Birth and rebirth

Update, June 25: I mistakenly attributed quotes from Testimony of Light to a different book by a different author. The error is corrected now. Thanks to Robert McLuhan for noticing the mistake. 

---

I've often commented on the biggest inconsistency in ostensibly channeled communications about the afterlife — the question of whether or not spirits reincarnate. The same concern shows up in Stafford Betty's worthwhile book The Afterlife Unveiled, which consists largely of excerpts from channeled material.

Betty, a PhD in Theology, teaches religuous studies at California State University and has a special intetest in mediumship. In his concluding chapter, Prof. Betty writes: 

I wish I could report that there was unanimity on this very important subject [of reincarnation], but the facts don't permit it. This lack is the main reason I leave open the possibility, however slight, that this entire literature could be coming from the subconscious beliefs of mediums rather than from spirits. There are many reasons for thinking otherwise, and they impress me far more than this lone thorn among so many flowers growing together harmoniously, but there is no denying the prick.

Still, Betty's own book showed me that explicit references to reincarnation are found in some of the oldest modern mediumistic accounts. It does not appear to be the case, as I'd previously believed, that reincarnation scarcely makes an appearance in the older messages but starts appearing regularly in the more recent ones. Instead, there seems to have been a certain tension over this issue right from the start. 

I was already somewhat aware of this, having read The Spirits' Book (free PDF here). This well-known volume was compiled by Allan Kardec and originally published in 1857, not too long after the modern Spiritualist movement began. Kardec's communicating spirits make no bones, so to speak, about reincarnation, which they view as a natural part of any spirit's evolution. 

Asked, "How can the soul that has not attained to perfection during the corporeal life complete the work of its purification?", the spirits answer: "By undergoing the trial of a new existence…" Additional questioning brings out the clarification that the new existence must be a physical one:

The soul, in purifying itself, undoubtedly undergoes a transformation; but, in order to effect this transformation, it needs the trial of corporeal life… we all have many such existences. Those who maintain the contrary wish to keep you in the same ignorance in which they are themselves… In each new existence, a spirit takes a step forwards in the path of progress; when he has stripped himself of all his impurities, he has no further need of the trials of corporeal life.… he who advances quickly spares himself many trials. Nevertheless, these successive incarnations are always very numerous, for progress is almost infinite. 

Returning to Stafford Betty's book, we find a discussion of reincarnation in his chapter on the 1914 book Letters from the Afterlife, in which Elsa Barker channeled Judge David Hatch. The discarnate Hatch tells us: 

You should get away from the mental habit of regarding your present life as the only one, get rid of the idea that the life you expect to lead on this side, after your death, is to be an endless existence in one state. You could no more endure such an endless existence in the subtle matter [of Hatch's world] then you could endure to live forever in the gross matter in which you are now encased. You would weary of it. You could not support it…

I could probably force the coming back [to earth], but that would be unwise, for I should then come back with less power than I want… it is better for me to rest in the condition of light matter until I have accumulated energy enough to come back with power. I shall not do, however, as many souls do; they stay out here until they are as tired of this world as they formerly were tired of the earth, and then are driven back half unconsciously by the irresistible force of the tide of rhythm. I want to guide to that rhythm…

When the soul enters matter, preparing for rebirth, it enters potentiality, if we may use such a term, and all its strength is needed in the herculean effort to form the new body and adjust to it.

Hatch goes on to explain that “the tendencies of any given life, the unexplained impulses and desires, are in nearly all cases brought over" to the new incarnation, though specific memories are usually forgotten. 

Another thing I noticed when reading The Afterlife Unveiled is the sharp similarity between some channeled accounts and the accounts given by the hypnotically regressed patients of Michael Newton and other therapists interested in between-lives memories. Typically, these patients describe an afterlife environment that is more abstract and unearthly than "Summerland" accounts, while saying that their own bodily forms are essentially patterns of light and color. 

As I wrote in an older post, 

There also is very little discussion [in Newton's accounts] of what has been called Paradise or Summerland -- the earthlike environment of the afterlife, featuring gardens, meadows, houses, birds, etc. Some of Newton's subjects do recall studying in a beautiful library, but for the most part the afterlife environment, as they depict it, seems to consist of blobs of color (which are souls) zipping around in a rather abstract geometric setting. It reminds me a little of the old sci-fi movie Tron.

