This is a topic that had to come out in its own thread, and I may just be the right guy to put it out there, and then put the whole thing to rest.  Often in discussions on this forum, we hear criticisms of retrievals and other mystical experences referred to as bogus daydreams or the imaginings of a New Age quackadoodle (Don tends to alternate between the word "wackadoodle" and "quackadoodle").  There are erudite discussions citing alleged verifications and "proof" of firsthand mystical experiences.  If what one person says doesn't pass the sniff test - it is dismissed by another as a lucid dream or self delusion.  When some contributors, like Dave-MBS, or Mairlyn bring up their own experiences with either past live regression or past lives, they are at times unfairly dismissed altogether.

Meanwhile, the majority of open minded people on this forum listen to each other, read the posts, throw in their own comments, and share their experiences.  Some have their own bend.....the Chumleys with their negative spin on immortality or the Darths with their anti-religious zeal.  But at least there is a sharing of ideas - a resonance of open minds tossing things out there to be taken as they will.  Over time, many of us take concepts, and when they ring true to us again and again, we decide to accept them into our thinking.  Certain terms such as "like attracts like" to describe the afterlife and how people move after death, or "as above, so below," to describe how certain fundamental laws of the universe likely apply in the afterlife as well.  Other concepts such as Swedenborg's dictum that chritian spirituality is about love of God and love of one's fellow man resonate with Bruce Moen's finding that we are here to learn to express pure unconditional love.  

As the ideas are bandied back and forth, our consciousness expands and grows.  Some call the incorporation of various concepts from christianity, buddhism, zen, taoism, etc. "New Age thought."  Don has called it a "ghetto mentality," and doesn't realize how many of us he insults by doing so.  The main criticism levied against this New Age thought is that in it, everyone's point of view may be correct - as such, anyone's experience, be it a retrieval, lucid dream, or partnered exploration, is taken at face value as being a true experience.  One senior member here said at one point that she was a reincarnation of St. Peter.  A critic scoffed at this notion - yet the same critic described in detail how a deceased relative (of a member of his parish) entered a car of a loved one in "materialized form" and drove a certain distance after death, before dissolving again into the afterlife.  Somehow, that was believeable, yet the St. Peter reincarnation was not.

If you go back through this forum far enough you will see much written about thought in the physical plane and the afterlife.  Many sources have found that in areas like focus 27 or the heavens - thought is immediately translated into reality.  Swedenborg described this centuries before Monroe and Moen.  In the "real world," the translation of thought and belief into reality is less direct, but just as real - and this has been the topic of a number of good threads on Bruce's forum.  

We also see that in the afterlife there are belief system territories, where individuals who adhere to rigorous religious doctrine find their own heavens, until something comes by that shakes their rigid belief structure enoguh that they realize there is more to consciousness.  At that point, we are told, they move on to different focus levels (heavens, or planes).  

So what is the difference between a New Age Wackadoodle, and a conservative fact driven explorer of spirituality?  The answer, my friends is that of belief systems.  The fact driven explorer wants everything proven, referenced and verifable.  This is his/her belief system.  If it is not supported by documentation and hard evidence, it is imaginary.  For the New Age explorer, it is not the written documentation that is sought in exploring spirituality - it is the direct experience itself!  It is the direct contact with the divine, the direct exploration that provides verification and spiritual growth.  Is it possible, that the New Ager will be more prone to error and daydreaming?  Of course - but the open mindedness is bound to let thought develop into reality (as it is want to do).

Daydreaming is part of the imagination method that Bruce teaches both to make contact with the deceased and to explore.  The trick is to start off with an open mind, and allow things to unfold without forcing the process of imagination beyond a certain point.  Then, when verifiable facts come out of the experience, it is clear that the ability to open one's mind and heart to imagination was not mere fakery, but an essential part of the mystical experience.

I have been raised in the United States to believe in and respect logic, documentation and reason.  Most of my medical practice is based upon case control studies showing what is the best way to treat people.  Yet the spiritual side of medicine - the intangibles of healing not easily explained by controlled data has become just as important and interesting to my practice as the textbooks of facts that I have studied.

If one could only choose to either be a New Age Wackadoodle, or a fact and documentation driven explorer, I suppose that I would have to be counted among the "Wack pack," if it were just one or the other.  I still am striving to combine both, however, true spirituality can only be assesed from the direct experience.  If I only count on written documentation, I am using logic to adopt a belief system of someone else rather than try to explore with my own open mind.  Until we merge with the divine, we all go from one belief system to another - like trying on new clothes.  The least restricted belief system, the better for spiritual growth.

I will be happy to debate anyone on the virtues behind what is commonly termed New Age thought - I am hopeful, but doubtful that this thread may put an end to the belittling and demeaning remarks I have seen out of one corner of the forum.  But we'll see.

Matthew

One of my ideas that I picked up from Bob Ross is that "We don't make mistakes, we have happy accidents."  I am one who likes to work with road maps of the afterlife, but I don't conform to any belief system and just do my best to not see the symbols through colored glasses.  One reason of infinite reasons that this might upset some people, but not all, is because they might feel a rush of power when somebody is seeing things through their ideals and the rush of power over people is their addiction.  The need to be right, the fear of being wrong, it could be anything aside from what I have mentioned.

Think about how many Fundamentalist Christian groups expect you to give unquestioning worship to a Holy Bible, the sect of Scientists that expect unquestioning worship to Darwin Evolution and/or accidental creation of life because we just got lucky, and how there are those that expect that we give unquestioning faith to their favorite documentaries.  I support freedom of speech and the respect of opinions first and foremost and loving respect for the people's right to individuality.

Also, the name calling seems a common tactic to take focus off of somebody and put it on somebody they want to discredit to boost their ego and it's supporting belief system.  When somebody has their ego well tamed, then they would see criticism as a means of expanding their knowledge given that this criticism does nor require submission to someone's authority.  The book "The Celestine Prophecy" gives an interesting view on this mental war as rooted in belief systems that see a world where you gain power by taking it from somebody else.

Written With Love,
Steve Edward

Quote:

So what is the difference between a New Age Wackadoodle, and a conservative fact driven explorer of spirituality?  The answer, my friends is that of belief systems.  The fact driven explorer wants everything proven, referenced and verifable.  This is his/her belief system.  If it is not supported by documentation and hard evidence, it is imaginary.  For the New Age explorer, it is not the written documentation that is sought in exploring spirituality - it is the direct experience itself!  It is the direct contact with the divine, the direct exploration that provides verification and spiritual growth.  Is it possible, that the New Ager will be more prone to error and daydreaming?  Of course - but the open mindedness is bound to let thought develop into reality (as it is want to do).   Daydreaming is part of the imagination method that Bruce teaches both to make contact with the deceased and to explore.  The trick is to start off with an open mind, and allow things to unfold without forcing the process of imagination beyond a certain point.  Then, when verifiable facts come out of the experience, it is clear that the ability to open one's mind and heart to imagination was not mere fakery, but an essential part of the mystical experience.

So then a little question, that comes to my mind from time to time, is the direct experience really more valuable than facts? One could argue that the approach, driven by experience, could be self betrayal, because there are much things that one can imagine and hold on to, even if they are simply not true. It lacks objectivity. It lacks a certain principle, that appeals to everyone, a law, that everyone is involved with.
It seems more of a dream, that is that easy to shift from here to there and back, and mostly bringing back with you, that what you asked for before going on a journey.
Therefore it is so easy to refuse.
Only because I believe, that means not that it really is like that. And that is the general problem, to verify, if that, we are searching for, really exists, or if it is just to comfort our fears. Even if it sounds morbid, some day everyone will get the correct answers to the big question of if there is an afterlife or not. Here we can only assume, from what we learned or experienced (what is for sure imperfect, to fully understand  our/the universes' origin and where we/it will "go".
Another issues are the impressions one gets from the place he seems to go after passing out. NDE e.g., there is one thing that is the same in every of these experiences, the tunnel and the light, but the visions of heaven, or how it looks are that far away from being the same, that one could really argue, if it is just imaginary, I assume that "heaven" must be the same for everyone, just like it is on earth, we share the same planet, it is not a mix of different realities crashing together. There might be differences in thinking, but it is the same place.
There is obviously also much emotion involved, always (in the eye of what we learned about what serious evidence is) leaves room for suspicion.
Might be that the feeling when entering the afterlife via oob/nde/ap is the same, but to the travelers disadvantage, feelings are not measurable, or listed, only the words that try to express what the traveler has experienced, but this is also arguable.

