Greetings,

Towards the end of 'Otherwhere,' author Leland (also a TMI grad) says--

'Any symbol encountered in the Afterdeath Zone is sustained
by people's belief in it....After millenia of being fed by a people's
beliefs, the symbols are so powerful that no one alive could
dissipate the energy contained in them.'

Does this account for the variety of forms or entities we might see while we're out exploring?
If so, if we set up a meditation session where we on purpose thought of a negative symbol or form and repeated that we did not believe in it, could we weaken it?  Would our focussed intent give strength to our attack on it?

Just wonderring,
Bets

betson wrote on Jul 6^th, 2007 at 11:10am:


I think it would be effective temporarily as a distraction, but it would begin with a focused intention of resistance. In my opinion, anything resisted in an attitude of attack brings unintended repercussions along with an outcome. These repercussions are not necessarily negative, but can complicate the situation.

Therefore, at this time, I would replace the thought of "evil" with that of "good" and see evil as simply an obstacle that can "never touch me" as Kelly Howell says. It is already removed from my sight.

See, I think that is the difference. See it as done, as so many others say. Then there is no need to attack, no need to defend, no need to focus intensely on any aspect which is troublesome.

This too shall pass. You are automatically free to live in the present moment, without fear. You are automatically connected with Divine Source as soon as you let go of whatever is restricting you from All That Is.

I guess this is all another way of saying that if you want to see your enemy less, let go of your enemy.

love, blink

Greetings Hawkeye,

Uh-oh, Did I mis-speak?  Leland refers to his 6 lab sessions on most of the 9 pages where he brings up the Monroe Institute name.  So I just thought that anyone who had been there that often must have gotten through a course or two. Did I use the wrong word?

Bets

I'm reminded of the folk belief that if one thinks of an elephant while taking medicine, at least in some parts of India, then the medicine will be counteracted. So the doctor begins the visit, "Don't think of an elephant." That way he has an excuse if the medicine fails, because it is certain that the patient immediately thought of an elephant.

In the same way, when a hypnotist tells someone, "Stop eating Twinkies," it leads to greater consumption, because the "doing it" part must preceed the "stopping doing".

However, if one works through a the logic, such as, "Darkness is only the absence of light. But everything is made of light. Therefor no darkness truly exists." Then darkness will not be perceived.

I can't think of any other way to sucessfully "weaken" a thought form.

dave

To that point and the above. There's lots of examples out there where when asking/praying for things that it's seen as important that the request is structured the right way. On the basis that while the words may say one thing, the act of bringing whatever it is into your consciousness and putting energy into it actually creates or gives it reality for you.

Another aspect of the same idea is the way that it's often said that we bring that which we most fear into our lives. The mechanism is presumably the same, albeit sometimes given a positive spin by the idea that it's the way we arrange experience to learn those lessons we most need. There's no hiding in the mind, or escaping the need to resolve our demons...

Another view is that as above this entire reality and system of so called learning/lessons/life/death/afterlife/rebirth is all a dream - is something we have imagined into reality. That the game is to (collectively) cease believing in its existence so we can get back to God who has no need of anything. That it has no meaning whatsoever other than that having (maybe even accidentally) separated from God we can't seem to stop creating - digging ourselves further into the mire.

It's interesting the way we have such a strong drive to create ever more complicated and ever deeper layers of mind objects which take us further from God/Spirit - especially in the Western world....

From my experience, any construct There, has to be actively maintained
by a conscious focus otherwise someone else can destroy it.

For example, I might encounter a retrievee in a particular scene where they are the
only one in that scene and then I somehow send him/her to a higher vibration.
At that point, if I still linger in that scene, I can begin to "crumble" it quite literally
by intending to do so.

The idea that some symbols are living, means they are currently being maintained by
conscious thoughts of people (alive or dead) who believe in them.
I'm not sure if they can be destroyed until the amount of destructive intent exceeds the amount of conscious intent keeping them active.

-mike

Vajra said: Buddhism and other spiritual traditions (e.g. ACIM which is very clear on this) are I guess full of situation where teachings at differing levels appear to contradict each other.\


Recoverer says: Sometimes teachings do more than contradict each other. For example, consider the following from page 263 of Gary Renard's Dissapearance of the Universe:

"But people can't tell you the whole experience (near death experience), and they'd be dead! Of course it's their body that would appear dead, and they'd be moving on to the next illusory lifetime.

What happens is that the awe eventually wears off because the unconscious guilt that is still within the mind starts to catch up with you. This causes you to reincarnate as a way of escaping your guilt and your fear of God. This "always" happens to you eventually, unless your mind has been completely healed by the Holy Spirit."

I've read numerous near death experiences that don't support the above. An NDE doesn't come to an end because a person "fears" God and has unconscious guilt. Many near death experiences make it very clear that THEY DID NOT FEAR GOD. Completely the opposite. They also make it clear that they deal with guilt issues by having a life review. Many have stated that their NDE came to an end, because either they were told it was time for them to return to physical life because they had more to accomplish, or they were given a choice and chose to return.

My experiences and the experiences of many others (including Robert Monroe and Bruce Moen),  clearly show that most Souls aren't compelled to reincarnate shortly after death because of "guilt" and "fear of God." Rather, they move onto the spirit  realm that matches their predominant state of being, and the issue of reincarnation, if it comes up, comes up in a much more selective manner than Gary Renard states.

To believe what Gary Renard has to say about the matter and to believe what somebody such as Bruce Moen has to say about the matter, is to believe in two completely different ways of viewing things.

There was a time when I would've believed a lot of what Gary Renard has to say because I used to be into Vedanta. I have since found that spiritual truth goes far beyond what Vedanta has to share.

One other point. Gary Renard writes that a Soul has to reincarnate thousands of times before it returns to God. Let's say he means just 5,000, rather than 999 thousand.  5,000 x 60 years = 300,000 years of physical life without ever getting a signifcant break. Considering how many tough lifetimes there are on this planet, this is a hard concept to fathom.

Recoverer,

and such a person might thank you very much for the information.

Bets