Oh I am going now--soon now, soon!’”...

“We were able to give him help and confidence from this world...Rea was not able to reach Herbert but so very anxious to help.  We saw Herbert’s being disturbed, due to his spirit body’s being too weak to get over the  chasm.  we were given to understand a general outline of the fixed laws and their equations involved in the transition of spirit, and also the possible solutions of
some of the problems arising therefrom.  It was the complexity of these problems with no solution in sight that disturbed Herbert.”

“He saw Rea in her spirit body of Light sufficiently transmuted to permit her development in spirit beyond the mental plane.  He could join her in his mental body for a while but not proceed with her into the truly spiritual Heavens.  His mental body was very strong. ; but how could he galvanize his impotent spirit body to cross the chasm to her side?  Mother Nellie was not permitted to help him from above, although she stood closer to him than Rea or the others.”

“Herbert was floundering, and one of us watching on this side was given to know that he must help Herbert’s infant spirit body reach the arms of Mother Nellie, on the other side of the chasm.   He drew himself into the vibration of  Nellie...and approached her, pushing Herbert, in his spirit body, ahead of him.  By an extreme effort of faith, trained in spiritual exercise, he had in his spirit
body just enough power to push Herbert into Mother  Nellie’s arms.  When Nellie was brought thus into contact with Herbert’s spirit body,  through this act of faith from this side, as  soon as she actually touched Herbert, she picked him up and held him as a baby son, his head on her left shoulder, his body obliquely across her body, and his legs across her right thigh.  Herbert was quiet then.  Though weak, he was conscious and happy with Mother Nellie.  He could then
rcognize and watch Rea.  Nellie continued to care for Herbert until his spirit body was strengthened into the power of a resurrection body through further transmution.  This was accomplished at the time of the funeral in the Church at South Sutton, New Hampshire, September 2, two days later (“Lighted Passage,” pp. 93, 103, 108).”

The retrieval or, better, assistance offered this couple raises at least 4 important issues:

(1) It implies that the mental body must be discarded and replaced by a spirit body before progress can be made.  

(2) It illustrates the role of the prayers and efforts of earthly loved ones in facilitating the upward "ascent" of our deceased loved ones.

(3) It also alerts us the limitations imposed on our discarnate loved ones in assisting our transition.  This of course raises questions about the advantages and disadvantages of being discarnate in the performance of soul retrievals.

(4) It raises the question of the absence of Herbert's deceased loved ones from his postmortem greeting party.  Were they absent because their memory of Herbert was impaired on their spirit plane? Because they lacked the strong bond that Rea's family had established with her?  Because they were on a lower plane in which souls are not informed about their loved ones' passing?  Such quesions could be mutliplied.   The point is this: the absence of loved ones in this greeting party is as important an issue as those who are present.

Don

With respect, Don, I think it implies a bit less, and we get back to the problem of verification.

(1) There is the implication that there exists  a "mental body" of various strengths, and that there exists a "spirit body" (aka "Spirit body of Light") and that these are differentiable in a (hopefully) non-trivial manner.

(2) There is the implication that there exist spiritual (?) doctors and nurses who operate on spiritual bodies in a manner seemingly analogous to physical practices.

(3) It implies that "brighter shades" exist, and that they are meaningful.

(4) There is the implication of a "chasm" across which the "spirit body" had to get across, but we do not know its nature nor why to cross it.

(5) We are told that some problems have no visible solution and that this can disturb the individual making the transition across the chasm.

(6) (a) It implies that the "spirit body of Light" is transmutable in a manner that permits development. (b) and that this development extends beyond the mental plane.  

(7) The existence of a mental plane is implied, and is located below the "spiritual heavens".

(8) It is implied that the spirit body might be impotent.

(9) It is implied that dead relatives may be present at death, but their abilities are limited by laws in that place.

(10) Spirit bodies are given relative ages, such as "infant".

(11) The spirit body is implied to give off vibrations by which it can be recognized.

(12) Contact interaction between spirits is implied.

(13) The body of a spirit is like the physical body.

(14) There is an embodiment called a "resurrection body" which occurs through some kind of "transmutation".

I don't wish to criticize the literary value of the selection, but it seems necessary to point out that it uses a vast number of terms without any type of definition.  To try to draw conclusions from this array of ill-defined concepts seems to me to be a poor idea.

This criticism does not argue that there is anything wrong with the selection nor its content, but simply that we can't really tell what it means.

In your conclusions, I'd suggest that whatever the mental body is and what discarding it might mean, and by what alternative  it is to be replaced may be true, but will remain meaningless until we can define what these terms mean.

I do not understand what the "upward 'ascent'" actually means. I can only assume that you mean some sort of spiritual induction into a place that is "above us" - and I don't know how
above" might be defined.

The selection states that there are limitations to what some of the characters could do. That this raises questions about being incarnate or discarnate is a non sequitur.

Similarly, questions about the presence or absence of Herbert's dead relations are your own, and carry the implicit assumption that not mentioning them means that they were not present. Your suggestions about reasons and their importance for not being present are speculation on your part.

Your statement that, "The point is this: the absence of loved ones in this greeting party is as important an issue as those who are present. " is a non sequitur.

I have great respect for people who are widely read and who know a lot of facts. Years ago I read or scanned the entire U C Berkeley Psych Library's Metaphysics section, every book. That is a great way to develop sensitivity, awareness of the state of the art, and common idioms in use. But it is not a way to do science, and in particular, it is not a substitute for methodology. That fact that ten million people write books claim, on the basis of well documented personal experience, that all crows are black birds, is not science. It is merely opinion - not even theory, because there is no test by which to falsify it. Maybe one albino crow lives in Patagonia, I don't know.

When doing bibliometric research, it might be more useful to  give terms and usage freqencies, as well as the associations used that seem to define what the terms mean, and how much variance is expected within and between authors etc. However, that does not validate the terms as having a real meaning - merely that a lot of people use them. As an example, a lot of French people use the term "Merde", but they do not actually imply an experience of excrement, nor that they have stepped in some etc.

Personally, I'd like to see where you go with these ideas after developing the ability to meditate deeply - at the "sound of silence" level and beyond, and after you have had some of these experiences. This is not an attempt to be snotty (God knows I have a long way to go!), but to encourage you to actually go and see, rather than quoting experiences with which you have limited familiarity. For some of us this is an almost impossible task (I am the worst case example I know of) but it can be done. I earnestly wish you all possible success in this venture.

Respectfully,
dave

[Dave:] “There is the implication that there exists  a "mental body" of various strengths, and that there exists a "spirit body" (aka "Spirit body of Light") and that these are differentiable in a (hopefully) non-trivial manner...(a) It implies that the "spirit body of Light" is transmutable in amanner that permits development. (b) and that this development extends beyond the mental
plane.”  
_________________________

The astral guidance offered for Rea and Herbert by Howell’s family members during their deathbed vigil raises as many questions as it solves.   What makes it unique is that it involves a group astral vision of the same series of transitional events to the afterlife.  As already noted, this family circle had previously experienced the materialiation of an astral flower from Nellie that was pressed and preserved.  Howell’s astral and retrieval gifts seem genuine.   This isnight is important to me due to my belief that all the retrievals reported on the AK board are bogus--cartoony and woefully deficient in accompanying verifications.   I will never learn to perform retrievals if I have no respect for alleged retrievals.  So my interest in Howell’s book is deeply personal.  

The assistance offered the dying Rea and Herbert by Howell’s circle implies that the integration of spirit and soul is essential to making the transition across “the chasm.”  Howell claims that his group actually wintesses the spirit body’s “transmutation.”  I am not clear about the validity of his metaphysical distinctions.  He does not define his terms.   But I am grateful for the attention he draws to the alleged need for such a “transmutation” and “integration” experience.  

In many NDEs, the tunnel experience is followed by an encounter with a Light which the patient identifies as his higher self.   This experience may not be the equivalent of reported encounters with a Being of Light (often Christ).  Rather, it may represent an alternative take on Howell’s observations about the integration of Rea and Herbert with their “soul.”  Here is Howell’s description of his own expereince of his “spirit’s” integration with his “soul:”  

“The integration of soul and spirit in man is an experience of growth which each individual must seek and obtain for himself before he is freed from the obligation of mundane life...I was praying in the Technique of Light, using an exercise of Convsiousness Breathing...Like a stroke of lightning, the vision came unexpectedly...Its effect abides with me even in the writing out of this
testimony...I experienced a spiritual sense of awareness that was similar to sight.  I sensed a dazzling whte light that enveloped my whole being, and permeated every cell of my body.   All energies of life were brought into perfect poise and seemed to be expanded infinitely.  Volumes of truth that were new to me swept across my consciousness as floodlights sweep across the stage.”  

“I could discern no form with my eyes but my spirit knew that the spiritual light had a form that merged with my physical body, a perfect complement interpenetrating each limb and organ and cell...It was not somthing or somebody apart from me...It was a rather familiar remembered self,
that I had lost for ages, and now having contacted, I recognize `her’ to be my soul...It is a man’soul in him integrating with his spirit in him...Before that time I did not know that i had a soul distinctly different from my spirit (131-137).”

[Dave:] “There is the implication that there exist spiritual (?) doctors and nurses who operate on spiritual bodies in a manner seemingly analogous to physical practices.”
________________________________________________________

During his NDE, Howard Storm’s astral body is shredded by multiple spirit assailants and he is left barely aware that he still exists.  A few years ago, an AK poster reported witnessing a similar dismemberment of an astral body which discouraged him from further astral exploration.  In Storm’s case, when Jesus comes to the rescue, He repairs Storm’s badly damaged astral body.   Like other astral adepts,  Robert Bruce reports visiting astral “Hospitals during his OBEs.  In my thread on medical researcher, Phyllis’s NDE, she reports  spirit doctors performing healing "surgery" on her astral body.   As as result, she no longer needs the planned earthly surgery when she returns to her body.  Howell seems to bear independent witness to such astral surgery, though the “surgeons” are inviisible to him.  .
 
[Dave:] “There is the implication of a "chasm" across which the "spirit body" had to get across, but we do not know its nature nor why to cross it.”
_______________________________________

I suspect that this “chasm”, “the tunnel” of NDEs, and the “inky void” of many OBEs are images for different astral conditions that are easily confused and wrongly merged.   If this “chasm” is a barrier that is hard for some to cross and cannot be bridged with the help of discarnate loved ones, then it seems vital to learn more about how this impasse should be handled.   Howell’s team
ease the couple’s transition.  But how would Rea and Herbert have fared without their earthly assistance?   Hopefully, they would have only experienced a  delay, but this question needs to be settled by astral research and not by New Age feel-good dogmatism.    

