In 1986 psychotherapist Joel Whitton and author Joe Fisher published Life Between Life, a book recounting Whitton's experiments in hypnotic past-life regression. Actually "past-life" is something of a misnomer, because while Whitton did explore his patients' alleged past lives, he was primarily interested in what he called the "interlife," the timeless and spaceless period between incarnations.
The first half of the book consists mainly of a general overview of the subject of reincarnation. Here, I think the authors are sometimes too eager to push the view that belief in reincarnation is nearly universal. For instance, there seems to be some conflation of two distinct beliefs: that the soul preexists its earthly incarnation, and that the soul is repeatedly incarnated. Cicero is quoted as saying that young children's facility for learning is "a strong proof of man knowing most things before birth." But Cicero was not maintaining that the soul undergoes multiple incarnations, merely that it exists on the spiritual plane before taking on a physical body. The church father Origen held essentially the same view, which is misrepresented in Life Between Life as an advocacy of reincarnation.
In the second half of the book, we get into the real meat of the subject: Whitton's hypnotic regressions. Unfortunately his database is rather small, consisting of only 30 clients. He explains that the extremely deep level of hypnotic trance necessary to access the interlife can be achieved by only a small segment of the population. Moreover, although he says he has made some efforts to verify the factual details of specific past lives, none of these verifying investigations are described (with one exception, to be discussed later).
Perhaps a bigger stumbling block to accepting Whitton's results is the melodramatic nature of many of the past lives he uncovered. In one case, the previous personality was a virtuoso musician, a woman who had a torrid love affair that ended in tragedy when the car carrying her lover and herself plunged off a cliff; the man died, and the woman, horribly scarred and unable to play the piano because she had lost the use of her hands, lived in isolation and eventually drowned herself by walking into the sea. I'm not saying this couldn't happen, but it does contain a lot of elements of Hollywood melodrama; the tragic denouement is right out of the classic soaper A Star Is Born.
Another case involved a previous personality who lived in the Wild West -- the proverbial hooker with a heart of gold, who became the target of an equally familiar stereotype, the firebreathing fundamentalist preacher. When the evil preacher tries to take custody of the prostitute's newborn baby, the desperate woman accidentally fires a shotgun that kills the infant. She is then handed over to the not-so-tender mercies of a vigilante band of cowboys, who rape and torture her before skinning her alive.
Now, it's true that the people who sought out Whitton's services were suffering from severe psychological (and sometimes physical) problems, so perhaps it's not surprising that they should have especially traumatic memories. And the book makes the point that these patients have experienced dozens of lives, some of which were quite prosaic; for therapeutic purposes, the focus of the sessions was on the most dramatic lives, the ones that left them emotionally scarred in their present incarnation. Still, the Harlequin Romance/Hollywood melodrama aspects of some of these tales make me uneasy.
Like other past-life therapists, Whitton claims significant success in curing longstanding problems that had defied more conventional treatment. It does seem as if past-life therapy can sometimes resolve painful, even crippling emotional disturbances in a relatively short time. This alone makes the therapy valuable, whether or not the purported past lives are genuine.
Interestingly, the patients' accounts of the dying process are quite similar to near-death experiences, typically including an out-of-body experience, a passage through a tunnel into a bright light, and a life review. But unlike most NDEs, the life review is usually supervised by a trio of sages, and is often accompanied by an in-depth interview.
As Whitton's patients describe it, the interlife involves grasping the mistakes that one has made in one's most recent incarnation, seeing where one has fallen short of one's goals, and then -- in cooperation with a more advanced guide -- designing the plan for one's next life. Occasionally a particularly impatient or reckless subject will reincarnate without a plan, a policy that is strongly discouraged by the powers that be.
Karma plays a large role in all this, but instead of being seen as a strictly mechanical process of cause and effect or action and reaction, it seems to be understood more as choosing the life circumstances that are most likely to teach the required lessons.
One interesting case involved apparent psychokinetic manifestations that began with the unexplained appearance of blood on the wall of the patient's home. The symbolic blood was eventually traced to past-life traumas, but I couldn't help thinking that if the mind is able to materialize blood out of thin air in order to spotlight a person's psychological problems, it might be capable of creating a convincing simulation of a previous persona.
The one instance in which we are told of efforts to verify the patient's claims was a case of xenoglossy -- i.e., speaking a language that should be unknown to the speaker. Actually, there were two languages -- Old Norse and an ancient Mesopotamian tongue. The authors write,
When Harold was reexperiencing his life as Thor (a Viking), Dr. Whitton instructed him to write down, phonetically, the vocal exchanges that were taking place. Harold responded by writing twenty-two words and phrases, none of which he understood. Working independently, linguistic authorities who spoke Icelandic and Norwegian subsequently identified and translated ten of these words as being Old Norse, the language of the Vikings and the precursor of modern Icelandic. Several other words seemed to have Russian, Serbian, or Slavic derivation and these were also identified. Most of the words relate to the sea -- precisely the type of verbal communication that could be expected from a Viking warrior.
Doctor Thor Jakobsson, a research scientist with Canada's Department of the Environment and an expert on the Icelandic language, studied the transcripts produced by Harold and concluded that many of the words -- including those for "storm," "heart," and "iceberg" -- were "definitely of Icelandic origin." That some of the words had their origins in other languages only added to the authenticity of the script, said Dr. Jakobsson, because the restless, warlike Vikings roamed to the far corners of Europe.
In recalling Harold's purported life in Mesopotamia, Whitton asked him to write down the words for common concepts, such as "brother," "house," and "clothing." The authors continue:
Holding the pencil very lightly, Harold carefully created a mysterious, Arabic-style script in a spidery, childlike hand....
Unsuccessful in matching his patient's supposed calligraphy with ancient scripts in library books, [Whitton] eventually submitted the pencil markings to Dr. Ibrahim Pourhadi, an expert in ancient Persian and Iranian languages at the Near Eastern Section of Washington's Library of Congress. After close examination of the samples, Dr. Pourhadi maintained that [they] were an authentic representation of the long-extinct language called Sassanid Pahlavi, which was used in Mesopotamia between A.D 226 and 651 and bears no relation to modern Iranian. [pp. 154-156]
I've quoted these excerpts at some length because they are the book's only report of an attempt to verify the accuracy of a patient's past-life recollections. As Whitton says in his Introduction,
In this book we do not review the evidence. That is worth a book in itself and has been done before. Instead, we proceed from the assumption that reincarnation is true. We do not assume, however, that every report of a past-life memory obtained under hypnosis, or claim of a spontaneously remembered past life, is what it purports to be. The issue of proof is not simple. There are important hidden assumptions in the theory of reincarnation as well as complex psychological issues in a memory of a past life. We do not articulate these issues in this book, but believe we have addressed them and have included only those cases wherein the hypothesis of past lives is the only valid one.
In the end, I don't know for sure if Whitton's cases establish reincarnation or not. Certainly his work provides much food for thought. The view of multiple rebirths, with each new life designed to resolve a specific problem and advance spiritual development by one more step, is intriguing and makes a certain amount of sense. But the melodramatic stories and general lack of verification provide grounds for doubt.
What the book does demonstrate is the incredible power of the mind. Whether the mind is seen as cooperating with other intelligences to design myriad lifetimes, or as confabulating these things in order to effect emotional and physical healing, it's still a powerful force. Add PK for physical manifestations and some kind of cryptomnesia or super-psi to explain the xenoglossy, and the mind becomes a much greater thing than we ordinarily realize.
Perhaps this insight is the real takeaway of Life Between Life.
This is the book that got me hooked on Parapsychology all those years ago as a teenager.
Posted by: michael duggan | June 03, 2010 at 07:40 AM
It's a shame about Joe Fisher:
JOE FISHER was a journalist and best-selling author. His previous works include 'Life Between Life', 'The Case for Reincarnation', and 'Predictions'.
Troubled by personal problems - as well as by the spirits he claimed to have angered in writing the 'Siren Call of Hungry Ghosts' - Joe Fisher took his own life on May 9, 2001. That he would do so is all the more surprising considering what he had written earlier in 'The Case for Reincarnation': "As much as the suicidal personality feels able to escape the world by getting rid of the body, reincarnation's revolving door ensures that all hope (of escape) is short lived. Those who learn that they have killed themselves in past lives are quickly brought to the realization that suicide, far from being an answer to life's problems is (instead) the violent breaking of the lifeline. If the (suicide) could only realize the resulting intensification of difficulty which must enter the life to come, (suicide) would never be (attempted)."
Posted by: Zerdini | June 03, 2010 at 08:01 AM
Fisher's book "The Siren Call of Hungry Ghosts" makes fascinating reading and points up the dark side of the paranormal very effectively. It's a shame Fisher himself became fixated on the idea that, by writing the book, he had angered the "hungry ghosts." This obsession, combined with financial and personal problems, seems to have driven him to commit suicide (although his fatal fall from a cliff is considered an accident by some people).
Posted by: Michael Prescott | June 03, 2010 at 10:37 AM
That is really sad. I've had a number of people ask me why I have concerns about having anomalous experiences. I do think that there can be a dark side to these experiences. Many of the people who want to experience paranormal phenomenon don't think about the possible consequences.
Truthfully, I think many of the consequences are self-inflicted. That's true enough in my own case with much of the anxiety I go through just because I have experiences. That doesn't make the dark side any less dark. It just means we have to find enough light inside ourselves to deal with it.
Posted by: Sandy | June 03, 2010 at 10:50 AM
I wonder, if those cases of Whitton's were genuine memories (and like you, Michael, their extreme melodrama makes me very dubious), might they not be what's called "spirit obsession"? That is, the memories are real but they aren't the memories of the person undergoing hypnosis, they are people who are in Spirit. I am biased on this point, as you probably know; I absolutely do NOT believe in reincarnation.
These sessions have just reminded me of something that happened a year or so ago. I was on a tram and a woman boarded who was either mentally ill or on something, or possibly both - she was in a bad way, abusing everyone around her in a really bizarre manner. I asked Louis afterward if she had any unpleasant creatures from the astral hanging around her, making things worse. He said she did, a couple of things that had been human once but were so degenerate they weren't much better than flies in their nature now - feeding off her distress and anger and confusion. They couldn't really DO anything, but their presence sure didn't help.
I know this is hardly a parallel, but it makes me wonder if the distress of Whitton's patients might not have attracted some equally distressed - or maybe lying - spirits to them?
Interesting, too, about Cicero's and Origen's suggestion of souls existing before their earthly lives, though; that's pretty much my understanding of it from what Louis's said about knowing when my soul came into existence.
Posted by: Louise | June 03, 2010 at 05:11 PM
Hi Michael,
I read your article form years ago about effectiveness of different waveform on time of bacterial die-off.
I am using CoolEdit pro to generate the waveforms and then run them through amplifier. Does the negative offset produces same effect as positive offset at 50% duty square wave?
