Whether astral travel, OBEs, and NDEs are experienced by Christians, New Agers, secularists, and others, one fact stands out as a serious problem of credibility: as a whole, these experiences are riddled with inconsistencies demonstrating that many of them are bogus or that the spiritual being contacted are deceptive or mistaken in their claims. Some Christian NDEs feature a Jseus (Being of Light) who suspiciously restricts communations to commentary with copious biblica prooftexts.  I attribute such NDEs to projections from the believer's imagination.   By contrast, atheist howard Storm's NDE conversation with Jesus is permeated by novel insights and claims, some of which can be intriguingly verified.  As a whole, Storm's Jesus would be deemed an imposter by cnnventional Christians.  Similarly, the glib way many New Age explorers claim to contact their Disk or Higher Self smacks of unwitting concoction by the imagination.  

From my research, Emanuel Swedenborg [ES] generally seems to have the most impressive verifications.  But even he seems subject to bogus contacts such as his visits to other planets in our solar system and his conversations with the inhabitants of those planets.  True, in ES's day, even the great German philosopher, Emanuel Kant, believed that other planets in our solar system are inhabited by intelligent life that cen breath in a satisfactory atmosphere.  Similarly, astral adepts like Robert Bruce and Gordon Phinn claim to have "seen" a hidden alien base on the dark side of the moon.  Are these adepts deluded by deceptive spirits?  Or is something else going on?

When one encounters spirits (real or imagined) during astral projection, one's preconceptions and interpretations are unavoidably activated.  The spirit or light often declines to identify itself, and so, becomes the target of our projected identities.  That spirit typically allows the astral explorer to take the inititiative and how the explorer does this may determine whether or not he slips into a lucid dream type of consciousness without realizing it.  In the lucid dream state, experience and communications can be shaped to reinforce preconceptions.

I theorize that this interpretive bias can amount to an unintentional transformation of a genuine astral experience into an analogous lucid dream in which the unconscious need to be in charge can play out.  The shift from genuine astral realms to sheer imagination can be subtle enough to escape the explorer's notice and lead to purely imaginative conversations that reflect the percipient's expectations.  Perhaps this is the explanation of why even the most gifted astral adpets can at times be so deceived.  If I am right, then criteria would need to be identified to help one detect this transition.  What do you think?

Don

Hi Don. This is an issue I think about from time to time too.

The following may conflict with your view, but depending on what the nature of the presumed framework of the underlying reality is the possibilities are almost endless.

Specifically: some traditions hold that relative dualistic realities (such as the cosmos we perceive ourselves to exist within, and the associated afterlife realms which seem also to be experienced as dualistic) are essentially illusory, and in essence are dreamed into existence by a collective ego intent on compensating for the suppressed fear it feels as a result of its separation from God or source.

It's said we're not normally conscious of this, that ego shields us from this awareness, and instead predisposes us to believe in the reality of the illusory reality.

God or source, or the non-dual absolute is meanwhile the only true reality - albeit that most of us are not experientially conscious of this.

Mind meanwhile creates all, so the reality we perceive is always going to be the reality specified by our belief systems.

This latter is the key point. As well as holding individual beliefs, we (mostly unconsciously or at the ego level) share many about the nature of the afterlife and this physical reality too - giving rise to the perception  of the existence of objectively existing afterlife realms and other realities. (all of this by the way leading to our cycling from life to life via the afterlife until such time as we drop our belief in the reality of these relative realities thus enabling our return to God/source)

The rub lies in the fact that if they are mind/ego created these relative realities need not objectively exist at all - they may simply be the manifestation of these shared belief systems, with individual variations accounting for perceived differences.

Despite the appearance of objective reality all may actually be delivered up by a cosmic ordering service responding via the creativity of mind to the previously mentioned beliefs.

In this framework Jesus for example may well manifest as an apparently physically or otherwise embodied self or person. (e.g. a light being) But in the above framework this is perhaps just the Holy Spirit/source drawing on our library of concepts, language and so on to find a way to communicate truth to us in a format which we (given our buy-in to relative reality) can accept. The same can equally be said of the Buddha, or of a number of other realised teachers.

This is only one view (albeit a fairly widely held one), and the point is not to argue for one or another. But it certainly adds more than a little complexity to any debate as to the nature of afterlife realities...

Don:

I believe there are explanations other than a person's imagination playing tricks on he or she or a person being deceived by a deceptive being.

Beings who represent the light surely know that this World has many belief systems, none of which is completely true. They also know that our life in this World is very temporary compared to eternity, and not what our existence is truly about. Therefore, I believe they provide information according to need, without having to feel that they can "only" share what is absolutely true on every single occasion. If they could only share what is absolutely true, many people wouldn't understand, and the needs of many people wouldn't be accounted for.

Consider near death experiences. Some are more fundamentalist than others.  The usual explanation is that it is a matter of what a person's beliefs will allow a person to experience. I believe there is more to it than this. It is also a matter of what a person will be able to integrate into his or her life after his or her experience is over, and how other people will benefit from what this person shares about about his or her experience.

Not all people are open to the same message. Some will believe that an NDE is created by Satan if it contradicts the Bible in any way. NDEs that are fundamentalist in nature are created so that to some degree a love message is included, with the hope that the people who read this experience will be inspired by the love portion. If they are inspired by the love message enough, perhaps they will be open to a more middle ground experience such as Howard Storm's experience.  If they are inspired by the love portion of a middle ground experience, perhaps they will open up to considering near death experiences and other sources of information that are more love oriented than fear oriented.

Eventually a person will get to the point where the love in his or heart stirs so strongly, there is no way such a person is going to allow his or her self to accept explanations that involve many Souls ending up in hell for all of eternity, simply because they didn't come around to believing in a certain way, or because they did something such as fall in love with a person who has the same gender. They'll also realize that it isn't okay to look at others as if they are being misled by satan and/or one of his supposed demons.

I believe that people like Howard Storm and Betty Eddie provide a bridge for people who are trying to move from a fundamentalist way of seeing things to a more moderate way of seeing things, when they state things such as it doesn't matter what religion you follow. It is more about what kind of person you are. Perhaps a fundamentalist person will realize that many people follow the religion they follow not because they are evil, but because this is the religion they learned about when they were children. Perhaps they will realize that true admiration for that which is divine doesn't come through fear, but through love.

When it comes to OBEs and lucid dreams I've had a lot, and I've found that they always serve an instructive purpose. I can tell that they are created by my higher self/spirit guidance. I've learned more through these experiences than I could by reading a book.

Robert Monroe and Bruce Moen aren't the only people who have found out about the existence of their I-there/disk/Oversoul/higher self/total self/whatever you want to call it.  People have found out about such a level of being without knowing that others have done so.  Why do you have a problem with this way of viewing things? Because this viewpoint isn't spoken about in the Bible? Such a way of thinking hardly fits in with some of the things the Bible speaks about. My guess is that Jesus knew about disks quite well, however, he didn't speak about such things to the masses, because most people from the time period wouldn't know how to make use of such information. Higher selves aren't evil demons that stand between people and God and try to replace God. They are our link to God and an extension of God at the same time.

If there is one thing I've found, fear will prevent you from experiencing the World of spirit to a significant degree. I believe it is important for people to use their discrimination, but it is more important for them to understand that if they have pure intentions, the light beings who are close to them will be there for them when they reach out to them.  Even if a person does get fooled, at least ways this person had the courage and faith to try to make contact. I've found that there are great rewards in doing so.

Don,

From the Bible

"In the last days said God I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh and your young men shall see visions and your old men dream dreams, and upon my servants and handmaidens I will pour out of my Spirit and they shall prophecy"

Paul said "he knew a man if in the body or out of the body who was taken into the third heaven and there saw unspeakable things "(or unexplainable things)

All direct from memory without reading the Bible so the wording might not be exact. Paul was believed to have been stoned for some reason, and I sure given your Biblical knowledge of Jewish punishment in those days is that the Jews would not stop the stoning, until they were sure the person was dead, absolutely dead, if dead can be absolute.

Paul was relating this near death experience to his follows of course he gave ino details apparently due to the strange realm of other reality he saw while clinically dead.


Regards

Alan

Don-

Seems to me that it would be better to establish criteria to identify a genuine astral experience as opposed to criteria to identify if a transition was made to a lucid dream.

Also, criteria need to be used for retrievals.  Personally I think the vast majority of retrievals are simply the results of a person's wanting to believe he/she has really contacted a deceased person.  There are simple ways to establish evidence of a genuine retrieval but for whatever reason, such evidence is never obtained.  For example, SS #s, street addresses, etc etc.

As to alien bases on the far side of the moon, this has been the object of speculation and science fiction writers for many years.  We now know what the far side looks like, just like the side facing the earth.  If an astral adept "travels" to the far side, with a preconception that alien bases may be there, chances are very good he will report that he "saw" them.  Now, considering that aliens would have to have the technology to get here in the first place without being detected, it is somewhat silly to think they would need to hide or even need bases.

ES warned about the high amount of deception in the afterlife.  Therefore, it's entirely plausible to suppose that his contacts with alien life forms were the result of such deceptions.

Bottom line for me is simply this- why should any of this concern us?  We're all going to die some day, and we will either survive death or not.  In the meantime, isn't it far more important to devote our lives by helping others?

It's all going to sort itself out in God's own time-line anyway.

Greetings Rog B,

I enjoy and learn from your posts!
However, I have to comment on your suggestion of obtaining addresses, SS#s, etc from retrievees.

I've tried to get such information, and the energy just goes blank, until I ask or comment on something else.  It's as if they check all that at the pearly gates when they drop off the physical. Haven't we been told that 'all knowledge shall pass away', or some such Biblical phrase?

It's attitudes we're supposed to be building down here, haven't we established that?
Attitudes result from infusing emotions or rawer energies with thoughtful and hopefully kind consciousness. That understanding was developed on  a previous and excellent discussion here, as I recall.

So when I ask for 'verification' now I ask for some information about the deceased family member that is unknown to outsiders. Their comments usually deal with relationships--events that caused attitudes that the family member usually recalls.

Of course that may not work if they are still stunned by the death trama and are in a healing place or a lower BST. They don't remember Earth very clearly there.

Now that I think of it, I wonder if you've done any retrievals yet?  You would know all this if you had.

Any 'test' will have to be devised by people who have a range of experience doing retrievals so they know what the experience is they are attempting to measure.

My verification is the difference it makes to me and those involved. Doing retrievals helps improve the attitudes of those involved.  :)

Compared to lucid dreams, retrievals pack a whallop of attitude improvement! :o  Lucid dreams that successfully resolve a situation may de-stress or lighten my load abit, but not nearly so strongly as a retrieval does.

Sorry I went on so long but you are usually on the right track and I was sorry to see you get off it.

Bets

Don,

I’m not sure that criteria could be developed because all experience including that of the astral realms is subjective and relative to an individual’s conscious experiences and beliefs about those experiences. As you mention, we humans seem to have a tendency to interpret and rationalize what we don’t understand. This always seems to be based on the things we do understand or at the very least have heard or read about so it seems entirely possible that we project what we know and believe onto whatever we come across regardless of whether or not we consider it to be physical or non-physical.

I don’t consider myself an adept astral explorer, but what I have experienced during meditation and higher states of consciousness (not sleeping or dreaming) I see, feel, and know certain information as an observer. In altered states of consciousness that seems to be all I really am… an observer, and I’m not inclined to interact with what I see, only observe it. From this standpoint of observation if I’m given instruction to take an action, I can do so, but it seems strange in that I am watching or observing me doing what I was instructed to do so in that regard it does seem like a projection or a “movie” where I’m an observer, watching me do whatever I was instructed to do.

One example is when I was living outside of LA in 1971. Just before the earthquake hit during meditation I observed myself flying over the fault line where I could see the earth movement deep inside the earth. Minutes later the ground I was sitting on literally began to rock and roll.

To me the difference from that of a lucid dream is that in the dream I’m not an observer, I’m right in the middle of the action. In a lucid dream I’m completely in control and if the dream is going in a direction I don’t like I can simply change it to something I do like.

Kathy

Hi Bets-

Thanks for your perspective.  Many years ago, I was about 8 or 9, something happened to me that had a profound affect on my belief system re. the afterlife.  So I guess for that reason I don't attempt retrievals nor do I try to contact the afterlife.  I have my own verification.

However, I do have a question that perhaps you can answer.  You say

"I've tried to get such information, and the energy just goes blank, until I ask or comment on something else.  It's as if they check all that at the pearly gates when they drop off the physical."

Yet when mediums such as John Edward or George Anderson contact deceased folks, they report all sorts of very specific information, supposedly provided by the deceased.  Maybe not SS #s, but certainly other very detailed info.

So, the question arises- why do you suppose that occurs in some cases, but not others?  Is it because these mediums are extremely proficient in what they do, or is it because of some other reason(s)?

Interesting huh.

R

Greetings Rog,

:D  I can tell from my retrieval assignments that I'm not considered very 'skilled!' So yes, I think there are levels of proficiency. 'Skilled' to me includes not only openness to the reality and energies of spirit, but also the ability to concentrate, vitality, degree of caring concern, etc. My experiences begin to fade while I'm with the subject, so I assume I lack concentration and vitality to question further.

Those people you mentionned aren't familiar to me, so I wouldn't know where to put them on a proficiency scale.
Once people get in the public eye and have to charge money for their work, alot of concerns could affect the results.

Nothing bests personal experience!  I'm so glad you've had such an encounter !  :)

Bets

Roger,

Most "verifications" adduced from astral travel nicely fit the profile of occasional ESP that need have nothing to do with spirit dimensions.  What makes this area of study smack of occult fundamentalism is the widespread failure to acknowledge the deafening silence of plausible but unmet expectations.  Astral explorers, it seems, would rather bask in the cliche, "There's no substitute for direct experience," than relentlessly focus on an honest and open inquiry into the Achilles' heels of this discipline.  The claim that obvious verifiable details are unattainable is refuted by adepts like Swedenborg, and yet, it is precisely this adept who is self-deluded in his alleged contacts with aliens on our solar system's planets.  No one--certainly not myself--has anything close to a satisfying explanation of such self-delusion victimizing even the most gifted.    