[Dave:] “ It is implied that dead relatives may be present at death, but their abilities are limited by laws in that place.”
_______________

Yes, this implication impresses me because I would not predict it on the basis that Howell’s circle is merely imagining a bogus series of astral events.   Yet New Age projectors sometimes allege that discarnate helpers have some disadvantages in comparison with earthly wannabe retrievers.  

[Dave:] “Similarly, questions about the presence or absence of Herbert's dead relations are your own, and carry the implicit assumption that not mentioning them means that they were not present. Your suggestions about reasons and their importance for not being present are speculation on your part.
____________________________________________________

I am trying to clarify issues raised by Howell; I was not making any dogmatic claims.  True, in any given case, no one can know whether other relatives lurk unnoticed in the astral background.   But I am drawing attention to the bigger picture.  What determines the composition of an NDE greeting party.   NDE reports often mention the presence of only one or just few deceased relatives in the greeting party.    The spirits present are often identified.   The question of the absence of other relatives whose presence might be expected seems to be overlooked and is worth investigating.  

There are 4 possible reasons for their absence.
(1) Their earth memories have become dormant.  ES and Classical Channeling support the view that such memory loss is the norm.   In the case of channeling, this claim seems to be in tension with the chatty access mediums allegedly have to discarnate spirits.  Is this contradiction to be resolved by supposing that mediums contact the discarnate loved one’s mind in a manner of which that loved one is not consciously aware?  I don’t know.  ES imples  that “the Lord” may on occasion permit memory restoration, but the circumstances of this restoration are clouded in mystery.

(2) For other reasons, they do not know about the passing of their close family member.  Perhaps, they need to be informed by discarnate spirits who specialize in such greetings.

(3) Perhaps, participation in such a greeting party is possible for residents of some spirit planes and not  others.  For example, such participation may be impossible for residents of lower hellish planes.  .

(4) Perhaps, the absentee discarnate relatives were not as emotionally close to the newly dead as the latter imagined.  

Don

Quote:

The assistance offered the dying Rea and Herbert by Howell’s circle implies that the integration of spirit and soul is essential to making the transition across “the chasm.”  Howell claims that his group actually wintesses the spirit body’s “transmutation.”  I am not clear about the validity of his metaphysical distinctions.  He does not define his terms.   But I am grateful for the attention he draws to the alleged need for such a “transmutation” and “integration” experience.   In many NDEs, the tunnel experience is followed by an encounter with a Light which the patient identifies as his higher self.   This experience may not be the equivalent of reported encounters with a Being of Light (often Christ).  Rather, it may represent an alternative take on Howell’s observations about the integration of Rea and Herbert with their “soul.”  Here is Howell’s description of his own expereince of his “spirit’s” integration with his “soul:”     “The integration of soul and spirit in man is an experience of growth which each individual must seek and obtain for himself before he is freed from the obligation of mundane life...I was praying in the Technique of Light, using an exercise of Convsiousness Breathing...Like a stroke of lightning, the vision came unexpectedly...Its effect abides with me even in the writing out of this testimony...I experienced a spiritual sense of awareness that was similar to sight.  I sensed a dazzling whte light that enveloped my whole being, and permeated every cell of my body.   All energies of life were brought into perfect poise and seemed to be expanded infinitely.  Volumes of truth that were new to me swept across my consciousness as floodlights sweep across the stage.”     “I could discern no form with my eyes but my spirit knew that the spiritual light had a form that merged with my physical body, a perfect complement interpenetrating each limb and organ and cell...It was not somthing or somebody apart from me...It was a rather familiar remembered self, that I had lost for ages, and now having contacted, I recognize `her’ to be my soul...It is a man’soul in him integrating with his spirit in him...Before that time I did not know that i had a soul distinctly different from my spirit (131-137).”

Don, it seems I may not be off topic after all, so I'll ask my question again.  Could you give the meaning of spirit and soul from the Old and New Testaments?  

Thanks,
Kathy

Kathy,

It is not productive to analyze biblical terms like “soul” and “spirit” in detail.  More intriguiing is the question of where our soul or spiritual body is located.   My views on this question are controversial.  So I’ll quote the relevant texts and let you decide.

(1) First, it is important to recognize that Jesus embraces the soul’s preexistence:
“As Jesus was walking along, he saw a man who had been blind from birth.  `Teacher,’ his disciples asked Him, `Why was this man born blind?  Was it the result of his own sins or those of his parents?’  `It was not because of his own sins or his parents’ sins,’ Jesus answered, `He was born blind so the power of God could seen in him (John 9:2).’”

Jesus’ disciples take for granted the possiblity of sinning prior to birth.  Jesus does not refute this possibility, but merely insists that the blind man’s current predicament has nothing to do with sin. Thus, both Jesus and His disciples assume that the soul preexists prior to birth.

(2) Reincarnation is not an option in the ancient Palestinian Jewish worldview.   But ancient Jews do believe that the soul, in its preexistent state, is capable of developing character and receiving an earthly destiny. In Jeremiah’s prophetic call, God seems to claim more than foreknowledge of Jeremiah’s future miinistry; God claims: “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, and before you were born, I consecrated you (Jeremiah 1:5).”

The possibility of developing character prior to birth is implied by a Catholic Old Testament book: “I was a boy of happy disposition.  I had received a good soul as my lot, or rather, being good, I had entered an undefiled body (Wisdom of Solomon 8:19-20).”  The question of when the ancient Jews thought human souls were created is answered by 2 Enoch 23:5: “All souls are prepared for etermity, before the composition of the earth.”  It is impossible to know whether this view was widely shared by Jews in Jesus’ day.  Though all New Age attempts to detect reincarnation in biblical texts fail (r. g. allusions to John the Baptist as Elijah) , the New Ager might argue that reincarnation may be implicit in the Jewish doctrine of the soul’s preexistence.    

(3) This doctrine of preexistence may not imply the ‘ghost within a machine” view of the mind-body connection.   The biblical use of terms for “soul” are often nebulous, but the soul concept is often synonymous with life.   When we ask where our life is located, we are told that it is located not in our body, but in non-spatial heavenly dimensions: “For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God (Colossians 3:3).”  Paul often uses the term “body” as a reference to the total earthly self.  This adds signficance to his use of “house” as a reference to our spiritual body, which he locates in non-spatial heavenly dimensions: “For we are well aware that when the tent that houses us on earth is folded up,m there is a house for us from God, not made by human hands, but everlasting, in the heavens (2 Corinthians 5:1).”  The non-localization of the soul, or rather, the soul’s location in a heavenly dimension, seems implicit in Paul’s claim that the believer is already established in a union with Christ in a heavenly dimension: “ For God raised us from the dead along with Christ, and WERE ARE SEATED WITH HIM (Christ) IN THE HEAVENLY REALMS (Ephesians 2:6).”

Paul’s teaching seems potentially compatible with Howell Vincent’s astral observattions and experiences of “transmutation” amd the “integration” of spirit and soul described in my prior posts.  What will such experiences mean for the faithful who pass over?  Peter celebrates our destiny to ultimately “become participants in the divine nature (2 Peter 1:4)” This seems to mean that we will become blinding light beings like Jesus: “Yes, dear friends, we are already God’s
children, and we can’t even imagine what we will be like when Christ appears.  But we do know that when He appears, WE WILL BE LIKE HIM, for we will see Him as He really is.  And all who believe this will purifiy themselves, just as Christ is pure (1 John 3:2).”

Don

ok so i've read through all these pages and have tried to follow along best i can, however i'm a newbie and still have a lot more learning. forgive me if what i'm about to ask is redundant.

as the story goes, when someone dies, they are more often than not greeted by a loved one(s). if this is the case, it would imply they have memory of the person who just passed over - enough so that they would want to greet and be near them. furthermore, it's my understanding that loved ones may decide to stay together in their afterlife travels. why would one be compelled to do so if their earthly memories have faded?

Hi Don and all  The only thing we lose at death is the family we leave behind,who have all the suffering when we go to spirit, so we lose nothing at death ,but gain quite a lot,we have the love we wish the earth plain had ,no more worries or suffering,our spirit is free at last to fly anywhere it wants to,our thoughts can finally come true and we have no  unhappiness in the spirit world and there, we are fullfilling the commandment from God "Thou shalt love one another, also we are never going to part up from our loved ones in the spirit world as the ones we leave behind at death,will also be with us in the spirit world,so we lose nothing and we gain plenty.

Love and God bless   Love Juditha

Bird:

Going by my communications with spirits, memories are retained as needed. In fact, I've found that the spirits I've communicated with have much better mental facility than we do. Some might claim that just about anytime a person communicates with a spirit they are communicating with demons who are pretending to be something other than what they are.  I believe there are some spirits who try to deceive. But I've also found in numerous ways that there are loved based spirits who communicate with people in this World.

Don has claimed that light beings make a point of not communicating to people in the World in order to prevent them from communicating with deceptive spirits. This suggests that people who have the courage to make contact with sprits for positive reasons, are completely abandoned by the love based spirits that exist.  This doesn't seem likely and doesn't match my experience. There is no way a deceptive spirit could duplicate some of the xperiences I've had while in contact with spirits.



bird wrote on May 15^th, 2007 at 8:32pm:

ok so i've read through all these pages and have tried to follow along best i can, however i'm a newbie and still have a lot more learning. forgive me if what i'm about to ask is redundant. as the story goes, when someone dies, they are more often than not greeted by a loved one(s). if this is the case, it would imply they have memory of the person who just passed over - enough so that they would want to greet and be near them. furthermore, it's my understanding that loved ones may decide to stay together in their afterlife travels. why would one be compelled to do so if their earthly memories have faded?

I appreciate the conviction that some here that they have conversed with discarnate spirits who retain their earth memory.  But none of my respondents seem to have directly tackled the apparent inconsistencies of three common astral discoveries.  (1) The newly dead seem to retain some ability to communicate their survival to earthly loved ones in ADCs, but then generally seem to lose this ability, or at least rarely exercise it after about a year.  Thus, 50% of Americans report some contact with their deceased loved one within the first year, but rarely thereafter.  (2) Both Classical Channeling and competent astral exploration suggest that the earth memory goes dormant as the soul progresses and generally (but not always) remains that way.  (3) Yet modern channeling purports to contact the dead in all stages of development with chatty ease and NDEs suggest that greeting parties of deceased relatives welcome the newly dead.  Yet this greeting party often seems suspciously like  mere thought forms similar to the doctors and nurses Robert Bruce encounters in astral Healing Centers.  Bruce doubts that these are real souls.  I am simply puzzled by these apparent inconsistencies and am dissatisfied by the explanations offered to date.  So I would appreciate new and more coherent attempts to directly address the evidence I shall repost.

