Does survival matter?

A lot of my blog posts concern the topic of life after death. But lately I've started to wonder whether the postmortem survival of the personality is actually that important.

This may seem like a strange thing to say. After all, what could be more important to us on a personal level than our own survival? And yet, I've begun to feel that the personality itself is not so important; and if the personality doesn't matter too much, then the survival of the personality after death doesn't matter much, either.

Now, I still think there is a very large accumulation of evidence supporting the after-death survival of the individual's personality. I'm not disputing that evidence or the most parsimonious conclusion to be drawn from it -- namely, that personal survival is a reality in many (possibly all) instances. I'm just wondering how much it really matters.

From a philosophical standpoint, it matters a great deal. Postmortem survival has major implications for the nature of the universe -- for the nature of reality as such. And there are ethical implications, as well. If the "life review" that near-death experiencers report is a reality, then the Golden Rule takes on a newfound immediacy. Moreover, at least some of the malaise and anomie that afflict modern society are probably traceable to the lack of belief in a higher meaning or purpose to life. The view that a human being is nothing but a collection of chemicals, temporarily activated and then deactivated, is hardly conducive to a high-flown sense of moral purpose.

But I'm not looking at the question from that standpoint right now. I'm looking at it from a purely personal standpoint. And it seems to me, at least at certain moments, that the personality itself -- or the ego, or the self -- is a somewhat artificial and trivial construct, a collection of repetitive behaviors and engrained attitudes. And if this is all the personality is, then the survival of the personality -- the survival of this assemblage of quirks and tics -- seems considerably less urgent. In fact, there are some occasions when the idea of my personality, my constricted little realm of self-centered thoughts, persisting eternally is rather depressing to me.

Of course, a consistent theme of spiritualist writings is that we go through various changes in the afterlife and evolve into higher, less egoic beings. Still, if we carry the residue of our earthly lives -- our memories, beliefs, and attachments -- then we will continue to be caged in the tight, confining space of our ego, at least to some extent. If we lose all of our earthly memories, beliefs, and attachments, and with them the ego itself, then how can "we" be said to have survived at all?

We probably all have times when we get tired of being ourselves. But at least we know that our earthly existence is of limited duration, so we won't have to put up with ourselves forever! Ah, but here's the rub: what if we do have to put up with ourselves forever? What if we're destined to persist throughout many eons, perhaps growing and changing in some ways, but still essentially ourselves? Is this a desirable outcome?

Sometimes I think it is, but at other times I must admit to thinking that simple nonexistence -- or perhaps losing one's own identity and merging with a universal mind -- would be, in Hamlet's words, "a consummation devoutly to be wished."

Comments

[soup in a basket]

If the "life review" that near-death experiencers report is a reality, then the Golden Rule takes on a newfound immediacy.

I think the golden rule is incorrect. Some people like to be treated differently than others. In one culture something can be a kindness which in another culture is an insult. The golden rule might help sunday school teachers keep order in the classroom but in reality people need to be a little more sophisticated than that.

The view that a human being is nothing but a collection of chemicals, temporarily activated and then deactivated, is hardly conducive to a high-flown sense of moral purpose.

There are plenty of reasons to have a well developed sense of morality without life after death. I'd rather live in a society where people treat each other right so I'm willing to constrain my own behavior. Also, the law of karma works to some extent without retribution in the hereafter. If you are nasty to people they will treat you differently than if you are kind to them. Also, if you think people who cheat you are scum, then if you want to respect yourself, you won't act like scum and cheat other people. etc. etc.

Egoic

Normally I wouldn't pick on grammar but since you are a writer I'll ask: is this a real word? It isn't in dictionary dot reference dot com. Would egoistic work instead?

If we lose all of our earthly memories, beliefs, and attachments, and with them the ego itself, then how can "we" be said to have survived at all?

Are you the same person you were as an infant? Do you have the same personality?

What if we're destined to persist throughout many eons, perhaps growing and changing in some ways, but still essentially ourselves? Is this a desirable outcome?

It's true that if you didn't exist you wouldn't regret it, but I think you have to at least get beyond the earth life to know what the afterlife is all about and whether it is a good thing or not. Certanly most spirits who communicate have said it is a lot better there than here.

It should also be considered that the idea of self, or what constitutes self is subjective and in some ways a function of the brain. It has been shown experimentally that experienced meditators who experience a "oneness of all things" when they are deep in meditation have a certain part of the brain dormant. This might mean that our sense of self is determined by the physical brain and might not exist when we are in the afterlife.

[william]

“What if we're destined to persist throughout many eons, perhaps growing and changing in some ways, but still essentially ourselves? Is this a desirable outcome?”

We change daily and in eons we may be able to remember our past personalities and errors but by that time we have learned something called compassion for ourselves. We think we understand compassion at this level of existence but we think we understand a lot more than we do.

My research indicates that the best is yet to come in these higher dimensions where love and trust are a way of life and creativity is abundant. The process of our evolution of consciousness to create unique souls means we have to pay our dues and go through stages of development.

We are gods in the making continuous on-going improvement of consciousness in divine intelligence and love demands it. We never lose our identity but our identity does evolve to levels we can only image at this stage of our existence. Working with small children I see such joy and love in their eyes while doing such simple activities with them sometimes it feels like I am looking into the eyes of God or gods.

Now I suspect that survival of personality means a lot more to people than most of us are willing to admit. We do not have the freedom to opt of survival of our unique life only the freedom to express ourselves in this dimension or another.

Does survival matter; some believe that the fear of death is responsible for much of the neurotic and psychotic behavior in our world.

[william]

some may find this lady interesting on youtube concerning consciousness.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mt9CwjixULI&feature=related

she is on six youtube videos.

this is the first one.

[Brent]

"The golden rule might help sunday school teachers keep order in the classroom but in reality people need to be a little more sophisticated than that."

-Yes, oh intellectual one...all of you intelligent(?) ones all know that nothing is really simple...the only possible "truth" has to be complicated..and if it seems to not be complicated..well, I'm sure you'll go ahead and make it complicated anyway...intelligence at work.

"Sometimes I think it is, but at other times I must admit to thinking that simple nonexistence -- or perhaps losing one's own identity and merging with a universal mind -- would be, in Hamlet's words, "a consummation devoutly to be wished."

-Perhaps put away the Eckhart Tolle books for awhile. Do you have a mother/dad/sister/brother/son/daughter who has died? Do you care at all about them? If you do, you might find an importance for survival that doesn't have as much to do with yourself. If you don't, I doubt you could possibly understand the implications of what you have written regarding winking out or merging with some kind of universal mind (another viewpoint of the intellectual ones), which would also be a reason that so many people are concerned about survival for THEMSELVES.