Given this standard premature dogmatism, it is refreshing to note the honest perspective of one of the most gifted adepts at OBEs and remote viewing--Ingo Swan.  With all his "verifications," Ingo was asked in a radio interview why he thinks this sort of astral gift proves the existence of an afterlife.  He bluntly replies that so far these gifts prove nothing about the question of postmortem survival.

If astral travel were genuine, what should we expect?  At least 4 areas bristling with annual breakthroughs: (1) Our knowledge of the number, structure, and governing principles of astral realms would dramatically increase annually.  (2) Research partnerships with concerned discarnate spirits would be cultivated and refined to the point that awesome research strategies would be developed.  These strategies would provide unequivocal verifications to authenticate retrievals and to establish the identities and lifestyles of dicarnate loved ones.  (3) The unlimited knowledge stored in the House of Knowledge in Focus 27 would be verifiably mined to expand human knowledge and evolution.  (4) New "highway systems" between astral worlds and our own would be prepared and introduced.  

I can't help but wonder: How will New Agers rationalize the inevitable coming failure of December 21, 2012 to mark any turning point in the development of human consciousness?  

Don

<<I can't help but wonder: How will New Agers rationalize the inevitable coming failure of December 21, 2012 to mark any turning point in the development of human consciousness?  >>

Don-

The same way the Jehovah Witnesses rationalized why the world did not end in 1975 as their magazines repeatedly warned.  They claim now that 1975 was simply the first "step" in reaching Armageddon.

R

Greetings Don,

Perhaps the spiritual intent of a dream, or a lucid dream, or an OB experience etc is fulfilled simply by its happening!

Perhaps for some souls, a dream they can recall even just for awhile is the full importance it was meant to have?
Perhaps a (lucid?) dream carries enough impact for the soul to which it was given; any more impact would be dangerous to that soul's development.

Any of these experiences can cause a "Call to Conscience."
Therefore any are validly spiritual !
The category they fall within is between a soul and its Guidance.
We can and do rejoice when they are effective, regardless of their category !   :)

Bets

It seems likely Don that as Kathy and others of us have said above that it's probably unwise to seek to apply rigid objective scientific logic to the astral.

As before it in a sense seems to be programmed to deliver to our beliefs/expectations, but to mix this with manifesting in cause/consequence space/time like (but not quite) terms - which reinforces the likelihood that while it's in some ways a bit like the physical, it can also be whatever we (at a probably unconscious level) want it to be.

We're already seeing here in the physical many observer determined effects which mean that a purist application of scientific observation is not universally applicable.

That's not to rubbish scientific method, nor for that matter when it's clear that most experience is highly subjective and open to all sorts of interpretation to place it all on a pedestal. Especially not when so much of our interpretation is driven by needs and belief systems.

Prophecy/prediction is equally unreliable. I'd for example not want to bet on what exactly if anything is going to happen in 2012 - notwithstanding that my gut feeling suggests that the world is heading for a critical point in respect of many issues like population, the financial system, spirituality, climate, resources and so on.

But perhaps as Bets suggests it's unnecessary for this crazy (and allegedly illusory reality and afterlife) to be anything more than subjective.

Perhaps it's no more than a teaching environment in which events and outcomes have no reality or importance whatsoever - that it's only their result in terms of loosening our belief in separation, individuality and the dog eat dog rules of this reality, and the development of our ability to connect again with and see in terms of spirit and love that matters....

So perhaps it's another case of needing to head for the middle ground - of avoiding the extremes of flap-happy anything goes gullibility and fundamentalist dogma regarding spiritual matters in favour of a more nuanced and open stance.

That's not to dismiss the need to live right in this reality - subjective or not conditions of excessive suffering are not amenable to spiritual progress.

The problem is perhaps that we are so driven to rush to judgement/interpretation of events, and consequently into beliefs, that we struggle so much to simply observe and remain open enough to learn - we end up at one or other polarity.  

According to views reported from Bruce, TMI, and other modern sources, consciousness in spirit, needs to be "compressed" (for want of a better word) in order to interact in the physical world.  The psychic "noise" called M Band by Bruce, would make it difficult for one human being to interact with another in the physical world.  As such, we voluntarily shut off our ability to perceive other minds, emotions, thoughts and planes.

An astral explorer must therefore relax, and reverse this process of compression of mind or consciousness.  During this process, it makes sense that we are exposed to noise and problems with our interpretation of things based on personal biases.  Mapping out precise, reproducible astral levels or realms, that are always perceived to be the same seems unlikely based on this paradigm.  Noise, interference, and personal interpretation will change much of the landscape.  

From my own point of view, there is little difference between astral exploration and lucid dreaming  - but there are differences.  Both are explorations of the mind in a nonphysical realm.  Much of the substance of a lucid dream seems to be of our own creation, and yet we are interacting in an environment that appears real with characters and personalities.  In a lucid dream, there may be more symbolic dialogue with other entities - pehaps we enter into a lucid dream when our relaxed mind wants to be in control of an exploration.  I would not trivialize the meaning of lucid dreaming though by calling it pure fantasy; I believe that often there are subtle messages we are meant to understand in conversations or images seen during these dreams.

I've had a bit of an "issue" with the idea of astral exploration simply because I think it artificially moves Mind from the physical body to an astral one.  Our pure thought/spirit is, at its core not bound by a form, and so I sometimes feel that the notion of creating this vehicle, interesting as it is, is still missing the point.  The person shifts their identification into an astral "body," when our real nature is one of mind/energy.

I like Don's question about the interpretor getting fooled and people mixing imagination with true contact with a deceased entity (the slipping of a spiritual direct contact into a lucid dream).  I believe that Ingo Swann developed a manul for remote viewing (available for free on the web) in which he developed simple exercises for "turning off" the interpretor during remote viewing.  Some were more successful at it than others.  His techniques would likely be invaluable to afterlfe explorers (even if Swann does not believe in an afterlife!).

Matthew

Don


“You make valid points that we cannot simply brush over” They must be addressed with similar logic to yours.

None of us, me included, seem to come back with absolutely irrefutable true unique facts and knowledge previously unknown to humanity.

But some credence should be given to my successful experiments on the forum involving both remote viiewing and telepathy.

An analogy to your viewpoint could be similar to that of the skeptics of the UFO phenomenon, in that if thes were truly beings from an advanced civilization, why the heck do they not land on the White house lawn.?

Alan

I strongly believe that one experience is just as valid as any other, whether it is on the physical plane, in the dream state, out of body in the astral realms, during trance meditation, or any other altered state of consciousness.

The need for verifications seems to ignore the fact that these experiences are of a nonphysical nature, and therefore cannot be truly defined in physical terms.  

The universal law that undoubtedly rules not only the physical universe, but nonphysical reality as well, which is belief and thought create reality, gives a validity to the imagination which seems to be ignored or denied by most. (Don)

The infinite nature of consciousness is only truly known to those who have explored its depths and realities firsthand.  To me, calling someone's experience bogus just because it does not fit your view of reality, is simply bogus.

If you were to experience the connection I recently made with my higher consciousness while out of body, you would realize how real these types of experiences actually are... they are way more real than any physical experience is, as far as the levels of lucidity and awareness experienced, the intensity of emotions and the [nonphysical] senses, and the direct knowledge experienced.  

You cannot say that the physical is more real than the nonphysical, for they are all equally valid.  Likewise, you cannot say that one nonphysical reality is more valid than another.  They will simply be of a different nature and focus of consciousness.  

First hand experience is the key to making these realizations.  Holding limiting beliefs about nonphysical reality will only get so far until these self created dilemmas begin to impede your progress.

Don, I remember you saying that you have had a few OBEs.  However, your beliefs about the nature of OBEs and lucid dreams caused you to consider your experiences "bogus," and therefore have shut you off from any further exploration.  A simple change of beliefs in this area, even if temporary, would allow you to experience the true reality of these levels in a whole new light, and would open you to obtaining the direct knowledge experienced in these higher levels which you have seemed to cut yourself off from.

OOBD


Quote:

The need for verifications seems to ignore the fact that these experiences are of a nonphysical nature, and therefore cannot be truly defined in physical terms.

Verification might be difficult it should not be impossible.
The nonphysical realm must be as equally subject to the truth as the physical.

We all belive in something or the other, but sometimes we sincerly believe in what is not true.

Alan

To be frank, I believe that verifications are something one focuses on when one hasn't taken the steps one needs to take in order to make contact with higher parts of one's self. Once one has done so, one's growth and experiences manifest in a way where it would be ridiculous to ask for verifications. If you had a good friend that you know you can trust, would you ask he or she to prove that he or she exists?

If we insist that experiences have to manifest within a particular dogmatic framework in order for them to be valid, it might be difficult for experiences to take place in a meaningful way.  Our higher self/guidance might decide to wait until we are willing to let go of our fear based beliefs to a degree where we will consider alternatives.

Regarding Emanuel Swedenborg, perhaps he was presented with information that people from his time period were able to accept. We are in a different age, and perhaps other explanations are more suitable.

This weekend I read a little of William Buhlman's first book (I can't remember the name).  His OBEs remind me of my OBEs, because his experiences were so much about what he needed to learn, rather than what his imagination spinned out.  He came to understand that we have higher parts of ourselves. He came to understand how spirit guidance is really there for us when it comes to OBEs.  I find it hard to believe that a deceptive being is more likely to be there when we go out of body, than a being we have a positive spiritual connection to.

Vajra said: "Specifically: some traditions hold that relative dualistic realities (such as the cosmos we perceive ourselves to exist within, and the associated afterlife realms which seem also to be experienced as dualistic) are essentially illusory, and in essence are dreamed into existence by a collective ego intent on compensating for the suppressed fear it feels as a result of its separation from God or source."

Recoverer responds:  The above way of thinking is one of the reasons I don't trust a source such as Gary Renard's Dissapearance of the Universe. Going by what I've learned and what other sources have found, this World isn't a mistake that is separate from God and divine planning. This World is a small part of the plan, and therefore, intentionally created. If everything God created is perfect, well then, we're a part of what he created. Our existence might not seem perfect when you don't consider the whole story, but if you consider the whole story? Below are a couple of short NDEs that reflect a different spirit. Especially Ken's's NDE. Consider these words:

"I understood (I use this term because I did not actually hear) the drops were the experiences of all who had lived. The experiences existed as separate items yet belonged to the whole. The whole was the collective knowledge of all. I understood there was no individual, just one, yet each experience was individual making up the whole. This concept of ONE is so foreign to any description I can give, there seems to be no way now of describing it. My previous understanding of one was a single uniqueness. In this case one is something else. Many being one and one being many, both existing simultaneously in the same time and space. I further understood that the collective experiences are omniscient knowledge. Everything that has been spoken, heard, and experienced.

...

I believe my actual physical existence resides in the river of life as its natural form when not present in this reality or life. As a drop taken from a cup of water and then returned, so the individual drop exists, yet is part of the whole. I believe there is a retained knowledge of life experience that becomes part of collective knowledge yet remains intact as a unit. There is no body in the sense we know one, no love, hate, or any emotion as we know it. In a perfect existence devoid of need or want, all needs and wants, positive and negative, do not exist. The one-ness I perceived was what is referred to as God. We are of God and God is of us. The purpose of our physical existence and life is to provide every possible variation of action so an omniscient knowledge base can exist."

http://www.cinemind.com/atwater/KenNDE.html

http://www.cinemind.com/atwater/RayNDE.html

From Thomas Sawyer's experience:

"You might ask, didn't I feel grief or regret because I'd be parted from Elaine and my children and this nice life I had lived for thirty-three years? Yes, to all of that, but this was beyond paradise, this was heaven, this was perfection. This was not a mosquito bite; this was not heat and humidity; not all of the stuff that we call reality; not all the joy of being able to share and to love people. It was everything that we experience joyfully and sorrowfully, only in a perfected state. It was perfection."

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/reincarnation03.html

R said: his experiences were so much about what he needed to learn, rather than what his imagination spinned out.
____
this is what I understand obes and lucid dreams to do for us, we get something we need to look at that we believe, so we can grow into our fullness this way. generally, the obes and dreams seem subjective and mysterious, easily brushed aside in favor of logic. later on, we can see why they are subjective, as it's buried in the subconscious; it needs to become conscious. hemi sync or certain types of music as well can bring what's unconscious, into greater awareness.
Yet meditating on the meaning of dreams and obes  produces some glimpses of our ability to be creative of ourselves and our environment, as well creates what level we gravitate to upon transition.
______
lively thread here. uhmm..concerning verification that you're growing into knowledge of who you are, I can say this from experience with obe and dream, lucid or not, that if you are shown something within these experiences which is not in your belief system, ie: something unbelievable, something crazy seeming..that is an indication it's simply something you've never considered could be true and you are forced to consider it's value upon awaking to C1. (what you've eaten has nothing to do with symbols given to you unless you're allergic to a food)
I like Doc's reminding us of the compressed awareness of C1. then on the other hand we know we sometimes have an expanded state also, which dreaming is like altered states of awareness.
______

I believe R thinks certain sources of info is reporting the physical world is a mistake. I don't see these sources as saying that. in the sense that  we should have just stayed home where everything was perfect then we wouldn't be in such a mess.
These sources are quite radical because a radical approach is needed sometimes to get to the next phase of our development.

you might be interpreting that the world is going to disappear and therefore you might lose something; when looking at the title of a book with the word disappearance in it. the only loss is the loss of limited thinking which curtails our well being while physical and gives us an anxiety feeling to be thinking the same thing over and over. and not experiencing the joy of life.