Astral adept Emanuel Swedenborg  discovers that the earth memories of the deceased eventually become dormant, but also learns that these memories can occasionally be revived by divine discretion.   One might conjecture that their earth memories are revived to allow them to encounter their newly arrived loved ones.  It must be stressed, however, that this is mere conjecture.  Three aspects of ES's claim strike me as significant:

(1) ES has by far the most convincing verifications for his astral gift and his claim of eventual memory loss finds independent confirmation in Classical Channeling.  
(2) Memory loss is not likely to be invented by wishful thinking.  
(3) Loss of earth memory seems the best explanation of why so few of the dead fail to confirm their survival in an unmistakable way to their earthly loved ones.  Most of the newly dead would realize that a simple appearance in their family's dreams would not be very convincing or comforting.   Full-blown apparitions or clairaudient communication would be far more compelling.   Yet such manifestations are rare.   If our deceased loved ones have this capability, why don’t they demonstrate it more frequently to comfort their family and inspire the world?  

What if sitters request contact with fake deceased relatives and the mediums still oblige with a very impressive channeling?  Leonora Piper is one of the most impressive mediums ever.   She had the uncanny ability to channel two entities at the same time, one through automatic writing and the other through entranced speech.   Psychologist G. Stanley Hall had a trick up his sleeve when he went for a sitting with her. She was currently using the spirit of Richard Hodgson as her control.   Hodgson had formerly investigated her, but had recently died of a massive heart attack.  Hall asked Hodgson's spirit to contact Hall’s niece, “Bessie Beals,” so that he might speak with her.  Miss Beals was duly introduced and proceeded to communicate with Hall through Mrs. Piper.  Actually Bessie Beals did not exist.  She was a figment of Hall’s mind.  "Hodgson" in embarrassment tried to wriggle out of the situation, saying that he had been mistaken about the name.  He said that the person brought was a Jessie Beals, related to another sitter.  Dr. Samuel Soal...visualized incidents with an imaginary friend, John Ferguson.  He then went for a sitting with the medium, Blanche Cooper.  The incidents he visualized came forth as though communicated from beyond death!  These cases demonstrate that mediums can unwittingy gain information about the ceased by reading the sitter's mind.  They then routinely dramatize this ESP by inventing a phony personal contact.  One might expect the telephatic abilities of their spirit controls to detect this sort of ruse.   Clearly, the spirit controls were also a fake.

For some, such studies refute all mediumistic claims to converse with the dead.  Others will want to keep open the possibility that some channeling might be genuine.  The latter group might contemplate an apparent contradiction in the claims of Classical Channeling.  On the one hand, mediums routinely claim to put their sitters in contact with the dead.  On the other hand, some of the  best channelers have claimed that, as the  dead, progress, their earth memories become dormant.  So how can they communicate with loved ones whom they cannot recall in any detail?  Does the medium retrieve earth memories from Universal Mind or the so-called Akashic records and present this information as an illusory contact with the deceased loved one?  In that scenario, channeling might be compatible with the grim possbility that we don’t survive death.  Or do some mediums draw from the memories of the deceased without their being aware of it and reissue these memories as bogus conscious contact?  That possibililty might be another implication of  both G. Stanley Hall’s invention of fictional deceased relatives to discredit channeling and the Gordon Davis case in which Davis is channeled as if dead, when in fact he is still alive and unaware of being channeled.    

I will again repost my summary of the Gordon Davis case for the benefit of newbies.  At a sitting with medium Blanche Cooper on Jan. 4 ,1922 , Dr. Samuel Soal’s deceased brother unexpectedly said, “Sam, I’ve brought someone who knows you.”  Then in a very clear, strong, and familiar voice, Gordon Davis began to speak through Cooper.  Davis was an old school acquaintance whom Soal believed to have been killed during World War I.  Davis seemed to verify this when he said, “My poor wife is my only concern now--and my kiddie.”  Soal thought he recognized Davis' tone of voice with its fastidious accent.  The communicator used forms of expression that typified the real Gordon Davis' speech  (e.g. “old chap”; “confab” instead of “meeting”).  Davis spoke of the school they had attended, Rochford, and provided details of their last conversation.  He proceeded to refer correctly to persons, places, and events from their school days.  At two ensuing sittings on Jan. 9 and 30, 1922, Davis gave a detailed description of his house, its contents, and the arrangement of its contents.  

To his great surprise, Soal learned in 1925 that Davis was still alive after all and went to visit him.  A great deal of the channeled material about the house proved to be correct.  But Davis and his "wife and kiddie” had not moved into the house until over a year after the relevant sitting!  Davis' diary showed that during Soal’s sittings he had been seeing real estate clients.  Only around the time of the sittings did Davis even inspect this house for the first time.   But Davis did not move into the house until a year later.  More importantly, the furnishings of the house had not been planned in advance!  Yet the details channeled earlier turned out to be correct: a large mirror, lots of paintings, glorious mountain and sea scenes, very big vases with funny saucers, two brass candlesticks, and a black dickie bird.  Two of the paintings were only done after the sittings!   So much of the material channeled in the later sittings about the house must be ascribed to precognitive telepathy (John Heaney, 176-177).  

Why is channeling not discredited in this way more often?  Well, ask yourself how often you are mistakenly informed that your friend has died.   Was the medium able to exploit Soal’s mistaken faith in Davis’ death as an aid in the process of reconstructing Davis’ personality and future by precognitive telepathy?  Or were the medium (Blanche Cooper) and sitter (Sam Soal) duped by an impersonating spirit?

Some spirit controls seem clearly fraudulent.  While Richard Hodgson was still alive, he thoroughly investigated one of Leonore Piper's spirit controls named Phinuit in 1892.  The Phinuit persona claimed to be the spirit of a French doctor whose full name was Jean Phinuit Scliville and who had lived in the early 1800s and had practiced medicine in London, France, and Belgium.  But he was unable to speak more than a few French phrases, displayed no more knowledge of medicine than the average layman, and had never (according to medical records) attended the medical schools at which he claimed to have studied and practiced.  Hodgson initially concluded that Phinuit was just a secondary personality of Mrs. Piper which either erroneously believed itself o be or falsely pretended to be the spirit of a deceased French doctor.   But Hodgson later changed his mind and now concluded that some of the material produced in a trance by Mrs. Piper seemed to go beyond what might be obtained by thought transference from the sitters and thus seemed to suggest real contact with the dead. In his words, “Among these (comunicators) are more than half-a-dozen intimate friends of my own, who have produced upon me the impression...that they are the personalities I knew, with characteristic intelligence and emotion, questioning me and conversing with me under difficulties.”  In my view, Hodgson's change of mind is misguided.

Shamans understand their mediumship to put them in contact with spirits and demons as well as with deceased people.  In earlier centuries Neoplatonists also practiced trance mediumship, but attributed it to the agency of gods or demons rather than to discarnate humans.   Likewise, witches from the 17th and 18th centuries ascribed their channeled material to demons.  Perhaps the modern attempt to identify spirit controls with deceased personalities reflects the wishful thinking of modern cultural prejudice.  Why is Leonora Piper’s spirit control (Phinuit) lying about his true identity?  Why did Sam Soal’s alleged brother lie about bringing Gordon Davis’ spirit through?   Or were these people simply deceived? I am not claiming that there is one devastating explanation of all channleing and astral contact with the dead. I am merely trying to reconcile contradictory claims and am seeking noew input.

Don

Hi Don,

Here is a possible alternative: perhaps the deceased move to an ever-higher vibratory level.  It may become difficult, then, to communicate with our lower vibrations; hence, it would also be more difficult for us to detect them even if they would willingly contact us.

In my own case, my husband contacted me 21 years after his death.  Later, I learned that the date of contact not only coincided with a time of emotional turmoil for me, but was the very day his father chose to commit suicide.  I have not found out if
the time synchronized also as his two remaining sons are not certain about the time.

Last fall, when I was at my husband's gravesite I had an unusual physical phenomenon.
I distinctly felt something like waves of pulsating electricity encompassing me from the ground on one side up and around and down to the ground on the other side.  What
was even more remarkable was that it felt as though  these pulsing vibrations were on a sort of invisble ruffle extending outward from my body.

Another unusual occurrence was that before I went to Europe to restore his grave
and reconnect with the remaining members of his family, I received an avalanche
of junk mail addressed to a person with an unusual name.  Imagine how I felt to
discover a person with that name as a member of the family in Europe.    I no longer
receive mail addressed to that person.

Best wishes in the move west.

Hi Don-
We've got a lot of stuff here, but with respect only to recall of prior lives, I do have some clinical experience. This is not a proof, but merely what is reported. However, it seems consistent, and is definitely not produced though guiding or biasing the regression.

I have observed that obvious attachment to the prior life, and ease of access to its content, often is connected to severe anxiety. It seems that people who have great fear of the afterlife tend to cling to the mental levels, since the physical ones have fallen away, and also to the lower astral situation in which they find themselves. This seems to be an effort to avoid either prior companions who are feared, or avoidance of "hell", which they don't understand, or some similar major effort at self preservation. Just as Bruce tells of people who build a BST and stay in it, we evidently have the same thing in the clinging to the material world during the interlife transition.  

The thinking ability of these spirits is one tracked - they can follow a single thread of reasoning, but do poorly with abstractions. This is also true of entities who are being liberated from their hosts. In general, the process of thought is a matter of urges and tendencies without any abstraction at all (primary process - raw emotional stuff - not "thoughtful", but entirely "reactive". Typically, these involve flight from feared past events, an effort to escape the prior situation, feelings that to escape the prior situation is dangerous, clinging to the material world as an escape vehicle, which stimulates recollection of past events.  Actual memories and so on tend to arise after intervention has entered the otherwise closed system of definitions of self for the frightened spirit.

You can personally do regressions and check this out - all it takes is a little patience, and great care to not lead people, since they'll build any kind of structure you hint at if you infer that that's what you're looking for. I think you'll find that you can directly observe this stuff more effectively than trying to extrapolate it out of other people's writings. Also, the same information that you get by regression methods should be easily verified by experiences retrieving stuck souls, since they're essentially the same.

Most definitely, one does not lose everything and wind up tabula rasa.  However, there seems to be something about secondary process thinking, the ability to abstract and carry multiple threads of logic, that uses the physical body and brain in a manner not generally available in regression, and presumably not available in one's spiritual existence.

d

How awful, Dave,

To lose our ability for abstract thinking after death........I for one will not take it as a given, and will try to find another path.  I can understand, on the one hand how attachment to this life and the physical world could prevent one from learning valuable lessons and moving on.  On the other, I believe that the love we carry with us of our loved ones can not easily be forgotten, no matter what our path.

