Revisiting the tree

Back in May I wrote a post called "The Tree," which speculated about the ultimate purpose of existence. In it, I compared a human soul to a leaf on a tree, then wrote,

And our ultimate fate is to drop from the branch, lose our form, rejoin the soil, and merge with the ground of being.

The post received a variety of reactions, but one anonymous commenter seemed quite dismayed by it. He (I'll use the masculine pronoun for convenience) didn't like the idea of people losing their individuality - or, as he put it, "completely losing who and everything they are, and merging with a whole 'something' that is not them and they will cease to exist anymore."

In a later comment he added,

If this was my destiny, I think I'd rather just be dead and extinguished, after all isn't that what's in store for me inevitably anyway based on this? As a matter of fact, if anyone is considering suicide, why not just go ahead and do it then, why bother struggling? After all, you're not really unique or important, you're just a manifestation of 'something' so why bother to keep struggling here for the entertainment of some 'whole'?

I think it's important to clarify what I was trying to say. First of all, my speculations are just that - speculations. I'm no guru, I'm not enlightened, I don't claim to have any inside information on the nature of ultimate reality. If something I say strikes you as wrong, the best thing to do is reject it. If your own soul does not vibrate positively to my suggestion, then there is no reason to accept it or take it seriously. After all, who is a greater expert on your own personal reality than you are?

That said, I think the commenter may have misunderstood my point. I was not saying that when we die, we immediately lose our identity and merge into a cosmic sea. If I believed that, I would not have spent so many years reading (and writing) about communications received through mediums. If those communications are genuine, and I believe some of them are, then the human personality does not dissolve after physical death. It continues.

I've cited other evidence in support of this contention - like after-death communications received by ordinary (non-mediumistic) people, and induced after-death communications, and NDEs in which the experiencer met his deceased loved ones, and deathbed visions in which the dying person saw friends and relatives who had already crossed over.

I think the evidence is very, very strong that we do not just wink out of existence when we die, and that we will continue to be very much the person we have been, and will rejoin those who have gone before us.

But then what is this business about "merging with the ground of being"? Well, my view - and remember, I'm speculating about this - is that at some distant point in our development, after we have passed through eons of spiritual evolution that we cannot begin to imagine, when we are fully ready to make this final transition ... then and only then will it come about. And even then, we will still retain our spark of individuality, while at the same time being one with the All. I can't conceptualize what this would feel like, because it lies far, far down the road.

The same reader remarked,

I also don't think I want to wonder who I really am and be reincarnated as 'someone' or 'something' else either, this sounds pretty hopeless again.

I resisted the idea of reincarnation for a long time, because (like the reader) I found it depressing. For one thing, it would mean going through high school again! These days I think the evidence for reincarnation is strong enough to support a belief in it. But the evidence indicates only that some people reincarnate, not necessarily that everyone does. Ian Stevenson's research, for instance, shows that children who spontaneously recall past lives are prone to remembering a life that ended abruptly or unexpectedly. I know of few, if any, cases in Stevenson's literature involving a past life that was lived to a ripe old age. Instead, the past lives typically ended quite young, often in an accident, in a homicide, or as the result of a sudden onset of illness. Could it be that people whose lives were cut short are more likely to come back and "try again" than people who lived out their expected lifespan? Or are dramatic deaths more likely to be remembered, so that only the past lives that ended suddenly are recalled? No one knows.

But in this connection, I think it's important to note that reincarnation may be a lot more complex than a simple, linear life-after-life progression. After all, if people are being reincarnated, how can they also be communicating through mediums or meeting near-death experiencers? Are they in two or more places at once?

It's at least possible - again, I'm speculating - that what is reincarnated is not "you," but another soul that is closely connected to you. Maybe this soul carries some of your memories with it, or has a psychic connection with you that persists after birth - but the new soul is distinct from you. It would be more like your twin - a separate being, to whom you are inextricably linked.

This idea is not original with me. It has been presented in mediumistic or channeled communications, as discussed by Michael Tymn in this excellent article.

Finally, I want to take special note of something the commenter said, which I quoted earlier:

As a matter of fact, if anyone is considering suicide, why not just go ahead and do it then, why bother struggling?

It is no exaggeration to say that everything I have read on this subject - and I do mean everything - discourages suicide in the strongest possible terms. Near-death experiencers, even those who have found themselves in "paradise," typically report no desire to commit suicide in order to get back there ahead of schedule. Quite the opposite - they appreciate their earthly life more than ever, because they realize that, for all its frustrations and difficulties, their life serves a purpose and is part of a plan.

People who commit suicide are cheating themselves of the chance to learn what they were meant to learn on Earth, and they make their transition in a confused and negative state of mind that affects them for some time afterward. They do not escape their problems; they bring their problems with them. In fact, their best chance of solving their problems is to remain on Earth and work them out. That's what Earth life is for. Or so it is said in literally thousands of communications.

Perhaps the best overview of what probably awaits us immediately after death is found in Robert Crookall's books, such as The Supreme Adventure and Intimations of Immortality. Crookall gathered hundreds of case histories and compared them, creating a self-consistent guide to the dying process, which showed that the individual human personality persists after death. In another book, The Interpretation of Cosmic and Mystical Experiences, Crookall collected reports of "at-onement," i.e., the feeling of being "at one" with nature, the universe, or God. He saw no contradiction between his work in these two areas, because they encompass different aspects of the same journey.

Or so I imagine. I could be wrong. As always, let your own soul guide you on your journey.  

Comments

[william]

“quite the opposite - they (after NDE) appreciate their earthly life more than ever, because they realize that, for all its frustrations and difficulties, their life serves a purpose and is part of a plan.”

A near death experiencer and how it changed his life. From my research into NDE’s this appears to be a common story. His story begins 5 min 20 seconds into the first video link and finishes 2 min 30 seconds with second link.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=j-sk2qW1tcc&feature=related

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=m9CDCZLRL9g&feature=related

[Paul Welsh]

I hesitate to post this as I am sure it has probably been covered elsewhere in the forum. With regard to reincarnation; wasn't Dean Radin quoted as comparing the physical body to a TV aerial for consciousness? From my admittedly limited reading on the subject, interference with this aerial by "unauthorised" discarnate spirits seems to me to be equally likely to explain cases of reincarnation. Couldn't such cases really be instances of discaranate entities 'broadcasting' - either knowingly or unknowingly? Perhaps they are simply cases of 'overshadowing' or a mixing of signals and not really examples of reincarnation at all (assuming that our consciousness survives physical death at all).

On the other hand there are clear indications from well-documented sources who have passed on who are adamant that we do reincarnate, and those that are equally sure we don't and those that are confident some do and some don't.

I am not sure where that leaves me but I feel better for having expressed it. :)

[Teri]

"On the other hand there are clear indications from well-documented sources who have passed on who are adamant that we do reincarnate, and those that are equally sure we don't and those that are confident some do and some don't."

I have seen this covered here before. Someone said that there is an oversoul which gathers in the aspects of itself, some of which reincarnate on earth and others of which incarnate on other planes. The oversoul is what sometimes greets NDErs (it manifests according to what we most expect to see, eg Jesus). The various aspects of itself that incarnate (by no means the whole oversoul, usually) can correlate with & have access to previous oversoul experiences. Individual aspects of the incarnated oversoul can continue on through other planes of existence as long as they wish to do so (or as long as they fail to recognise their connection to the oversoul). This may not be accurate, but fits in with what I've read, eg in Michael Newton's regressions.

[Teri]

I hadn't read Michael P's link to Michael Tymn when I posted, It seems to say pretty much the same thing.

[Art]

Man, I could write pages and pages on this stuff? Not sure you'd want me to? I don't know how to condense all my ideas into just a few short pithy sentences that would be understandable? Reincarnation? Perhaps the only thing that "reincarnate" are memories and not the soul itself. Children who haven't developed a strong sense of "self" tune into memories that aren't their own, and hypnotized adults have their own sense of self "turned off" and so they are able to tune into other folks memories? And as far as physical manifestations of past lives? Perhaps they are just examples of thoughts being things and consciousness creating reality? If my theories are correct that the purpose of life is to become a separate, unique, individual then reincarnation would seem to contradict that idea because it would lead to schizophrenic souls. Every soul experiences duality and separation, time and space, and imprints memories of what it's like to live in a 3 dimensional + one time universe. Life's lessons seem to be embedded in our everyday lives and the soul is able to learn holistically what it needs to learn with very little if any extra input from us. The soul learns in much the same way that children learn before they ever start kindergarten. Just by going about our daily lives the soul encounters enough duality and experiences enough separation to learn what it means and how it feels to be separate, apart, and unique. Just by spending some time in the physical universe the soul learns what time and space looks and feels like, and the only thing we get to take with us to the other side are our memories. Okay, I'll stifle myself for now, but I could go on and on about this stuff.

[Zerdini]

An excellent book to read about the Afterlife is called "The French Revelation" by N. Riley Heagerty who compiled it from the books by Edward Randall, a lawyer, who sat with Emily French, a direct voice medium, for twenty-two years and, with the help of a stenographer, recorded everything that was communicated.

There is some tremendous material which will repay study. I would be very interested to hear others' views.

Some of the chapters:

The Mind, The Spiritual or Etheric body, God, Creation and Force, The Drama of Death, The Spirit World, Mission Work, Children, Various Subjects.

"We are leaves tossed on the broad river of life, sometimes lying in the small dark shadows near the shore until a breeze or ripple quickens us to action, and then we are carried toward the ultimate end of all, the great Ocean of Exaltation.
Wise are they who seek the faster current, avoiding all stagnant pools. The great force of the universe sweeps us on and on, and in the end we become a part of the power that speeds all life."

