In his amazing tome from several hundred years ago, Emanuel Swedenborg describes two to three stages after death.  The initial or first stage consists of a person very much like they were when in the physical world, where a person still remembers the physical world and being in the physical plane.  We still have an outer nature (which is the mask of civility or "superego" - sort of a combination of upbringing, human law and an internal parent type of nature) and an inner nature - which is our "true character."  Our inner nature is our true loves and focus on things that really matter.  The inner nature may be self centered or centered or centered on others.  Ultimately our nature is either loving (as defined as one who love God and other people), or unloving to some degree.  Our true post-mortem fate is ultimately and willingly decided by this inner nature. 

On earth, someone may have a sadistic inner nature, however, they "learn" while alive, to restrain it.  To heed the rules and laws of society and repress it.  Yet, their inner nature comes through in interaction with others, and their cruelty comes out as it is allowed. 

So initially when dead we have these two sides to our mind.  That is why, many seem to function in Focus 27 and other temporary way stations like "the Park" much as they did in their earthly life.

However, this stage lasts anywhere from weeks  to one year at most (according to Swedenborg, and other sources).  Gradually, the lack of earthly things or correspondences, makes our consciousness change when there is no spiritual equivalent for an object or idea.  As we change, most of us lose the exterior or outer part of our thought process, which included the civil mask we wear, or the superego we were taught by our parents and teachers. 

Our inner nature then shines through.  If a person's tendency is toward hatred or violence, gradually but inexorably, they care less about pretending to be civil.  In the afterlife planes, since communication is telepathic, one can not put up a false mask (which is part of the outer or exterior nature).  If one's nature is loving, this then shines through.  It is at this stage that a spirit chooses it path - willingly.  Some on this board wonder when it is said that no force condemns us to a Hell but tht we choose it willingly why anyone in their right mind would do that.  This is why; because if our inner nature has no restraint, and we prefer to act to make pain or harm others, then we seek out a plane where others like us are doing the same thing. 

Swedenborg mentions a third stage of death, reserved only for those who are receptive to it (in a heavenly plane).  That is, instruction.  If our nature is based on love, we then join others in a place of similar spirits, and receive instruction. 

There are many implications to these stages, if they are true.  The first that comes to mind, is when we contact people in the afterlife, in what stage are they in?  Many contacts sound as if they are in the first stage of death, where earthly memories are fresh and the spirit is still familiar with earthly things and attitudes.  If we think about it, however, if most contacts are with those in the first stage of death, then Focus 27 and other similar realms are but a brief way station - and likely not a place we "hang out" in for very long.  Think about it.

Another major issue that comes up is the notion that if only our inner nature persists after death, then how do we cultivate it toward spiritual growth?  While alive, many religions and societies come out with thier codes of conduct to help just this way.  The ten commandments.  The path eight fold path noted in buddhism.  Following the rules.  The thing is, right action that masks a nature in conflict with it appears meaningless - this outer nature is doomed to fade away after the first stage of death. 

In my next post, I will post Swedenborg's own passages about these stages after death. 

Is all the afterlife exploration centered in the first stage of death?  If so, does that mean that contact with those in the second and third stages is more difficult?

Matthew

Matthew, I think you're right: the more a spirit lives in higher Focuses, the more contacts are hard to make. It's a question of energies: we need more energy to "uplift", they (in the Spirit World) need more efforts to lower their vibrations to reach a "point of balance" where we can communicate with easy.
My 2€-cent worth thought.  ;)

This makes sense to me. I can find nothing to argue with here.

Regarding the moral rules which religious traditions emphasize, to me they seem meaningless without an understanding of human relationships and how they work in this world. Basically, it seems to me that a person must be able to value life at their core to be able to practice 'love' with authenticity. This, to me, indicates that the person must learn how to value themselves as a human being  first, and then others. How does a person know how to treat another person well unless he or she can understand their own intrinsic value? Not that I think that 'pretending' is wrong -- I think it's valuable to help others whether you feel great about yourself or not. To me, it seems that life requires a huge amount of courage for a human being, a huge amount of risk.

It makes sense to me that a 'benevolent' universe would allow the human mind to grow along 'with' it, would allow the human mind which has lost its bondage to the earth to expand right along with it, as we are part of it, and it is part of us.

As I was writing this, and then reading this, it occurred to me that my bias is showing. For, in a 'benevolent' universe it would be all living creatures which would be shown this amazing 'grace' which extends the core of 'what is' toward infinity.

Thinking about it this way changes my understanding of these well-known verses:

By John Newton (1725-1807)

Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound,
That saved a wretch like me -
I once was lost but now am found,
Was blind, but now, I see.

T'was Grace that taught -
my heart to fear.
And Grace, my fears relieved.
How precious did that Grace appear -
the hour I first believed.

Through many dangers, toils and snares -
we have already come.
T'was Grace that brought us safe thus far -
and Grace will lead us home.

The Lord has promised good to me -
His word my hope secures.
He will my shield and portion be -
as long as life endures.

When we've been here ten thousand years -
bright shining as the sun.
We've no less days to sing God's praise -
then when we've first begun.

Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound,
That saved a wretch like me -
I once was lost but now am found,
Was blind, but now, I see.

Hi Matthew-

I recently sent a question to a ES website based on Van Dusen's book The Presence of Other Worlds, as follows:

"Everything about us comes from the primary tendency of our life......If we are good we make our heaven according to it, and if we are bad we make our hell according to it.  It is our basic motivation, our personality, and our character, since it is the reality of our life.  It cannot be changed after death because it is our essential self." Italics added.
From Heavenly Doctrine S57

Elsewhere in the book it's clear that ES believes (or more accurately was informed) that this essential character is with us since birth.  Not only can't we change it after death, it sounds as if we can't change it during life.

Yes, we can make choices to do good rather than bad, but unless those choices flow from, and are consistent with, our core character, they don't really mean all that much.

I can go to church regularly, give to the poor, and generally be nice to others, but if I'm doing those things because I think I "should" or because I'm hoping to get to heaven, I may as well not do them at all.

Conversely, it is not enough to have a good essential character if I don't manifest that character in tangible ways while I'm alive. 

So my question is this: If our core character, or our essence, is fixed in stone from birth, it appears that we are pretty much stuck with it. 

That not only somewhat dooms those of us who weren't lucky enough to get a good character from birth, it also raises the question as to who gave us that character to begin with.  God?  Genetics?

However, on page 128, Van Dusen says "It is clear that by the style and quality of his life the individual sets his eternal condition."  For me, that is not clear at all unless somehow we can change our core character via the choices we make and the things we do while physically alive.

As an aside, when we think of the main reason Jesus came to earth, it was to forgive us for our sins.  BUT when we think of our sins, we think of things we did or said.  And if those things flowed from a bad essential character, forgiving them really wouldn't mean much since even after forgiveness, our core character remains!

Are there other passages from ES that clarify these things? 

So the above are my questions as posed to an ES site.  If you're interested, I'll post what response(s) I get.

R

Perhaps there is more lattitude than what Matthew wrote.

For example, Howard Storm wasn't a positive person before his NDE, yet he was able to move on to a higher realm during his NDE. It seems to me that when he expressed the willingness to change for the better, he was cleansed of his negative tendencies. If you watch his videos on You Tube, he "doen't" seem like a self-centered man. My impression of him is quite positive.

The same can be said for Sylvia from Bruce's books. When she expressed her willigness to change for the  better by asking Jesus for help, she received help that enabled her to change for the better. PUL was applied to her so she could let go of negative tendencies of mind.

I'm involved with spirit work where I help stuck spirits get cleansed, so they can move on towards the light.

The manner in which I have been cleansed also comes to mind.

Therefore, I get the impression that once a spirit decides to change for the better, this spirit can be cleansed of negative thought patterns.

I believe it is also significant that body based drives such as the self-defense instinct are left behind when we leave our body. It is also significant that the spirit World doesn't require the competiveness that this World sometimes "apparently" requires.

I have to say that the illustration of people willingly heading to their afterlife 'focus', 'level' or 'plane' through knowing themselves, being exposed and acting out true intentions in the afterlife (like attracts like) is much more logically sound than traditional Christianity, where the idea that God punishes people with eternal damnation for temporal sins doesn't seem to make God fair or just at all.  And I am a Christian.

