The problem with writers before Monroe and Moen


I have come to the conclusion that if you are a serious student of metaphysics and cosmology you must be thoroughly steeped in Monroe and Moen… (I would include Robert Bruce because as a practical theoretician he has no peer) together they are the Rosetta Stone templates of the field. I say this in all seriousness because using these two writer’s complete works you can evaluate all other works as to authenticity and accuracy of observation.

The reason for this is the two mind functions that control understanding… Moen ~ Voyages into the Unknown p. 134 to p 144.

Moen discovers the Perceiver and the Interpreter and how they work. The most important of these is the Interpreter… because every mystic’s work before Monroe and Moen will be limited by the Interpreter’s ‘known’ in the memory bank of established data.

Swedenborg goes wrong:

Excerpted: berserk2…

Emanuel Swedenborg is the astral explorer with the best verifications.  ES was initially convinced that he was recalling his past lives during astral exploration.  But when he ascended to the higher heavens, his guide warned him that these were not past lives, but rather undetected possessing spirits.  It is well known that the memories of such spirits are mistakenly experienced as if they were those of the astral traveler.  Then ES's guide descended with him to a reincarnationist hollow heaven and offered to demonstrate to its denizens that their reincarnation beliefs were mistaken.

Swedenborg and his guide get’s this wrong because the guide is only half right. Yes, the resonating past life contains a possessing spirit. But, the spirit is not a demon or a unique entity… it is a split-phantom… you the spiritual being is capable of splitting into many parts, you may be able to split into infinite numbers of parts… I am not sure and Monroe and Moen don’t discuss this to my knowledge… but, be that as it may the spiritual entity leaves behind a phantom in serious unresolved past life incidents… such as long lingering, painful deaths. Monroe left three behind which he retrieved. To date Moen left only one phantom which caused his present life sarcoidosis (now cured by the way).

This does not mean that there are not undetected possessing spirits, it only means that one must drop the broad rule and keep an open mind and take every situation on a case by case basis. The key to the whole thing is the scientific method… find a way to test the concept… TMI’s method is build from strong reverse engineering principles and direct experience. The test of any material that you read revolves around the question of… is it speculation or direct experience and most importantly has it been tested in some way. Just because the material comes from a channeled source doesn’t mean the channeled source has it right. Or that the channeler has a broad enough “known data” base with which to communicate.

:)



 

I don't disagree with anything you wrote up there, but I would have to put Thomas Campbell in the mix with Moen and Monroe. His trilogy gave me the perspective I have always craved for understanding exactly what Bruce and Bob are about. Campbell takes much of the subjectivity out of the subject if such a thing could ever be possible. Now Moen and Monroe have far more meaning for me than before.

Seraphis, it's interesting how you pontificate on the basis of limited reading.  It is obvious that you have read neither Swedenborg's "Heaven and Hell," nor Wilson Van Dusen's commentary on ES's life, "The Presence of Other Worlds." If you had, you'd realize that ES's verifications are far more impressive than any modern adept.  Or can it actually be that you don't want your New Age dogmas to be confused by actual verifications?  Posters should notice that Seraphis makes no actual attempt to critically engage ES's reversal of his prior reincarnationism based on discoveries in higher heavenly realms.  I guess all Fundmentalists, (New Age or otherwise) deem it sufficient to cite chapter and verse, or page number in their limited authoritative sources.  Sigh!

Don

so?

All the verifications in the world will not support the validity of Swedenbarf's experiences in higher realms, unless those verfications verfy his actual findings in those realms.  Until we are provided with verification of his findings on reincarnation, it is just another possibility in a sea of other possibilities.  Swedenbogus did not have an infallible belief system, and so as our experiences are filtered through our belief systems, it is possible that certain information he recieved was distorted.  Apparently he was open enough to recieve information which went against his beliefs about reincarnation.  However, it is possible that this information was distorted to fit his limited view of the nature of reincarnation.  In other words, I doubt Swedenbooger understood the idea of reincarnation in the nonlinear sense of the higher self's simultaneous incarnations.  Perhaps this is actually what his guide told him, and being that he had no accurate concept or mental representation of what was being explained, Swedenbiotch translated the information into the closest thing he could conceptualize. 

Dude,

"Swedenbarf" and "Swedenbogus" and "Swedenbiotch?"   You are showing your youth and level of maturity, by demeaning one of the most insightful and educated and by all reports good-natured men of his time.  Have you read any of his writings?  If you did, and could understand that he was not putting through some standard church dogma, you'd be singing a different tune.

He had one of the most brilliant, systematic and logical minds of his time (or any other), had numerous inventions and patents prior to his spiritual phase which rivaled other  great minds/thinkers such as Davinci and Gallileo.  But most importantly, his quest for knowledge was without preconceived notions.  Unlike the church of his time, he was told, most emphatically by deceased people, that those who believe in a holy trinity but do not understand the unity that is God, just don't get it, and don't move on until they do.  Many considered this to be heresy at that time and place, and some wanted him tried for heretical writings. 

This is not to say that Swedenborg (please take note of the correct spelling), did not have belief systems, however, he was open minded.  Read what he has to say about time and space in heaven.  He said  that those spirits he conversed with could not understand linnear time as we do on earth.  For them, it was only understood as a change of state (from one state to another), but time did not exist for them.  Likewise, he described the difference in terms of space and distance in heaven.  What he found was that distance/space really depended on thought.  Bring someone to your mind, and it brought them to you.  Distance was not a factor (it was instantaneous), merely a property of thought in the spiritual realms.   In understanding and writing all this information, he had to have no preset expectations, otherwise he would not have come up with these concepts most foreign to his century (remember, he was born in the 1600s). 

The idea that metaphysical writers before Monroe and Moen are flawed without their understanding and experience is absurd.  There were profound metaphysical writings over thousands of years, and I would venture to say, it would take the better part of a lifetime to go through and understand a fraction of what is out there.

What strikes me as laughable is how some readers and members on the board fall into their own belief systems when it suits them, and then criticize others for not recognizing their systems.  The theory of the disc, and probes is quite interesting, but it is a set of ideas or beliefs.  In some ways, I see the disc theory as a step backward because it still separates us from God and the divine by an intermediary, step - the disc or oversoul (which is not God, but a complex structure closer on the metaphysical chain to God or "all that is"). 

The theory of simultaneous incarnations directed by a disc is also just that - and while I like to run hypothetical scenarios by my own thought process too, I think it would be presumptuous to say that this is truly the way things work.

Of course the reincarnation issue is not settled, and will not be by mere debate.  In one sense, we all will find the answer upon our demise, if we keep our conscious memories. 

Don is merely pointing out that many take the reincarnationalist view for granted, without considering that those who experience past lives may be merging with the memories of another in a mental realm, where such transference of thought is thorough and common (read up on TMI versions of "thought balls").

Matthew

Matthew


Quote:

"Swedenbarf" and "Swedenbogus" and "Swedenbiotch?"   You are showing your youth and level of maturity, by demeaning one of the most insightful and educated and by all reports good-natured men of his time.

You forgot "Swedenbooger."  Relax man, I'm just having some fun.  I remember inventing these names for Swedenborg a couple years ago during a debate with Don, and I thought it would be funny to resurrect them.  I actually respect ES, and me calling him "Swedenbarf" is as meaningless as me calling Robert Monroe "Robert Moron," for the words are hollow and do not reflect my true feelings.  It's funny, the reactions to silly things like this. 


Quote:

Have you read any of his writings?  If you did, and could understand that he was not putting through some standard church dogma, you'd be singing a different tune.

It's funny, as I was writing my post, I began thinking.. man, I really gotta get around to buying some of ES's books.  I acknowledge that he was a great explorer, and understand that he wasn't preaching church dogma. 

What I am trying to say is that just like everyone else in this system of consciousness, his experiences were to an extent colored by his beliefs, and perhaps some of his interpretations were slightly skewed, as in the case of his findings on reincarnation.  I believe he misinterpreted the idea that the memories were those of a possessing spirit.  I believe the memories were most likely from another individual connected to him through his higher self, and this connection was mistaken for possession.  I am not saying that this is definitely the case, but it is definitely a possibility.  Of course, it is also possible that he was in fact simply experiencing another random individual's memories, an individual with no strong connection to himself.  However, this still does not negate the reality of reincarnation.  It simply means these particular individuals were not ES's reincarnational selves.

hi all: sorry if i upset people... the detractors miss the point... which was that the "knowns" in the interpreters memory bank controls the quality of the information coming across into physical reality... this was not a personal attack on anyone.

:)

Well I kinda like what Frank Kepple says about a person's life happening simultaneously over all time periods at once so that it looks like reincarnation but it's actually different parts of a soul group experiencing life all at once (or something like that).

Whether reincarnation happens or not is really not important compared to developing one's self spiritually.

I personally believe in reincarnation as much as my little linear brain can comprehend it. I didn't invent anything either, but I don't have to write a dozen books on my belief for my own spiritual advancement to occur.

Seraphis1 wrote on Nov 1^st, 2009 at 1:26pm:

The problem with writers before Monroe and Moen I have come to the conclusion that if you are a serious student of metaphysics and cosmology you must be thoroughly steeped in Monroe and Moen… (I would include Robert Bruce because as a practical theoretician he has no peer) together they are the Rosetta Stone templates of the field. I say this in all seriousness because using these two writer’s complete works you can evaluate all other works as to authenticity and accuracy of observation. The reason for this is the two mind functions that control understanding… Moen ~ Voyages into the Unknown p. 134 to p 144. Moen discovers the Perceiver and the Interpreter and how they work. The most important of these is the Interpreter… because every mystic’s work before Monroe and Moen will be limited by the Interpreter’s ‘known’ in the memory bank of established data. Swedenborg goes wrong: Excerpted: berserk2… Emanuel Swedenborg is the astral explorer with the best verifications.  ES was initially convinced that he was recalling his past lives during astral exploration.  But when he ascended to the higher heavens, his guide warned him that these were not past lives, but rather undetected possessing spirits.  It is well known that the memories of such spirits are mistakenly experienced as if they were those of the astral traveler.  Then ES's guide descended with him to a reincarnationist hollow heaven and offered to demonstrate to its denizens that their reincarnation beliefs were mistaken. Swedenborg and his guide get’s this wrong because the guide is only half right. Yes, the resonating past life contains a possessing spirit. But, the spirit is not a demon or a unique entity… it is a split-phantom… you the spiritual being is capable of splitting into many parts, you may be able to split into infinite numbers of parts… I am not sure and Monroe and Moen don’t discuss this to my knowledge… but, be that as it may the spiritual entity leaves behind a phantom in serious unresolved past life incidents… such as long lingering, painful deaths. Monroe left three behind which he retrieved. To date Moen left only one phantom which caused his present life sarcoidosis (now cured by the way). This does not mean that there are not undetected possessing spirits, it only means that one must drop the broad rule and keep an open mind and take every situation on a case by case basis. The key to the whole thing is the scientific method… find a way to test the concept… TMI’s method is build from strong reverse engineering principles and direct experience. The test of any material that you read revolves around the question of… is it speculation or direct experience and most importantly has it been tested in some way. Just because the material comes from a channeled source doesn’t mean the channeled source has it right. Or that the channeler has a broad enough “known data” base with which to communicate. :)

Moen and Monroe have all the answers? No they do not!! only God has all the answers and nowhere have I read or heard we can not ask him questions!!

<<Moen and Monroe have all the answers? No they do not!! only God has all the answers and nowhere have I read or heard we can not ask him questions>>

Hi Alan: I'm sorry you read more into what I said than what I meant... no Monroe and Moen don't have all the answers... as a matter of fact both Monroe and Moen say repeatedly in their works that... the beliefs that they turned into knowns are only knowns to themselves... and have no reality as a known to anyoneelse until YOU!!!... convert them into a known for yourself... this is YOUR job and your job alone...  :-[

I'm with Gooby Girl. Frank Kepple is the cats pajamas. Thank you for posting that link in the other thread. I spent my Sunday with it. Had a great time. He makes a lot of sense and he simplifies things a bit too. I like that.

Dude,

I understood the humor, but come on, you can do better.  As to reading ES, you can do it for free, if you Google Emanuel Sweedenborg and Heaven and Hell, there are at least two free online interpretations.  If you read him, it is important to keep in mind that he was writing in the 1700s.  Evenso, the translations are very readable.  His two main tenets, which he learns about on having his eyes opened to spirituality, and the main theme behind "Heaven and Hell" are that the universe and heavens are based on the rule of love, love of God and love of one's fellow man.  This premise then sets up, what follows.

I find it fascinating as a work of writing, to go about things in such detail, and at a time centuries ago when it was not as popular to do.  Swedenborg first learned Hebrew, and translated the old and new testaments himself, to try to explore and understand what had been written there (he embarked on this, well past age 40). 


M

Matthew-

When you have the time, check out one of the Youtube videos of Mr. Anka as he channels Bashar, the multi-dimensional all-knowing master from the future.

Then, after you've watched his facial contortions as he pretends to be Bashar, and when you finish laughing from such an obvious fraud, remember this:

Dude actually thinks Bashar is for real.

Case closed. 

R

Rondele

Please, show me, with quotes and all, where I said I think Bashar is a genuine channel.  You cannot do this, for I never said this.  Rather, what I said was that his information is valuable.

By the way, what case does my thinking Bashar is a real channel close?

Hi Rondele and Dude: Why aren't you guys locating Bashar at some focus level where he is residing and see for yourself first hand whether he exists or not... Dude you are traveler contact him directly. Are you a traveler Rondele?

;)

<<Please, show me, with quotes and all, where I said I think Bashar is a genuine channel.  You cannot do this, for I never said this. >>

Well Dude, here is just one quote:

"it is obvious that you have not listened to the many hours of his recorded sessions, for if you did you would know of the truth that radiates from him." 

If he "radiates truth", wouldn't that mean he's genuine?  Seems pretty clear cut to me.....

Seraphis- Bashar resides in the imagination of the  guy who dreamed him up, and who is charging plenty for people to listen to his charade.  That's a place that I'd rather not go.

R

Rondele

"it is obvious that you have not listened to the many hours of his recorded sessions, for if you did you would know of the truth that radiates from him." 

He is genuine in the things he says, in his message, in the advice he gives to others to help them.  It really does not matter to me if he really channels Bashar or not.  I believe he does, but this is besides the point.  I like what he has to say- it has been a positive influence in my life, so attempting to refute Bashar's existence is really meaningless to me.  Your waisted effort is even more meaningless because you have no proof that he is not really channelling Bashar.  Just another biased, uneducated opinion. 

You watch a youtube video and think you have him figured out.  Have you done any research into Daryll's life, his past spiritual work and acomplishments, the history of his channeling, or what he actually has to say through his channelling?  Do you know of the many other channels which exist all over the world who also channel the entity Bashar, in various languages?  Do you know of the uncanny similarities in both the personality and the messages of the channels during sessions?  Do you realize that these all occurred without prior knowledge of the other channles?  So far the proof shows that he is genuine.  Prove me wrong bud.  (keep in mind, your opinions are not proof)


Here is a personal note from Darryl:

"I always make it clear to people that they do not have to believe that “Bashar” is really an extraterrestrial in telepathic communication with me during the channelings. If they want to believe the words are coming from another part of my own consciousness, that’s fine with me. I have no way of proving “Bashar’s” existence to anyone anyway. The most important thing is that the information, wherever it’s coming from, has made a difference in many people’s lives, including my own.

The information has answered many burning questions with cool satisfaction and clarity, expanded my creativity, inspired and instructed others how to change their lives for the better, and provided insights into concepts I never imagined possible. For that gift, I am eternally grateful, no matter what the source may be. It is my desire that this information will expand your spirit, heighten your awareness of the limitless potential that life offers each and every day, inspire you to follow your highest joy and, as “Bashar” so often suggests to Live your dreams, instead of merely dreaming about living."