Augo has an interesting quote from Steiner on the board where he describes the stages after death, and the living of one's earthly memories, which, unbound from a physical body take on an existence of their own in the astral.  I'm not sure I like everything he has to say about it as well.

We still have not reconciled Don's chatty mediums with the loss of memories and abstract thinking that others on the board find.  As such, I will stubbornly cling to the belief that loss of abstract reasoning and memory is not a given in the afterlife, and that there may be other forces at work here.  If the purpose of our existence is based on love, I don't see why complete loss of memory is necessary or loss of the ability to think clearly or use intelligence in an abstract way.  There has to be more to consciousness than that.


Matthew

Hi Matthew - hope you are well

Steiner tells us the condition of the recent past life memories becoming an outer reality lasts for a couple of days and then a new kind of consciousness appears after this.  It seems this consciousness is inherent with us all the time however in the afterlife it does not need the brain process to think - it is more of an awareness ..

Relating to what Dave, Doc and Augo have recently wrote, I'm adding some thoughts, without coming to a definite conclusion.

When I had my night in heaven experience I was an atheist. If somebody tried to tell me that God and the afterlife existed, I would've said no way. Yet when I had my experience no effort to convince me was required. Divine truth was completeley obvious. I've had other experiences where the truth of the matter was simply known beyond what my beliefs told me. Many NDEs have confirmed what I have found.

On the other hand, while we dream, our abstract thinking gets lost to an extent where we usually don't tend to notice that we are dreaming, even though we experience things that contradict our physical life. I've found that my basic moral structure stays alive during a dream. If I consider a particular kind of activity inappropriate while in the physical, I'm likely to find it inappropriate during a dream. I've found that unfavorable tendencies I haven't let go of completely will manifest in a dream, even though for the most part I prevent them from manifesting in the physical. After analyzing over 1,000 dreams during the past two years or so, I believe that dreams are created by our higher selves.  Therefore, the factor of not questioning things that are inconsistent with what we experience while in the physical, might be a matter of how our higher self feeds us information.  I believe there are limits. If we aren't open to seeing something, our higher self won't force it on us.

I've found that a lot of people aren't good at abstract thinking while in the physical. They are quick to react to what their overall psychological conditioning tells them. If a person gets in the habit of stepping back and trying to look at things honestly while in the physical, this tendency might carry over into the after life. Sort of related to this, sometimes I have meditations where I experience all kinds of things but don't get effected, because I take the position of the one who experiences everything. I take such a position by feeling it, rather than thinking about it. Since this type of experience doesn't happen all of the time, I believe my higher self is getting me used to taking the position of my awareness self. It is at this level that true intelligence and detachment exists. If you want to remember who you really are when you die, try to remember who you are while alive.

OK Don- we agree on this for sure. The modality of awareness when you had your "night in heaven" was primary - just as is the mode of awareness in dreams. However, as Caryn mentions, there is a subtle kind of "thinking" that works on the primary level in meditation. It is non-verbal, and seems to carry basic meanings, rather than analytical interpretations. This is the normal "thinking state" in meditation.

Matthew - I personally don't need to analyze ideas when they are self evident - "God is love" is an analytical expression that totally misses all but my opinion about God. The experience of directly facing God is, in itself, sufficient - it doesn't need to be analyzed. This doesn't feel awful at all. In fact, it feels as if the thinking process is far too often interposed between me and reality, and that only by ceasing to "think" can I be directly present in the events of the moment.

Many people "meditate" by abstract thought. This is actually the beginning of the meditative sequence, and more often is called "concentration". It's a good skill, but still binds us to the material world. A useful exercize is to chant "Om" (or any other desired syllable - I like Om because it is associated with the transcendental) and do it four times -  (a) First time, chant aloud with volume. (b) Second time, chant at low volume. (c) Third time, chant it only in your mind. (d) Listen very intently for the surrounding world to chant it. - Now, notice the kind of "thinking" that happened while you were listening, and before your mind started to tell you that "Hey, look, I'm listening." - That gratuitous verbalization, or its equivalent, is a useless activity, since you're already doing what it says. All that these verbalizations do is isolate us from the moment of experience.

After a while, the mind gives up and shuts up until you call on it for something, which is sometimes called "the sound of silence". I think you'll like the experience, but it marks the end of dependency on secondary processing.

dave

Dave,

I have experienced moments of deep awareness in calm meditation.  Pure awareness.  While I appreciate that, I know for a fact that you and I value our ability to think and reason, whether based on physical reality or not.  

Your goals of understanding involve, by necessity some abstract line of reasoning.  I do not accept therefore, as fact that in spirit we would be incapable of juggling various lines of thought or abstractions.  I agree that we may lose the ability to speak of our elxperience in terms of being a physical entity, and as such, our descriptions and idease may be changed.

But I will not buy into this idea that most spirits lose their ability to reason or be what we consider to be rational, thinking creatures.  Cogito ergo sum.  I think therefore I am.   My thoughts while presented in the physical plane do not arise from there now, and hence when I pass away from the physical, these thoughts should still find expression, even the abstract ones.


M

If one watches people closely, are they abstract thinkers, or do they think according to their overall psychological conditioning? Perhaps until a Soul reaches a point where it is the master of its thought energy, rather than a being who is lost within it, there is no such thing as complete abstract thought. A lack of a physical World to set limits, really causes a reactive belief way of thinking to get the best of a person after he or she dies.

Perhaps the subjects Dave hypnotized never got to the point in their previous lifetimes where they could honestly question their belief systems and way of thinking. Therefore, when they died, just as when they were alive, they lived in a reactive manner rather than a proactive manner.

How often do you run into a person who will seriously question his or her beliefs, or doesn't reactively respond to circumstances in an emotional way? Just watch a cable news program and see how unbending people are when they discuss differing viewpoints.

Hi all, my, I just decided to look over this thread and find it kickin! it is putting some things in perspective for me regarding the area of retrievals and that state of mind. I find in retrievals a merge takes place in the energy field of the retriever and the retrievee. my first retrieval I was cautioned by a guide to not get overwhelmed by the emotion of the retrievee and I am calling an emotion a field of energy.
Thanks for my lesson today Dave in primary process.
______

Primary process is the operational description for emotional thinking.  It's difficult for me to express verbally because I always use symbols working at home.
______

I found associative state of mind most expansive when changing out belief system programs.  emotional thinking I found can be two types: conscious or unconscious. emotions of the unconscious type are difficult to separate from the thoughts they are attached to, where they had their inception, if they are attached to a programmed belief system, perhaps, for example a buried memory will hold an emotion, and the emotion is attached to a false belief of self definition.
Non emotional thinking on the other hand would point to an altered state of awareness or a mind merged into all that is, including the collective mind. However, Dave expresses a psychotic state can be non-emotional. I would just add there is buried emotion there in the psychotic which aided by the energy of PUL, can bring out the buried emotion and those features of the emotion which relate to a belief system. a flashlight symbol just flashed by.

  The mindstate of those stuck in astral levels close to the earth upon demise is what I think is the subject here.
I would like to add for the benefit of those who might fear a death transistion to be stuck, that it can also be looked at as a natural process, in that assistance is available, involved with the right moment where free will is not interfered with. the lightbulb has to want to change. Those of us who practice retrieval while physical or nonphysical, provide a nudge of movement into what will be a natural movement anyway within process. We speed things up to move, as change is the only constant.

Without a body, our definition is the sum of all the relationships associated with being who we were in the past. Thus, without a body, we are just history, plus a dynamic tendency for interaction.
I agree, I did have a dynamic tendency for interaction when I experienced a situation of being dead and not knowing I was dead. (obviously, I wasn't totally dead although I had become history) I was only this dynamic tendency, I recognized it differently, I called it a sense of adventure or defined it as myself. u guys will have to pardon me that I speak from my own level of observation as I am motivated by the emotion of excitement to finally understand Dave's language. Dave, I wanted to become a psychologist but they wouldn't let me in.  :)

Emotion arises as the logical projection of our history, and manifests as the dynamic. Were the available realityinto which to next move our existence to not support all of our definitions, then those fall off. This is sensed as some kind of suffering.

if I continue with my NDE, then I do recall a sense one could call suffering, but to me, it wasn't like suffering in the worst degree, but a sense of being a non-entity, of no intrinsic value to those whom could not interact with me, as they were physical and I was non/physical and couldn't tell the difference; this causes a type of suffering, but the propelling agent was the sense of adventure to find the answer to the question of why I was dissociated from these others. So the state of confusion can be seen as suffering. I didn't consider it suffering. there were some grid lines which caused self navigation. suffering must be relative.  what I liked about this experience is that I now had a clue how a deceased person might feel while trying to get the attention of us here who are in bodies. although I say it wasn't the greatest degree of suffering I can imagine exists, at the same time it was certainly not pleasant. It was love that was my salvation. the grid put me to the love of my daughter. Doc will feel comforted by this message.

The reason that we "live the thought" in primary processing is that the mechanism by which it is handled is our collection of attributive relationships with the world, so that these are altered as we alter our attitudes. In this way, the physical body is involved in emotions when we have one, and when we don't, our definition as an historically supported event is altered.
________
Were we to be able to exist as a static structure, matters might be different, but our existence is in the dynamic between instants of external definition. Thus, as we "live the thought" we also alter attitudes and the choices made. The options for participation in some of the other available future states are more likely in some cases, less so in others. But we are forced, willy nilly, to participate, because only in the dynamic do we exist.
____

right. I think Dave just said we are all one, and nothing without each other because only in the dynamic do we exist. or no man is an island.  thanks again for your post Dave. I was just thinking of writing some more about retrievals. now I have some thought about it. love, alysia

There is a schism between what we are told by NDEs and mediums and what Dave and others have said about losing the ability to abstract.

In Bruce's explorations of Focus 27, he has found centers for learning, education and others, much like one would find in a university or library.  How exactly does one study if one can no longer think in abstract terms.  Concrete thinking misses much.

My own belief is that after a while in spirit, we interpret our surroundings and ideas in terms of spirit.  If certain earthly creations are not respresented there, there may be no way to incorporate those ideas/items in ones frame of reference without a body or physical plane.  Hence our ideas and communications with others in the physical plane may then be limited to certain ideas/concepts that are present in both planes.  This may, in part answer Don's question about why we don't get better verifications from the deceased.  If, in spirit, we evaluate our past earthly life at first, then, loose the bonds with it, and let it go, we may not feel compelled to tell a living person like Don factual information that could be confirmed on the earthly plane.  These earthly matters are somewhat based in the physical to begin with.  

Yet one still must look at a medium like George Anderson, or Leonore Piper and question how they get such a "normal" detailed conversation with the deceased, even years after they passed over?  Are they, as Don suggested, accessing the "universal record," and not truly communicating with the deceased?  And why are they so chatty with mediums but not with us?