That is at least a few of the doubts I have concerning what you said, no offense to be taken, only the doubts of one, who has never reached what you already did (have to add that I received Voyage Beyond Doubt and Voyages Into The Unknown today, it may help to get rid of ONLY thinking after facts).

Yours sincerely,

pulsar

Hi Pulsar,

The intent of those who consider themselves New Age, is to attempt to verify experiences and not delude themselves with daydreams.  However, the approach to mysticism through meditation and an open mind, to use the imagination (guided thought) to get things going is often how things begin.  What happens after a certain point is that the mystical experience takes on a life of its own, and the person in meditation then tries to see if after starting the process they can explore and then verify that some real information was obtained.

So my point was not that "everyone is right," no matter if they are daydreaming or getting an independent communication.  This is the mistake that rigid critics of New Age thought make frequently.  They end up saying that if a New Ager has a bad pizza and a nightmare, to them it will have been a true mystical experience (etc.).  

The ideal then is to approach spiritual investigation with an open heart and mind.  Many have employed Bruce Moen's imagination method to "get things going," as thought is independent from physical reality, and can truly manifest in both the spiritual and the common physical plane.  But imagination is not meant to supersede the real communication that it attracts.  You may then ask "how do we know where imagination ends and where real communication begins?"  A good question.  This one is difficult to answer.  Some people here will tell you they "just know."  Some, like those who have NDEs (such as Howard Storm) are absolutely convinced that they are in the presence of the divine.

The best way to document the "truth," behind mystical experience seems to be to try to obtain some objective verification (names/events/items, etc.) that accompanies the direct experience.  Documentation itself, while inspiring, does not elicit the same spiritual reaction as being part of the communication, first hand.


Matthew

There will alwas be people  that come to boards like this one because of the desperate need to have their egos pumped up and their need to control other souls. Some closed minded people who can not except realities other than there own religious fundamentalism will revert to the name calling and demand that only their beliefs are correct. Some of these people are even start their own churchs or cults and can be some of the most dangerous people on the planet. For example Jim Jones. The message was all about God but the end result was all about his ego and the necessity to die for him and his twisted beliefs. There easier to spot if you look closely... They start their own churchs, have very fundamentalist beliefs...say that they can heal a lot of times...only their way of believing is the right way...everyone else is wrong, stupid or inferior to them and what they belief in. Etc etc. Their beliefs will bring You closer to God. Sound like someone you know here? Well guess what, he's/she's most likely here and you might want to consider keeping your kids locked up. Was most likely kicked out of his/her church for inappropriate behavior but has never seen himself/herself as wrong. Most likely was a bully growing up. Probably has a church or prayer group. or both, going on right now. I will bet can't see these thing as even being related to him/her. Dangerous, dangerous, dangerous. I've seen one here and he knows that I know just what he's all about. He's collecting souls for his belief system territory so that he won't be alone. I hope he enjoys his own hell someday without trapping to many. I will be there to help get them out and to move on.
PS: I like my life in the Ghetto. A lot of really nice people live/visit here.  
Joe        

Hi matthew I think that this new age label should not be, as you and i and all on here have our own ideas annd thoughts about everything from God to the afterlife,we are all the same inside as we are all spirit,and when i am on here i feel great because of the love we all share and it helps me face the crapped up world out there.

I want to see my life through to the end but knowing that i can go to the spirit world one day and i wont be living in some crapped up hellhole anymore is the highlight of my life,you are one of the most honest souls on here matthew as we all are and there is so much feeling in what you write on here,what i mean by this new age label should not be,because we should not have to be labelled because we have our own thoughts.

Love to you matthew and all on here God bless    Love juditha

I have mixed feelings about this.  I'm with Don in that I don't like it when sources of information, wherever they come from, deny the life of Jesus and his crucifixion. Some of them are intentionally deceptive, some are irresponsible.

On the other hand, I believe there are a lot good hearted, well meaning people who visit this board. I'm certain that God, Christ, the divine powers that be, love them very much.  I don't believe you get people to change their ways by being judgmental towards them. If you seriously want to help somebody, the way to begin is to love them as much as you can. Once you do this, you'll see how wonderful they are, even if they don't share your viewpoints, and you won't feel the need to demonize them.  If satan does in fact exist (???),  when we demonize others because we're afraid they're being influenced by him and his supposed demons, we accomplish what he has in mind, rather than what God and Christ have in mind. They want us to love everybody. Jesus was pretty big on telling people to not throw stones.

Whatever spiritual truth is all about, in the end, as long as we live according to love, each of us will find what divine truth is in our own time.  Certainly the amount of love we have in our hearts is more important than what we believe.  Fear and a judgmental attitude prevent us from living according to love.  Whatever dark spirits exist, they can't harm us if we choose to live according to love and goodness.

P.S. to Don. I love your Biblical knowledge and devotion to God and Christ, so I hope you stay around. :)

Albert (not Don Dave ;))

Hehe, this thread has reached 6 replies and 66 views, but I just felt like saying that just for fun.   ;)

Anyway, I sort of experienced the opposite that "Recoverer" mentioned about Jesus, in that my former branch of Christianity accepted Jesus and constantly hammered on about the eternal suffering and pain for those who reject the offer of eternal life from Jesus;  "But, he loves you!!" :o  Ironically, their methods did more discrediting for me than good for what they were teaching but I am finished ranting about them and hope for them to experience a true taste of love.  Check out Westboro Baptist Church if you want to see this zero tolerance taken to hilarity.

As for my ties with Jesus Christ, I will seek to meet him, or just let him meet me without any presumption about his existence.  In other words, I shall just assume that all exists.

Yours Truly,
Steve Edward

It is possible that critics simply cause more solidarity to arise here. No one is trying to "prove" anything by putting their experiences on the forum. They are simply reporting their experiences, and that is perfectly appropriate.

The experience is the message, to my point of view, and everyone here has the same right and opportunity to report whatever they choose.

Therefore, I am unconcerned about such criticism. Some critics choose to berate and shame people, not only in vague and derogatory language, but also with harsh words toward individuals. This is nothing new, unique, or really very interesting at all.

We can find this sort of thing everywhere if we allow it to divert our attention from our own paths. Not that it is wrong to be diverted. But it is our choice whether to allow our own selves to be diverted in such a manner.

I am interested in what makes people happy. For me, it is this present moment, inclusive of all that it contains.

Therefore, I love critics, when they complain, and when they don't. They are really reaching for the sublime in their own way. I suppose we can applaud their honesty; however, from my own personal experience, I know that even when we think we are being honest, that is not always the case.

love, blink :)

I believe the below is a good approach. If a person has the ability to make contact spiritually, it is better he or she find out for his or herself, rather than relying what other people tell he or she.