Some of those entities have very strong personalities and their channels appear to be less so, so when they come in it's like an explosion. There may be something to it. I used to blow it off, but not so much anymore.

"Cleverness is not Wisdom"-- Euripides

Hi Gang: All channels and guides are not good see Bruce Moen's - Voyages into teh Unknown p. 188 thru 196 Black Stuff. It is enlightning.

:D

Seraphis

I suppose I could go searching for Bashar out there.  I'm sure I would find someone- whether it be an actual entity, or a manifestation of the thought form of the fictional character Bashar, I don't know.  I'm really not interested in proving his existence, however, for like I said before, and as the channel himself admits, it is not the validity of the entity bashar that is important, but the message. 

But perhaps I have met Bashar.  I have had quite a few nonphysical experiences with extraterrestrial entities- none of which I was able to identify.  Some of these occurred during a time when I was getting pretty deep into the Bashar material.  Perhaps it isn't a coincidence.  I even had an experience similar to Darryl's, in which I was told by an ET that I had some sort of prior agreement or connection with this group of beings. 


This reminds me-  I am currently making a (fictional)movie detailing the visitation of extraterrestrial entities occuring with me and my wife, the progressive tension it causes in our lives, and our eventual "final" abduction.  It's gonna be a spooky one!

I Am Dude wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2009 at 10:44pm:

Seraphis I suppose I could go searching for Bashar out there.  I'm sure I would find someone- whether it be an actual entity, or a manifestation of the thought form of the fictional character Bashar, I don't know.  I'm really not interested in proving his existence, however, for like I said before, and as the channel himself admits, it is not the validity of the entity bashar that is important, but the message.  But perhaps I have met Bashar.  I have had quite a few nonphysical experiences with extraterrestrial entities- none of which I was able to identify.  Some of these occurred during a time when I was getting pretty deep into the Bashar material.  Perhaps it isn't a coincidence.  I even had an experience similar to Darryl's, in which I was told by an ET that I had some sort of prior agreement or connection with this group of beings.  This reminds me-  I am currently making a (fictional)movie detailing the visitation of extraterrestrial entities occuring with me and my wife, the progressive tension it causes in our lives, and our eventual "final" abduction.  It's gonna be a spooky one!

Hi Dude: Great to hear about your movie. Good luck. The problem I see with these arguements in the forum, they seem to be based on speculation and second hand hearsay references. We all have the power to get at the truth through the Hall of records and going astrally to the source. Why use questionable source material.

:D

I think Dude is saying that he takes ideas and concepts that suit him.  As to the hall of records - hmmmmmmm good idea.  Except that few of us are Edgar Cayces.  Gee, I should travel there to get a cure for breast cancer for my patients.  Or maybe, a quick consult with the hall of records could enable us to answer the vexing problems of our age or historical controversies. 

The problem is, Seraphis, that no one on this board has such an open connection to these "akashic records" that they can use it like the old fashioned libraries with the Dewey decimal system.  At best, I find we can ask for guidance, and feel, on a gut level, that we have an answer. 

The type of precise research that you mention in the akashic records, is, at this stage in human spiritual development not something we can access like Wikipedia.  Hopefully, that will change.

M

Seraphis-

<<We all have the power to get at the truth through the Hall of records and going astrally to the source.>>

Great idea!  In the ten years or more that I've been on this board, I always wondered about people who said they could go to the Hall of Knowledge (or records) and access any information they needed.

Strangely, not one person has ever reported what they found during their "visit."  I mean, let's take just one example.....why not ask who really authored ACIM and what their motives were.

Or ask if reincarnation exists.

Ask some detailed questions about what the afterlife is really like.  I mean, what do we actually DO there?  It's odd that this board is called afterlife knowledge, but I have yet to read any detailed description of it.

Peculiar.  And to be honest, a bit suspicious.

So let's have a volunteer step up and visit the Hall, and answer some of these questions that have been around for centuries.

R

Really, some of this assumes pretty blatantly that the same things are important to us in the 'afterlife' realms that may be important to some of us 'here'. I don't find that to be so. I have tried to visit the 'hall of records' various times -- for healing purposes. Basically, I have not been allowed to bring anything back whatsoever, in a specific manner, that would please anyone here.

I don't believe we have to check with the hall of records to see if somebody like Bashar is valid. All we need to do is allow ourselves to discriminate him in a wise manner.

Quote:

<<We all have the power to get at the truth through the Hall of records and going astrally to the source.>> Great idea!  In the ten years or more that I've been on this board, I always wondered about people who said they could go to the Hall of Knowledge (or records) and access any information they needed. Strangely, not one person has ever reported what they found during their "visit."  I mean, let's take just one example.....why not ask who really authored ACIM and what their motives were. Or ask if reincarnation exists. Ask some detailed questions about what the afterlife is really like.  I mean, what do we actually DO there?  It's odd that this board is called afterlife knowledge, but I have yet to read any detailed description of it. Peculiar.  And to be honest, a bit suspicious. So let's have a volunteer step up and visit the Hall, and answer some of these questions that have been around for centuries. R

Hi Roger,

You know I love you, my friend, but I have to say this post made me laugh out loud.

Ok, let's think about this for a moment... if we are consciousness, which seems to be basically information, then wouldn't it seem reasonable that the hall of records/knowledge/database or whatever it's called is simply all of the possible bits of information/consciousness that ever was, is or will be?  What makes us think that the consciousness system sorts out one bit of information as "truth" as opposed to another bit of information as "false"? 

Actually now that I think about it, I'd like to hear everyone's opinion about this question.

Kathy

Rondelle:

Regarding ACIM, I didn't check the hall records, but I asked a couple of times after praying to God and Christ, and on each occasion I received the answer that Helen Schuchman received the words from an unfriendly misleading being with a non-human origin.

Considering that this being pushed itself on Helen (wouldn't allow her to sleep until she wrote notes), she had 30 minute coughing fits when she tried to share the words with William Thetford, the strong distaste she had for spirituality, the dark state of mind she ended up in, and the clever but misleading approach the course presents, this makes sense.



rondele wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2009 at 12:26pm:

Seraphis- <<We all have the power to get at the truth through the Hall of records and going astrally to the source.>> Great idea!  In the ten years or more that I've been on this board, I always wondered about people who said they could go to the Hall of Knowledge (or records) and access any information they needed. Strangely, not one person has ever reported what they found during their "visit."  I mean, let's take just one example.....why not ask who really authored ACIM and what their motives were. Or ask if reincarnation exists. Ask some detailed questions about what the afterlife is really like.  I mean, what do we actually DO there?  It's odd that this board is called afterlife knowledge, but I have yet to read any detailed description of it. Peculiar.  And to be honest, a bit suspicious. So let's have a volunteer step up and visit the Hall, and answer some of these questions that have been around for centuries. R

In the past few days I tried to visit the hall of records (not to find out about Bashar) and had no success.

Hi Kathy-

I guess my penchant for tongue in cheek got away from me!

Fear not, I haven't gone off the cliff quite yet.   :)

R

Regarding Kathy's question,

If the hall of records contains every bit of information that conscious minds have perceived/thought, etc., then if there was nothing sorted out (truth, actual happenings, etc.) it wouldn't be much of a hall of learning.  If every possible or probable scenario in existence is recorded, it is not useful.  If earth history, and events in individual consciousness are accurately logged in, it would be of value in many trying to get answers to specific questions in the earth life system.


Matthew

DocM wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2009 at 9:30am:

I think Dude is saying that he takes ideas and concepts that suit him.  As to the hall of records - hmmmmmmm good idea.  Except that few of us are Edgar Cayces.  Gee, I should travel there to get a cure for breast cancer for my patients.  Or maybe, a quick consult with the hall of records could enable us to answer the vexing problems of our age or historical controversies.  The problem is, Seraphis, that no one on this board has such an open connection to these "akashic records" that they can use it like the old fashioned libraries with the Dewey decimal system.  At best, I find we can ask for guidance, and feel, on a gut level, that we have an answer.  The type of precise research that you mention in the akashic records, is, at this stage in human spiritual development not something we can access like Wikipedia.  Hopefully, that will change. M

"The greatest illusion of all is that Mankind has limitations."