You've heard of the term what happens after enlightenment? the same thing that happened before enlightenment. you chop wood, you carry water, only now it's not work. work has become pleasurable. the only thing that may be said to disappear is all of our fears, replaced with PUL. few reach that plateau in just one life but nothing is impossible but what that you say it is.

that's not what TMI has said either, that it's a mistake. the way I understand Curiosity Vision, we had free will to undertake the project of physical being, and forgot that there is more than being physical.
the way I explain it is that there comes a point where you look around at what everyone is believing, in every individual's life you may observe most of us seem to be trying to prove that we have indeed separated from God, (our goodness, our perfection, our peace of mind) and if they believe that, they go about seeing if they can find verification that the separation from God took place. then we take up sides and war about who is holier...

in addition there is this hidden trait we commonly hold, whereby we project guilt out of ourselves and onto another person, nation, etc. we make them wrong so we can feel innocent ourselves. that is a mistake, an incorrect perception that needs correction before we can move forward as an intelligent species experimenting in physical nature without destroying the entire planet.

so I can see where R might get this idea certain literature is making life seem quite meaningless here. The only thing I can see that is meaningless is to go to war and kill your brother to prove you are right and he is wrong. I'm not talking about defending your loved ones on necessary occasions. but there will come a time the world as we know it now will disappear and there will be no more acts of aggression, or physical defense measures needed because we will realize how temporary a single life really is and we will wish to cooperate with one another rather than simply remove the problem by killing it.

any reason is meaningless to me to kill, maim, torture, etc. and that is the mistake the individual ego is doing, and what this ego may do, there comes a time there can be no justification for actions like this, and therefore he is in error, his life is a mis...take. he has failed to love his brother.
Now I hear the draft is no longer in force. so you see we slowly make progress to value human life by at the least, not making a young man go and be killed if he doesn't want to.

even though we are forgiven when we are sorry for killing, we are all not in the same place of evolvement, so we are going to interpret our studies differently no matter what. and those who do not see oneness, they will see separation, and thats just where they are for the moment.

the gist of it is, I can see myself plainly in spirit, saying to my group, whatever, hey, I see now, I made it all up in my mind, and what I believed is what I saw. what I did, if I injured another, I saw them as separated from God and myself as one with God. I should have seen they are also one with God. truth of oneness, it can spread just as fast as a virus, only it's a beneficial virus.

for the most part, R's sources are saying the same thing as mine, and our differences lie in our interpretative reflections and differing experiences.  I don't see my higher self as active in full measure here, but what that I allow it to do so with my acceptance, that I'm able to trust God and higher self as one. I rather see my body as a simple hologram and my ego as subservient to god's will, but I always have to ask to be reminded, I am wanting God's will, for a hologram is nothing really that is going to last and I constantly have to ask what the highest good is, because my ego does not know. (C1)

rather, it's been a gift to me. my life. I am glad I came here. it was no mistake. I want to see a golden age. it will have to be in a different body I think. :) perhaps I might be able to catch some glimpses of what awaits the ones who hold up a torch..sounds good.

Alysia:

Regardless of what sources we speak of, I don't get the feeling that you believe we're separate from God.  If we're all extensions of God, could we really stop being the part we are? Even when we get confused for a little while and forget who we are, we're still a part.

I also figure that you probably believe that our experiences both human and non-human in the end serve a greater purpose.

Hello, Don, and welcome back.

In reply to your question, I would have to agree with you to a certain extent. It would be wonderful to have a way to verify experiences with more concrete examples which can be shown to have a factual basis in physical reality.

The coincidences and other "spiritual" experiences which are noted here as proof of "afterlife" visits may be missed entirely by those viewing them.

I don't have an answer for you. So far, this all seems very personalized for the individual exploring, for the most part. There are some interesting exceptions, and I hope for more verifications which will be reasonable evidence for skeptical readers, as well as reason for hope by those such as yourself.

[quote author=recoverer link=1220647330/15#20 date=1220911591]Alysia:

Regardless of what sources we speak of, I don't get the feeling that you believe we're separate from God.
____
I see the ego as believing it is separate from god, when it is not. I see it as having a bad dream, and I see we can listen to another part of us, which proclaims the opposite of what our ego's say.
the ego is a fear structure.
while god is a love structure.
we are both animal/fear and god/divine and we can listen to either voice due to free will.
____


 If we're all extensions of God, could we really stop being the part we are?
____
free will means we make choices every day. if you identify your voice of despair, as being true, that is your ego talking.
so you would want to stop being saddened, by this voice, right?
the thing is to go to an egoless place, you are filled with the gracefulness of God, who replaces the ego's voice, gradually, as in process, so that you don't feel you are losing yourself, but gaining new life. it's what the Christians speak of, to refer to being reborn, I would surmise. the idea is to pray without ceasing. or to be vigilant against non-truth. (anything or anyone that tells you that there's something wrong with you, and so you must be as guilty as they are.) this is where you can use your will with purpose, to make your choice what you will believe which is like love. one such example is doing unto others..what u want done to yourself. u wouldn't want to have someone make u feel guilty, right? so you wouldn't cause them to feel like they were stupid or guilty of that.
_____

Even when we get confused for a little while and forget who we are, we're still a part.
____
agreed. we forget. I call it blinking on and off. no reason to get upset about blinking off. it's so easy to get sucked into all the hype and mayhem around us..don't heap guilt on yourself either.
____

I also figure that you probably believe that our experiences both human and non-human in the end serve a greater purpose.
_____

yes. I think I already explained that I do believe in a greater purpose and that we are not alone in our struggles to understand our universe and what we're doing here.
nice talking to you the other night..even if it's all in me head! haha!

:)

Don I see it as when you need verification it is because you don't really believe. That's true or both Christians and for New Age believers. Many people look all their lives for truth and for God through religions yet never find it. The same goes for a lot of different beliefs and doctrines. Can it be proven that there is God? I mean real proof. Not some book that was changed and rewritten a multitude of time in order to suit the ruling over the masses. Not age old stories about swarms of insects or floods or burning bushes that only one person apparantely saw. Proof. Its like me saying that there is life after death. In fact there is no death. You could say "prove it" and I couldn't do so. For me its all about belief. If you believe it to be, then it is so. You seem o believe in a Christian style God. I have never seen your proof but I know that's what you believe. Now just because I believe in something more than that, does it make it not what is? None of us are wrong Don. None of us need saving from ourselves, belief wise that is. I except your beliefs. They are your truth. The difference for me is that I don't need this proof you speak of. I know I am following the correct path. There is a lot of mes out there helping me move in the necessary direction. Now this proof you seek, most likely you will never find it until you die.(Of course then you will know I was right. lol)

To respond on both strands that seem to have developed in this discussion.

'Objective' proof is difficult. I've for example had a local psychic in two instances describe deceased people and situations from their lives in unmistakable and complex detail to me (a grandfather, and the mother of a friend), and go on to relay personal messages to me which also drew on past events that she could have had no knowledge of.

Incontrovertible proof of life after death you might say. But then the doubting part of my mind kicks in and says 'what if she was somehow drawing on my own memory?'. Now Occam's razor says that if it's hairy, has got a tail that wags and it barks then it's a dog and not a cat impersonating a dog - but the point is that you can never be 100% sure.

The other issue about 'proof' is that in attempting to validate experience we apply linear logic, rely on what we regard as the laws of nature, and rely on our perceptions as a source of hard data. Newtonian science if you like, with an overlay of a scientific method that presumes the possibility of the independence of the observer.

The trouble is that this paradigm is already in our physical world coming apart at the seams in the face of the latest quantum based science which (as the spiritual traditions have insisted for milennia) is finding that given the creative nature of mind that belief/intention play an important role in determining outcomes. i.e. what happens or what we observe is to quite a degree determined by what we want to see.

Add the afterlife and higher realms into the game, and this seems to become even more the case in that the creativity of mind becomes far more immediate - the normal laws of time, space, cause and effect, force/energy and so on seem at best only to apply in a very limited and local sense in those realities we dream up. And if you accept that these realities have no absolute existence, and that you have to revert to God/Source for truth then these absolutely are at best on local phenomena.

On the point about what ACIM, Buddhism and the like say about this relative reality. Despite saying that its our creation, neither (as Alysia says) holds that it does not matter. The opposite in fact. ACIM characterises it as a learning environment we have to use if we are to find our way back to God.

Buddhism likewise suggests that if we can't or won't find the right way to the live that the suffering we experience will as a result of cause/consequence and karmic effects escalate to the point where spiritual progress becomes impossible - we become so driven in our attempts to as we see it survive that it becomes incredibly difficult to find the space to cultivate true/higher seeing and hence loving or non ego driven behaviours.

Put another way. This existence is taught of as being significant, but both teach that we simultaneously are on a trajectory which ultimately will transcend it with a non-dual view and hence true seeing.

Buddhism teaches we do this by achieving enlightenment, by accessing what it characterises as the higher nature of non-relative collective/universal mind. ACIM says very similar things about the primacy of mind, and the nature of the route - except that it argues that the collective/universal mind we initially access is separated from God, is the creator of this reality, and that there's another step beyond that which is the return to God.

So on the issue of simultaneity. Both traditions I think would regard it as dualistic thinking to categorise the view they suggest as focusing on the absolute/universal to the point where the relative is regarded as unimportant, or vice versa.

Both views instead seem to be suggesting that ultimately if we are to truly see reality and progress spiritually we must come to deal simultaneously and in an unbiased way with all dimensions and gradations - from individual perception based conciousness to God consciousness, and from one polarity to the other including all the intermediate possibilities (black at one extreme, white at the other, and all the shades of grey in between) on the realities arising at all levels.

Put another way - to focus as is our wont on one polarity or another in any given situation (to perceive in self interested black and white terms) is to ensure that we can never see the true picture. Especially not when the polarity we are attracted to is usually that which suits our selfish interest...

if we come from another angle, to think in terms of how there is power in numbers, we think about the collective consensus agreement, where we all think the world is flat, as it certainly looks flat from where we're standing.

that would be an example of our consensus agreement, and that we all can see how we might get into a concept of having fallen into error, sin as it's called in biblical times. and what ACIM is saying is that the sin never happened, only that we accept it did, and then we live a guilty life, believing we must have done something wrong.

we punish each other also this way. back to the power in numbers concept, we somehow are so creative, within our minds, we created the entire world of our collective oneness, that creative power.
ACIM calls the seeming separation from God that we believe we have accomplished, and which Monroe has termed it as an addiction to live countless lives, attempting to "get it right."

then you have this, gamble or experiment within this area to look at, but really ELS is quite addictive if life after life we end up paying off debts we owe to one another.

it's mind boggling to think on the subject. the separation is called the tiny mad idea that the entire sonship had, that we could break off and make a world, and make death real, have the power of life and death in our own hands.

the positive outlook is that we have J as an example of one who was teaching the art of forgiveness of our fellow man, and that we would return through learning to let go of the world and return to our origin point, and God seems to be patiently awaiting us to wake up from our nightmares, self created, whereby we think we have been very bad to have left in the first place.

if you look at some of the ascended masters teachings, they do have quite alot of difference in their demeanor and behavior, for instance, there's no reason for them to stick around after enlightenment, in a body. J could have stayed around, however, he finished his work here, must be better where he went! he earned it.
but he's still watching and waiting and aiding the rest of us, by telling us to teach only love, for that is what you are.

if you don't believe that is what you are, then think back over your life, the only times you felt good was when you felt love. and we're back to Monroe's loosh analogy as well, to consider PUL is what is eternal among all the illusions we are beset with.

just consider, it may be true, we are trying to teach each other we are other than love, whenever we are judging each other as wrong.

I think it is very dangerous to live a life here, as none of us get out of here alive.   ;)

I will repeat a retrieval experience I had years ago.  An ex-girlfriend, Janet, committed siuicide in DC.  I had broken up with her, largely because I couldn't handle her bouts of depression.  But I was young and had mishandled that relationhip.  Sometimes we grow up at other people's expense!  I still deeply cared about Janet; so I tried to retrieve her. 

I floated up into the etheric and mentally demanded to see her.  Suddenly, I floated to a hovering little tent in which a guide was seated at a table and chair.  She told me that Janet was not ready to see me.  I couldn't take no for an answer because I was desperate to know she was at least OK.  I surprised myself with the force of my rote: "But I must see her!"  I expressed this thought with great passion and affecton.   Suddenly, there she was, but she seemed about 14 rather than the 26 year-old-woman I knew.  Oh, the power and love of our embrace!  She kept on reassuring me, "I'm OK, Sweetie; I'm OK; really I am.  I'm OK!"  I sensed that she was undergoing some sort of psychological rehab program and had to return to her plane.  I was ecstatically reassured.  "Wow, another OBE!" I thought. 

I had earlier used my own voice to create a hypnosis tape suggesting that I have an OBE.   On the first playing, I soared up to the ceiling and looked down on my messy hair as I blissfully slept in bed.  It was like looking at my body under water.  Then I was struck by a fearful thought, "What if I can't get back into my body!"  I floated down and draped my etheric body over my physcial one and tried to move my finger.   My etheric finger moved, but not my physical one.  "Oh no, have I died?"  I worried.  That fear popped me back into my body and I woke up. 

Those were wonderful days!  I could astral project and even perform retrievals, I thought.  But I soon became disilllusioned whern I read Stephen LaBerge's book, "Lucid Dreaming."  I taught myself his technique and had incredibly vivid and real lucid dreams at will--for a while.  But then I was struck by a horrifying thought: I could not justify a different feeling tone for those dreams than my OBE, including my retrieval of Janet.  Bummer!  Later, I heard LaBerge and a fellow researcher insist that OBE adepts are confusing OBEs with lucid dreams.  This disilllusinoment explains why I am obsessed with replicated verifications as a condition for conceding that adepts like Bob Monroe, Bruce Moen, and Robert Bruce have experienced the real thing.  I'm not claiming they have not, but my disillusionment with my own apparent OBEs makes me skeptical.  I just feel that a genuine adept should be routinely able to receive verifications. 

