(Update, June 23: This post was considerably amended to correct some mistakes I made in describing the activity level of the double during earthly life, a problem pointed out by Zerdini in comments.)
My last post concerned the idea of the etheric double, a duplicate body that takes over for us when our earthly body dies. The idea was presented in some channeled material produced by Geraldine Cummins in her book Beyond Human Personality.
Of course, the idea of a double - astral body, soul body, etc. - is hardly new. It dates back at least as far as ancient Egypt. According to the Egyptians, each person was born with a ka, or twin. One Web site says:
It was thought that the creator god Khnum created a person's Ka when he created the person on his potter's wheel. The Ka then followed the person like a shadow or double all through life, but when the person died, the Ka returned to its heavenly abode.
Other sources (like this one) say the ka remained in the tomb, rather than going to heaven. In any event, it was conceived of as a double or twin of the human being, and was represented as an exact duplicate in Egyptian art. (More about the ka here.)
Variants of the idea of the "double" are found in other traditions, such as the kama rupa of Theosophy, the perispirit of Allan Kardec's writings, and the subtle body of many religions.
For Christians, the most famous description of the subtle body is the one given by St. Paul in First Corinthians 15:35-50. Paul calls it the resurrection body:
35But someone may ask, "How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?" 36How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. 38But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body ....
42So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; 43it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body .... 50I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. [New International Version, via Bible Gateway]
As presented in Cummins' book, the etheric double is a secondary body through which the mind/soul operates. The double serves as an interface between the mind/soul and the physical body. As "Myers" says,
But the soul has to work through the medium of the double and never directly commands matter. Always there is this unifying body which comes between the self and his outward appearance in the material world.
The double is active at all times, but is independently active - i.e., functioning independently of the physical body - only on certain occasions, such as when the physical body is asleep or comatose. The rest of the time, the etheric body is closely entwined with the physical body.
The etheric double is not merely superficially identical to the physical body. It is said to contain all the same organs, vessels, nerves, and so forth, including, of course, an etheric brain. While the mind/soul may have difficulty operating through an aging, damaged, or defective physical brain (even with the etheric double as an interface), no similar difficulties would be encountered in operating through the etheric brain directly, since the etheric form is free from the effects of age, injury, or illness. Thus, the dying person feels himself reborn in a body that is a duplicate of his earthly body, but without earthly weaknesses and flaws - a body that is familiar, yet different; his own, yet new.
A post I published earlier this year contains an "eyewitness account" of the separation of an etheric double from the physical body, as reported by the clairvoyant Andrew Jackson Davis. Here's part of what I wrote back in March:
-------
John DeSalvo's worthwhile albeit regrettably brief book Andrew Jackson Davis: The First American Prophet and Clairvoyant contains some interesting material on the 19th century medium. One chapter recounts Davis's experience in a hospital when he observed two dying men. Davis reported that he saw, clairvoyantly, the entire dying process. His description matches up pretty well with accounts collected by Robert Crookall in his books on death and dying, such as Intimations of Immortality.
Observing one of the unconscious patients, Davis wrote,
There was, at first, a broad, ribbon-shaped current arising from the epigastrium. As it ascended, it separated, and expanded into a sort of fleecy steam-cloud, about three feet above the bosom, in the air where the effulgent elements assumed the form of an inverted pyramid with a turbinate envelope, which was, by a strong psychical cord, attached to the solar ganglia, a sort of linea alba tube.
The inverted pyramidal cloud gradually assumed an oval shape externally, amid, internally, a representation of the perfect ellipse, approximating to a globular form, and with a throbbing sun-bright nucleus, which seemed like the germ-cell from which, in a few moments, the miracle would be wrought of an immediate incubation, rapidly resulting in the production of a full-formed and indescribably perfect angel man!
An illustration commissioned by Davis shows a luminous oval cloud issuing from the supine patient's midsection and head. Though two cords are shown connecting the cloud to the patient, the idea seems to be that there is only one cord (the "broad, ribbon-shaped current"), which begins at the solar plexus and then gradually moves up to the head.
Once the cloud is fully formed, the patient's spirit flows through it "with lightning rapidity and vividness," forming a full-sized replica of the patient's body, starting with the head and working downward. In the illustration this body is shown still inside the now-expanded cloud, hovering vertically over the patient in a standing position.
Before the outline of the immortal head was visible, I observed that the cloud-like appearance of the emulations, as a whole, manifested several remarkable innate movements. There were vertical motions, upward and downward; lateral motions, like an anchored balloon, from side to side; then rotatory or gyrating motions, like a spinning-top immediately before losing its momentum. These various graceful motions completely subsided, and the whole became absolutely still, when the formation had advanced sufficiently to unfold the head and bust.