In your opinion, what combination of offset and duty cycle produces best effect? do you have your own website?
Best regards,
Alex
Posted by: Alex | June 04, 2010 at 10:55 AM
Hi Alex,
Honestly I have no memory of the post you're citing. I also lack the technical knowledge to answer your questions. Sorry.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | June 04, 2010 at 11:14 AM
Continuing the theme of judging by appearances; if we are UNABLE to spiritually discern the underlying reality of phenomena (appearances) then we are IN the world and OF the world; likewise when we are ABLE to discern these underlying realities then we are IN the world but NOT OF the world.
SOME spirits teach that once we are able to discern these underlying realties of appearances, then we can be in the world but not of the world therefore we no longer have a need to reincarnate on this planet. What can this world teach us once we have reached this level of spiritual discernment? The exception is if an advanced spirit is on a spiritual mission to be a beneficial presence to humanity by their teachings and by example to human kind.
The spirit teachings that I am presenting on this blog state that reincarnation is a reality.
Posted by: william | June 04, 2010 at 07:34 PM
I think reincarnation is a tough thing to either prove or disprove. Unlike the survival of consciousness after death, which I think is pretty unsinkable.
But I'd be curious as to why you're so sure, Louise? And if there is no rebirth, what mechanism explains the different levels of evolution/development demonstrated by various beings?
Is a human life like a merit badge or pre-req for further cosmic adventures, but you can put if off 'till later, and some souls don't deal with it until they're older?
Because I can see why you might put it off! Such a bloody bother, these meat-bags. But I do love a good steak every now and again!
Posted by: Tharpa | June 04, 2010 at 08:25 PM
“I think reincarnation is a tough thing to either prove or disprove. Unlike the survival of consciousness after death, which I think is pretty unsinkable.”
I agree with this statement. One would think that if survival of consciousness is pretty unsinkable hopefully not like the titanic and one can communicate with spirits from the other side then proof of reincarnation would be as unsinkable as survival of consciousness.
There appears to be as much variation of beliefs in these other dimensions as there is in the physical world. Which makes sense, as souls are at all different levels of development there and here on earth.
As these spirits evolve to these higher dimensions there is much less variation in beliefs and profoundly more compassion for those in these lower levels of understanding such as the earth experience. After all they have lived in these lower dimensions such as earth and have learned compassion through experiences of joy, sorrow, suffering, delight, mistakes, misguided desires, longings, passion, love, etc.
The spirit teachings that I have been presenting on this blog that are going over “like a lead balloon” state that reincarnation is a reality. Of course the messenger of these teachings meaning myself has been I suspect more of a hindrance than helpful in presenting these teachings.
But these teachings were rejected by most of the world in they past when presented by those much more capable than me. These teachings challenge the very validity of most of the world’s teachings.
After much discussion with a friend today I am gaining some insights why these teachings on innocence is getting such responses. I will ask for guidance on how better to present these teachings. We decided that they come off pretentious to state someone is innocent when they clearly are causing harm to others.
“Is a human life like a merit badge or pre-req for further cosmic adventures”
Yes the book testimony of light by Helen Greaves states this very thing. The higher the level of light a soul evolves to the greater the adventure in creation, love, compassion, energy, etc.
Posted by: william | June 04, 2010 at 10:50 PM
G'day Tharpa,
Argh, I don't really want to go into detail here, it'd take forever. It's only recently that I've landed on the "no" side, I used to wonder about it, but the contacts I've had from Spirit have said it's not reincarnation of one soul, but more like links in a chain, with these sort of memories. (And I've asked many times about this, looking for clear answers, lol.) I don't have any particular explanation for why people are different - unless it's simply like why some people are smarter than others. Partly I guess it's my Western bias.
There's an interesting book called The Case Against Reincarnation: A Rational Approach by James Webster, available on Amazon. It's a bit hard to know when he's making his own arguments and when he's quoting sources (self-published book that really needed a better editor!) but it does have some interesting material in it. That's where I first read about the idea of spirit obsession.
I don't see the next world as so much something one gains as a reward, or however one would describe it, but simply the continuum of life - like getting past being a toddler or a teenager (not phases I'd want to repeat!) As to why we incarnate as earthly beings, I've no idea, nor does it bother me. Maybe there's less of a divide between earth and spirit than we think, who knows? :)
Posted by: Louise | June 04, 2010 at 11:56 PM
Michael, I think that you focus on wrong books about reincarnation. Children's spontaneous cases offer much better evidence than hypnotic regression cases. I'd suggest Ian Stevenson's Reincarnation and Biology and Jim Tucker's Life Before Life. Those are in my opinion best books about this subject.
I'm convinced that reincarnation is best explanation for the strongest cases. Some subjects have birthmarks and birth defects and they remember some certain dead individual's life instead of some random memories. Subjects can also have strong feelings toward previous personality's relatives. They can have phobias and philias that fit exactly to previous personality. Subjects of these cases can also remember the whole continuum: they remember their past live, their life as a discarnate spirit between lives and they also remember how they chose their parents or were drawn to them.
There are also NDErs, who are 100% certain, that reincarnation happens. Personally I prefer Reincarnation and NDE cases over some "advanced" spirit's teachings.
Posted by: Sven | June 05, 2010 at 06:21 AM
@William
I don't your think comments about reincarnation are going down like a lead balloon in all quarters. Although maybe some don't like your version of it, I don't know anyone who thinks all proposed models of reincarnation are OK and some of them seem mutually exclusive to me.
Even what I have read that has been reported through, ostensibly, genuine mediums does seem to contain (sometimes wide) disagreement about whether and how reincarnation occurs, I suspect for many of us here 'the jury is out' - and will remain out for quite some time after we pop-our-clogs.
There are some models I can't see the point of and that don't seem particularly well-evidenced and others that certainly seem possible (assuming acceptance of survival of 'something' after physical death). I am not sure we will know if or until we get there, and even then there seems to be quite a difference of opinion.
Perhaps the true answer requires an understanding of how the 'universe' works that we just don't have sufficient ability to comprehend right now, being in the world and off it as you put it.
I don't think that precludes debating the matter but I am wary of those who assert that have 'sorted it all out' (for the avoidance of doubt I am not aiming that remark at you).
JOE FISHER - a very sad tale indeed having read it a couple of times. Without knowing the guy and his mental state it is difficult to form as view as to how much of it is genuine and how much is from his own mind. I got the impression of a person who was deeply unhappy and unsettled - perhaps this made him vulnerable. When we feel low we are often more vulnerable to influence by others are we not? Whether the influences are real, imagined, physical or discarnate.
Posted by: Paul | June 05, 2010 at 10:44 AM
@Sven
I haven't seen a case of reincarnation that cannot be explained by spirit-obsession (as I am no expert there could be thousands of them for all I know). Do you know of a case that couldn't be ascribed to that cause? (If you think it is worth discussing I am happy to consider a hypothetical example :)).
Posted by: Paul | June 05, 2010 at 10:47 AM
“I don't think that precludes debating the matter but I am wary of those who assert that have 'sorted it all out' (for the avoidance of doubt I am not aiming that remark at you).”
Presenting teachings is not having sorted it all out. There is the profound difference between knowing and a knowing beyond knowing. This I thought I had made clear over and over but it appears I have not made this aspect clear to the reader. I know you are not aiming that remark at me but it was good feedback to help me better understand the resistance of these teachings.
When a person has a knowing beyond knowing and not judging by appearances they can be in the world and not of the world. This was a beautiful insight for me. Now I have never claimed any knowing beyond knowing in these spiritual teachings; a knowing can come to us from our research or being open to spirit communication. Of course the level of that knowing from spirit depends on the level of the knowledge of the spirit. Kardec does a good job of explaining this difference in his book called the spirits book.
Now what I have claimed on this blog is a knowing beyond knowing that has to the with the variation aspect of the relative phenomenal world. This came to me as a revelation then an instant realization one Tuesday morning many years ago while teaching a presentation from Deming’s material entitled understanding variation. This is the only realization I have had to date in my life.
Now much of Deming’s knowledge is not profound as Louise pointed out correctly. But his knowledge on the need for leaders in fact for most employees of an organization to have knowledge of understanding variation is indeed profound knowledge. There is a profound difference between understanding variation and statistics.
Let me take a chance here with this bit of information. A model that I helped develop and sought no recognition for is now used worldwide. It is called the DMAIC model and the D part of that model I designed developed and taught it as DMAIC for the first time to general electric employees in 1996. Jack Welch took it worldwide.
The previous model was entitled MAIC. Stated another way the profound knowledge of Deming was left out of that model. The MAIC model was designed by a statistician not by someone that had a knowing beyond knowing of Deming’s profound knowledge. In fact this person that designed the six-sigma model I sent to him his first book on Deming as we both have our PhD’s from the same university and the same dept at that university.
Now what in the world does Deming have to do with a blog like this? Everything, just about everything. If understood not a knowing but a knowing beyond knowing it has to do with the meaning and purpose of the variation that exists in the relative phenomenal world. Another time with an explanation of that aspect of Deming’s teachings.
It was that revelation on Deming’s material, which I have no idea where that revelation came from that allowed me to see the profound need to put Define on that six-sigma model. So a revelation by one person (it matters not the source) caused a process improvement model to be used worldwide. If you Google six sigma or DMAIC you will find nowhere have I sought or been given credit or whatever. I hesitate to state this, as some will accuse me of a whole host of self-confirmatory things or whatever. My point: this is how a revelation can change the world to some degree and it matters not the source.
Interesting to me at least is that revelation helped my in my spiritual seeking many years later when I sought an answer to the question “if suffering causes so much suffering in the world than what is the meaning or origin of that suffering”. Seeking an answer to the question for some reason unknown to me has allowed me to receive communication from someone now in spirit to guide me along in that discovery. While in human form that person was close ever so close in his knowledge about the origin of our ignorance.
This is an honest answer Paul. In no way on this blog have I ever claimed any kind of enlightenment quite the contrary I struggle with these spiritual teachings every day of my life. But my writing style leads some to believe something different. I am just another soul as a work in process.
Sorry for the long post Michael but Deming is a hot button for me. I owe him much very much.
Posted by: william | June 05, 2010 at 02:11 PM
William - where did I say 'presenting teaching is the same as having it all sorted out'? :)
Posted by: Paul | June 05, 2010 at 02:28 PM
Tonite (Sat.) at 10 pm - 2 am Pacific time on talk radio show Coast to Coast AM:
"Ian Punnett is joined by Newsweek senior editor, Lisa Miller, who'll discuss the existence of the afterlife, and the various cultural perceptions of what heaven could possibly be."