Don

Don-

Have you noticed how so many of the PEs posted on that forum never amount to much of anything?

Seems obvious that a controlled PE could be useful to see if it's legitimate.  For instance, Joe and Mary agree to meet at the crystal or the Park and agree to request a guide to show them something specific.  Doesn't matter what.  A blue vase with flowers would suffice.

Then, when the PE is over, Joe and Mary report separately to a third person before having any contact with each other.

Seems simple.

On an unrelated subject- ever notice that now that everyone has a cell phone camera they carry around everywhere, there have been hardly any pictures of UFOs?

Does that mean that aliens know we now can easily document their existence so they stay away, or might that mean something altogether different?

R

[R:] Seems obvious that a controlled PE could be useful to see if it's legitimate.  For instance, Joe and Mary agree to meet at the crystal or the Park and agree to request a guide to show them something specific.  Doesn't matter what.  A blue vase with flowers would suffice.

In my view, the concept of deafening silence is one of the best tools for critical thinking.  One lists all the ways one would naturally verify one's postmorten survival or one's identity of a specific soul in need of retrieval, and then asks why these obvious verifications are never provided. 

For another example, consider this hypothesis about the identity of the Being of Light of NDE fame: its identity differs from the familiar suspects (God, Jesus, an angel); so because it is loving, it allows the NDEr to project a comforting, but false identity onto it based on religious training or prior expectations.  This seems logical, but can be challenged on certain grounds.

For example, the Being of Light sometimes identifies itself as Jesus, even to atheists and Jews who don't believe in Jesus.  The Being of Light never identifies itself as Muhammad to Muslims.  So more hypotheses might be offered: perhaps the Being of Light is Jesus, but His loving purpose makes it wise not to identify Himself that way to unbelievers who are traumatized enough by their fear of imminent death.  Or perhaps the Being of Light is a radiance indicative of a threshold region for accessing higher planes and the heavenly "Person" encountered varies, depending on level of spiritual development and belief system.  For less developed souls, perhaps the "Person" is a deceptive spirit impersonator!   During his NDE, atheist Howard Storm is deceived by malevolent spirits from a hellish realm who entice Howard to follow by creating a false impression of helpfulness.  What is needed is the identification of  significant silences with respect to natural expectations that might confirm one unanticipated identity theory or another. 

[R:] On an unrelated subject- ever notice that now that everyone has a cell phone camera they carry around everywhere, there have been hardly any pictures of UFOs?


The aliens are shy when overexposed to humans!  See example below.

[R:] Does that mean that aliens know we now can easily document their existence so they stay away, or might that mean something altogether different?

Don excitedly informs R that he has a continuous erlationships with a little green man floating in space and eating toasted cheese sandwiches.  Don claims to see this green man through is telescope and that the alien is viewable right now.  R excitedly asks, "Give me your telescope; I want to see!"  Don complies, but R expresses disappointment that he can't see the alien.  Don nods understandingly and explains, "Oh, I forgot to tell you; my little green man is shy around strangers, but he'll show up again for me.  Give me back my telescope.  Yes, he is winking at me between bites of his sandwich!  Why don't you try again?"  R does with the same result.  Don laments: "Well, I guess it will take more time for him to get used to you, R."  No matter how often R tries to confirm Don's claim, Don always has a rationalization for why R can't see the green alien.  Don's claim in even inprinciple unfalsifiable and hence meaningless.  So in my view are the PE claims.  The alleged verifications are just too rare and general to qualify as satisfactory. 

Don

Don-

Did you happen to also see a W.C. Fields character through your scope who was lamenting that his home planet has lost its sense of humor, so he is visiting Earth to collect jokes to cheer up his peeps?

WHAT??  You didn't?  Your problem is that you are way too skeptical for your own good.  We might have to send you to one of our re-education camps somewhere in downstate Virginia.

Stop by on your way back, you'll be re-tested before being allowed to return home.

R

Hi Don,

I remember you mentioning your experience with Janet, but I think this is the first time I've seen some details.  It's really too bad LaBerge's book convinced you OOBE is the same thing as lucid dreaming.  As I recall he believes dreams/OBE's are created by our brain which contains our consciousness.  To really understand that both an OOB reality and a dream reality exist and be able to distinguish the difference between them I think we need to at least consider, if not adopt, a new paradigm in which consciousness, including our personal consciousness is and always has been non-physical... that consciousness is not a construct of the brain, but that the brain is merely a tool that constrains/limits consciousness.

If I remember correctly, LaBerge considers the dream state/reality to be a virtual reality created by our brain or the mind contained within the brain.  He's kind of on the right track, but is only seeing things from a little picture perspective.  To see things from a big picture perspective we need to consider that consciousness is fundamental/primary and everything else, including all realities, as well as our physical reality that we are participating in are virtual realities.  It's understandable that people come to this conclusion since the physical reality is all we really know. 

To get to know and understand other realities, we need to try to let go of our beliefs associated with the physical reality by being open minded enough to make allowances, yet skeptical enough to not fall into a belief.  And we need lots and lots of experience exploring these other non-physical realities taking great care and honesty when discerning our experiences.  I agree with you that many times people misinterpret a lucid dream as an OOB experience, but the same could also be true for misinterpreting an OOB experience for a lucid dream.  So what's the difference between these?  I think the differences are subtle, but do exist.

In both a lucid dream and OOBE we are consciously aware of what is taking place, however in a LD we are in control and can direct the dream in any direction we choose.  We know we are dreaming and making it happen.  We control and/or create how others in the dreamscape interact with us.  In an OOBE we are not in control of someone else and their interaction with us.  I think your experience with Janet could have been an OOBE unless you created her as a young girl of 14 as well as you creating the tent, table, guide, embrace, etc.

Also in both a LD and OOBE we can have the sense of coming back into our body or C1 conscious awareness, so this alone cannot be an indicator of whether or not one was OOB.   Certainly you could have dreamed your experience of seeing yourself sleeping, etc., but from your description, I'd say you were OOB.  Feeling alone is not a valid indicator of LD or OOB because feeling/emotion occurs in all realities since it is an intrinsic part of our being.

Kathy

I used to have OBEs with all the effects, but eventually things reached the point where they are no longer necessary. In a way they are as necessary as seeing a tunnel during an NDE. One doesn't actually have to go through a tunnel in order to go to another realm.  Tunnels are created by higher level beings (perhaps a higher self) so a person will have a way to understand what's going on.

The same is true with out of body effects. Once a person reaches the point where he (or she) doesn't need to experience such effects in order to understand that something is going on, the need for such pagentry goes away.

Plus, I've found that it is possible to have OBEs with the effects where you experience something that was created by a higher level being for no other purpose than telling you something through a experiential and perhaps symbolic way.

Take Robert Monroe's experience of W.C. Fields.  I so much understand why a being would've chosen to present information to him in such a way. It was a symbolic way of saying that some aliens found out about humor from people. Certainly it is possible that there are aliens that didn't find out about humor on their own.

There is also the possibility that humor wasn't the only quality that was being spoken of. Rather, human-like qualities that some alien races weren't aware of before they made contact with human beings. Humor is just an example.

If one has lots of non-physical experiences and communicates with spirit beings (and aliens?) often, one is likely to find out that quite often experiences are created in a way that enables a person to understand something that actually takes place but is hard to comprehend if experienced as it actually exists.

Plus, there are occasions when we are told of what happens at levels of our being we aren't conscious of.

Kathy,  LaBerge didn't really convince me that most OBEs are lucid dreams misinterpreted through wishful thinking.  Rather, my direct experiece of lucid dreaming forced me to ask: "Why do I imagine that my retrieval of Janet and my other OBE are more than lucid dreams?" 

In one lucid dream, I chose to stand across the street from the Boston Common at high noon.  I could see and hear vendors across the street barking their sales pitch to gain customers.  I could smell the fumes of auto exhaust, hear the honking horns, the sound of brakes and moving traffic, and the buzz of blending conversations of the many pedestrians who passed by in both directions.  Then this thought struck me: "I unconsciously chose to create this, even though many of the details seem beyond my conscious choice to create them. In short, I am God in this universe I have just created!"  Realizing that it was just a dream, I decided to take charge of my dream.  So I grabbed the next pretty woman who walked by, explaining to her that she is just a figment of my imagination and that I want to study the conversation we would spontaneously generate.  But she reacted in startled horror the way a real woman would react.  Her distress drew the attention of other pedestrians and I realized I might be in trouble.  I had no control over how the "people" in my dream were reacting!  Fear snapped me out of this dream and woke me up.  I realized that the vividness, the detail, and the multiple senses engaged were every bit as compelling as my alleged OBEs. I am not denying that OBEs with impressive verifications exist.  I'm just saying that the line between lucid dreams and OBEs may be far more subtle than we realize and that the many contradictory claims of OBE adepts may in part be due to inadvertent slips from an OBE to a dreaming state or its conscious equivalent.  This distinction needs clarification before knowledge claims about the structure of the etheric can be vindicated.  The problem is greater than attribution to deceptive spirits.

Don

I have met Stephen LaBerge and asked him in person why he believes that there is no distinction between OBEs and lucid dreaming, and he said it was because he had never yet experienced a "genuine OBE" himself to convince him that they exist apart from a mere lucid dream. 

Yes, the line between lucid dreams and OBEs is more subtle than we realize, and yes we do slip between different states of consciousness which in turn alter our experience.  What starts out as a regular dream or lucid dream can turn into an OBE or real visit from a deceased loved one.  It doesn't have anything to do with the dream, reality, or "where" it takes place.  It has to do with our level of consciousness and our ability to perceive while maintaining that focus.

There's a reason why the most important thing Bruce teaches is the Feeling Love exercise.  Our moods can be compared to levels of consciousness.  For instance, you being in a bad mood and playing with your dog or kid will make for a different kind of experience than if you were in a great mood and spending time with your dog or kid.  The reverse is true too.  Sometimes someone else's mood rubs off onto us, changing us. 

The reason for the Feeling Love exercise is to raise your consciousness and make you able to perceive (receive and feel) that which you would not otherwise be able to experience. 

The same is true for the reasons behind focused attention.  Practicing and using focused attention has a way of raising consciousness and opening perception beyond its normal limits.  I'm not just repeating what Bruce teaches.  I actually speak from personal experience. 

But like you said, Don, the lines are very subtle.  It makes the transition between levels very easy, so much so that we sometimes have no idea we've gone through any change at all.  Meditation, prayer, focused attention, wishful thinking, and even daydreaming are all ways in which we can utilize moving through consciousness in order to reach a bigger picture perspective. 

As for looking for intrinsic differences between a LD and OBE, I'd say the difference is your focus of attention. If you discover you're asleep and dreaming, you can either remain focused on doing that, or you can choose to change your focus.  In most cases, this conscious effort changes not only the environment you're perceiving but also alters or raises your state of consciousness.  Your mental clarity enhances greatly.  The things previously occupying your attention in the dream melt away and move to greater, more important things (feelings and awareness). 

As for proof, I can't really provide it to anyone's satisfaction, but an example is that I was once having, for all intents and purposes, a regular dream.  When I realized I was dreaming and that it was not actual physical reality, everything changed.  I was now finding myself walking up in bed.  For a moment I thought it was physical reality, but then as I walked from my bedroom down the stairs, I saw my dad standing there smiling at me.  I realized, "This isn't physical reality either, Dad is dead."  Upon that conscious realization, my state of consciousness altered to something I can only describe as being "higher" than any other state I've ever been in.  Suddenly, I knew (without any proof or verification necessary or possible) that my dad's spirit was actually "here" visiting me, for real.  It wasn't a question of where we were or what reality we were in, or whether the dream scene was real, was a lucid dream, or an OBE.  What was real was sharing a moment with my dad consciously, together, in such a "high" state of consciousness and being that nothing else mattered at that moment.  Seconds before, I was questioning "is this physical reality?  No, it's just a dream."  But upon that shift to "being with my dad in spirit", nothing else mattered anymore. 

That's why I know how important it is to learn how to move oneself through various levels of consciousness, hold to maintain focused attention and awareness, and utilize these "higher" states.  I've only experienced them briefly and have certainly wished I could have held onto the state longer.  It's something I'm always personally working on and practicing. 

Don,

Oh yes, I agree that the line between OBE and LD are very subtle and I think we can and do slip from OBE into a LD and vice versa quite easily.  However, the question is:  When you had your experience with Janet was it possible that somewhere within your own consciousness could you have thought to see her at a young age?  For example, had you had contact with a teenage girl recently in which the idea of a young girl could have been projected by your own consciousness?  Is so, it probably was a LD.  If not, it likely was an OBE.

With the Boston LD the entire thing could have been a LD or part LD and part OBE, but I'd say from your description it was a LD.  Even though it appeared you didn't have control over the reactions of others in the scenario, it seems reasonable to expect people to react with fear in that circumstance.  I know if I grabbed someone, a fear reaction from them would have been well within my conscious understanding, and the same would go for people watching the incident.

But you're correct about the contradictory claims of OBE adepts and I'm not sure if any satisfactory elucidation can be attained or even how to go about assessing meaningful clarification.

Thought I'd add a lucid dream I had to perhaps clarify how misinterpretation between a LD and OBE can easily occur by jumping to conclusions without thinking it through with a discerning mind. 