As has probably been made clear on my past posts, I'm a person who couldn't be convinced until I had my own experiences.  It isn't about meeting a dictator like being. In fact, during a period of time where my posts were a bit on the judgmental side (I still haven't completely lost that part of myself), I received the message one night, "You make us sound like a bunch of dictators." Certainly if Christ is a key part of divine reality, in the spirit of love, he would be so in a very joyful way, not a repressive way. I still consider it possible that when Bruce Moen met the planning intelligence, he met what some people would refer to as Christ. Certainly the intelligence he met wasn't some dictator like being.


wrote on Aug 31^st, 2007 at 1:50pm:

As for my ties with Jesus Christ, I will seek to meet him, or just let him meet me without any presumption about his existence.  In other words, I shall just assume that all exists. Yours Truly, Steve Edward

Hi Matthew-
I tend to tke the "everybody is right" attitude, but I also realize that the realm within which they are right might be limited.  Still, when I get a lot of roughly similar reports from serious literature (not the popular kind that is about "he said that she said" or the parrotting of cliches ) by serious authors, such as Swedenborg and Tibetan writings, and the comparisons with the Judeo-Christian Bible, and the mystical writings of the Sufis, then I tend to view that as a moderately good guide toward truth.

My approach is to try to describe things in terms of math, lambda calculus, quantum effects, thermodynamics and so on. I can generally describe the surrounding limits within which reality must lie (for example, as I was telling someone else recently,  reality is surrounded by emptiness and exists between the "ultimate beginning" and the "ultimate end") but this is little better than the more popular mythic expressions of all major religious groups.  So I doubtless qualify for at least one Quack by virtue of saying this. My history started with agnosia, and then Christian beliefs which eventualy led me to Hindu philosophy and then Buddhism  - not in violation of any of the prior tenets, but rather as a mens of refining them. I tend to find some truth in all of these, but nobody seems to have a monopoly on it yet.

I do get the impression that we can make a fair estimation of what is true and not by paying attention to those aspects of belief that are self-supporting, and by eliminating those that are clearly self-negating - and then maybe taking the rest with a grain of salt. In this respect I feel that participating on the Forum here has been valuable - even when it's dealing with a more negative focus - and that through it I personally have grown. That may have nothing to do with ultimate truth, but it seems to work for me.  :D
dave

Doc-

To me, the new age material is like the internet.....it is a huge stew of solid information mixed in with all kinds of crackpots.

The key is in discernment, separating the wheat from the chaff.  Therein lies the rub.

For example, let's take Nanner's story about the death of her friend and the apparent manipulation of her computer after her friend died.

Can things like this actually happen?  If we say yes, then I'd like to pose this question-  hundreds of millions of people own computers.  Therefore, if what nanner said can actually happen, it stands to reason that it shouldn't be unique or rare.  It should happen at least frequently enough that we could find many cases similar to it in the literature.

So, the question is, why are cases like that so extremely rare?

I propose a little experiment.....suppose all of us, when we go to bed tonight, leave our computer on with a word processing program open, with a blank screen and the cursor blinking.

Since all of us either have a friend or loved one who is deceased, wouldn't it stand to reason that at least a few of us would wake up in the morning and find a message on the screen?

My own feeling is that none of us would.  The real question is, why?

R

Hi rondele I think thats a good idea and i am going to try that tonight and if anything is on my computer in the morning ,i will put it on here as i beleive that can happen.

Love and God bless      love juditha

rondele wrote on Aug 31^st, 2007 at 4:00pm:

Doc- ......For example, let's take Nanner's story about the death of her friend and the apparent manipulation of her computer after her friend died. Can things like this actually happen?  If we say yes, then I'd like to pose this question-  hundreds of millions of people own computers.  Therefore, if what nanner said can actually happen, it stands to reason that it shouldn't be unique or rare.  It should happen at least frequently enough that we could find many cases similar to it in the literature. So, the question is, why are cases like that so extremely rare? I propose a little experiment.....suppose all of us, when we go to bed tonight, leave our computer on with a word processing program open, with a blank screen and the cursor blinking. Since all of us either have a friend or loved one who is deceased, wouldn't it stand to reason that at least a few of us would wake up in the morning and find a message on the screen? My own feeling is that none of us would.  The real question is, why? R

First of all, you are making assumptions about someone's experience, Rondele. You assume that if such a visitation occurred through the use of a computer, that it shouldn't be rare. What makes you think it shouldn't be rare? What makes you think that it should be common?

You are operating on an assumption.

Yes, it would be interesting if every single one of us focused on one night, and all left our computers on. Let's do it. Who wants to sign up?

Perhaps there is an element of group "ownership" of this problem that must be addressed. Should we all meditate first? What would be the process? Let's talk about it.

love, blink :)

Sincerely.....I mean it. Would we pose a question to "the universe" or how would we accomplish such a thing?

Are we still afraid to succeed? Would that affect the outcome?

How would we feel, collectively and individually, if we were successful, together, and attracted a great deal of outside attention because of it?

Would we be ready for it? Would we be able to handle it? Would we inspire others?

Or would critics find a way to destroy what we achieved honestly, by discrediting it somehow?

I believe in the power of the group, and the availability of spirit to communicate to each of us individually, and collectively. What is this group willing to do to achieve its aims? Do we have a common aim?

love, blink :)

Rondele, Consider the amount of people who have been saying that the world is coming to an end, or that Christ is returning. Just because we are still manifesting "being here" and that no one is having a conversation on CNN with JC, does not mean that is is not going to, or in fact is not presently about to, or is happening. Christ could well be here already. So when it comes to these strainge things happening on peoples PC's, lights going out, radio interference and the like. I think its for real. Some people just are not ready to except or even notice whats going on. Some people have seen UFO's. I have not, but know their is no reasion for them not to be there. Another example is the miracles portrayed in the bible. Just because only a few were to see does not mean they did not happin. I do like your experiment idea, and I would be willing to be a part of it also.

Hi blink and joe ,im willing to be part of it to,i think it is a great idea.

love and God bless  Love juditha

Alright, I'll leave my Word Processor on tonight as well...

Do we want to give spirits one night, or more time to build some momentum here? Do we demand that it happen tonight, or do we give it a week? What is appropriate? Does it matter?

I'm willing to do this every night for a week. I'm actually willing to do this every night for the rest of my life if it actually produces a result.

That might be a logistical nightmare, though.....and it would require the patience of a saint, which I am not.  I will certainly join all of you tonight, and any others later who miss this go around.

love, blink :)

Tonight I will meditate on this item, postulating on some communication, with some being who has passed on and that the communication be shaired with me through a manifestation of a electrical sort that I can observe and be awair of when I wake up and look at my PC. I will do this exercise for the long weeend and report any finding back to this thread on Tues.( now if I see my PC in my sleep will that count?)
Joe

So, is there anything we are missing? Shall we leave this open-ended? I don't imagine that a photograph from a computer screen is going to convince anyone unless they stood in front of the computer the entire time to know what happened.

Still, if anyone receives a result, whatever it is, a photograph cannot do any harm.

Essentially, this comes down to trust. Do we trust each other? Do we trust the spirit world to make a meaningful connection with us?

love, blink :)

Okay, I have opened a Word document on a home computer which I restarted. I did not touch the document once it opened. If it fails for some reason, I will make note of it and reopen it if I can. If not, I will open a new document.

My curser is at the ready, as they say. I have spoken out loud to anyone listening in the area of my room. I have said a silent prayer to any and all concerned. I have emphasized that I don't really care what the response is, I just want one, not for my own curiosity's sake, although there would be nothing wrong with that, but for the sake of the unity of the people on this forum. Surely, there must be a spirit out there willing to cooperate, and willing to press at least a few keys on the computer. If it takes a week to get those keys pressed, then so be it.

The thing is, I must not have written it, and it must be something that makes sense to an average human being.

love, blink :)

The experiment, while logical has been offered up in various forms by skeptics for centuries, even by the likes of the Amazing Randi, who has never had to pay any psychic or medium 1,000,000 if they could prove contact with the afterlife - none have ever accepted and succeeded.  In fact it is not so easy for the deceased to contact us using conventional physical objects, and on the rare occasions that it happens it is tailored to a specific person and their specific spiritual needs.