Posted by: Roger Knights | June 05, 2010 at 02:54 PM
Somehow I doubt that the Newsweek editor's discussion will involve any of the evidence for an afterlife collected by medical doctors and parapsychologists. It will probably consist of an overview of various religious beliefs. That's how these things usually go.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | June 05, 2010 at 03:55 PM
“William - where did I say 'presenting teaching is the same as having it all sorted out'? :)”
That is how I interpreted it. This is what communication often comes down to when we use symbols to communicate. As these symbols can be taken many different ways. Plus it gave me a chance to comment on the my view of the difference between having it sorted out and not sorted out.
In my terms this is the difference between knowing and a knowing beyond knowing. Also we may never sort it all out as souls. What would the journey be like if we had it all sorted out? Would we just then merge back into that that is which most call God.
This has been an age-old debate if souls every merge back into from that from which they came, the Infinite.
The journey I believe indeed our individualized perceived identity depends on us not having it all sorted out. Continual learning through insights, discoveries, and revelations appears to be part of the process of the evolution of the soul.
As I work with young children it is a delight when they learn something new even if it is how to write a letter in the alphabet. Their eyes light up and that smile comes to their face for something we adults have taken for granted.
“Lisa Miller, who'll discuss the existence of the afterlife, and the various cultural perceptions of what heaven could possibly be."
I think it was Lisa Miller that was on a TV show last week with her book. It is interesting to see how different religions teach and interpet heaven. She has done her research but it appears not into spiritualism. But then she was on for only a short period of time. She used revelations in the bible to refer to the Christian heaven of streets of gold.
But at least she is writing about something that is on most people’s minds whether they admit to it or not.
Posted by: william | June 05, 2010 at 04:01 PM
If I had meant that I would have said so directly. You surely can be in no doubt that I would hesitate to say what I think on the matter if I thought it appropriate?
Posted by: Paul | June 05, 2010 at 04:31 PM
Having said that, it is possible that a particular style of presentation might induce a reader to infer that it was being presented as fact, either inadvertently or by design is it not?
Posted by: Paul | June 05, 2010 at 04:36 PM
Hey William,
I often have a hard time focusing on the content of your posts because of your writing style.
I might be so bold as to suggest that you re-read your sentences aloud and make sure they flow and make grammatical sense- if you want to connect with folks, that will surely help.
I appreciate your obvious good heart and passion in any case.
Cheers-
Posted by: Tharpa | June 05, 2010 at 07:44 PM
"I'd suggest Ian Stevenson's Reincarnation and Biology and Jim Tucker's Life Before Life."
Sven, I agree that Stevenson's research is stronger, but I've already written about it several times. Use the Google search box on the left side of this screen to search the blog archives, if you like.
I've read Tucker's book also, and liked it a lot. I don't remember if I posted anything about it.
Since I'd already covered Stevenson, I decided to look at hypnotic regression, even though I find it less persuasive.
Partly, this is because Ian Lawton reported very favorably on the regression evidence in his "Big Book of the Soul," so I thought I should give it another look.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | June 05, 2010 at 09:12 PM
Louise wrote:
There's an interesting book called The Case Against Reincarnation: A Rational Approach by James Webster, available on Amazon. It's a bit hard to know when he's making his own arguments and when he's quoting sources (self-published book that really needed a better editor!) but it does have some interesting material in it. That's where I first read about the idea of spirit obsession.
James Webster is a magician and Spiritualist. He used to be a member of the Noahs Ark Society and I had many discussions with him about reincarnation. He was always adamantly opposed to the idea of reincarnation almost to the point of obsession which I found strange. He wouldn't even consider the possibility.
I don't believe in reincarnation but I used to in a former life!
Posted by: Zerdini | June 06, 2010 at 12:30 AM
William: The spirit teachings that I am presenting on this blog state that reincarnation is a reality.
I don't necessarily disagree that reincarnation is a reality but whose spirit teachings are you presenting on this blog?
Posted by: Zerdini | June 06, 2010 at 12:39 AM
William wrote: Yes the book testimony of light by Helen Greaves states this very thing.
Frances Banks "was an outstanding woman in many fields of endeavour" and a deeply spiritual person. For twenty-five years she was a Sister in an Anglican Community in South Africa, during which time she was the principal of a teachers’ training college.
She was the author of many books on psychology and similar subjects. Eventually she left the community and, during the last eight years of her life, she and Helen Greaves worked together psychically and spiritually. Because of this close relationship, after her death in 1962 Frances Banks was able to communicate, "by telepathy and inspiration", with Helen Greaves resulting in the series of scripts which have been published as The Testimony of Light. In the scripts, transmitted over a period of two years, she recounts her experience of death "... and the change into a new conception of living, ...". As Helen Greaves says: "She gives us freely of her further knowledge of the progress of the soul outwards, upwards and forwards into Divinity." This book is a classic of communication across the barrier of death.
Frances Banks published her own last book in 1962, just before she died. It was an account of her researches into psychic and mystical phenomena and discusses many of the subjects associated with the survival of death. It is:
Banks, Frances (1962). "Frontiers of Revelation"
Fifteen years after "The Testimony of Light" Helen Greaves published a sequel containing further communications from Frances Banks:
Greaves, Helen (1984). "The Challenging Light."
Posted by: Zerdini | June 06, 2010 at 12:48 AM
The Frances Banks Memorial Hall is at The Seekers Trust Healing Centre based at Addington Park in Kent.
http://www.theseekerstrust.org.uk/history.htm
The remarkable story of the Seekers trust founder, Charles Simpson, and his doctor guide "Dr Lascelles" can be found at the above website.
Many years ago I spent a lot of time at the Seekers Trust and came to know their work intimately.
It is a beautful and tranquil place and is still carrying on the healing work begun in 1929.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 06, 2010 at 01:01 AM
“I often have a hard time focusing on the content of your posts because of your writing style”
I do not want to come off defensive here but I have commented on my writing style many times on this blog. I think some of it goes back to a power point presentation style format of being brief with bullet statements and then the opportunity to explain each bullet statement. Well there is no opportunity to explain each bullet statement on a blog so the content I have been told by others is difficult to follow.
This has been discussed several times by others and myself and I recognize it. But thanks for the advice especially the passion part and the good heart. I cannot begin to tell you how important that passion aspect of my consulting career was to my clients. Authentic passion cannot be bought. These teachings are very extremely difficult to comprehend as I have been studying them for many years.
This style of writing worked for writing technical articles but when it comes to this type of format it does not suffice. I have an editor and published author that will be doing the editing and much of the rewriting if we decide to put in a book format.
If there is something that does not make sense I am more than open to dialog on any comment that needs further clarification. I learn so much by posting as thoughts on how to explain these teachings just seem to come into my mind faster than I can type them. For that reason I am thankful to be able to post even if no one reads the post. Of course it is always nice if someone wants to dialog on these teachings. What would be helpful to me is just pick one sentence in a post that does not make sense and I will be more than happy to elaborate or dialog on.
The person that presented many of these teachings over 100 years ago was a very competent medium, editor, and writer and still they were rejected.
Posted by: william | June 06, 2010 at 01:16 AM
The person that presented many of these teachings over 100 years ago was a very competent medium, editor, and writer and still they were rejected.
No doubt but who was it? Why are you so reluctant to answer what is a very simple question?
Posted by: Zerdini | June 06, 2010 at 02:29 AM
“I don't necessarily disagree that reincarnation is a reality but whose spirit teachings are you presenting on this blog?”
Here is in my view a short answer. The third paragraph is relevant to your repeated interest in the source. It matters not the source but the validity of the teachings. That is a very difficult concept to comprehend.
The source of all valid spiritual teachings is divine intelligence. The source of all invalid spiritual teachings is ignorance. The culprit is always ignorance, no exceptions. Think of ignorance as unawareness it is less threatening to the ego.
Now “to take responsibility and be a mature adult” for our ignorance, which is our created unawareness, is to see ourselves as separate from infinite Mind not as expressions of Infinite. We live and move and have our Being within infinite Mind; therefore each and every soul can only be an expression or manifestation of this infinite Mind that most call God.
To put much substance or concern into the source of spiritual teachings is still judging by appearances and judging by appearances (phenomena) is not the source of ignorance as some teach but a demonstration or refection of what this link calls our original ignorance.
This link may be helpful but it fails in several areas in its teachings. But oh so very close.
http://www.gurusoftware.com/GuruNet/Creation/Related.htm
Source of Ignorance
“Ignorance Born of Creation”
”Ignorance has its root in the very process of the creation of the universe. When Supermind began the process of dividing the Spirit through the division of the Force to create distinct forms and entities, Ignorance took root.”
Posted by: william | June 06, 2010 at 12:55 PM
“Why are you so reluctant to answer what is a very simple question?”
Why would anyone want to know the source of spiritual teachings that they stated were fatuous drivel? Why indeed would anyone call such teachings that teach that sin and evil do not exist as a reality and we are not only created with original innocence but even those that we deem to be the very worst of humanity have at their very essence eternal innocence.
Only our simple and ignorant minds would pronounce such teachings as drivel. If for one moment, just one moment a mind could see the near perfection in such teachings they would want to climb the tallest building or the highest mountain and proclaim “my God, my God” your wisdom is beyond perfection or our mere words or thoughts. Only in a brief moment of awareness can we even begin to comprehend such teachings. This first now moment of awareness must come as an awaking not as a flow of thoughts.
If for one brief in the Now moment one could move past a paradigm paralysis of blameworthiness, culpability, taking responsibility as a mature adult, and the most devious of ignorance: guilt; then these teachings will open up a reality that the world knows little of. Then you to can be called insane, new age, wimpy, or worst. Sorry my idea of humor.
Only when we see the culprit of these simple and unaware responses as our prevailing but impermanent ignorance and the origin of that unawareness as innocence; do these teachings have meaning. That is the profound challenge of presenting these teachings to the world. Most will and have disregarded them as trivial or worst.
The ego will scream in protest, “one must take responsibility for one’s actions because the world would be chaos if we did not demand of people to take personal responsibility”. The world is in chaos now; take your vacation this year to the gulf coast. If you still believe that was due to an accident and not a mentality of profound ignorance; we still are not on the same page. The reality is that one must be accountable for their actions as every action has a reaction (consequences) of what we sow we reap not as punishment but as a guiding light (divine intelligence) to greater and greater perfection of the soul.
Even the spirits book that Kardec believes to be advanced spirits communicating to mediums has Divine Providence punishing souls for their sins and evil deeds. Karma is not punishment but it sure feels like it. It is a divine light of intelligence, for without karma there is no evolution of the soul. Stated another way there is no dynamic expressions of the Infinite just pure stillness. And Infinite is anything but stillness; one only has to look thought the Hubble telescope to see this dynamic creation of form occurring moment by moment.
http://www.fateproject.org/innocence.html
This link above may help. It is ever so close to these spiritual teachings I am writing about; its words may be easier to comprehend than mine. Hope this helps.
Posted by: william | June 06, 2010 at 01:12 PM
Sorry William it doesn't make any sense at all.
Putting links that are 'ever so close' to the original doesn't help. What are you so scared of?