ISBN: 0-9703914-0-4

Library of Congress Control Number: 00-91247

[Art]

It's the qualitative difference between just reading about something versus actually experiencing it. You can read a million books about sex and making love, or even watch numerous DVD's about it, but it's nowhere near the same thing as actually doing it. One can't say they really "know" what it feels like to make love to another person if they've never done it. It's only in the act of making love that one accumulates the full range of feelings and emotions, smells, visual, sounds of what making love means. We use all our senses to experience life, and in so doing we make memories of what it was like to be alive, to live in a 3 dimensional + 1 time Universe. When you ride a bike you feel the wind in your hair, you get the thrill of what it feels like when you go flying over a bump in the road, to balance yourself, etc. When you eat a plate of delicious spaghetti you see it, taste it, smell it, feel the texture in your mouth, etc. The soul is here to experience life. To accumulate memories of what it was like to be alive and live in a physical universe where time and space exists. We'll carry all these memories over with us into the Spiritual Universe and use them to recreate whatever kind of reality we might wish to experience. Heaven is a place where thoughts are things and consciousness creates reality. A place where matter is an epiphenomena of consciousness, where consciousness is primary and matter is secondary. But the only way that a new "baby" soul would know how to create that reality is if it had first spent some time in a physical universe. The alternative is to spend eternity in eternal nothingness, to float around like wisps of vapor, interacting with nothing. This earth life is a school, a place where the soul comes to learn about what it's like to be alive, to inhabit a body, to make love, eat, move, be separate and unique, and move through time and space.

[Hope Rivers]

Sounds wonderful Art but don't forget all the nasty thoughts created in our minds (lusts, envy, greed, hateful etc)if thoughts are things they'd have an existence too according to this theory, so therefore it's not all lovely experiences or like those you described "sex and spaghetti".;-)

Evil doesnt just dissapear at death and Michael P I agree with you with life's purpose is to overcome our difficulties. I would add to this its too experience love in it's highest state and experience freedom from addictions, depression, fear, guilt, rejection and all sin that keeps us from experiencing oneness with God.

[Art]

Sounds wonderful Art but don't forget all the nasty thoughts created in our minds (lusts, envy, greed, hateful etc)if thoughts are things they'd have an existence too according to this theory, - Hope Rivers
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Howard Storm's NDE is a perfect example of that. He conjured all his negative energy into demons, hate, greed, fear, jealousy, rage, etc. Before he could enter the light he had to do battle with those demons and overcome them, and in the end, at the point when he finally called out to the Light (as in "God is Light" - from 1st John) the Light appeared and rescued him. The universal element that I find to be common to all negative NDE's is "fear." People who are fearful oftentimes approach their NDE's from an entirely different viewpoint then people who have positive NDE's. Same experience, different perspective. But, at the point when people are ready to let go of their negative baggage, the Light does appear and rescues them. It seems that everyone, regardless of how reprobate they have been, is eventually enlightened and rescued and assisted into the Light. You find what you expect to find. Heaven is a place where thoughts are things and consciousness creates reality. Howard Storm's self assessed evaluation of himself does not paint a very pretty picture. In the Light, everything is illuminated.

Howard Storm's NDE:
http://near-death.com/storm.html

[Hope Rivers]

Yes but in the light of my NDE it doesnt make any sense because prior my NDE experience I was in an extremely fearful state yet my NDE didnt reflect this at all, it was filed with love, awe and peace.

[Hope Rivers]

I still believe NDE's are like an invitation to witness the afterlife, not necessarily that persons same final destination.

[Småfornå]

"For one thing, it would mean going through high school again!"

Well, there's always homeschool.... :)

[Art]

I still believe NDE's are like an invitation to witness the afterlife, not necessarily that persons same final destination. - Hope Rivers
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Oh, I'd definitely buy that! There is always some kind of barrier that they are not allowed to cross and if they do they say they wouldn't be able to come back. It's sort of like the difference between just visiting a hotel lobby and actually staying in the hotel. Big difference. Or, it's like going to pick up your girlfriend at a conservative Christian College at her dorm, and the dorm mother has to call up to the girl's room and ask her to come downstairs because she has a visitor versus going to a liberal college with co-ed dorms and spending the night with your girl friend in her room. In the former you can't really say you've seen the whole dorm, whereas in the latter you've really seen the whole dorm!

[Michael H]

. . . at some distant point in our development, after we have passed through eons of spiritual evolution that we cannot begin to imagine, when we are fully ready to make this final transition ... then and only then will it come about. And even then, we will still retain our spark of individuality, while at the same time being one with the All.

This is consistent with nearly every esoteric spiritual cosmology I’ve encountered as well. Hall’s description of Kabbalah in The Secret Teachings of All Ages is just one example. He describes 43 spheres of creation, arranged as concentric rings, and those of us on earth need only to ascend through 42 more to arrive at the destination. (On the bright side, he makes it clear that all 43 exist entirely within us as well as outside of us).

It’s also true that even for those who have experienced higher levels of consciousness, either through an NDE or meditative practice, or the spontaneous onset of Cosmic Consciousness, there is always a sense of an “I” involved in the experience. Dr. Allan Smith’s portrayal of the latter, which appears to be a description of a few moments of complete immersion, addresses this:

Eventually, the sense of time passing stopped entirely. It is difficult to describe this feeling, but perhaps it would be better to say that there was no time, or no sense of time. Only the present moment existed. My elation proceeded to an ecstatic state, the intensity of which I had never even imagined could be possible. The white light around me merged with the reddish light of the sunset to become one all enveloping, intense undifferentiated light field. Perception of other things faded. Again, the changes seemed to be continuous.

At this point, I merged with the light and everything, including myself, became one unified whole. There was no separation between myself and the rest of the universe. In fact, to say that there was a universe, a self, or any thing would be misleading. It would be an equally correct description to say that there was nothing as to say that there was everything. To say that subject merged with object might be almost adequate as a description of the entrance into Cosmic Consciousness, but during Cosmic Consciousness there was neither subject nor object. All words or discursive thinking had stopped and there was no sense of an observer to comment or to categorize what was happening. In fact, there were no discrete events to happen just a timeless, unitary state of being.

Notice that although he describes the event as without subject or object and void of all sensory perception except a sense of 'light', there’s still the perception of “being”, the sense of "I am" and overwhelming feelings of ecstasy.

The other thing I think is important to recognize is that although these events are attainable on earth, they are rare and they are not permanent states. Plotinus, the founder of Neo-Platonism and maybe the most profound secular mystic of the past 2000 years, is known to have experienced the unity state on four separate occasions, although Bucke speculates that it may have been as many as seven.

As far as the reincarnation question, I tend to think that Seth’s description is probably the clearest and most accurate. The repeated reference to timelessness in high level mystical experience and NDE accounts leads me to believe that our ordinary consciousness is a severe governor of sorts. Seth and certain other esoteric traditions suggest that we are actually experiencing existence simultaneously in multiple aspects on multiple realms and multiple times. In other words, my sense that “I’m Michael H”, though true, is woefully incomplete.

It’s sort of annoying to think about. I’ve often wondered what my other aspects are up to. On the other hand, this suggests that we have already completely merged with the source at this very moment on some level, and just aren’t aware of it from our current perspective.

[Michael H]

By the way, the suicide issue is one of the more troubling consequences of the failure to grasp a spiritual aspect of existence.

I've lost two high school friends and one former business associate to suicide over the past three years. It's sad to think that so many accept that there is such a thing as non-existence. I can certainly understand the feeling of wanting to abandon circumstances that we may be faced with on earth, but it must be a terrible shock to recognize that one still exists after going to such drastic means to stop existing.

[Leo MacDonald]

just curious what people's opinion on this skeptic viewpoint?

Every medical treatment that involves the brain rests on the assumption that the brain IS the source of consciousness. When they prescribe Alzheimer or Parkinson's treatment, it is always aimed to helping the brain function better, not in switching off parts of the brain so that the supernatural consciousness can filter through better. When they map your brain functions before brain surgery, they do it in the assumption that the surgery may damage your mind if it damages parts of your brain. Psychiatric treatment of mental illness is based on the assumption that the problems of the mind are caused by chemical imbalances in the brain. The treatment for autism is founded on the assumption that the problems stem from the brain being wired wrong, and that long and patient therapy can help rewire some of it.
Incidentally all these treatments seem to work quite well. Enough, in fact, to make you wonder if the assumptions they use are in fact, correct.

[Raimo]

"If my theories are correct that the purpose of life is to become a separate, unique, individual then reincarnation would seem to contradict that idea because it would lead to schizophrenic souls."

Art, I too believe that the purpose of life is to become a separate unique individual, but I also believe in reincarnation. In my opinion Stevenson's and other researchers work gives us enough evidencence that at least some people will reincarnate. I mean individual consciousness or soul inhabiting new body instead of just some remaining memories. To me this seems logical; same consciousness evolves to higher stage during many incarnations (and between them).

I would recommend Stevenson's Reincarnation and Biology and Jim Tucker's Life Before Life to anyone who is interested in survival of consciousness. In my opinion reincarnation research (excluding hypnotic regression) gives us best evidence of survival. Even better than NDE research and far more better evidence than research on mediums.

I don't believe at all in this "merging" thing. I'd say that it's about individual soul's temporary connection and memory transmission to the cosmic consciousness. Thus there is no final destination and merging in the soul's journey. Souls evolution is endless process and during various incarnations souls powers and individuality will increase.

[william]

“On the other hand there are clear indications from well-documented sources who have passed on who are adamant that we do reincarnate, and those that are equally sure we don't and those that are confident some do and some don't.”

Research into life after death, the meaning of life, the purpose of life and the paranormal is not for the faint of heart. It appears to me that most often it is the higher-level spirits in higher realms of existence that tend to support reincarnation whereas those in lower realms or recent arrivals do not tend to support reincarnation.

I suspect it is a choice. It appears we live in soul bands or families and often reincarnate to live and learn within those soul bands. These soul groups appear to have several levels of interaction from intimate (6to12?) to maybe just a causal acquaintance (25 to 500?) during one lifetime. This also would explain the concept of old souls and new souls living simultaneously on this earth.

Some research I have done suggest that those souls that want a faster track to soul development choose to reincarnate to have the opportunity to learn greater love and compassion. It also appears that a harsh or challenging mental environment on earth gives greater opportunities for soul development.

[Rufus (was drknow)]

(There seems to be a certain prejudice against education in our society so I am changing my name (see below).)