Of all the funerals goin on, day after day, how many have paranormal occurrences which are verifiable?   Few to none.  That is how it is; there are spiritual laws, and at this stage (being incarnate on earth), most of us can't explain why verifications are not more commonplace.including

In my next thread, I plan to post on a famous medium of the 20th century, who provided what seemed like perfect verification from a deceased person, actually two deceased people, using a code and words which seemed that only they could have known.  However, it was later found that it all was one of the most well researched and clever frauds of recent history.  Had this fraud never been uncovered, some on this board would have looked on the impressive documented verifications as proof of the afterlife and the medium would have been celebrated as a divinely gifted psychic.  

Matthew

Hey everyone,

Just wanted to add something concerning the daydreaming method, Matthew referred to. I also tried to get access to my subconsciousness via daydreaming, just let the thoughts flow, but not with the intend to travel to different realms. I do it mostly for more profane reasons, e.g. when I feel like my mind is overloaded and I am confused, or working on a task and it does not work well and I lose patience or desire to resign, I just switch to this daydreaming mode, in order to calm down, to structure what is buzzing around my brain, so to have the possibility to go on more relaxed, not in a hurry.
One may ask what that has to do with subconsciousness. Well, the subconsciousness is what I would call a section where our innermost feelings, goals and beliefs are "stored".
So for me it works, when I just use this method to remind myself why I am really doing e.g. this task, because I want to, not only need to do so, so reminding myself that it is a part of the puzzle, that, when put together, is what my future (the future I want, not the one that is forced on me) is. That helps to ease exhaustion, and to view this task with more, I call it hypocritically "empathy", not just stubborn chewing.

But I doubt, even if you get some information about the afterlife, that it must be just like the image you got from it. In my former post I talked about this different type of views on heaven that people who had the matching experiences, described.
So if I got it right, according to the general beliefs, one is creating his own reality, right?
So referring to heaven, which is suggested to be a place of salvation, as  the views on how salvation must be like  in the eye of different people are also varying.
I assumed that the feeling that one gets of heaven might be the same, now I refer to some nde's I read  the net, all describe the same kind of feelings, unconditional love, being one with god, feeling of being united with an allknowing consciousness and therefor feeling like the thirst for the biggest question about life being quenched.
If the feeling is the same, might be an approach towards the question wether there is something behind the curtain or not.
The next point is, that researchers tried to gather information on the quantity of such phenomenons, I remember an attempt with 60 patients in near death conditions, only 8 of those really had an nde.
On the background of this, I now tend to ask, how valuble this experiences are, if they were just lack of oxygen or a trip made up in our mind, through biochemical reactions, the brain emitting dmt, that is able to bring across such experiences, a brain lacking oxygen is also able to play "mind trips".
There we have low quantity. So maybe attemps like this might not be the right way to access the ultimate truth. But the dmt thesis is only one explanation, I remeber a patient named Pam, during her surgery she was set "braindead", flat line brainwaves. So might we say the consciousness is there but not necessarily placed in our brain.
But where to search then? Religious teachings sometimes refer to the heart as the place to be for our soul.
So if the brain is not neccessary to emulate conscious feelings... .
These are for sure just some little "facts" from observing, but they seem not to convey about if "it" is real or not.

So I do not want to say that your methods are only a matter of phantasy (phantasy for me, even if I am stuck with my believing in facts, is the highest gift on can get. Imagination, visionary thinking, is not only spiritual bound, I think science would not have been possible, if there haven't been people, with the ability to imagine how to make a the principles in nature "touchable", you know that the models used in physics to explain how the laws, nature is bound to (not in a biological sense) work, it is a concept that was bred in a "visionary" brain. But what makes this laws accessable, is some mathematic approach.
Won't work for the afterlife, but I found an interesting book, you might have heard of Frank J. Tiplers' "The Physics of Immortality", claiming via his omega point theory to be able to verify god by formulas used in physics, I went not through the entire book, but may present it here on the board, when I am through.

So it is logic vs. intuition. One could really say that we just, in order to scientific approach to explain the universe/nature, have dismissed intuition as being just a cave mans device to live by.

The more I think about this, the more I know that I really do not know.

Love,

pulsar

Name calling, such as dismissing somebody as "Crackpot" seems to me like a way of evading discussion since is dismisses it as not worth discussing.  Why do the existence "crack pots" need to be a strong factor on whether the internet is trustworthy, and why be so fearful that people are out to convert or deceive one? We can stay locked up in our homes fearing that a walk in the park makes up open to murderers and rapists, or we can love the world and consider that we can are in command of our own life, and we do not need to fall victim to a random, cruel world.  In fact, focusing on faults in character tends to make one blind to what is actually of value.

Getting dirty is part of the process of growing.  Remember how Bruce Moen learned about the nature of fear by jumping right into the sticky goo?  Not the wisest decision, but he still learned a lesson regardless of the injury.

The "Us VS Them" trend is one trend I am wishing we can outgrow once and for all.  This fear of individuality, I think, drives various fear machines, like evil governments, war, hatred, etc.  

""
Steve Edward

Doc-

Is the fraud story the same one that Don had told us about sometime ago?

Don's story about Leonard, who saw his deceased son reappear to him and actually sat next to him as his son drove his truck....yes, Leonard and his son had a close relationship but so do countless millions of other people who never have an experience that even comes close to Leonard's.  

The real question remains....why are cases like Leonard's so extremely rare?  One thing that bothers me is that there seldom is a witness to the event who can independently verify the story.  The experience seems to be limited to the reappearance of the deceased and the person to whom he/she appears.  That makes verification virtually impossible.

Yes, we can say that Nanner and her deceased friend were very close, and that's why her friend was able to manipulate her computer.  That's probably true, but given that fact, we then have to ask ourselves what existed in that particular relationship that apparently doesn't exist in millions upon millions of other equally close relationships?

I have yet to be convinced that we survive death.  Before I get flamed, let me also say that I'm more than willing to change my mind.  Both my parents have died and I would be immensely comforted if I somehow knew they continue to exist.

R

Greetings,

I got nothing, except some strange dreams.

But what that 'prooves' could be that
my afterlife contacts were busy
or reassigned to new incarnations
or not in vital condition enough (too ethereal) to poke at our material instruments,
etc.

WackadoodleBets   :)

Nothing yet, but I'm feeling the vibe, the open door vibe.....it's a good one  :)

I dreamed about my present lifetime being related to redeeming myself for some lifetimes that didn't balance out.  I learn that beside motherly birth, there is at least one other way to be born as well.  I am shown a symbol of a pipe with a body inside of it.  The pipe and body is at a beach.  According to the dream, I think I was "born of the pipe", but I would like to review that dream to clarify.  In addition, I dreamed of my past lives being something like a aged, dark office building (file cabinets, desks, etc.)

Then, I have a daydream about "my central server bank" losing it's cooling system.

It is a well worth step to a better self-understanding, thus world-understanding, to take dreams, daydreams, imaginations, thoughts generally as reality. Only not confuse it with physical reality. Then we can attempt to draw lines between the nonphysical parts of reality and the physical ones. If we don't find those lines (like when we had a retrieval experience, but no verification in the physical) doesn't mean this experience is not real. Better to look what this experience means to us, what it teaches us.

I'm, too, not amused about putting people word-wise into ghettos. That's the mindset to get it started in the physical.

Thanks Matthew for your balancing and clarifying posts.

Spooky

P.S. I wouldn't keep the PC running while sleeping or absent, risk of fire.

spooky2 wrote on Sep 1^st, 2007 at 9:50pm:

P.S. I wouldn't keep the PC running while sleeping or absent, risk of fire.

Thanks for mention it, as my CPU fan has been making audible noises during heavy loads of video processing.  I'll get around to checking the condition of the fan.

Not to be outdone, someone evidently sent a spook that ate my computer. Blew the P-4 chip and everything attached as far as I can tell. Just bought a new (used) one. Whoever is guiding this thing into computers, please poin it some other direction :-)

d

:o Dave,
I promise you I have nothing to do with it. I just know how frustrating it can be! I know that some of us in here know more about PC frequencies than others. It would really be nice to hear if anyone understands how the spirit may use such form of communication. As consciousness grows, so do the possibilities and probabilities, Am I on the right track?