I would rather read the original teachings myself and form my own opinion.
It is very strange that you are so unwilling to tell us who the medium was and where the teachings came from.
I never said the teachings were 'fatuous drivel'. I said what you wrote came across as such to which you replied that I had insulted Christians.
I stated that I held no brief for any religion, Christian, Buddhist or any other.
I cannot judge the alleged teachings as correctly or incorrectly interpreted by you as you will not reveal the medium from 100 years ago who was rejected. Rejected by whom? The world? If we don't know who the medium was how can you claim the teachings were rejected?
You sound like one of those evangelists who have uniquely received divine inspiration and everyone else must accept what he says or face eternal damnation.
Cut out the waffle, William, and be open and honest and stop obfuscating.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 06, 2010 at 01:57 PM
“Sorry William it doesn't make any sense at all.”
At least this is an honest answer. Much appreciated for that. Of course you could just state it is my writing style. We know full well we will not be able to reach everyone. I knew from past experience it would be over your head so to speak. But you might want to give it a try; that first link has profound teachings, very Hindu but never the less very profound. You could learn much from the knowledge on that link.
The medium that received some of these teachings over 100 years ago was capable of physical manifestations but he sought higher knowledge and had no interest in these types of proofs. He found that those that only wanted to seek out physical and direct voice manifestations were of the lower level of knowledge. Your responses and lack of depth of understanding and inability to dialog on suggested links have proved his statements all too true.
But by responding to your questions much came to me. The profound divine beauty of judge not by appearances but judge by righteous judgment correlates and validates perfectly that we can be in the world but not of the world.
You see I have seen your responses and I already knew you would be unable to comprehend this similar material in those two links. But it is always worth a try; we continually underestimate the human mind and its ability.
I have offered to dialog about the Deming material now I offer to dialog about these two links. What not accept such an offer? I think we could offer much to the readers of this blog and maybe others may want to join in. Or not.
You have given me the opportunity to bring out two ok three of my favorite quotes; enjoy.
“All truths pass through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher
“To be a great spirit is to be misunderstood”.
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Ok I fudged this one by Emerson a bit.
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds."
Albert Einstein.
Think of it this way when we meet on the other side we will look into each other’s eyes and smile and then laugh at such foolishness that we participated in on this blog. Our souls will view reality so much different then in this human body with the limitations of our physical brain and our bruised and fragile egos that are in a constant state of self-confirmatory ideation.
Now ask yourself what is the origin of that foolishness? It is our original innocence that has manifested itself into something we have called ignorance.
Posted by: william | June 06, 2010 at 07:01 PM
Gotta say, I'm with Zerdini on this one. William, why can't you just tell us the name of the medium from 100 years ago? Are you reserving this information for your book?
Posted by: Michael Prescott | June 06, 2010 at 07:15 PM
You have given me the opportunity to bring out two ok three of my favorite quotes; enjoy.
“All truths pass through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher
“To be a great spirit is to be misunderstood”.
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Ok I fudged this one by Emerson a bit.
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds."
Albert Einstein.
Emerson also wrote:
"I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."
Posted by: Zerdini | June 06, 2010 at 10:26 PM
William wrote (not for the first time!):
The medium that received some of these teachings over 100 years ago was capable of physical manifestations but he sought higher knowledge and had no interest in these types of proofs. He found that those that only wanted to seek out physical and direct voice manifestations were of the lower level of knowledge. Your responses and lack of depth of understanding and inability to dialog on suggested links have proved his statements all too true.
I am quite prepared to dialogue on the mystery medium's teachings (assuming such a person existed and is not a product of your imagination) so why not do as Michael suggests and reveal the name?
What are you so scared of?
Is it because you've dug yourself into a hole and can't climb out of it?
Stop waffling, William and reveal the name.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 06, 2010 at 10:35 PM
William - have you ever studied obscurantism?
It certainly seems like it.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 06, 2010 at 10:40 PM
“Gotta say, I'm with Zerdini on this one. William, why can't you just tell us the name of the medium from 100 years ago? Are you reserving this information for your book?”
The source of the information is not that important. Let me try again. If Hitler stated judge not by appearances but judge with righteous judgment. That would still be profound spiritual teachings. If we judge the source of the teachings (Hitler) we would dismiss the teachings and miss some profound spiritual knowledge. Now we might then say well Hitler may have stated such profound spiritual knowledge, but he sure does not live by that knowledge which is true but that does not take away from the spiritual reality of the teachings.
Now if Hitler had had understanding of these teachings he would not even considered the mode of being in the world that he chose. Indeed if the German people would have had even knowledge of such teachings and others Hitler would have never come to power.
Let me try again. It is written that when Jesus returned to his village and he was not treated as a prophet but just Jesus the carpenter. They paid him little attention and his healing abilities were nil. They missed his spiritual wisdom because they judged the source of the teachings. They judged the phenomena of Jesus the carpenter just one of them.
Also Michael many of these statements I have made do not come from just one person’s or a spirit’s spiritual teachings. Often combined they support one another as spiritual teachings must do or else they are not that valid.
It appears to me that most people even sincere spiritual seekers do not understand the difference between phenomena and the need to seek the underlying reality of phenomena. If we don’t make this clear in our book we are toast. This is what Deming taught how to analyze phenomena into systemic and special causes of variation. Most of the world failed to understand his teachings. 85 to 95% of problems in an organization and indeed the world are systemic yet the world continues to blame individuals and chaos and much suffering remains intact.
I have dialoged long enough with Zerdini to know that these teachings would not interest him. He was unable to even understand the knowledge in the two links I sent him or did not care to dialog on them.
If he showed a sincere interest in dialog that is another story but if you read his past posts he is more interested in demeaning the teachings. At least Louise gave sincere feedback on these teaching being new age, wimpy, etc. That is good authentic and common feedback we can use to help us better explain these teachings to the world. maybe. :-)
Posted by: william | June 07, 2010 at 01:50 AM
"I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."
I personally love quotations. To each his own.
I have been telling you much but you hear not, you see not and you know not. You have not dialoged to the best of my knowledge on any of these teachings.
“I am quite prepared to dialogue on the mystery medium's teachings (assuming such a person existed and is not a product of your imagination)”
If you cannot tell the difference between one’s imagination and discern the validity of spiritual teachings you need to do some serious looking into that proverbial mirror. I JUST GOT IT: it is the mystery part that is driving you crazy because of your belief that you are expert in knowing all mediums and mediumship. Ok now we are tracking. It is not the teachings; it is the mystery of it all. This has nothing to do with the teachings; this has to do with the medium. Got it finally.
Your interest in not in spiritual teachings you take pride in your knowledge of all known mediums and mediumship. It took some time but now it has come to me this unrelenting asking about the medium.
My co-author and I both know what we are up against we have been dialoging through emails and on the phone for almost two years now. I have spent time in malls, before yoga classes, etc, getting feedback.
If (big If) a book is developed it will be up to her and I as a consensus to reveal the spirit that is coming through to me and how I was able to verify that this in indeed this spirit, etc. I sent her some material from this spiritual teachers book when he was in physical body and in about two weeks I got an email and in the subject section she wrote: “wow”. Then she went on to say we have to quote this person in the book. So it appears she is very interested in revealing the author of many of these teachings that I have revealed on this blog.
I also will reveal in this book why this person now in the spirit world choose me of all people to communicate with. Why not one of his followers that is still alive today? As far as the medium that received these profound teachings this will be revealed in the book with quotes. For years on this blog I have quoted these teachings many times and no one to date has even commented on those quotes. These are the most profound spiritual teachings I have found to date. These teachings was another one of those one-dollar books I found at a used book store in Sedona, AZ like Gunnels book.
There are many teachings that I am revealing on this blog but two spiritual teachers I will not be revealing for personal reasons unless we decide to do in a book format. Judge the teachings if they do not make sense disregard them. Do not depend on authority with any teachings that is religion not spiritual discernment.
I only wish I was at a level of spiritual discernment that I could have make some of these statements about spiritual reality. Take what works for you the rest just ignore. They have to make sense to us if they don’t it matters not whose teachings they are.
But this entire dialog has proven my point over and over and over most people still do not understand judge not by appearances. When we judge by appearances we tend to follow the source not the teachings then we have ourselves a religion and we all know the problems religion has brought to the world.
Example 2500 hundred years ago the Buddha had a realization on the origin of suffering. 2500 years later few in the world have understanding and even knowledge of his realization. 2000 years ago Jesus is given credit for some profound spiritual teachings but 2000 years later few in the world can even spiritual discern the teaching judge not by appearances.
Now if anyone is interested; three teachers that have been very influential in my own spiritual discernment is W Edwards Deming and his understanding of variation, Emmanuel’s books one and two and Albert Gunnels book entitled “the evolution of the soul” with a subtitle of “all of creation is relative. Would love to dialog on those teachings.
If a sincere seeker can come to have understanding even knowledge as to the meaning that “all of creation is relative” many of these teachings will give them the wow factor in their lives. As yet I have seen little evidence of this understanding. This is why this medium a sincere seeker of spiritual knowledge tried to share this knowledge and felt he failed completely and never tried again to teach others his spirit’s profound knowledge. Lucky for us all of those teachings were preserved for later publication.
Posted by: william | June 07, 2010 at 01:54 AM
Is it Charlie Drake ?
Posted by: @-) | June 07, 2010 at 05:00 AM
William said: The source of the information is not that important.
The source of the information IS important.
How are supposed to assess the validity of the teachings which you are supposed to have put on this blog.
Well tell us then what are they and when did you post them?
If you cannot even respond to Michael's question with a simple answer that says it all.
This is why this medium a sincere seeker of spiritual knowledge tried to share this knowledge and felt he failed completely and never tried again to teach others his spirit’s profound knowledge. Lucky for us all of those teachings were preserved for later publication.
That is only your view which is top secret because you are terrified of revealing the medium's name.
You refer to Jesus's teachings as an authority yet you have previously stated: "You could claim Jesus as a source and it matters not to me".
You are unable to answer a simple question except with a load of waffle.
Sorry, William, you've been rumbled.
It IS fatuous drivel.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 07, 2010 at 05:19 AM
I have dialoged long enough with Zerdini to know that these teachings would not interest him. He was unable to even understand the knowledge in the two links I sent him or did not care to dialog on them.
When you can bring yourself to answer my questions without adding a lot of extraneous matter I will happily discuss them with you.
I would prefer some original thought but you would rather quote other people's work.
So be it.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 07, 2010 at 05:24 AM
"I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."
I personally love quotations. To each his own.
You don't even read what I said viz. You quoted Emerson and I quoted Emerson's response (see above).
I JUST GOT IT: it is the mystery part that is driving you crazy because of your belief that you are expert in knowing all mediums and mediumship. Ok now we are tracking. It is not the teachings; it is the mystery of it all. This has nothing to do with the teachings; this has to do with the medium. Got it finally.