"Incidentally all these treatments seem to work quite well. Enough, in fact, to make you wonder if the assumptions they use are in fact, correct."

This is part of why I think the only evidence that the mind can be separate from the brain comes from evidence for the afterlife. A lot of the arguments about normal people with tiny brains etc. can be countered with other evidence, like that posted above, that the brain does effect consciousness.

The explanation of how the brain and body effect consciousness is very complicated. I don't see how the theory that brain is simply a filter explains why we get forgetful when we age, why we can't remember some form of existence when we get hit on the head and lose consciousness etc.

I would hypothesize that when we are incarnated we do use the physical brain for reasoning and memory in addition to processing sense perceptions of the physical world. But when we are out of the body we use the nonphysical mind alone.

[william]

“In my opinion reincarnation research (excluding hypnotic regression) gives us best evidence of survival. Even better than NDE research and far more better evidence than research on mediums.”

At one time I would have agreed with this quote but the past 8 years of research into spiritualism has given me some of the best evidence yet on survival of life after death and even the meaning and purpose of life.

People are so interested in this subject matter that even a medium like a John Edwards or Sylvia Brown make massive amounts of money with what I consider limited abilities compared to a Sloan that Findlay worked with for years.

[Paul Welsh]

Interesting. I guess the medical interventions are based in the idea that the mind remains in the brain. However if the brain is an "antenna" for consciousness I don't see how twiddling with it (chemically) if there is a problem in order to re-tune it to improve reception/function would be in conflict with the idea of consciousness and brain being separate. I don't see how anyone would know whether a particular treatment was switching anything on or off -whatever on/off means in the context - unless they understood the mechanism fully. Or am I being too simplistic?

[Zetetic_chick]

"I would hypothesize that when we are incarnated we do use the physical brain for reasoning and memory in addition to processing sense perceptions of the physical world. But when we are out of the body we use the nonphysical mind alone"

Physical brain has its utility. Maybe its function is of "transmiter" or "decoding machine" for consciousness in the physical world.

Obviously, if we're out of the body, we can't use the physical brain anymore. But according to Findlay's book, our etheric body has a etheric brain too... So, we should suppose that its function is the etheric equivalent of the physical brain (that is, of trasmiter and decoding "machine" for the non-material consciousness functioning in the etheric world).

Only another speculation... :-)

[Zetetic_chick]

"But the evidence indicates only that some people reincarnate, not necessarily that everyone does. Ian Stevenson's research, for instance, shows that children who spontaneously recall past lives are prone to remembering a life that ended abruptly or unexpectedly"

It's consistent with many other literature about afterlife. In fact, I tend to believe that reincarnation is the exception, not the rule... however, some other systems and ideologies, like those of Scientology, claims that everybody reincarnate, except when you get the high status of "operating thetan", a semi-god state; in that case, you're "cause over matter, energy, space and time" (Hubbard's own definition of a operating thetan)

In the book of Findlay, he asked to an etherian about reincarnation, and the response was something like this (I don't have the book at hand): "I've never known somebody who's reincarnated" (the broken english expressions are mine... :-))

On the other hand, in case of psychiatrists who has explored reincarnation with hypnosis, most of them confirm in almost all of their patients the existence of memories of a previous life. An example is Brian Weiss' research. (This type of research suggest that reincarnation is the rule, not the exception...)

Another possibility I've thought is that only can reincarnate people who are in a specific sphere or spiritual state. Suppose you're a high spiritual being; in that case, in the etheric world, you will be with beings like you, and neither of you will reincarnate (It can explain the response that Findlay's get)

But, on the other hand, if you has a low spiritual level, maybe you need one (or one thousand) reincarnation to "evolve".

But I don't think it's possible (or probable) that you can reincarnate in a lower form of life (e.g a plant or a fish), because in that case, how could you evolve? (Byt "lower form", I mean a less evolved form of spiritual consciousness)

[Cloud9]

Rufus:
“The explanation of how the brain and body effect consciousness is very complicated. I don't see how the theory that brain is simply a filter explains why we get forgetful when we age, why we can't remember some form of existence when we get hit on the head and lose consciousness etc.”

It would be pushing it too far to say that the brain is simply a filter. Does anyone say that?

Not clear why you mention dementia – if the brain is not functioning properly due to physical decline, it can’t do the physical job it is supposed to, however it works. The lack of memory of pre-birth existence during unconsciousness and sleep would be because the brain is not ordinarily wired (in the classical sense) to record memories not perceived by the physical senses –it’s hard even to remember our own dreams. Elements of such experiences may be recalled, sometimes in symbols.

Roger Penrose uses Godel’s proof of the incompeteness of arithmetic to show that human minds don’t work like computers –he looks to quantum effects on the microtubules in nerve cells. Alternatively, neurons may themselves be organised to record and amplify events on the quantum scale, and once one has fired, a chain reaction ensues.

Quantum is a useful idea for the way brains work because the way two different states of affairs can apparently be held in suspense resembles the way two different courses of action can be suspended in the mind during the act of choice.

Then there is the special role of observation - becoming conscious of things - in causing the collapse of the wavefunction.

Also, quantum physics puts some limits on how precisely we can specify details; details, perhaps, like the precise centres of activity in the brain or fuzzy memories instead of perfect computational memory. When you consider such ideas, you doubt consciousness could ever be simulated digitally.

As you say, NDEs appear to be a special case. They usually occur when the brain and body are close to shutting down. I would suggest that NDEs, which are non-physical experiences, are remembered even in an untrained brain due to the high-level quantum choice that becomes available: the big choice of life or death.

[Art]

just curious what people's opinion on this skeptic viewpoint? - Leo Macdonald
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

No skeptic has ever been able to adequately explain away to me how it is that people who have NDE's routinely make comments that parallel, support, and corroborate quantum physics and the holographic universe. What I find endlessly fascinating are the parallels, corroboration, and support between near death experiences and what Michael Talbot wrote about in his book The Holographic Universe. It really is amazing. When Dr. Kenneth Ring taught a class on near death experiences at the University of Connecticut he required his students to read The Holographic Universe as well as his books, Life At Death, etc.

Feelings of overwhelming oneness and connectedness, feeling like they are literally everywhere in the Universe at once, 360 degree vision, time and space not existing, having all knowledge, things being made out of light, during the life review feeling the emotions and telepathically hearing the thoughts of the people they interacted with, seeing colors they've never seen before and hearing sounds they've never heard, even overwhelming feelings of Love, are all by products or what one might expect in a holographic universe.

It really is eerie because Talbot didn't write his book to specifically support NDE's but the connection between the two can not be easily explained away. I'm not sure it's even possible to fully understand NDE's without some grasp of how a hologram works.

People report seeing colors they've never seen before and hearing sounds they've never heard. I've read numerous NDE's where they've have said that they saw more colors than what we have in this life, and heard more sounds than what they've heard in this life. If you think about it it sort of makes sense. There is a huge range of the light spectrum we are not privvy to, and the same is true for sound. Elephants use infra-sound to communicate and dolphins and bats communicate with echolocation and dogs and cats can hear ultra-sound that we can't hear. They can pin point mice under snow that we don't have a clue are there. I once saw my little terrier dig up a mole and kill it. He must have heard the mole under the earth.

As far as colors we've never seen - because we have never seen them we can't imagine what they look like, but bees see colors in flowers that we can't see, and I've read that there are shrimp that can see parts of the light spectrum we can't see.

It may be that our physical bodies actually limit what range of all the possibilities we can experience, but once the body dies and the soul is set free we will be able to see the entire light spectrum (all colors) and the entire range of possible sound spectrum. ----

Quantum physics validates NDE's by C.D. Rollins:
http://near-death.com/experiences/articles004.html

[Rufus]

"Not clear why you mention dementia – if the brain is not functioning properly due to physical decline, it can’t do the physical job it is supposed to, however it works. "

If the mind is independent from matter, ie the brain, and the brain is just an interface to the physical body, then functions internal to the mind should not be effected by defects in the brain.

A damaged brain might affect muscular coordination, cause blurred vision, tinitus, a speech impediment, etc etc. But mental functions that would seem to be internal to the mind, like reasoning and memory, should not be effected by brain damage.

What I've read is that after death all those effects of a damaged brain, including dementia, go away, so I suppose that consciousness is independent of matter (the brain) before incarnation and after death but not during life. The etheric body being some kind of parallel to the physical body seems like a good hypothesis for how that could work.

[Paul Welsh]

That's a good point Rufus - if the mind is separate from the body how come when the brain is damaged we can lose our thinking capacity or some of it? Why don't we still have full access to memories and logical function? Perhaps some of the answer lies in the point made by Cloud9 - that our brain is the store of information we acquire when we are in a physical body or at least its the primary store of those memories. Memories do seem to be preserved though. I seem to remember (sic) that recently I read that people with memory loss due to disease had their memories restored via a new drug. Were these memories being help on some neural island? Or summoned from a "backup store" when the brain began to function properly again? Any thoughts?

[Zetetic_chick]

"If the mind is independent from matter, ie the brain, and the brain is just an interface to the physical body, then functions internal to the mind should not be effected by defects in the brain"

The internal functions of the mind are expressed through the brain and restricted by it. Logic and reasoning can be internal funtions of the mind, but they could have specific correlates in the brain (e.g. in the pre-frontal lobules) needed to a physical expression of them.

If you damage the cerebral correlate, you're affeting the expression of these specific mental qualities in the physical world. It works like a prism that alters the light: the form and type of prism alter and change the expression of the light; but it doesn't follow that the light isn't independent of the prism. It only shows that light can be affected (in their expression) by a prism.

Mind is restricted by the limitations of a material brain with which it's related, and it explains the mutual influence and interactions.

An analogy: my intention and ideas to write this message can be very clear; but my english isn't perfect, and I'm restricted by that limitation. This blog works as an interface between my subjetive ideas and its material (objetive) linguistic expression.

But you can't deduce that any linguistic formal defect to express my opinion in perfect english suggest that my internal mental ideas are imperfect or unclear. I can have clear ideas, but their expression result confused or altered for a incorrect use of english's linguistic rules.