Hi Roger,

The problem with the idea that our inner nature that comes out in the second stage of death is "fixed" is that proposal sort of negates free will, and removes meaning from our spiritual journey.  I would say that the inner nature is changeable but in a more slow and subtle way.  In our outer nature on earth, people change behaviours like they change clothes.  The inner nature - the tendency of our spirit toward love or hate - can only change when we change our deepest thought and beliefs.  Yet there always is a choice from which path to take.  We can think of countless examples in earth life of people who have gone from a path of hate to one of love (Howard Storm was one example).  You could argue that those peoples' inner character was always loving and that the hateful behaviour was temporary, but then we get into convultions of logic.......

Very little is truly static in our world, so why should our inner nature's be so?  I will comb through the text - I'm curious now myself - but I think that ES' whole point about the second stage of death is that as we drop the outer nature associated with earth life, our true tendencies manifest without regret.

For me, the second and third stages of death are important in terms of communication.  If we learn through meditation, a dream or a medium, that a loved one is in "the park" and happy, it now appears that this is a common initial pit stop prior to the dropping off of our "exteriors" from earth life.  That same contented loved one could find themself in a Hell in due time.  Bruce and others have located people in Hells or belief systems, but it has been my impression that spontaneous contact there is not nearly as easy as when a peron has just passed on, and is in a park or Focus 27. 

For myself, I wouldn't mind hanging out for a while in a Focu 27 area, as I learned and explored.  I'm just getting a feeling that is not often a long term option.


Matthew

Hi Matthew,


DocM wrote on Sep 30^th, 2009 at 11:07pm:

Is all the afterlife exploration centered in the first stage of death?  If so, does that mean that contact with those in the second and third stages is more difficult? Matthew

This Swedenborg guy seems to have been quite an explorer.  My first entry into afterlife exploration was, I would say, primarily in the first stage that you describe by virtue of the fact that I was using retrieval as the method of exploration.  Those retrieved seem to be most often inhabitants of the first stage area.  Since I learned the art of retrieval at the Monroe Institute Lifeline program  my early explorations included trips to what might be Swedenborg's third stage, but these were only short visits at first.  In my opinion Monroe's Focus 27 and Swedenborg's third stage have many things in common.

The method of retrieval I was using back then was essentially one in which I (with the assistance of a Guide or Helper who was typically a resident of Focus 27) would locate, contact and communicate with a person stuck in Focus 23 (which resembles Swedenborg's first stage level).  Then I would follow along as the Guide 'took' this person to a 'better place' which was sometimes in Focus 24, 25 or 26.  These areas coincide, in my opinion, with different 'intensities' or perhaps 'subcategories' of  Swedenborg's second stage level.  OR the Guide would, most often, 'take' the retrieved person to Focus 27, again, similar to the stage three level.

Monroe's system encouraged retrievers to take whatever opportunites that came up during these retrievals to explore in more detail within the various levels that 'retrievees' were taken by the Guide.  Being such a natural born curiosity addict I took every such opportunity I became aware of.  So for me what started out as strictly retrieval work in Focus 23/Stage One became a sort of springboard to deeper exploration of the areas of Consciousness labeled 'Human Afterlife."  This progressed to exploration into other areas of Consciousness beyond human afterlife consciousness.

So, getting back to your original question . . .
I wouldn't say, from where I am sitting now, that contact with those is Swedenborg's second and third stages is 'more difficult' than those in his Stage one.  Rather, I would say it takes some practical experience and practice to make contact with those in any of his Stages.  It also typically takes some 'adjustments' to ones perceptual abilities which seem to occur naturally as one practices contact and can accept ones' own experiences as real.  These 'perceptual adjustments' that enable contact with those in Stage one also enable conact with the inhabitants of Stage two and three, in my opinion.  In fact it has been my experience that contact with those beings who inhabit areas of Consciousness other than human is also enabled by practice and learning with Stage one inhabitants.

One of the primary reasons I teach retrieval is that I know that if a person practices this simple art a strong likelihood exists that they will also begin to explore and learn about the existence of the other levels.  Then they will likely expand their explorations, if they are curiosity junkies like me, and start getting at the real issue.  That issue being, in my opinion, learn more about who and what we really are.

Bruce

Bruce,
I found that to be an excellent post. Thanks for the good read.

Thanks Bruce, that did clarify a lot for me.  My question about Focus 27 has always been - is "the park" there, or is it in many areas as an initial pit stop after passing over?  This is why I assumed that Focus 27 might still have human beings in the first stage there......

What is truly amazing to me is that ES made his insights and explored on his own, eventhough his findings were considered to be outright heresy by the church at the time.  For instance, he found when conversing with "spirits/angels" that there was no true separate trinity, and that deceased people are taught that the trinity is in reality a unity based on love - if they don't get that, they usually go into what he saw as a belief system area. 

There is no evidence that ES had outside influences to base his writings on, though he was a very learned person born in the 1600s.  This is why his writings smack of genuine experience (along with other historical facts).  In other words - he was quite the explorer as you say.

Matthew

For those interested, here is a translation of ES "First stage after death from Heaven and Hell:

"491. THE FIRST STATE OF MAN AFTER DEATH.
There are three states that man passes through after death before he enters either heaven or hell. The first state is the state of his exteriors, the second state the state of his interiors, and the third his state of preparation. These states man passes through in the world of spirits. There are some, however, that do not pass through them; but immediately after death are either taken up into heaven or cast into hell. Those that are immediately taken up into heaven are those that have been regenerated in the world and thereby prepared for heaven. Those that have been so regenerated and prepared that they need simply to cast off natural impurities with the body are at once taken up by the angels into heaven. I have seen them so taken up soon after the hour of death. On the other hand, those that have been inwardly wicked while maintaining an outward appearance of goodness, and have thus filled up the measure of their wickedness by artifices, using goodness as a means of deceiving-these are at once cast into hell. I have seen some such cast into hell immediately after death, one of the most deceitful with his head downward and feet upward, and others in other ways. There are some that immediately after death are cast into caverns and are thus separated from those that are in the world of spirits, and are taken out from these and put back again by turns. They are such as have dealt wickedly with the neighbor under civil pretences. But all these are few in comparison with those that are retained in the world of spirits, and are there prepared in accordance with Divine order for heaven or for hell.

492. In regard to the first state, which is the state of the exteriors, it is that which man comes into immediately after death. Every man, as regards his spirit, has exteriors and interiors. The exteriors of the spirit are the means by which it adapts the man's body in the world, especially the face, speech, and movements, to fellowship with others; while the interiors of the spirit are what belong to its own will and consequent thought; and these are rarely manifested in face, speech, and movement. For man is accustomed from childhood to maintain a semblance of friendship, benevolence, and sincerity, and to conceal the thoughts of his own will, thereby living from habit a moral and civil life in externals, whatever he may be internally. As a result of this habit man scarcely knows what his interiors are, and gives little thought to them.

493. The first state of man after death resembles his state in the world, for he is then likewise in externals, having a like face, like speech, and a like disposition, thus a like moral and civil life; and in consequence he is made aware that he is not still in the world only by giving attention to what he encounters, and from his having been told by the angels when he was resuscitated that he had become a spirit(n. 450). Thus is one life continued into the other, and death is merely transition.

494. The state of man's spirit that immediately follows his life in the world being such, he is then recognized by his friends and by those he had known in the world; for this is something that spirits perceive not only from one's face and speech but also from the sphere of his life when they draw near. Whenever any one in the other life thinks about another he brings his face before him in thought, and at the same time many things of his life; and when he does this the other becomes present, as if he had been sent for or called. This is so in the spiritual world because thoughts there are shared, and there is no such space there as in the natural world (see above, n. 191-199). So all, as soon as they enter the other life, are recognized by their friends, their relatives, and those in any way known to them; and they talk with one another, and afterward associate in accordance with their friendships in the world. I have often heard that those that have come from the world were rejoiced at seeing their friends again, and that their friends in turn were rejoiced that they had come. Very commonly husband and wife come together and congratulate each other, and continue together, and this for a longer or shorter time according to their delight in living together in the world. But if they had not been united by a true marriage love, which is a conjunction of minds by heavenly love, after remaining together for a while they separate. Or if their minds had been discordant and were inwardly adverse, they break forth into open enmity, and sometimes into combat; nevertheless they are not separated until they enter the second state, which will be treated of presently.