LD: I'm at the ocean and sitting on a dock across from someone that looks similar to a human, but isn't one.  Suddenly someone grabs this person and pulls her into the water.  She can swim like a fish, but she's struggling to get away from her assailant.  I notice there's a gun beside me so I pick it up and not wanting to take a chance of shooting her I aim it upwards and fire.  I hear a pop that sounds like a child's cap gun that kids played with 50 or so years ago.  She disappears into the water so I get up from my sitting position to dive into the water after her when a man wearing a suit pops out of the water carrying her to the beach.  As the scene fades I feel myself come back into my body and become fully awake.

Now, one could interpret this as:  Wow! I went OOB and visited another world/reality that was similar to ours, but had fishlike aliens populating it.  The people weren't as evolved as we are because of the old style cap gun and bodies that could swim like a fish...  or whatever scenario that would fit your own personal beliefs.

Or one could get out their favorite dream interpretation book and try to decipher meaning from the dream elements:  Water in the dream means it was a spiritual dream... fish like person may mean spiritual opportunities... struggling with someone may mean things won't be easy... man saving may mean spirit guide will help... etc., etc. (Sorry, I had to just throw this in because it shows how people add more and more beliefs that are likely to become traps.)

Or one could realize that everything that occurred reflected recent things that ran through their conscious mind:  In this case, I'd watched "Person of interest" on TV which reflected not only the man in the suit obviously, but also the blond girl that was in danger reminded me of an old movie about a mermaid.  (I don't recall the name of it.)  I'd also earlier in the day thought about a trip to the beach I'd taken a while back and I'd also thought of my brother who use to play with a cap gun when we were kids.

As with your Boston LD, I didn't have any control over others in my dream, but the way they reacted was well within the range of reasonable for me to have created the scenario from recent thoughts within my consciousness, which is what I was attempting to get at previously.

Kathy

Vicky,

I'll use the analogy of my experience with speaking in tongues.  I grew up in a Pentecostal church and eventually had many high ecstasy experiences of speaking in tongues.  Interpretations of tongues can  occasionally be spectacular--helpful, even life-saving verifiable messages in Swahili and other tribal languages. But over time, I became convinced that 90% of tiongues is not divinely inspired but rather a learned mechanical reflex that produces ecstasy. 

Then one day  at age 16, I experenced the real thing.  I was on the verge of losing my faith due to doubts about the Bible and the reality of paranormal spiritual manifestations.  At a camp meeting place in western Manitoba I went on a long walk during which I challenged God to make Himself real to me.  I promised to serve Him with all my heart if He would do so, but said that my flawed sense of integrity would drive me from the faith, if He refused to come thruogh.  {Yes, I know God is not literally a "He.")

When I returned form the walk, I was ravenous, but decided to skip dinner and give the money that would have paid for the meal in the Tuesday evening service's offering.  After the service, I went forward to pray at the altar of the open amphitheater. I stayed there even after the lights were turned off.  After a half an hour, my heart was stone cold.  I was determined not to give in to wishful thinking or self-manipulation.  But then suddenly I felt what I can only describe as a supernatural warm breeze.  I was then enveloped by wave after wave of ever increasing liquid love so intense that I feared it might kill me.  I was possessed by the Holy Spirit and forced to speak in tongues at the top of my voice.  Soon curious spectators drifted into the amphitheater to sit and watch in awe what was happening to me.  I would later ask a lady why she came, and she replied, 'Don't you know?  Your face was glowing in the dark!"  One spectator, a skeptical Lutheran pastor, interrupted me: "I'm not into speaking in tongues at all, but I can tell that God is doing something special in your life.  Would you pray for me?"  I gently touched him and it was as if I electricuted him; he gushed forth in other tongues.  In my view, I experienced the level of love that some experience in NDEs when they encounter the Being of Light.  I later found descriptions of this experience that parallel my own imagery. 

My point is this: that experience of speaking in tongues was unquestionably the real thing, but I wouldn't expect to convince a skeptic of that claim.  Similarly, I believe OBEs can be real, despite the lack of verifications.  I just haven't had a self-authenticating OBE of the same order as that experience of speaking in tongues. 

Don

Don,

Great story.  I can see that that was quite a moving experience for you as well as for the ones who witnessed it.  I definitely believe we get experiences that are tailored and meaningful to us. 

And I'm glad to see you say you believe OBEs can be real despite verification. 

I too have had one most amazing experience in my life that I have since not been able to have again nor replicate in any way.  But it changed my life and my beliefs.  I wasn't even looking for it nor asking for any proof or guidance.  So the fact that it happened the way it did seemed more impressive to me.  I wonder every day, why can't I have more such experiences??  It's why I'm so adamant about trusting what we receive especially when it's something very powerful and moving.  We just don't get those kinds of experiences just because we wish it were so.  There is more going on behind the scenes than we're aware.  Like your speaking in tongues experience, you weren't the only one there that night in need of faith. 

Vexing. The path is so mysterious. Some follow it and never have such powerful experiences. Other have them with no intent whatsoever. It is hard, at a certain point, to continue based on a single experience that happened several years ago...

Not all may start from the same square, Bardo. And not all may need to have the same experience.

Quote:

...This distinction needs clarification before knowledge claims about the structure of the etheric can be vindicated.

Don, the statement you made above has been on my mind for most of the day today.  Could you explain more of what you mean by "structure of the etheric"?

Thanks,
Kathy

Kathy,
I can't recall in detail all the models, but here is the general idea:

1. The Conflicting Afterlife Models in HInduism vs. Tibetan vs. Other Forms of Buddhism where there is no afterlife "career," but either a loss of individual identity or planes to prepare for reincarnation

2. The standard Older New Age Models: (Rudolph Steiner, etc.)
Plane of Illusion
Mental Plane
Plane of Fire
Plane of Form

3. The Many Very Different Planes Identified by the Eckandar Cult's Astral Travelers

4. Swedenborg:
the 3  Heavens, each with its own nature and purpose
and with postmortem careers of service made possbile by the absence of reincarnation
the World of Spirits, from which one can be schooled to advance to a heaven
the 3 hells


5. The Monroe-Moen Model:
Focus 24
The Belief System Territories in Focus 25-26
Focus 27: The Plane of Laissez-Fair Freedom, provided one deesn not interfere with the journey's of others
Focus 34-35: The Plane of "The Gathering"
A Choice about Reincarnation (parallel, not sequential)

Trhoguh tortured homonizatoins, some overlap in these models might be achieved but the differences are often so striking that the contamination of belief influence, and more importantly, confusion of genuine OOB states with lucid dream consciousness and its conscious equivalent strikes me as inevitable. 

Don

Or perhaps what lies beyond time/space is so vast, diverse and beyond our ability to fully understand, combined with each explorer's ability to only perceive in the context of his/her own previous experiences (Moen's perceiver/interpreter), that such multiple interpretations are inevitable.  Many blind men examining an elephant sort of thing.

Berserk2 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2013 at 6:14pm:

5. The Monroe-Moen Model: Focus 24 The Belief System Territories in Focus 25-26

The Belief System Territories are F 24-26.

Focus 24 is part of the BSTs. Also, DeMarco has experienced some consensus
regions in Focus 23, so it's possible that the BSTs to some part reach into
Focus 23, too.

Some words about Focus 23. Most people who get stuck in F 23 are alone or
(on rare occasions) only a few persons. But DeMarco claims that there are mall
regions, probably with little or without any specific afterlife belief, where dead
people walk around and "buy" stuff, or just do nothing special in those shopping
centers.

I would expect those mall regions to be located in F 25, so if anyone gets
any info on this matter, please place a post somewhere on this forum.

One quality of people in Focus 23 is that they don't always know that they
are dead. Maybe some people in F 23 in those large shopping areas have
such poor awareness that they can't move forward, at least for some
time until an "inner" development has occurred?

So in a sense, perhaps some of those F 23 people are in a state closer to
a dream, than to an OBE state? There are other people too, like in one of
Monroe's books, where a man was without afterlife beliefs, stuck alone
in F 23 and well aware that he was dead.

---


I wonder if the difference between an OBE and an LD is the ability to hold
a certain amount of "nonphysical energy". Most people can't gather that
type of energy on their own, and when they receive such energy, they
have difficulties keeping it for any long time. I for example have always
slipped into LDs, and then regular dreams rather quickly from OBEs,
so I just assume that there is something going on, which could be
said to be energy related between a clear OBE state and an LD state.

Maybe the OBE ability is related to developing certain nonphsycial "organs"?

PauliEffect wrote: "But DeMarco claims that there are mall regions, probably with little or without any specific afterlife belief, where dead
people walk around and "buy" stuff, or just do nothing special in those shopping
centers."

Recoverer responds: "I didn't read what DeMarco wrote so it is hard to say, but an experience of "mall regions" might've been a symbolic representation of the state of consciousness some people are in after they die. If they gave no thought to spiritual growth while in this World (and didn't help others) and instead focused on materialistic interests etc., they might have a "mall-like" consciousness after they die.

Hi Don,   My understanding of. "After-life Buddhist Careers" is: you work to help all Beings everywhere to realise full awakening. You delay your own full awakening until all others have realised it first. Giving aid to the deceased is part of this. My understanding comes from oral/practical teachings & books, so I'm not speaking from profound personal experience .  I'm not an expert on Buddhism beyond long experience with meditation. The "doctrine" part of it doesn't interest me much. I like the Heart Sutra very much though.... but I'm no expert and can't speak for "Buddhism" with any real authority. I only know practical stuff and can only "show" it and not "speak" it. In my own non-physical travels, I just encounter individuals. The ones who obviously are very intelligent don't identify themselves as coming out of any particular religion, though they may have for all I know. ...  It's really nice to hear your voice again Don. I have more affection for you than I think you know. It's good you're here. It makes me feel happy.                                                                                Tim.                                                                                                                        Y
Berserk2 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2013 at 6:14pm:

Kathy, I can't recall in detail all the models, but here is the general idea: 1. The Conflicting Afterlife Models in HInduism vs. Tibetan vs. Other Forms of Buddhism where there is no afterlife "career," but either a loss of individual identity or planes to prepare for reincarnation 2. The standard Older New Age Models: (Rudolph Steiner, etc.) Plane of Illusion Mental Plane Plane of Fire Plane of Form 3. The Many Very Different Planes Identified by the Eckandar Cult's Astral Travelers 4. Swedenborg: the 3  Heavens, each with its own nature and purpose and with postmortem careers of service made possbile by the absence of reincarnation the World of Spirits, from which one can be schooled to advance to a heaven the 3 hells 5. The Monroe-Moen Model: Focus 24 The Belief System Territories in Focus 25-26 Focus 27: The Plane of Laissez-Fair Freedom, provided one deesn not interfere with the journey's of others Focus 34-35: The Plane of "The Gathering" A Choice about Reincarnation (parallel, not sequential) Trhoguh tortured homonizatoins, some overlap in these models might be achieved but the differences are often so striking that the contamination of belief influence, and more importantly, confusion of genuine OOB states with lucid dream consciousness and its conscious equivalent strikes me as inevitable.  Don

ThankS Tim,
I would like to pin that down because the concept of a "career" of various developments and service rendered is often presented as antithetical to religious reincarnatiionism, in which postmortem existence is presented as a phase of preparation for future reincarnation until one escapes the rebirth cycle,


My main point to Kathy is that the various afterlife models are hard to evaluate experientially because many of the contradictions may be due to a confusion of astral states wtih lucid dream states and their conscious equivalent. Jesus advocates a more sophisticated version of the principle of like attracts like: e. g. "The measure you dish out to others will be dished out to you (Matthew 7:2)."  So his presumed model seems more compatible with the Monroe-Moen model than most models that seem to contradict it.  But Pat E's suggestion that the overall scheme may be far more complex than simplistic models can address may be correct. Based on astral experience, we may make simplistc models that shape future expectations and therefore impose limitations on future astral experience.  We just need better clarification of how bogus astral visions can be identified as lucid dreams, etc.

Don

Carl,

Your comment is mean-spirited and totally inappropriate.    You debase the conversation by making a hurtful personal attack about a difficult situation that was shared in earnestness on the board.  I would like to think of a way to include everyone in a conversation.  In this instance, I can only say - get lost.  You crossed a line, and nobody wants to hear that here.


Matthew

"In this instance, I can only say - get lost.  You crossed a line, and nobody wants to hear that here."

Pure unconditional (get) lost. Well done, DocM.

Carl-

I have no problem with legitimate differences of opinion.  But your posts are consistently sarcastic and add nothing to the substance regardless of what thread you select.

As Bruce has said regarding posters such as yourself, "be good or be gone."

R
ps- Doc, did you see my post asking you about Eben Alexander?

Carl,

I second what Matthew and Rondele said.  Please take your mean personal attacks and disdainful sarcasm elsewhere.

Kathy

Thanks Don. 

I wonder if it is even possible to go OOB and accurately describe the non-physical since there are no objects or any kind of physical structure.  Plus all interpretation of what one encounters is subjective.  I'm just trying to think this through here, but couldn't all the structures (models) you mentioned be based on interpreted belief of a group or groups of people reinforcing that belief because they all share the same or similar cultures?

Below is a quote from Tom Campbell that may shed some light.  The virtual PMR structures he mentions (the PMRsubk) may fall into the modeled categories, but I'm guessing the PMRsubk realities are supportive ones that are created to support our physical reality.

Great subject!  You've got me thinking about this more.

Kathy


Quote:

Tom: There are identifiable structures in NPMR - but not objects - not physical structures - that is a PMR thing - as is personal virtual structure (interpretation) perceived by a PMR inhabitant's perception of NPMR. There is personal structure (you - your intent, your entropy) and there are information structures (databases and messages), and functional structures (causality and rules of interaction), and relationship structures (communication meaning and content). There are also virtual PMR structures (the PMRsubk). There is a multitude of each of these types of structures, and they are persistent, consistent, dependable, interactive and real - i.e., they are there, and the same, every time you look.  In fact, they are more fundamentally real than what we usually call real because they are the consciousness system - at least in our neighborhood.  One get to know and gain competence working with and using these structures as one becomes familiar and experienced with the actual fundamental nature of NPMR (as opposed to the jumble of published personal metaphors and symbols that now definite the nature of NPMR in the popular literature.)  A small sense of interacting with the structures within NPMR can be glimpsed if you imagine what your existence would be like if you were blind and had no nerves in your skin, could speak and hear normally, and were gifted with telepathy --what would your reality be like then?