Any linguistic imperfection can affect the sense of my words and, as consequence, the understanding of any of you about my message; but it doesn't follow that the "internal functioning of my mind" (my ideas, concepts, inferences, etc.) was the cause of my imperfect message.

The brain could be a transmiter or decoder of mental functioning; an a serious defect in brain could imply an impediment in the correct expression of the internal mental functioning (e.g. loss of memory, systematic errors in reasoning, lack of recognition of loved ones, etc.)

[Marcel Cairo]

This week I published my podcast interview with Dr. Dean Radin. You can listen to it at AfterlifeFM Profiles. In the interview, Dr. Radin and I briefly discuss reincarnation and materialization mediumship. I stated that I tend to agree with former Apollo 14 astronaut and IONS founder, Dr. Edgar Mitchell, in thinking that reincarnation may just be "misappropriated clairvoyance."

Also, doing a soft search on reincarnation, I came across this online publication which epitomizes the worse kind of skepticism out there, uneducated skepticism. However, reading this short 20 page document helps us realize the mindset that we are actually dealing with and one that psi has to overcome in order to be able to actively engage your average internet skeptic.

[Rufus]

"An analogy: my intention and ideas to write this message can be very clear; but my english isn't perfect, and I'm restricted by that limitation. This blog works as an interface between my subjetive ideas and its material (objetive) linguistic expression."

My mother is elderly and she often has a lot of trouble remembering words. I know what this is like because occasionally I have trouble remembering words too. The problem is not that I can't say them, it is that I can't remember them. I'm pretty sure this is what is happening to my mother because of her aging body/brain. It happens to everyone but more often as we get older.

Recently, I sent my mother a greeting card and with a picture of a panda on it. She asked me if that animal was panda or a koala. She had a picture of the animal, and she knew and could say both words "panda" and "koala" but because of some effect of aging on her brain she couldn't remember which name applied to the animal.

I don't see this effect of aging as a restriction limited to expression. To me it seems like a restriction on function.

I think there is good evidence that spirits can communicate with words without having to resort to using a living biological brain, and so I think it is very likely that the brain restricts the spirit's actual functioning of memory and reasoning while we are incarnated.

[pec]

"A damaged brain might affect muscular coordination, cause blurred vision, tinitus, a speech impediment, etc etc. But mental functions that would seem to be internal to the mind, like reasoning and memory, should not be effected by brain damage."

When the brain is damaged the mind's ability to interact with this world can be impaired. The brain's language centers allow the mind to serialize its thoughts and communicate them to other people. All we know about a demented person is what he can tell us -- we may assume the mind is demented when actually only the brain is demented.

Most alternative scientists seem to think of the brain as a receiver for information systems, or what we call minds, or persons. In alternative science, the brain is not seen as a generator of consciousness or mind, but as an instrument for the mind's expression in this particular aspect of reality.

I think the brain includes various types of machines, the most obvious ones being the sensory and motor components. When sensory or motor components are broken, the mind's ability to interact in this environment is broken.

I wonder what the internal life of the demented, retarded, or brain-damaged person is like -- are they just like a normal person inside, or are they in some kind of dreamlike state, or what?

My guess is that the demented (I'll stick to just demented for now) person is as intelligent and sensitive as the rest of us, and it's mostly their ability to interact that has been damaged.

But the brain also allows the mind to focus on the shared earth reality. So it's more than an inability to interact; it's also an inability to focus on the earthly and to screen out the other-worldly. That is the problem of schizophrenia -- the brain's ability to screen out non-physical entities is damaged, who amuse themselves by taking control of the brain's language components.

As Sheldrake and probably all other alternative scientists have hypothesized, a broken brain is like a broken TV set -- the sound and picture may be absent or scrambled, but the signals are working just fine.

Mainstream science is becoming ever more certain that the brain IS the mind. If you see it that way, you will interpret all evidence within that context.

[Zetetic_chick]

"My mother is elderly and she often has a lot of trouble remembering words. I know what this is like because occasionally I have trouble remembering words too. The problem is not that I can't say them, it is that I can't remember them."

She can't remember them because her brain, as the physical trasmiter of consciousness, isn't working very well. It can't transmit correct information anymore.

When I wrote that brain is requered to the "expression" of mental functioning in a physical world, I wasn't refering to a linguistic (verbal) expression (I only use the linguistic expression as an analogy, not as an example). I was refering to a mental expresion in a physical world.

In the case of prism analogy, the expression of the light is altered; but it doesn't follow that the light is created by the prism, or is depend on it for its existence.

By the way Rufus (and all of you), philosopher David Ray Griffin has a book titled "Unsnarling the World-Knot", where he present a philosophical solution of the mind-body problem, beyond materialism and dualism. His view is consistent with psi, afertlife and current neurological scientific evidence.

As far I'm a dualist, I think Griffin's original view is a very good alternative to materialism (and dualism). It's the most original philosophical thesis I've ever read about the mind-body problem.

Maybe you'd like to read it.

[william]

“Mainstream science is becoming ever more certain that the brain IS the mind. If you see it that way, you will interpret all evidence within that context.”

The history of mainstream science beliefs are not that flawless. Paradigm paralysis can affect even PhD’s especially I suspect PhD’s. Truth is often 180 degrees away from common accepted beliefs.

Future generations will be amazed that at one time many scientists believed that matter is primary and consciousness is secondary.

[Michael H]

. . . philosopher David Ray Griffin has a book titled "Unsnarling the World-Knot", where he present a philosophical solution of the mind-body problem, beyond materialism and dualism.

It appears that the full text is available here.

[Matthew C.]

On the other hand, this suggests that we have already completely merged with the source at this very moment on some level, and just aren’t aware of it from our current perspective.

I like this very much, Michael H.

I would only suggest that that rather than being "merged", instead the apparent separation never happened. All the separation amounts to is a fleeting dream playing itself out. That is the unavoidable reality that Advaita, Buddhism, and mysticism of all religions and philosophies is pointing at.

For anyone interested, I have quite a few nondual quotes on my blog. And some pictures I enjoy too. :-)

[Art]

I would only suggest that that rather than being "merged", instead the apparent separation never happened. All the separation amounts to is a fleeting dream playing itself out. That is the unavoidable reality that Advaita, Buddhism, and mysticism of all religions and philosophies is pointing at. - Matthew C.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And this is also what near death experiences point towards. A fleeting dream. I very much suspicion that this is very much the case. - Art

excerpt from Michelle M's NDE:
"I felt an understanding about life, what it was, is. As if it was a dream in itself. It's so very hard to explain this part. I'll try, but my words limit the fullness of it. I don't have the words here, but I understood that it really didn't matter what happened in the life experience, I knew/understood that it was intense, brief, but when we were in it, it seemed like forever. I understood that whatever happened in life, I was really ok, and so were the others here."
http://nderf.org/michelle_m%27s_nde.htm

[Rufus]

"When I wrote that brain is requered to the "expression" of mental functioning in a physical world, I wasn't refering to a linguistic (verbal) expression (I only use the linguistic expression as an analogy, not as an example). I was refering to a mental expresion in a physical world."

Can you explain this in more detail?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean, but I'll tell you my potential objections to what I think you might mean and maybe that will help you understand where my confusion is...

When you use the phrase "mental expression in a physical world" you give the impression that spirits live in another universe and they are somehow transformed into something physical when incarnating.

If the spirit is really transformed into something physical how is that different from saying that consciousness arises from matter?

If obe's and nde's are real I think we have to assume the spirit is not transformed but exists as a spirit even when incarnating since it can so easily slip in and out of the body during nde's and obe's.

If the spirit still exists as a spirit while incarnated why does it need a brain to reason and remember while in the body when the spirit mind can function again just by slipping out in an obe? For example blind people see in obe's and nde's.

One hypothesis that I think I understand is the idea that Findlay expressed that the astral body is a cell for cell duplicate of the physical body. In this case I would assume that when incarnated, the spirit brain is slaved to the physical brain. The physical brain is used and the astral brain follows along so that memory and personality are copied for use later when the spirit leaves the body.

This is why we supposedly don't remember leaving the body every night during sleep - because the physical brain doesn't have a record we can use during when awake.

The only problem with this is that it might imply that consciousness can be derived from matter.

I don't have any problem with the idea that consciousness can arise from matter. In the previous thread I have been saying that I think reductionism can explain consciousness. If that is right, why not make consciousness out of something besides "spirit". You can make a house of straw, wood, or brick why not make a mind out of spirit, protoplasm, or silicon?

I don't think human consciousness arises from matter because of the evidence for survival after death, and I don't think consciousness would be immortal if it was entirely physical.

[Pete]

Why do you keep typing "obe's and nde's" when you mean "OBEs and NDEs"? You don't have Zetetic Chick's excuse.

[The Major]

Does it really matter? We know what he means. Surely we're discussing more important things than grammar here.

[Hope Rivers]

Here is an excerpt from an email I wrote to someone explaining what happened in my NDE

"My Near Death experience when I lived with my folks as a younger girl. It actually occured not from a tragic accident or anything of the sort,(that I'm aware of) in actual fact I was sleeping in my bed and it's possible I stopped breathing for a moment, as I gasped for air when jolted out of it but I pondered on this much later and wondered whether that could have been my "shock & awe" from the experience, because after waking up, directly after it, I prayed so fervently to go back and I did, I drifted back to "sleep" and into NDE state as one would going into a dream and found myself travelling up the tunnel and standing directly infront of a wall of lights, (again!) pretty much like a graph with all the squares a different shade of coloured lights. So brilliant and unimaginable to the human experience of light and colour but only the second time I didn't have the ability or the invitation to pass through the wall of lights to the other side as the first time, in seconds I found myself travelling in the tunnel again back to being jolted awake from this experience".

My experience clearly demonstrates "Near Death" is not an accurate term in every case, if I was near death how did I have an immediate repeat of the tunnel process etc the minute I drifted off too sleep the second time? also like my many sleep paralysis experiences in my past, I was triggered awake almost immediately after the tunnel trip and re entering my body.