495. As the life of spirits recently from the world is not unlike their life in the natural world and as they know nothing about their state of life after death and nothing about heaven and hell except what they have learned from the sense of the letter of the Word and preaching from it, they are at first surprised to find themselves in a body and in every sense that they had in the world, and seeing like things; and they become eager to know what heaven is, what hell is, and where they are. Therefore their friends tell them about the conditions of eternal life, and take them about to various places and into various companies, and sometimes into cities, and into gardens and parks, showing them chiefly such magnificent things as delight the externals in which they are. They are then brought in turn into those notions about the state of their soul after death, and about heaven and hell, that they had entertained in the life of the body, even until they feel indignant at their total ignorance of such things, and at the ignorance of the church also. Nearly all are anxious to know whether they will get to heaven. Most of them believe that they will, because of their having lived in the world a moral and civil life, never considering that the bad and the good live a like life outwardly, alike doing good to others, attending public worship, hearing sermons, and praying; and wholly ignorant that external deeds and external acts of worship are of no avail, but only the internals from which the externals proceed. There is hardly one out of thousands who knows what internals are, and that it is in them that man must find heaven and the church. Still less is it known that outward acts are such as the intentions and thoughts are, and the love and faith in these from which they spring. And even when taught they fail to comprehend that thinking and willing are of any avail, but only speaking and acting. Such for the most part are those that go at this day from the Christian world into the other life.


496. Such, however, are explored by good spirits to discover what they are, and this in various ways; since in this the first state the evil equally with the good utter truths and do good acts, and for the reason mentioned above, that like the good they have lived morally in outward respects, since they have lived under governments, and subject to laws, and have thereby acquired a reputation for justice and honesty, and have gained favor, and thus been raised to honors, and have acquired wealth. But evil spirits are distinguished from good spirits chiefly by this, that the evil give eager attention to whatever is said about external things, and but little attention to what is said about internal things, which are the truths and goods of the church and of heaven. These they listen to, but not with attention and joy. The two classes are also distinguished by their turning repeatedly in specific directions, and following, when left to themselves, the paths that lead in those directions. From such turning to certain quarters and going in certain ways it is known by what love they are led.


497. All spirits that arrive from the world are connected with some society in heaven or some society in hell, and yet only as regards their interiors; and so long as they are in exteriors their interiors are manifested to no one, for externals cover and conceal internals, especially in the case of those who are in interior evil. But afterwards, when they come into the second state, their evils become manifest, because their interiors are then opened and their exteriors laid asleep.


498. This first state of man after death continues with some for days, with some for months, and with some for a year; but seldom with any one beyond a year; for a shorter or longer time with each one according to the agreement or disagreement of his interiors with his exteriors. For with everyone the exteriors and interior must make one and correspond. In the spiritual world no one is permitted to think and will in one way and speak and act in another. Everyone there must be an image of his own affection or his own love, and therefore such as he is inwardly such he must be outwardly; and for this reason a spirit's exteriors are first disclosed and reduced to order that they may serve the interiors as a corresponding plane."

Just dropping in....

That sounds very like what the Tibetan book of the dead has to say about the Bardo states as well Doc, albeit that there is more emphasis in it on avoiding the pitfalls that lead to unfortunate rebirths.

One aspect of this view that may not be that palatable to many is the idea that the afterlife is not a heaven-like realm, it's rather a continuation of the personal/relative and in the end a part of 'samsara' or this realm of suffering.

Depending on the nature of the being there are lots of options for rebirth that lead from within it - some very pleasant but not spiritually helpful, others very negative and nasty, and indeed many levels of human existence combining various mixes.

There's potentially multiple levels of mind in play in the case of each of us - the egoistic conscious one, more integrated and seemingly more powerful levels of this fear inspired tendency (responsible from the background for creation of this entire realm), and the genuinely higher levels of mind that extend upwards to the absolute/God realm.

Depending on our level of awareness we're not necessarily conscious of any more than the personal ego perspective, but it's taught that the higher levels are accessible/present in all of us. (some teach it's Grace or the Holy Spirit that keeps us all connected with the genuinely higher realms B2) The connection becomes discernible with with willingness to listen, and with the quietening of the ego driven aspect of mind.

You can say in this sort of view that death and the afterlife transition is a sort of giant washing machine that takes us apart and spits us out in all sorts of directions.

The negative egoistic aspect draws its power from the fear this thrashing about inspires in us, if on the other hand we remain calm and trusting of higher realities through the process it may gain little traction.

From the ego perspective it resets our intellectual  clock, and sets up the possibility of our being drawn back down into unthinking dominance by our ego nature: on the other hand if we're genuinely that way inclined it presents opportunities for higher learning, spiritually advantageous re-birth and even total transcendence of our fixation with the individual relative existence.

Human existence is taught in Buddhism as being highly advantageous - the combination of abilities and a reality that is tough but not so tough as to be incapable of being used as a learning environment is reckoned to be ideal.

While you can argue forever about the details, it's interesting isn't it the way so many traditions and explorers seem to have arrived at broadly similar views.....

Matthew-

Thanks for posting this.  The more I read of ES, the more I'm impressed and the more I want to learn about what his research revealed.

When I first read about ES, I was fascinated about his findings regarding the afterlife.  I still am, but I now understand that what he learned about this life is far more important.

I'll quote from your post: "Those that are immediately taken up into heaven are those that have been regenerated in the world and thereby prepared for heaven." Italics added.

In other words, we can know every last detail about the afterlife, but that's not really the point, nor should it be how we spend our time.

Instead, we need to take heed about what Swedenborg said that was far more important, namely how essential it is that we ensure that our inner life- our true character- be such that we prepare ourselves for a heavenly existence.

And since it's far easier to deal with that while physically alive than it is after we're dead, that really should be our first priority right now.

For me, ES has given me a sense of urgency about improving my own character and then putting the fruits of that character into actions that flow from it.

R

It seems like most people in this thread that there is large agreement that this chain of events seems to be legitimate; however the next step is to consider again one of the things that Doc posted originally; its definitely worth thinking about for our own sake of where we personally will end up:


Quote:

Another major issue that comes up is the notion that if only our inner nature persists after death, then how do we cultivate it toward spiritual growth?  While alive, many religions and societies come out with thier codes of conduct to help just this way.  The ten commandments.  The path eight fold path noted in buddhism.  Following the rules.  The thing is, right action that masks a nature in conflict with it appears meaningless - this outer nature is doomed to fade away after the first stage of death.

So I would put this as: how can we change our motivations for doing good towards others; not just how to muster up the discipline to do good things, but how do we change our motivation to become more loving or compassionate?

P.S. - Bruce thank you for your website, your books, and your help with the posting quotes.

Hi Matthew, All

Good thread you've started here.  It's been a while since I've read any of the ES material but one thing that I'm not sure if he brings out in his writings is the idea that Intent and Freewill are intrinsic to our inner being of consciousness, so I'd like to throw that into the mix.

The Intent that I'm thinking of here is fundamental and is an aspect/attribute of the essence of God Consciousness that carries the purpose to evolve in ways that are beneficial/profitable... spiritual growth in the direction of love.  This basic Intent is what moves consciousness along its evolutionary path and is like a tiny seed of God Consciousness that is carried forth in each of us regardless of where (physical or nonphysical realities) our individual consciousness exists.

This basic Intent/purpose would not interfere with free will; it opens the way for any and every potentiality to be carried forth by the use of free will choice from all the possibilities because deep inside each of us this basic Intent/intrinsic to the One Consciousness intent exists. It is this tangible connection that drives us toward spiritual growth. In our experience this intent could also be described as a deep spiritual longing or purpose to be fulfilled. How purpose is fulfilled is freewill choice, only that there is a purpose is ingrained in us so to speak. This is what leads to self-concept. The higher the quality of our consciousness, the more our self-concept becomes relational to this God Consciousness Essence or state of being. Another way to say this is to say our intent/purpose becomes aligned with universal intent/purpose through evolutionary process.

In its natural state fundamental Intent has no adversaries. By this I mean the seed of fundamental Intent/purpose that is ingrained within the core of our being is not in conflict with the Intent/purpose of God, the One Consciousness. The laws/rules of ELS and "nonphysical" realities is what opens up opportunity for conflict to arise for the purpose of the One Consciousness to gain better organization of information by an evolutionary process that seemingly is a process of struggle.  The same struggle we experience internally when we have cross-purposes.  Fundamental Intent (essence) sets the standard, which is of course, continually evolving, and the physical and nonphysical reality laws/rules provide opportunity for growth to evolve out of that struggle.