Robert A. Monroe  ;D

rondele wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2009 at 12:26pm:

Seraphis- <<We all have the power to get at the truth through the Hall of records and going astrally to the source.>> Great idea!  In the ten years or more that I've been on this board, I always wondered about people who said they could go to the Hall of Knowledge (or records) and access any information they needed. Strangely, not one person has ever reported what they found during their "visit."  I mean, let's take just one example.....why not ask who really authored ACIM and what their motives were. Or ask if reincarnation exists. Ask some detailed questions about what the afterlife is really like.  I mean, what do we actually DO there?  It's odd that this board is called afterlife knowledge, but I have yet to read any detailed description of it. Peculiar.  And to be honest, a bit suspicious. So let's have a volunteer step up and visit the Hall, and answer some of these questions that have been around for centuries. R

Have you read Bruce Moen's books?  :)

wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2009 at 1:25pm:

Really, some of this assumes pretty blatantly that the same things are important to us in the 'afterlife' realms that may be important to some of us 'here'. I don't find that to be so. I have tried to visit the 'hall of records' various times -- for healing purposes. Basically, I have not been allowed to bring anything back whatsoever, in a specific manner, that would please anyone here.

Some people on this board have engaged in libel and slander against individual using hearsay, speculative reporting and other flimsy worthless evidence that court not stand the test of beyond a reasonable doubt and moral certainty... it is incumbant upon them to use every reasonable effort to get to the truth... the Hall of Records holds the truth.

:)

recoverer wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2009 at 1:33pm:

I don't believe we have to check with the hall of records to see if somebody like Bashar is valid. All we need to do is allow ourselves to discriminate him in a wise manner.

Yes, you don't have to check the hall of records all you have to do is find out when he is next channeled and go o.be. to the site and see if he is there... what colors are being exhuded by the apparition if the entity is there... if it is black stuff don't touch it or go near it... report it to the board... if you attack then it is incumbant upon the attacker to prove his allegations... you have the tools.

:)

Dude wrote: Here is a personal note from Darryl:

"I always make it clear to people that they do not have to believe that “Bashar” is really an extraterrestrial in telepathic communication with me during the channelings. If they want to believe the words are coming from another part of my own consciousness, that’s fine with me. I have no way of proving “Bashar’s” existence to anyone anyway. The most important thing is that the information, wherever it’s coming from, has made a difference in many people’s lives, including my own.

The information has answered many burning questions with cool satisfaction and clarity, expanded my creativity, inspired and instructed others how to change their lives for the better, and provided insights into concepts I never imagined possible. For that gift, I am eternally grateful, no matter what the source may be. It is my desire that this information will expand your spirit, heighten your awareness of the limitless potential that life offers each and every day, inspire you to follow your highest joy and, as “Bashar” so often suggests to Live your dreams, instead of merely dreaming about living."

Recoverer: Many fraudulent sources have said something similar to what Darryl said in order to cover themselves.

If you find what he has to say interesting, that's another matter.

Seraphis-

Yes, I've read all of Bruce's books and have been on the AK board for over 10 years..

In addition, I attended his workshop in northern VA.

Any other questions?

R

Seraphis1:

I've stated on more than one occasion that I've received spirit messages stating that ACIM isn't what it claims to be, yet nobody seems to care. This being the case, what would be the point in reporting as you suggest?

Some of us have said plenty of things to explain that ACIM and Seth aren't trustworthy sources, and yet again, nobody listens. Nevertheless, I'll give it another go on another thread and we'll see how people respond. I believe I make some pretty good points.




Seraphis1 wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2009 at 8:41pm:

recoverer wrote on Nov 3rd, 2009 at 1:33pm: I don't believe we have to check with the hall of records to see if somebody like Bashar is valid. All we need to do is allow ourselves to discriminate him in a wise manner. Yes, you don't have to check the hall of records all you have to do is find out when he is next channeled and go o.be. to the site and see if he is there... what colors are being exhuded by the apparition if the entity is there... if it is black stuff don't touch it or go near it... report it to the board... if you attack then it is incumbant upon the attacker to prove his allegations... you have the tools. :)

Quote:

I don't believe we have to check with the hall of records to see if somebody like Bashar is valid. All we need to do is allow ourselves to discriminate him in a wise manner.

Perhaps.  But are you doing that?  Is it wise to judge without doing proper research? 

Recoverer


Quote:

It is my desire that this information will expand your spirit, heighten your awareness of the limitless potential that life offers each and every day, inspire you to follow your highest joy and, as “Bashar” so often suggests to Live your dreams, instead of merely dreaming about living."

If you do sufficient research into Bashar, you will see that this statement is 100% accurate.  Basically those who tell people to stay away from this source are helping to prevent others from possibly benefitting from the material in the stated ways- and I am telling you from experience that his material has done this- and there was very, very little which did not resonate with me.  Sure, some of his material is basic, but he also gets very deep into topics and explores facets which are quite enlightening.  As for seemingly silly concepts such as the santa clause article- I have yet to come across something like this in any of his recorded sessions- I definitely wouldn't point to this as disproving Bashar's validity.  I'm sure santa clause exists somewhere in the astral realms as a manifested thought form, just as many other fictional characters probably do.  Consciousness creates consciousness, after all.

Seraphis,

The idea that anyone on this board can astrally project at will, anytime, anyplace, and control the experience each time, is far off.  Many OOB experiences are on a continuum with dreams or lucid dreams.  Read OOB dude's Gateway journals.  Great mind opening experiences, but they "wink out" at odd times, and often are not at all easy to control.

I also encourage you or anyone else to check for guidance and answers.  But the nature of earth life doesn't make it that easy to verify things by astrally projecting or using akashic records - this is why Don,(Berserk2) constantly brings up the lack of verification. 

Some actually believe that we agree to restrict our awareness in joining the earth-life system.  I'm not sure what to think about this, but I do know that we have a difficult time getting super specific information at will.


M

DocM wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2009 at 9:30am:

I think Dude is saying that he takes ideas and concepts that suit him.  As to the hall of records - hmmmmmmm good idea.  Except that few of us are Edgar Cayces.  Gee, I should travel there to get a cure for breast cancer for my patients.  Or maybe, a quick consult with the hall of records could enable us to answer the vexing problems of our age or historical controversies.  The problem is, Seraphis, that no one on this board has such an open connection to these "akashic records" that they can use it like the old fashioned libraries with the Dewey decimal system.  At best, I find we can ask for guidance, and feel, on a gut level, that we have an answer.  The type of precise research that you mention in the akashic records, is, at this stage in human spiritual development not something we can access like Wikipedia.  Hopefully, that will change. M

DocM

Hi Doc: I invite you to read Bruce Moen’s Voyage to Curiousity’s Father… beginning on p. 56, parag: 5 to begin getting information on what Moen refers to as the Library Archives… at some point in the narrative in this book Moen and exploration partners review an well known historical incident and compare that to actual Library Archive event… I will let you read the material and draw your own conclusions.

8-)

<<Hi Roger,

You know I love you, my friend, but I have to say this post made me laugh out loud.

Ok, let's think about this for a moment... if we are consciousness, which seems to be basically information, then wouldn't it seem reasonable that the hall of records/knowledge/database or whatever it's called is simply all of the possible bits of information/consciousness that ever was, is or will be?  What makes us think that the consciousness system sorts out one bit of information as "truth" as opposed to another bit of information as "false"? 

Actually now that I think about it, I'd like to hear everyone's opinion about this question.

Kathy
[/quote]

Hi Kathy: I refer you also to Bruce Moen’s Voyage to Curiousity’s Father… beginning on p. 56, parag: 5 to begin getting information on what Moen refers to as the Library Archives…

Essentially, as I understand it, you can access events that have actually happened… as opposed to possibilities and probabilities that were only potentials… for example… a poster who shall remain nameless slandered Ramakrishna as a pedophile… well in the Library Archives will be Ramakrishna’s life stream… you will be able to review his every actual act… did he have sex with a minor??? You will be able to see that event…  8-)

Seraphis,

The question is not whether or not one can, rarely get a single piece of information from akashic records (or the library cited).  The issue I spoke of before deals with how often one can access this information, how precise the answers are and whether this can be done at will, as you suggest.

Was Jesus God incarnate?  Do we reincarnate as often as some Eastern religions claim, or is it a rare event?  Do we choose our parents and pre-create our earth experience (as some like Michael Newton suggest) by planning before we enter the womb with angelic advisors?

All these answers should be given definitive "yes" or "no" answers, if the akashic records were that clear, obvious and defined.  What about Bruce's discussion of the role of the interpretor in all of us, and how that might affect the information we receive?  Are the akashic records filed in terms of unchanging truths, or can we put our own spin and interpretation on them?

I do take heart when I hear of Bruce or others performing a partnered exploration and getting specific information back.  But at best, this information is a small sliver compared to the type of access your post implies we have to this limitless information while in physical bodies.

M

Robert Bruce claims to be proficient at accessing the Akashic Records.  He can also enter altered states and project his consciousness at will (more or less).  I believe he is one of the most advanced spiritual practitioners of our time(certainly the most advanced that I know of).  What is interesting is that he followed a totally different road then Monroe and Moen as far as the exploration of his consciousness, began his metaphysical training with a totally different belief system, and utilizes different systems of spiritual practice, and yet his findings on the nature of reality are very similar- even his beliefs on reincarnation and the higher self. 

Getting this thread back on track a bit...

I recently began reading Swedenborg's Heaven and Hell.  I must say, I am very, very impressed.  So far, what he says about the nature of heaven seems to fit in nicely with what Robert Monroe has found in many ways.  He also offers new perspectives which really resonate with me.


I was hoping that Don (or anyone else) could address these issues I had with some things Swedenborg says:


Quote:

"They have also told me that when people arrive from earth with the idea of three divine beings they cannot be admitted to heaven. This is because their thinking vacillates between one opinion and the other, and in heaven they are not allowed to think “three” and say “one. This means that if people have divided the Divine into three in the world and held a separate image of each one without gathering and focusing these three into one, they cannot be accepted. In heaven, there is a communication of all thoughts, so if people arrive who think “three” and say “one,” they are recognized immediately for what they are and are sent away"

So he is saying that if you believe in the trinity as three separate beings, you will not be "admitted" into heaven?  But how can he say that what level of heaven you are in depends upon how great your love of the lord and love of your neighbors is, and then say this?  Ones love and goodness has nothing to do with whether you believe the trinity is one being or three.

Towards the end of the quote I see he is saying that your true self is displayed for all to see, so you cannot hide behind lies and falseness.  But I don't see how this applies to one's beliefs on the trinity.

Hi Dude: I think what he is saying is he is not on focus 27 but in the belief system territories... and the hollow heavens this is what I mean by Monroe and Moen are the templates by which to identify where the writers are coming from. But the hells and hollow heavens are strictly Moenic. :D

:D

Dude:

I recently checked out Swendenborg's Heaven and  Hell from the library, and even though I believe it has some good things to say, some things are hard to believe.

For example, the very words you referred to.  On the one hand Swedenborg says non-Christians who are good people can precede to heaven, but then says Christians such as Catholics have to go to the right rather than heaven, because they believe in the trinity.

What else is somebody such as a Catholic supposed to believe? They believe as they were taught. What about somebody such as Betty Eadie? When she had her NDE she was surprised to find that God and Jesus are two beings, because she believed they were one.

Or in other words, two people with non-physical experiences contradict each other.

How is a person supposed to know which version is  true? I still don't know.

Another thing about Swedenborg is that his explanations are "so" body based.

Consider the below words.

pg. 373 (488,5): If people have devoted their lives wholly to pleasure, living elegantly, pandering to the gullet and the belly, loving this as the greatest good of life, in the other life they love feces and latrines (bathrooms) and find them delightful. This is because pleasures like these are spiritual filth. They avoid places that are clean and free from filth because they find them distasteful."

Is a person supposed to take the above seriously?

I wonder if any of us obtain information through non-physical means that is completely accurate. It is partly a matter of what we are open to, and partly a matter of what the audience we speak to is willing to hear.

Since Swedenborg was from the 1700's,  he had to be provided with information people from the 1700's were open to. People who probably believed in eternal hellfire and needed a more reasonable explanation.

Swedenborg couldn't speak of disks/oversouls because for the most part people from his time weren't open to find out about such information. Today, some people are.

I agree Recoverer.  Although much of what Swedenborg says seems pretty accurate, there are some things he "learns" which are obviously distorted by false beliefs he  probably acquired through the church.  But these inaccuracies are very apparent, and easily dismissed without really affecting the quality and significance of the truths he discovers.  I am interested in what Don thinks of these obvious inaccuracies. 

I was also playing with the idea that if the angels he speaks with in heaven are in fact telling him these untruths, then perhaps the heaven he is experiencing is actually a belief system territory.  He does refer to the heaven as a "Christian" heaven.  However, the truths he speaks of does make the heavens he visits seem genuine.  I have yet to finish the book, so I am trying not to draw too many conclusions until I have assimilated the entire work.      

Albert,

You aren't getting what ES was tallking about.  First off, he did not say catholics don't go to heaven because of belief in the trinity.  Rather, his point was that God is a unity, and that when loving people come to heaven, they are told this fact, and that the trinity represents different facets of the unity.  If they don't get this, and insist on worshipping the son as a different deity than the father, it is similar to idolatry, in some ways.  His writings state that until they could understand the nature of love and the unity of God they would be in a "heaven" but not enlightened enough to progress in the heavenly planes.

As to the gluttons eating garbage in hells, he literally meant one who showed indifference or hatred to his/her fellow person, but loved, reveled and indulged in earthly pleasures like food, wine and debauchery.  Since they went opposite to the path of love, he was able to see that upon passing over, they sought out hellish realms where they could indulge their appetites without caring for other people.  I'm not sure how you missed that part. 

Interestingly enough, ES did in fact note that there were many communities in heavens and hells some of which bore striking resemblence to soul groups or discs.  He just didn't use that temrinology.

M

Matthew:

Below are some of Swedenborg's words (I haven't read all of them):

Swedenborg: Still, it needs to be realized that in the other life any people who have not put "good" in one compartment and "true" in another--who have not separated faith from love--accept the heavenly concept of the Lord as God of the universe once they have been taught.

Albert: By Lord Swedenborg means Jesus Christ, therefore he says God and Christ are one and the same.

Swedenborg: On the other hand, people who have denied the Lord's divine nature and have recognized only his human nature (like the Socinians) are also excluded from heaven. They are taken a little way forward to the right and are let down into the depths, which completely separates the from the Christian realm.

Albert: Swedenborg doesn't mention Catholics, but he does mention people who don't believe that God and Christ are one. Some sources say we select the life we incarnate into.  Why would people choose to incarnate as a Catholic, if being taught to believe in the trinity would prevent them from returning to heaven?  Perhaps the answer is that regardless of what we believe after we die, as long as we have the humility to accept divine truth as it is, we'll able to see things as they are.

Swedenborg: Things happen differently for people who are born outside the church, the ones we call non-Christians. We will discuss them later.

Albert: Going by the above, belief is irrelevant, except why does Swedenborg find it necessary to speak of Christians who believe in the trinity differently than he speaks of non-Christians? A Christian such as a Catholic is just as unlikely to believe that God and Christ are one, as a person in a non-Christian religion.

Swedenborg: There were some spirits who had acknowledged the Father but whose only concept of the Lord has been that he was a human being like everyone else. This meant they did not believe that he was the God of heaven. As a result, they were allowed to travel here and there and to ask at will whether there was a heaven that did not belong to the lord. They asked around for some days without finding any.

Albert: According to the above, they are provided with the chance to find out what's true. I figure that as long as they are humble towards divine will, they will be okay. Therefore, once again, what they believed before hand is irrelevant. This being the case, it is odd that Swedenborg makes a distinction between Christians who believe in the trinity and those who don't.

Hey Albert,

You still don't seem to get it. ES believes that many who were taught that the trinity includes separate deities, when they see their loved ones and hear that heaven is based on God the father, the son and spirit as a unity - many of these people, no matter catholic or protestant, or non christian get the concept of God as a unity, and accept love as the driving force of heaven.  (for ES this is love of God and love of one's fellow man).

Yes, ES says God and Christ are one.  He says that pagans (non Christians) who are loving enter a loving heaven - but to him, it meant that they are taught about the structure of heaven based on love. 

You should know that ES never said that people are condemned to hell or a hollow heaven, by anything but by their own second nature, and degree of loving God and their fellow man....

What ES is saying is that loving souls, when shown around so to speak and being instructed, usually accept the truth as obvious, no matter if they were catholic or non-christian.

If ES entered into his exploration of the heavens or hells with pre-conceptions he would not have come up with the concepts of PUL; of pagans admitted to heaven based on their loving nature. 

Admittedly, ES had his own "interpretor" and must have put some spin on what he encountered, but he was meticulous, and very logical and methodical.  He did not want to just write down what he was told, but rather the cosmology all had to fit together and pass the sniff test.

Even as a non-christian, I find ES to be open minded and loving.  Not at all the kind to bar any one group or person from heaven.  When you read him saying that people of certain beliefs don't get the love that the universe is built on and don't enter heaven, he states this not as a proclamation, but an observation.

Matthew

Hi All: Seems as I read the posts that I am more and more right about Monroe and Moen. Since, the two have realigned mysticism and cosmology with "knowns" that have brought all that past information into line with the truth about what is actually happening in the physical and non-physical realms and are defining very clearly the road ahead and its goals... the caviat is this... these "knowns" for Monroe and Moen are still only "beliefs" for us until we turn them into knowns... past writers didn't have the technology to get "knowns"... remember Monroe's hemi-sync work is all reversed engineered... no past mystic ever thought to reverse engineer... nor had they the technology to do it... or even possibly the inclination to do it... Monroe is one of a kind... I don't know if the board knows it but Joe McMonagle has the original manuscript for Ultimate Journey and it is many time larger than the published version and his publisher didn't think the real version could be profitably published because it was so far out... that is why Monroe after he died engaged Moen to start finishing the job... Moen wrote what Monroe wanted to write... that is my opinion...

;)

Hi Seraphis,

You're all right!  :D  :D Regale, regale!

I don't know about your last statement but over all I salute your POV!

Betson

Thank you betson... I love you.  :)

Matthew (Doc): I understand that Swedenborg says that people who believe in the trinity are provided with an opportunity to see that they are wrong. This is why I provided some of his words I provided.

Perhaps I had a knee jerk reaction. As a doctor, I figure you know about them, or do you own one of those little rubber hammers? :)

Perhaps he wrote what he wrote not so much to focus on people who believe in the trinity, but simply to explain how it works out in their case.

What I find interesting about ES in heaven and hell is to read his discussion of the three stages of man after death.  they ring true with a lot of modern explorers, including Bruce (in fact I had a thread about this, and Bruce correlated his explorations/retrievals with ES's description.

In a nutshell, nowhere does ES pretend to condemn people to hell.  He asserts that our post mortem fate is determined by our ability to love God and our fellow human beings, and to the degree we achieve either or both, we enter a heavenly realm.  To the degree we turn away from both, we voluntarily enter the hellish planes.  Free will persists though.

The trinity example is, for ES a teaching point.  That there is one God; that God is not subdivided, that the trinity looks at different aspects of one God, but in Heaven one does not address the holy ghost or father differently.  True he said anyone who didn't get this would likely not enter into the heavens - more for their understanding and attempt to subdivide the divine unity than anything else. 

ES states that for most people entering Monroe/Moen's focus 27, after the mask of earthlife falls away they will enter a third stage of death, namely a stage of instruction.  For those who are selfish and unloving, once they migrate toward others who feel the same way, there is no formal heavenly instruction (though admittedly there may be types of hellish instructions). 


M

Matthew said: The trinity example is, for ES a teaching point.  That there is one God; that God is not subdivided, that the trinity looks at different aspects of one God, but in Heaven one does not address the holy ghost or father differently.

Recoverer responds: Perhaps I'm wrong, but it seems as if you are understating how Swedenborg states that Christ and God are one, not two seperate beings. According to Swedenborg, when Jesus walked on this planet he was in fact God. Swedenborg referenced gospel verses that make this point.

Consider your words, "but in Heaven one does not address the holy ghost or father differently." You didn't include the name Jesus Christ.

Albert,

This is more in Don's arena, but I would say that for ES, Jesus, the Holy Spirit and the father/God were always one and the same.  It is the paradox of the trinity, namely appearing to be separate yet being a unity that he mentions.  Apparently, in the heavenly realms, he found the understanding of this unity to be essential to proceed in the heavens.

M

Has anybody read Swedenborg's book "Life on other planets?" Below is a description. Kind of hard to believe.

Is there life on other planets? This intriguing question is still being debated in scientific circles, but Emanuel Swedenborg attested that he had actually spoken with spirits from other planets in the afterlife. Originally published in 1758, this startling book details Swedenborg's conversations with angels unlike any other spirits he encountered in the afterlife. Spirits from Jupiter, Mars, Mercury, Saturn, Venus, and the moon discuss their lives on other planets and how their cultures differed from those of earthly life. Swedenborg also explains why the Lord chose Earth as the planet on which he would be born. Translated by the late Cambridge scholar John Chadwick and co-published with the Swedenborg Society of London, this volume also offers an introduction by Dr. Raymond Moody, author of Life after Life, who ruminates on how modern science is validating some of Swedenborg's assertions.

http://www.amazon.com/Life-Other-Planets-Emanuel-Swedenborg/dp/0877853207/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257811694&sr=1-5

I don't think it's too hard to believe.  If one keeps in mind that our universe is multidimensional, this leaves open the possibility of life existing on these other planets in other dimensions.

I guess one would have to see what he said. I wonder if Emanuel realized that places like the moon don't have an atmosphere. How did people from the 1700's view such things?

I looked around and one source stated that Emanuel contended that every planet God created has life. This premise is worth questioning.

Yes, the premise is worth questioning. 

It is also worth noting that Swedenborg discovered this during his astral projections.  There have been many modern explorers who also claim to have witnessed life on the other planets in our solar system in other dimensions. 

recoverer wrote on Nov 9^th, 2009 at 8:40pm:

I guess one would have to see what he said. I wonder if Emanuel realized that places like the moon don't have an atmosphere. How did people from the 1700's view such things? I looked around and one source stated that Emanuel contended that every planet God created has life. This premise is worth questioning.

Probably the life they are talking about on these planets are not necessarily physical but astral in nature... but, individual entities hang around these locales and even build communities there... this is only an opinion of course

Matthew


Quote:

In a nutshell, nowhere does ES pretend to condemn people to hell.  He asserts that our post mortem fate is determined by our ability to love God and our fellow human beings, and to the degree we achieve either or both, we enter a heavenly realm.  To the degree we turn away from both, we voluntarily enter the hellish planes.  Free will persists though.

Swedenborg clearly states that one's inner nature is permanent; it does not change.  Those who are destined to hell eventually go there and stay forever, and the same goes for those destined for heaven.  There are major faults in this line of thinking, and this puts into question the credibility of some of his other more fanatic claims as well.

Below is what I wrote on another thread.