Perhaps further exploration through TMI and other efforts will yield more information on these matters.


Matthew

Hi Doc- When you dream, you use primary functions, just as when you live in any other world in which the spirit is awake, but the body is not being used. Some of us have "lucid dreams" in which we are presented with the immediacy of an event. Now watch what happens when we're awake - First the event occurs. Next we prehend it as it is in and of itself. (Primary) Then we interpret and evaluate. (reaction). Finally we cast into terms of other ideas in an interpretive manner., (secondary) - Hang onto that sequene for a moment and consider what happens when we try to make love but spend the time focussing on interpretations of what we are doing. "Spectatoring" in that manner is the primary cause of primary anorgasmia.  To make love is a primary process activity, and needs absolutely no secondary thought. That does not detract from the pleasure - in fact, I'd say that it adds, since it eliminates the intermediate efforts to capture the ineffable nature of the experience.

Anyway - the "sound of silence" state is the first major permanent attainment of meditation. Once attained, the mind does not operate as an abstract observer, but rather interacts at the point of experience. Afterwards we can analyze it - and unfortunately, our ability to handle abstractions is pretty poor. Thus, we lose something that was there when all we did was to have the experience. And if we try to "explainb" it to someone else, things really get mucked up.

Alyssia- - you understand what I'm trying to say, and doubtless agree that we lack adequate words for the task. However, I'm trying to deal with normal psychic states, not psychotic ones. But the latter are always the product of conflicted primary factors - interesting that you picked up on that.

I on't see whay you would be denied entry into psychology. That's a major ripoff!!  - I mean, it's not like my efforts to get into Girl Scouts - whether singly or in groups - But there may be a parallel hidden there anyhow, considering that you got screwed anyway, so to say.

What you refer to as "like suffering" is what I express as "regret" - or pretty close. It's a gut-level sensation, and I'm glad that for you it turned you to love. In my case, the example that comes to mind is the girl friend who got herself preggers (obviously I didn't have anything to do with it) and desiired an abortion. I based a sense of security and happoiness on her not being PG anymore, and (without admission of gult nor responsibility) I bought her an abortion. The nextday a big billborad went up right across fro my apartment: "Abortion Is Murder" - including a picture of a test tube of fetal remanants. Meditation then too me to a place where I idnetified with my decision, and could see that I had predicated my life on the death of the fetus, plus a sense that I was the fetus, and the implication by direct association that I had thus killed myself. The next few hours brought me the experience of being the star attraction of a D&C, disposal into a trash compactor, and somekind of incineration or some such. I stayed sane primarily by telling God to do whatever was needed so that I wouldn't cause more problems.

Don - I honestly tend to believe that past life regressions are valid. BUT I have no basis except my own personal recollections on which to base that opinion. Some people I've regressed were pro-active, and some were re-active in their lives. It seems that everybody is more or less the same. Those who cling to abstract reasoning tend to be earthbound, because they are typically frightened that if they stop analyzing, they'll stop existing. (Making love etc is proof that this isn't true.)

The biggest problem is that we're dealing with a second hand recollection of inexpressable experienceas. No hard data. No first order data. Everything is abstracted to death. It's like doing psychoanalysis on people caught in their own BSTs - like Bruce's tank driver, for example. - Incidently, notice that the tank driver was greeted joyfully by his comrades - secondary abstractions seem not to be necessary when we have direct miond-to-mind connections.

The flip side of that is that wthout secondary functions we lack interpretive ability for many things. I have a vast array of what looks like Japanese Kanji ideographs that scrolls by me in meditation - and I have no idea at all what it means. I also have a bunch of Egyptian hieroglyphs that occasionally appear, and again, I can't make out the meaning. - Maybe that's the primary process psychotic state that Alyssia was mentioning - aka "Duh?"

d

Doc asked:  And why are they so chatty with mediums but not with us?
___

from what I've gathered, the slightest bit of doubt on the part of the receiver station sets up static. Even mediums produce static, so how much more so a person who doesn't practice mediumship.

Dave said: I on't see whay you would be denied entry into psychology. That's a major ripoff!!  - I mean, it's not like my efforts to get into Girl Scouts - whether singly or in groups - But there may be a parallel hidden there anyhow, considering that you got screwed anyway, so to say.
___

ahh, I was attempting humor Dave. sorry.
I thought I was funny ::)  the story was I went to a college career counselor and discovered through him the psychology field was so glutted with would be fix it type persons that soon everybody would be trying to fix somebody else and nobody would get paid for it. and so I let him dissuade me and became a happy contemplative. ultimately I'm from a another planet where nothing ever needs fixing so I got lucky I didn't take up psychology.
_____
sorry to confuse things with the psychotic reference I made as a sort of afterthought. I should probably explain what I was thinking better.
I was thinking of how primary thing you are talking about, relates to a belief system, which in turn relates to a computer type brain, which in turn relates to how a person, we can label them psychotic, will commit a crime from a mentality place where they will later say "I don't remember what happened." I called it an altered state.

upon transition into death, there can occur temporarily a state of amnesia. this I conjecture, I only speak for the nearest experience I experienced, plus some retrievals I did. and I think we have it figured out on this thread that being in physical body, our consciousness is divided into segments, concerned with body functions which on the other side there is no events into segmented time slots, such as eating, defecating, driving to work, driving home, so we can agree it is vastly "different" to be relieved of all body and livlihood responsibilities.
this state of affairs is enough to spend many hours of contemplation on but we will not agree necessarily nor immediately what its like.

I would only say its vastly important to gather as much knowledge about the states of consciousness, the different levels, to get one's priorities, desires in place before exiting physical area as what we think now becomes reality there.
the amnesia then can be bypassed entirely, the life review can be done while you are still alive.
Dave said: "sound of silence" state is the first major permanent attainment of meditation. Once attained, the mind does not operate as an abstract observer, but rather interacts at the point of experience.
___

this statement above is a gem. and now I shall go and be silent.
and I promise the next time I make a joke Dave, I am going to make sure you know it's a joke.

love you all (most of the time) alysia

Hi

Dave rightly refers to the process of primary state in sleeping

Quote:

When you dream, you use primary functions, just as when you live in any other world in which the spirit is awake, but the body is not being used.

In truth we die every night (on a mini-scale) and experience our spiritual state as we do when our physical bodies leave us.  This is most probably why our past life review is relatively short because every night in our sleep we review the days happenings from a spiritual point of view in connection with the people we were in contact with during the day.  This is deep sleep.  Lucid dreaming is our inner thoughts becoming alive outside of us and our emotions and thoughts attached to the day events becoming alive in this state.  As discussed previously though there are many levels to dreaming and one cannot attach too much meaning to them without acknowledging they are expressions of our inner thoughts.  It is the deep sleep stage where most of our primary state would take place.  Here it also good to contemplate the microcosm in the macrocosm.

Albert

Quote:

I've found that my basic moral structure stays alive during a dream. If I consider a particular kind of activity inappropriate while in the physical, I'm likely to find it inappropriate during a dream. I've found that unfavorable tendencies I haven't let go of completely will manifest in a dream, even though for the most part I prevent them from manifesting in the physical.

I really enjoyed everything you wrote Albert, it is true there is moral structure (just the fact we die every night is moral in preparation for our final leaving so there are no surprises and shocks – God in his infinite wisdom in Creation looks after everyone of us)

Also the facts of afterlife need to be told (as Steiner does) without emotion or mysticism but we add our colour and degrees to the experience.  For example; the fact is ‘today is Wednesday’ that is a fact but your Wednesday and my Wednesday have unique meaning for us.  For example; my Wednesday today is a crisp blue sky, there’s lovely warmth from the sun and the birds are singing.

Matthew

Quote:

But I will not buy into this idea that most spirits lose their ability to reason or be what we consider to be rational, thinking creatures.  Cogito ergo sum.  I think therefore I am.   My thoughts while presented in the physical plane do not arise from there now, and hence when I pass away from the physical, these thoughts should still find expression, even the abstract ones.

I think Dave explained the primary thinking state quite well and if we look at; there is a present in the soul after death (and during sleep) like a willing or desiring feeling-life, or a will-life that is wholly imbued with feeling.  Feeling is more similar to one’s experience of willing.  The soul, besides developing self-awareness now begins to experience itself through an empowering and strengthening of its life of willed feeling and feeling-imbued will.  Willingly through feeling becomes our thinking in the primary state.  Quite a difficult concept to grasp but if we look at OBE we see it is our feeling (very close to thought) which becomes our will in traveling in our of body state.

Matthew

Quote:

In Bruce's explorations of Focus 27, he has found centers for learning, education and others, much like one would find in a university or library.

We do live in a / our spiritual country for a long time with our spiritual family / group (we live with our group in like attracts like, although it is not random through pre-destination) The spiritual countries (planetary spheres) have buildings and home and gardens and occupations.  We dwell here when we go through our second death which is the falling away of our etheric and astral bodies.

Matthew

Quote:

This may, in part answer Don's question about why we don't get better verifications from the deceased.

Alysia

Quote:

from what I've gathered, the slightest bit of doubt on the part of the receiver station sets up static. Even mediums produce static, so how much more so a person who doesn't practice mediumship.

Our spiritual family does come to us; it is a very subtle process which needs fine tuning.  First sending and thinking about them with love and dignity clears the waves.  Information received from a higher source is integrated with the daily mind, flows through it and uses what it has.  A state where it becomes another separate being is not needed, and in fact is a sign that lower subconscious forces are at work. Information from such sources must always be suspect: truth is mixed with half-truths and no truth at all.

This is the on-going channeling discussion.

Dave

Quote:

What you refer to as "like suffering" is what I express as "regret" - or pretty close. It's a gut-level sensation,

It is good to release self-punishment.  There is nothing worse than fear, worry or anxiety which causes blockages not only in physical health but in clear communication with the spiritual world through our conscious waking mind.

When we look at the after life state of looking back and realizing we could have done more (this happens before our second death) it is a very important stage in creating self-awareness through feeling.  It is not meant to be seen as punishment although we can see karma working in this stage.  Karma happens for a reason.

It is said before our second death we leave our bag of karma at the Moon (for the Moon is the arrival into earth and departure from Earth) and go home.  When we incarnate into our next life we pick up our bag of karma left there at the Moon.

Well, my notes and still being a student each day is a learning day.
 
:)

Very interesting Augo,

I still think we have to account for our ability to think and reason in the afterlife.  I do agree that we may perceive things in thought more directly/emotionally, however this is NOT to say that it is without intelligence.  This is my objection to the complete loss of the ability to abstract concepts after death.  I believe that our ability to reason survives death, but that the vocabulary changes because much of our abstractions on earth deal with earthly sensory input.  