Since God Consciousness evolved into a brilliant being of “love”, it seems logical that the essence of its “reality cell” is the same or similar quality and exists in our ELS experience as an essence of love within the core of our being. Most of the time we don’t allow this inner essence to well up and flow freely because of fear and ego.

Self-concept seems to be at the heart of this experience. It is relational. We have the example deep within us regardless of our "location" in ELS or the nonphysical "stages" of death ES describes. We can sense its presence intuitively and we struggle, go through the process to allow this inner essence to help us develop and define our self-concept. As our self-concept evolves our Intent (purpose) becomes more and more aligned with Universal Intent (that of spiritual growth... Love) and all of our perceived adversaries disappear… we experience the ONE as it is.

Kathy

In the transition to Stage 3, ES reports that souls are now ready for extensive education and schcoling.  But what then?  As far as I know, ES is the only astral explorer who actively sought out contacts with the most famous humans from the distant past: e. g. the Greek philosopher Aristotle, the pioneer of the Portestant Reformation, Martin Luther, and John Calvin.  ES strikes me as too cocky here; he fills these worthies in on his insights from years of exploration, but does not report their insights from much longer stays in astral realms.  Surely these people have much to teach ES too!  But ES does interestingly claim that he persuaded Martin Luther that some of his new insights were correct, adding that he failed to make a dent in Calvin's worldview. His debates with the famous suggest a recognition that spirits evolve new perspectives as they explore and study over there, even after their initial "schooling." 

ES's most recent biographer points out tha ES did perform retrievals, but retrievals are not mentioned in his classic work, "Heaven and Hell." In ES's terms, retrievals would certainly imply astral spiritual growth.

Don

Matthew, the classical church dotrine of the Trinity--3 Persons in one and one in three--is a later Catholic construct that can't really be read back into the New Testament.  So I don't really consider ES's perspective on this heretical.

Pratekya, your reply #5 seems to suggest that you believe the New Testament teaches the eternal damnation of unbelievers.  The early church taught that God's love never permanently abandons anyone after death.  If they remain in hellish conditions, that is their choice, not God's.  I have developed threads on Christian retrievals from Hell before.  Would you like me to start another one on the misconception that the Bible teachers eternal damnation?

Berserk -
  I've actually got most of your past posts saved as Word files because I think they are great and insightful.  I'm a liberal Christian, and what I was mentioning was my take on a conservative interpretation of Christianity that would imply eternal suffering meted out as judgment with no chance of change / development in the afterlife for those who are judged.  I find that take on the afterlife by 'traditional' Christians to be unhelpful and a obstacle for educated or intelligent people who are looking for something that can stand up to logical criticism.  If we assume that God is good, and we say that God judges people to hell for eternity for temporary sins, I would say that this argument is not sound, and that God is not good (worse than say Hitler, who had a limit to the amount of suffering imposed on his victims).  Sadly I think this conservative view is somewhat of a common interpretation of Christianity.  For the afterlife to be fair, and God to be good, there must be choice involved on the part of those who are judged, or the pain caused must be somewhat proportional to the pain given to others in the physical life.  Maybe the 'door' to someone's personal hell is locked, but the door is locked from the inside, not the outside.  I forget who's NDE I was reading about when he asked to be put back with those who were in hell, simply because being in the presence of Jesus brought his sins and selfishness into sharp contrast and brought him pain.

If you are up for posting more about this or anything else feel free; I love reading your stuff.

Also, yeah I'm still interested in hearing from anyone about tips for changing our internal motivation; I'm not asking how do we do the right thing, I'm asking how to we change our innermost selves so that we want to do the right thing more often and our actions eventually show that to be the case as a natural consequence.  Jesus has a passage about this in John 15 about abiding in him and we will bear much fruit; I'm not sure practically how this happens.

How to change our motivations? Very good question.

My point of view is that kindness toward ourselves and others can be cultivated, can be nurtured, just as we nurture plants and trees which support our lives. There are very many ways to do this. Perhaps an obvious way is to encourage it in each other when we can. We can observe our thoughts and learn a great deal about ourselves and others by focusing on and, thus, training ourselves, to be loving, in as many ways as possible, one day at a time.

Good point, b2, but its more than just practicing the act of being loving.  Its feeling it, and moving away from ego related motivations, so that you honestly have no selfish/self serving, motive behind everything you do.
That is what ES is saying.  The loving person is loving in their feeling/core - this is not something to be imitated, but felt.

M

I would first have said cultivate humility and gratitude, but that sounds complicated. I think kindness contains a touch of both.

But, according to Bruce, and I agree with his method, you can change your state of mind and your state of 'heart' by simply picturing in your mind those loving experiences and those loved ones which you have had the good fortune to have in your life. And practicing feeling the 'good feelings' that go along with those experiences.

But, some things, for those of us like me, who is prone to forgetfulness, just come with time. A moment of discovery can appear unexpectedly, or a moment of clarity can appear unexpectedly.

I think guided meditation is a particularly good way to allow a 'therapist' of your choosing to help change those thoughts which pester and continually confuse a person.

But, there seem to be lots of ways. Simply having a communal experience which is positive can really help people to see others differently. It can break barriers.

Maybe, simply experience your life. Have varied experiences. This is important, so that you can relate to other people, so that you can put yourself in their shoes. I think a person needs to be able to remember both pleasure and pain, and to see the 'other' as their own self. To be able to compare and contrast different states of being takes experience. And to be able to listen and respond to another's actual need rather than our presumption of what they need can be tricky at times.

DocM wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2009 at 10:35am:

My question about Focus 27 has always been - is "the park" there, or is it in many areas as an initial pit stop after passing over?  This is why I assumed that Focus 27 might still have human beings in the first stage there......

I think of the Park as a sort of multifaceted, adaptive, Ellis Island kind of place.  A point of entry into the vast territory of the 'new world' for the deceased.  Your "initial pit stop after passing over" fits to some extent.  The Park, with its specific features and characteristics, that I am familar with is only a Focus 27 place, though it is probably true that many other places have their own form of a point of entry. 

I have encountered points of entry in other places, often in the Belief System Territories versions of the Heavens of various religions.

As an aside . . .

I remember heading out with a friend on some nonphysical exploration or other when we both unexpectedly stopped after being called to by an elderly lady.  Standing in front of her we noticed that she was all dressed up in white, glowing clothes and behind her were these huge, white gates.  The gates looked like wrought iron in shape and construction but the were painted with a thick, white, sparkling pearl-like substance.  The lady did her best to welcome us and induce us to both pass through the Pearly Gates into her heaven, saying we should be happy that we had arrived at the Gates to Heaven.  Since that wasn't what we had planned to explore we thanked the lady and told her we had other places to visit instead.  She had a very shocked look on her face as we flew off into the darkness.

Back to the Park . . .

Many of the newly deceased are probably in some sort of Stage 1 mental state when they arrive at the Park.  Kind of like Ellis Island, each person brought with them the habits, customs, beliefs, etc. from their life in their old country and culture.  Each of these folks are usually individually met by a Helper (or Guide if you prefer) who assists them in becoming aquainted with the new world they have arrived in.  The Helper is assisting with what for some will be a gradual shift toward being a, sort of, Stage 3 'resident'.

There are other areas of Focus 27, most notably the Health and Rejuvenation Center, where there are lots of folks who are probably Stage 1 and Stage 2 in terms of their mental state.  Some of these have carried the 'habit' of a disease, injury or other medical or mental condition into their afterlife experience.  These folks are typically brought here as soon after death as possible by Helpers to receive 'treatment' for their conditions.  Helpers who 'work' at this Center assist these folks with resolving whatever the condition is.  The 'conditions' range from simple things like missing limbs and aches and pains to those folks who are comatose or severely deranged.

So, I would say that in my opinion you are correct in assuming that their might be Stage 1 and Stage 2 types in Focus 27.  But, they are actively given opportunities to shift toward Stage 3 with the assistance of whatever resources or Helpers might be required to accelerate the pace of the transision.

Bruce

To ask a very direct question of you Bruce - do you have any sense from the perspective of experience as to what happens after focus 27 and education?

By what means do we find our way into rebirth? What of the 'self' continues?  What is the range of possibilities? Is there an escape from the death/afterlife/rebirth cycle?

Drawing on the Bardo teachings, or just even observing everyday reality it seems pretty clear that some sort of dissolution of the individual self takes place at some stage during the transition.