Good thoughts to all,
Anja

Have been reflecting a bit on the possible background to Don's tendency to take a tilt at people and views he regards as 'new age wackadoodle'.

What's going on here probably reflects something we've talked of before -  that realisation involves a seamless integration of higher egoless awareness with the intuitive/sensing/feeling (call it the romantic) and more objective/thinking/logical/conceptual/ intellectual (call it the rationalising) aspects of mind.

For sure we find that most people's default gameplan in trying to make  sense of their experience is very clearly either rationalising or romantic. The romantic mind has come to be synonomous with the female, while the rationalising is basically male, although this isn't necessarily the case.

Romantic mind tends to involve sense making based on data arising from emotional responses to things as they appear at first contact. Resulting in a certain speediness of touch. Rationalising mind tends to be about use of intellectual thought to build or apply theoretical/conceptual frameworks to the raw data make sense of what's seen. Resulting in a rather heavy and inflexible touch. Both in undeveloped egotistical form are infexible and wedded to their own way of seeing a situation.

The tendency is for polarisation to occur between the types - the rationaliser sneers at the shallow knee jerk responses of the romantic, and the romantic at the intellectual coldness and lack of sensing of the rationaliser.

This wasn't/isn't necessarily always the case, and isn't everywhere the case even today. But it's possible to argue that the age of Pisces now passing was all about the development of the rationalising mind. Somebody like Ken Wilber writes very persuasively about how it was the inevitable consequence of the development of agricultural and ultimately urban societies.

Rationalising mind delivers lots useful including science and technology, freedom from superstition and ability to handle complex scenarios, objective driven behaviours and the ability to live much more comfortably in the world.

As usual in matters human we seem to have managed to massively overshoot however, especially in the Western world.  Selfish egotistical urges combined with this new way of understanding our environment ultimately led us so deeply into a mind made world of ideas that we largely lost contact with God, nature and our intuition (inherent wisdom and compassion), and came to suppress female knowing and nurturing sensibilities.

And out of the resulting fear and shortfall in compassion into use of dangerous and unwise technologies, and into abuse of our ecology, the environment, and whole populations. A position from which we urgently need to reverse so we can evolve in a new direction  - although many slow to realise the lode is mined out (especially the more committed rationalists) will seek to apply the old ways in ever more extreme forms. Which explains the rise of fundamentalism and the like.  

That's not to say that the undisciplined romantic mind can't cause a lot of trouble too - it's knee jerk responses to what it perceives can lead to a world of grief.

This is all relevant to the spiritual path.

Realisation requires relatively little conceptual understanding, just a pure experiencing of the total reality revealed by higher awareness undistorted by egotistical cravings. Pure sensing/awareness in fact.

Rationalising minds (like most today) that have become highly habituated to characterising their circumstances by theories and living from these find it extremely difficult to get back to this direct mind way of sensing, especially since the resulting tendency to perceive selectively in accordance with our mind made and ego driven theoretical framework also blocks higher awareness.

So now we have the story. The higher awareness enjoyed by sensitive people is often partly the result of a highly romantic/sensing mind, and certain lightness of touch. (one which is not compelled to dicker with the data) Meaning that they perceive greater realities, but maybe sometimes jump to not very well figured out theories as to what it all means. Wackadoodle theories in some cases in fact.

Trouble is that the rationalising types often don't have the awareness to perceive these greater realities - which probably can't be fitted in their theoretical frameworks anyway. So they sound far fetched. Or if they do have the required awareness their supposedly rational framework causes them to deny their own and others' experience. Or to stand with a foot in both camps - trashing the wackadoodles while theorising within entirely predictable but delusional conventional (so called scientific and academic) frameworks to explain their experience in their own way.

And as usual neither the twain shall meet. And each is to the other 'wackadoodle', although it's the rationalists that tend to be most aggressive in expressing their sentiments. But meet they must, because the truth combines both views.

Meaning that it behoves us all (both groups) to be tolerant and patient with our fellow man - realising that while their view may not compute within the particular sense making framework we are addicted to that it very probably does make sense when viewed the right way. Or when applied in a specific context. That we can and must learn from each other, and that with lightness and openness this will happen.

Understanding also that when we reach realisation that this apparent dichotomy will fade in the light of a new awareness that combines a higher awareness with both views.  

As must happen if we are to live in wisdom and compassion, if the human race and this world and all of its inhabitants are to survive.

Love to you all, hope i've managed to keep a foot in both camps.....

Hey varja,

grats! A great post consisting of so much truth about rational and romantic minds, reflecting how they work and one seems to be contradicting another.

But a few short words on technology, I agree, some are dangerous, but I don't really agree that it is technologies fault to fall apart from god. It is more that some of them working on this field, mostly in the "earlier years" of modern technologies had a wrong pov concerning technology.
They indeed thought they would be able to reign over nature by using technology, forgetting what technologies true values are, and they are more profane. Technology is just there to make things like work, travelling and communication easier. Just devices that are helpful, not devices to rule the environment. If spending money right, technology can be put on the next level, working environment-friendly, like solar cells, but at the moment, these alternative types of technology are far away from replacing the old, polluting ways.

Love,

pulsar

Thanks P. I guess the point is not that we shouldn't use technologies. Only that in making decisions on which we develop, adopt and need we have to apply the lightness and intuitive wisdom and compassion of the romantic mind as well as the intellectual discipline.

The danger follows from the loss of wisdom and compassion that arises when ego driven rationalistic tunnel vision sets in. And unfortunately it's those on that wing that occupy most posts of business, military and civil responsibility today....

Hm Vajra, I don't think there ever was a really "romantic age". Even in the earliest times we have informations of, there has been a very elaborated system of religion, social system, and technology. Very strict and often brutal. It's rational rather than romantic, only of a different type. People weren't more compassionate, or more gently treating their environment back then (they had of course not the technical means, and weren't that many as today). It has been always about putting the untamed human emotions into channels- only of a different sort than now. What is different now is this "mechanistic" view. Earlier, one might felt chosen by a god to put effort in a project, today one might feel instead like a meaningless sack of crude ideas, if this one has been trapped by the mechanistic worldview, the decrease of personal meaning.

Spooky

I guess maybe romantic wasn't the word to use Spooky for the sensing/intuitive/instinctive mind in that it implies 'niceness'. In it's raw form that mind is that of an instinct driven brute. Nor was it the aim to imply that somehow there was a romantic and idyllic golden era that we need to get back to.

Rationality seems to have really grown from its priveleged roots (as the consciousness changed and education became more widely available) during and after the Renaissance, and rescued us from much of that, but even applied in good faith it's become over relied upon and led into it's own pitfalls as described above. Meaning that we need to back away from over reliance on it too.

So for sure both methods of making sense of our world have their positive aspects and their negatives. Both in all their forms are still alive and well.

The core point though is that  as above those seeing from one or other of these perspectives cannot afford to write off the others' view.  That's not to say we must ignore garbage, but closed mindedness is not an option.

It's a delicate balancing act, but the magic ingredient to make it all work is probably as ever lightness and love. And as said before love comes through the sensing/intuitive channel.....

Hi Guys,

I realize that there’s just something about conflict and or insults that gets the juices of creativity going. I’ve noticed that some of the best material/feedback regarding learning the lessons of love and tolerance have arisen from posts of close-minded individuals that have contributed throughout the years to this site.

Anywho, in attempting to understand what’s going on in my world of paid work in C-1, I came across a wonderful response, in the form of a letter, to those who “Cups are full” in terms of belief systems and aren’t really open to the possibility that the average “Joe” here today might have something new or innovative to contribute.