For those who don't know my experience here, A guide/angel I met in my first NDE/Dream or whatever tag you wanna give it, appeared a year later to a stranger who psychically saw the guide enter her home and approach me with a rose from the garden we walked past in the NDE with a message he spoke to me of during the NDE.

This woman had no idea of my NDE, in fact no one except my mother and best friend knew back then and she described his physical appearance, his attire, and he told her tell her something only I would remember from the NDE which would set him apart and then passed on a gift with a message of hope (again it was in the spirit). A physical gift didnt materialise, although that would have been cool but she physically felt it as though it were materialised, if that makes sense to anyone.

This angel man fortold my future on a couple of matters in the NDE, one thing has come to fruition the other is still ahead (I was given a year basically when it would occur)

Since this experience my own prophetic abilities have become more enhanced, whether this is a result of the NDE or just a natural progression that would have occured anyway I don't know, as I was always that way inclined from a tiny tot onwards, although instead of embracing it, and working with it, I ran from it (obviously sleep paralysis & OBE's were two things I couldn't escape, when they come over you, but you can certainly choose to go with it or not.

My personal opinion is NDE is just an OBE with "unseen" guidance initally, helping us to the tunnel, to the heaven realm location, differing from usual OBE's.Its why I believe its an invitation, if it werent then more OBE's (without being on death's edge)could find the third heaven everytime. I've had many OBE's over 20yrs and never could achieve getting to the Heavenly place again, but then again I never thought about it either in the throes of one, but what I did think during it could manifest, maybe my thoughts were guided against thinking of third heavens, who knows?

When you think about why is it some NDE's dont recall all their conversations or come back blank after being told the mysteries of the universe, it clearly poses the question, could angels being at the core of all of this?

[Teri]

Hope, very interesting. Is it possible your sleep paralysis OBEs might have been forced on you by your unconscious because you were resisting your own development? And is it possible that the OBEs that did not allow you full freedom to choose where to go were in fact not OBEs but lucid dreams?

[Hope Rivers]

I should have added "

Come back blank after being told the mysteries of the universe, yet they remember being told something" Yet are able to recall the full journey, scenery, people, vivid emotions, peace, love, amazing colours, so detailed even 20/30/40yrs+ later as though it happened yesterday, does this make sense?

[Hope Rivers]

Teri unless you had them yourself I don't feel your qualified to comment as though your some expert, your making assumptions regarding my development.

When a person witnesses your presence during an OBE where I have travelled to their home, I would say this is more than a lucid dream, dont you think?

I know what lucid dreaming is, I have them at least 3 times a week, OBE's are very different to this.

[Hope Rivers]

Okay 3 times a week would be an average, some weeks less, some more.

Becoming "present" in a dream and directing the scene's has definitely added to my soul development, I recommend for everyone to make the effort to become lucid every time they dream.

[william]

From the book On the edge of the etheric by Findlay page 53.

“Sir James Jeans in the mysterious universe remarks “that mind no longer appears as an accidental intruder into the realm of matter; we are beginning to suspect that we ought rather to hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter.”

[Ben]

Thanks for the link to the Griffin book, Zetetic Chick and Michael H. Panexperientialism looks very sensible as a philosophy of consciousness.

[Teri]

Hope said…“I don't feel your qualified to comment as though your some expert, your making assumptions regarding my development.”

I was asking questions, not making assumptions. The point about your development was taken from what *you * said, namely:

“instead of embracing it, and working with it, I ran from it (obviously sleep paralysis & OBE's were two things I couldn't escape, when they come over you, but you can certainly choose to go with it or not.”

What’s the point of posting if you don’t expect people to ask questions or make comments? There was no hidden criticism in my questions. Not to say I’m never derogatory…but when I am, it will be very obvious.

[alice]

wb9wl6 xf78fg623fv0skghlq56fd

[Hope Rivers]

Terri what I was running from was spirit manifestations and their persistance of getting my attention, I didnt enjoy this experience, I don't think you would either if every time you go to bed you get hounded by their presenc, keeping you awake all night. I managed to learn what to do with sleep paralysis and OBE's, so there was development in this area.

And I succeeded eventually in the spiritual interruptions in the form of an exorcism and prayer.

[Hope Rivers]

It also made me wonder why they felt the need to cross back by making their presence felt, why werent they happy enough in the afterlife to just stay there, why were they roaming into my house often and how could I make a difference to them and their existence?

Were they really just bridging the gap as some of you people here might believe, wanting to pass dear messages onto relatives, maybe my friends or neighbours or enlighten me with their advanced wisdom.

If they had any wisdom or foresight they would have known not to bother bugging me as I was cleary not interested both in thought and deed, but their persistence became clear to me, it was just a reflection of their darkened state.

[Hope Rivers]

The law of "love" is not only for humans but spirits to, it's universal.

I realised if any spirit is persistant and doesn't "love" other spirits (meaning you and I) in the form of respect, interrupting and causing distress to their brother/sister, inducing fear by their presence etc and in awareness continue to manifest then their motives need to be questioned and same with their messages.

[Hope Rivers]

Many mediums and spiritualists lives were deeply troubled due to spirit manifestations, often bringing mediums severe stress and crises which led to poor health, or living lives in poverty due to working around the clock seances etc. Where's the love demonstrated there for the medium from those self indulging spirits?

[Hope Rivers]

Yeah some of those pesty spirits claimed they were "advanced" also. Yeah Right! I'm a believer of actions speak louder than words, maybe we need to look more of the actions in the books we read than just the words said.

TO further Paul Welsh's statement and Dean Radin:

In that final hour, I was told that I had had many lives. The first past life they spoke about was that of an ancient Hebrew; it was in this life that I had made a pact with God and died in His service. I must admit that I liked this very much; it not only made me feel important, it also could have been a possible explanation for my burning spiritual desire. Next, they told me that I was in the Crusades and was killed trying to free the Holy Land. From there, I lived as a Frenchman and was robbed and murdered on the road to Paris. Following that life, I was a World War I soldier killed in the trenches of Europe. After that life was revealed to me, my body began to shake. And, with each additional past life they described, the shaking intensified. I didn't know what was happening I could only think that it was my kundulini rising. Then, all of a sudden, the door swung open, and the director of the school burst into the room and exclaimed, in a huff, "What are all these spirits doing in the room? Get them out of here!"

...that the psychics were skilled at their craft and were able to read the identities of the 'spirits in the room' and in particular their last experience on earth their death. However, I somehow realized that their mistake was telling me that the lives they were reading were my past lives when in reality, they were the lives of the 'spirits in the room'.

Rev. Merrill goes on about how spirits are continually interacting with the mortal world; child prodigies and child geniuses are said to be old souls who have come back in re-birth. Do people not know that children are most susceptible to spirit influence from birth to six or seven years of age, whether that influencing spirit is a musician, mathematician, poet or writer of prose? How easy it is to forget that spirits are around us at all times, mingling and co-mingling.

FINALLY, ABOUT CLAIMS THAT "SUDDEN DEATH" victims always seem to be the ones reincarnating because the 'past' life is 'remembered'...read this:

Van Praagh continues, "Spirits with the most traumatic deaths, say suicide or murder, are subject to reliving that final experience. The spirit sees his or her death over and over again, and it repeats itself like a bad movie. The spirit is trapped, and there is no way out of the theater." Suddenly, I realized that all the past lives given to me at my reading ended violently, none were due to natural causes.

Van Praagh further validates, "Spirits are not limited simply to transmitting their death experience; their personality and their preferences may come through via telepathic links. Spirits are constantly around us; we are all mediums in our own right. Artists, doctors, musicians, chefs and almost every living creature is inspired by thoughts. Many times we think these thoughts are our own, but, more often than not, they emanate from spiritual realms."

I realize, for many people, the idea that reincarnation will not be the destiny of their soul may be disappointing and difficult to accept. Memories of past lives are caused by spirits that bring such thoughts and represent the lives that they lived. A spirit impresses a person with the experiences of its life and these are implanted in the mind as one's own, causing you to think you remember your past.

Perhaps the 'higher' souls insisting on reincarnation are not really the 'higher' ones after all?

The doctrine of reincarnation has to face this large question. We cannot apply to any future life the categories of the present, unless personal identity be assumed. Memory from one stage to another is necessary to the continuance of existence. "Karma" without memory is retribution minus all grounds for it, abstracting everything that makes it rational. When, in the light of psychic research, we examine the early theories of animism and the doctrine of reincarnation as held among the early Greek philosophers, even the materialists Empedocles and Democritus, we may discover how the theory of reincarnation originated.

I FELT THIS PRETTY WELL TIED UP PAUL WELSH'S EARLIER STATEMENT, THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A WAY TO REFUTE THIS INFORMATION OTHER THAN REFUSING TO BELIEVE IT.

Get it? The sudden deaths that are remembered in 'past lives'...were really the deaths of the Spirits In The Room:)

Findlay replies: ?To return would be retrogression and we have no evidence that this is nature?s plan. It sounds simple and believable to those who have never thought out how we obtain our individual minds and become individual beings. Those who cling to a phsycial life as being the pinnacle of existence, unable to fathom progression, not retrogression.

...These views, I may say, receive the support of my informants in the Etheric world, who say that they know of no one who has incarnated again on earth. They have with them those who live on earth thousands of years ago, and those not with them have gone on to higher planes.

[Hope Rivers]

Here's some wisdom for all;

1If I speak in the tongues[a] of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames,[b] but have not love, I gain nothing.

Reflecting back to my previous post on mediums, what's the point of all their communications with the afterworld, if it detracts from their own growth? Spirits can stall, blind us from our own progression, outwitting us is their forte.

If the mediums or anybodies lives are spiralling out of control, not moving forward or plagued with bad luck etc their mental health deteriorating or stunted, what advanced spirit would be a part of this?

A true advance spirit would not interfer in our growth, would guide us without making their presence known (in humbleness/meekness (thats real love), not Ego and self recognition.

See how many spirits hold up to this standard;

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes.

8Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. 11When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. 12Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

13And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love

[Rufus]

"I stated that I tend to agree with former Apollo 14 astronaut and IONS founder, Dr. Edgar Mitchell, in thinking that reincarnation may just be "misappropriated clairvoyance."

How do you explain:

Birthmarks are often located on the body at the same place injuries occurred in a previous life.

Past life regression has been found to have immense therapeutic value.

During hypnotic regression people recognize other people from past lives as incarnating again as people they recognize in their current life.

[Hope Rivers]

Rufus lying, mischievous spirits with access to more information than you and I influencing someone's thoughts, thats an explanation as good as any other bizarre unfounded one you come across on this blog.

Rufus, for a start:

FROM A MEDIUM- B. Having a vision or what seems like a memory of another time and place, ... which can be done with psychic ability picking up on the energy of that and it’s meaning is absolutely nothing. Seeming to know about another person's life or 'recognize' them does not mean it was our own life once upon a time or that we lived with them at some point before, it would be the life of someone else in spirit that we are picking up on, and, unknowingly picking up on the energy of the person you think you know from some other life. Yes, it is possible to pick up almost as much info on a psychic level that is 'just out there'. Sometimes this happens because the person doing it is not trained to tell the difference, this is why there are those who think they 'know' someone who lived with them in a 'previous' life on earth.

As far as regression having therapeutic value, Rufus...have you heard of the placebo effect? It's used in medicine all the time. Many times when people are told something and believe that it will help them..surprise, it does! What you are stating really is no proof of anything.

Once again Rufus, I will also deal with the 'birthmarks' you mention...however until then..in order for your claim to be even worthy of consideration, given all of the evidence AGAINST reincarnation, you would need to demonstrate a plausible explanation as to WHY these birthmarks are what you ASSUME them to be and what the PURPOSE would be..this would all be required in order to justify your 'proof' as actually VALID. I will deal with this further for you, soon.

[Rufus]

Rufus lying, mischievous spirits with access to more information than you and I influencing someone's thoughts, thats an explanation as good as any other bizarre unfounded one you come across on this blog.

I don't see how that could explain the therapeutic value of regression or the birthmarks.

The birthmarks are objective evidence that are verified on the person (ie a child who remembers a past life) and when you go try to verify the past life from people still living they confirm the location of injuries.

[Hope Rivers]

It like if I had a birthmark on my stomach, I get regressed to find out I was stabbed in the stomach, a familair spirt hanging off me, with telepathic abiliites so advanced, finds a case history to implant in my mind, I believe it was me, the spirit is influencing my thought and emotion.

As bizarre and farout as you may think this sounds, do some reading about evolved mediumship and parapsychology, you will discover "spirits" can have access to future events, give information to several total strangers (unknown to them, in a seance about the sitters deceased relatives, or living ones anywhere in the world.

Basically they often display vast superficial knowledge and perform amazing feats which humans go gaga over(bit like a Madonna Concert until you realise you'd been had as she lip synched the whole time, of course only some gleam this truth the rest and stuck in awe and wonder, totally paralysed by her brilliance)

"I am a member of the Spiritualists' National Union which is possibly the largest Spiritualist organisation in the world. Its philosophy is factually based and does not, therefore, include reincarnation. SNU mediums are not allowed to put forward the concept of reincarnation from Church rostrums as part of its philosophy."

A guide of Emma Hardinge Britten when questioned on this subject asked: "Does the eagle go back to the egg?"

Psychologist Robert Baker demonstrated that belief in reincarnation is the greatest predictor of whether a subject would have a past-life memory while under past life regression. Furthermore, Baker demonstrated that the subject's expectations significantly affect the past-life regressive session. He divided a group of 60 students into three groups. He told the first group that they were about to experience an exciting new therapy that could help them uncover their past lives. Eighty-five per cent in this group were successful in "remembering" a past life. He told the second group that they were to learn about a therapy which may or may not work to engender past-life memories. In this group, the success rate was 60%. He told the third group that the therapy was crazy and that normal people generally do not experience a past life. Only 10% of this group had a past-life "memory."

[Hope Rivers]

of course only some gleam this truth the rest ARE stuck in awe and wonder, totally paralysed by her brilliance.

...The spirit guide, Magnus, replied that he had certainly seen many spirits waiting to return to earth, but had never seen any spirits actually leave the spirit world. Furthermore, he added that he and his companions were more advanced than mortals and, therefore, could not imagine what would be accomplished by returning to the earth. I quickly glanced over at the woman to see her reaction. She was visibly taken back; obviously, this was not what she had expected to hear.

[Hope Rivers]

SO WHICH LYING SPIRT DO WE BELIEVE?

[Hope Rivers]

Sorry for the caps, I wasnt shouting ;-)

Rufus, you must've missed this earlier post:

Being helped by past life regressions: Do you yourself have a logical explanation for this? If so, what is it? How would this LOGICALLY help anyone?

Once again..HAVE YOU HEARD OF THE PLACEBO EFFECT? Medicine uses it often, guess what...it often works if people believe something may help them...even if it's a sugar pill! Did you read the other posts above that already answered your question? Please go back and do so.

MADAME BLAVATSKY PUSHED REINCARNATION...YET, AFTER PASSING, SHE COMES THROUGH AND STATES THIS:

The most powerful testimonial came from Helena Blavatsky. Madam Blavatsky was a spiritualist medium of considerable talent and co-founder of the Theosophical Society. She was a pioneer of the New Thought Movement, the early forerunner of New Age. She stated, "I studied reincarnation in India and thought there was truth and justice in the theory that we come back to learn and grow. I taught the theory and wanted to bring it to the world. I felt that I remembered far back into my past, but I was mistaken. When you become sensitive and can feel the spirits around you, they speak to you by impressions, and their past will be like a panorama. A person feels it and will relive the past of spirits, but the mistake is made of taking this for the memory of past incarnations. I did not know this when I lived on earth, but when I came to the spirit side of life I learned differently. Once you reach the spirit world, where all is congenial, where all is life, where all is bliss, where there is no jealousy, no envy, where all is one grand harmony, do you think for one moment that you would want to leave that beautiful condition to come back to earth and be a little baby, restricted in mind and knowing nothing whatever?"

So Rufus, we'll turn the tables on you for now, and ask...how would you explain her change of understanding?

[rick astley]

You're definitely wrong about Blavatsky, I attended a seance where she came through and was very insistent that reincarnation was real. The spirit you quote sounds like they maybe don't like reincarnation and are trying to convince people not to believe it. That sometimes happens.

Problems with reincarnation:

1. Even though reincarnation is a prominent feature in the New age movement it should be noted that people in the West are not consistent in their adoption of this belief, but rather pick and choose what they do and don't like regarding it. For example, the true doctrine of reincarnation involves the possibility of coming back as a dog, a cat, or even an insect. This tends to be somewhat offensive and ridiculous to many Western New Agers and has been quietly dropped.

2. Reincarnation can also lead those who believe in it to have nothing to do with lower classes of people who are suffering. For example, there is much poverty in India, with shanty towns where disease is rife. These people need help, but many of the higher classes, or castes, think things like "They must have done something terrible in a previous life. Far better to just let the law of karma work its way out".

Also, Stevenson had no explanation for WHY bodily wounds would be something to carry over to the body of a personality that was reincarnated or WHY an experience in one life would carry over to a phobia or philia in another.

"Obviously then other conditions can arise that can be harmful indeed to the spirit and the person. This is where one will harbour the past life memories of many wandering spirits. They will keep moving from residence to residence till they come to reconcile their condition and learn from mortals. These are wandering spirits that can and do control a person’s life to the point of suicide or insanity. Watch that which wants to be a companion spirit and question this spirit severely."

-when Joe Fisher followed this 'spirit' advice and travelled extensively determined to prove their information and his own past life but found out it was all false, when confronted, the 'guides' and his past life lover weren't very happy about him doing that, yet they did know intimate details about his life...he ended up committing suicide after finishing "Hungry Ghosts".

RICK ASTLEY: LOL, ok, so tell me this...we have a medium source who claims Blavatsky spoke this, it was written down. You claim to have a source that says she DIDN'T speak as such...so then tell me, who is right?

Is your source? If so, why and how do you know?

Circular reasoning...perhaps YOU are the one who had a spirit who LIKED reincarnation and was trying to get people to believe it. Wouldn't this sometimes happen as well then?

LOL. Do you not see the preposterous nature of this? Reincarnationists usually accept NOTHING that contradicts their own belief, in fact, as you have done, they will 'prove' the others wrong by invalid arguments that are so simply turned around on them, as I have done with you!

So tell us...do you 'just know'??

How silly, your Blavatsky was the 'right' one and the other medium's Blavatsky was an imposter...or not. I guess it's up to your 'belief' right, sort of like reasoning with a fundamentalist.

[Småfornå]

I don't think "rick astley" was implying any of this.

Anonymous, you're sounding extremely defensive about all this, throwing out accusations and insults where they are not warranted. Perhaps you need to take a little break.

Madam Blavatsky's words have all been written down from her communication that I posted a part of...it is numerous pages in length, I won't post it because of length...though I will admit I'm tempted!

[Småfornå]

Sorry for the double post.

"Also, Stevenson had no explanation for WHY bodily wounds would be something to carry over to the body of a personality that was reincarnated or WHY an experience in one life would carry over to a phobia or philia in another."

This argument sounds eerily similar to the reductionists "we don't know how or why consciousness exists therefore it does not" argument. You need not explain why or how before you show that it does happen.

"You're definitely wrong about Blavatsky, I attended a seance where she came through and was very insistent that reincarnation was real. The spirit you quote sounds like they maybe don't like reincarnation and are trying to convince people not to believe it. That sometimes happens."

What about this statement have I misinterpreted? Where have I spoken in error when I addressed this statement..when you point out that none of what I said was 'being implied'...I don't see how I misunderstood.

Oh come now...and you are saying that because of a scar it MUST be true...you are doing the same thing that you just accused reductionists of doing, except in reverse.

Reincarnationists always dismiss spirits who insist that PROGRESSION is a reality and RETROGRESSION is not reality, as being lowly and 'unevolved'. The biggest question for the reincarnationists is HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS? To which there is no answer except "I believe it..." regardless how illogical it is both spiritually and scientifically and all the contradicting spirit evidence..somehow their spirits 'just know'.