If you haven't already seen this, try taking a look at these videos..and then provide an explanation for them (there isn't any explanation other than survival of YOU)and complicating something as simple as the golden rule:

http://www.vimeo.com/1188598 (soul travel)(there are 12 other videos to be seen here as well-Peter Shockey and Raymond Moody)

http://www.vimeo.com/1486726 (interview with George Ritchie and 3 other segments-Miracles Angels and Afterlife)

Oh oh, these don't seem to support Eckhart Tolle! What's wrong here?!? Where's the great oneness oblivion?!? Where's the complicated stuff?!?

[Paul]

I guess it depends what one means by "personality". If we mean our attitudes, responses and behaviours then I ask myself: Is my personality the same now as it was when I was 5 years old? Or 16 years old? I would think that some people would recognise elements of my personality as continuing but I am not the same person I was at those ages (although of course I am the same person in a different sense and my consciousness is the same (I think)). I probably won't be the same when I am 60 or 80 if I make it that far.

If we survive death, will my personality be the same after 100, 200, 1000, 100000 years? I doubt it based on what has happened so far in life.

So in a sense our personality (assuming my definition), as William pointed out, is perhaps constantly but slowly changing and survives in essence but my personality today might not bear much comparison to my personality in 200 years time. In that sense it did not survive I guess.

My consciousness however is something else. I would hope what does survive and remain intact is my consciousness of self and my memories. I am not concerned whether my humour, responses, attidues etc remain the same.

[Art]

I think everything we experience in this life is aimed in the direction of teaching the soul what it means and how it feels to be a separate unique individual. All the separation that we experience exists for the express purpose of imprinting or teaching the soul what it means to be a separate unique individual, something it can't learn in heaven due to those overwhelming feelings of oneness and connectedness so often commented on in near death experiences. It can't be accomplished in the Spiritual Universe so it has to be done here. This life seems to be a never ending lesson in separation, from the moment we are born till the day we die and our deaths become a lesson in separation to the loved ones we leave behind. Separation seems to be the theme to almost every book, play, movie, and the lyrics to almost every song. I asked my gay friend what he thought about the movie "Brokeback Mountain" and he said that the whole movie was about what I talk about all the time. My sister was fixing to leave her husband and two (grown) sons and move to Sweden to live with some guy she met on the Internet and before she told me I was trying to tell her about "separation" and she said it was weird because that is exactly what she was fixing to experience. This life is about separation, in every way, shape, and form imaginable. I could go on and on about this topic but I'll try and stifle myself for now.

[Tony S]

I don't think you are exactly your Earthly self in the afterlife, especially if reincarnation enters the picture.

The way I look it it, you are consciousness. When you enter an eartly body, you take on traits that are a product of genetics and the environment. You may retain memory/knowledge of them.

We get hung up on that the afterlife is just like Earth life, except without the nasty bits. But I think it's just a completely different way of existing. It may seem disconcerting now, but it will seem like the most natural thing when we get there.

[Raimo]

"My consciousness however is something else. I would hope what does survive and remain intact is my consciousness of self and my memories. I am not concerned whether my humour, responses, attidues etc remain the same."

I agree. At the end of Reincarnation and Biology Stevenson concluded that what reincarnates (and thus survives death) is not personality, but individuality. Same individual consciousness continues, but personality could be different in different lives.

[Zetetic_chick]

And it seems to me, at least at certain moments, that the personality itself -- or the ego, or the self -- is a somewhat artificial and trivial construct, a collection of repetitive behaviors and engrained attitudes. And if this is all the personality is, then the survival of the personality -- the survival of this assemblage of quirks and tics -- seems considerably less urgent

Personally, I don't think the self is an artificial construct. Actually, it's the basis of our (known) existence. You know you exist because you're self-conscious of your own individual identity or self.

Even mystical experiences are experienced by specific individuals (not by all the humankind at the same time). And such individuals conclude, based on their personal/individual experience, that individual separation is only illusory (or at least, not our ultimate real nature or destiny). Their mystical experiences pressupose the previous actual existence of a self being the "experiencer" of such experiences.

Also, all the important things in life are important regarding to how they affect your self (or the self of people you care). If you don't exist, then you won't care about you or anybody else.

In the case of some mystical experiences, part of the spiritual importance of them is the realization that a separated self doesn't exist; so their importance is at least partially defined in terms of their relationship with an individual self!

If the self is not important, then what's important? Importance is, generally, relative to an individual self (or interactions between different individual selves), its thoughts, values and circunstances. But if such self doesn't exist, then all of this makes no sense at all.

Also, I don't think the self is properly defined as a collection of repetitive behaviors and engrained attitudes. They are properties or potentialities of a self, but not the self in itself (they are not its essence). Non-repetitive behaviours and non-engrained attitudes could be part of a self too (probably, not a self attached to a physical body on earth, however).

But there is not contradiction in the idea of a personal self-conscious identity (self) with non-repetitive behaviours and non-engrained attitudes.

If the existence of the self is the basis of any importance (which we attach to any problem, idea, person or circunstance), then the survival of death is important too, since we'll keep the pre-condition of any concept of importance (i.e. the existence of an individual self).

Suppose that individual selves don't exist. In such scenario, what's important and what's unimportant? For who? For what motive? Who cares?

So, the concept of importance seems closely related with the existence of individual self or identites (given that something is important to some individuals but not for others; but not important in absence of individuals).

If the individual self is important (since it's the basis of all consideration of importance) then the survival of the personal self is important too (in some sense).

What will be important in the afterlife? We don't know, but some afterlife communications suggest the spirts cares about his family on earth, or about the evolution of the soul in the spirit world, or about raising the level of consciousness about spiritual matters, etc.

But keep in mind that such interests, concerns, and worries (all of them revealing some "importance" to certain spirits) entails that a certain self/personalitty exists in the afterlife.

Hence, in my opinion, the survival of human personality is not only important but, maybe, the most important fact about our existence.

[Sandy]

I think most of us understand that in this life there are no constants, unless you see change as a constant. I’m not the person I was as a child. I’m not the person I was before my NDE. I’m not even the same person I was before I married my husband. I keep growing and changing in unexpected and amazing ways. Not every change has been welcomed, but that’s life. We change.

When I had my NDE, I started seeing and communicating with my Grandmother who had passed away a few years before the car accident that led to my experience. It wasn’t the same as having her alive, but it was very close. For years I only talked to her in dreams, but during the last year I had started to experience her presence even when I was awake. I could see her, and sometimes even touch her. She smelled like cigarettes and cinnamon. And like her garden in the spring. Most importantly, we could really talk about stuff.

Not long ago, Grandma changed. She “moved on”. I know that this is a wonderful change for her, and I try to be happy about it. But for me it was like she died again. I didn’t stop seeing her, but she was different. She is much harder to understand now; she communicates with symbols and feelings instead of words. And even though she seems much happier, she is less connected to this place and less like the person she was in life. She doesn’t have all the issues that made her seem so human before. I’m happy that she truly is in a better place, but I also really miss her being the way she was.

Do we survive? Yes, I believe that we do. Do we remain unchanged? No, we continue to grow in death, just as we do in life.