“Dear [Mr.Ms. K'n'it All]

As you must know, those who value knowledge can only obtain it by keeping their minds open. No doubt you have spent a considerable amount of time learning all you know. Perhaps you have also discovered that the more you know, the more you don’t know, and the more there is to know.

Every person has the potential to add to your wealth of knowledge, because everyone has a unique perspective, When discussing ideas, remember this and instead of shutting out others, find out what they are really talking about, Someone can suggest a totally bonehead idea that will never work, but the criteria that makes them suggest it may be worth it’s weight in gold.

As far as your attitude is concerned, we recommend that you become curious, and then fascinated with the differences in perception and in behavior between people.  In an age of information, where an entire encyclopedia can be accessed in Microseconds at the touch of a computer key, wisdom has greater value than knowledge. Wisdom does not come from age, for from the mouths of babes can come great wisdom. Wisdom is the product of an inquiring mind that’s connected to the heart.” (Dealing with People You Can’t Stand-how to bring out the best in people at their worst, R.Brinkman&R.Kirschyner,pg.178)

Of course all of us have had our periods of Know-It-All-ism, where we can’t or don’t want to hear the other guy, but most of us on this site are here to learn and do a pretty good job of using and expressing our inquiring by way of our heart through being kind to each other.

Keep up the good work!  Reading these posts and Alysia’s book are keeping me sane and giving me some much needed fun.

Jean

Hi Vajra,
yes Renaissance is indeed remarkable date of change. I think in the early times of R. there is a branch which could be a sort of balance of the two sides you mentioned, I mean Alchemy. It takes the traditional technical knowledge (still connected to some rituals of pre-christian ages), and adds  1. the new liking and freedom of experimentation and research, 2. a re-newed and increased system of corresponds, signs, associations. This branch, or approach to view the world and persons has survived, now in form of various esoteric and spiritual practice, in some forms of psychology (mainly therapy oriented) and philosophy (or simply in the ability to have an open-eyed view on other persons).

Hi Lady Jean!
Interesting notice about the "conflicts and insults" thing, and good article. Yes I do hear some strange things from people when they talk  :-? and then it's often good to wait a minute and figure  out where this person is coming from and why did he/she just said that, it opens up some channels of understanding and communication.

Spooky

I just had in interesting insight into the folly of destructive criticism and persecution.  In many cases, they can actually further the cause that the persecutor is trying to kill off.  Take for instance, "everyone's favorite" Fundamentalist Christianity. ;D  I realized today that attacking them head-on is a folly because it supports their cause for these reasons:  First, it reinforces their fears of Satan tempting them to think doubtful thoughts and magnetizes them to their cause even more, second, it actually strengthens their egos and reinforces their beliefs that Persecution means someone hates "the truth" and strengthens their belief that they have found the truth and that unbelievers have come to deceive them.

So, while your experience may be different, this is just one of my experiences that teaches how judgment and persecution can ironically further the cause it wishes to stop by actually putting in more energy to feed it's ego.  In fact, I could say that dualist belief systems have a dependence upon critics for their extra energy supplies, meaning that criticism will just keep it's object going.  Who knows, this may be a truth that rings true for you too.

Stephen Updegraff / Steve Edward

I swam over these posts fairly quickly...

Jean, you got some juice in yours that I like the taste of.

Yes, so many different flavors here, a real feast.

I have no problem with everything that one can experience being called imagination.

I already feel everything I experience is mind-born.

Imagination is Creativity.

I love to play with imagination. Imagination, Love, Play...

I connect with the world through Imagination.

I sometimes experience it as musical notes, spontaneous facial expressions passed among strangers, half-remembered dreams, verbal expressions that don't arise from the impulse to defeat or kill, love for nothing-in-particular, appreciation for the simplest things in my immediate envirornment, tears or laughter, it can arise as anything at all...

Minds can make themselves feel like they are so complicated, that life is a problem to be solved, a zillion answers to be answered before any resolution can be reached. I NEED PROOF!!!  

SHHHHH...... (relax)

* you find "proof" when you're relaxed *

then ( "later") you have to remember what you found and give it your fullest confidence....



What if it's ALL  dream-like ?

What if "proof" doesn't really exist? (Nothing you can hold in your fist)

Would you tense and shake your fist at the sky anyway?

Would it bother you if you find that it's ALL imagination and there is no such thing as an "answer" or "proof" ?  That there's only your engagement with the creative process, your own unique ability to play?

Or... what if the proof is so close to you, even now, it's never been apart from you, it's always been there, something so obvious, you just haven't noticed something so simple, you were looking for something complicated and missed recognising the answer & proof you've been seeking all these years. What if it's right in front of your face right now?

Your mind can't hold it in it's fist.

You can't find it staring at a computer,

You might not find it looking at words on a computer screen.

It's not that there isn't tremendous value in us connecting through a web-site, tremendous value in all of us getting to know each other here.

Ahhh, that real value has nothing to do with "proof". It's...










SHHHHH....

*relax*

:)

rondele wrote on Aug 31^st, 2007 at 4:00pm:

...For example, let's take Nanner's story about the death of her friend and the apparent manipulation of her computer after her friend died..... Therefore, if what nanner said can actually happen, it stands to reason that it shouldn't be unique or rare.  It should happen at least frequently enough that we could find many cases similar to it in the literature. So, the question is, why are cases like that so extremely rare? ....I propose a little experiment.....suppose all of us, when we go to bed tonight, leave our computer on with a word processing program open, with a blank screen and the cursor blinking.

----------------------------------------------------
@ Rondele,
Keep in mind, that prior to this incidence, the doorbell rang those 3 times (short,short, long) which I (and my hubby) acknowledged in my mind, however dismissed within the "frame of reaction". The PC contact, happened thereafter. My vulnerability between the door bell night and that particular morning had been needless to say:
ironically spoken: WORLDS APART. :o

I am sure that others have had unexplainable "pc" problems and I`ll bet you a dime and a silver dollar  ;)  that some of these pc problems are attempted communications from the Afterlife, but because of the conscienceness level of that indivudual, they don`t even remotely think of the possibility of anything else ergo he/she tend to blame it on Bill Gates!  ;D .(Poor fella - as many times as he`s been cursed out by us all and to think its..... spirits, which are causing alot of crashes, black screens, for which he has to give explaination and create patches for..lol... If that sucker knew that, then he`d even try to bill them for all that.

Let`s be for real - EVEN I myself, thought of a virus on my pc - until I was convinced otherwise.

To your proposal, I find it a great idea, matter of fact, (I am convinced that more people will learn to open their degree in conscieneness levels during the next 5 years anyway) and thats going to be the cause of normality of such an occurance.
It wasn`t very long ago Rondele, that people would have screamed and possibly committed suicide in the Dark Ages if they would have seen a refridgerator or a dishwasher, let alone a car as the one we take for granted just about everyday. We consider these things normal. People of the Middle Ages wouldnt have. It would have been demonic! However the consciousness level to "accept" such had to be slowly developed, and the most quick way "humans" adapt to anything, is when it proves to be able to make them lazier than they already are...lol..

However I warn you ahead of time: Creation, doesn`t function according to "human rules and regulations". It has a complete set of it`s own.

Why I find Manuela ten Bulte choose the route of the pc is NOW simple for me to comprehend. Because I am dunce Rondele  ;) Someone has to literally take a hammer and hit me on the hand, for me to say "ouch that hurt"! Pinching, smackin me, pushin me just don`t do the trick.  I didnt open my eyes for any other occurances, and maybe she tried. Maybe she moved a picture from one place to another, but the Nanner does this all the time, so poop, I wouldnt have noticed. Maybe she did brush my face once or twice, but I get chilled sensations since I was 5 years old, so it`s not uncommon for me. Maybe she pushed a glass on the floor and made it burst, well donkey doo I am a clumsy chick anyway, so I didn`t pay attention, maybe she tried to call me on the phone, and since this happens to me about 30 times a year for the last 20 years, I will just keep on thinking its someone whom misdialed..

