After the death of her husband and when friends and family gathered in her living room following his funeral, something happened which is both funny and potentially a rather powerful indicator that we do survive death.

The story was told by the widow's daughter, who was one of the people in the room when the incident occurred.  There were several other people there as well, including family members and friends.

As I recall, there were about a half dozen or so people who came to the house to comfort the man's wife and to share stories of her husband's past life.

As this was going on, a vase on the tv set suddenly rose into the air, and moved across the room to where the widow was seated.  It hovered there for a second or two, and then fell to the floor, smashing into many pieces.

Some people reported seeing faint human-like hands carrying the vase, others did not.  But all people saw the vase levitate, move across the room, and fall to the floor and break.

After the initial shock of this experience wore off, the widow told everyone that her late husband hated that vase and often urged her to get rid of it.  He even teased her that if she didn't, he would do the job after he died. 

I personally heard the daughter on radio recounting this experience and while I can't vouch for anything, I can say that she came across as extremely credible.  The host of the show quizzed her at length, trying to find flaws in her story as well as trying as best he could to get her to admit she was just making it up or that she was greatly embellishing it.  She stuck to her guns thruout.

I myself tend to be on the skeptical side of many of the so-called afterlife stories.  This one, however, was different in that I could find absolutely no reason why she would make it up.  This wasn't a contest, no money was involved for the "best" survival story, etc.  Also the radio station is not located in a major media market so that would discount any hopes of publicity.

The host of the show has a reputation of being a tough interviewer (Larry King he is NOT!).  The host concluded the interview by saying he had no explanation for the incident after asking many on-point questions designed to test the woman's story.

I also tend to dismiss most of what I hear when the famous mediums appear on tv, such as John Edward and most especially Sylvia Browne who I think is an outright fraud.

Having said that, I'd like to ask the Board members what they see as being "wrong" about this story. 

Let's take it for granted that the story is 100% true for the purpose of this little experiment.  Let's assume that all persons in the room saw exactly what was described above.  And let's exclude group hallucinations or the well known device of story telling, where each member adds something to the story so that by the time the daughter appeared on radio, she herself was telling a story that had been greatly embellished over the years and therefore believed every bit of it.

I see two things that bother me about it.  The first is that from everything I've heard and read, spirits are not able to move physical objects.  They may try, but their etheric hands go right thru anything they try to touch.  So this is a major exception.

But there is a second, more provocative problem.  This is not a trick question whatsoever.  I'd be curious and appreciative if you guys could mull this over and present what you think is the biggest problem this story represents.

Again, please do so from the premise that the story is absolutely true.

I don't have a big problem with it either.  I don't see an overly strong link to the deceased husband other than wifey's comment, but the timing is synchronistic.

I DO have a problem with a couple details, but I think they violate your experiment parameter of presuming 100% truth to the story.  I'll mention them anyway:

1) who puts a vase on a TV?  Won't that wilt the flowers?  Maybe it wasn't used for flowers.  If it was used for flowers, hopefully she didn't pour water in it while it sat on the TV.  Maybe she had hubby do it and he got electrocuted?

2) what husband notices a vase, much less has the nerve to comment to his wife about it and come up with an emotional projection toward it such as "hate"?  Personally, vases aren't a big part of my day.

3) what wife, knowing her husband hated a household decoration, sets it atop the one piece of furniture he probably spent hours staring at?  Was she trying to piss him off?

hmmm...

Don-

I might be wrong in saying the husband indicated he would get rid of the vase after his death.  That was my recollection when I posted, but on reflection, I can't say I'm 100% certain of this particular detail.

Nevertheless, you correctly identified what I consider to be the problem this story represents.

Namely, the whole story is just too "cute."  I don't mean that it didn't happen- as I said, I personally think it did.  But, that doesn't automatically mean that it was the husband who was responsible for carrying out the incident.  Because, if it was, it begs the question as to why appearances from deceased persons aren't a routine occurence.

Why is it that this particular man was able to come to his house, transport a vase and drop it at the feet of his widow.....and do it with such apparent ease?  And by so doing, demonstrate to his grieving wife that he was still alive in such a unique and convincing way.  According to her daughter, grief was replaced with laughter and relief.

I don't know if her husband did appear to her subsequently in dreams or other ways.  Perhaps he did. 

I am inclined to think your hypothesis might be correct.....it wasn't her husband at all.  It was an advanced entity of some sort, whether mischievous or not, who did this in order to bring her comfort in her time of grief.

But even so, millions of us have lost loved ones, and we all would give almost anything to have such an experience to let us know they are still with us.  Yet an occurrence of this kind is extremely rare, regardless of who it is that carries it out.

The key question is why.

Rondele, let me try to flesh out your reservation.
Channeling, NDEs, and other forms of astral travel all report the existence of many schools and mentors in the afterlife.  Consider the schools where PUL is respected and experienced.   Obviously, the question of contact with incarnate loved ones would arise.   It seems inevitable that the various principles and methods of contact would be discussed.  Loving souls would want to familiarize themselves with a great variety of methods: e.g. contact through psychokinetic effects, dreams, apparitions, channeling, a sense of loving touch on the shoulder by an invisible hand, characteristic odors, and vivid telepathic thought communication.  It seems likely that most new arrivees would want to develop expertise in most of these methods.   So why are we not all contacted by several of these means? 

The question of the receptivity of our incarnate loved ones would also be addressed and methods of detecting and inducing psi-conducive states would be taught.  Much attention would be devoted to the need for verification and the best methods of providing it.   Most of us would want to provide our incarnate loved ones a variety of contacts with several verifications to inspire and reassure them.

Yet such multi-faceted contact from deceased loved ones seems to be rare and to happen in a very haphazard and limited way.  Why?  I don't buy the answer that most incarnate humans are rarely in a receptive state or that such contacts would somehow be bad for our spiritual development.   Just the opposite would surely be the case! 

Perhaps a clue to the answer can be found in the notoriously haphazard or random nature of ESP in this life. Very few can turn ESP on and off like a tap.   Perhaps, astral contact from the dead is as haphazard and poorly understood there as ESP is here.   Perhaps, it is harder than we imagine for the dead to rigorously monitor the living.  We have evolved physically, culturally, and technologically.  Perhaps, the astral realms evolve in analogous ways.  Our obsession with the technology of astral contact (EVP devices, etc.) may be matched by an analogous relatively recent obsession on the other side where methods of providing new safeguards may be evolving.   Perhaps, what Bruce calls the Gathering  is a reaction to human progress in this area both here and in the hereafter.   Perhaps, our obsession with the whys and why nots of this issue is a vital aspect of this evolutionary progress.  Or is all afterlife contact simply a delusion created by unconscious ESP experiences masquerading as spirit contact?

Don