[Zetetic_chick]

The HTML citation and texts don't work. The first paragraph is a MP's quote.

[william]

“-Yes, oh intellectual one...all of you intelligent(?) ones all know that nothing is really simple...the only possible "truth" has to be complicated..and if it seems to not be complicated..well, I'm sure you'll go ahead and make it complicated anyway...intelligence at work.”

Actually I don’t know who you are referring to but it appears to me that truth is simple. If it becomes complicated it is not intelligence at work but intellect. When I made the discovery into the origin of ignorance the answer was so simple it staggered the mind.

But the intellect is what we have to discover these simple truths. And Brent do you believe it is your intellect or intelligence at work that is displaying such hostility or anger or whatever towards the “intelligent (?) ones” as you put it?

I hope Brent you think about that last sentence deeply. Now I realize that was unsolicited advice and in the realm of intellect and not divine intelligence. Personality I see my intellect at work much much more than what I refer to as divine intelligence.

It is exponentially easier to see others intellect at work as you put it then our own.

[Art]

Do we survive? Yes, I believe that we do. Do we remain unchanged? No, we continue to grow in death, just as we do in life.
- Sandy
------------------------------------------

That was a great post Sandy and I could really relate to it. It made a lot of sense. I am "me" but I am not the same "me" that I was in the fourth grade. We continue to change and to grow, hopefully for the better! Perhaps we either accomplish a lot of it here in this life, or we do it on the other side, but regardless of whether it's here or there, we continue to grow. I can definitely buy into that.

[Sandy]

Thanks, Art. I know people must think I'm very odd. I appreciate the support.

=)

[Paul Welsh]

I don't see anything very odd in what you have written above Sandy.

[Ben]

This is a brave post, Michael. By coincidence (?) I too have often felt this way lately. What’s wrong with just getting lost in the Boss?

But it’s probably a reaction to hard times –when you feel you’re not making progress. That’s so in my case. Meditation can dispel the negativity.

Some say the ego is mostly a residuum of fear and selfishness (because it serves the self, whereas Consciousness is equated with Unconditional Love for “other”). Ego therefore has to be lost so that we can know who we truly are. But I think personality is more than just negatives. It’s style, character and temperament. As ZC says, that must have value, else why are all 7 billion of us different?

One way of looking at it is to say ‘Little You’ is just a fragment of the ‘Big You’, with only a fraction of the ‘Big You’ perspective. ‘Little You’s personality will feed into the unique identity of ‘Big You’ (the Oversoul or Higher Self). The dross and bad habits get refined away over multiple lifetimes. It is also said that most of us (traumatised souls excepted) soon forget our difficulties on earth, rather as we dismiss bad dreams.

Egoic: thumbs up! All writer’s have the right to coin new words. “Egoic” has a pithy economy and its meaning is plain, so I like it. May I use it please, or is there a copyright?

[Art]

As ZC says, that must have value, else why are all 7 billion of us different? - Ben

What's the point of experiencing all the separation we do in life if there is no ultimate reason for it? Life seems to be a never ending lesson in separation. From the moment we are born and we exit our mother's wombs, and the umbilical cord is cut, till the day we die and our deaths' become a lesson in separation to our loved ones we leave behind? Religion, politics, race, language, culture, dialects, gender, sexual orientation, weight and height, socio-economic status, I.Q., wealth, education, etc., all the the stuff that separates us. Life seems to be a never ending lesson in separation. And it's not just about people, different genus and species, animal or plant kingdoms, mineral or living, etc. Over and over and over again till it's firmly imprinted into the soul's memory what it means - what it means to be "separate." Like the bits of information that make up a computer program, when you add up all the labels that make us who we are, we are all separate, unique, individuals. Like Alison Krauss says in the song There Is A Reason, "There must be a reason for it all!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWXNm9b6pKs

[william]

“One way of looking at it is to say ‘Little You’ is just a fragment of the ‘Big You’, with only a fraction of the ‘Big You’ perspective. ‘Little You’s personality will feed into the unique identity of ‘Big You’ (the Oversoul or Higher Self). The dross and bad habits get refined away over multiple lifetimes”

Two words explain it. Involution and Evolution. Was that three words?

Does survival matter? It matters to me as it mattered to the one starfish the guy walking on the beach through back into the ocean.

[Bruce Siegel]

>When I had my NDE, I started seeing and communicating with my Grandmother who had passed away a few years before the car accident that led to my experience.

Sandy, I second Art's comment: that WAS a great post. You write about amazing things, but somehow it's easy to take you seriously. You're fortunate, I think, to have had such clear and direct meetings with your grandmother. If you'd care to share more about them here—or if you've written about them elsewhere—I'd love to find out more.

For example, when you had the experience of seeing and touching her—what was that like?

[Leo MacDonald]

I see no problem with existing forever, because my personality even though important, doesn't matter that much compared to my loved ones and seeing some that i never seen in my earthly life.

[Michael Prescott]

"I think the golden rule is incorrect. Some people like to be treated differently than others. In one culture something can be a kindness which in another culture is an insult."

In the appendix to his book The Abolition of Man, C.S. Lewis compiles ethical precepts from many different cultures. The Golden Rule (in some form) is part of most of them. I think it's pretty universal.

"Egoic ... is this a real word?"

Eckhart Tolle uses it a lot. Here are a definition and some references:

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/egoic

It's a little less ethically charged than "egoistic" or "egotistic."

"Oh oh, these don't seem to support Eckhart Tolle! What's wrong here?!? Where's the great oneness oblivion?!? Where's the complicated stuff?!?"

Could you use more exclamation points and question marks? I don't think you're getting!!! your point!!!! across!?!?!?!

"I don't think the self is properly defined as a collection of repetitive behaviors and engrained attitudes. They are properties or potentialities of a self, but not the self in itself (they are not its essence)."

I would suggest, though, that if we strip away behaviors and attitudes (and memories, etc.), what we're left with is pure consciousness of the type that advanced meditators experience. And this pure consciousness seems to be impersonal and "universal," not individual or "egoic."

"Suppose that individual selves don't exist. In such scenario, what's important and what's unimportant? For who? For what motive? Who cares?"

Good point. Maybe I should have titled my post, "Is anything important?" And maybe the answer is "No." There may be no meaning, purpose, or point to any of it.

Increasingly I see things this way. The meaning and purpose I thought I'd found are looking less and less plausible to me, more like wishful thinking or rationalization. Of course I could be wrong.

"But it’s probably a reaction to hard times – when you feel you’re not making progress."

That's entirely possible.

"Egoic: thumbs up! ... May I use it please, or is there a copyright?"

Sadly, it's not original with me. According to the Wiktionary entry indicated above, it dates back to at least 1970. But only in recent years has it started to catch on, doubtless because of Tolle.

[dmduncan]

"There may be no meaning, purpose, or point to any of it."

I think love is the meaning, the point, and the purpose. Can you imagine a life totally devoid of love and also imagine in that life some meaning or purpose? I cannot.