She was the only one whom "knew" that I am connected to my pc as she was to hers, just the same. She knew that if she blocks me long enough, that I would eventually get "pis**d off" as hell, that this would paralayze "all other thoughts" in me instantly. As she was the only one that knew, that I threw my last printer against the wall and shattered it to a hundred pieces. (Be aware children, don`t do this at home. HP printers have a lot of freakin pieces... :-/) Rondele, no one would throw their printer against the wall, knowing that they don`t have the money to purchase a new one...lol...But I did that, so what I am getting at, she knew my temper! And she got me RIGHT THERE!

I grew through this experience Rondele, I grew afterwards, is what I mean. After I did not disacknowledge the possibility. That was the key for her to get to my attention. My sense of sensitivity has sharpend thru this.

I`m not saying that she`s my Guide, but I MOST certainly know that I have one now. Ergo, if it wouldnt have been for her and that contact, I would have not checked into creation like I ended up doing. Its called a "wake up call", as I am sure you already know. The more I learn, the more I listen, the more sensitive I am getting.

The way I have come to see it: I`ll compare it to a staffel race okay. (we humans always seem to need materialised visualization inorder to understand) Lets say I am cloned 8 times (Boy oh boy, my hubby would have a blast with that!  ;) Joke aside) Each one of me gets placed at a certain part of the track, ready to take over that staffel from the other clone of me, correct? However each clone must [experience what it feels like to run that freakin 1/2 mile long run, before to be able to give the clone infront of it that staffel. Meaning if I go back and take a good solid look at my life, then before I was allowed to go to a higher level of consciousness (to give that staffel to the next clone infront of me to run "forward" with) I had to learn certain levels of pain, levels of love, levels of understanding, levels of faith, levels of hatred, levels of forgiving and so on.

Ergo, this what happened to me with Manu, was sort of like going to the next level. I must have done something right honey, so to be able to open such frequency within myself. It was suppose to be that way. Like I said before the creation functions on its own terms and not that of the "25% consciousness level human beings".

And on another note: I didnt open up a word processing, starred at it and waited. I was working on a 1 Mill $ project and the pc rebooted itself in middle of my writing in the pages, it rebooted without probable cause!

Tricking creation into haveing to proove to us at our will = forget it, it will never happen, as I am sure the qualified mediums out there will agree with me on that one.

Take my incident as a "wake up call", I shared my expereince with you Rondele (It was`t mandatory) so instead of tampering with its existence use it to your advantage for growth my love. Use it as the starting block to dive into that pool of information, spiritual growth and advancement to furthure consciousness.

I`m over here in europe right now, but I hope you can feel the hug and the loving smile I just gave you.

and...so no one else feels unhugged today.. heres one for you too!
Nanner

@ Blink,
This collective state of mind, can by far reach the skirts of existence, I really believe this! I`m in  if - we can get up enough people to really concentrate on the same exact vibe / frequency. Really using that exact preferred method (the pc) and not asking for anything more than that. Looking at Peter`s website in the link section, things of such nature have already been done.

It would be really nice to see a non-biased qualified medial person jump forth right about now and open up another thread for the purpose of setting the stage and rules for us all. Because tricking the afterlife is not gonna work. For Pete`s sake, does anyone here really believe that the creation doesnt know we are writing and thinking this..  ;D

Just on Sunday night, I watched "Galieo" and they did a study and an experiement using telepathy. It turned out pretty obvious that "collectively" the energy worked to perform that which they wanted, however they did state that it must be in conformaty.

And might I add, if it doesnt work to give us the resolution which we expect, doesn`t mean that it doesn`t work. It merely means that "collectively" we didnt reach for the same "goal", right?

Hugs and good thoughts,
Nanner

Reading the last several posts it at one level sounds like we've lost the thread. Yet in truth it all links and just illustrates some of the multiple dimensions of this whole topic of consciousness, and the way we act within and make sense of the dream. To try to capture some of these:

For sure conflict and destructive criticism (JK ) get the creative juices going, but more often than not in an ego driven  retaliatory and self justificatory direction (Steve). Unless as many have done here one party consciously draws back from reciprocation.

I guess the trick is to transmute the urge to hit back into an urge to do right. The Buddhist principle that the better solution to any given issue usually lies between the polarities and at a higher level comes to mind - by heading for the higher ground and placing the issue in a wider and more loving/wiser more constructive context the cause of the aggression often becomes irrelevant.

The old adage that violence and aggression always escalate holds true unless one or the other party is prepared to take the risk of not returning  the last blow - the parties remain locked in a tit for tat reciprocation based on their mutually being locked by their ego driven anger into what is actually a very narrow and in spiritual terms delusional and selfish way of seeing the situation.

The rationalising/romantic split is one way of characterising how different individuals make sense of what they experience. And how they may discriminate against others. Becoming wedded to either way of seeing to the extent that it blinds all other perspectives is just another delusion.

Tim's very eloquent post on the need to relax and be open is central too. As is Nanner's. When out of ignorance (unknowingly looking at things the wrong way: e.g. as a result of ruling out certain things as impossible due to a limiting belief system) or out of ego involvement (fear, anger, hurt, prejudice, whatever leading to the emotion getting intense and heavy) we find ourselves blinded we become  unable to raise our view beyond the stereotype to see the reality of the situation, or to see the way out.

Maintaining a light and open way of relating to others and to situations (a strong Buddhist emphasis again) is so important.

That's not to say that knowledge is not important. Used correctly a training in how the mind works, and on how we should behave (along with the more usual stuff) is  critical to this process too - they provide a framework for personal behaviour and development of higher solutions of the sort mentioned above. Used wrongly knowledge becomes just another tool of the ego - something to be clung to, or used as a weapon against others.

I guess raising consciousness is the magic ingredient. When we come to know intuitively what's right, we above all else become unable to act except from love. It doesn't mean we'll necessarily have the most high brow solution, but we'll not be driven to do harm.....

nanner-

I totally agree with your point that we cannot induce the afterlife to contact us.  When or if it chooses to do so, it does so at its own discretion and for its own purposes.

In fact, that's one key reason why I do not agree with Bruce's admonitions for us to keep attempting to contact the afterlife.  
It's really up to the afterlife to contact us if and when it finds it to be helpful or necessary, and not the other way around.

Another reason I don't think it's a good idea to delve into the afterlife is based on a warning from Swedenborg.  He was at the time, and still is even today, one of the world's preeminent afterlife explorer.  And he warned us that there is a tremendous amount of deception in the afterlife, and we have to on guard all the time.  

For example, we think we are contacting a deceased loved one, but we cannot know for certain it really is the person we think it is.  We might get all kinds of so-called "verifications", meaning information that only the deceased loved one would know.  Even that is insufficient, because apparently there are forces in the afterlife that have access to information that we think is private.  

As even Bruce has said, the whole notion of "privacy" simply doesn't exist in the Afterlife.

R

@ Rondele,
Your words give me a lot to think about. We agree on several things, on another count it`s a bit confusing right now in some way. This is where I usually "step back" focus and relax.

Rondele I respect your thoughts on the matter, however one must step back from the entire material and diffus the messages being sent by Moen and co.. okay. Admonitions are "warnings". I find it okay that he warns.

I am in assumption that Bruce is not out here telling people to do playful sèances, as he also warns of that which is carelessly done and he`s probably just as less telling people to contact the deceased for the purpose of sh*t`s and grins  ;) either. I believe (without ever have met him) his purpose is to help eliminate the biased misconception of many in relevance to what the afterlife is all about to begin with, so to help people overcome the centuries over centuries, generational passdown worth of "gossip, manipulated info and ego driven identification with the subject". For his insight I am thankful, as it adds another piece to the puzzle.