'Joe' dies, seems to remain in some way recognisable in the afterlife, but while there is seemingly propagation at some level of characteristics is patently not reborn as the personality 'Joe'.

Is it even possible that what we contact after death in the afterlife is maybe even just a residual shell of decaying beliefs, that what continues has separated and merged (or may be about to merge) back into some sort of whole that is beyond our reach?

Another related angle that begs some questions for me is that of not just the 'what, but also the 'why' of the afterlife reality.

It's pretty clearly still (so far as most reports go) a relative or dualistic reality: it in a sense provides the other half of the duality - is the matrix against which the level of mind that thinks of itself as a 'self' reacts, by which as a result of a basically fearful orientation it is driven to behave in certain ways.

Some argue this is God made, others that it is the means by which (through behaviours which reinforce the 'fearful self' belief system) some unconscious (to us) higher level of ego mind imprisons us in this reality.

Yet at some level this 'higher' level of unconscious ego (although unreal) is our creation, is consequently a part of us and of our (typically) fear based belief system.

That's just one (albeit widely held) view, but the question remains - is there any other view from the experiential perspective as to what the nature of this reality we find ourselves in is??

Swedenborg's terms "interior" and "exteriors" of a soul indeed need to be interpretated, as he, at least in the above excerpt, wasn't aware of some problems in understanding this.

What he obviously didn't want to say is that the interior of a soul is unchangeable, because that would mean you can think or do what you want, finally it all doesn't matter as your interior won't change anyway. Then Swedenborg's work itself would be pointless.

So, the interior must be changeable. This now, for me, means that the interior must be influencable by what Swedenborg gathers under the term "exteriors" of a soul: What one does, says, how one behaves under the conditions of one's specific environment. As it would be rather odd to think that the interior changes from itself, independently from the exterior (as in this case our physical existence seemed to be pointless), it seems as if old, strong habits (exteriors) can influence the interior, if not become a part of the interior.

In the above excerpt Swedenborg seems to mean with "interior" something we would expect to find during a long, honest and careful self-exploration, maybe in meditation. I won't characterize this simply as "thoughts" as opposed to "speech". It's probably something which is not really describable in words, and is definitely not any thoughts, no matter what thoughts.

Swedenborg, in that, is emphasizing individuality and self-responsibility.

Spooky

Some of the questions in this series of posts might be partly answered in "Curiosity's Father", one of Moen's books which is chock-full of information which at the very least gives one a lot to chew over. Vee

Hi Spooky and Vee,

Vee, thanks for the reference. I'm sure there are answers to find there.

Spooky,

Yes, I agree - the state of one's interiors is changeable, otherwise there would be no point to any existence.  I don't believe that ES truly meant the second stage of death or the state of our interiors is unchangeable; only that it is a slower state of our pure/true inclination and intentions.

From my readings, the state of our interiors is the true state of our soul at the time - our true loves, passions, etc.  This state, as Kathy alluded to is like unto a "potential" state which guides our actions.  As such, I believe it is not a state to change quickly or with by quick argument or reason and rationality. 

The state of one's exteriors definitely reflects the state of one's interiors (how could it not?)  Yet repetition of good deeds just for the pretense of being good does not change anything.  You are right however, Spooky, in assuming that life on eath with both states (exteriors and interiors) appears to allow us to try out different levels of love or hate, and then change our interiors accordingly.

Those who revel in anger and hatred find, at some point that they are unhappy, and reaping what they sow.  Perhaps we learn this more quickly while alive on earth, and this has something to do with our reason for being incarnate here.  Perhaps in the afterlife or spiritual planes, there is also evolution and salvation (ability to change the state of one's interiors), yet it happens by nature more slowly than it does while alive with this mixture of "exteriors and "interiors" which we have while alive on earth. 

I will post the passage of ES on the second stage of death soon.

Matthew

Hi guys

We are accountable for our earthly actions on entry to the afterlife and beyond. What we do in this life will dictate where we enter the afterlife

Telepathy is indeed the mode of communication on the other side, so it is obvious that the "Birds of a Feather" concept applies in the ethereal planes

The hideous minds of a depraved serial killer is simply not allowed into the purer and higher realms, just like a drop of cyanide in a bottle of spring water will pollute or kill you, so will their dark open thoughts pollute the light, not so?

I must say I remain puzzled about the disc concept and why there are so few, when in reality there are countless planes of reality going up towards the light, and unfortunately planes darker than our earthly one, going down.

I know this as a fact because I have explored many realms of afterlife existence, both glorious and full of light, love and life, and the dark realms where depraved beings go after death due to their evil actions in life

People never seem to speak about other life forms (non human) that are sentient, have souls and evolve through the afterlife in a very similar way that we humans do

There are more than three stages of afterlife, there is a progression or regression through countless realms or dimensions and how we evolve or devolve , is a process of learning.


Quote:

"Re: Second Stage of Death; the REAL Afterlife?"

Matthew why do you state "REAL Afterlife", it gives the impression that up to that moment the forum have been debating something else and false??

The issue is, Alan, that by this theory, of stages, we are all initially much the same way we were when alive in our "first stage" of death.  As if we wake up in the spiritual plane, and see ourselves much like we were before. 

As the exteriors of the first stage fall away, our true motivation and driving force becomes apparent.  Thus, a sadistic man, while on earth pretended to be good and just (give to the poor, a community leader, etc.).  Yet in the second stage of death, he drops the pretense.  If his love is to hurt others, he does not try to conceal it.  He thus willingly seeks out an afterlife plane where others share his love of hurting others.

My reason for writing about this was to point out that when we contact others, if they are in the first stage of death, they will have responses and thoughts most like us while alive.  So who is it we most frequetnly contact?  And is it more difficult to contact those who have dropped the "exteriors" of earth life (including the mask of civility, and the superego which holds our inner nature in restraint?) 

The "real afterlife" comment was meant to address our inner nature which comes out.  The first stage of the afterlife is merely the complex human, discarnate with his/her exteriors and interiors still in place.


M

DocM wrote on Oct 5^th, 2009 at 9:14am:

The issue is, Alan, that by this theory, of stages, we are all initially much the same way we were when alive in our "first stage" of death.  As if we wake up in the spiritual plane, and see ourselves much like we were before.  As the exteriors of the first stage fall away, our true motivation and driving force becomes apparent.  Thus, a sadistic man, while on earth pretended to be good and just (give to the poor, a community leader, etc.).  Yet in the second stage of death, he drops the pretense.  If his love is to hurt others, he does not try to conceal it.  He thus willingly seeks out an afterlife plane where others share his love of hurting others. My reason for writing about this was to point out that when we contact others, if they are in the first stage of death, they will have responses and thoughts most like us while alive.  So who is it we most frequetnly contact?  And is it more difficult to contact those who have dropped the "exteriors" of earth life (including the mask of civility, and the superego which holds our inner nature in restraint?)  The "real afterlife" comment was meant to address our inner nature which comes out.  The first stage of the afterlife is merely the complex human, discarnate with his/her exteriors and interiors still in place. M

I agree, when a person first passes over they see other humans clothed in normal clothing, little cottages by a blue sea, plants exactly like their earthly world. This is to ease a soul into the higher and very strange realms and planes of existence they will encounter later as they evolve.

During my first NDE instead of having an earth like ethereal body, I seemed to have become a singularity of intense light sentient energy. A point particle of awareness, but this is most unusual as most people seem to be very much the same in appearance in the FIRST STAGE of afterlife that they were in earthly life.

As they/we evolve and progress we change and take on forms that might be considered strange, frightening and alien to those who have just passes over. Thus the initial illusion of "sameness" to the earthly realm, in the "first realm of the afterlife"

What do think?

Al

Vajra,


wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2009 at 2:26pm:

To ask a very direct question of you Bruce - do you have any sense from the perspective of experience as to what happens after focus 27 and education?

It might be useful to start by saying that Monroe's focus levels were defined by him as being based on the kinds of people he found inhabiting various areas of Consciousness.  His 'C1' (physical reality) through Focus 27 were areas he defined as areas of 'human consciousness.'  So, to talk about what might be beyond Focus 27 we would be talking about areas of Consciousness inhabited by 'non-humans.'  These could be other life forms like plants, animals, rocks, aliens, etc.  But I think what you are asking about is more along the lines of, 'what happens for us humans as a result of going through this whole system of focus levels.'  Perhaps this with an eye toward 'what purpose is served' or 'why do we put ourselves through all this wierdness in the first place?'  In Voyage to Curiosity's Father, my fourth book, there are lots of answers to those questions that I have come to believe, not that anyone else should believe them, but I do. 