When life sucks, death doesn't seem so bad or frightening a thing, but when life is good you do not want it to end. But things change. The wheel turns. But if we have love, then even when things are bad we still have faith that being is better than non being, and that the bad times will pass as the good times did.

[william]

“Increasingly I see things this way. The meaning and purpose I thought I'd found are looking less and less plausible to me, more like wishful thinking or rationalization. Of course I could be wrong.”

It appears to me that as most of us grow older our materialistic ideals become less satisfying and sometimes we replace those ideals with a spiritual search for meaning and purpose in life.

Kind of like well we know what did not work for us now we begin a new search for meaning in our lives. The ego conditioned in materialism loses some of its grip on our lives and we often seek deeper into the mysteries of life. Many suggest as long as we are separated from our source we will always seek into the meaning of our lives.

Does life matter? It must or we would not be here discussing if indeed it does matter. We cannot opt out of life; many have tried only to find out it is impossible to opt out. We are the expression of that that is so we don’t have the freedom not to express ourselves.

But how we decide to express ourselves well that is another story.

[Harlan]

"I asked my gay friend what he thought about the movie "Brokeback Mountain" and he said that the whole movie was about what I talk about all the time. My sister was fixing to leave her husband and two (grown) sons and move to Sweden to live with some guy she met on the Internet and before she told me I was trying to tell her about "separation" and she said it was weird because that is exactly what she was fixing to experience."

-This is just like buying a Volkswagen Beetle. Before you bought and owned one you hardly, if ever, noticed one before. But now that you own one, you seem to see every one there is, and they are everywhere! You have bought into this philosophy of yours so much that now everything you see, you see how it just seems to magically fit into it. Yes, I know...the overwhelming feelings of oneness suddenly become underwhelming after you've been born, become a god, and then die. Once this happens the overwhelming oneness becomes underwhelming. And, your mind creates an illusory "reality" for you since you are now a god.Makes sense to me..... :)

"I agree. At the end of Reincarnation and Biology Stevenson concluded that what reincarnates (and thus survives death) is not personality, but individuality. Same individual consciousness continues, but personality could be different in different lives."

-Just because Stevenson "concludes" this does not make it true, it seems you've overlooked that...unless you base firmness in your "truth" upon people who are hosting someone/something due to attachment/possession.

The few psychiatrists who do engage in de-possession work can sometimes dislodge the troubling entity in a matter of minutes! Imagine clearing off your client base in a matter of hours, days or even weeks! Then what! De-possessing a patient named M--- did take quite a few sessions and a team of helpers. M---’s circumstance resembled Morehouse’s in one respect: he was afraid that some inner compulsion would take over and he would kill his wife. It was a profoundly violent and bloody impulse that came out of nowhere. There were signs of something extremely dark lurking in his mind and M. himself believed there was an entity present in him that was now ready to possess him completely. He felt the existence of a monster inside, an entity with a mind of its own.

Let’s see how the “reincarnated” ones score on this litmus test. A pastlife regressionist tells of a young woman who kept thinking about stabbing people in the back; this troubled her deeply. A Life Reading showed she had once been a mentally ill man who had stabbed several persons. Been the man? Or – hosting him?

The surge of inexplicable dread which escalates to panic is usually accompanied by somatics – whether dizziness, gasping, paralysis, mutism, choking or shaking. Well, pastlife therapists also mention that their client’s body may begin to shake as soon as they experience their “previous personality.” One doctor noted this shaking among his patients entering hypnotic trance for pastlife recall – a twitching of the facial muscles or trembling and perspiring. Yet this shaking, according to psychics, is typical of channeling in trance, a sign that their guide is trying to get through. Their guide, not their past self. Such tremors or mild seizures are a well-known accompaniment of entity control: there is a subtle shift in vitality, as the medium relinquishes control (for the sake of mediumistic trance). The body begins to shake and shudder – a good sign that a foreign personality has come “on-board.”

Shall we, too, jump to conclusions like the reincarnationist who states authoritatively that hundreds of documented cases of phobias stem from the way they died in a past life? Or that the emotional trauma of a violent death can carry over from one life to the next? But I ask you – Why should an abnormal state such as phobia become the paragon of reincarnation, if Rebirth is natural, normal and universal? Our best cases of reincarnation should not be crowded into the confines of abnormal psychology – should they? They should be everywhere. But they are not. And if the “evidence” takes us anywhere, it is right back to the casualties of sudden death and their persistent haunting in the grey area of Psyche’s outer reach.

“when a person dies with an illness, one psychic explains, the soul will carry the energy…If the soul attaches to another living human, that human may then manifest the illness carried by the departed soul. I have seen a number of illnesses remit after the attaching spirit leaves the body.”But with the reincarnationist’s assertion that birthmarks (as “trauma transfer” from one’s previous life) clinch the case for reincarnation, let us ask the simple question: Why would a soul “come back” with its former defects? Why not take full advantage of the fresh new body and leave old scars behind? If reincarnation is a “choice” and shining example of our unlimited free will, why choose to return stigmatized with ancient traumas?

One of the most common remarks among adherents is that “it makes sense.” Really? How much “sense” does it make to brand the new body with traces of a painful past?

JWC, malignantly overshadowed, was still a boy when, one night, his mother put him to bed after one of his sleepwalking (read: OBE) episodes. In the morning she noticed he had acquired a birthmark which had disappeared from her arm and reappeared on John’s! The mother felt it was a kind of supernatural, religious experience. We know that some of our modern-day offenders (criminals who break out in inexplicable skin eruptions) bear a palpable imprint of negative overshadowing: an actual mark. Browsing among old ghost stories, we find a 17th century chronicle of “fiery marks” and blisters left on a girl by the apparition of a man who had “led an evil life.” Indeed his spirit-form revealed some of his crimes.

How naïve and incautious is the sweeping assumption that the ills of today stem from some bygone existence! Past-life readers, professionalizing the sham, slickly apply the facile and fake formula: Do you have an allergy to dust? But of course! You died, in your former life, in a mine explosion’s cloud of dust!

Dr. Guirdham has shown that the sensitive, the empath, is all too prone to the travails of others – both living and dead. He should know, he’s one. “Sometimes I acquired the symptoms… of patients who began to recover at the same time that I had assumed their symptoms.” The good doctor had also been prostrated by the pangs of the dead, like the time he stayed overnight at an inn near Otmoor and was overtaken with violent shivering, cold and jaundice for two days running. After the fact, he found out that Otmoor was one of the last places in England blighted by malaria; and only then did he realize he had experienced all the symptoms of malaria.

To Guirdham we can also turn for an understanding of why we pick up certain “vibrations” simply because we tend to exchange with those on the same wavelength, not only thoughts and feelings, but even the syndromes of disease. And Dr. Stevenson agrees. “We would associate, after death, with persons of attainments similar to our own”
- Ian Stevenson

"Perhaps we either accomplish a lot of it here in this life, or we do it on the other side, but regardless of whether it's here or there, we continue to grow. I can definitely buy into that."