BobMonroe,

Just so we are clear, cultivating PUL does not mean that we take no action.  You imply that my telling Carl to get lost is unloving.  Trying to cultivate PUL does not signify that we allow any degradation to other people, because (as some might say) "hey, live and let live."  Or, you could say "its not my problem if someone is implying that a man drove is significant other to suicide - let's hear more!  No, PUL is a feeling.  It is not contingent on anything.  But you misinterpret its meaning if you feel that someone who cultivates love will stand by and let another be attacked or savaged.  Do I wish the attacker ill?  No.  Do I think he should stop the attacks (which are numerous and frequent) by getting lost?  I do.  That is my opinion.  If, as you imply you feel that PUL means giving up on any opinion or action in defense of another, then no, I have not reached that advanced state yet.  I am not sure I want to - but it may be right for you. 

M

Quote:

Rondele, I have no problem with legitimate differences of opinion.  But your posts are consistently sarcastic and add nothing to the substance regardless of what thread you select.

Here's what Don had to say about this issue in 2007:

In this respect, it is useful to consider from a Christian perspective just what PUL entails:

"Love your enemies.  Do good to those who hate you.  Pray for the happiness of those who curse you.  Pray for those who hurt you (Luke 6:27-28)."

"Love is patient and kind.  Love is not boastful or jealous or proud or rude.  Love does not demand its own way.  Love is not irritable and it keeps no record of when it has been wronged.  It is never glad about injustice, but rejoices whenever the truth wins out (1 Corinthians 13:4-6)."

From a Christian perspective, love is a permanent mood or psychological orientation in that it becomes a core desire, indeed a manifestion of one's mystical union with God at the core of one's being: "Love never gives up, never loses faith, is always hopeful, and endures in every circumstance.  Love never ends (1 Corinthians 13:7-8)."

from Carl
{Don. So all those all those "Christian Experiences", are true, and most "New Age" experiences are false!..Why don't you admit that your former girlfriend committed suicide because you constantly tried to 'convert' her into your "Pauline Christian Fundamentalism"..Carl.}

Carl, please understand that there is no rational reason why someone commits suicide, and the blame cannot be placed on another person. What to one person is intolerable is to another a learning experience.

Eventually, if possible, a person can learn to move away (emotionally or physically) from ideas/people which leave one feeling off balance. A person can always return to them with a different perspective later, if he/she is still in this world.

That is the importance of being patient, and trying to resolve differences. It's not an easy thing to do, for sure. It's especially hard if your emotions are highly charged.

To sum it all up, how can a person learn to maintain or to change personal boundaries without practicing that skill? Just a thought.

This morning I had a lucid dream and for an extended period of time I made a point of noticing how real everything seemed. Everything seemed just as real as this physical World.

This experience definitely served a purpose and this is true for all of my lucid dreams. They aren't a matter of my mind spinning out meaningless fantasies that have no connection with truth.

Because they are clearer than OBEs tend to be, I believe they are often a better way to accomplish whatever it is that needs to be accomplished.

Durning OBEs with the effects I tended to stay aware of my physical body even though I was flying around some place, and I had to make certain I didn't move my physical body or concentrate on it too much because my OBE would come to an end. Sometimes I would have to strive to make my OBE perception clearer. 

The same isn't true with a lucid dream even though I'm aware that I'm having a non-physical experience as such an experience takes place.

Bob-

Here is a timely example of a legitimate difference of opinion:

Matthew says "PUL is a feeling."  I would say that it's really a state of being.  It's not something that can be "sent" to others or something that can be cultivated.

It simply IS.  It is inviolable.  Our actions can neither increase it nor decrease it.  As a matter of fact, it just might be what some people would call God, or All That Is.  If it were to disappear, I think we'd all disappear along with it.  Just my opinion.

It's easy to confuse PUL with an emotion.  Some people have described it as the feeling a new mother has for her baby.  But that feeling is really an emotion. Thing is, emotions change.  PUL never does.

And btw, I'm not posting this to start a whole new discussion about PUL.  Just an example that Carl might decide to follow.

R 

Hey Roger,

I agree with you that PUL is a foundation from which everything flows.  But when I describe it as a feeling - there is for me, for lack of a better word a feeling associated with love - a synergy or sense of connectedness, which I think many of us can "feel."

From my perspective, emotions and feelings are more primary (with regard to consciousness) and therefore in some ways more of a guide to our inner current state of being than is rational thought. 

I don't think love comes and goes.  I think it is inside all of us like a molten core in the center of a planet, and we either open up to it or close ourselves off from it by our thoughts and actions.   

M

Hi Matthew-

I never really paid too much attention to PUL in terms of definition until I came across this quote I had posted a few months ago from Guy De Maupassant, a 19th century French writer, about the word love:

"To love 'very much' is to love poorly: one loves -that is all- it cannot be modified or completed without being nullified."

"It is a short word, but it contains all: it means the body, the soul, the life, the entire being.  We feel it as we feel the warmth of the blood, we breathe it as we breathe the air, we carry it in ourselves as we carry our thoughts.  Nothing more exists for us."

"It is not a word; it is an inexpressible state indicated by four letters."

I said then that to modify love in any way diminishes the true meaning of the word.

After all, Love cannot be impure, nor can it be conditional, otherwise it really wasn't love to begin with.  Those 2 modifiers were really irrelevant.

I agree with you that genuine love cannot come and go.  It is there, all around us, like the air that we breathe.

R

This may be a silly thought, too simple to be bothered with, but when we demand certain kinds of proof, are we ignoring the routing that occurs in our own brains, which consist of many parts.

I am no scientist, but I recall one person's account of her experience with, perhaps a stroke, in which her entire perception of reality changed. Because she was a scientist, she was able to observe her own self, and her own reactions, and describe them in detail. She had become, in her disability, a person who perceived her reality in a way quite alien to the way in which we perceive our typical day to day reality. She was overcome with feelings of love and beauty and the aliveness of her own being.

It's just difficult for me to place primary importance on "proofs" which originate in our day to day way of establishing reality for ourselves.

Even in a lucid dream, even if we look around us and establish the amazing details of our surroundings, how real it is, how incredibly real it is...how do we bring that back with us? We can be instantly moved to a different location with just a thought.

That is the nature of this kind of exploration. The emotions which we sometimes feel during meditation or explorations seem more expanded, and are difficult to explain to others.

Although it has been said so many times, the "proof" we actually seek is and must be subjective -- it must become apparent to us individually before we can truly "believe".

Carl, Janet was already a professing Christian when we first met.  I met Janet at a  church "grad group" in Boston. In some sense, it seemed like divine fate that we met in Boston because she had just moved from her apartment nearby my dorm in Princeton, New Jersey.  We never formally met there, but we must have encountered each other a few times in passing. 

And Carl, you do need to read more carefully.  I said that the Monroe-Monroe model is similar to the biblical model of afterlife realms by virtue of the shared principle of like attracts like.  Indeed, St. Paul makes clear that the first and second heavens are realms that contain Christians who have made miminal progress in their manifestation of PUL.  I have always been struck by the parallelism between biblical portraits of the first 2 heavens and Monroe-Moen portrayals of Focus 25-26 and the parallelism between the Park of Focus 27 and the Park of the biblical "Paradise," a term meaning "park" or "garden."   

Consider the relevance of my analogy posed to Rondele of a little green man visible through a telescope, apparently only by me, a man who hovers in the air, eating toasted cheese sandwiches.  No matter how often R protests that, when he gazes through my telescope, he sees no such man, I find bogus reasons to explain away his failure.  At a certain point, my claim to see this man is untestable and therefore meaningless, since nothing even in principle can count against my claim.  Similarly, conflicting claims about astral plane structures approach absurdity, if rationalizations are always offered to rebut the complaint that acknowledged adepts routinely contradict each other in their professed insights from astral exploration. 

R's suggestion is a good antidote.  Two explorers agree to contact the same discarnate spirit.  The first asks this spirit to express a thought or display an object that will then be expressed or displayed to the 2nd soon arriving explorer.  If such synchronized quests for common ground cannot be established, then the authenticity of the alleged spirit's realm can be plausibly challenged. 

OBE and NDE descriptions of the "geography" of heaven's planes cry out for such attempts at verification.  Residences are described in detail and located in communities in the heavenly equivalent of specific spatial relationships.  Now Swedenborg makes it clear that this "space" is merely apparent because the "time" required to traverse that space is relative to the core similarities of the spirit who is the target of the visit.  But despite the problem of separating fact from interpretation, different astral explorers should be able to replicate much of their astral journeys to shared destinations if the astral  territories are real.  The contradictory PE claims of attempts to work with the crystal in TMI-There illustrate the problem. 

I am not trying to debunk this.  On the contrary, I need to believe these astral territories are real.  But if astral travel does not transcend the level of lucid dream consciousness, then our inability to find common ground in our continual quest for mapping progress seems a telling objection against the genuineness of these realms.   There will be no breakthrough in our knowledge until someone develops a method that enables a progressive learning curve and until different explorers can contact the same spirit guide and independently gain the same detailed information from that guide.

Suggested Expeiment:
Astral Explorers A and B contact a spirit guide to arrange for a joint retrieval attempt of the same discarnate spirit.  A and B project to that spirit at the same time and interact with that spirit.  Later they report back on their shared experience.  If few of the details about the course of the retrieval are jointly experienced and if even the outcome of the effort is not the same, then the reality of the attempt should be dismissed in the same way I dismiss my retrieval of Janet, though I desperately wish my initial perception of success were valid.  But utimately what matters is Janet's wellbeing and progress, not my need to make a difference in her spirit life.  And presumably when I die, I'll have another crack at checking out on her wellbeing. 

Don

Berserk2 wrote on Jan 14^th, 2013 at 11:34pm:

I am not trying to debunk this.  On the contrary, I need to believe these astral territories are real.

Have you tried to set up a PE to compare common experiences?

DocM wrote on Jan 14^th, 2013 at 10:03am:

Carl, Your comment is mean-spirited and totally inappropriate.    You debase the conversation by making a hurtful personal attack about a difficult situation that was shared in earnestness on the board.  I would like to think of a way to include everyone in a conversation.  In this instance, I can only say - get lost.  You crossed a line, and nobody wants to hear that here. Matthew

Sure Pal!, You're a compete groupie and clone(idiot!)of Imagination Bruce and this site. I've been a poster and lurker of this site since 1999. Now we are back to all those pathetic debates, resurrected  from the late 1990's and 2000's till now...

I was so wishing to be elevated to the 4th or 5th physical dimension as promised by many New Age Seers that lurk and post on this forum...Pity it was all bullshit ! DocM, You're just like the rest when it  comes to truth!

So now, again, we have those 'resurrected' posters and posts', complied by DonM and others, who seek to convince us to believe in the scripture's, as outlined in the New Age and/or Christian Bible. 



       

   

Carl-

Since this board falls so short of your expectations, why not just leave instead of continuing with your insulting posts?

The thing is, this board is unlike so many other conversation boards on the net where people compete to see who can flame each other with demeaning and rude comments.

Therefore, since this obviously isn't the venue for you, let's just say goodbye and then both you and we will be much better off.

R

I have bought and often used TMI's Gateway DVDs, with no OBE success.  But they have at times made me a much better chess player than usual, and so, they can serve as wonderful tools for relaxation and increased focus.   A few years ago, I enrolled in TMI's Gateway program, but was closed out; so I substituted a vacation to London and Paris instead. 
I often think about re-registering, but I am ambivalent becsuse of the cult-like atmosphere that lurks in the background, despte TMI's claims to be ideologically neutral. 

For example, consider neurosurgeon, Dr. Eben Alexander, of recent NDE book fame who heads up TMI's research programs.  I find it disturbing how he seems to uncritically embrace RAM's OBE claims as Truth, especially his reincarnational claims, which I find intuitively absurd.  All of his alleged past lives seem as sensationalistically cartoony as his  past life in another world, in which he flies around in a small machine, dodging spears thrown up at him by primitive natives.  Also, Alexander seems to uncritically embrace the U of Virginia research by Dr. Ian Stevenson's successors on reincarnation, when in fact 2 of Dr. Stevenson's past life subjects were born prior to the deaths of their alleged prior personalities!  Swedenborg's [= ES] critique of astral past life recall strikes me as more credibie due to (1) the fact that he does something that New Age OBErs seldom do--change his mind through further astral exploration to challenge prior astral insights; (2) the plausibility of ES's later realization that the illusion of astral past life recall is created by the unconscious merger of the explorer's mind with the mind of an intruding spirit, whose memories blend in with the explorer's; (3) the fact that, desptie ES's limitations, his verifications seem to be more consistent and on a higher level than those of modern adepts.  I would hope that TMI would gladly embrace ES's own research as a foil against which their own research can be tested and challenged.  TMI strikes me as having (dare I say it) too much of a Ghetto mentality, despite their protestations that they are ideologically neutral.
But I may take their Gateway program there anyway!

Don 

Don-

I didn't read his book but saw his interview on Imus last week.  Very impressive and even the hard-bitten, skeptical Imus seemed moved by his account.

But I didn't know about the TMI deal or the other things you mentioned.

So here we go again.  Are we ever going to get solid, replicable verification or is it like Sisyphus pushing the boulder up the hill only to have it roll back down just before reaching the top?

I lean to the latter as you no doubt know!

R

Berserk2 wrote on Jan 15^th, 2013 at 4:03pm:

Also, Alexander seems to uncritically embrace the U of Virginia research by Dr. Ian Stevenson's successors on reincarnation, when in fact 2 of Dr. Stevenson's past life subjects were born prior to the deaths of their alleged prior personalities!

