Don, no need to take time to find exact references.  Just an overview from your memory should be sufficient.  From the gist of your post I may already understand your meaning of "controversial" as in a reincarnation concept.  Or in other words, RAM and ES encountered a gathering of spiritual beings they interpreted as aspects of themselves and interpreted these beings to be past, present, future lives/personalities of themselves, thus making a case for reincarnation.  Though wasn't ES shown this was not the case?  Anyway, I could be reading you incorrectly, but I think the short answer to your question is yes, one could possibly encounter spiritual beings and view them as aspects of themselves at different stages of current life and interpret them as separate individuals and incorrectly view it as themselves in another lifetime. I think you're looking for a plausible explanation for misinterpretation of the reincarnation concept and I'll get back to this question.  On second thought, since it's been a few years, why don't we in the future as your time allows revisit the cases for/against reincarnation in another thread.  Don't you have one you started at one time?

In regards to your previously posted thoughts, Natalie doesn't consider the thousands of personalities to be aspects of herself, at least not in her book.  And she doesn't speak of time as being simultaneous, as in a timeless dimension either.  At least not in my understanding of what she's saying.  I may need to listen to her interviews again, but I wonder if you've misinterpreted what she said?

Regarding the thousands of personalities, in the book she indicates she is aware of them arrayed around her clothed in white robes, yet she's also aware of them as "energies, points of light or monsters" as she prefers because changing her visual perception of them is an allowance of the environment itself.  In other words, according to the rules/laws that construct the environment/dimension one is allowed to see the spiritual beings as whatever one chooses, which is usually the way that is most comfortable for them.  Yet, the environment allowing her the ability to change her visual perception of the personalities does not allow her to change the immediacy of their presence or their individuality and separateness from her.  The spiritual beings exist within this environment, but how she views them is her choice.  Initially the choice may be somewhat unconscious and based on cultural belief, however, after closer examination one realizes that only certain elements are fixed. 

Just a note, in my understanding it is also allowed for the spiritual beings themselves to determine how they present themselves to someone as well, however, that statement assumes what Natalie calls the "Blink Environment" is the same as what I refer to as a crossover reality, which may encompass multiple dimensions.  Natalie seems to be singling out and describing individual dimensions and I haven't really taken the time to try to do that.  Instead I've simply been aware of various interconnecting or overlapping dimensions.  Her attempt to single these out by individual description is one of the things that attracted me to her book.  And she goes into more detail than what I'm describing for the sake of brevity.  Ha!  Sometimes I wonder how brevity is even possible when discussing ineffable concepts from a human perspective.  I guess it isn't... there's always more to say.

In addition she says, "Their number is overwhelming to my conscious mind, yet I'm able to single out any one of them to fully recognize the personality of that individual, simultaneously and instantly perceiving and knowing each of the other thousands as unique individuals."  So in my understanding "simultaneously" is an artifact of expanded conscious awareness.  She goes on to say this "knowing" occurs as a gestalt that is available to her conscious mind instantaneously and that her conscious mind in this expanded awareness is capable of focusing on innumerable points at once with full consciousness.  The points including not only each personality/spiritual being present, but also includes the setting of this dimension along with other dimensions that overlap or interconnect with it either internally or externally.  Though she also mentions that some dimensions cannot interact or overlap with one another.  This description also fits with my experience of various dimensions or realities as I usually call them.

She also states: "... my understanding of the various dimensions-- or vibrations or worlds or focus levels-- of expanded consciousness is that they are aspects of one encompassing reality.  The one reality includes all beingness or consciousness.  It is the endlessly unknowable infinity of creativity and an apparent paradox of infinite numbers of unique individuals that are simultaneously one...  This 'All That Is' can be perceived simultaneously as a force and as an individual consciousness that exists within each consciousness and yet is separate from each consciousness or being... I understand them to be aspects of-- the unknowable totality of conscious and infinitely expanding creation."

She goes on with more insights that I find intriguing, but I'll stop here.

Kathy

Hi Kathy-

I couldn't find a reference in Van Dusen's book about ES concerning reincarnation, but did find this on the net:

The writings of 18th century Emanuel  Swedenborg who claimed to have seen into the other side for 27 years do not support reincarnation. He wrote that we have one life - eternal - and that we are born into this physical world to prepare us for our eternal life. In the book, Heaven and Hell, Swedenborg explained that these memories of what is now called "past lives' are the memories of those who have gone before us. Very often, we sense these past memories and believe them to be our own. Swedenborg's explanation does not discount the experience - this life was lived - but not by the person claiming more than one life. We have one life - eternal life - and we are ourselves throughout eternity.