It was remarkable, the perfect progressiveness manifested in each succeeding stage of development. The two men patients were leaving the earth together, with only a few feet of airy space between; yet they were as absolutely without consciousness of each other's existence as though they were departing with the earth's entire diameter between them. In reality, there was no self consciousness in either during the metamorphosis. One was being born (or, in earthly words, one was dying) about an hour in advance of the other; which interesting difference gave me, as a medical student an opportunity to classify the successive stages of the marvelous process.
Davis goes on to say that the spirit, once separated from the body, enters a bright light and emerges in a heavenly environment surrounded by departed loved ones.
-----
If the "Myers" communication in Beyond Human Personality is accurate, then what Davis saw was not an original formation of the etheric double but its re-formation after separating from the physical body. The etheric double, which previously served mainly as the interface between the mind/soul and the earthly body, becomes the only vehicle through which the person's mind/soul operates, now that his earthly vehicle is defunct.
In comments, both Michael Tymn and Zerdini give additional examples of such "eyewitness accounts." Such accounts are fairly common; here are a few cases collected by William Barrett.
The idea of the etheric double seems to address the issue of how the mind/soul can continue to be individuated and distinctly personal when the physical brain is no more. It has a long pedigree and has won acceptance in many cultures, and is a persistent part of modern spiritualist communications.
Of course, one might argue that the double is some sort of Jungian archetype, and that it crops up so persistently in so many places merely because it is a symbol hardwired into the human psyche. Maybe so.
Or maybe "Myers," Davis, and sages throughout history have known what they were talking about, and there really is a spirit double that continues to receive our consciousness after we pass on.
Zerdini,
01-vitor - you can huff and puff as much as you like but you have no evidence that Estelle Roberts was a fraud and you will never find any.
Well, no one found evidence of fraud in Nina Kulagina also, but I am 99% now sure that she was a fraud. Mirabelli was a Brazilian medium that did exatly what she did, in the same conditions, by fraud. Even their failures were the same. The controls were not good. Robert's mediumship and Xavier's mediumship were very similar, and both were never caught cheating alive, but I and others discover plagiarism in Xavier's writing after his dead. Maybe I can't find a direct evidence of fraud by Roberts, but certainly I found indirect evidence.
02-How do you define real and false mediumship?
False mediumship:
a) the medium give names very easily (Xavier and Robert did this)
b) the medium don't accept tests
c) there is no way to check the existence of the guide (in Xavier's case, a friend of mine proof the inexistence of the guide)
Real mediumship:
Exatly the oposite of a), b), c).
03-By agreeing to be investigated by scientists? I'm sorry that is simply not acceptable.
That's just one of the items.
04- You also stated: "Worst, we have cases of mediums that Science itself refused to investigate, like Daniel Home or Florence Cook."
William Crookes, the leading scientist of the day, DID investigate Daniel Home and Florence Cook.
Yes, and I said that. Go back to my post and read again:
Crookes invited many scientists to help him in his research, but almost no one did.
05-Read "Researches into the phenomena of Spiritualism" by Crookes.
I have the book. Again, I mention Crookes in my post.
06-It has become apparent after reading all your posts that you have no idea what mediumship is. All the reading in the world balanced against personal experience carries no weight and is extremely unscientific.
I can't check your personal experience. Your personal experience will die with you. I don't know you, I don't know if I can trust in your report, because there was no control.
07-The mistakes appear to be on your part not mine.
Sorry, but you can't compare personal experience with evidence adquired by experiments under rigorous control. Millions of people had their personal experience with Chico Xavier and he was a fraud.
Posted by: Vitor | June 25, 2009 at 11:48 PM
Vitor - you don't seem to understand that making unsubstantiated allegations against mediums is not evidence of anything.
01 - Nina Kulagina was not a medium - again you don't seem to know the difference between a medium and a psychc.
You admit you never found direct evidence of fraud in the mediums you happily libel because they are 'dead'.
Comparing mediums abilities to try and prove 'indirect evidence' is a mark of desperation on your part.
'Maybe' is NOT evidence.
I have to go out now but will happily deal with the rest of your statements later.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 26, 2009 at 03:51 AM
contd.
02 False mediumship:
a) the medium give names very easily (Xavier and Robert did this)
b) the medium don't accept tests
c) there is no way to check the existence of the guide (in Xavier's case, a friend of mine proof the inexistence of the guide)
(a)I've already explained that Mrs Roberts was an outstanding clairaudient and gave an example of her public mediumship.