I found three passages from Swedenborg's writings, which I feel are very much on topic for this discussion, and go toward explaining my point that abstract thinking may be found in the spiritual world:

The first sets up his philosophy -

"The first step in philosophy is to admit that the essence of being is knowable or intelligible. While the esse of a thing is in itself unknowable, its qualities are made manifest as 'essence.'14 Thus the essence of God is knowable as Divine love and Divine wisdom, thus as Divinely Human.15 But man's mind is finite, limited. What the Infinite and Eternal is in itself cannot be comprehended, for no finite idea can 'contain' the Infinite; yet by means of ideas abstracted from space and time it can be seen that a thing is although not what it is.16

There is an absolute Truth which, being infinite, is above human or angelic comprehension, yet must be the source and origin of all perception. This Divine truth, in its proceeding, is the same in all creation, in all substance and in all phenomena - and thus represents itself in matter and in spirit, in nature and in mind. The essence of material things is represented to our minds in terms of sensations of space, time, and motion, and can be evaluated only by these. The physical reality of a thing-in-itself can be attested only by experience, scientific analysis, and checked research, which thus become the criteria of natural actualities. Nature represents the Divine truth which operates therein as laws of order.

The essence of spiritual things is represented to our minds in terms of states - as moods and emotions and thoughts, or as goods and truths and perceptions of use. The reality or essence of spiritual things can be estimated only by the experiences of the mind which sees its own phenomena (or noumena) to be independent of, and antithetical to, physical phenomena and their causal sequences. In the Word, the Divine truth regarding spiritual things is revealed as sequences of spiritual causes and spiritual effects, represented correspondentially in the letter and formally in doctrine; and the Word is therefore the criterion of all spiritual truth.

There is no absolute or "pure" human truth." 17 In both worlds the essence of the thing-in-itself is knowable so far as it can be inferred from its results and qualities. But the perceiving intellect is limited (even as are the senses of both men and angels), and is disturbed in its functions by the affections of the will and by the fact that the media of perception may be lacking, wholly or in part. This accounts for errors of sense, information, and judgment. Since the will motivates the understanding, a true philosopher must not only have a love of truth for the sake of truth, but have modesty and a love of Deity.18 Yet so long as men debate whether a thing is so, they cannot advance into anything of wisdom.19"


Matthew

The spirit beings I communicate with have no problem thinking in abstract terms. In fact, it is clear that their ability to think far surpasses my ability to think. It is obvious that as opposed to seeing things to the limited extent in which I see things, they see all levels. When I ask a question, they can immediately respond by providing me with a detailed short waking dream that has all the details that are required in order to make the point/points they are trying to make. Therefore, eventually, I believe that each Soul comes to a point where it can think as clearly as it wants and remember whatever it wants.

Regarding what Robert Bruce wrote, there are some things he has shared which shows me that he isn't a man of perfect discrimination. Regarding what Emanuel Swedenborg wrote, I recently checked out four of his books from the library, and after reading a little I stopped doing so, because some of his viewpoints are hard to believe. For example, in heaven and hell, he writes that when a male and female get married they merge as one, the male spirit takes on the role of intellect, and the female takes on the role of volition. In another book he writes about how Jewish people end up in a realm that is knee deep in mud. If you go into their house you find that it smells really foul. I know it isn't fair to judge after reading so little, but sometimes after you read a few things that sound preposterous, you have to wonder if it's worth the effort.

At this point. it seems that we all have more or less fixed ideas, wherever obtained, which await discovery in the future. Perhaps a more fruitful approach would be to look for the minimal functions expected in the spirit world.

My experience in meditation is that I have, as a meditator, more capability to be aware and understand, then when I'm dreaming. Lucid moments of dreaming seem to be the exception, and bring an acute awareness, but still of the immediate situation.

Piaget attempted to define the transition between pre-operational function at birth, and fully abstract logic.  Perhaps the issue is the notion of "abstraction". Concrete operations, using Piaget's sense of the term, imply that all we can do is shuffle immediate sense data. That is certainly not the limit. On the other hand, to view something as defined by some kind of abstract implications, such as the ratiocinations by which I try to justify immoral things I've done on the basis of some long and involved chain of reasoning, that always falls apart, and concrete terms prevail.

As Caryn says, our basic morality seems to stays with us in sleep, which is a concrete connection. Being in this state, or an equivalent with eyes open, a fair percentage of the time, I sense relationships slightly differently than I used to. When I am with other women who might be willing to engage in a little hanky-panky, the association I sense is that this would negate my relationship with my wife. This is an absolute negation, either-or, no possible way to abstract a compromise. That's the sense I get with respect to all moral imperatives, and I call it non-abstract, and I sense the logic to be based outside of myself, not where I can manipulate and bend it. Maybe there's a better term that would communicate what's happening more clearly.

Incidently, the same kind of logic seems to govern the mental operations of drug users, which is why drugs (which actually seem to block certain functions) can lead into states equivalent to meditation, especially if augmented by standard meditative methods. It also suggests a reason why people who take drugs sense a "different kind of mental operation" or a "different reality", even though nothing has been altered externally.

Alysia - I recognize your humor - but can't resist responding in kind. That leads to a totally useless conversation, but it's fun. Having gone through the usual academic process, I'd be inclined to say that people go into the area of study that makes them feel most secure. Psychologists are all bonkers, sociologists are typically sociopathic, philosophers are long winded and confused, political scientists talk a lot and say nothing, and so on. Maybe you just weren't sufficiently dysfunctional to get people to believe that you needed a psych degree to fulfill yourself.

thanks Doc, heres the part I focused on from ES: a true philosopher must not only have a love of truth for the sake of truth, but have modesty and a love of Deity.18 Yet so long as men debate whether a thing is so, they cannot advance into anything of wisdom.19"
____

it is my thought that the title of this thread is misleading us: It should be "What people gain at Death." Not what people lose at death.

Albert,

I'll have to find the passages where you feel Swedenborg disparages Jews or women - I don't believe that to be the case, but he was, afterall human, and perhaps prone to bias as anyone.  He did leave room for non-christians to enter heaven - so this was a big leap for anyone who lived in his time.  I bet Don would have a better answer about this.

Dave, I think we are starting to agree, that when in spirit, the ability to communicate and understand things which were based on an understanding of the physical/sensory world may be lost.  This may be different than saying that we are not able to think/reason in the abstract.  I plan to post two more Swedeborgian passages that I think solve the puzzle of what we lose at death shortly.


Matthew

Dave said: Alysia - I recognize your humor - but can't resist responding in kind. That leads to a totally useless conversation, but it's fun. Having gone through the usual academic process, I'd be inclined to say that people go into the area of study that makes them feel most secure. Psychologists are all bonkers, sociologists are typically sociopathic, philosophers are long winded and confused, political scientists talk a lot and say nothing, and so on. Maybe you just weren't sufficiently dysfunctional to get people to believe that you needed a psych degree to fulfill yourself.  
_____

I see your point Dave, but I also see the divinity in man above and beyond the confusion, the saying nothing, the talking a lot, the bonkers, the sociopathic, the long winded, all of these statements are negating our divinity, our purposes and our love for one another. I submit that nothing said here, whether it's an attempt at humor or perceived as pointless or useless is still us, and we are all god. god likes to have fun. anyone see JC with a smile on his face? I do.
that all aside, if we continue as we are here, we will surely have some revelations to chew on as we are all adding to this stew.
My friend Gordon Phinn has joined us and I have it from the god of my being, he can add something to the conversation board as well.
as a matter of fact, I have something else to add to this fascinating thread regarding the abilities we have to reason once out there and so I can say empathically, at least speaking for myself, we can retain all our facilities either in obe, or permanently transited from physical senes..same thing anyway.
I have delivered lectures out there and retained the gist of them while not retaining them word for word and slowly this ability can even be mastered as more memory is retained.
also was able to make a decision out there which entails the use of yay or nay, a reasoning process.

if this silly goofus who likes to joke around can do it, I don't see why anyone can't retain all their faculties, personality, loves and dislikes, etc. out of body.

carry on, it gets better, I promise.

Doc:

I didn't write that Emanuel disparaged women.  I wrote that in "Heaven and Hell" he states that when a male and female Soul marry, they become one, the male intellect takes over, and the female intellect goes into subsidance. I find this hard to believe. It goes against everything else I've found to be true. I believe that our Souls are neither male or female or both.

Regarding what he wrote about Jewish people, it doesn't come from Heaven and Hell. I returned the books to the library so I'm not certain what book he stated this in, but it was either in "The true Christian religion" or "Angelic wisdom concerning the divine." Probably the first. If you like I can check the book out again and share the section that relates. I read this section more than once in order to be certain, and he clearly wrote that Jewish people end up living in a squalid place. My feeling is that if a person is open to the love of God, he or she will make it to heaven quite fine. Regarding how Christ fits into the picture, there are all kinds of things spirits find out about after they cross over that they didn't know about before doing so. If a spirit has love in its heart, I believe heaven will be an experience of rejoicing about what is or isn't true, not a matter of, "Well, that doesn't fit into how I believe things should be." One time when I got too hard core on this forum my guidance told me: "You make us sound like a bunch of dictators."


DocM wrote on May 30^th, 2007 at 3:20pm:

Albert, I'll have to find the passages where you feel Swedenborg disparages Jews or women - I don't believe that to be the case, but he was, afterall human, and perhaps prone to bias as anyone.  He did leave room for non-christians to enter heaven - so this was a big leap for anyone who lived in his time.  I bet Don would have a better answer about this. Dave, I think we are starting to agree, that when in spirit, the ability to communicate and understand things which were based on an understanding of the physical/sensory world may be lost.  This may be different than saying that we are not able to think/reason in the abstract.  I plan to post two more Swedeborgian passages that I think solve the puzzle of what we lose at death shortly. Matthew

Doc pasted this for us from ES: interesting.

quote: The first step in philosophy is to admit that the essence of being is knowable or intelligible. While the esse of a thing is in itself unknowable, its qualities are made manifest as 'essence.'14 Thus the essence of God is knowable as Divine love and Divine wisdom, thus as Divinely Human.15 But man's mind is finite, limited. What the Infinite and Eternal is in itself cannot be comprehended, for no finite idea can 'contain' the Infinite; yet by means of ideas abstracted from space and time it can be seen that a thing is although not what it is.16

____

I'm just taking this in chuncks Doc, as if I were to condense all the thoughts on this thread, it would take me 1,000 years probably!