I've explored a place I refer to in Curiosity's Father as the Land of Angels which is a place that Graduates of this human 'school' appear to inhabit.  If one of the primary purposes of enrolling in this human area of Consciousness is to learn to experience and express Pure Unconditional Love (PUL) these Graduates have completed that purpose.  For them every act they commit is one of PUL.  In terms of location within Monroe's focus level system my opinion is that the Land of Angels is at or near the very outter fringes of Focus 27.  The inhabitants of that area appear to interact with other humans within any of the focus levels I am aware of and probably with humans in other areas that I am not aware of.  The inhabitants also appear to interact with other life forms that exist beyond the boundaries of the areas of human consciousness.

Quote:

By what means do we find our way into rebirth?

There are many means to do this and several are described in my third book, Voyages into the Afterlife.  Basically, for most of us, examining ourselves after a physical lifetime we may decide we'd like to experience another physical lifetime.  We chose which of our 'personality traits' will be emphasized and which muted as a way to guide ourselves through the approaching moment of our birth and that lifetime.  We do this to cause ourselves (during the lifetime) to be drawn toward some areas of experience and repulsed from others.  We may chose the timeframe of our birth, our parents, country, culture, etc.  We are free to make any choice for the approaching lifetime that we are aware is available to us.  We are free to listen to Helpers, Guides, etc. to assist us in becoming aware of more choices available to us.  Then at some point we pick the entry point within time/space for our birth and enter through a process described in detail in the third book.

Sometimes we may have gotten ourselves so 'lost' that we re-enter a lifetime without our conscious awareness, ill prepared, and do our best to find ourselves again.

Quote:

What of the 'self' continues?  What is the range of possibilities?

It would take a rather large book to describe the full range of possibilities.  I could start by asking you, What part of the 'self' you were as a child continues to exist to this day?   Would you say that some parts of your childhood self no longer exist?  Or would you say that they do (probably) exist but that you are just living your life now through other parts of your self at the moment?  For me the latter comes closest to describing an answer to your question.  No part of me ever ceases to exist, it just folds into and becomes the parts of myself that I now express my individuality through.

Quote:

Is there an escape from the death/afterlife/rebirth cycle?

Why would anyone want to do such a thing?  'Escape' makes it sound as though we had no part in deciding to enter into and join this 'death/afterlife/rebirth cycle.'  It also assumes that we exist within one and only one area of consciousness at any given point in our existence.  That concept is so foreign to me it is hard for me to think in those terms anymore.  In my view we exist within many, many areas of consciousness symultaneously.

Personally, I view my lifetime Here as a welcomed vacation from eternity.  While being focused 'over There' the fact that we are eternal beings who exist forever is a more 'in your face' kind of thing.  Frankly, knowledge of the eternal nature of our being can get boring after a while.  Focusing Here, in a physical lifetime, seems to block awareness of ourselves as eternal beings.  It's kind of a welcomed relief for some of us.

Quote:

Drawing on the Bardo teachings, or just even observing everyday reality it seems pretty clear that some sort of dissolution of the individual self takes place at some stage during the transition.

Again, I would call it a sort of rearranging of which parts of Self I chose to express through, rather than 'some sort of dissolution of the individual self.'  But like the 'Bardo teaching' your refer to, my understanding is just based on my beliefs that spring from my limited experience and understanding of the whole subject.

Quote:

'Joe' dies, seems to remain in some way recognisable in the afterlife, but while there is seemingly propagation at some level of characteristics is patently not reborn as the personality 'Joe'.

Or one could say, Joe dies . . . and then choses to emphasize a different set of his personality traits to experience his next incarnation through.  Joe didn't dissolve, all the original parts are still there, just emphasis on a different set of his parts.


Quote:

Is it even possible that what we contact after death in the afterlife is maybe even just a residual shell of decaying beliefs, that what continues has separated and merged (or may be about to merge) back into some sort of whole that is beyond our reach?

In my view, yes, that is possible.  That's why I developed the third workshop, Self Discover and Self Healing.  The primary goal of this workshop is to teach folks how to retrieve Aspects of self that are often a sort of shell or fragment of the Whole person often stuck within the effects of beliefs or traumas.  In my view it is also possible that what we are in contact with is the whole person, or at least the majority of that person's 'parts.'


Quote:

Some argue this is God made, others that it is the means by which (through behaviours which reinforce the 'fearful self' belief system) some unconscious (to us) higher level of ego mind imprisons us in this reality.

Both arguments assume that it is possible to be separated from 'God' or some 'higher level of ego mind.'  This is another concept that is so foreign to me that I can no longer think in those terms.  For me such a separation is not possible except to the extent that we can cause ourselves to believe it's true and thereby be, temporarily, unaware of our connection.  Lack of awareness of this connection is part of what I mean by 'a vacation from eternity.'


Quote:

That's just one (albeit widely held) view, but the question remains - is there any other view from the experiential perspective as to what the nature of this reality we find ourselves in is??

I would say that there are as many 'other' views as there are individual awarenesses in existence.

Bruce

Bruce said: "I remember heading out with a friend on some nonphysical exploration or other when we both unexpectedly stopped after being called to by an elderly lady.  Standing in front of her we noticed that she was all dressed up in white, glowing clothes and behind her were these huge, white gates.  The gates looked like wrought iron in shape and construction but the were painted with a thick, white, sparkling pearl-like substance.  The lady did her best to welcome us and induce us to both pass through the Pearly Gates into her heaven, saying we should be happy that we had arrived at the Gates to Heaven.  Since that wasn't what we had planned to explore we thanked the lady and told her we had other places to visit instead.  She had a very shocked look on her face as we flew off into the darkness."

Recoverer responds: "The above is a bit puzzling. You would think that a lady who believed in such a heaven wouldn't be in a position to welcome people into such a heaven, she would leave it up to Jesus or perhaps St. Peter if she was Catholic.  I also find it puzzling that a spirit wouldn't be able to recognize that Bruce and his friend were spirits that still made use of a body.

I've found that quite often what is experienced non-physically is a simulation, not a literal experience of an actual realm.

In Voyage to Curiosity's father Bruce speaks of a hollow heaven. Other sources of information that seem honest also speak of hollow heavens. When I read Bruce's account the following questions occurred to me:

1. For the denomination Bruce spoke of, who did the first person of the referred to denomination meet up with when he (or she) went to the hollow heaven Bruce wrote about? Did he end up in a hollow heaven all by himself?

2. If this person did end up all by himself, wouldn't he expect to meet up with beings such as God, Jesus, the Apostles, Moses, an Angel or some of the Christians from Biblical times? Even if these beings weren't members of this person's denomination, certainly they would be qualified to abide in heaven.

3. I find it puzzling that souls masquerading to be Jesus were the first light beings to appear to the souls in the hollow heaven Bruce spoke of, because I figure Jesus himself would've done so beforehand. If Jesus' spirit can appear to me, Howard Storm, George Ritchie, and many other people, why couldn't his spirit appear to the people in the hollow heaven Bruce wrote about?

4. Supposedly spirit communication takes place with telepathy. Also, numerous people including near death experiencers have spoken of the intense love Jesus radiates. This being the case, it is hard to figure why souls in a hollow heaven would have a difficult time recognizing Jesus. Especially, if they expected to meet him.

There are other factors I find curious, but perhaps what I said is a good enough start. If hollow heavens exist in some manner, perhaps they exist simply so each soul is able to have the free will to decide for its self if it wants to move onto a more expansive way of viewing life. Nevertheless, because some of the facets of the hollow heaven Bruce experienced seem illogical, perhaps he was presented with a symbolic representation rather than experiencing an actual hollow heaven.  Therefore, I refer back to what I said when I mentioned that quite often we experience a simulation rather than an actual realm.

In one of his youtube interviews Howard Storm suggests this possibly.  When he witnessed Jewish people being burned to death during the holocaust (during his NDE), and saw them greeted by angels as their spirits left smoke stacks, he stated that he might've experienced a simulation rather than an actual event.