[Raimo]

Nameless poster, those things you mentioned are only some people's beliefs. Stevenson's research suggests that people only reincarnate as people and there is no such thing as karma.

Blavatsky and other spiritualists and New Age people can say whatever they want about reincarnation, but I don't trust anything they say. Nor do I trust any "spirit". Those "spirits" are probably only fraud or mediums subconsciousness.

Stevenson and other researchers actually investigated the cases. As I wrote earlier, in my opinion reincarnation research(excluding hypnotic regression, which is not at all reliable) gives us best evidence of survival.

This is just my personal opinion, but I consider spiritualists and New Age people as frauds. There may be few genuine mediums though.

Last post because I have to leave...although I was once a doubter of mediums (and I still am of many) I have seen and received irrefutable and verifiable proof so I do not have any struggle with some mediums being legitimate, I have seen it, though I once did not believe any of it.

If reincarnation is the best evidence we have of survival..there is likely no survival then because it so weak with so much contradicting evidence that it's virtually hopeless, but, I suppose if you are willing to say all mediums are frauds then that is one way to eliminate the evidence against it..but that still doesn't stand reincarnation up any higher...here is why:

A. Having a dream set in another time and place, which as far as I am concerned is not evidence of anything. We imagine up all sorts of things in our dreams.

B. Having a vision or what seems like a memory of another time and place, ... which can be done with psychic ability picking up on the energy of that and it’s meaning is absolutely nothing. Seeming to know about another's life does not mean it was our own life once upon a time, it would be the life of someone else in spirit that we are picking up on.

C. Others just want to believe in it with nothing to support it because they either like the idea of having many lives, think we need to have every imaginable experience, think we can only possibly learn from our mistakes by copping some sort of pay back or chance to correct a wrong doing in the form of Karma, or as one spirit I have spoken to put it "they can't yet conceive of another way of living so they hold a physical life as the pinnacle of existence".

So whilst some people think that evidence enough, I think it is no evidence at all. What strikes me -in no particular order - as illogical about reincarnation tho is ...

A. The amount of people who all claim to be the same historical figure - Cleopatra, Napoleon, etc, etc, .. they can't all be right! However, if they have had some experience which has led them to believe that, then it only backs up one of the points above, ... that they are dreaming something not true, picking up a thought energy that is just there to be tapped in to by anyone without it being applicable to themselves, or they just want to think they are based on pretty much nothing.

B. Reincarnation is going around in circles when the natural order of things is evolvement and progression.

C. If people come back here, who are mediums speaking to when giving messages? If people have no individuality/ identity, then how can mediums speak to them and identify them? Also how can mediums tell if they have one, two, three, etc, spirits linking to them if their separate uniqueness can not be sensed? It can - we can have more than one spirit link to us at the same time and be able to tell them apart simply by feeling the different energies.

D. The fourth reason, and the one that clinches it being totally illogical to me is unfortunately a concept that is clear in my head but hard to externalize to explain to another as the spiritual side of it really has to be experienced to truly understand that there is no time beyond the divisions we apply based on our physical environment and our planets revolution (but divisions that do not apply when not on a revolving planet in a physical environment - making no time really) , other aspects that all tie in here refer to light and it taking what we perceive as 'time' to travel, our ability to literally see the past as it is unfolding due to technology such as the Hubble telescope based on light as it reaches it, and it also needs an understanding of Einstein’s time space continuum. You can at least read up on that last bit, (which will give you the cornerstone to understand a concept of an eternal now in which past and future are fluid and RE incarnation can not fit in to the reality of an eternal now) but people can spend ages trying to arrive at this understanding from a spiritual side of things and it takes a lot of deep contemplation, and possibly even a state of expanded consciousness. I sat and thought about this and nothing else for 4 days straight before it all clicked in to comprehension, so as you can appreciate, I can't exactly spill 4 days of thought processing out that easily. I can only say I don't 'believe' this, for me it is a ‘knowing’ as clear as knowing water is wet. I wish I could find words to make it make sense to someone who has not arrived there themselves, but I think that may be the only way to FULLY get it - for it to click in to knowingness for one's self.

Forgot this: What I feel is the strongest evidence of survival is more than one person present actually seeing someone who is 'deceased' who gives them information abuot insurance policies, etc. that turns out to be correct and was unknown. However, from personal verification, I know that there are indeed legitimate mediums, so the argument that they're all frauds doesn't hold up for me, and as soon as the 'medium' can of worms opens up, and very legitmately so, then reincarnationists have a lot of contradictions and problems to explain.

[Hope Rivers]

In the big scheme of things "love" is what we are here for, not debating about things that will remain mysteries until death knock on your door, it's that simple.

[Rufus]

"As far as regression having therapeutic value, Rufus...have you heard of the placebo effect? It's used in medicine all the time. Many times when people are told something and believe that it will help them..surprise, it does! What you are stating really is no proof of anything."

Many of these people have been in therapy of one form or another before and were not helped. Why wouldn't the placebo effect work on traditional therapy?

[rick astley]

I'm very spiritually sensitive and what I am picking up from anonymous man's posts (Spirit assures me he is a man) is that he has a very strong fear of reincarnation and of appearing to be wrong, I would ask you all to bear this in mind and not to be judgmental or angry towards him if his writing seems confused or fantastical.

[Rufus]

"I taught the theory and wanted to bring it to the world. I felt that I remembered far back into my past, but I was mistaken. When you become sensitive and can feel the spirits around you, they speak to you by impressions, and their past will be like a panorama"

I didn't say that clarivoyance was never mistaken for evidence of reincarnation.

I just asked what other people thought about those things that seemed to me to rule out mistaken clairvoyance in other cases.

I think Madam Blavatsky taught an incorrect version of reincarnation based on what I read in "Thirty Years Among the Dead" by Carl Wickland which is available free on the internet (my copy has a passage similar but not identical to your quote).

She says she was mistaken. I agree.

She taught that people float around in the bardo state before reincarnating. This led spirits to hang around the earth plane and try to reincarnate but instead obsessed infants. The more reliable descriptions of reincarnation indicate that spirits go back to the spirit plane and analyze their past life and plan a new one and arrange for the particular parents they will have before reincarnating.

As a result of Blavatsky's false teaching which caused misfortune to innocent children and spirits she was repentful and to atone had to come back and un-teach her incorrect doctrine.

She says no one would want to reincarnate. I agree no one would want to, but that doesn't mean we don't. Even the spirit who say they believe in reincarnation admit they don't always want to do it. Generally they say they feel compelled because they have to do it to learn certain lessons so that they can proceed to higher levels in the spirit world.

[william]

Reincarnation is not a pleasant thought. This appears to be so for most of us. As far as why would a soul want to come back if they are in bliss in another dimension? First I doubt they are in perfect bliss and they may see a need for more growth in love and compassion.

Growth pure and simple growth in love, compassion, and divine intelligence is what the advanced spirits tell us why a person would choose to reincarnate. The perception of a new beginning.

Living in a harsh world appears to give us more opportunities (only opportunities) for growth. It appears to me that more advanced souls talk of the validity of reincarnation then newly arrived souls or souls on a lower dimension.

If reincarnation is not reality I can live with that.

The thought of being stung with a wet towel snapping on the buttocks while entering the shower by most freshmen in my high school by a senior/s does not conjure up I suspect pleasant memories for most who lived through those experiences. But then I am pleased to report that as a senior I did not do such a thing to any freshman.

Maybe these types of experiences teach us levels of love and compassion. Or maybe not.

[Michael H]

Nor do I trust any "spirit"

I'd suggest that the spirit one should trust is their own.

[Rufus]

"Being helped by past life regressions: Do you yourself have a logical explanation for this? If so, what is it? How would this LOGICALLY help anyone?"

Maybe past life regression therapy works like normal regression therapy. When people are helped to remember repressed memories like from childhood abuse, for some reaon, I don't know why, they feel better.

Maybe it's because when a memory is lurking in the unconscious it effects our conscious thinking in sublte ways. Like if someone was frightened by a clown as a very young child he might hate the circus as an adult. If he had regression therapy and remembered the episode which he had repressed he would no longer hate the circus.

Is the human mind logical? I don't know, maybe it is illigocal and that is why there are so many problems in the world.

[Michael H]

I like this very much, Michael H.

I would only suggest that that rather than being "merged", instead the apparent separation never happened.

It's an excellent point, Matthew. If the underlying reality is timeless, then all references to time (Beginning, In-between, End) are all really happening Now, aren't they? All appearances to the contrary notwithstanding.

Panexperientialism looks very sensible as a philosophy of consciousness.

I'll be curious to see if you still think so after Kingsley gets done with you, Ben.

:-)

[Småfornå]

"Oh come now...and you are saying that because of a scar it MUST be true...you are doing the same thing that you just accused reductionists of doing, except in reverse."

I never said this. You need to stop extrapolating peoples' words and putting words in their mouths. I simply said that you need not know how or why something occurs to know that it does occur. I never said that birthmarks PROVE reincarnation, only that dismissing it because you do not understand it is wrong.

As for your four points on why reincarnation is illogical:

A - no serious researcher takes the "Cleopatras" and "Napoleons" seriously. The veracity of their claims is impossible and meaningless to judge. It is likely that they are merely deluded.

B - Reincarnation is not "going around in circles." If you want to learn how to play a piano piece, do you merely play it once? Absolutely not. You will never learn that way. You must repeat over and over again to learn it. This is how we learn things. It is how we progress.

C - Good question. Point is, we simply do not know or understand how this works. However, the evidence is very strong that people reincarnate, and the evidence is very strong that mediums can speak to the deceased. My guess - a totally nonscientific guess, would be that we have an "overmind" that, when the body dies, it is not the PERSONALITY that is reborn, but a new personality with a connection to the "overmind" that retains a minimal connection to the other personalities that the "overmind" has within it. This would suggest that the "you" you are now is merely a fraction - a puzzle piece, if you will, of your entire "self."