There are many medials but very few educated afterlife qualified mediums. Its a learning process. If one can learn to kick the ego, has been given the insight then theres a good chance. Thats where Peter H. Kirchner comes in as well. The non-biased research is very important aspect when ones learning. Experiencers are also needed for others to learn, because those that experience are the pioniers. To me it makes sense, theres leaders, followers and people whom get out of the way. I am trying to find out which one of these I am.

The "Moment in History" for to advance to the next step of evolution and consciousness must be very near, after all, look at what we have learned when merely looking at the past 2000 years of history. Geez, I just took a moment to reflect the different aspects of freedom the poeple of all of this world really have experienced only in the last 62 years. (Freedom of travel, speech, feeling, thinking, business adventures, food choice, religion, education just to name a few of the basics) I dont know what country you originate from, but my grandfather had none of the above, as the freedom wasn`t here in germany during his time and alot of people can`t handle being suddenly dropped from governmental dependancy into personal freedom of choice.  

My point is: Humans have to slowly be awakend and explained of what they really are, for the evolution to even be able to take place.  We have one thing working against us: OUR FREAKIN BRAIN! It always trys to interfere with the "little voice inside of us" ergo: our spirit! We have been taught to listen to our "logical brain" instead of our "spiritual being", why: because mankind could put the logical brain in his hands and look at it, disect it, try to rebuild it however mankind is too freaking dumb...ooops, take that back (wanna be nice)... too unconsciously aware to catch a soul! Or do we catch them everyday, and just not notice, because of the barriers our BRAIN sets us.  ;)

EXAMPLE. Our brain tells us: Don`t fall in love and trust another wo(man) like that again, because our brain made the protective connection that the wo(man) nearly killed us in the last relationship, so automatically the "fear" of a new comes about - instinctively" - However our spirit wants us to experience love; rejoice in that experience more and more. And as you can witness a thousand times a day: The spirit always wins that arguement, as we always fall in love over and over again throughout our lives, sometimes with someone new and then sometimes with our long lived "old" partner.

Its all about experiencing Rondele. Swedenborg is also right. Be careful, he says. As one person drives a car 100 miles using sober responsibility, another may drive his car 100 miles drunk! Both feel at the time of driving that they are good drivers. Its the experience of consequence of ones own choice, that makes the difference if one has learned the lesson. Click on the added website and learn all about why you may be having this conversation with me. There are no co-incidences.

I can already tell, you`re my buddy  ;) thank you for being that too! Even if you weren`t I`d love ya anyway :P ! I think we got off of the initial thread, and we should apologise to the thread starter for that.
Nanner

Quote:

In fact, that's one key reason why I do not agree with Bruce's admonitions for us to keep attempting to contact the afterlife. It's really up to the afterlife to contact us if and when it finds it to be helpful or necessary, and not the other way around.

Hence, according to Bruce, many of Bruce's Helpers encourage "looking inward" and using intuition skill.  In other words, the helpers and the F27 types stress that one be their own authority so as to not be a "mindless drone."  

On a side note, according to my dream experience, the bad-hearted spirits I can detect by "bad feelings I get about this one" and I know to steer clear.  Giving up one's power is a no-no if the transaction is parasitic.

The other question is, how do we tell for sure when we are making contact for ego gratification and when we truly do it for the higher good?  

Being a person of integrity, I will stand by my vow to respect you and NOT criticize you as I can not bear causing mental pain to somebody just because my ego wants to start a war over it's need to be right.  Your point is valid in my view because it points us in the direction of self-empowerment so I can not hate it in the end. :D

My feeling is that from the moment we're born we have a natural connection to the beings of love and light who are close to us.  Even if one hasn't tried to make contact with one's friends from the spirit World, one can find clues that one has done so without realizing it. Perhaps one has been sent intuition level messages throughout one's life, or messages through dreams.

After I made conscious contact with my friends from the spirit World, I realized they were there all along.  I don't know when the presence of Christ came into the picture. My feeling is that if he exists in a Gospel of John sense, and/or has something in common with the planning intelligence Bruce made contact with, his presence has always been there. It was just waiting for me to say hello.

Whether one should make contact should be determined on a case by case basis. I believe it would be too stringent to do like some people stated Emanuel Swedenbory suggests, and to conclude that unless you are him, you shouldn't make contact.  To take such an approach is to have no faith in the light.  If one sincerely prays to make contact with divine beings for positive reasons, one should be able to have faith that one can make contact with divine beings.

I was very careful about it. Everything tells me that I am in contact with light beings. My contact with them has helped me immensly.  Occasionally an unfriendly spirit will show up. They are usually easy to recognize. IF I WOULD'VE MADE THE CHOICE TO "NOT" MAKE CONTACT WITH LIGHT BEINGS DUE TO FEAR, I WOULD'VE ALLOWED DARK SPIRITS TO INTIMIDATE ME INTO NOT DOING MY PART TO HELP WITH THE DIVINE CAUSE.  I ALSO WOULD'VE MADE A DECISION THAT STUNTED MY SPIRITUAL GROWTH BIG TIME. I believe it is a big mistake to give them so much power.  They probably love it when we do so. They probably say: "Hee, hee, hee.  That guy has more confidence in us than he does in the light."

Quote:

Whether one should make contact should be determined on a case by case basis. I believe it would be too stringent to do like some people stated Emanuel Swedenborg suggests, and to conclude that unless you are him, you shouldn't make contact.  To take such an approach is to have no faith in the light.  If one sincerely prays to make contact with divine beings for positive reasons, one should be able to have faith that one can make contact with divine beings.

That is similar to how I feel.  Like I said, we can cower in our homes in fear that someone is out to take advantage and wrong us, or we can enjoy a nice walk in the park. [smiley=vrolijk_26.gif]

About moving off topic, I see the thread as an ever expanding tree of knowledge;  Even though the branches are growing in their own route and taking their own approaches to Afterlife Knowledge, not one branch or leaf should ever be disrespected and be removed from the whole.  I haven't gotten extensive experience on how inner knowledge works, but I see a metaphor of the branch remembering the trunk that it is connected to.  When I think about it, even though the thread started as a discussion on Daydreams, it has expanded into something even larger and we can use the topic to get to the root of the discussion which is using daydreams as a means of exploring the unseen world and the core which is the nature of the world in whole.

I guess we could say the only thing we will not tolerate is intolerance since this blights the tree.  This is my best phrase I can devise for now for setting a suggestion for the growth of the thread.
[smiley=happy.gif]

Last night's dream: a neat diagram-like "forum" presence...it was us....was scanning through. All is well; feeling of "almost" perfection, all is in place.

love, blink :)

Obviously I agree with you Steve. Especially the branch part. I feel like I'm connecting to a bigger part of myself. Not something foreign.


wrote on Sep 4^th, 2007 at 8:47pm:

Quote: Whether one should make contact should be determined on a case by case basis. I believe it would be too stringent to do like some people stated Emanuel Swedenborg suggests, and to conclude that unless you are him, you shouldn't make contact.  To take such an approach is to have no faith in the light.  If one sincerely prays to make contact with divine beings for positive reasons, one should be able to have faith that one can make contact with divine beings. That is similar to how I feel.  Like I said, we can cower in our homes in fear that someone is out to take advantage and wrong us, or we can enjoy a nice walk in the park. [smiley=vrolijk_26.gif] About moving off topic, I see the thread as an ever expanding tree of knowledge;  Even though the branches are growing in their own route and taking their own approaches to Afterlife Knowledge, not one branch or leaf should ever be disrespected and be removed from the whole.  I haven't gotten extensive experience on how inner knowledge works, but I see a metaphor of the branch remembering the trunk that it is connected to.  When I think about it, even though the thread started as a discussion on Daydreams, it has expanded into something even larger and we can use the topic to get to the root of the discussion which is using daydreams as a means of exploring the unseen world and the core which is the nature of the world in whole. I guess we could say the only thing we will not tolerate is intolerance since this blights the tree.  This is my best phrase I can devise for now for setting a suggestion for the growth of the thread. [smiley=happy.gif]