It is not driving me crazy - another false assumption on your part. You have no idea about my beliefs - you wouldn't write such drivel in reply to my genuine questions.
Is it driving Michael crazy too? He asked the same question.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 07, 2010 at 05:33 AM
I read this blog (and comments) for years yet I hardly ever comment because I have little to add to the discussions.
I've been following this discussion with william for a while and I realize that he might never answer the question because simply put, he possibly can't.
These teachings and revelations could quite possibly be the result of his "direct spirit communications", but if he says so, he believes everything he has been saying will be invalidated because he cannot produce "proof" of it. He comes across as quite afraid of such a thing happening. He might not even know the name of this "teacher" from whom he has been receiving communications and even if he does know a name, it might not be a verifiable one.
So william, perhaps you should come
clean if that is the case and let people make up their minds about the credibility of your statements. If these "teachings" are valuable, they should be able to stand on their own regardless of the source, don't you think?
Posted by: Edna | June 07, 2010 at 06:01 AM
I think the source does matter. Let me explain. Geraldine Cummins produced two books allegedly channeling the communications of the deceased FWH Myers. These books make claims about the afterlife, the purpose of life, etc. I find them pretty credible. But the main reason I take Cummins seriously at all is that she also produced the book Swan on a Black Sea, which is considered one of the best authenticated of all channeled books. Swan contains a host of verifiable details and, for me at least, establishes Cummins' bona fides as a legitimate medium.
If Cummins had never produced Swan, I would be less inclined to take her other writings seriously. After all, anyone can claim to have a pipeline to the Beyond, and some (probably many) who do are delusional or fraudulent. We need some way of separating the wheat from the chaff, and a medium's proven ability to obtain accurate information is the best way I know.
If William prefers to withhold this information, that's his prerogative. But it's also other people's prerogative to be skeptical of unsourced claims.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | June 07, 2010 at 08:09 AM
I agree Michael. "Swan on a Black Sea" is an excellent book and certainly well authenticated as you rightly say.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 07, 2010 at 09:07 AM
“If these "teachings" are valuable, they should be able to stand on their own regardless of the source, don't you think?”
Exactly you just proved my point much more concisely than I have done that the source is irrelevant. Divine teaching stand on their own regardless of the source.
Now we are tracking as some say Edna. In one sentence you have stated this beautifully Edna. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.
Posted by: william | June 07, 2010 at 09:16 AM
Gee William you searched through the whole of Edna's post to find a sentence which might confirm your belief yet studiously ignored the rest of her post!
You must be desperate.
This is a part you left out:
"I've been following this discussion with william for a while and I realize that he might never answer the question because simply put, he possibly can't.
These teachings and revelations could quite possibly be the result of his "direct spirit communications", but if he says so, he believes everything he has been saying will be invalidated because he cannot produce "proof" of it. He comes across as quite afraid of such a thing happening. He might not even know the name of this "teacher" from whom he has been receiving communications and even if he does know a name, it might not be a verifiable one."
Posted by: Zerdini | June 07, 2010 at 10:00 AM
“If William prefers to withhold this information, that's his prerogative. But it's also other people's prerogative to be skeptical of unsourced claims.”
Absolutely always be skeptical even of so-called sourced claims but not cynical; I would expect nothing less of a sincere seeker. If most if not all of us on here were not skeptical of sourced claims I suspect we would be following a certain religion and not spending time on this blog.
Thank you for allowing that prerogative on this blog. I must write why I see and hear. Some of these statements below are what came to me this morning in my words, which always fail in comparison to the thoughts that flow through my mind while in a semi trance state.
I hesitated for a long time to reveal this aspect of my life because I knew what would be coming. It has arrived but it has given me much to ponder and write about. For that I am grateful.
But I see your point Michael very well put. Past experiences of the source of the teachings may help validate the data for some people. I will give those points some thought. Read Edna’s point it is very well stated. If we do not have the ability yet to evaluate divine teachings on their own then some means of authority of the source’s past experiences is needed. This I see clearly and has been my point.
When we judge by appearances and are unable to have righteous judgment for we have focused on the source of the teachings and not the divine wisdom of the teachings. And by focusing on the source (messenger) we are unable to see or hear or begin to even understand the teaching that we can be in the world but not of the world. We can be misguided by appearances but never by divine teachings. Never.
This has everything to do with reincarnation because if a seeker is able to be in the world but not of the world there is no need to reincarnate. What has the world of physical phenomena to teach such a person if they no longer judge by appearances? When we focus on even worship the source of the teachings we have created a religion and have ceased to be spiritual seekers but religious followers of the source that stated the teachings.
This is exactly what has happened to Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, and even the Bahai religions. They focused on the source not on the divine wisdom of the teachings. They missed most of the message. How can this be? Is there proof of this? Yes 2500 years later few in the world know that the Buddha realized that the origin of suffering was ignorance. The Buddhists became followers of the source and were unable to comprehend his realization and its implications for the world.
Now the follow up question of course to the Buddha’s realization is what is the origin or meaning of that ignorance that prevails in the world. But who can ask that question if one judges by appearances of authority and therefore is unable to make righteous judgment. Righteous meaning blameless or virtuous.
Further proof 2000 years later the Christians who really followed the source of the teachings from their own bible to judge not by appearance but judge with righteous judgment is the very teachings that will allow a seeker to be in the world but not of the world. Jesus made this very clear that his teachings were not his own but he was only a messenger. The world heard him not, but yet we still have this need to have authority to validate any teachings, which we do not understand.
We judge the messenger as an accepted or unaccepted authority not the wisdom of the teachings. Surely someone here can see this clearly; it is self evident that these two teachings go together like a hand and glove.
With Islam no words need to be stated about focusing on the source of the teachings. With the Bahai religion they focus on the sources of all religions.
When I contacted the last remaining student of a spiritual teacher that gave her and others many divine teachings and I stated something that was beyond the teachings of her spiritual teacher that she studied under for 30 years she stated, “oh but we cannot know that because he taught that is unknowable”. What this spiritual teacher taught that was unknowable was which came first, humans or ignorance. Surely someone that has followed this dialog at least has some knowledge to that question if they took the time to study that link I recently posted.
Oh but Zerdini does not, why is that? We must have a sincere interest in such a question. Sincere interest is rare; judging by appearances is commonplace. Judging by appearances is not a sin or in error; it is the drama of life, which develops the soul and is but one phase of the evolution of the soul. There are no errors in the divine Mind.
Now ask yourselves if there are no errors in the divine Mind why so much error in the human mind, even the soul’s mind? The valid answer to that question will reveal a whole new world of reality and one will never view the world quite the same again. But of course if you reveal to others your new reality some will call you many names so prepare yourself for that. Ignorance will always attempt to desecrate intelligence.
Posted by: william | June 07, 2010 at 10:00 AM
william, dude, please do not cling to the part of my post that you believe validates your refusal to disclose your source. I am with the rest in expecting that you should reveal how this knowledge came to you. I will re-word my statement so that it better reflects my position in a concise and clear manner:
"Let the people who read your comments/posts/ writing decide if these "teachings" are valuable by providing them complete information, including the source, and not just what you deem "important", they (the teachings) should be able to stand on their own regardless of the source, don't you think?"
There, that better reflects what I meant but perhaps didn't express with as many words. I thought it was implied by the rest of my previous comment.
To me, something I read in a book by a respected physicist will be evaluated under a pretty different light than something I read in the website of the Timecube guy. I am sure you can appreciate this difference. And like I said before, by following this discussion, this is the distinction others would probably wish to make when evaluating your statements.
Posted by: Edna | June 07, 2010 at 10:25 AM
“To me, something I read in a book by a respected physicist will be evaluated under a pretty different light than something I read in the website of the Timecube guy. I am sure you can appreciate this difference. And like I said before, by following this discussion, this is the distinction others would probably wish to make when evaluating your statements.”
That is judging by appearances and yes we all do that but that does not make it a valid mode of being in the world. I am sorry you and others cannot see that. I can appreciate the difference but look at history of those that have followed a respected source. Wars have been fought over following a respected source. That word respected can be a double-edged sword.
As far as physicists I find very few (there are exceptions) that have what I would view as having divine intelligence. Smart, as with a high IQ is not intelligence contrary to what the world teaches. The tube guy may indeed have more divine intelligence and offer more valid spiritual teachings than the respected physicist. Sorry I know that won't go down well.
Just as an interest what is your definition of judging by appearances if you would be so kind to share your views or anyone on this blog.
You first post was accurate. Apparently You stated it well from a subconscious level of knowledge. You may want to go to that subconscious level more often as you stated it well. Valid spiritual teachings will stand on their own regardless of their source.
I will use very similar words in the future to explain this, as I doubt that you want to be quoted. If you do want to be quoted that is ok also.
I do thank you for your input you revealed more in one sentence then I have in many posts. Well stated. I am only beginning to realize the full extent of how this teaching judge not by appearances is misunderstood. It appears one must study phenomenology to a great degree to have better knowledge of these teachings. This is duly noted.
This is why this blog is so helpful for the feedback that I receive. It may not always be what I would like to receive but it is sooooooooooo beneficial.
Posted by: william | June 07, 2010 at 11:05 AM
Indeed, one can take a horse to water, but a pencil must be lead.
Posted by: @-) | June 07, 2010 at 11:13 AM
Let me try to explain why I find some of your statements problematic: I tend to be suspicious of people who turn personal anecdote into universal axioms. I am, by now, convinced that you will not divulge your source because it is not an "orthodox", quotable one, but something probably more esoteric and not verifiable. See? I do not consider those experiences as something laughable or to be subjected to derision. On the contrary, they can be very valuable and offer profound insights to those who experience them. However, I do feel troubled when someone turns them into some sort of universal truth that we are supposed to take at face value. And I am afraid that such is the way many of your comments come across. We are expected to accept these teachings, basically "because you say so". I am afraid that has little to hold on to if you want your theories to be evaluated objectively. Because someone says so, without further evidence, is quite flimsy to hold on to and defend. Now, if you told me you had x,y and z spiritual communication and then went and do your research and found a,b and c books/ studies supporting these statements, I would probably go and verify those sources and make up my mind if the theory is something that I would consider seriously and incorporate into my current belief system.
Look, I will probably come across as quite snarky with this, but I'll try to give you some context on where I stand on all spiritual theories: 2000 years of Christianity have yet to convince me of the immaculate conception, the apparitions of angels to Mary and some other unexplainable phenomenons in the gospels. If one can remain skeptical to entire religions, how do you think your unsupported statements will be taken?
Posted by: Edna | June 07, 2010 at 11:23 AM
One more addendum to my previous comment: I do not judge on appearance. I judge based on reputation. Not the reputation of whoever makes the comment (although, that probably plays a role) but more so, the reputation of those who support the claims through research, publication, backgrounds and previous studies/ experiences. Even in a field like psi or spirituality, I try to apply critical thinking and certain principles often found in the scientific method. Somehow, I believe I am not the only one who evaluates statements and theories in this fashion.