Perhaps you would do the same for Xavier so I can compare them.
(b) I already dealt with this.
(c) What has the existence of a guide got to do with evidence of survival? If a guide lived on earth thousands of years ago is it necessary to prove that? (rhetorical question). It doesn't affect the medium's abilities.
04 - Yes, Crookes a leading scientist of his day, did investigate D.D. Home and Florence Cook and came out in their favour.
06 - You state: "I can't check your personal experience. Your personal experience will die with you. I don't know you, I don't know if I can trust in your report, because there was no control."
Equally I can't check your personal experience. I don't know you and your allegations will die with you. My personal experiences will live on as they have been published in various books and on the internet.
Where have yours been published?
I can't trust in your reports because there was no control.
07 - Again you do not produce any evidence that Xavier was a fraud - it is simply your opinion and that is not scientifically acceptable.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 26, 2009 at 05:02 AM
Zerdini
01- Vitor - you don't seem to understand that making unsubstantiated allegations against mediums is not evidence of anything.
My allegations HAS substance. They are based in what we can find in psychic literature, in other examples of fraud, in my own research about others false mediums.
02 - Nina Kulagina was not a medium - again you don't seem to know the difference between a medium and a psychc.
I NEVER said she was a medium. It was just an example of someone who was never caught in cheating alive but it was a fraud after all.
03- You admit you never found direct evidence of fraud in the mediums you happily libel because they are 'dead'.
Wrong. I found direct evidence of fraud in Chico Xavier and Mirabelli. Even both already dead, I found many documents that prove their frauds.
04-Comparing mediums abilities to try and prove 'indirect evidence' is a mark of desperation on your part.'Maybe' is NOT evidence.
It is not a mark of desparation, it's just inference.
Posted by: Vitor | June 26, 2009 at 07:58 AM
Vitor
01 - You haven't produced a single piece of evidence to substantiate your claims. it seems it's all in your mind. People have by now read enough to show that you are talking nonsense. It seems pointless to continue this any longer.
02 - You were comparing Kulagina to a medium and there was no comparison. As you now admit Kulagina was never caught cheating neither was Estelle Roberts.
03 - I asked you to produce evidence and you failed to do so.
04 - Inference is NOT evidence of fraud.
Continually repeating yourself without producing any evidence of your claims is wasting my time and yours. I suggest you leave the subject and turn to something you might know something about.
Readers of this blog have enough information now to form their own opinions.
Best wishes.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 26, 2009 at 08:34 AM
"I suggest you leave the subject and turn to something you might know something about."
Vitor is quite knowledgeable on the subject of mediumship and has contributed many valuable comments to this blog.
Zerdini also has a thorough knowledge of the subject and has contributed many helpful comments.
Can't we all just get along?
:-)
Posted by: Michael Prescott | June 26, 2009 at 12:11 PM
I have no problem with that Michael. I have read Vitor's comments on mediumship before but did not reply until he started calling certain mediums frauds without a scrap of evidence to back up his assertions.
As far as I am concerned the subject is now closed.
Best wishes.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 26, 2009 at 02:11 PM
Zerdini,
I had answered all your others criticisms but my post vanished. Briefly, my research is in Portuguese, and you can find it here:
http://obraspsicografadas.haaan.com/
01- You haven't produced a single piece of evidence to substantiate your claims. it seems it's all in your mind. People have by now read enough to show that you are talking nonsense. It seems pointless to continue this any longer.
Estelle Roberts has the same profile of false mediums. That's evidence, and a good one.
02 - You were comparing Kulagina to a medium and there was no comparison. As you now admit Kulagina was never caught cheating neither was Estelle Roberts.
Kulagina has the same profile of Mirabelli, and he was a fraud. The proofs are here:
http://obraspsicografadas.haaan.com/category/obras-de-carmine-mirabelli/
Both could not move objects if they were wet, they almost always have to touch the objects before or during the experiments, even their clothes were similar. This can't be coincidence. Mirabelli used one hair to move objects, with the help of some kind of wax. That's why the objects could not be wet.
I will continue in another post, Prescott said that the reason for my post vanish could be the excessive number of links.
Posted by: Vitor | June 26, 2009 at 10:31 PM
Zerdini,
I had answered all your others criticisms but my post vanished many times. Briefly, my research is in Portuguese, and you can find it here:
http://obraspsicografadas.haaan.com/
Posted by: Vitor | June 26, 2009 at 10:33 PM
03 - I asked you to produce evidence and you failed to do so.