-Yes, this is making a lot more sense than the duality and separation from the overwhelming oneness that suddenly becomes underwhelming after passing.

[Bryan.A]

"I think love is the meaning, the point, and the purpose"

Problem is,stuff like love is subjective.What's love for one is lust or greed for another.The word love needs to be much more specific so it needs another word for it.

I don't think survival is pointless.MP ya gotta look at the BIG picture.Defeating your own ego is a part of evolution,with that comes reincarnation.With Reincarnation you are not just one person,u are able to experience many aspects of personalities u had in past lives if you so wish though with one dominant personality.Also in the afterlife u might "peel away the ego",but memories don't go forgotten.The Life review is just one of the many ways of seeying past experiences.Nature itself has engraved all experiences as would an endless taperecorder record movies.

The big picture in the universe I think is in the evolution of personality.Going back to where we came from.In a way I see it like the personality fusing with the soul.Personality or spirit and the soul need to be in harmony with eachother in order to fuse in one-ness with "God".The main purpose of life,or life after life thus is advancing this process in the many ways available.

This is very important because u can go two ways,either evolve or devolve.Taken individually it might not mean much,but take it collectively and see what it can do.

Collectively it can create chaos or harmony.
Peace or War.
Hate or Love.
These it can create on earth or in the afterlife.

There must be many more such details but yeah the big picture is certainly not pointless.

[Harlan]

"Defeating your own ego is a part of evolution,with that comes reincarnation.With Reincarnation you are not just one person,u are able to experience many aspects of personalities u had in past lives if you so wish though with one dominant personality."

-Really? Why does reincarnation just "come" with that? It seems that people who see this tiny little speck called earth as the BE ALL END ALL of everything...in other words they think very small, and this seems to be why reincarnation just "comes" with it...all without any proof of course.

"Problem is,stuff like love is subjective.What's love for one is lust or greed for another."

-Really? I'm not sure that love of things involving lust or greed is love at all...perhaps it's really someone's selfishness that distorts their idea of "love"...nothing else.

George Ritchie Interview:

George says he was then taken on a tour of the other realms where he was initially shown a kind of purgatory and even a place that he described as hellish. “This realm was full of beings that I had never seen such hate, such animosity, such jealousy, such know-it-alls and such self righteousness in my life. And these beings would try to bludgeon each other to death, to commit the most lewd acts on one another that you have ever seen. If I might say at this stage…to all these realms that I first toured about, the Christ and I could see them but they could not see us in any of these realms. And I was beginning to realize something…we don’t change just because we die, the habits that we set up and become addicted to here continue with us after we die so what we’ve got to learn is that we can’t let anything control us here…we’ve got to be able to learn to control ourselves because just because we die, you don’t suddenly have control that you didn’t have before.”

George describes seeing a run down bar where people were drinking, and he could see that the living human beings had an electrical field or aura around them but the discarnate did not. “And I could see the soldiers and sailors and civilians inside of the bar, but I could also see these other beings. Now, we human beings have an electrical field or aura around us but these other beings didn’t and I knew it was a different realm because they didn’t have an aura. And, when the human beings got intoxicated enough, so that they were on the verge of passing out, this electrical field began to split from the top to the bottom, and one of these other beings would go rushing towards them and disappear inside of them. I gather, to vicariously experience what it’s like to be drunk.” (And here we have more than one example of attachment/obsession/possession actually taking place).

All of this was being shown to George Ritchie by the being of light who identified himself as the Christ, for a reason. “What he was showing me was this much…we don’t change just because we die…the habits that we become addicted to here continue with us after we die. Now, if that was devastating, the next realm was terrific.” Ultimately Dr. Ritchie was taken to an area that he calls the angelic realm. “Now angels on the other hand, are also beings that emit a terrific amount of light. They do not have wings, they can transcend realms, they seem to be in special service to God…ahh…voluntarily, but once they come into that service it seems to be for their life. And they have the capacity to also affect human beings.” He says that these angelic beings were hard at work in a vastly organized system of advanced research. “Now I was conducted to higher centers of learning where I couldn’t even understand the instrumentation with which I saw these beings working.” George says he saw these angelic beings becoming excited over conceptual break-throughs in many different arts and sciences. “Ten years later, in 1952 or 1953, I picked up Life magazine, in which I saw a picture of the first atomic power plant and I felt the hair go right up the back of my neck because here was an instrument in this picture that I had seen these beings working on in 1943.” The angelic realm appears to be a kind of a bridge between Heaven and Earth. It also makes sense to me, from an organizational point of view, that God would have a system for communicating creative ideas to individuals who are involved in God’s creation here on Earth.

[Harlan]

"I see no problem with existing forever, because my personality even though important, doesn't matter that much compared to my loved ones and seeing some that i never seen in my earthly life."

-Very simply put, and very true.

[Harlan]

By the way, Michael Prescott, with what you have written here you sound a lot like I did at one time. While I was trying to catch the wind by proving something to myself and everyone else, everything I read and everyone I talked to only brought up more questions than answers and I chased my own tail for a long time. During this time, I was really determined that I couldn't possibly think of anything "small" or personal.

I was really into Eckhart Tolle and everything new age...as you put it, the "advanced" meditators. Everything was an impersonal force (a big floating "nothing") that I called "mind", that that is, etc. I was convinced that everything was "big" and I wasn't going to limit it in any way. I also saw myself as far more advanced than most other people around me and I always felt compelled to enlighten them.

What happened was that I "advanced" myself (with a lot of help from the "big" thinkers) right into an existence that there was no point to! I was sure that I had been other people, animals and plants. I was sure there was no creator, only a sea of consciousness. I was sure that there was no absolute anything and everything was a moving target. Eventually I got to the point where I couldn't see any reason for existence. I was only an essence, an expression of an impersonal force and I would be absorbed into the impersonal force, and since everything was a moving target there wasn't really a purpose to anything.

One day, after I had spoken about how unevolved a certain person was, and they told me "you seem to think you are beyond the rest of us", I noticed that they seemed to be generally happier than I was, they weren't trying to catch the wind or feel their own brain, yet they seemed to be generally happy and willing to be helpful to me without me having to ask them for anything. And, they even existed on just faith! But this is just absurd!

Suddenly I realized I had "meditated" myself right out of being a person and into an essence with no point in existing, either here or hereafter! I put the Tolle books into the garbage where I should have put them long before that, and started trying to live again in a regular world where I wasn't trying to feel my own brain, and where I wasn't more "advanced" than all the "small" thinkers. I also started to question how a force (big floating impersonal mind) can create anything...and how this impersonal mind arose out of "nothing"...and so on. I started to figure out that if I wasn't able or willing to judge ANYTHING, or have any kind of a foundation, then I wouldn't be able to function for very much longer. So, I started the difficult task of undoing everything I had done with the help of the advanced meditators. Slowly, it worked.