I'd like to add that I stopped reading Swendenborg's heaven and hell because even though he has some good things to say, on more than one occassion he stated that some people end up in hell "forever."

In one paragraph he wrote that some people are cast into hell right after death head first with their feet sticking out.

When he spoke of people going to hell he made no mention of why many people develop in a negative way. There are so many negative influences in this World. Many people are likely to be influenced in a negative way.

One of the reasons we incarnate into this World is so we can learn to live according to love and choose wisely. It isn't reasonable to expect people to be done with the lesson plan before they have a chance to complete it.

Therefore, when I listen to my heart and common sense, Swedenborg is too indifferent to souls who supposedly end up in hell forever.

I doubt souls would choose to incarnate into lives that have negative influences if they understood there is a good chance they might end up in hell for all of eternity, or as Swedenborg says, forever.

Life in this World is a means to a greater end, not a way to get many souls stuck in hell for all of eternity.

Since Swedenborg lived in the 1700's, perhaps he wrote what was relevant to the time period. Perhaps today a more enlightened and less accusatory approach (they get what they deserve) is required.

Perhaps it is possible to set up a system where all souls find their way back to the light, especially those who took on the more challenging lifetimes.

Recoverer

It's obvious to me that a lot of what Swedenborg discovered was at least somewhat influenced by his beliefs, which apparently came from the bible.  Almost every page in Heaven and Hell had references to the bible.  Some of his experiences he related to what was said in the bible.. but it seems like many of his experiences were actually caused by what he read in the bible.  It is usually easy to see through his belief system filter and find truth in his material, but some things are so skewed there seems to be no truth in them whatsoever. 

Anyway, I am still reading the book, for even though it's not 100% accurate, there are still things that can be learned, and it is interesting to see things from his unique perspective.  Like they say, don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

Dude:

The thing is, I don't have time to read everything I want to read, so sometimes I move onto something else.

You guys are way off on ES.  He does state that our natures bring us inevitably to a heaven or hell, but that is to drive home the point.  i have only read his Heaven and Hell and a biography about him.  But I have heard that he speaks of a kind of retrieval from higher planes as well.  I would love to hear a passage from Albert wherein he states that once in a Hell, a person can not leave for eternity. 

Don't forget also, that he is talking from points in time, i.e. the person in the hell has a current nature as such that they should be there.  The evolutionary path of the hellbound, is not, as I recall talked much about.


Matthew

Doc-

ES does in fact hint at what Recoverer says.

On pg 111 of Van Dusen's book The Presence of Other Worlds, ES is quoted 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." 

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.

I know ES exhorts us to good behavior, but it also seems that unless that behavior flows from a good essential character, it may not necessarily be of much value. 

R

If you look at your quote from page 111, he does talk about our primary motivation/character.  Of course it can not be changed immediately after death, because it is the immediate post mortem reality.  This is the point he was driving home.  He actually does not address the issue of eternity or evloution in that passage.

M

Also, Albert and Dude, from an ES forum there are two examples of ES speaking of people being raised up of or out of hells:

Two examples of them are from Spiritual Experiences:
"I desire to state this fact, for I know it to be true, for I have perceived it, that many … [in hell] have been raised from hell and torments into heaven where they now live … [Spiritual Experiences #228]"

"[In a large vat in hell] there are none of those there who perished in the time of the Flood, but they have been brought out … and there are those who have been created anew." SE 286

Also, SE 1497, read in light of SE 1928, indicates that certain spirits remain in a dungeon in hell “for centuries, until their former life is altered … Thus their former life dies, although it still remains.” After this, they were enabled by a “superadded gift” to live among angels. Whether you read this as complementary or contradictory to Heaven and Hell 480, is a subjective judgment, not an objective one."

Matthew

I can't provide specific quotes since I returned the book to the library.

On more than one occasion Swedenborg says "forever" while saying we can't change our basic nature once we join the afterlife. I don't believe this is negated when he says that "some" spirits move onto a higher realm. He makes it sound as if many never do so.

One time I did that cleansing/retrievel thing I've spoken about for a spirit that was as bad as Hitler when he was a person. He moved on to the light after his energy was cleansed and more light was revealed to him. I figure that if this spirit can be helped, then just about any spirit can be helped.

There is no way a spirit would choose darkness over light if it understood the difference. Therefore, when one doesn't know the difference you have to find a way to show it the difference, rather than say its dark nature is eternal and leave it at that.

Again, I think ES may have been vague and/or possibly conflicted himself on this issue.  On the one hand, he wanted to emphasize that our inner love drives us to hells or heavens.  That all pretense falls off some time after death, so we willingly pursue our inner love.  For ES, those in hellish realms express a love for the materialistic or the sadistic or hedonistic without the primal love of others or God.

That the stay in the hellish realms is forever I do not think he actually says.  In parts of his writing, such as what I pulled from the ES forum, he implies that a part of the person is altered in the hell and then they are in a heaven.

I must also add that ES was an extremely logical coherent thinker, and though I think many of his ideas came as suggested by his astral travels, it appears to me that he uses a socratic like dialogue to show logically how one thing leads to another in heaven.  This makes one wonder how much came from his brilliant and logical mind and how much came from direct revelation from talks with deceased people (angels). 


M

Yes, when I read Heaven and Hell I wondered how much came from Swedenborg's intellect and how much came from his experience.

There is also the matter of how he was a prolific writer back in the days when people didn't have computers. It would've been difficult for him to correct contradictions, or when he understated or overstated what he had in mind.

I haven't read all of the posts here, but from what I have read I'm in agreement with Matthew.  Thinking this same thing was discussed on another thread a few months ago.

Kathy

Matthew

Here is a direct quote from Heaven and Hell, one which I am referring to in my previous post:

(page 363) "we remain the same forever in regard to our volition or dominant love"

Swedenborg says that if our dominant love is love of self, we end up in a hell.  And he says that our dominant love never changes.  So put two and two together, and we have a false belief.

It's great to see that in other works he finds that retrievals from Hell are possible, and that it is possible to change one's inner nature.  Of course, this is a blatant contradiction to what he says in Heaven and Hell.  Perhaps his beliefs on this subject changed as he gained more experience and learned deeper truths. 

I read on more than one place in heaven in hell where he said something that made the point that some people end up in hell forever. I don't know why these words are being disregarded. If he wrote them, them he wrote them.



I Am Dude wrote on Nov 23^rd, 2009 at 6:37pm:

Mattew Here is a direct quote from Heaven and Hell, one which I am referring to in my previous post: (page 363) "we remain the same forever in regard to our volition or dominant love" Swedenborg says that if our dominant love is love of self, we end up in a hell.  And he says that our dominant love never changes.  So put two and two together, and we have a false belief. It's great to see that in other works he finds that retrievals from Hell are possible, and that it is possible to change one's inner nature.  Of course, this is a blatant contradiction to what he says in Heaven and Hell.  Perhaps his beliefs on this subject changed as he gained more experience and learned deeper truths.

It's true.  He said it and that's that.  What he says is generally straight forward, and although much of what he says can be interpreted to fit more advanced concepts which we have come to understand in these modern times which were unknown back in his time, I don't believe this one applies.  It is possible for him to accurately understand and describe certain aspects of the afterlife, and fall short of truth on others.  Not everyone has a crystal clear interpreter or a perfect TOE. 

Doc


Quote:

A great deal of experience has also convinced me that after death we remain the same forever in regard to our volition or dominant love . I have been allowed to talk with some people who lived more than two thousand years ago, people whose lives are described in history books and are therefore familiar. I discovered that they were still the same, just as described, including the love that was the source and determinant of their lives. There were others who had lived seventeen centuries ago, also known from history books, and some who had lived four centuries ago, some three, and so on, with whom I was also allowed to talk and to learn that the same affection still governed within them. The only difference was that the pleasures of their love had been changed into corresponding ones. Angels have told me that the life of our dominant love never changes for anyone to all eternity because we are our love, so to change it in any spirit would be to take away and snuff out his or her life. They have also told me that this is because after death we can no longer be reformed by being taught the way we could in this world, since the outmost level, made up of natural insights and affections, is then dormant and cannot be opened because it is not spiritual (see above, §464). The deeper functions of our mind or spirit rest on this level the way a house rests on its foundation, which is why we do stay forever like the life of our love in the world.