Newton's patients also report being part of a group soul — an organizational unit that allows spirits to learn from each other and make progress together. 

Compare all this with the discussion of reincarnation in another of Betty's sources — The Road to Immortality, channeled by Geraldine Cummins and published in 1932. (Complete text online here.) The communicating spirit, allegedly famed psychical researcher F.W.H. Myers, tells us that on the fourth spiritual plane the spirit acquires

a body entirely dissimilar from the human body. As regards appearance, it can only be described as being apparently a compound of light and colors unimaginable. The shape of this form is influenced by all the ego's past acts so far as they have impressed themselves on his deeper consciousness. This colored compound may be grotesque, bizarre in form, may be lovely beyond words, may possess strange absurdities of outline, or may transcend the loftiest dream of earthly beauty… 

Within the subtle world of which I speak you will perceive a variety of forms which are not known on earth and therefore may not be expressed in words. Yet there is a certain similarity, a correspondence between the appearances on this luminiferous plane. Flowers are there; but these are in shapes unknown to you, exquisite in color, radiant with light. Such colors, such lights are not contained within any earthly octave, are expressed by us in thoughts and not in words…

Betty summarizes the book's presentation of the group soul concept: 

Myers introduces us to the Group Soul, one of the hallmarks of the Fourth Plane. A Group Soul is “a number of souls all bound together by one spirit.” There are countless Group Souls, each headed and inspired by a single spirit of uncommon power. Each Group Soul might contain as few as 20 souls or as many as a thousand. And there is some unifying interest, for example music, that acts as the thread that binds the group together.… Most Group Souls significantly quicken progress. Myers is himself a member of one: “The interesting feature of my state here is that I am within a larger mind, and many of my affinities are contained in it.” He tells us we will “realize how fine and beautiful is this brotherhood within the one being; how it deepens and intensifies existence; how it destroys the cold selfishness so necessary to an earth life.”

Of special interest is the economy of the Group Soul. Each soul is so privy to the experiences of its fellows that the lessons normally learned only by a succession of many reincarnations can be speeded up. It works like this:

“… what the Buddhists would call the karma I had brought with me from a previous life is, very frequently, not that of my life, but of the life of the soul [in my group] that preceded me by many years on earth and left for me a pattern which made my life. I, too, wove a pattern for another of my group during my earthly career. We are all of us distinct, though we are influenced by others of our community on the various planes of being.”

Myers tells us he will not reincarnate. The surrogate experiences of his brothers and sisters, which he feels with as much intensity as if he were the actor, are teaching him all the remaining lessons of earth needed for his advancement.

Another point made by Newton's patients is that they plan out their earthly lives before birth, even choosing their parents. Yet the vicissitudes of life and the vagaries of free will mean that the plan — mostly forgotten by the conscious mind while incarnated — is often not carried out successfully. This idea is paralleled in Betty's excerpts from Testimony of Light (1980), by Helen Greaves, a book of material purportedly originating with a deceased nun, Frances Banks. Note that Greaves' book was published 14 years earlier than Newton's first book, Journey of Souls. 

Here is how the life plan is described by "Frances Banks":

Somewhere in the deeps of my mind two ‘blueprints’ are brought forward into my consciousness. These are so clear that I can (literally) take them out, materialize them and study them. One is the Perfect Idea with which my spirit went bravely into incarnation. The other is the resultant of only a partially-understood Plan… in fact my life as it was actually lived… First of all the mind looks at the whole comparison, and sets the blueprints side-by-side. This is the first shock; a true humbling of yourself to find that you did so little when you would have done so much; that you went wrong so often when you were sure that you were right. During this experience the whole cycle of your life-term unfolds before you in a kaleidoscopic series of pictures. During the crisis one seems to be entirely alone. Yours is the judgment. You stand at your own bar of judgment. You make your own decisions. You take the blame.… You are the accused, the judge and jury.

Readers of Newton's accounts obtained from hypnosis sessions will find this description strikingly familiar.