No, the post vanished. In my blog you will find all proofs against Chico Xavier [plagiarism, inexistence of the guide and even false materializations]and Mirabelli.
04 - Inference is NOT evidence of fraud.
It is if we cand find a lot of coincidences betwenn the behavior of a false medium and someone who the people think that is a real medium. And I have found many coincidences in Estelle Roberts and Chico Xavier.
05-Continually repeating yourself without producing any evidence of your claims is wasting my time and yours. I suggest you leave the subject and turn to something you might know something about.
I suggest you to stop with these ad-hominems, like if I am some kind of stupid, and stop misquoting me. Even Prescott showed a way that Estelle Roberts could have cheated. And I have show others in the same condition that were false mediums.
Posted by: Vitor | June 26, 2009 at 10:39 PM
6-Readers of this blog have enough information now to form their own opinions.
No, they don't, like I said, one of my post disapeared. I will answer your other cristicisms again:
a)What has the existence of a guide got to do with evidence of survival? If a guide lived on earth thousands of years ago is it necessary to prove that? (rhetorical question). It doesn't affect the medium's abilities.
Yes, even a guide that lived on earth thousands of years ago has to prove his existence. That's what Xavier's guide tried to do, he said it was a Roman Senator called Publius Lentulus that knew Jesus (so, two thousands years ago), and wrote a book about this. But the book has many inconsistences, and the Senator NEVER existed (see http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09154a.htm).
See, even a false guide tried to prove his existence.
b) I can't trust in your reports because there was no control.
I don't need control to find proof of plagiarism or to do historical research.
Posted by: Vitor | June 26, 2009 at 10:41 PM
03 - I asked you to produce evidence and you failed to do so.
No, the post disappeared. In my blog you will find all proofs against Chico Xavier [plagiarism, inexistence of the guide and even false materializations]and Mirabelli. Unfortunely I can't put the links, myposts are continuously vanishing.
04 - Inference is NOT evidence of fraud.
It is if we cand find a lot of coincidences betwenn the behaviorof a false medium and someone who the people thinkthat is a real medium. And I have found many coincidences in Estelle Roberts and Chico Xavier.
05-Continually repeating yourself without producing any evidence of your claims is wasting my time and yours. I suggest you leave the subject and turn to something you might know something about.
I suggest you to stop with these ad-hominems, like if I am some kind of stupid, and stop misquoting me. Even Prescott showed a way that Estelle Roberts could have cheated.
6-Readers of this blog have enough information now to form their own opinions.
No, they don't, like I said, one of my post disapeared. I will ansewer your other cristicisms again:
a)What has the existence of a guide got to do with evidence of survival? If a guide lived on earth thousands of years ago is it necessary to prove that? (rhetorical question). It doesn't affect the medium's abilities.
Yes, even a guide that lived on earth thousands of years ago has to prove his existence. That's what Xavier's guide tried to do, he said it was a Roman Senator called Publius Lentulus that knew Jesus (so, two thousands years ago), and wrote a book about this. But the book has many inconsistences, and the Senator NEVER existed. See, even a false guide tried to prove his existence.
b) I can't trust in your reports because there was no control.
I don't need control to find proof of plagiarism or to do historical research.
c) Again you do not produce any evidence that Xavier was a fraud - it is simply your opinion and that is not scientifically acceptable.
Go to my blog and ask to someone translate it for you.
Posted by: Vitor | June 26, 2009 at 10:46 PM
Vitor wrote: "Even Prescott showed a way that Estelle Roberts could have cheated."
Michael did no such thing. That remark perfectly illustrates my case.
There is no point in continuing this pointless debate.
As far as I am concerned people can form their own opinions based on what has been said.
Posted by: Zerdini | June 27, 2009 at 02:14 AM
Dear Client,
We are mandate company in West Africa, we have our mining firm in Ghana and also our sales company head quarters is located in Capital City ACCRA GHANA.
Presently we have in stock as fellows...
1. Product : Alluvial Gold Dust
2. Quality: 22+carats
3. Purity : 92.5%
4. Quantity: 450kg
5. Origin: West Africa/Ghana
6. Price : US$ 12,000 per kilo
Upon your Reply we will send our Full Co-operate Offer to you, we are very intreted and happy doing business with you.
THANKS,
Jeff Morgan
Sales mandate manager.
Posted by: Jeff Morgan | July 08, 2009 at 04:19 PM
Wow, that sounds like a totally legitimate offer, "Mr. Morgan." I'll get right on it.
I'd better close down comments on this thread. The spammers are jumping on.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | July 08, 2009 at 05:54 PM