Posted by: Edna | June 07, 2010 at 11:44 AM
"That is judging by appearances and yes we all do that but that does not make it a valid mode of being in the world."
IMO, judging (in part) by someone's level of knowledge and expertise *is* a valid mode of being. This doesn't mean we have to accept the opinions of experts uncritically, but we do need to give added weight to an opinion rendered by someone with the relevant background and accomplishments. For instance, if seeking a medical diagnosis, I would take the opinion of a medical doctor more seriously than the opinion of the guy sitting next to me at a bar. Of course I might seek a second opinion from another doctor, but in any event I would be looking for someone with a proven record of success.
"The tube guy may indeed have more divine intelligence and offer more valid spiritual teachings than the respected physicist."
He may, but this is an equivocation. The issue is which of them would have more valid info regarding *physics*, not spirituality.
"I am sorry you and others cannot see that."
Statements like this come across badly, I think. They seem to reflect a pious, holier-than-thou attitude.
It reminds me a little of an episode years ago when a friend asked me to critique his short story. I gave him a number of critical comments and suggested a thorough rewrite. Rather than accept my suggestions, he said, "I'm sorry you couldn't understand what I was trying to do." Well, I did understand, but I didn't think he had pulled it off. And in fact the story was never published and the guy never did become a writer. He was more concerned with establishing his superiority than in learning something from a writer who had been published.
"You first post was accurate. Apparently You stated it well from a subconscious level of knowledge."
Here again, IMO this comes across badly, as if you have a window into the subconscious of someone you've never even met, and as if the one statement that could be interpreted as favorable to you is what the person "really" meant, while all the rest of it can be discounted. Personally I would try to avoid speculating about other people's subconscious.
"This is why this blog is so helpful for the feedback that I receive."
I have the impression that, like my unpublished writer friend, you're not really hearing the feedback. Which is okay; you're not obligated to listen to criticism. But then you'll have to expect that other people will get a little exasperated with you from time to time.
But it's no big deal. We all have our own way of looking at things, and our own ideas about "the truth."
Posted by: Michael Prescott | June 07, 2010 at 11:59 AM
Thank you Edna and Michael for your comments.
Even when Edna tried to make her post clearer William refused to accept it clinging instead to one of her sentences to bolster his point.
I am not convinced that William wants dialogue
He prefers a monologue and a pretty uninteresting and boring one at that.
But it's no big deal. We all have our own way of looking at things, and our own ideas about "the truth."
William, I suggest you read the above carefully and take it to heart instead of proselytizing.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 07, 2010 at 01:02 PM
William said:
Oh but Zerdini does not, why is that?
Because you continually misrepresent my words and refuse to answer perfectly genuine points if they don't conform to your views.
The answer is apparent to everyone, but you, it seems.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 07, 2010 at 01:09 PM
Regarding William’s reluctance to give the name of the medium from 100 years ago - on February 14th William wrote in response to one of my posts:
“But I am interested in what your wise spirits have told you about if the infinite is perfect love why so much suffering in the world.
“Spirit communications come in all levels of intelligence; discerning what is advanced teachings and not so advanced is an interesting research project.
It appears at this time that the level of intelligence and selfless motivation of the medium is the main factor in the level of spirit communication that is attained. “
I replied:
“At last! We cut to the chase lol. It seems that you have a lot more research to do.
May I suggest you read the ‘Silver Birch’ books (Google for more information) for a start. There are nine original books covering nearly fifty years of spirit teachings on a tremendous variety of subjects.
“Silver Birch is not an extension of the medium’s mind. He is a separate entity and gave evidence of his identity by speaking (in the independent direct voice) through another medium.”
What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 07, 2010 at 01:46 PM
“There are nine original books covering nearly fifty years of spirit teachings on a tremendous variety of subjects.”
I am in. I would love to dialog on these teachings. Please everyone note his answer because he has refused to dialog; he keeps asking about the source. He has been asking for the source for months. Hung up on the source is judging by appearances; the very thing the source Jesus stated not to do. Also I am still up for a Deming dialog as you quoted him in some detail on this blog.
“At last! We cut to the chase lol. It seems that you have a lot more research to do.”
Do you not see with such a response, it is demeaning and spiteful and exposes a very immature fragile ego with a fearful mode of being in the world? This usually comes from a low self-esteem. Please quote me on this blog when I have used lol to anyone’s comments. I used the words appears to not come off with a holier than thou attitude and you jumped on it with a lol. Your remarks have been demeaning and small-minded time and time again. I have a feeling Silver Birch has much to say about this demeaning and spiteful attitude and of course if I come off with a holier then thou attitude.
“ have the impression that, like my unpublished writer friend, you're not really hearing the feedback. Which is okay; you're not obligated to listen to criticism. But then you'll have to expect that other people will get a little exasperated with you from time to time.”
Your criticisms have been noted but I cannot change what I see with clarity. It is like asking me to believe that two plus two is five. My comments were that we must not judge by appearances but with righteous judgment as the road to be in the world but not of the world, which means we may not have to be reincarnated. What has the world to teach us if we are no longer influenced by phenomena?
I did not see any sincere interest in dialog I only saw a sincere interest in a source. That has been my point; one does not need to know the source; one needs to be able to spiritually discern the teachings. It matters not the source. The source of the teachings could come from the cable guy. Judge not by appearances for the source but spiritually discern the teachings on the validity of their divine wisdom, which we all have within us as a soul. No exceptions.
"I am sorry you and others cannot see that."
“Statements like this come across badly, I think. They seem to reflect a pious, holier-than-thou attitude”.
I agree very poorly worded but I am sorry that no one cannot see that aspect of judging by appearances and I would love to dialog on this wisdom that if we judge by appearances we are looking for a “respected source” to tell us or validate the answer. I would enjoy dialoging on the divine beauty of judge not by appearances but judge by righteous judgment as a means to be in the world but not of the world as it relates to reincarnation. This is what started this interesting discussion.
Posted by: william | June 07, 2010 at 03:54 PM
“Somehow, I believe I am not the only one who evaluates statements and theories in this fashion.”
Very well stated Edna and I appreciated your input. No you are not alone. But please consider this. In my view this is still judging by appearances. Think of it this way; paradigm shifts are very seldom made by those within the existing paradigm or established beliefs: Scientific, religious, or spiritual beliefs. All that reputation and articles and whatever could be within the existing established paradigm or beliefs.
Have I made my point here to some degree; why judging by appearances and not the underlying reality of the appearances can be just supporting the existing world paradigm. One can be very popular with others if that person supports others existing paradigms. You comments are appreciated and welcomed.
When we step out of that existing paradigm of spiritual beliefs the attacks will come; count on it. Also getting a book published when we present material outside the existing paradigm is no easy task. Again and again scientists are not asked to attend seminars and present papers because of their beliefs.
But I like your points and I will reconsider my stance on not revealing my source as you made a good case for considering the source. Thank you for that.
If you are interested in this below I would love a dialog on our different points of views on this subject.
Anyone interested in the source of why we don’t have to be reincarnated if we are in the world but not of the world then this might be of interest as I will reveal not only the source, but the book and also the person asking the questions.
In the spirits book questions 120 and 121 Kardec has asked almost the same questions that I asked in 1995 before I knew the spirits book even existed. I searched here and there and almost everywhere for an answer to no avail. I worded my question different but it was very similar to Kardec’s. The responses to Kardec’s questions from what he believed to be advanced spirits are a very close answer to why souls are created simple and ignorant. Actually souls are created simple and innocent then ignorance arrives on the scene of our life as the soul progresses. See I tried to give the answer. Won’t work. Sorry.
Always be skeptical to a degree and do not accept anyone’s discovery as valid; one must find the validity of a discovery WITHIN THEM. Even if a source gives some profound knowledge we will most likely reject it outright, as it has no meaning to us.
Now some can read those questions and answers over and over and over and they will mean nothing to them. Why is that? First we have to sincerely believe the question is a valid question and then we have to discover or realize an answer to those two questions WITHIN OURSELVES. It is our own divine intelligence, which we do not trust that reveals that answer, it lies within us. I call it the spirit within and it is hidden like a precious pearl. This is why churches have such attendance; people are looking for someone to give them the answer. They have respected the source but the source may know not.
Now we must have a sincere interest in asking such a question and making such a discovery, because the road may be long and difficult. If we do not find that answer within ourselves even if we receive an advanced spirit’s help from the other side they cannot be of help. Their answers will elude us. The world knows not; even if it did their answers would have no meaning until it is our awaking. Again the answer to these questions lie within each and every one of us. No one is chosen special as our egos would like to think but we are unique.
If we are able to find the valid answer to these two questions as to what is the meaning of being created simple and ignorant and it is the road from ignorance to divine intelligence that advances a soul you will have found a precious treasure. You will see the world anew. Now sources might be helpful as I was reading Gunnels book on the evolution of the soul when this discovery came to me in an instant after five years of seeking of course.
Kardec asked two profound questions and accepted the answers as valid. Why is this? He did not find the answer within himself but from a respected source. I don’t know if many here have read the spirits book but Kardec does ask some very advanced and profound questions. The validity of the answers; every person will have to decide their validity.
Posted by: william | June 07, 2010 at 04:22 PM
My head is spinning.
The last I remember I stopped in at 330 to check for a new post - ended up on the William Diaries - 4 hours later - the office lights are off - everybody left and the maintanance man is knocking on my door wondering if i'm in the world or of it...and I'm officially out of answers.
William - I'm going to buy your book - but are you sure you aren't giving away the best parts here?
Posted by: Felipe | June 07, 2010 at 04:23 PM
william, this is the last thing I will say on the subject because the original discussion has been derailed beyond recognition by now (it was reincarnation, not the validity of your claims). However, I want to answer this last point lest you believe I somehow support your views (yet again). You invite me and others to engage in a dialog with you about the subjects you consider important. Such a dialog is, I am afraid, impossible, in so far as a) you dictate the subjects that are open for discussion and refuse to engage in those you do not approve of (i.e. the source of all your claims) and b) a dialog implies mutual challenges and you have made it clear that you refuse to be challenged by cutting all questions about your sources and claims from the discussions.
What you seem to want is not really a dialog but validation at face value for your statements, blind acceptance of said statements and that we passively overlook the fact that you mention yourself, Jesus, Buddha and Kardec in the same breath, while somehow implying your teachings are as valid and credible as theirs.
Man, you are making it incredibly difficult for anyone reading this to take it seriously.
Posted by: Edna | June 07, 2010 at 04:57 PM
William,
As someone who has tried to see the best in your comments, please have a little rest. Your enemies are having a field day.
Posted by: anon | June 07, 2010 at 05:16 PM
The person that presented many of these teachings over 100 years ago was a very competent medium, editor, and writer and still they were rejected.