D - I can't really respond to this. It is all subjective and within you, so who am I to tell you your own experience is wrong?

[Paul Welsh]

I take your point ZC. Are you suggesting that people with brain damage are merely unable to communicate but that their mind is functioning fully and conscious of its inability to communicate fully? If not do you think that the mind is in some way restricted by the brain in other words its complete or partial function is dependent on the brain in some way?

[pec]

"Growth pure and simple growth in love, compassion, and divine intelligence is what the advanced spirits tell us why a person would choose to reincarnate."

I don't understand this because there seem to be so many reasons for living other than love and compassion. Yet every religious and spiritual tradition seems to focus only on love and compassion.

Why don't we also need to learn about how to stand up for ourselves rather than do whatever others demand?

Don't some of us come here to learn things about physical reality, like how to fly an airplane or build a house or program a computer or play piano, etc., etc.?

Yes love is a very basic force which motivates a lot of our actions, but not all. I can imagine someone flying a plane just because they love flying, and it has nothing at all to do with brotherly love or compassion for humanity.

Don't we also come here to appreciate various aspects of God's creation, not just to appreciate humans? Do you include love for animals under "love?"

Anyway, I don't get it. Love and compassion are fine but definitely not all there is. And too much love and compassion, not balanced by hate and self-preservation, is unhealthy.

I am not trying to be funny, just really don't get it. I see people self-destructing because they think of others instead of themselves. And every religious or spiritual leader tells them to go even farther with the self-destruction.

[Rufus]

"Once again Rufus, I will also deal with the 'birthmarks' you mention...however until then..in order for your claim to be even worthy of consideration, given all of the evidence AGAINST reincarnation, you would need to demonstrate a plausible explanation as to WHY these birthmarks are what you ASSUME them to be and what the PURPOSE would be..this would all be required in order to justify your 'proof' as actually VALID. I will deal with this further for you, soon."

I don't see why there has to be a purpose to it. I also don't see why I have to give an explanation of what causes it. I don't know how my fingernails grow but they do. I'd say it is related to the fact that the astral body is said to act as a template for the physical body but I don't really understand how the astral body of a previous incarnaion who died as an adult could be a template for the new born re-incarnate.

However, if a child claims to remember a past life in another city, he says in that life he was killed in a certain way and has a birth mark on that part of his body and investigators go to the other city find and verify all the information the child gives about the previous life including the cause of death it seems reasonable to consider this evidence for reincarnation.

Maybe the purpose of the birth marks is to help us believe in reincarnation?

[Raimo]

To anonymous poster:

There may be many mentally disturbed persons, who think that they have been Napoleon or Hitler or some other famous person. Stevenson did NOT research those people's claims. Ramblings of mentally disturbed people don't make reincarnation any less valid.

Also hypnotic regression is highly unreliable. If some people have "memories", where they were some famous person, it doesn't prove anything. Stevenson and Tucker etc. did not use that method. In their cases children remember ordinary past lives. Their previous personalities were normal people, sometimes even drunks and criminals etc. There were no famous personalities.

How can you explain that some people have birthmarks or birth defects that match to wounds, injuries etc. previous personality got? One of identical twins may have birthmarks that are in same locations as previous personality had them. The other identical twin doesn't have them. Or subject of the case may have three defects in same places as previous personality. These people can also have many accurate memories (very specific memories) and phobias and philias that fit to previous personality. It's also important to mention that these children identify themselves as previous personalities. Boys who remember previous life as women may be very feminine in their behavior and vice versa. There are also extreme emotions involved. Love for past life parents, hatred for people who murdered previous personality etc.

I could write much longer posts about this subject, but I don't want to disturb discussion on this blog.

rick astley, I think that you are right. Anonymous man probably has strong fear of reincarnation. I just wanted to mention, that there is lots of good evidence for reincarnation. If anonymous man doesn't believe in reincarnation, it's ok. Nobody has to believe in anything.

[Teri]

All the above posts on spirit communications suggest, as Michael H implies, that it's impossible to trust them. They may be true, they may not. It's not possible to know, is it? Even if they say they're your granny, if they have access to 'Granny's Collected Memories', they may be someone else entirely. For all we know they may even be demons. So I suggest we give up on spirits and mediumistic communications.

Somehow, I don't think this suggestion will prove to be very popular :-{

[Art]

"Rick Astley?" I love that little guy's singing. Such a voice from such a little guy. Are you THE Rick Astley?
This Rick Astley:
Never Gonna Give You Up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu_moia-oVI

[Art]

Reincarnation? Birth marks? Perhaps an example of thoughts are things and consciousness creates reality.
"As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he." (Proverbs)
I think Marineboy said it best:
"I suspect that it is a time-based misreading of "interconnection". Also, when people say they felt that "I" had all these past lives, I think the I is not the I they think it is, but the I of interconnection, the I of universal presence incarnating in myraid forms everywhere. Because there are no absolute boundaries to this "I" it seems in an nde as if it is THEY personally."

[Michael H]

Somehow, I don't think this suggestion will prove to be very popular :-{

I've got your back, Teri!

;-)

[Ben]

Panexperientialism looks very sensible as a philosophy of consciousness.

I'll be curious to see if you still think so after Kingsley gets done with you, Ben.

Michael H, I'm drooling at the prospect. I might even read chapters in each book alternately to try to get a kind of Socratic dialogue going :)

[Zetetic_chick]

"If not do you think that the mind is in some way restricted by the brain in other words its complete or partial function is dependent on the brain in some way?"

Yes Paul, I accept funtional dependence between mind and brain. But I don't accept "production" of mind by the brain.

In this sense, it's truth that "its complete or partial function is dependent on the brain in some way", because it's obvious that a brain damage change the functioning of the mind.

If mind is an exclusive product of the brain, and depends of it for its existence, the logical implication is that mind can't exist after brain death (because in that case, its material sustrate doesn't exist anymore). This is why materialists don't accept afterlife as an possibility. Materialism, if used consistently and pushed for its ultimate consequences, imply or entail the non-existence of consciousness as independent of material brain.

Using again the prism analogy, depending of the prism's concrete form, size, etc., so will be the light it transmits. But light doesn't depend for its existence in the prism; the latter only alters or modifies the light in a specific form. (If we only known the light transmitted by the prism, but don't know about the independent existence of lights, I'm sure many people would believe that "prism is the productive cause of light; it's absurd that light can exist independent of a prism.")

A brain can be destroyed or damaged by drugs, injuries, etc. and, because the functional mind-body dependence, it will affect the mind. But it doesn't entail that mind is PRODUCED by the brain, it only shows that mind is affected by it.

Anonymous poster: your objections about reincarnation are very interesting, but I don't see them as conclusive or convincing.

For example, you say: " Reincarnation is going around in circles when the natural order of things is evolvement and progression"

That comment seems to imply that reincarnation isn't progressive (from a spiritual point of view). But, as far I know, reincarnation has as purpose the spiritual growing of the being. I don't see how it could be otherwise.

Regarding birthmarks, they are empirical evidence that:

1)Suggest that materialism is false

2)Support the hypothesis of dualism (and, pamexperientialism too)

3)They could be explained by a super-psi hypothesis too; but that hypothesis seems to me be less parsimonious than reincarnation hypothesis:

http://www.geocities.com/athanasiafoundation/reincarnationresearch.html

Science works with empirical evidence for and against specific hypothesis; rarely with definitive and absolute "proofs".

I see reincarnation hypothesis as the best explanaition to Stevenson's research.

Spiritual testimonies against reincarnation are contradicted and balanced by spiritual testimonies in favor of it. But Stevenson's scientific research put the balance on the side of reincarnation.

[Michael H]

I don't understand this because there seem to be so many reasons for living other than love and compassion. Yet every religious and spiritual tradition seems to focus only on love and compassion.

Why don't we also need to learn about how to stand up for ourselves rather than do whatever others demand?

I see people self-destructing because they think of others instead of themselves.

These are good points, pec, as unpopular as they may be. I could probably write a fairly lengthy book on how corrupted the concept of ‘love and compassion’ has become.

My position on this is that genuine love and compassion sometimes does require standing up for oneself, as well as firm and decisive action at times. Any good parent knows this intuitively. And contrary to the pacifist interpretations of spirituality, there is plentiful support for this statement. The Bhagavad Gita is essentially an allegory about how one can take up arms against those one genuinely loves, and the Tao te Ching addresses the issue directly in Chapter 31 (Mitchell translation):

Weapons are the tools of violence; all decent men detest them.

Weapons are the tools of fear;
a decent man will avoid them
except in the direst necessity
and, if compelled, will use them
only with the utmost restraint.
Peace is his highest value.
If the peace has been shattered,
how can he be content?
His enemies are not demons,
but human beings like himself.
He doesn't wish them personal harm.
Nor does he rejoice in victory.
How could he rejoice in victory
and delight in the slaughter of men?

He enters a battle gravely,
with sorrow and with great compassion,
as if he were attending a funeral.

Those who think that these ideas are exclusive to the Eastern faiths should consider this quote:

"Men think, perhaps, that it is peace which I have come to cast upon the world. They do not know that it is dissension which I have come to cast upon the earth: fire, sword, and war. For there will be five in a house: three will be against two, and two against three, the father against the son, and the son against the father. And they will stand solitary."

This is verse 16 from The Gospel of Thomas, which many fundamentalists reject on grounds of ‘doubtful provenance’, even though some scholars regard it as an important source text for the synoptic gospels.

The point of all of this is not that one should behave in a self-obsessed manner, or that love and compassion need to be “balanced by hate and self-preservation”; but only to say that the more one understands the self, the more love and compassion one will realize, and the more one will understand what Emerson was talking about when he wrote: “One may say boldly that no man has the right perception of any truth who has not been reacted on by it so as to be ready to be its martyr.” The truth and martyrdom that Emerson is speaking of is not the same truth and martyrdom that leads to planes flying into buildings.

Like everything else, this all goes back to understanding the self. Understanding these ideas comes about only as a consequence of that. There is no self-destruction involved in any true spiritual understanding, and certainly no willful destruction of others.