Maybe you can find some use in what Rev. Dr. Wilma Wake Ph.d wrote about the new age gurus (after all, she is a former new age channeller):

Dr. Wilma Wake, Ph.D (Education) whose spiritual journey took her from being a New Age channeler and author of these New Age Books: "Beyond the Body" and "Beyond the Mind", to a Swedenborgian minister (ordained in 1990), has written in her new book "Crystals, Crosses and Chakras":

"The New Age movement does not have the grounding and generations of community that allow mysticism to flourish safely and deeply. Because of this, some New Agers become seekers after phenomena and personal acclaim rather than travelers along the road of spiritual growth.

"During my own years as an active participant in the New Age culture, I was confused about the difference between psychic phenomena and spiritual growth. At times, I saw the presence of psychic experiences, such as channeling, as evidence of spiritual advancement. I functioned within communities that saw me as a spiritual leader because of my channeling abilities and frequently people urged me to tell them of their "past lives" and futures.

"While such affirmation appealed to one side of me, it also brought me fear and anxiety, for I struggled with how one could assess the validity of this channeled material and psychic experiences. I was not utilizing any of the traditional religious mystical paths. If I were, I would have heard that psychic experiences for some are a stage along the spiritual path, that they can be dangerous to the ego, that they should not be sought for their own sake, but rather just accepted with humility when they are present. Nor was I part of a tradition that could have warned me that they can be the first step of a spiritual journey that moves to a steep, rocky pathway, which many have called a dark night of the soul. When I found myself in a classic "dark night", I could find no explanation for why my psychic spirituality had come to an end...

"My own life fell apart under the weight of psychic experiences that had no place to grow and develop, followed by years of wilderness wandering..."

Reading from Swedenborg:

If we believed the way things really are--that everything good and true is from God and everything evil and false is from the hells--we would not attribute good things to ourselves and take credit for them, nor would we attribute evil things to ourselves and make ourselves responsible for them. Instead, we would focus on God in everything good that we think and do, and we would throw everything evil back into the hell that it came from. (Divine Providence #320; Heaven and Hell #302)

[Teri]

Harlan, you do Michael Prescott and everyone else here a disservice if you think we are all in thrall to Eckhart Tolle or any other New Age Guru. We're all seekers like you.

[Raimo]

"Just because Stevenson "concludes" this does not make it true"

Because of the research I have done over the last 10 years and also because of my own experiences of psi I have formed my world view. I don't base my world view only on something Stevenson or some other researcher has said. I mentioned that Stevenson's conclusion because that personality/individuality/consciousness - stuff is relevant to this discussion.

"With Reincarnation you are not just one person"

I believe that reincarnation is a personal process. Even though personalities, physical attributes etc. may change, the consciousness that reincarnates is always the same.

I disagree very strongly with Eastern religions and New Age. In my opinion evidence shows clearly that those religions are false. I don't want to disrespect anyone's beliefs, but in my opinion the thought of merging with larger consciousness and losing your individuality is false. I also think that the thought of merging with universal consciousnes is disgusting.

[Leo MacDonald]

Hi Raimo,

But isn't new age and eastern religions pretty compatible with psi?, where evidence for survival is compatible with dualism over idealism?. This is where my thinking gets me in trouble, because how do we know which view of reality is correct?. Or perhaps idealism and dualism are both wrong ways to look at reality. That perhaps neutral monism is the answer which can support psi and survival of bodily death.

Then their is materialism which isn't compatible with either survival of bodily of death and psi. Also what about the view of an infinite number of parellel universes, could we be interacting with these universe, without no decoherence. We know that these universes could have completely different laws of physics. Also what about poltergeist phenomena?, could it be just quantum fluctuations being taped by our minds to create effects of poltergeist phenomena?.

But does that really hold?, it appears it may not their are cases of furniture being moved etc. These large objects couldn't be possibility moved by small quantum fluctuation effects from the vacuum.

According to the researchers Brovetto and Maxia believe that the extra fluctuations triggered by the pubescent brain would substantially enhance the presence of the virtual particles surrounding the person. This could slowly increase the pressure of air around them, moving objects and even sending them hurtling across the room.

Here is an new scientist on this

" They're here: the mechanism for poltergeist activity.

However Brian Josephson, a Nobel laureate physicist who is on the editorial board of Neuroquantology.

"This looks distinctly flaky to me," Josephson commented.

That would explain it seems cases of apparitions where people claim to see their people with past wounds. Such as a entity with a hole through his head but show that physical impression tide with his soul.

[Bruce Duensing]

To whom or what does it matter beyond ourselves, does it matter is a more apt question.
Does the living system of creation destroy itself overnight only to be reinvented at dawn? In materiality as a mirror, we do not find this to be the case and so, what is the evidence that living things are more than their form? Plenty, more than enough. Do photons have a nihilistic state that tells us that zero is a viable tool of measurement? Even nothing has to be something to be considered nothing.
Then we have the game of rewards and punishments we have superimposed upon living systems, win or lose...in a psychological orientation of duality.
Yes, it does matter, by the act of being capable to pose this question..whether we recognize this or we do not and this is the crux of an incoherent, anthropomorphic lens. We do not find an existential state in nature and we as nature are not a exception to any rule we could superimpose upon this. We explore the nature of our universe as so it may discern it's own nature and as such a vehicle, this infers we ourselves are such a superimposition, having no autonomous state to begin with.

[Bryan.A]

"I disagree very strongly with Eastern religions and New Age. In my opinion evidence shows clearly that those religions are false. I don't want to disrespect anyone's beliefs, but in my opinion the thought of merging with larger consciousness and losing your individuality is false. I also think that the thought of merging with universal consciousnes is disgusting."

You don't disrespect my believes by saying that.Though I would like to add when merging with the universal consciousness,I know it sounds like a contradiction but it's actually a paradox,you don't lose your individuality completely perse.You gain both universal consciousness while maintaining individuality.I'm not here to prove the existence of reincarnation/universal conciousness,it's only meant to be relevant to the "Does survival matter" question.

Though even if this of merging with the all is disgusting to some(matter of taste) it doesn't mean it doesn't matter.To me living in the dark spheres 24/7 with nothing but chaos surrounding you,people raping eachother,violence everywhere,seems alot more terrible for example.Spiritual Evolution is the way to Bliss.

"Problem is,stuff like love is subjective.What's love for one is lust or greed for another."

-Really? I'm not sure that love of things involving lust or greed is love at all...perhaps it's really someone's selfishness that distorts their idea of "love"...nothing else.

Then u show me scientific evidence what love is.The current meanings across many cultures tell me that love is a fairy tale like Santa claus.Well offcourse you could say absolute love exists like Jesus maybe showed.Free will +Nothing to gain but doing everything for the other,and with nothing I mean even appreciation should be out of the picture.(which can be a powerful gift)
Not like the popular love of todays cultures.Though I can't prove the existence of this intangible thing myself.