And here is Frances on the group soul: 

Whilst I was meditating in my golden garden, I found myself ‘transported’ to… a cluster of entities about a Teacher. Immediately I experienced a rise of consciousness, an upsurge of joy, a mingling of unity and harmony which colored my hole being. I cannot explain this in any of the terms, though I doubt whether they will have the same connotation for you. I knew this was right for me. I had come into my own. There was no definite acceptance, the entire operation was unobtrusive and simple, yet I had the conviction that all was well, that I was amidst my fellow-travelers on the Way.

This "upsurge of joy"and sense of belonging are typical of the reactions of Newton's hypnotized patients, often expressed in highly emotional terms. 

Finally, it's worth mentioning a little-known channeled book called The Afterlife of Leslie Stringfellow, which Betty discusses in one of his early chapters. Stringfellow died in 1886. Thereafter, his mother obtained fifteen years of mediumistic communication allegedly from him. Eventually she wrote up the best of these and published just one hundred copies of the resulting book, which she called Leslie's Letter to His Mother. Betty writes, "Leslie's Letter to His Mother was lost to the world until a librarian at the University of Arkansas, Stephen Chism, stumbled across a copy and was so intrigued by it that he undertook to bring it out in a new edition (2005) with the title The Afterlife of Leslie Stringfellow." 

What does Leslie say about reincarnation? I'm not sure. I did not see it mentioned in Betty's overview, but in his last chapter, Betty reports, "One of our seven sources (Benson/Borgia) says nothing about [reincarnation] and even implies that it doesn't occur. The other six do mention it, and five of those six endorse it."

"Benson/Borgia" refers to the famous book by Anthony Borgia, Life in the World Unseen* (1956). Presumably, then, the Stringfellow book does contain some discussion of reincarnation — and given its early date and near-total obscurity, I'd be interested to know what it says. So I've ordered it. (Amazon sells only used copies, starting at $95, but the book is available from the publisher for $14.95.) 

It should be noted that even some contemporary channeled material throws cold water on reincarnation. The Risen, by August Goforth and Timothy Gray, quotes its discarnate coauthor as stating emphatically that reincarnation does not occur. 

So what can we conclude from all this? First, reincarnation has been part of Spiritualist literature from early days, and is not a later accretion inspired by the Theosophy and similar movements. Second, there has never been unanimity on this issue. Third, there are interesting parallels between some channeled material and the accounts of between-lives hypnotic regressions. 

If reincarnation is a fact, it would seem most likely that the group soul concept is intimately connected with it, and that the whole process is more subtle and complex than it might appear. The channeled material attributed to Seth and to Silver Birch tends in this direction also.

Voltaire may yet be proved correct in his observation: "It is not more surprising to be born twice than once; everything in nature is resurrection."

---

*By the way, I should note that Borgia's book, Life in the World Unseen, has always read like fiction to me. Prof. Betty's summary of the book does nothing to change my impression. 

Comments

[passenger]

Michael,

I've been meaning to ask you a personal question. You don't have to answer it if you don't want to. A few post back you stated that you were originally an atheist and then jumped on the spiritual side.

I was wondering what made you take that jump? I'm currently on the edge as in "I have no idea if there is anything after death, etc".

[no one]

passenger, I too feel compelled to reiterate my strong recommendation that you NOT experiment with psychedelics, especially DMT.

Go the Monroe Institute. Seriously. It would be a great opportunity. One of the items on my wish list is to go there myself.

Let's not forget that psychedelics are illegal.

I repeat that when you purchase drugs on the street, in addition to potentially being arrested, you don't know what you are getting, even if the dealer is a "cool" and knowledgeable person.

I was fortunate to have been a member of an informal "cognoscenti" group - these were people that generally, were professionals in their respective fields - and we had connections to sources for supply that no one else would have - I am talking about professional PhD chemists, some of whom you may have even read about. Even so I can tell you a horror story that I personally witnessed. A friend - and group member - thought he was purchasing and then ingesting pure mescaline. The compound had been sold (or given) to him, by one of our regular sources, as mescaline. He ingested an amount that would have normally produced a very strong mescaline experience. However, the substance was not mescaline. It was Bromo-mescaline, one of the so called "designer" drugs based on mescaline (see Shulgin) which is many times stronger than mescaline itself. The bottom line was that he went totally out of his mind, in a really crazy bad way, for three days, and ended up having to be traquilized and placed in physical restraints to prevent him from hurting himself - in a psychiatric hospital. I was one of the people that tried to keep him safe before making the call to have him hospitalized.