(Heaven and Hell page 366)

You must admit, there are fundamental flaws in this line of thinking, and obviously in his experiences as well.  He claims "angels"  say that one's inner nature is unchangeable, but I don't believe a true angel would be this deluded or misleading.  Perhaps the beings he communicates with are not really angels, and the "heaven" he experiences is a hollow heaven, a grand belief system territory.  Or maybe he just skews the information he receives to fit his beliefs.  Either way, this is a major flaw, and should not be overlooked.

Dude,

I can not say that I agree with ES, although I haven't had discussions with deceased people from thousands of years ago. 

To me, however, he is saying we have each, individually a primary love which we follow, which does not have to be evil or good.  In fact if the form of love is applied in a loving manner, it may lead to spiritual growth, if it is applied toward selfish or sadistic ends, it can lead us toward a hell.

Let us say our primary love is to solve puzzling situations.  One can imagine following this toward either loving ends, or unloving ones.  There is nothing wrong in acknowledging that we may have a primary love to our personality that persists indefinitely.  This, by no means indicates that we won't have secondary loves.  Thus the person who enjoys solving puzzles - figuring out what makes things tick, may also love God and other people.  However, when ES peered into the persons nature, he saw the primary love first.  He would look at a Julius Caeser, and find that when he died, his love of power over others persisted for centuries in the afterlife.  Or perhaps that a famous lover such as Paris from the Trojan war, persisted in following his lusts and narcissism after he died. 

What ES says, is not different from what many afterlife sources say.  Many sources point to the fact that spiritual growth occurs much more rapidly on earth, where we have our interior love under control and being modified by our exterior mask of society.    ES is sort of saying the same thing, only he says that without our exterior masks, we stay with our primary love.  But I feel that he was saying more that we follow this primary love and change it less and in different ways once we are dead. 

I think I "get" his point, but don't necessarily agree with it all.  I think ES does speak of people leaving hells, as I documented, as so he is inconsistent and perhaps conflicted himself. 


Matthew

Hi All: As I began to get the feedback on my narrow view point... I began to realize that the real criteria for evaluating metaphysical writers is "direct" experience... for example Sylvan Muldoon and Oliver Fox... both were prolific astral travelers in the real-time zone... Muldoon was more analytical and got it all quite right, right down to affirmations and the subconscious' roll in bringing about conscious projections. Monroe and Moen however refined his work and extended it... but, I think both Monroe and Moen may have owed much of their refinement of the mechanics to having ready access to Muldoon... but, I don't know this for sure... but, how could Monroe or Moen have avoided Muldoon...??  8-)

Seraphis1

Ok.  I believe I initially misunderstood what he was saying.  I thought he was saying that our inner state of "good" or "evil" never changes.  Rather, what he is saying is that our deepest passions never change.  I suppose what is important is whether we seek out to fulfill these passions in a loving way or a selfish way. 

DocM wrote on Nov 23^rd, 2009 at 9:56pm:

Dude, I can not say that I agree with ES, although I haven't had discussions with deceased people from thousands of years ago.  To me, however, he is saying we have each, individually a primary love which we follow, which does not have to be evil or good.  In fact if the form of love is applied in a loving manner, it may lead to spiritual growth, if it is applied toward selfish or sadistic ends, it can lead us toward a hell. Let us say our primary love is to solve puzzling situations.  One can imagine following this toward either loving ends, or unloving ones.  There is nothing wrong in acknowledging that we may have a primary love to our personality that persists indefinitely.  This, by no means indicates that we won't have secondary loves.  Thus the person who enjoys solving puzzles - figuring out what makes things tick, may also love God and other people.  However, when ES peered into the persons nature, he saw the primary love first.  He would look at a Julius Caeser, and find that when he died, his love of power over others persisted for centuries in the afterlife.  Or perhaps that a famous lover such as Paris from the Trojan war, persisted in following his lusts and narcissism after he died.  What ES says, is not different from what many afterlife sources say.  Many sources point to the fact that spiritual growth occurs much more rapidly on earth, where we have our interior love under control and being modified by our exterior mask of society.    ES is sort of saying the same thing, only he says that without our exterior masks, we stay with our primary love.  But I feel that he was saying more that we follow this primary love and change it less and in different ways once we are dead.  I think I "get" his point, but don't necessarily agree with it all.  I think ES does speak of people leaving hells, as I documented, as so he is inconsistent and perhaps conflicted himself.  Matthew

Hi Matthew: One of the reasons spiritual growth is not as effective in the astral is the fact that you cannot met anyone who hates you in the astral... according to Monroe/Moen... this means the clash and contrast of interaction that one encounters in the physical plane is missing in the astral...

If I have it right from Moen... the Hells are very specifically structured... thieves met other thieves and encounter thieves who are better at thieving than they are... etc... that is why it is a Hell... one is always being beaten at one's own game... in a never ending cycle... it is also the way out... when a retriever uses that frustration to turn a thief... that is the beginning of moving out of that Hell to focus 27 and another way of life....

the Hollow Heavens are closed end structures which mirror the earthly dogmas and if the individual awakens to a different concept by either retrievers or personal discoveries and is vocal in their variation in dogma... they get banished into darkness... by the arbitors of that particular Hollow Heaven... that is my take...

I haven't read ES in years so I don't know exactly what he wrote in this light... whoever is familiar with the exact ES belief might post it here...

Seraphis1

Why would spirits in a thief's hell have to steal, if they could simply create what they want? Do you steal astral creations from each other? Does money have anything to do with an astral realm?

I do not believe the free creation we see in focus 27 is available at all levels.  People in hells follow their passions.  If a passion/love is theft, then scenarios are conncocted to steal and covet.  Yet I very much doubt that those in the hell materialize anything out of thin air.  Rather, it is a bunch of like minded people playing within an agreed upon matrix.

My thoughts anyway.

M

recoverer wrote on Nov 24^th, 2009 at 1:38pm:

Why would spirits in a thief's hell have to steal, if they could simply create what they want? Do you steal astral creations from each other? Does money have anything to do with an astral realm?

Hi Recoverer: My understanding of the Hell's is that they are a fixation that creates a specific kind of environment... it apparently works like the belief systems... i.e... if you believe you must steal to exist... you create an environment in which you MUST steal to exist... and if your game is putting one over on an adversary... you will create an adversary to... spar with... that seems to be the mechanics of it... A famous 19th century con man... Berstein I think his name was... is said to have been anything he wanted to be in the legitimate world... but he loved the art of the con... :-?

Seraphis1

Seraphis1 wrote on Nov 24^th, 2009 at 12:55am:

but, I don't know this for sure... but, how could Monroe or Moen have avoided Muldoon...??  8-)

Seraphis1,

Who is Muldoon?

Bruce

Bruce Moen wrote on Nov 24^th, 2009 at 4:14pm:

Seraphis1 wrote on Nov 24th, 2009 at 12:55am: but, I don't know this for sure... but, how could Monroe or Moen have avoided Muldoon...??  8-) Seraphis1, Who is Muldoon? Bruce

Hi Bruce: Guess I got that wrong... when I was in Monroe's house for Guidelines... I found a hole world of books on o.b.e. very old and probably very valuable... but, Sylvan Muldoon was the the premier writer on real-time-zone... projection... a prolific traveler... The Projection of the Astral Body by Slyvan Muldoon and Carrington... still in print from 1927. In Voyage Beyond Doubt you suggest you read broadly on the subject... Muldoon was the most accurate and analytically correct writer whose work still holds up... he wrote a second book with Carrington where he describes how to go about helping people out of their bodies in training groups..

Sorry if I got that wrong.  :)

Seraphis1