~Bryan

[Raimo]

"But isn't new age and eastern religions pretty compatible with psi?"

They have some concepts and also philosophy that I disagree strongly. I don't believe in karma, merging with universal consciousness and other things like that.

"You gain both universal consciousness while maintaining individuality."

I'm aware of that. I meant that losing one's individuality is false. I'm sure that this merging is only temporary and not a goal to be reached. Merging is just a process, where our memories are downloaded by universal mind. In my opinion our destiny is to become more separate, powerful and sophisticated individuals.

"We probably all have times when we get tired of being ourselves."

I haven't had that feeling. I'm very satisfied with myself and my life. If I had to spend eternity being just like I'm today, I would be very happy.

[william]

"I agree. At the end of Reincarnation and Biology Stevenson concluded that what reincarnates (and thus survives death) is not personality, but individuality. Same individual consciousness continues, but personality could be different in different lives."

This is open for discussion because often that very same personality comes through a medium to convince a relative they still exist as that personality. Of course there could be many reasons they do this; one being they are that very same personality. Stevenson was a very through researcher but he confined his research into somewhat limited areas of paranormal research.

“Our best cases of reincarnation should not be crowded into the confines of abnormal psychology – should they? They should be everywhere.”

Why should they be everywhere? Trauma may create greater opportunities to access these past lives. Or not.

“All of this was being shown to George Ritchie by the being of light who identified himself as the Christ, for a reason”

This is one person’s NDE ( i.e. one data point) and the Christ reference may be due to conditioning. Christians see Christ, Buddhists see the Buddha, and etc. even if he said he was an atheist he may have experienced religious training in his youth that may have influenced his perception of heaven, hell, and a Christ person. NDE’s are very good research but they are very subjective and can be heavily influenced by one’s religious conditioning in childhood.

“It also makes sense to me, from an organizational point of view, that God would have a system for communicating creative ideas to individuals who are involved in God’s creation here on Earth.”

Some of my research supports this statement. Where does a revelation that leads to a realization come from? It happens in an instant. It appears to me there may be a lot more communication between these realms and ours than we realize. Could these higher realms be responsible for many of these gaps that appear to be in the evolutionary process of species? I have never bought into the idea we are here by chance or national selection or mutation.

"This looks distinctly flaky to me," Josephson commented.”

With due respect to Josephson all the awards in the world does not make all of his words truth. The history of scientific discoveries has had a lot of scientists calling many of these discoveries flaky or worst. This statement is not intended to support or not support what he called flaky just an observation I have learned in my life about how often we humans have adverse reactions to new information.

[william]

“I don't believe in karma, merging with universal consciousness and other things like that.”

Most of my research supports the idea of karma and from my point of view it appears to be a reality. How could we progress in consciousness without it? It appears to be a perfect principle but because of our unawareness we seldom see it in action. It also appears to work for individuals and nations and indeed the world.

My definition of karma is a bit different than the eastern religions as I lean in the direction of what they call the fruits of karma or what we sow we reap.

Now merging with the universal consciousness that is open for debate as my research leans in the direction that we always keep our individuality even if we merge. My opinion at this time is that we do merge with this universal pure awareness. Now could we not? When do we stop learning and become static. We never lose our identity as our “identity” becomes that that is.

[william]

“I don't believe in karma, merging with universal consciousness and other things like that.”

Most of my research supports the idea of at least the fruits of karma and from my point of view it appears to be a reality. How could we progress in consciousness without it? This fruits of karma appears to be a perfect principle but because of our unawareness we seldom see it in action. It also appears to work for individuals and nations and indeed the world.

My definition of karma is a bit different than the eastern religions as I lean in the direction of what they call the fruits of karma or what we sow we reap. Kind of like going to school and getting feedback on how well we are doing in the love and divine intelligence part.

Now merging with the universal consciousness that is open for debate as my research leans in the direction that we always keep our individuality even if we “merge”. My opinion at this time is that we do merge with this universal pure awareness. How could we not? When do we stop learning and become static until we become pure or infinite awareness. We never lose our identity as our “identity” becomes that that is. I.e. Isness

[Hope Rivers]

We are created to experience love by love.

I also had an NDE and there is no word that can express the divinity, the purity, the peace and joyful ecstasy one encounters when basking in God's light(love).

Do we all end up in THAT realm after death? Despite my experience I cant say we all do. There's too much evidence of evil in this world, of selfishness, greed and lust to not transpire into a realm of these conditions. People deceive and hurt one another here on earth, just as many spirits do in their dimension, including ours.

This life is an exciting journey with all its ups and downs, but one thing thats certain is that we are so loved. We are created out of love, so this makes me feel pretty darn good too know I was thought about and created by "God" to experience the dream called "life" given freedom to make my choices but also know in my heart that the little voice inside that kept me seeking truth was me being nudged by the creator to not give up. "Love" does not impose, love sets us free. Once the selfishness and ego are stripped love begins to manifest, you connect with your creator and slowly but surely you can't help but want to love in return, which transpires to all of God's creations, because you realise that all things was created with such care, magnificently beautiful and perfect. Its only evil that perverts and makes us sick, confused, abandoned, fearful and dark.

It is a narrow road that leads to real LIFE and real LOVE.

I was in the supermarket the other day getting fruit and veges and I was overcome by God's creativity. I mean forget the cosmos and look to the beautiful fruits, vegetables,their colour, shape, texture and taste. How could anyone dismiss that as evidence, that there IS a God, who loves us and has made all these things out of love for us. What about all the 1000's of beautiful flowers and their perfume. We all should be overcome with appreciation and humilty for ever doubting.

[Michael Prescott]

"How could anyone dismiss that as evidence, that there IS a God, who loves us and has made all these things out of love for us."

Not to be too cynical, but evidently God also made the smallpox virus, the tapeworm, the cholera bacterium, e.coli, cancer, and Simon Cowell.

It's a mixed bag, I'd say.

[Leo MacDonald]

I agree with you Raimo, i also want my personality to continue in the same form forever, for it not to merge into a universal consciousness. Yes their is strong evidence that shows this merging with universal consciousness could be wrong. But what about multiple personality disorder? reincarnation evidence?. Which appears to point in the other direction, but of course their is other ways to interpret that evidence too.

[Felipe']

Michael -

I couldn't disagree with you more strongly on your last point.

I think that if god does exist ( which unfortunately, Hope's love for Avocados aside - ain't very likely) Simon Cowell is a huge step up from tapeworm - especially on this season's show.

I can't stand Randy - I'd love to see them replace him next season with Eckhard Tolle or even Wayne Dyer would be a step in the right direction.

Love the blog and keep up the great work!

[william]

“Not to be too cynical, but evidently God also made the smallpox virus, the tapeworm, the cholera bacterium, e.coli, cancer, and Simon Cowell.”

“It's a mixed bag, I'd say.”