I find no disagreement with what I read above, as a matter of fact I owe Don an apology for saying he ruined ES for me..hehehe. sorry, you were right Don, I am cheeky but you made me that way. :)

When the above says "no finite idea can contain the infinite"
this should be apparent as true. it's elementary, its the basis of TMI's phrases and focus levels. C1 is the limited finite mind.  this is us, wearing an idea around like a piece of clothing. the process to infinite mind is a process of remembering who we are, bit by bit.
this takes preparation to accept the truth.

I simply submit C1 is temporary station. an experience within physicality for the sheer purpose of that existence, that lifetime of experiences as an individual who does want that life, even if they do not realize they do want this life and to gain mastery within that life. mastery over appetites, and how to create our realities for all, not just our own little world.

I am looking at the idea of being plugged into infinite mind 24/7. A constant stream of info/energy. now, this is not an objective.
this goes back to the concept of PUL. of course no one wants to talk about it, as where is PUL?  Unless you define yourself as that, as PUL, you won't be seeing much of it.
As my friend GP says, he is totally right on, no one gets to heaven, unless they figure they deserve it.

so get rid of the guilt. speaking of abortions, to somebody here, I had one. I have absolutely no guilt over this. I did not come here to breed. I spoke with the soul in question and my son was fine with my decision, knowing the circumstances were wrong for his entrance.
I'm not speaking for anyone else. its a decision for each to make and not to be taken lightly, but in order to live with yourself, you have to carefully consider everything so you can live with yourself without wanting to stick a gun to your head and get it over quickly.

once you get on the other side its easier to see all sides of an argument, but just because we gain an expanded view from over there, is no reason to put off the work we have to here to expand our minds in this level of C1 and theres no reason you can't relax into the journey instead of making it like a grueling task.

Albert said: Regarding what Emanuel Swedenborg wrote, I recently checked out four of his books from the library, and after reading a little I stopped doing so, because some of his viewpoints are hard to believe. For example, in heaven and hell, he writes that when a male and female get married they merge as one, the male spirit takes on the role of intellect, and the female takes on the role of volition.
________

Albert I had to go to the dictionary for "volition."  I don't know about these statements either, I think they need much greater scrutiny, they seem incomplete.

speaking just off the top of my cranium, there's only a few men I've met personally who could keep up with me intellectually. I have to rely on archtypes for guidance there.
as for the definition of "volition" and speaking as a woman, my polarity choice in this lifetime only, the definition went like this: noun:   the act of making a choice (Example: "Followed my father of my own volition")

it can be said in marriage between opposite polarities love of the highest order entails a desire to please. yet its beyond that aways. man and woman surrender to each other their respective egos and do merge. she is receptive in that regard, he is active in leading in his spirit. it has nothing to do with who's boss if they are in Oneness, like is described above.

in general, we are not at that high of an evolutionary standard.

may I be excused from being funny?  I just read Doc's post of ES:

its not that I disagree, ES appears to have very balanced perspective and all, but the only consensus I gained from it, unless Doc can show me something new, what I got out of it is that no matter how much college credits you have gained, you are at risk of losing your common sense if you rely on your scholastic training apart from spirit.

Alysia:

I don't believe that merging means that one spirit has to surrender its intellect so that another spirit's intellect can take over.  Especially not,  if as Swendenborg suggests, it's always the spirit who used to inhabit a female body that has to surrender its intelllect.

Alysia, my guess is, that even though you inhabit a female body now, you believe that your spirit isn't limited to one particular gender. Why go through the trouble of developing your intellect in this lifetime, just so you can give it up when you merge with a spirit that used to inhabit a male body? Where is the National Organization For Women when we need them? :) They need to chime in on Swedenborg's concept of how merging works.  :'(


LaffingRain wrote on May 30^th, 2007 at 4:35pm:

Albert said: Regarding what Emanuel Swedenborg wrote, I recently checked out four of his books from the library, and after reading a little I stopped doing so, because some of his viewpoints are hard to believe. For example, in heaven and hell, he writes that when a male and female get married they merge as one, the male spirit takes on the role of intellect, and the female takes on the role of volition. ________ Albert I had to go to the dictionary for "volition."  I don't know about these statements either, I think they need much greater scrutiny, they seem incomplete. speaking just off the top of my cranium, there's only a few men I've met personally who could keep up with me intellectually. I have to rely on archtypes for guidance there. as for the definition of "volition" and speaking as a woman, my polarity choice in this lifetime only, the definition went like this: noun:   the act of making a choice (Example: "Followed my father of my own volition") it can be said in marriage between opposite polarities love of the highest order entails a desire to please. yet its beyond that aways. man and woman surrender to each other their respective egos and do merge. she is receptive in that regard, he is active in leading in his spirit. it has nothing to do with who's boss if they are in Oneness, like is described above. in general, we are not at that high of an evolutionary standard.

We need a bona fide Swendenborgian expert to advise us here.
However, I have a different take on this.  I do not read "surrender" into
this text.  I believe that to be a demeaning and confused  interpretation of
what he actually wrote

I see Swedenborg as saying that there is a division of labor for sheer functionality.
Accordingly, he is implying that we continue being as useful as possible.  Our
existance is for the greater good of all of the cosmos, not just as a personal ego trip.
I see this as an example of how we are going to, probably, have the opportunity
to work efficiently and effectively with ever-larger groupings of evolved beings

I read his remarks as follows: Half of the complete person, i.e. the E. S. angel,
reasons about a matter and presents it to the other half  which then decides whether
the angel should act upon it and how to act upon it .In other words, the feminine half, based upon the most clearly reasoned information available, is the deciding half.  I don't see that as losing one's intellect but rather using it effectively.  Frankly, one can hardly have too much information and it speaks to a future of active, rapid decision making.

Further, as a person becomes more involved in cosmological pursuits, knowledge that
was useful here ,in this dimension, probably would be less and less useful in other realms.
An analogy, even though it's good and useful knowledge to know how to pilot a plane,
when one can move with the speed of light or thought probably the earthly skill decays.
It surely doesn't mean that useful attitudes learned while driving (spirit of adventure, etc., ) would vanish.  That would be the useful, practical part and would enhance flexibility in
encountering the ever- expanding, extraordinary universe.
.  

I don't believe a person needs to be a Swedenborg expert to understand what he said about the issue of a female spirit, if there is such a thing, surrendering her intellect to a male spirit, if there is such a thing. Certainly oneness can be obtained without spirits who inhabited a female body for a while having to surrender their intellect to a spirit who used inhabit a male body.

I haven't run accross any other source that suggests what Swedenborg contends on this matter. It sure doesn't feel right to me.



vikingsgal wrote on May 30^th, 2007 at 5:31pm:

We need a bona fide Swendenborgian expert to advise us here. However, I have a different take on this.  I do not read "surrender" into this text.  I believe that to be a demeaning and confused  interpretation of what he actually wrote I see Swedenborg as saying that there is a division of labor for sheer functionality. Accordingly, he is implying that we continue being as useful as possible.  Our existance is for the greater good of the cosmos, not just as a personal ego trip. I see this as an example of how we are going to, probably, have to work with ever-larger groupings. I read his remarks as follows: Half of the complete person, i.e. the E. S. angel, reasons about a matter and presents it to the other half  which then decides whether the angel should act upon it and how to act upon it .In other words, the feminine half, based upon the most clearly reasoned information available, is the deciding half.  I don't see that as losing one's intellect but rather using it effectively.  Frankly, one can hardly have too much information and it speaks to a future of active, rapid decision making.

This summary of Swedenborg's ideas gets to the heart of our discussion about abstract thinking or reason in the spiritual world:

LOGIC

There are no connate ideas.40 Animals have no ideas of thought but they have instincts which can be called 'connate knowledges' corresponding to their affections; but man's perfection is in part due to his being born ignorant. 41 All his knowledge of individual things is gained a posteriori, through sense experience, and is cumulative and incomplete, never absolute.42 Yet what we call 'sensation' is not a physical influx into the mind, but it results from the influx of what is spiritual which forms itself into memories in accommodation to, or correspondence with, the state of the sensories.43

It is thus the spiritual which endows a sensory impulse with 'meaning,' whether this meaning be felt consciously or not. This would be impossible unless the spiritual soul were in the constant endeavor to "represent to itself the universe," and (even in the embryo) acted as if omniscient of all the possible states of its finite realm of both body and mind.44

The soul is entirely beyond the compass of conscious thought. Nor can the soul instruct the mind.45 Man is not born rational but is born with the faculties of rationality and liberty.46 The soul endows the mind with the faculty of drawing meanings from the changes of its sensories, and also with spontaneous patterns or inherent laws for rational thinking: patterns which the mind may fill in, or - from free will - avoid.47

This inborn faculty of rationality, or of seeing truths in light, enables a man to raise his understanding above his native will and to recognize truth contrary to his self interest.48

Certain laws of reason operate as connate endowments above man's consciousness and enable him to have a direct intuitive perception or acknowledgment of universals a priori. 49 The laws of "logic" are therefore inscribed on the mind from the first, and operate even in a babe.50 As man, consciously and a posteriori, fills out and confirms some of its patterns, he recognizes the resulting concept as an a priori doctrine from which he views his further experience.51

This mode of procedure is equally applicable to theological research, whether the data are gathered from a field of representative truths or from revealed doctrine. The doctrines thus formed are always conditioned upon a state of enlightenment and upon the clarity of a man's perception of universals.52 The perception of celestial good which was common with the most ancient people no longer exists. But a perception of what is just and right - or 'common sense' - exists naturally, based on knowledge.53

As an animal from influx knows his natural needs, so man, if rightly educated, can see, in things purely rational, moral, and spiritual, truths from the light of truth, which is from heaven and which is obscured only by confirmed falsities.54 On the other hand, to rely on artificial systems of logic and involved scholastic terms leads to the loss of 'common sense.'55


Matthew

Thank you so much, Matthew, for transcribing this cogent,  well-organized
argument.

I particularly like his view that our knowledge will be forever incomplete.(Remember
that in the late 19th century, it was argued that the US patent office should be
closed as everything that could possibly be invented had been invented.)
Thus, he argues for a vertical, ever- expanding growth as the ideal for both the
individual and mankind in general. Isn't this what's happening now?

Further, it is true that we choose to assign meanings based on previous sensory
experiences as seen through the filter of our own consciousness.  We need to recognize
this basic freedom of choice.

What's needful is to explore our personal use of will in assigning meanings.  Alot of
non-developmental stages could be surpassed by not working against ourselves
by resorting to habitual patterns that do not enhance anything.

At some point, apparently, we'll observe our actions and be called upon to accept
responsibility.  I think it's a good idea now to take a closer look at our own
actions and see if we were other-directed or actually having a frequent pity party.