Fortunately, he eventually made a full recovery, but it tooks weeks, maybe months (I can't recall as this was around 25 years ago) before his mental faculties returned to normal. I won't say that he was brain damaged stupid pre-recovery. Rather, that he had difficulty focussing on work and normal interactions and would drift off into a strange space in almost schizophrenic fashion.

When we told the source what had happened, he instantly looked into the issue. It had all been an innocent mistake resulting from some misunderstanding on his end.

I have heard, anecdotally, of people buying what they thought were psilocybe mushrooms when the material was actually ordinary mushrooms soaked in PCP or some other nasty screw up your head substance.

I have also heard of people thinking that they had picked psilocybe mushrooms, but due to lack of expertise, had picked a similar looking poisonous mushroom. You really do not want to die from mushroom poisoning. It is a horrible way to go. If you manage to live you could be on dialysis and need a new kidney and/or have severe liver damage requiring transplant.

Most LSD purchased on the street (at rave events, concerts, etc) really is pure LSD. However, the dosage is usually very small; barely above threshold. Therefore it is necessary to ingest 3 to 5 "tabs" to have a full fledged cosmic experience. Once in a while a "tab" of LSD is up to 1960s dose levels; meaning one tab is enough. But you don't know this. Say you took 4 of these tabs. Wow! Look out!

I don't mean to insult you, but a loose analogy to your desire to take DMT would be as follows: You hear professional Indy Car drivers describing the thrill of racing at 200 miles an hour. Sounds like fun to you. So you fill your old Nissan full of jet fuel and take off down the local hiway with the pedal to the metal.

Don't do it.

Go to the Montoe Institute.

[no one]

I should add, and I've said this here before, that, IMO, there is no magic pill or magic technique or special philosophy that will transform you quickly into a spiritually realized person.

IMO, spiritual realization isn't even necessarily a goal. It's the journey that counts.

All of my real spiritual growth has been built on a foundation of hard work in all areas of life, rational thinking combined with sober meditation, dedication and sacrifice to family and friends, soberly experiencing and then working through hardships, you know, all that old fashioned square stuff.

To the extent that I have been slack in the above, my spiritual development has suffered.

Then there is another ingredient, that takes us beyond the typical 'square', and that is facing, accepting and integrating the truth, one's own personal truth, no matter how unsettling or how outside the norm it may be and, if the truth you see is discordant with love, soberly working to change yourself, though that work may be hard and make take a lifetime.

[Michael Prescott]

Passenger, here's a post I wrote on the intellectual side of that topic:

http://tinyurl.com/7leljgs

For a more personal answer, see this Q&A I did with Mike Tymn:

http://www.aspsi.org/feat/life_after/Michael_Prescott.htm

[Bruce Siegel]

"I don't want to inadvertently encourage drug experimentation."

I'm gonna speak for the other side of this issue, Passenger. If it feels really, really, important to you--do it.

But--and this is a big but--find a mentor. We see drugs as lethal because we see them used outside the social context in which mankind has benefitted from these substances, and held them sacred, for thousands of years.

I've done some reading about this group, for example, and have been impressed:
http://www.bluemorphotours.com/the-people-of-blue-morpho-ayahuasca-center.html

Ayahuasca is one form of DMT that can be ingested orally.

Does going to South America feel out of the question? Well, if I really wanted to do something, I wouldn't let that stand in my way. When I was 25, I left my home, my friends, and my livelihood in New York City to go Los Angeles to be in Primal Therapy.

Now primal is NOT a drug-oriented therapy, but I mention it for several reasons:

• I was willing to uproot myself because I had come to believe that in Los Angeles were the people who could best assist me at that point in my life.

• I couldn't stop thinking and dreaming about this therapy and what it would do for my life. And, 40 years later, I can tell you that in one sense, my hopes were well-founded. And, in other, completely wrong.