Bruce wrote: "Personally, I view my lifetime Here as a welcomed vacation from eternity.  While being focused 'over There' the fact that we are eternal beings who exist forever is a more 'in your face' kind of thing.  Frankly, knowledge of the eternal nature of our being can get boring after a while.  Focusing Here, in a physical lifetime, seems to block awareness of ourselves as eternal beings.  It's kind of a welcomed relief for some of us."

Recoverer responds: "The above contradicts what a lot of people including myself have found. When I've experienced a heavenly realm it felt so wonderful I couldn't imagine this World having more to offer. Many near death experiencers speak of how they don't want to leave a heavenly realm and are anxious to return.

Does a being such as the planning intelligence get bored and have to reincarnate?

Outside of the lessons that are available in this World, what could this World offer that is preferable to what a higher realm has to offer? Is there something better than perfect love and peace? Plus, it isn't as if the creative aspect of being can't be used in a heavenly realm.

There is also the matter of how this World includes many terrible incarnations. How could it possibly be more enjoyable to go through the suffering many people go through, than to abide in a heavenly realm?

Regarding reincarnation, going by the spirit messages I received and what makes sense to me, no self incarnates more than one time.  This is a hazy area. Some people receive information one way, and some people receive it another way.

If we think in terms of all time periods happening at the same time, then all parts of a disk are incarnated at the same time.  Therefore, a probe that is incarnated in the 18th century is a different parcel of consciousness than a probe that is incarnated in the 21st century."

Albert,

Bruce reports his experiences, and encourages you to explore yourself.  He does not present his explorations as the bottom line of "the way it is," just his journal of events, as it were. 

You clearly have a bend to what you expect to find - your post shows that most clearly.  Our perceptions are colored by our expectations.  Everything does not have to be perfectly logical.  It simply is or it isn't.

Our afterlife journey appears to be governed by how much we allow the love of heaven to enter our thoughts, and how loving we are to others.  The woman standing by the unusual pearly gates might have been one who just crossed over; one who attended church or temple regularly, who wanted recognition for her deeds, but was not truly loving, and acting out of love.  She may have been caught up in her exteriors for recognition, without it being her inner feeling of love and charity.  As such, it was "her heaven," they encountered, somewhat off from classical description.

We will NEVER know, if astral or other exploration is absolutely "real" or a simulation, but I find it somewhat offensive that you assume that Bruce's experience that doesn't fit your expectation should be considered a simulation.  We explore with our minds with the tools we have to perceive and it is not usually an objective exploration (as stated above).

Regarding us willingly incarnating to take a break from eternity, I can empathize with both sides of that coin.  In focus 27, if we can create almost anything by thinking about it, when does the shine wear off the new toy?  If we follow the path of love, perhaps we will find a role helping others in heaven.  However, what if we knew that we could incarnate, and accomplish that goal?  Or what if we wanted to dive in to experience the vulnerabilities of being mortal, where things seem to matter more (at the time)?   What if one of our loved ones could be helped by our incarnating on earth and guiding them?  I've often felt that I was meant to be my six-year-old son's father.  That it was a tacit decision I made or was destined to make because our souls were linked.  If I were in spirit and knew that I could incarnate simply to guide him and be there for him, I would do it in a minute, despite the hardships I've faced in my life.

This is not to say that any of those thoughts prove or disprove the idea of reincarnation.  I am of the mind that reincarnation occurs much less often than some think.  But the reasons for incarnating could be many.

In the thread about the second stage of death, it has become clear to me that earth life offers certain advantages to spiritual growth, aside from paths where we can stray.  I believe that evolution may occur much more slowly in spirit, after the second stage of death, when people pursue their innermost loves in a heaven or hell.  On earth perhaps the unique mixture of our exteriors (supergo, laws, or mask of civility) and our interiors (our deepest loves), may allow some people to move into a more loving spiritual state in a quicker fashion.  In part this may happen because the earth is the one meeting ground where people of all inner inclinations, loving, hateful or in between interact on an even playing field.   In spirit, people seem to congregate only in a "like attracts like" fashion

Matthew

Beyond Focus 27, and what Bruce said about it, I remember a mind-journey where I thought I was in Focus 27, but on the very edge of it: A plane, nearly featureless, let it be a short-cut lawn or a sandy desert, there were people sitting, like meditating. Each one alone. What I got from that was, they will be soon leaving Focus 27, or better said, they will be soon overcome any attachments of the human life, so that they can act as really true helpers for the humans, or leave this human sphere, to merge with something more encompassing, or roam on their own the now, for them, greater world.

Spooky

Matthew:

I don't believe it is a matter of being offensive or having a strong bend one way or the other. It is a matter of being allowed to discern what somebody reports.

Just because some people state that reincarnation happens in a manner that is similar to the manner people often believe, this doesn't mean that I lose the right to receive information that states differently. Bruce presented a viewpoint that is somewhat conventional, and I presented another viewpoint. Why is it wrong for me to do so?

Regarding the simulation factor, I believe it is incumbent upon me to use my discrimination when I read what other people have to say.  Because I found that many of my non-physical experiences were simulations that served the purpose of making one or more specific points rather than providing a precise and complete explanation of how reality exists, I consider whether other people experience a simulation or something factual.

There is nothing wrong with me wondering what would actually happen if a soul arrived at a hollow heaven such as the one Bruce spoke about in Voyage to Curiosity's Father. Would the first soul from a sect to arrive in a hollow heaven expect other souls to be there? Would such a soul be expectant and therefore open to meeting Christ? Would Christ be able to present himself in a manner that is convincing?

What is your suggestion, that I read what people write without considering the details of what they say?

I believe it is a bit much for you to conclude that I'm heavily biased in some way because I'm willing to question.

You stated that Bruce suggests that we have our own experiences. Well I've had some of my own experiences and some included Christ. Therefore, if the spirit of Christ can be available for me, then his spirit can be available for others, even though some report in a manner that possibley suggests that his spirit isn't available.

I must add, that when it comes to Christ, I started out as a skeptic. How can a person really know if he or she doesn't try to find out.

Albert,

I respect your experiences with Christ, and they are yours.  Everyone's perception is unique.  The misconception I feel, that is inherent in your questions is that a person must encounter JC in their afterlife experience. 

If God is love, and JC was the embodiment of God on earth, then it is possible that loving people come to heaven in all sorts of ways, without having a personal conversation with him.  Yes, there are instances where people have met JC who were not christian, and surprised to find him at the end of the tunnel.  But there are many instances where this was not the case (NDE Mellen-Benedict).

Some people need to see what they want to at the time both in death and life.  Bruce did not postulate that we all reincarnate, without exception.  He just stated his findings on a center for incarnation, and ideas why incarnating might be a welcome break from the spirit realm.

As to bias, it was, to me clear in your writings that JC is a figure that has been verified to you, and that if other explorations don't factor him in as a presence, you wonder and/or doubt their "reality." As I said, I accept your profound experiences with him one on one, yet I am uncertain that the personification of the divine is right for all of us.  When Storm was asked which was the "best religion" the answer was whatever brings us closer to God.  Swedenborg too found that righteous pagans, and those who loved God and their fellow men ended up in heaven. 

In Swedenborg's point of view, it was the state of the soul vis a vis love that determined where they would be.  True, he felt that after finding themselves in heaven, most pagans would be schooled about Christ, and their reality.   That was his take on things.

The NDE and afterlife experience is so varied and so dependent on a person's own inner consciousness, that I think trying to standardize who we should meet, etc. is not a useful exercise.  There is not just one post-mortem reality.


Matthew

Matthew:

I don't know if a person needs to meet Christ before he (or she) goes to heaven. I believe what is necessary is that a person is humble enough so he is willing to accept what divine will and truth is about, even if it means acknowledging more (or perhaps less) about Christ than he was willing to acknowledge before going to heaven. Things are set up as they are, regardless of what we are willing to acknowledge.

When it comes to the hollow heaven issue, I was referring to what a Christian would expect. If you go by the experience of Howard Storm, if you ask for Christ's help, you will receive it.  I don't believe that Storm dealt with a being who was pretending to be Christ.

This being the case, why wouldn't the Christians people refer to when they speak of hollow heavens be met by the spirit of Christ if they ask for his assistance?

Going by what I've read, Swedenborg's explanations of how realms are set up don't jive with the Monroe description.

What about the main reservations I brought up? It doesn't seem as if you have addressed them directly.

1. Wouldn't the first soul who arrived in a hollow heaven find it puzzling that nobody else could be found in such a realm?