To lead a useful life, one needs to extend one's self and focus on the needs of others.
All of us have read of people who have accomplished this.  Just now, an example
that comes to mind is a young person who sacrifices his life by physically blocking
a grenade explosion.  He acts against his basic, instinctual behavior of self preservation.

The comment about ancient people having a greater awareness of celestial good is
interesting.  I think he's hit on something there. Eons ago people did have a mystic
take on the world.  When we moved to the "only what can be measured" view.
we threw out the baby too.  These days, many recognize the sheer unknowability
of creation, and are utilizing intuition to gain insight.

Once again, thanks.  This is a fascinating thread.  :D

Vikingsgal

Hi all – hi there vikingsgal nice to meet you  :)

I once had this experience, it wasn’t so long ago, and it is those experiences which linger in memory forever.

I have a tiny box made out of shells and in the box are small shells I have collected while being on the coast here.  Also in this box is my small silver cross and a couple of silver and gold stars.

One day I opened the box and had this incredible flash almost vision run through my mind.  The scene was the coastline and the overall colour was this incredible warm golden hue.  The most amazing part was I felt myself to be part of the scene, I was the air, I was the beach, I was the sea, I was the clouds.

It is difficult to find the words to describe it exactly and I am not sure if I’m making sense to you but it was such a feeling of being part of nature and at the same time aware of everything including myself.

Every now and now I open my box to see if I can capture that scene again but it’s only happened once.


I can understand what Swedenborg is saying (I haven’t read his work but really enjoyed what you posted Matt) It is a very special thing he is talking about and the metaphor is so beautiful.  He’s talking about the Her/Him, the Soul (her) and the Spirit (him) joining in the ultimate marriage.

There are many interpretations and meanings to this poetry – I think it’s quite beautiful – a love story!  I think it is important for the soul (and spirit) to read poetry and other literature written by the elders for the nourishment of the soul which in turn awakens it into the area of being moved by feeling.

Sigh  :)

I've decided to resurrect this old thread for 2 reasons:
(1) It deals with a very important spiritual topic that is seldom discussed critically.
(2) Although some of the discussion here is the most intelligent I've encountered on any of my threads, I find most of the various suggestions finally unconvincing because of conflicting relevant claims from various "spiritual sources."  Please survey the thread and share your current thinking about this issue.

First of all, on rereading this thread, I have to say that it brought back memories, of how a great discussion could be had by all without a soap opera of personal attacks.  The next thing that comes to mind is how great it was to have Dave-MBS around, and how I miss him here after his sudden passing.  But the contributions of all including Bruce, Alysia, Vikingsgal, and all others was inspirational.

When I read the title of this thread, I think of Swedenborg's descriptions of the three stages of man after death.  The first stage is described as man being in his "outer aspects," much like he/she was while alive, vested in the ego, the mask of personality which was crafted while incarnate with societal norms in place, and culture - much of which was cultivated over a lifetime. 

The second stage after death is described as a move toward our inner aspects - i.e., our true intentions, and inner loves, which may be restrained or masked by the cloak of our earthly training, mask or personality.  At a certain point in spirit, we begin to allow any pretense from our earthly egos to melt away, so that we follow our true inner inclinations and do not put up a false front as so many do to interact in the physical world.  Here, at this stage, a person's true intentions tend to be amplified.  If a person's intentions were loving and good while incarnate, during the second stage they tend to follow that path and remain rational and wise; if they were evil, they then drifted toward their inner nature and became more irrational and unloving.

The third stage, according to ES, was a state of instruction.  This stage generally was only encountered in those who were bound for a heavenly plane, as those who who were bound for a hellish plane he found could not be taught, for they preferred to turn their back toward real love and goodness in favor of their own pleasure in the plane they belonged too. 

One of the main questions that comes up is what do we retain as we progress along these stages after death?

M

DocM wrote on Jun 4^th, 2017 at 11:38pm:

One of the main questions that comes up is what do we retain as we progress along these stages after death?M

But what is there to retain? If we leave out the physical body, there are emotions and thoughts.

If I were to close my eyes, my awareness can register external sounds for example, and internal emotions and thoughts. But not only is there awareness, but also an internal initiative that decides to keep the eyes closed or to open them.

So you, Uno, have a unique earthly personality; likes, dislikes, memories, thoughts.  There are outer aspects which have accumulated over time; things you've been taught, societal norms, the mask we all wear to interact with others.  However, some of what makes you Uno has to do with your inner motivations and primary love/focus. 

So what is there to retain?  Well, earthly memories for one.  Some of our memory is tied to correspondences in the earthly plane.  So there is a theory that while in spirit long enough we may refocus our thought/intentions on our new reality and not access some of these memories when we are apart from physical reality.  At the first stage after death, all memories appear to be intact, but as we progress to our inner nature, it is unclear how often and when we can access these memories.  That issue, if true, is troubling to many. 

These questions strike me as potentially helpful,
(1) In our dream consciousness, we normally seem far less astute in our critical faculties and scope of awareness.  How analogous is such dream consciousness to disembodied consciousness after death? 

(2) Most of us love our families and, if it were up to us, we would be eager to reassure them of our wellbeing and survival after our death.  So why aren't  ADCs with convincing verifications more common?  Is it because most of us don't know how to make such ADC contacts?  Or is it because the earth memories of most of us become dormant soon after death?  What, then, about the exceptions who provide us convincing ADCs?  [See my ADC thread.]   Are they simply earthbound spirits whose status as such makes it easier for them to make postmortem contact with their surviving loved ones?  Or are their energetic vibrations more in sync with the loved ones they contact?   Or have they simply been able to shed limiting beliefs that prevent ADC encounters from happening?  Perhaps research into the personality types and religious/ philosophical backgrounds of postmortem ADC contactors might hint at the answer. 

Good point about accumulation DocM. And regarding what there is to retain I forgot about values.

My first alleged memory is when being 1 year and 7 months old. I remember raising myself by a chair, falling down and raising myself while out of the blue being hushed several times. My mom was watching TV and there was news she was emotional about. I remember what the news was about. I remember the house we allegedly were at and the color of the house. If the memory itself was important to me, I could check with my mom and the verification would be at the mercy of her memory. The important takeaway though is the possibility and concept of a false memory. I do not remember using a pacifier in my early years, but I have seen pictures that confirms my previous addiction. I have noticed that my own memory and the memory of others vary from reliable, to unreliable, to the actual opposite of what is true (according to my memory). Some people have problematic and traumatic memories that resurface after a number of years.

TheDonald wrote on Jun 5^th, 2017 at 12:39am:

(1) In our dream consciousness, we normally seem far less astute in our critical faculties and scope of awareness.

The quality of awareness in my dreams that is most common is being along for the ride, like a passenger having a look out the window. Then with lucid dreams there can also be partial and not full lucidity. I've found changing the size of a pair of shoes to be harder than flying when gaining lucidity (being able to decide). The last lucid dream to my recollection was treating the objects in the dream world as 3D ojects in a computer program and then zooming into the objects and checking the resolution of the texture wrapping themselves around the forms/objects.

I would add to your questions (2): is it common to be unaware about one's death and hence the newly deceased will then not want to contact loved ones? Also I expect some deaths resulting from accidents to be quite shocking and confusing. One minute a person could be walking down a hill to suddenly loose footing, tumble down, raise up and find a familiar body in the field of view.

Uno: "I would add to your questions (2): is it common to be unaware about one's death and hence the newly deceased will then not want to contact loved ones? Also I expect some deaths resulting from accidents to be quite shocking and confusing."

Yes, those 2 issues could be factors to help explain an initial failure to contact surviving loved ones.  But of course, both issues would also imply a badly diminished level of lucidity and astuteness. 

Surely TMI and other astral adepts could explore these questions by seeking out new arrives to the afterlife and studying their mental condition.  ES is the only adept to my knowledge who does this for 3 stages of the arrival process, but he doesn't explicitly address my  questions.   But his discovery of the onset of memory dormancy comes closest to a truly experience-based answer.  Yet his concession that God at times restores memory for His own purpose (e. g. past life reviews) may also signal a window of opportunity for an ADC contact.  What seems unlikely is the chatty ease with which mediums claim to to routinely mediate such contact. 

Following what there is to retain at death, I'll try to exemplify conscience, so help me God, with a simple and hopefully suitable example for a public forum. But first some definitions:

Conscience:
A guide for one's behaviour
Awareness of one's actions as being either morally right or wrong
Awareness of right and wrong that governs a persons's thoughts and actions
Awareness of right and wrong in one's conduct and motives, impelling one toward right action
Inner judge/voice of right and wrong to guide one's conduct
The highest sense within our self of what is good and right to do by others (1796/Crossbow)
The urge to prefer right over wrong
The responsibility of one's own words and deeds (Morrighan)

Like:
To feel attraction toward, to feel inclined, to take pleasure (feeling of enjoyment) in

Example:
I was a potato employee for my former employer, and it turned out to be a dynamic position to learn about the structure and the people from top to bottom, and sometimes assignments nobody else would do. One assignment was taking pictures of collected stray animals, in order to see if any of them became reported as missing or else they would be killed. I hesitated about the scenario and when learning about who had collected the animals. I knew the man had been convicted for harming my ex-girlfriend when she was growing up, but eventually agreed to do the snapshots.

Not knowing what to expect I stepped into the room where the animals were and my first thought was "this is wrong" and then took a closer look around. The room was barely lit, cold, damp, the cages were way too small and the animals seemed alarmed/frightened but yet settled. My emotional reaction started swirling, but composed myself quickly and decided to do what I agreed to do with smooth movements and be quick about it to try to minimise the duration they had to spend with the stranger. And of course, my exposure to the situation would end. The way back to work took a short time, while thinking about the whole situation and how to address it while my emotions were boiling and bubbling. I met my employer on the way in and told him that the pictures were taken, and that it was likely that he would be accused of animal abuse if there was to be an inspection. I don't remember the exact response only that it was defensive and swift. When I came back home and met the cat of the house, shame and post-cowardice lingered for the rest of the day, while questioning myself, how I could have done better, how my weakness betrayed my sense of doing what was right, though I wasn't really sure what was right. I did one more round of pictures and then at least the room was lit and the cages were much bigger. Soon after the collection stopped, not to my involvement.

Questions:
If what we like and what we don't like are treated as right and wrong, how likely is one to pay attention to conscience? How likely is one to be aware of one's conscience when one is wrapped up in or centred around what we don't like or what we do like, seeing that as the most trustworthy compass? Does one eye conscience when too emotional?

If you like doing good and have a clear sense of what is good then it there is a fortunate compatibility, yet if somebody likes to harm children then like is revealed to be relative.

Is a halo/nimbus symbolic of conscience? Awareness? Something else? https://ibb.co/cMFHyF