But I made the commitment, acted on it with all my heart, and 40 years later, I know I made exactly the right choice.

• It was an inner journey. Which, for me, and like the psychedelic experience, are the journeys most worth taking.

And finally, another interesting point:

• I made the decision to go under the influence of a (mild) psychoactive substance. After years of hesitating and thinking about going to L.A., that altered state gave me the clarity and the courage to take one of the boldest and best steps I've ever taken.

[Bruce Siegel]

That last paragraph is a little hard to understand. This is clearer:

• I made the final decision to go to Los Angeles, while I was under the influence of a (mild) psychoactive substance. After years of hesitating and thinking about it, that altered state gave me the clarity and the courage to take one of the boldest and best steps I've ever taken.

[no one]

Bruce, I agree with you and your suggestion to passenger ***IF*** passenger were to do all of the things you include; basically making that commitment and investment.

I left home and everything and everyone I knew (against their protests and arguments not to go) when I was 18 to pursue my interests.

I worry because I don't see a lot of young people these days being willing to make commitments and investments to obtain what they seek; way too much instant gratification and entitlement.

Otherwise I am totally with Michael on this. I am, for several reasons, 100% opposed to irresponsible uniformed use such as that posted on erowid.

[Matt Rouge]

Passenger,

One question no one has asked yet is, "Why do you want to take DMT?"

My guess: You want to experience something out of the ordinary. I.e., "cool stuff."

If you do meditation and stick to it, you *will* experience cool stuff.

I think the same can be said about talking to spirit guides.

BTW, I recommend www.erowid.org more for reading about the BAD trips. They are quite interesting. And they're what convinced me never to try drugs.

Also, a lot of people who post here agree that the brain is a like a tuning mechanism, or like a radio receiver, for the spirit. A good receiver doesn't just let in any frequency; rather, it just lets in what is needed at the moment. What hallucinogens do is mess with the receiver so that it lets in all kinds of stuff that normally is kept out.

If you look at people with mental illness, it's pretty clear they have "receiver issues": they are getting information they don't want. That's essentially what a bad trip is. A *lot* of the bad trips described on Erowid involve people thinking they had gone permanently insane.

I'm not trying to be a scold or prude about drugs. I'm just trying to provide a little background about how these things might work. Personally, I am risk averse when it comes to things like this and would not want to risk the downside.

[no one]

"Why do you want to take DMT?"

Yes, Matt, that is the question, isn't it.

If I was passenger, I would ask you, right back, why you want to lucid dream.

I can only be a hypocrite for so long.

Here's the bottom line concerning psychedelics; They are going to work right here and right now and you're not going to be able to ignore where they send you and they can send you very very far. Right now. That is an advantage they have over all other techniques.

If you put 300 micrograms of LSD under your tongue or consume four grams or more (dried) of a potent psilocybe mushroom you ARE going to experience a journey through, and probably beyond, time and space. No two ways about it. And it's going to last all night long. It's not meditation where you might just yawn and then go have ham sandwich or dreaming techniques where you can just wake up and read a book if things get a little too weird.

But that advantage is also the disadvantage if things go wrong.

Proper set, setting, drug/dosage and a good guide/mentor help ensure a positive experience. More important is that something inside you - I call it "soul" (more as in the music than in the generic thing that departs at death) - that gives you the strength to ride the wave and to direct the filtering system if things are coming through that are undesired. Important components of "soul" include, but are not limited to, inner strength/ belief in one's self, sense of humor (esp. the ability to laugh at one's self), knowing one's self in some fundemental positive way and the ability to love. Some people don't have "soul". They shouldn't take psychedelics. Most of those have no desire to any how. Sometimes they do take them because they want to get F'ed up and, to them, it's just another drug to do that with. Then they have a bad time of it and don't do it again.

I have never personally had, nor known anyone who had, a "flashback" from LSD or Psilocybin use. Flashback is urban myth, IMO. I have known people who wished they would have a flashback :-)

Once the drug's effect has worn off, as it inevitibly will, it is out of the system. The drugs are not toxic. They do not cause brain damage or chromosone damage (more urban myth around all of that). If one is having a hard time of it and one has a good guide, one should be able to come out of it just fine psychologically. As Bruce has noted, sometimes a bad trip is actually a blessing in disguise. For the true seeker, the "badness" can contain much insight concerning what needs to be worked on.