I have spent most of my life wondering about this “mixed bag” and the last two decades doing much research into these mysteries of life. Without that mixed bag it appears there would not be much if any soul evolution. Stated another way it is this dualism with the fruits of karma that polishes or purifies the soul into greater and purer awareness.

“Its only evil that perverts and makes us sick, confused, abandoned, fearful and dark.”

And the underlying reality of that evil is ignorance, but it is a mixed bag because without that ignorance (unawareness) there is no US as perceived separate identities just Isness.

This Isness, which is Infinite Perfect Awareness (God) minus some level or *degree of unawareness equals degrees, levels, or realms of consciousness and we souls are an aspect of those degrees of consciousness. I.e. even water has some degree or aspect of consciousness.

The mystics and most advanced spirits tell us that evil is nonexistent as an absolute reality. For evil to be a reality there would have to be an aspect of God that is evil and since God is infinite perfect awareness there is no evil in God.

But there is evil in ignorance but then ignorance is not an absolute infinite reality but a temporal reality. Now that temporal part can be very long as our reality but to the Infinite time is nonexistent.

* In Simon Cowell’s case large degrees of unawareness.

[Michael Prescott]

"Simon Cowell is a huge step up from tapeworm"

To be honest, I just picked Cowell because he is in the news a lot and seems easily mockable. I've never watched American Idol, so I don't have any real opinion about him.

Maybe I should have picked Paris Hilton or Britney Spears ...

[Felipe']

Thanks, Michael - I was just playing..;-)

I do find all of the "god created us to feel love, experience separation or see the world through his/her/it's eyes" REALLY sort of self indulgently naive and a bit on the silly, specious and wishful thinking side of the not so smart street- and a bit surprised at how many people REALLY believe that. ( although my instincts tell me that most....at heart, probably don't)

The survival stuff is pretty compelling though in toto - I find it curious and interesting - but in keeping with the American Idol theme a bit - not sure what God's got to do with it as Tina Turner once said.

Maybe our conciousness continues in the same random, inexplicable way that it seems to exist here and now - no dogma, no reason, no real destination - it just is.

The happy ending of understanding that we all seem to waxing poetic about - might not be any more clear over "there" than it is over here..:-)

[william]

“I do find all of the "god created us to feel love, experience separation or see the world through his/her/it's eyes" REALLY sort of self indulgently naive and a bit on the silly, specious and wishful thinking side of the not so smart street- and a bit surprised at how many people REALLY believe that.”

This quote is a classic example of intellectualism. I.e. “I am smart they are not therefore I am special”. The atheists and ultra skeptics are big into this line of reasoning. The ego loves the idea that it is special and will do and say some interesting things to feel special. This statement in no way is meant to demean or attack just a classic example of the ego in action. The ego is so deceptive it can convince itself that it knows when others don’t even if it has not experienced what others have.

You see we all have a God and the ego has found its God: itself. This is the problem of using the word God it has so many different meanings to so many different people. I prefer the term perfect or pure awareness but the word pure may be viewed as a religious term. Also Source or Absolute might be better choice to attempt to define the indefinable than the term God. Once we try to define infinite we limit it.

Hope I cannot speak to your experience as I have not had a NDE but I do know this until one experiences such a love or understanding for the most part you will be speaking to deaf ears. This may explain why we have to experience life to gain understanding.

“The happy ending of understanding that we all seem to waxing poetic about - might not be any more clear over "there" than it is over here..:-)”

When we cross over we appear to be our same sweet or not so sweet selves even to the point some still think they exist in this physical world and many call these spirits earthbound. It also appears that like attracts like in these other astral realms so if we are religious in this physical world spirits appear to be religious in these other realms of existence.

Also I don’t believe that over there is one place or dimension but many. How many who knows. Some claim to know but how could they know unless they have lived or visited all of them. The higher realms don’t appear to be as interested in communicating with the physical world as the lower realms of existence.

“not sure what God's got to do with it as Tina Turner once said.”

Tina Turner is a confirmed Buddhist and her view is highly tainted. Once we join any organization religious or otherwise our view can become very tainted. The Buddhists have a God it is called Mind.

[william]

Hope while looking at the book the supreme adventure to recommend to Ally I noticed two quotes at the front of the book. I think they apply to your post and our follow up responses.

"He that answereth a matter before he heareth it; it is a shame and a folly unto him" Solomon.

From my point of view one could change the word "heareth" to "experience".

The other quote: “Read not to contradict and confute nor to believe and take for granted but to weigh and consider.”

[Felipe']

William -

Tina Turner said - "what LOVE got to do with it..." which was the reference..:-)

( I didn't know she was Buddhist, nor did I realize her view was tainted as a result..:-)

I agree with some of what you just said, but all of the sort of convolutions that god must NEED to experience him, or herself, through the little chess pieces that are you and I seem to me, a FAR more illustrative example of overthinking something to give it a significance, or meaning....when in fact it may have none at all.

We are - we're aware - and to what degree that matters - who knows?

I personally think the liklihood that there
is a "god" to be pretty slim.

I also think the argument that the colors of fruit at the supermarket, or the humbling awe of a sunset, or the great second half of last weeks episode of 24, are the sorts of arguments that make it fairly easy to feel somewhat comfortable in that belief. As Michael P said SO much better than I - sure - a peach may be pretty and feel real nice too - but the humility and awe of feeling fruity quickly disappears when you consider the 50 people who were blown to bits in Iraq this morning - or the suffering around the world - or simply the rotted underbelly of the fruit that didn't make the supermarket floor.

That's it - I'm just a big believer that a God worth believing in - as someone smarter than me once said - has a bit more going for him or her than the arguments that we make in her defense.

( But I appreciate your point of view)

[Hope Rivers]

Felipe its the evil in man that commits the crime, can't blame that on God.

[Hope Rivers]

"Hope I cannot speak to your experience as I have not had a NDE but I do know this until one experiences such a love or understanding for the most part you will be speaking to deaf ears. This may explain why we have to experience life to gain understanding".

William I agree that my experience would be foreign to most that post here, and yes my voice may fall on death ears as you put it, all that demonstrates is ignorance and evidence of people who claim to be open and seekers of truth, really aren't.

Defensiveness, arrogance and attacking my input just shows exactly where one is at. We all are entitled to believe what we want but when mocking others comes to the table that shows naivety, foolishness and immaturity for something one can't guarantee that their belief/analysis is "The golden nugget"

I have a high regard and respect for your views William and Michael, and I enjoy reading the posts here but I dont ever recall insulting or disrespecting either of you.

[Michael Prescott]

"I dont ever recall insulting or disrespecting either of you."

I wasn't trying to mock you, Hope - just pointing out a possible objection to your argument that the beauty and diversity of nature are evidence of God. The objection is that nature consists of a lot of pain and ugliness too. Right now I'm watching a family member deteriorate with Alzheimer's. If God made the marvelous human brain, He made Alzheimer's also.