Most (all?) of us may have parallel incarnations. Reincarnation doesn't
work in the Hindu/Buddhist way. A few of us may reincarnate in total,
but many of us are composed of _parts_ of previous incarnations.
Monroe explains that in his last book.

The upcoming PE-Queries9 will ask such questions on concurrent parallel lives.

You're welcome. :)

That's such a cool idea. I sure feel like I am composed of more than one entity. I find, also, that some of those I have known over the years have personalities which seem to switch on and off. It can happen fast or slow, but it is as if you were talking to more than one person.

Also, Alexander seems to uncritically embrace the U of Virginia research by Dr. Ian Stevenson's successors on reincarnation, when in fact 2 of Dr. Stevenson's past life subjects were born prior to the deaths of their alleged prior personalities!

Most (all?) of us may have parallel incarnations. Reincarnation doesn't work in the Hindu/Buddhist way. A few of us may reincarnate in total,
but many of us are composed of _parts_ of previous incarnations.  Monroe explains that in his last book.

Yes, I know; I've read all 3 of RAM's books, and what he claims about his own past life recall is in my view self-refuting--cartoony absurdities like his memories of fliying a machine, while dodging spears thrown by primitive aliens on another planet.  Please reread his 3 past life claims and make the case that they are plausible. 

Besides, you dogmatize without addressing Swedenborg's refutation of OBE past life recall.  He initially thought this represented past life memories.  Then his guides demonstrated to his satisfaction that these memories were illusory, created by unconscious spirit mergers whose presence was unknown to him. In other words, when the astral memories are genuine, they are the memories of the intruding spirit, not of the astral explorer.  Even apart from this,the case against reincarnation is very strong.  Do you want a more detailed account of it? 

Don

rondele wrote on Jan 15^th, 2013 at 10:30am:

Carl- Since this board falls so short of your expectations, why not just leave instead of continuing with your insulting posts? The thing is, this board is unlike so many other conversation boards on the net where people compete to see who can flame each other with demeaning and rude comments. Therefore, since this obviously isn't the venue for you, let's just say goodbye and then both you and we will be much better off. R

No Rondele!..You insult me!, and the majority of posting members of this forum! Less than 5% of registered members will ever post a message on forums, and that's only a fraction of those who read the posts on this forum, as it is(posts)freely available to the public to read without registering.

This whole forum/website is based on Bruce Moens "imagination" method of contacting the dead and travels into the afterlife. There is Zero verification of this method of  afterlife exploration. And this includes you! If not, just 'imagine' where the next earthquake, tsunami, and major earth disaster will happen?

After all. All you have to do is to 'imagine' these scenarios will happen in whatever country you 'imagine', and it will happen in our physical reality! Is this not what the "Grand Poobah" teaches you? Talk to your dead relatives also! Don't forget to tell your living physical relatives about your contact!???

You Insult Me, and probably 95% of those who read posts on this forum. Get Real and Get Honest Girl! Carl.

    

[Carl to Rondele:] This whole forum/website is based on Bruce Moens "imagination" method of contacting the dead and travels into the afterlife. There is Zero verification of this method of  afterlife exploration. And this includes you!

First, Carl, Rondele is a skeptic whom you treat like a boingy-eyed believer!  Secondly, if you read Bruce Moen's books, you would know that he was initially very skeptical until his method achieved a few impressive verifications.  The question for discussion is this: how consistently reliable is the method of Focused Imagination and other Phasing Methods like the TMI Gateway program? And if you read posts from those who have taken Bruce's workshops, you would realize that his methods generate signigficant paranormal insights.  Bruce is a very bright researcher and our challenges of programs like partnered exploration in no way suggests that he lacks an interesting and meaningful case for what he does.

[Carl to Rondele:] Get Real and Get Honest Girl!

Duh!  Rondele is NOT a girl. I've actually met her--I mean, him!   :D

Berserk2 wrote on Jan 15^th, 2013 at 11:49pm:

...read all 3 of RAM's books, and what he claims about his own past life recall is in my view self-refuting--cartoony absurdities like his memories of fliying a machine, while dodging spears thrown by primitive aliens on another planet.

Why don't you join and find out for yourself? First PE session is on Saturday.

Carl, Berserk and Rondele are having a little disagreement, aren't they? Boingy-eyed believers? Hmmmn, that's an interesting picture.

This site has attracted a lot of very different posters over the years, coming and going like little butterflies at a picnic. I suppose the proof is in the pudding. If I could only find that pudding....I know it's around here somewhere....

Wouldn't it be interesting if Berserk participated in the PE? Since he has had so many paranormal experiences and is so experienced in communing with God and all that, it seems like he just might have a breakthrough....I sure wouldn't want to miss that!

Parallel incarnations? Perhaps the disk viewpoint is in some way true. More than one probe is sent out at the same time.

Regarding the possession explanation for Ian Stevenson's findings, how would this be the case when a parallel incarnation takes place?

recoverer,
Your question begs the question in this sense: the concept of parallel incarnations is based on alleged past life recall, which seems better interpreted as mind merger or possession by discarnate spirits.  How this mind merger works was demonstrated by ES's guides, so that he could correct his aarlier reincarnational interpretation.  Or do you want to say that ES's guides were deceiving him in this matter? 
Secondly, the concept of parallel incarnations is a belief rooted in an ambiguous sense of astral timeless realms.  It must first be demonstrated that the illusion of past and future is cognitively meaningful.  ES's explorations  establishe not timeless realms, but a different experience of time that is relative to how similar the core desires of separate beings are.

Don

PauliEffectt wrote on Jan 15^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

Berserk2 wrote on Jan 15th, 2013 at 4:03pm: Also, Alexander seems to uncritically embrace the U of Virginia research by Dr. Ian Stevenson's successors on reincarnation, when in fact 2 of Dr. Stevenson's past life subjects were born prior to the deaths of their alleged prior personalities! Most (all?) of us may have parallel incarnations. Reincarnation doesn't work in the Hindu/Buddhist way. A few of us may reincarnate in total, but many of us are composed of _parts_ of previous incarnations. Monroe explains that in his last book. The upcoming PE-Queries9 will ask such questions on concurrent parallel lives. You're welcome. :)

  Yes, i've found out that the majority of incarnations are the rolled together aspects of a Disk sense type process, but direct, literal reincarnations (aka traditional reincarnation as found in some Eastern beliefs) can and do happen as well--they just seem to be (much?) more rare than the other kind. 

   I've had the somewhat recent sense, that more direct and traditional type reincarnation has increased some in this particular cycle because of the nature of it's opportunity and extremity.  Some "past" helpers are coming directly back from the "nonphysical" for service and guiding reasons during these times of great change, transition and hopefully eventually positive transformation. 

  Why?  Because having already experienced the physical directly themselves, and having grown to a certain extent during their inphysical life and much after, they can better handle some of the limiting tendencies of being here, and tend to remember better what they and this process really are and is about. Hence they tend to make more effective and powerful helpers here.  Plus, they are still very much connected to their Disk, as any recently rolled together type self, and so they still have that connection to call up and be influenced by.  It's sort of like the saying, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."  If a particular self reached a very expanded consciousness state before, they can more easily do so again or more likely go beyond and thus be of greater help to their and other Disks. 

  However, in that case, the choice is not made lightly.  There tends to be more planning and carefulness involved with these. 

Berserk2 wrote on Jan 16^th, 2013 at 3:01pm:

recoverer, Your question begs the question in this sense: the concept of parallel incarnations is based on alleged past life recall, which seems better interpreted as mind merger or possession by discarnate spirits.  How this mind merger works was demonstrated by ES's guides, so that he could correct his aarlier reincarnational interpretation.  Or do you want to say that ES's guides were deceiving him in this matter?  Secondly, the concept of parallel incarnations is a belief rooted in an ambiguous sense of astral timeless realms.  It must first be demonstrated that the illusion of past and future is cognitively meaningful.  ES's explorations  establishe not timeless realms, but a different experience of time that is relative to how similar the core desires of separate beings are. Don

  Just to point out that there are different levels of guides and guidance.  Any kind of real guide is not going to deliberately deceive anyone, but it may be like a friend who is on a similar wavelength or developement as yourself or a bit more expanded than you, they might give you limited or not fully correct information based on their own limited current perspective. 

  The kind of guides and guidance levels we tune into, tend to act on the "like attracts like" principle, and so, the more intune and developed an individual, the more they tend to connect and communicate with a more expanded level of guidance. 

    Specifically asking and intending for specific level of help, helps as well.  Which is why i often ask for help and guidance from the most Source and Christ attuned Consciousnesses (and sometimes the most expanded level of my own Disk too--easier to perceive usually). 

   So it may be that Swedenborg was at times communicating with real guides who were not deceptive, but slightly ignorant as compared to say someone like Jesus who is fully merged with PUL and Source and so has access to the whole entire data bank of info and therefore will have the most accurate, clear, and balanced perspective. 

The "problem" with Teachers like Jesus though, is that they won't always give you direct or full answers because they know learning in an experiential way is usually more helpful and valuable.  You just might get hints, nudgings, or the like to help you on that path. 

   This is not even talking about translation issues!  That's a whole nother can of worms.  It's not particularly easy to translate nonphysically based info well into physical and human terms.  Those who can do so on average very well and accurately, are akin to gifted musicians like Mozart and the like.  There is not many of them, though all of us can improve with practice and experience (and occasionally some of us will reach that level of talent).

  But then again, just more opinion from the Ghetto i suppose ;)

carl wrote on Jan 16^th, 2013 at 12:42am:

rondele wrote on Jan 15th, 2013 at 10:30am: Carl- Since this board falls so short of your expectations, why not just leave instead of continuing with your insulting posts? The thing is, this board is unlike so many other conversation boards on the net where people compete to see who can flame each other with demeaning and rude comments. Therefore, since this obviously isn't the venue for you, let's just say goodbye and then both you and we will be much better off. R No Rondele!..You insult me!, and the majority of posting members of this forum! Less than 5% of registered members will ever post a message on forums, and that's only a fraction of those who read the posts on this forum, as it is(posts)freely available to the public to read without registering. This whole forum/website is based on Bruce Moens "imagination" method of contacting the dead and travels into the afterlife. There is Zero verification of this method of  afterlife exploration. And this includes you! If not, just 'imagine' where the next earthquake, tsunami, and major earth disaster will happen? After all. All you have to do is to 'imagine' these scenarios will happen in whatever country you 'imagine', and it will happen in our physical reality! Is this not what the "Grand Poobah" teaches you? Talk to your dead relatives also! Don't forget to tell your living physical relatives about your contact!??? You Insult Me, and probably 95% of those who read posts on this forum. Get Real and Get Honest Girl! Carl.

  Hi Carl, I will go out somewhat on a limb.  I see it as very probable that a very large and intense Solar event is going to happen sometime between latter 2013 to mid 2014.  I have not been given an exact date, and perhaps can't because of fluidic nature of the future and time.  That and perhaps people aren't supposed to know the exact timing, because frankly some are meant to be caught off guard. 

Anyways, what i have seen is that this Solar event will knock out electricity around much of the world, and will cause severe climate, geological and health issues.  But, it's the downing of electricity which is going to be the biggest issue since in so called developed countries so much of our life and living is based on electricity and so many of us don't know how to survive in direct connection with the land anymore.  We have become so dependent on technology, and that technology is much more fragile than we realize or would like to think.   A large solar flare knocked out electricity for a bit in Quebec a couple of decades or so ago.  Well the flares we may see (very probable so i've been told) will be much more intense and direct. 

  When this event first starts to happen, it will be very noticeable because the skies will appear as quite Red pretty much everywhere.  I recommend finding and hanging out for awhile in a cave if you see that. 

  I see a lot of people dying, and a lot of challenge for at least a few years, but after that i see a probable, and quite a positive transformation process.  Some of the people you disparage on this site, for example, will be part of this positive transformation process.  They will help to co-create healthy--spiritually and ecologically based communities where the emphasis is on helping one another and the Earth.  Real farming, meditation and prayer, music, healing, psychism, and above all Love will become the greater emphasis.   I see a collectively joyous, peaceful, and truly healthy humanity being born.   

I've gotten this info from a combination of dreams, meditation, and synchronicity with others who likewise have received similar info. 

  It's possible it won't happen the harder way, but it's very probable that it will, and i think America is going to have it rougher than most of the rest of the world. 

Berserk2 wrote on Jan 15^th, 2013 at 11:49pm:

Yes, I know; I've read all 3 of RAM's books, and what he claims about his own past life recall is in my view self-refuting--cartoony absurdities like his memories of fliying a machine, while dodging spears thrown by primitive aliens on another planet.  Please reread his 3 past life claims and make the case that they are plausible.

Yes, they are plausible.

Don:

Put it this way.  Jesus said things such as "As you sow so you reap" because if he said things about energetic levels people from his time period, for the most part, would not have understood what he was talking about.

It could be that the people who lived when Swedenborg lived would not had been able to understand something such as the disk concept. Therefore, Swedenborg was instead told that Souls share information with each other and end up mistaking this information for past life information.

In a way this is true, because if information comes from other disk members, soul group members, and beyond, a case of past life misidentification might take place. There is an identity connection in the sense that "all disk members are one," "all Soul Group members are one," and "all Souls are one."

It doesn't make sense to me that a Soul is going to limit itself to just one incarnation. Once it acquires a lot of experience it isn't possible for it to incarnate all of itself into an incarnation. Therefore, it extends a small part of itself, and in the end, going by what I understand, allows this small part to continue as a unique entity/Soul. I believe it is possible that such an extension will incarnate a limited number of times.

Some people have had NDEs and such where they found out about disk-like reincarnation in a way that is beyond the confusion and deception Swedenborg wrote about.