It seems to me that 'these teachings' are most accurately contained in the original writings by the medium and not necessarly your (or my) interpretation of those writings.
Without access to the medium's writings, we have no way of judging whether your interpretation of his/her writings accurately reflect his/her thoughts.
Posted by: PD | June 07, 2010 at 07:30 PM
Honestly, William. Give it a rest. And Zerdini, you're just encouraging him.
By many of your posts you seem to feel you are a misunderstood and persecuted prophet. All I know is you've found a way to dominate this blog, but your grandiosity is boring and your teachings predictable and unremarkable. IMO.
I'm not trying to be mean; I'm sure you're a good and sincere seeker. But, please seek to actually dialog instead of preach. I don't want to start skipping your posts, so mix it up. Be specific. Use proper grammar. Tell a joke. Use "I feel" statements. Don't listen to us. Listen to us. Don't put down other paths when you don't know what you're talking about, like Buddhism. Ask a question. Try going one post without responding.
Don't listen to me- it it the Spirits- many with huge resumes and major word-of-mind otherworld cloud cred, that speak through me now. One was a major player in turn of the century zeppelin production- and that ol' windbag is just a bit gassy. But pay her heed- we don't need any more Hindenburg jokes. I'm not saying she's fat, but when she sits around the airship..........
Posted by: Tharpa | June 07, 2010 at 08:38 PM
William,
What I think you ought to do is...stick those books you've been reading in the garbage can, clear your head completely of all the rubbish that's got in there and start being yourself again.
It's fine to be 'just William'(no pun intended) who is actually a nice(and not silly) person who wouldn't do anyone any harm. And that's something to be proud of, isn't it.
Posted by: anon | June 08, 2010 at 01:27 AM
William stated:
“It appears at this time that the level of intelligence and selfless motivation of the medium is the main factor in the level of spirit communication that is attained. “
Then he expressed an interest in the source and I told him, without prevarication, that I referred to the teachings of Silver Birch. Yet when I asked him for the source of the medium and his teachings from 100 years ago he refused to answer.
It is true that I have researched mediums and their teachings from their guides over many years and was therefore interested, as were many on this blog, as to who it might be.
What did I get instead? Evasion, prevarication and obscurantism!
Did I get dialogue? Not at all, just a monologue repeating and rehashing other people’s words.
Others have replied to him in detail and far more eloquently than me yet he persists in arguing and suggesting that they don’t know what they are talking about.
MP, Edna, Tharpa, PD and Anon gave excellent advice but it was ignored because he has “seen with clarity” implying that others haven’t.
I have ignored his constant digs at me referring him to “don’t try to teach your grandmother to suck eggs” which he doesn’t seem to grasp.
I have discussed his references to his constant failure to get his points across, his sense of rejection, and his constant references to others lack of understanding with a behavioural psychologist who said that they are all classical signs of an inferiority complex.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 08, 2010 at 03:36 AM
I think it's true that you show signs of a inferiority/superiority kind of split, William. No big deal, I've got all kinds of splits- including being bi-gendered- two very distinct personalities that aren't very integrated. Pretty painful. To be human is to be a work in progress.
I hope you're not feeling hurt, underneath, by all this feedback. I do feel your passion and good heart. It's just that your neurosis is hidden under all this high-fallutin' rhetorical Divinity Talk. And that drives some of us crazy, which granted is our problem.
Don't get me wrong- the Divine is the core of all of our lives. But there's something called 'spiritual bypassing' whereas one avoids a painful relative situation by clinging on to higher truths/states/experiences. At that point it becomes a kind of escapism, a 'magic cloak' for the bewildered ego to hide behind.
If this is true, it's o.k. and I hope you'll take all this feedback with good heart- and when it's my turn I'll do the same. All I can ask is that you let yourself be more yourself and watch the tendency to preach and correct from a spiritual high-horse.
Cheers!
Posted by: Tharpa | June 08, 2010 at 05:34 AM
I have been reading the Silver Birch teachings and for anyone to maintain that these are advanced teachings; well I guess it depends on one’s level of understanding of what constitutes the concept of advanced. I had an acquaintance in the 90’s that channeled this level of teachings on a weekly basis with a local spiritual self-study group.
Personally I would recommend Emmanuel’s book one and two over these teachings but these teachings are worthwhile readings for a new spiritual seeker from my point of view.
These teaching’s like most spiritual teachings still places the onus of man’s ignorance or unawareness on man. How can this perceived world religious mental model of human culpability and blameworthy exist for so long? Why is it so difficult to comprehend that our unawareness is a necessity for the creation and manifestation of new and unique souls. It is simple to state but a profound paradigm shift that without our ignorance, which is our created unawareness, there is no unique soul, just Isness. Or in Silver Birch’s teachings just the Great Spirit.
I completely failed to see the enormous opposition in bringing such a paradigm shift to the world: i.e. seminal teachings that explain that our soul’s unawareness has its origin in our original and eternal innocence.
Below are some quotes and my views from the Silver Birch articles.
“The path of the truth-seeker is not an easy one, for the pioneer does not achieve truth with ease.”
Every truth seeker has a unique path in their search. I found this a very concise and accurate statement of reality. The concepts of path, truth seeker, and pioneer are excellent choices of words. Everyone once in his or her life would benefit from the experience of bringing a new paradigm to the world. Previously I had this opportunity in the business-consulting world but it pales in comparison to this existing challenge.
“They would rather be weak when they could be strong, they would rather dwell in darkness with undisturbed faith built on error than seek the light.”
A soul would not rather be weak or dwell in darkness. All souls seek but all souls in their journey at some time seek in all the wrong places due to their unawareness: until karma brings them back to recognize and regret their misguided longings and then each soul goes through a process of reorienting their lives. Even misguided desires are a longing for perfection. The culprit is always ignorance or unawareness. Unawareness is not a choice; it is a condition of necessity for the creation and manifestation of a new and unique soul. The new age, spiritualists, and religious even lower level spirits have failed to see this unawareness as a created necessity. Silver Birch is no exception.
“Ours is the constant fight against selfishness, self-interest, the powers that belong to all the darkness of life. Prejudice, superstition, error, jealous, greed, avarice, hate - against these we are at war.”
There is no war occurring; this misguided concept of war gives power to darkness and is in alignment with the Christian spiritual warriors concept. The term spiritual warrior is an oxymoron. Darkness has no power but it can lead to the phenomena of misguided longings. This is an extremely difficult concept and I am finding almost impossible to have knowledge of and accept as a reality. Only light has power and darkness is the absence of light. Stated another way only divine intelligence has power and darkness is revealed ignorance.
The wise serpent might have stated in the Adam and Eve story, “if you eat from the tree of knowledge you shall leave your paradise of innocence and yea shall be as gods knowing light from darkness”. Eating from the tree of knowledge is the journey of the soul.
“Do not confuse the shadows with the reality.”
We will judge by appearances if we confuse shadows with reality. To avoid judging by appearances we must journey towards seeing appearances as temporal and transient phenomena not illusions as some eastern religions teach. If we confuse appearances with its underlying reality we will be unable to see the underlying reality of phenomena. Righteous judgment becomes blameless judgment by allowing us to see this underlying reality of phenomena. All the underlying reality of phenomena is light not darkness. Without righteous judgment we will continue to be in the world and of the world.
“Our work is spreading - that much I know and can say with certainty. That is why I always stress the note of optimism and tell you we are marching forward to victory.”
Victory would not be my choice of words as it implies a win or lose mentality. The evolution of the soul is not a win or lose mentality. But I agree that all souls are moving forward towards greater awareness; the law of progress demands it for all souls. No soul is left behind. This note of optimism is well stated.
“Man has the chance to make the world in which he lives a garden of Eden, a paradise, a heaven, just as he can make it a dark, desolate and grim forbidding world. That is the measure of his choice.”
There is a profound difference between a garden on Eden, a paradise, and a heaven. This statement reveals this spirits lack of understanding of the necessity of unawareness as a created necessity to be unique. Stated another way this spirit lacks knowledge of the origin of ignorance. Stated simply this spirit would be unable to answer the question why souls are created simple and unique.
This teaching still does not answer the question that Kardec asked about a soul being created simple and ignorant. This still puts the burden of human ignorance on man’s choices. Religions worship at the altar of free will; Silver Birch correctly used the word choice. These teachings still put the onus of our unawareness on the soul not with the Infinite Mind. If we put the onus of man’s unawareness on humankind this would make man culpable and blameworthy. God does not create culpable and blameworthy expressions but does create unique expressions of its infinite Mind. We are expressions of Infinite Mind not separate entities therefore we are not culpable and blameworthy. It is absolute ignorance (but expected for a time due to our created unawareness) to believe we are culpable and blameworthy.
“Wherever there are human beings there are difficulties and problems, because you are imperfect beings living in an imperfect world. If you were perfect you would not be on earth. You would have joined the apex of divinity which is the great spirit of life.”
This quote correctly states that if we were perfect we would not be on earth. The reality is if we were perfect we would not exist. We would merge with the great spirit of life.
Yes we souls are created imperfect not by choice but created out of necessity by the “Great Spirit” imperfect Beings. Imperfect means with unawareness. Again this quote does not reveal the origin or meaning of our created unawareness. Skips right over it. This is the reason for our book, which to our knowledge the meaning and purpose of our original or origin of our unawareness has never been written about. This is a paradigm shift of the highest order and will be met with much resistance even personal attacks. A paradigm shift must come from someone outside the existing religious and spiritualist paradigm.
“You are witnessing the birth of a new order and all around you are the signs that the old world, founded on selfishness, materialism, greed, avarice and cruelty, is dying. You who call yourselves Spiritualists are the custodians of a great truth, for you are the sentries guarding the outposts, helping to forge the new era. Think of yourselves as soldiers of the Great Spirit, fighting the greatest fight of all, for you are helping to vanquish all the forces that belong to the darkness of man’s ignorance and brought war, misery, chaos and bankruptcy to your world.”
Soldiers of the Great Spirit is still that military mental model, which in my view is in the same erroneous system of beliefs as the religious “spiritual warriors” mental model. The darkness of man’s ignorance is not due to a choice; it is created and has profound spiritual purpose and meaning. Spiritualists never did reach the level of influence most of these spirits predicted.
Man’s ignorance is not a force but it appears to be a force. If we judge by appearances then it will appear as a force. Silver Birch is judging by appearances. Humankind and even a soul’s ignorance is the absence of light and only Light (God) has power. All power/vitality belongs to the Great Spirit; therefore for darkness to have power then an aspect of Great Spirit would have to be darkness. It is impossible for Infinite to have any permanent darkness. Darkness which is in the realm of phenomena is temporal and transient.
“Your footsteps have been guided so that you have been brought out of the darkness into the light”
Very well and accurately stated.