As far as the filter system gone awry and negative signals or influences entering, that can and does happen to all of us all of the time any how. One thing that becomes apparent under psychedelics is just how much *IS* getting through the filtration system in our daily lives, even if subconsciously, and how it is effecting us, spiritually, psychologically and with regards to physical health. That is why so many people who have responsibly used psychedelics opt to eat healthy foods, get closer to nature and further from consumer culture madness and are more concerned with how what they do and say impacts others and vice versa. They tend to develop a holistic view of health.

Also, as the recent John Hopkins study (as well as others) reveals, psychedelic users tend to become more spiritually aware and changes, for the better, in time and energy spent devoted to spiritual thoughts and activities persist long after the last drug experience. They are *happier* than pre-experience.

Again, the sensitivities provided by the drugs cannot easily be ignored. Much less readily ignored, IMO, than meditation and dreaming techniques, which can take years to develop, if at all.

Of course, what I am talking about is a far cry from taking drugs to see a bunch of radical stuff, dude.

Back to the brain as filter system argument against drugs.......some truth to it, absolutely. That said, with the power of *you* that problem can be ameliorated, perhaps eliminated. You just have to be someone with enough personal power/soul.

But what if you don't have this quality, this soul or personal power?

I've already stated that I believe the filtration system is pretty lousy at keeping out bad vibes on a daily (subconscious) basis. Not even so good at it on a conscious basis. My opinion seems to be backed up by all cultures throughout the ages which have contained various ritualized ceremonies for purging intaken bad vibes.

Furthermore, I submit that dreaming techniques and meditation suffer from the same issue as drugs.

Any time you alter your focus of attention, moving it off the concensus meat and potatos physical world, you are opened up to all kinds of influences. It is mere predjudice to say that drugs will render one vunerable to undesirable influences whereas dreaming/meditation will not. There is a large body of evidence suggesting psychological breakdowns resulting from intensive meditation practice. It doesn't happen often, but it does. The risk is there.

Any prayer that you believe protects you from bad influences in daily life, while dreaming or while channeling spirits, would offer the same protection while "tripping". Why wouldn't it?

And if you don't feel there is a danger of bad influences in these non-drug techniques, why the prayer for potection, light and all of that? I think you know better.

I believe in hard work first and foremost. Secondly, I believe in hard work with no short cuts. Once some basic development is in place i don't see psychedelic use as a shortcut if done right. I think some people have a Calvinist objection to drugs that clouds their thinking.

Mostly though I think McKenna had it right when he said that people on the spiritual scene don't like psychedelics because they sense that 1. they are for real and 2. that they are going to work and work in a big way that can't be avoided or mitigated.

These two points should serve as a word of caution for anyone with a casual interest as much as they should serve as a potential for anyone with a serious desire to explore.

[Bruce Siegel]

No one--thanks for speaking in such a balanced way about psychedelics. And thanks for reminding me about Terence McKenna. You got me looking at my heavily annotated copy of Archaic Revival, that I read in the mid-90's.

"If you do meditation and stick to it, you *will* experience cool stuff."

Matt, I've gotta be honest. It bothers me when people such as yourself, who are fortunate to be able to have the sorts of experiences you do, make the assumption that meditation is the ideal substitute for psychedelics. Michael seems to be suggesting that too.

For some people, it may be. But for others, it's certainly not.

I've been meditating daily for twenty years. It's a core aspect of my life. And the kinds of experiences I've had with psychedelics are in a completely different category than the experiences I've had meditating.

Since I talk so much on this subject, it might be worth mentioning that I haven't taken any drugs in years, and have only had about a dozen or so journeys in my life. Put them all together, and they constitute a near-death experience of sorts, that, I think it's fair to say, has been my salvation.

Meditation serves me daily, and I'm grateful for it. But it's apples and oranges.

My first trip, by the way, happened when I was about 22, and had not the VAGUEST notion of what I was getting myself into. How could I have? I hadn't even smoked grass at that point, and had only been drunk once!

The setting was not at all supportive, and I would not recommend that approach to anyone.

The second journey took place in the company of about a dozen people, under the watchful eye of an experienced shaman-like figure, with his several assistants providing loving attention to anyone in need. He had met with me in private, weeks earlier, so we could get a feel for each other.

That time around I was truly ready, I had chosen the ideal setting, and it was one of the best and most important days of my life.

[Matt Rouge]

no one, Bruce,

Great posts from both of you. I actually don't disagree with anything you're saying. We seem to agree that:

1. Psychedelics will show you other worlds, etc. They're the real deal.

2. They will give you some type of experience right now.

3. They will give you different types of experiences than meditation, lucid dreaming, etc.

4. Caution is in order in taking psychedelics. Having the right substance in the right place with the right people is crucial.

5. Meditation, lucid dreaming, and other practices also have their dangers.

My cautions have mostly been about #4 above. You two have been privileged to do the drugs under extremely good circumstances. I'm worried about a newbie who does not. Would I try them under really good circumstances? Maybe. I'd have to think about it. I, personally, am very sensitive to chemicals in general, and I have loose filters to begin with. That's one of the reasons why I'm able to have "cool" experiences without a lot of effort (actually, having controlled and good experiences *has* taken a lot of effort) and the main reason I'm psychic. The flip side of that is that my mind is constantly running, and I've had to fight the bad stuff too (my OCD as a kid was no fun, I'll tell ya). So my drug of choice tends to be alcohol, since it helps me filter down and relax (and concentrate, even, depending).

So that's another thing to consider: your own mental type and whether a drug is right for you.

Also, for the record, I have never done anything to promote lucid dreaming. I just have them sometimes. But even if you don't lucid dream, you can still have mighty trips from regular ol' dreams. I also am not a big meditator--I need to do it more. For me, that is not what I used to have "cool experiences"; it's more about spiritual hygiene and discipline, although I almost always have strong memory flashbacks when I do. My methods for having "cool experiences" have mainly been dreams and introspection. Some things, like the recent alien communications, have come to me when I was wide awake and not even trying to do anything.

[Sandy]

The question about taking psychedelics reminds me of a hypothetical question someone posted on the skeptiko forum about if it were possible to induce an NDE without physically harming someone, would anyone want to try it and would it be a good thing to attempt?

As an NDEr, I value my NDEs. I wouldn't go back and changed what happened to me even though, unlike the hypothetical NDE posed in the question, I was physically harmed. But I couldn't in all good conscious tell someone to go out and have an NDE, even if there were a safe reliable way of doing so. There are really big consequences to such an experience, both good and bad ones. And there is no way to adequately warn someone or let them know what they are getting into until they are there.

[Matt Rouge]

Sandy,

I saw you had posted your experience, but I didn't see the URL. Where should I go to see that?

Thanks!

Matt

[Sandy]

Sorry Matt, if you click on my name it should take you to my blog.

[Matt Rouge]

Sandy,

That is awesome! I'd like to read about the adult NDE too. Coming soon?

[no one]

"There are really big consequences to such an experience, both good and bad ones."

Yes Sandy. I agree. The left handed/counter clockwise path is never easy because it is not the way that most everyone else goes. One can be a sheep or one can be a falcon. Maybe there is no choice. Maybe one should be exactly what one is. A sheep that tries to fly will fail and get hurt and die. Ditto a falcon that tries to eat grass on the ground and be a sheep.

It's just life and only life.

[Bruce Siegel]

Matt, thanks for clarifying your views on psychedelics. It does sound like we're in agreement!

[Bruce Siegel]

"But I couldn't in all good conscience, tell someone to go out and have an NDE, even if there were a safe reliable way of doing so."

Sandy, I feel exactly the same way about psychedelics. While I speak passionately about their role in my own life (and, to some extent, what I'm hearing about what they've done for others), I have no way at all of knowing whether they'd be useful for any specific individual.

And the same goes for therapy or any other major life choice.

[Sandy]

Matt, the adult NDE account is now posted.

[no one]

I couldn't tell someone via the internet to use psychedelics. That would be incredibly irresponsible. I *could* feel positive about recommending, even assisting, someone I knew well personally and that I felt good about.

Sandy, why not, in all good conscience, tell someone to go out and have an NDE, if there were a safe reliable way of doing so?

Is this not the sort of thing that spiritual teachers, like say in Tibet, have been guiding their students towards for millenia?

I also feel that I am in agreement with Matt's most recnet comment re; psychedelics.

[Sandy]

no one, I'm not a spiritual teacher, and I have no experience with such people to know if what they teach would be useful for me or anyone else. I don't see any point in forcing an NDE. They happen when they are supposed to.

[Matt Rouge]

Sandy,

Wow, that is really great!

Matt

[Sandy]

Thanks, Matt.

[Norm Thomas]

There are 2 things I cannot get my head around; 1) If there is re-incarnation how does that explain the massive population growth seen on earth? Where have all the new souls come frome?; 2) What happens when a new soul dies say soon after birth or in their formative years? How could a soul with no prior experience exist in the afterlife without any of the experiential advantages of a more developed soul? If each incarnation is planned how does this possibly explain the purpose of a new soul daying within days of coming into existence?

[Juan]

Hey, Norm Thomas.

The issues you state that you are very interesting and I would like to try to answer them.

The first question, we must distinguish two possibilities: if there is reincarnation, then maybe we all go to reincarnate or only some people are reincarnated. Evidence of the type studied by Stevenson suggests that the second possibility occurs, so that population growth would not be an objection to reincarnation because only few people reincarnate. If we are on the first possibility, then there are several possibilities: people can reincarnate on other planets that are Earth or while people are reincarnated new souls come who have not had a past life. That is, population growth is only one objection to the reincarnation if we keep questionable metaphysical assumptions, such as the Earth is the only place to reincarnate, and so on.

And on the second question, I think the new souls who die early would be reincarnated quickly, because the evidence indicates that the early stages of the afterlife, the Tibetan bardo, are constructs made ​​from our previous experiences, and if someone has few experiences, the time in these stages must be quite short. And on the planning of each incarnation, I have not really clear if each incarnation is planned or just these things happen, but one could say that the new soul was not ready to incarnate at that moment, but this is certainly quite speculative.

[passenger]

Juan,

I would add Jim Tucker's research. It shows that a person's "soul" can inhabit two bodies at one time.

For example, he has a story of a business man dying in a plane crash and reborn in a child. But the child was 2 years ago at the time of the accident.

The child later explained his past life wife, children, etc.

So maybe we are currently inhabiting 2 or more bodies at once

[Juan]

Hello Passenger.

Mmmm. What you affirm the situation becomes more complex, because someone may consider that the claim that the soul is indivisible is more plausible than the claim that someone's soul to inhabit two bodies at once, then rejecting that such cases are examples of reincarnation. Provided we have excluded the possibility that the child has obtained such data by ordinary means, we could say that this child somehow tuned with memories of the deceased, without being the deceased, as Art would say. But is the problem of why the child will tune into the memories of the deceased and not to any other, a problem that has no the reincarnation hypothesis. It is something that is not clear and is very complex.

[passenger]

Juan,

it's here on Jim Tucker's website

http://www.iisis.net/index.php?page=semkiw-reincarnation-split-incarnation-parallel-lives&hl=en_US

[Juan]

Passenger, I already knew that page about cases of split reincarnations, but I do not find very convincing these cases. This is because the case of Penney Pierce only based on reports of a medium, not someone who starts to remember a previous life, so I do not know how to take this case. And in other cases we must suppose that the soul has to be involved in fetal development to accept the split incarnation, but this assumption may be false, and the soul could incarnate shortly before birth or shortly after birth. Of course here we have a problem about what we mean by soul: if you have a notion of the soul as a principle of life, then the soul must be involved in fetal development since the embryo is alive, but this notion is not necessary for the reincarnation, because for the reincarnation makes sense only need to conceive the soul as the vehicle of our memories and experiences that passes from one body to another, giving rise to the possibility of developing a body that is alive but without a vehicle of memories and experiences. But can the soul as a principle of life and as a vehicle for memories and experiences always go together and the split reincarnation can be, I do not know.