2. Wouldn't such a soul expect beings such as Jesus to be there?

3. Would Jesus actually have a hard time convincing a soul that he is in fact himself? Not even Thomas was a doubting Thomas once he met Jesus after his crucifixion.

Hi all. Thank you for the careful reply Bruce. I've not read many of your books, and not the one which looks at some of these possibilities. Nor have i read ES.

What's interesting about this thread is that it shows considerable agreement about the 'what' of the afterlife, but quite a lot of variation in how we interpret the 'why', and how we describe it.

We seem mostly to see an afterlife where initially we arrive with our learned patterns of behaviour and personality more or less intact, and create a surrounding reality in accordance with these, but that over 'time' (?) these fall away to reveal our true nature or core self/beliefs - at which point we create/migrate to like realities. (sounds a lot like dissolution to me)

There's clarity to the effect that it's our true nature/beliefs that determine the realities we are drawn to/find ourselves in/create, with the caveat that confusion may introduce potentially a lot of randomness into the process.

We seem to do better at accessing (from this life) the earlier stages of the afterlife than the rebirth/release stages, but even there there is a fair amount of insight and agreement. (e.g. Spooky - your beings waiting to move on, having transcended the cycle of re-birth. Robert Monroe describes more integrated beings moving beyond the cycle of life/death too)

Differences in language, expression and specific beliefs/objections to beliefs make the the views seem far less harmonised than i suspect they actually are.

Depending on our perspective we can look on the earth/afterlife/time/space/relative reality as a realm of ego and of suffering, a learning school, a realm of God, or even as a vacation from eternity.

Depending on our system of logic/expression we can talk of God as manifesting will in our mind/created realities in various ways using concepts like ego, self, duality, Spirit, Christ, Love, our own higher mind,  Buddha nature and so on.

My personal sense is that these views are all (from the perspective of our dualistic minds) at least partially true - and may appear totally true to us depending on our view or perception.

The ego dominated mind sees little except those  'others' vs. 'me' in a dog eat dog physical world of competing selves. When they look beyond the physical they still tend to create a power based reality of demons, devils  and other negative entities.

To the mind manifesting only Love the negative aspects of this existence are as nothing - unreal. (they only become significant iof your beliefs make them so)

Most of us have a considerable connection to God and Love, but are equally still quite heavily bound to our belief in the reality of the physical/relative and self based world and its importance. Others that have transcended this may choose to manifest in it out of Love to help others, but for them it may have no absolute reality or significance whatsoever and be quite incidental.

I guess i was pushing a little because i felt there was possibly a bit of a tendency to view the afterlife as some sort of personal heaven, and to feel that we only had to intellectually decide to do so and we could transcend the likelihood that our beliefs determine our afterlife experience come what may.

We seem to agree that this is clearly not the case. I guess the point is that there is an enormous gulf between thinking something, and 'being' something - the whole point of spiritual self work is transformation. Until we transcend certain less than loving beliefs they will determine the afterlife realities/route we create for ourselves back into the world  - and presumably the sort of scenario we find ourselves in it.

The Buddhist expression of all this (the wheel of death/dissolution/rebirth into a more or less desirable physical life) tends to emphasise the unsatisfactory nature of this life, and the desirability of transcending this - yet peculiarly enough it's all there in what we describe...

Ok, Vaj,

I am guided to chime in here.  I like your post.  A few issues came up.  You mentioned the second stage of death (stripping away of the exteriors as ES calls it) as dissolution; I see it more as a distillation or clarification.  Our inner nature shines through without the mask of society or superego.  We are purely what our deepest love or motivation is, without pretending to be anything else.

My next thought to your post is on the necessity of reincarnation.  This is a big sticking point on the forum.  Classic doctrine of reincarnationsts is clear that it is an inevitable cycle, even one that man goes through without choice unless he transcends ego based thinking.

Yet some afterlife scenarios and reports are not so cut and dry.  We hear of loving people who die who become part of heavenly societies, trying to help others.  They may not have thrown off the vestiges of ego yet, but for the most part they are well intentioned.  There seems to be free will in the physical and afterlife planes of existence.  The idea that our free will must lead to reincarnation if we are not realized (of our buddha nature/enlightened), seems to be an over-simplification.  It seems to me that there are many choices available to us when we make the transition of consciousness. 

Matthew

There's probably no problem there Doc. While i've never heard a Buddhist teaching to the effect that we can remain in the non-physical in some sort of teaching role (it doesn't remotely mean there isn't one), it seems likely to follow logically from the principle that we are inevitably driven by our deepest beliefs and convictions.

'Dissolution' too just happens to be the word used in some quarters for a process which (while we're maybe not quite sure of the detail) we're pretty sure happens.

Reincarnation is likewise by the principle that beliefs/attachments determine outcomes presumably only inevitable for those (very much the majority) attached to continued physical existence in the earth life system. (that's almost Monroe speak  :))

It seems perfectly reasonable that there may be some who while they are not ready to transcend individuality are more than ready to give up earth life to enable them to maximise their assistance to others. There may also be others who while they could move on choose to remain in this sort of teaching role - in much the same way that Buddhism teaches (the Bodhisattva ideal) that realised teachers have chosen to be reborn on earth for this same reason. By what we have said there may even be some early on acting out the facade of teacher, and misleading others...

It's maybe worth saying too that Buddhism posits that there are many realms into which we can be reborn, and many of these seem not to be physical, or at least do not seem to operate to the same rules as earth life. (the wheel of life briefly sketches some of the possibilities)

It does teach though that a human life (better still an appropriate one) is pretty ideal as a basis for spiritual progress - tough enough to force us to confront the reality of egoistic behaviours, but not so tough that we are driven out of all consuming fear into karmically unhelpful behaviours  - which could in turn cause re-incarnation in an even worse realm.

The result is that it's taught that we should do all the spiritual work we can in this life to help ourselves gain the freedom from ego needed to enable an optimum (suitable human) re-birth. (it's basically taught too that we should not over indulge in this sort of speculation  ;) - that we should instead concentrate on our knitting. That is work at what is directly relevant to our spiritual progress)

There's a pretty high degree of unanimity between spiritual teachings too to the effect that we (even those realised) ultimately don't gain complete  freedom to move on until we collectively transcend individuality. (i can't say if 'we' means just all humans, or all earth life, or as i suspect it may mean all physical and non physical life with any attachment to individuality in the cosmos. Buddhism routinely talks of assisting 'all sentient beings')

What i can't even speculate on is what the full range of afterlife possibilities may be - but i can't help feeling too that the possibilities are probably infinite.

You mention choice, but i think it's not a simple matter in this context. We all have 100% freedom of choice at all times, and indeed there exists the possibility of our deciding to move beyond this sort of existence at any time.

The problem is that out of fear we actually are unable to bring ourselves to do so - the attachment to physical existence, self-hood or whatever other ego inspired beliefs we hold, and the fear caused by the possibility of losing what we as a result mistakenly value (by the principle above) binds us to the possibility of only those options we can entertain.

When dominated 100% by unthinking, instinctive and reactive ego backed by a rigid template of associated beliefs we presumably have no freedom of choice at all, whereas those who have developed rather more equanimity have freedom within the areas they have ironed out.

The realised person can access this total freedom of choice, but i think maybe that at that stage the love we all hold for our fellow beings (but which is significantly obscured by ego in most of us) kicks in and we become unwilling to move on without doing what is necessary to release them too. We all become Christ....

Pardon my going on, but it's quite scary and at the same time wonderful territory....

Sweedenborg says we are in human form for just one year.If that is true,than how come I saw and talked to my little playmate who died 70 years ago still had a human body,just as solid as I did.I even talked to her and she to me.and she looked as if she came from where the sun shines.jesus said he would set his kingdom up on earth with people with human bodies.

Hi George,

ES doesn't say we are not human after a year.  And for any person, the time passing can vary greatly.  To be honest, since there is no sense of time in the afterlife, I'm not sure how you correlate earth-time with afterlife  consciousness.

Anyhow, the only point he brings up that he experiences is that the outer mask that we wear, from our upbringing and earthly lives falls away, and our true inner motivations take hold.  We are, in my opinion, still as human as we ever were or will be, just without false pretense or lies. 

Unless you define the human condition as being a person with an outer exterior way of acting and an inner way of acting which may be quite different.

Matthew

I should also add that no one ever said as we move on in heaven, so to speak that there is ever a phase where we can't communicate with a person on earth.  It may be more difficult, however to have conversations.