Hope this helps; if past experiences is an accurate indicator then these personal comments will be met with much resistance, which must be expected; but I must teach what I have been taught, realized, and discovered in my own journey towards this perfection of the Infinite. To do otherwise would be popular but not authentic.
I am going to the cool mountains for some time so I won’t be able to respond any time soon but I will be back. Thanks to everyone for their comments, much appreciated.
Posted by: william | June 08, 2010 at 09:14 AM
William, I wish you well on your journey and hope that you enjoy your time in the mountains. Take care.
Posted by: Sandy | June 08, 2010 at 09:49 AM
How did I know you would find fault with the teachings of Silver Birch?
Are you claiming you read all nine books on the Silver Birch teachings given on a weekly basis over fifty years.
More than likely you picked out a few sentences from somewhere on the internet and then peddled the same old stuff that you've done before. I suggest that readers buy the books, study them at their leisure and form their own opinions.
Unlike William, who refers to a medium and spirit teachings he can't or won't name or publish, I was able to question Silver Birch at first hand.
Every word was taken down by a stenographer and the result published weekly. Every sentence was grammatically correct and not a single word or sentence had to be edited.
The medium for Silver Birch passed in 1981 not a hundred years ago.
William I hope you will find time to reflect on your contributions in the cool mountains but I doubt it somehow.
Meanwhile I will be away from the end of this week enjoying a well-earned rest visiting the USA and Canada (cool mountains?).
Best wishes to all.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 08, 2010 at 10:18 AM
Every sentence was grammatically correct and not a single word or sentence had to be edited.
If some medium were to channel me after I'm gone, if everything she communicates is grammatically correct then you'll know it wasn't really me that she was communicating with.
I hope you have a good vacation too, Zerdini.
Posted by: Sandy | June 08, 2010 at 12:23 PM
Every sentence was grammatically correct and not a single word or sentence had to be edited.
If some medium were to channel me after I'm gone, if everything she communicates is grammatically correct then you'll know it wasn't really me that she was communicating with.
I hope you have a good vacation too, Zerdini.
Posted by: Sandy | June 08, 2010 at 12:23 PM
Sorry for the double post. I have no idea how that happened. I only clicked on "post" once.
Posted by: Sandy | June 08, 2010 at 12:28 PM
Sandy, you're too modest. You communicate extremely well.
Posted by: Ben | June 08, 2010 at 12:36 PM
Sandy: It was worth reading twice!
Thanks for your good wishes.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 08, 2010 at 02:28 PM
Oooooooh... Suddenly it's all got cuddly !
Well.. let me just remind you, this is a no-funny business-blog.
Please, return to type !
Posted by: . | June 08, 2010 at 04:52 PM
Silver Birch was asked why he returned to earth. These extracts are taken from some of the teachings he gave:
When I was asked, many long years ago, whether I would return to the world of matter and find on earth a band who would work with me to deliver the message of the spirit, I said I would, as did many others, and my task was given me.
I have no vested interest…; I have no money to earn; I have no job to defend. I have nothing to gain. I come back after many, many years in a world of spirit to tell you what I know. It is for you to listen.
What does it matter whether I am a teacher of great distinction or a lowly beggar, so long as the seal of truth stamps what I say?
I have come back merely to stress a few elementary spiritual truths. It seems to me - and I am quite an old man - that what your world needs is not some high-flown, theological, abstract collection of doctrines, but a few simple truths enthroned in the hearts of most religions, taught by those who were inspired by the power of the spirit in days gone by, that all mankind is part of one another, that beneath our physical differences there is a common bond of the spirit which unites us all.
I make no claim to infallibility. I do not say that I have reached the limit of all knowledge and wisdom. I, like you, am human still. I, too, strive after perfection. I, too, have weaknesses to conquer. I, too, have progress to achieve. I do not say that what I tell you represents final truth.
I am a human being like yourselves. I have lived much longer than any of you who are listening to what I say. As a result of my experiences in realms far beyond your earth I have gained some knowledge of the Great Spirit you call God, and of the natural laws which have been devised to ensure that the will of the Great Spirit will and must ultimately prevail.
What I have learnt as a result of my experiences I am willing to share with those who are ready to receive them because I think they may be of helpfulness to them.
I am not in any way a deity. I am still very human, capable of error, weakness and imperfection. I have, like every one of you, a long, long way to go on the road to perfection. It is an infinite one.
But, like others in my world, I was asked to retrace my steps so that I could offer some of the truth, the wisdom and the knowledge that we have gained, and share it with you. At the same time we would be able, with the aid of those who co-operate with us, to make available the supreme power of the spirit, which is responsible for all life despite its multitudinous forms, so that this power can stream through gifted individuals and serve its benign purpose.
Silver Birch gave an indication of the progress that he has had to make since leaving the earth ... nearly 3,000 years ago . …
In my days on earth I venerated many gods. I had to learn that there is only one Great Spirit, Who has provided eternal laws for the control of every phase of life throughout the boundless universe.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 09, 2010 at 02:52 AM
Here are a selection of Silver Birch’s views on Reincarnation and Personality and Individuality.
You have risen and ascended through all forms of evolution.
There is within each one of you a trace of your animal ancestry, which is part of your heredity.
The soul has the awareness imprinted within it. If that awareness does not dawn, then it will have to reincarnate again. If the awareness does come, then it will begin to fulfill the purpose of its incarnation.
What incarnates is another aspect of the same individuality, and I do not mean personality. If you visualise man as an individual, who in his earthly life is like an iceberg in which you have one small portion manifesting and the larger portion not manifesting, then that is the end of one incarnation. In a successive incarnation, a portion of the submerged self will come into the world of matter, two different personalities, but one individual. And in spirit life, as progression takes place, it is part of the submerged self that comes to the surface all the time.
I maintain reincarnation is a fact. I have not said that it is so for everybody. What I have said is that the human individuality is not always a single entity but a facet of a larger diamond.
These facets incarnate into your world for experience that will enable them to return to the diamond and add to its lustre and radiance. It is part of the law of cause and effect in operation because there are karmic debts to be paid. There are also opportunities for evolved souls to return at a time when they can perform a service to groups, and even to countries, where there is a need for their qualities and gifts to be expressed.
Another facet of the diamond can incarnate at the same time. But it is all regulated by law and order.
You must make a difference between personality and individuality. Personality is merely the life as exhibited by the physical body on earth. Individuality is the totality of the soul. You cannot express the whole of that individuality in a person of 70, 80, 0r 90 years in your world.
Reincarnation] is a complex subject. It involves an understanding of the extent to which individuality can be appreciated because it is far more than the personality in one earthly incarnation.
There is a confusion between personality and individuality. An individual can reincarnate and have many personalities. These are the physical expressions, manifestations of the individuality, but the individuality is unchanged.
Personality, from persona, the mask, belongs to the physical body. It is the way that the individuality is able to express itself through the five material senses and that is the tip of the iceberg.
Personality is the mask that you wear on earth; individuality, the real self, seldom expresses itself, through the inability to do so. At best it is only a very poor manifestation of what can be shown when it is finally divorced from the physical body.
The individuality is far greater than the personality. It is not personality that exists after physical death. Personality is only a shadow cast by the sun which is the individuality.
Individuality survives, and gradually manifests its latent potential that cannot be expressed on earth. In the case of service that is to be rendered to your world there is a large individuality, a diamond which has many facets. These facets incarnate so as to have expression that will add to the diamond’s lustre.
You can have a soul which is the diamond of many facets. These facets, at differing eras, can incarnate into your world as personalities. But when they pass from your world and return to ours they are still facets of the one individuality.
I would prefer to use the word individuality rather than personality. I draw distinctions between the personality, which is physical, and the individuality which is the soul or spiritual make-up, the reality behind the mask, so to speak.
Persons are persons so far as your world is concerned, but you cannot separate spiritual individuality in the same way. There are, for example, affinities, two kindred halves of the one soul, and sometimes they incarnate at the same time.
There are also what I call facets of the one diamond. This is the over-soul, the greater individuality, and the facets are aspects of it which incarnate into your world for experiences that will add lustre to the diamond when they return to it.
Also there are people who, although separate persons, are aspects of the one individuality. For instance, my medium, his wife and myself are parts of one individual. So you can have facets of the one guide.
You can call these extensions if you like, but it comes to the same thing. Only an infinitesimal part of the whole individuality can be manifested in physical form on earth.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 09, 2010 at 03:32 AM
Cool. Thanks Z.
I've been reading the Ra material, the 'Law of One' channeled in the early 80s. Really interesting, and quite technical in language.
I take all channeled teachings with a grain of salt. After all, any spirit can claim to be anyone at all...... it simply comes back, for me, to respecting and developing all 7 chakras- but especially love and the heart.
Posted by: Tharpa | June 10, 2010 at 06:55 AM
In Bhagavad-Gita Lord SriKrishna says to Arjuna:
“I taught this immortal Yoga to Vivasvan (sun-god), Vivasvan conveyed it to Manu(his son), and Manu imparted it to (his son) Iksvaku. Thus transmitted to succession from father to son, Arjuna, this Yoga remained known to the Rajarisis (royal sages). It has however long since disappeared from this earth. The same ancient Yoga has this day been imparted to you by Me, because you are My devotee and friend, and also because this is a supreme secret”.
At this Arjuna said: You are of recent origin while the birth of Vivasvan dates back to remote antiquity. How, then, I am to believe that you taught this Yoga at the beginning of creation? Lord SriKrishna said: Arjuna, you and I have passed through many births. I remember them all, you do not remember.
1. Radha Soami Faith was founded by His Holiness Param Purush Puran Dhani Huzur Soamiji Maharaj on the prayer of His Holiness Huzur Maharaj who later on became second Spiritual Head of Radha Soami Faith. The prime object of the Radha Soami Faith is the emancipation of all Jeevas (Souls) i.e. to take the entire force of consciousness to its original abode. There is a tradition of succession of Gurus or Spiritual Adepts in Radha Soami Faith. I am one of them as is evident from the following facts or ….
“My most Revered Guru of my previous life His Holiness Maharaj Sahab, 3rd Spiritual Head of Radhasoami Faith had revealed this secret to me during trance like state.
HE told me, “Tum Sarkar Sahab Ho” (You are Sarkar Sahab). Sarkar Sahab was one of the most beloved disciple of His Holiness Maharj Sahab. Sarkar Sahab later on became Fourth Spiritual Head of Radhasoami Faith.
Since I don’t have any direct realization of it so I can not claim the extent of its correctness. But it seems to be correct. During my previous birth I wanted to sing the song of ‘Infinite’ (Agam Geet yeh gawan chahoon tumhri mauj nihara, mauj hoi to satguru soami karoon supanth vichara) but I could not do so then since I had to leave the mortal frame at a very early age. But through the unbounded Grace and Mercy of my most Revered Guru that desire of my past birth is being fulfilled now.”
Posted by: Anirudh Kumar Satsangi | June 14, 2010 at 01:58 AM