When I experienced about 12 incarnations at once I felt like I was this large spacious being that is capable of much more than what can be stuffed into one little body. Yet, I was still me. When I make contact with such a higher level of being it seems like too much for my body.

Regarding the Ian Stevenson reincarnation case/possession possibility, I brought it up because you've brought it up before. There may be cases where a child has memories that seem to be past life memories but instead they come from an earthbound spirit that has attached to a child. The parallel incarnation examples Stevenson provided suggest otherwise, because what is the likelihood of the spirit of a still alive person possessing a child?

Regarding the time factor, a disk can send out more than one incarnation during the same time period.





Berserk2 wrote on Jan 16^th, 2013 at 3:01pm:

recoverer, Your question begs the question in this sense: the concept of parallel incarnations is based on alleged past life recall, which seems better interpreted as mind merger or possession by discarnate spirits.  How this mind merger works was demonstrated by ES's guides, so that he could correct his aarlier reincarnational interpretation.  Or do you want to say that ES's guides were deceiving him in this matter?  Secondly, the concept of parallel incarnations is a belief rooted in an ambiguous sense of astral timeless realms.  It must first be demonstrated that the illusion of past and future is cognitively meaningful.  ES's explorations  establishe not timeless realms, but a different experience of time that is relative to how similar the core desires of separate beings are. Don

Sometimes it seems as if Robert Monroe took things to literally. There were occasions when he could've considered the possibility that something was being communicated to him in a symbolic way.

Natives throwing spears at a plane he flew might be a way of saying that he used to live on a planet where technologically advanced people lived wth non-technologically advance people. Considering what takes place in this World, this is a possibility.

I'm prone to think in the way described above, because I've received a lot of information in a symbolic way.  I would really limit the communication process if I didn't allow for symbolism to take place.

For example, sometimes I'm shown people riding bicycles. This doesn't literally mean that people are riding bicycles. It is a way of saying that people are moving in the direction of Christ consciousness.

This symbolism might not make sense to others, but after a while you understand what various symbols mean.




PauliEffectt wrote on Jan 16^th, 2013 at 5:44pm:

Berserk2 wrote on Jan 15th, 2013 at 11:49pm: Yes, I know; I've read all 3 of RAM's books, and what he claims about his own past life recall is in my view self-refuting--cartoony absurdities like his memories of fliying a machine, while dodging spears thrown by primitive aliens on another planet.  Please reread his 3 past life claims and make the case that they are plausible. Yes, they are plausible.

  Sort of along the lines that Albert earlier wrote.  Say you were exploring the nonphysical, say you were Swedenborg.  You come upon a particular "Disk" or Total Essence, and out of that Disk comes several very distinct individuals with their own unique characters, traits, tendencies, etc. 

   You might say, oh, these are separate "Souls" as i perceive them as individuals.  In a very real sense, they all each lived their own physical lifetimes and survive as distinct personalities in the nonphysical.  It wasn't that one personality and self was born, lived, died, experienced the nonphysical and then was born again. 

   If one saw such a thing, one might surmise, "reincarnation is bunk".  But if you understand the Disk concept, you can understand that these selves are very much individual, freewilled, and unique beings, but are also so very connected to each other and really are part of one larger self. 

  This is a microcosm process and reflection of what Source/The Creator did in the beginning.  It projected unique, individual, freewilled parts of itself out.  These parts are different, unique, etc. but they are not separate from the Source they came from. 

  What the Creator did with creating our Disks, is what our Disks did with creating "probes". 

  But again, i've found that direct, literal, traditional reincarnation can and does happen, but it seems much more rare than the other kind. 

  Also, it's true that sometimes we may think we were a certain person because of either an inphysical or nonphysical association with another.  There is a interesting case of this in the Cayce work.  A man was convinced he had been Judas Iscariot in another life--some visions of his had seemed to confirm it.  A friend of his, asked for this man about this issue.  They were told that in another life, that he was very closely associated with Judas Iscariot and that was part of the reason of why they believed they WERE J.I., but that they weren't actually. 

  While this can and sometimes does happen, it may not be very common unless in cases of more well known people.  A  person who had been a close confidante and friend of say Cleopatra, might in another life think that she was Cleopatra because of related memories. 

Swedenborg does encounter what might be called the group soul pheonomenon and interprets it as a merger of like-minded separate souls, not a soul Disk of souls with many parnllel incarnations.  So this iis an interesting test case of similar experiences costrued differently.  But Swedenborg's interpretaion strikes me as preferable for 3 reasons:
(1) His verifications are far superior.
(2) He has no axe to grind with rival interpretations.  There was no equivalent of New Age reincarnationism in his day.
(3) Unlike New Agers, he carefully considered  the possibility that he might be wrong about his past life memories and allowed a guide to correct his misinterpretation by demonstrating how unconscious soul mergers can create this false impression.  The intruding spirit's memories are confused as one's own.

Don

Berserk2 wrote on Jan 17^th, 2013 at 3:24pm:

But Swedenborg's interpretaion strikes me as preferable for 3 reasons: (1) His verifications are far superior.

Are they?

A. He believed in the Last Judgement Day. Smacks of religious stupidity.
B. He thought The Last Judgement had already passed (in the year 1757). Cartoonish, isn't it?



Berserk2 wrote on Jan 17^th, 2013 at 3:24pm:

(2) He has no axe to grind with rival interpretations.  There was no equivalent of New Age reincarnationism in his day.

He really ground his axe with the idea of Trinity, as he cut it down and rejected Trinity. Praise the Lord! Hallelujha!
More unsubstantiated religion and sort of ES first denial of the existence of the Disk concept. :)

Perhaps an indication why his view on incarnations was different than Monroe's?



Berserk2 wrote on Jan 17^th, 2013 at 3:24pm:

(3) Unlike New Agers, he carefully considered  the possibility that he might be wrong about his past life memories and allowed a guide to correct his misinterpretation by demonstrating how unconscious soul mergers can create this false impression.

Your assumption is wrong when you paint all non-Catholics the same.

Don, if you believe so, why are you here? On a Moen/Monroe site, when
you think Monroe and Moen are wrong? Why aren't you on one of the
many Swedenborg forums or in his New Church?

PauliEffectt wrote on Jan 17^th, 2013 at 4:40pm:

Berserk2 wrote on Jan 17th, 2013 at 3:24pm: But Swedenborg's interpretaion strikes me as preferable for 3 reasons: (1) His verifications are far superior. Are they? I'll ignore your mistatements of his theology, which, by the way, I also disagree with.  The point I raised was his verifications about which you are apparently ignorant: e. g. his routine ability to visit discarnate souls on demand, retrieve detailed verifiable information from them about which he was ignorant, and then later confirm this information with surviving friends and loved ones.  [quote author=7C5B4C4D5B4C550C3E0 link=1220647330/81#81 date=1358450676](2) He has no axe to grind with rival interpretations.  There was no equivalent of New Age reincarnationism in his day.

[Pauli:] He really ground his axe with the idea of Trinity, as he cut it down and rejected Trinity.

Irrelevant to this issue under discussion.  You are apaarently incapable of sticking to the point at issue.

[Pauli:] More unsubstantiated religion and sort of ES first denial of the existence of the Disk concept.

Incoherent gibberish!  ES was never exposed to the Disk concept.  He lived in the 18th century!



Unlike New Agers, he carefully considered  the possibility that he might be wrong about his past life memories and allowed a guide to correct his misinterpretation by demonstrating how unconscious soul mergers can create this false impression.

[Pauli:] Your assumption is wrong when you paint all non-Catholics the same.

Duh, the Catholic vs. non-Catholic distinction is not under discussion. Swedenborg was not a Catholic.

[Pauli:] Don, if you believe so, why are you here?
Because I'm interested in the discussions here.  Why are you here?

[Pauli:] Why aren't you on one of the many Swedenborg forums or in his New Church?

Because, as you know and I have repeatedly said, I think Swedenborg's biblical interpretation is misguided.  I'm interested in what he leqrned and verified by direct astral experience.

Berserker, get your quotes right.

Hi Don,

I would like to ask you 2 questions:

1. How would you define a 'new ager' ?

2. Given that Van Dusen says in 'The Presence of Other Worlds' that ' Proof for Swedenborg appropriately rested on how well what he had to say fit with human experience and biblical revelation.These are internal or spiritual evidences.These little miracles, though very curious, are not really proof of anything ' (p.157), what objective basis do you have for the claim that ' his (Swedenborg's) verifications are far superior' to those of the 'new age' (whatever that phrase means ! ) ?

Go see Swedenborg flaws.

Berserk2 wrote on Sep 5^th, 2008 at 4:42pm:

Whether astral travel, OBEs, and NDEs are experienced by Christians, New Agers, secularists, and others, one fact stands out as a serious problem of credibility: as a whole, these experiences are riddled with inconsistencies demonstrating that many of them are bogus or that the spiritual being contacted are deceptive or mistaken in their claims.

All this substantiates is that people perceive through inner senses that are at different stages of development. I would neither call that bogus nor would I suspect deception from the entities encountered, to me it is a bit more akin to what happens in a game of Chinese whispers.

I welcome all of this activity for what it really is - the development of inner senses by many people. It is not about accuracy, nor about developing a skill of niche relevancy like validated accounts. There's no guarantee that because a person makes an accurate account of one thing (that does not conflict with their belief system) the person would still not mistranslate another information (that they happen to have problems with for whatever reason). Nonphysical communication is never a transfer of words. All the words given to describe an experience are best effort attempts at trying to translate an energy into a truthful account. Experience and exposure help develop it, beliefs and desires distort it. There are notably few so free of rigid beliefs that they can bring through information of high accuracy.

These verifications in my opinion do not help the process that really matters: spiritual self-discovery. Spiritual self-discovery is (to me) about discovering those inner senses and through them the values we want to live from. It is not an intellectual exercise as such. The divine nature that we seek is not hidden to someone because they may lack a certain kind of mental prowess, or because they do not follow a certain process or chose a given path.

Exposure to that kind of experience is what matters. The lithmus test for me is not the material a person brings through, that dubious "information." People show their mettle through their behavior towards self and others. If the experience helps in transforming a person it will show in how they treat others and self. And this will in the long run also show the quality of the energy and beings they have been in touch with.

O wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 12:36pm:

Exposure to that kind of experience is what matters. The lithmus test for me is not the material a person brings through, that dubious "information." People show their mettle through their behavior towards self and others. If the experience helps in transforming a person it will show in how they treat others and self. And this will in the long run also show the quality of the energy and beings they have been in touch with.

   That is a very good point, the fruits matter the most.  But, i would also say the information itself does matter.  Everything is information, Consciousness is vibrating information in it's essence.  Since all information is interconnected, information of any kind can and often does have an influence on us in some way.  No information is truly "neutral"--it's either relatively expanding, or contracting in nature.  Expanding is "good" or rather freeing, and contracting is limiting in nature.

   To what extent we are influenced by information seemingly outside of ourselves, varies depending on different factors, our awareness, experience bank, strength of will, level of spiritual maturity, balance between our physical, mental and Consciousness levels, etc.   However, outside information often has more influence us than we may consciously realize or give credit too.  Hence, information itself can and should be discriminated, along with the sources of same if we are serious about our consciousness growth (the very reason why all of us our here, both for ours and others).   Sometimes it's helpful to be mislead for awhile and may even be prechosen as part of our life path, but ultimately, we are going to more helped or facilitated by more accurate, helpful, balanced, and expanding information.  Naturally, sources which are themselves more intune, balanced, constructive are going to have the tendency to give such information. 

   It's far, far, far from a black and white process. The fruits of a source definitely are very important, but so isn't the source itself and the "vibratory field" it radiates, aka the information it communicates with others.  It all has potential influence depending.   

Related to what Justin just wrote, if you read a book that comes from a particular source, it is very possible that you might make an energetic connection to that source. The degree of influence will vary according to each person's discrimination level and spiritual strength.

Hello, a channel.

I would think that most cases of information lacking accuracy or even seeming absurd it's more likely something brought on by the translator of that information, not something to do with that information itself.

To me there initially exists the energy, which we can also perceive as consciousness and information. The ability to perceive these three aspects - the underlying energy, its consciousness and its information aspect - can be developed to a different degree.

Somebody in touch with the energy might still experience the transforming effect of that particular energy event/experience, but not be able to render words or pictures to describe it, an experience common to many mystics that we might not see as clairvoyants as such. Looking at their behavior still works, even if we cannot even remotely tell what they were in touch with.

An extreme example would be a spiritual teacher that never speaks, yet might be a conduit for such beneficial energy, and yet would never release any information that we can evaluate mentally.

Other clairvoyants we can more readily identify and identify with - they talk to beings or they suddenly know something or have experiences with plot and so on. There's no guarantee that they are in touch with the underlying energy and it's hard to gauge how transformative their experiences were based on their accounts, at least imo.

I'm not sure I see it as a matter of contraction or expansion - these are just two of the fundamental forces governing everything. What transformative effect an experience has on us has a lot to do with our reaction we have to it.

I would say most information brought through you seem to  consider contractive has a lot to do with the messenger. There's plenty of astral clairvoyants bringing through information suiting their worldview, so I would say it has to do a lot with belief system issues. I would furthermore expect that those are the most likely to attract entities from the astral level willing to deceive.

I still think there's an underlying truth, but it is not really accessible from the astral level. There's a truth sense within man, something we sometimes call intuition, and clairvoyants or channels of the highest caliber develop it and render high quality information.

Gauging the information others bring through and one's own reaction to it can help to sharpen this inner "truth sense." Of course it's trial and error to find teachers and clairvoyants who expose this quality, as we cannot readily tell without falling prey to our own bias and prejudice.

This is where I found my little test to be most useful. Qualities like great compassion shine through and "expose" such a person, visible both in deed and word.