R

Don, I did listen to both interviews on Bob Olson's site here: http://www.afterlifetv.com/ ; Are these the same as you listened to?  Or does she have others?

I can try to find time to listen to them again with this in mind, but I sure don't see it in her book.  Either that or I'm not understanding your meaning in regards to what you're saying here:
Quote:


Perhaps when you have time you could elaborate.  Sounds like you've had a busy day today.



Thanks Roger.  That's my understanding of what ES said, too.  And as far as I can see Natalie doesn't even imply anything in regards to reincarnation either.  And I'm not familiar with (or don't remember) Monroe's theater experience and his conclusions from that.  I do recall his philosophy being in support of reincarnation, however.  Just not any of the specifics as to how he made that assumption.

Kathy

(2) SWEDENBORGIAN CRITIQUE OF THE
NEW AGE CONCEPT OF THE GROUP SOUL

In reply #18 I outline the grounds of ES's rejection of reincarnation.  New Age reincarnation is often associated with the concept of a soul Disk or group soul comprised of many manifestations of one's soul throughout history.  ES would view this as a perversion of what actually happens:

"Kindred souls gravitate towards each other spontaneously...for with each other they feel as though they are with their own family (HH 44)," 

"There was a kind of angelic face that appeared to me, and this varied according to the qualities of affections...that were characteristic of the individuals in a particular community.  These variations lasted quite a while, and through it all I noticed that the same general face remained constant as a basis, with everything else being simply derivations and elaborations from it.  So there was shown me through this face the affections of the whole community...Not many individuals leave their own community to go to another because leaving their community is like leaving themselves or their life...(HH 47, 49)." 

"Sometimes a whole angelic community appears as a single entity in the form of an angel, a sight that the Lord has allowed me to see. . .Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael are nothing but angelic communities that are given these names because of their functions (HH 52)." 

Similary, in classical channeling, the group soul is not like the Monroe/Moen soul Disk composed of multiple selves of the same soul unit.  Rather, the group soul is composed of originally distinct kindred souls with the same purpose.  Yet this channeled conception might easily be confused with the soul Disk concept.  For example, consider this quote form Paul Beard, "Living On," p. 135:

"The group as a whole is in a real sense a soul also, a group soul, and [the discarnate person] is in very truth part of this soul.  The bond, the common purpose, will not all be seen in a flash....[but] will be carried out gradually, until the various parts are gathered together and made a whole." 

This alternative understanding may be the key to solving a significant contradiction between Bruce Moen and Robert Monroe.  Moen claims to be part of the same soul Disk as Monroe.  But Monroe is astrally informed that he has only one parallel incarnation--a female one.  He is also told that "she would seem like a long-lost sister (UJ 174)."  Moen reports no such intimacy in his earthly encounter with Monroe.  Perhaps, Moen, Monroe, and even this unknown female are distinct and separate souls destined to participate in a group soul in this Swedenborgian sense.  If so, there is no such thing as retrieving portions of one's self.

The group soul in the Swedenborgian sense gets rid of the the troubling notion of parallel incarnations from a timeless astral realm. 
Consider the contradictory nature of Seth's perspective on the timeless interval between lives.  In "Eternal Validity of the Soul" Seth says, "There is no time schedule, and yet it is very unusual for an individual to wait for anything over 3 centuries between lives, for this makes the orientation very difficult, and the emotional ties with the earth have become weak."  But Seth assumes that time is irrelevant for entities between lives.  The earth ties can only become gradually weakened if there is in fact a passage of time!  A real contradiction!

Don

Quote:

"I have an idea that there's another one being human here at this time — another one out of this I-There of ours." Your presentation of it has an obvious difference.

Quote:

What do you find troubling about it?

Yes, Focus27, Natalie comments that from the perspective of physical life, this does not make sense. And she does not wish to make pain for her friends who were also injured or for anyone else. It only makes sense from the larger perspective of the Whole Self. That's the point, or one of them. We don't quite understand the perspective of the whole self.

Harvey:

How did she get George W. Bush to pose with her if she has faked injuries?

http://rapidcityjournal.com/search/topic/?k=%22natalie%20sudman%22&d1=&d2=&s=sta...


harvey wrote on Sep 13^th, 2012 at 4:44am: