On a regular basis, I practice guided meditations, in which I try to achieve a mild trance state and then ask questions of a "spirit guide." I'm very much aware of the possibility – in fact, the probability – that much of the information I receive originates in my unconscious mind. However, I'm of the opinion that the boundary between the unconscious mind and the spiritual realm is pretty fuzzy, and that we can't access spiritual sources of information without going through the unconscious.
This idea ties in with what has been called the imaginal realm, a sort of twilight zone midway between physical and spiritual reality. A certain tolerance for ambiguity is, I think, necessary in carrying out these highly subjective experiments.
(Incidentally, I think an inability to tolerate ambiguity lies at the root of much skeptical thinking. Skeptics, in my observation, tend to see things in terms of black and white, true or false, objectivity or subjective, with little or no gray area. But spiritual explorations of the type that we talk about on this blog require a willingness to explore the uncharted no-man's-land between hard physical facts and subjective imagination.)
Well, anyway, I do these meditative exercises. A few weeks ago, when I was sick with acute sinusitis and probably running a slight fever, I had some unusually vivid and convincing meditative experiences. These could be chalked up to mental aberrations brought on by an elevated temperature, but I prefer to think that, in a state of illness, the etheric body may be more loosely connected to the physical body than usual, leading to more direct access to the spiritual realm. I could be wrong.
One of these meditations was particularly meaningful to me. I've been reluctant to post about it, because it doesn't contain any new information, and its impact was largely emotional. I doubt I can convey the emotional qualities of this meditative exercise in words. But I decided I might as well try.
Before I go on, I should point out that none of the information contained in this exercise was new to me. It could easily have come from my unconscious mind. I had encountered this imagery before, in reading about life after death. The only thing that makes the experience seem like more than a regurgitation of stuff I'd read is the fact that it packed an emotional punch.
That particular day, I was not feeling well at all, and because it was a Sunday, I couldn't get hold of my doctor to obtain the antibiotics I needed. Since I knew I couldn't reach him until Monday morning, I basically made the decision to shut down – to lie on the couch, drifting between sleep and a half-awake state, and wait until the next day to do anything. I hardly moved, except to use the bathroom and take medicine, throughout the succeeding 24 hours, and I ate almost nothing.
During this time I practiced various meditations, and as I said, they were more vivid and clear than usual. In one case, I asked what my soul was like.
I was shown an image of a diamond, brilliant and multifaceted. But this was no ordinary diamond. It was alive. The facets, which were far more luminous than any real-life diamond's, were in constant motion. They were constantly shifting positions like the pieces of a mosaic, creating patterns that were intricate and harmonious. It did not appear that there was anything random about these patterns; rather, they seemed to involve the working-out of some larger scheme, much in the way that notes of music can be used to work out the themes and melodies of a musical composition.
I was told that this diamond was my true soul, and that the individual facets were merely contributing elements. The real me, the eternal me, was the diamond as a whole, even though I wasn't aware of it in everyday life.
These living and moving facets each represented some persona that my larger soul had adopted – presumably in some previous (or perhaps future) earthly incarnation. The sum total of all these facets made up the diamond itself.
Let me expand on this a little. The diamond could be seen as the so-called "group soul" often discussed by metaphysical writers. But I was given to understand that the "group soul" is something of a misnomer, because actually we are talking only about a group of personae; the diamond/soul itself is our own personal soul in its purest and highest form. To think of it as a group soul is to imagine that our individual self is just one of the facets of the diamond, when in fact our soul consists of all the facets and more, because it includes the core of the diamond as well. Thus we are much greater, much more all-encompassing, than we might think.
What was most strongly impressed on me was the sheer beauty of the soul. It seemed to me that this soul was the most beautiful and precious thing in the world. Of course, I'm not just talking about my own soul, but about any human soul. The impression I had – and this is where the emotional impact came in – was that if we could only grasp the magnificence and perfection of our own souls, we would have a whole new perspective on life, and negative things (such as the illness I was experiencing) would pale into insignificance.
Again, while I cannot really convey the feeling I got, I came away with an extraordinarily strong impression that our soul – mine, or yours, or anyone's – is an object of exquisite beauty, unfathomable complexity, and ultimate perfection. Even the flaws that we perceive in ourselves are not really flaws, but elements necessary to a larger harmonious whole.
There are many wonderful things in our physical reality, including stars and galaxies, but the impression I got was that each of us, inasmuch as we represent this diamond-like perfection of the soul, is a far more wondrous and valuable thing than any physical object.
Now, as I said at the start, there was no new information conveyed to me in this exercise. The image of the soul as a diamond is part of the channeled material attributed to Silver Birch, who suggested that our individual earthly lives are facets of this diamond. For instance:
What I have said is that the human individuality is not always a single entity but a facet of a larger diamond. These facets incarnate into your world for experience that will enable them to return to the diamond and add to its lustre and radiance. [source; scroll down to "On Reincarnation"]
This idea has been reiterated by other sources, and it was familiar to me from my reading. It always resonated with me as being probably true. So it's not surprising that it would come up in my meditation.
Do I think the meditation was a genuine insight into the nature of spiritual reality? Yes, I do, though I can't expect anyone else to share my conviction. I've had other meditative experiences now and then – only a few, unfortunately – that shared the same quality, which I've come to recognize as a sign of a particularly intense spiritual insight. As best I can describe it, it is the feeling of my whole body tingling with a kind of pleasurable electric current and suffused with indescribable joy, coupled with a sense of peace and acceptance, "the peace that passeth all understanding" - the sense that everything is all right and there is nothing to worry about, complain about, or fear. It is a sense of having seen through the trivialities of everyday existence to some much more fundamental and reassuring reality. I suspect that this is what the Gospels mean when they talk about "the Kingdom of Heaven," which is "the pearl of great price," and which "is within you."
By the way, it is largely because of experiences like this that I'm not too sympathetic to people who say the universe is ultimately malicious or irrational or arbitrary, and that we may end up in a bad place just as easily as a good place after we die. My strong impression – entirely subjective, and certainly not provable – is that there is a logic, order, justice, harmony, and larger purpose to existence, and that if we merely surrender ourselves to this higher purpose we will end up in a very good place indeed. Perhaps the idea of Hell has its roots in the possibility that some people will willfully cut themselves off from this higher purpose out of a refusal to practice self-surrender. Possibly this also suggests the value of learning to practice self-abnegation and non-egoic thinking here on earth.
In any case, while I'm sure I've failed to convey the impact of my meditation, it may at least be helpful to try seeing each of the people you meet and deal with - even the more obnoxious ones - as representing a shining facet of a perfect diamond, more pure and more beautiful than any precious stone we could ever know on earth.
Merry Christmas!
"I am big believer in Kundalini." No One
-----------
One of the most interesting kundalini experiences I've ever read is Carl Turner's transcendental experience. He calls it his Kundalini experience. Now the reason I find it so interesting is because he says something that I think has a very holographic flavor to it, "My awareness was somehow intensified to a level that is not humanly possible. "I" was the awareness I was experiencing and that is the part that I find frustrating to communicate. I had the realization that I was everywhere at the same time...and I mean everywhere. I knew that everything is perfect and happening according to some divine plan, regardless of all the things we see as wrong with the world."
Turner says that he literally felt like he was everywhere in the Universe at once which is a statement that I've read in several near death experiences. It has to be something more than coincidence that people say this. It's exactly what one might expect if their consciousness or soul had merged into the original holographic film that our universe is a projection from.
http://www.beyondreligion.com/su_personal/dreamsvisions-kundalini.htm
Posted by: Art | December 26, 2012 at 12:26 PM
Barbara,
'Presumably we long for bliss because we don’t have much of it. Buddhists say life is pain, though also try to suggest we don’t need to suffer if we don’t identify with the pain. That’s avoidance of feeling, Bruce.'
Enlightening insight, Barbara! But what exactly does identifying with a pain entail? Is it something absolute, like 'I am the pain I feel'? Or might it be something more like 'I surrender to my pain'?
Bruce,
'I don't know much about Buddhism. But I have read several books by Pema Chodron, the well-known Buddhist author, and far from being about avoiding pain, her approach centers on accepting and fully exploring all the negative emotions, including fear, sadness, and anger. These are wonderful books that have been very helpful to me.'
'Exploring' is a difficult concept vis-à-vis pain. I have a feeling that, exploring (i.e., analysing, scrutinising), one is distancing feeling (approaching it 'scientifically', detachedly). Indeed, the two of you seem to be in agreement on Buddhism and attitude to pain.
This approach to pain worries me considerably. Also, you might have noticed how inadequately pain is treated in bereavement literature. There, we read about bereavement as emotions to do with 'bewilderment, pain, anger', etc., but no-one seems to pause to describe 'pain'. (The other two emotions are much simpler ones, easier to experience.) As a deeply bereaved person, I should like to embrace my pain. I do recognise it. I think the best metaphor I can offer to describe it is 'articulate heartache'. It is quite distinct from sadness or pity (for one's loved one or for oneself). And it visits very briefly, only for some seconds. To my mind, that is pure grief. I dearly wish I could hold it. I am trying to learn to meditate, hoping that that will help me hold it. If I have made any sense to either of you, please let me know.
Posted by: Sophie | December 26, 2012 at 12:34 PM
" 'Exploring' is a difficult concept vis-à-vis pain. I have a feeling that, exploring (i.e., analysing, scrutinising), one is distancing feeling (approaching it 'scientifically', detachedly)."
Sophie, I agree with you completely. "Explore" wasn't the ideal word for me to use because it has conflicting meanings. Actually, I wasn't talking about analyzing pain at all, but just the opposite--how important it is to simply *feel* it. Often, that means crying.
Coming to terms with pain has been an important part of my own journey, something I've talked about here before. I briefly had a blog, for which I wrote a post on this subject. If you're interested, you can read it here :
http://www.brucesiegel.com/primal.html
Posted by: Bruce Siegel | December 26, 2012 at 03:24 PM
Pain teaches the soul, which is pure thought, about the body. Little bits of information, like the 0's and 1's in a computer program, teach the soul about the shape of the body, what it's like to occupy a body, to control it, to identify with it. The soul comes from a place where time and space don't exist, and where you feel like you are everywhere at once, so to be confined to a particular body is an entirely new concept and idea. So the soul learns here what it can't learn on the other side, the things that are common to this side but don't exist on the other side unless they have first been experienced.
Posted by: Art | December 26, 2012 at 04:55 PM
Thank you, Bruce, for the link to your article. I hope I shall be able to learn to feel my pain like you did. It is difficult to understand why I cannot feel it all the time. I so want to.
Posted by: Sophie | December 26, 2012 at 05:24 PM
Wow, I wrote this whole thing earlier that I don't see. Don't have the energy now! Boo!
Posted by: J9 | December 27, 2012 at 12:43 AM
Kathleen,Mat,I am not denying the reality of your experiences or that of the afterlife. Just questioning the reliability of others experiences whilst medicated etc.
Have I tried Meditation ? As I mentioned in a post earlier in this thread, too many abstract thoughts wizzing around in my mind, particularly this year.
Even before the stress of my wifes passing, several years ago I attended Yoga classes at my Gym. Same thing,too much junk going on in my head.Aside from that a structural misalignment in my back/shoulders gives a constant headache that whilst manageable does preclude obtaining a totally clear and receptive mind state. Possibly some mild pain relief from the magic weed may assist in reaching that state after all,but over here it, LSD, mushrooms etc are illegal, and as to sourcing those products, I would prefer to keep well away from that scene.
Posted by: snorkler | December 27, 2012 at 02:18 AM
Maybe you could check the spam bin, MP?
Posted by: Roger Knights | December 27, 2012 at 02:27 AM
"over here it, LSD, mushrooms etc are illegal, and as to sourcing those products, I would prefer to keep well away from that scene."
A wise move, IMO. Those items are illegal in the US as well. I'm actually not too comfortable with people recommending them on my blog, since these recommendations amount to encouragement to break the law. Besides, these substances can be dangerous, especially if consumed in an adulterated form or in unsupervised conditions. I've never tried them myself, and I strongly advise others to steer clear of them.
J9, we've had problems with longer comments disappearing, apparently because they are misidentified as spam. Breaking up long comments into shorter pieces may help.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | December 27, 2012 at 02:29 AM
Bruce, Michael, No One, I'm trying to keep my posts brief, so as they don't disappear into the ether of cyberspace, but I do acknowledge your responses. Once the many constant distractions of the xmas/new year holidays subside,I'll endeavor to work through your meditation techniques No One, thanks.
Posted by: snorkler | December 27, 2012 at 02:36 AM
"I'm actually not too comfortable with people recommending them on my blog, since these recommendations amount to encouragement to break the law. Besides....."
I agree. To be clear, Snokler (or anyone else), I am NOT recommending that anyone run out and try to obtain or use these substance either.
They are illegal.
When you buy them on the "street" you don't what you are getting or how much of it. In addition to just plain being ripped off (sugar pills, grocery store mushrooms, just a piece of blotter paper, etc), you could end up ingesting something different - something even poisonous - than you thought you were going to be.
Additionally, even if you some how managed to get the right substance in the right amount, the effects of these substances are extreme. If you are not properly prepared the result can be, in the least, a very psychologically disturbing evening.
In fact, I would say the probability of someone who has been through what Snokler recently has, taking psychedelics without professional guidance, having a terrible (perhaps long term damaging) experience, approaches 100%.
I pick my own mushrooms. I've even taken classes to help me properly identify the right genus/species and to how to avoid the wrong ones. I am fortunate to live in an area where one of the target species naturally grows abundantly on my own farm during wet summers. I don't have to risk legal issues. I've been doing this a long time. It's a ritual for me. It isn't necessary for spiritual development.
Yes, I see value in psychedelics, but only if and when used in proper set and setting, under professional guidance, with pure substances in proper dosage. A lot of necessary variables there, any one of which, if lacking, negates any positive potential.
And still, they are not at all necessary.
Michael shared a beautiful spiritual insight that he came by through simple safe meditation exercises. What more could anyone want?
Posted by: no one | December 27, 2012 at 09:24 AM
But what exactly does identifying with a pain entail? Is it something absolute, like 'I am the pain I feel'? Or might it be something more like 'I surrender to my pain'? -Sophie
My view, Sophie, is that we are not the pain we feel (rather the opposite, we are the hope of no pain), but that if we surrender to it, we are more likely to cope. Tears are important as Bruce says. If you can’t cry, you suffer more. As Matt says, pain is a great teacher, but my experience tells me that it teaches the inevitability of more pain, unless we fool ourselves with (or allow ourselves to be fooled by) cunning anaesthesias. There are plenty of anaesthesias to choose from. Humans are good at that. IMHO, the best anaesthesias are creative in nature.
Posted by: Barbara | December 27, 2012 at 12:43 PM
"Maybe you could check the spam bin, MP?"
I did, but it's not there. Sorry.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | December 27, 2012 at 12:43 PM
What a beautiful Christmas present.
Michael's proof of genuine spiritual insight:
As best I can describe it,it is the feeling of my whole body tingling with a kind of pleasurable electric current and suffused with indescribable joy, coupled with a sense of peace and acceptance, "the peace that passeth all understanding" - the sense that everything is all right and there is nothing to worry about, complain about, or fear...
Could that be love? Your description sounds very much like what I felt as a child when I would receive occasional visits by an invisible loving presence.
Posted by: abcdefg | December 27, 2012 at 12:49 PM
@Michael, "I did, but it's not there sorry."
Some quite lengthy posts have made it through unscathed. I still think some posts disappearing are time related. Perhaps No One could recall roughly how long it took him to complete and post his latest contribution. Personally i am slow at structuring sentences, and an even slower scratch and peck typist, so even some medium length posts don't get through because the dreaded "Session has expired" notice appears.
Posted by: snorkler | December 27, 2012 at 05:34 PM
"Again, while I cannot really convey the feeling I got, I came away with an extraordinarily strong impression that our soul – mine, or yours, or anyone's – is an object of exquisite beauty, unfathomable complexity, and ultimate perfection. Even the flaws that we perceive in ourselves are not really flaws, but elements necessary to a larger harmonious whole."
Not really flaws, and necessary parts of a larger harmonious whole? The problem with this sort of vision is the usual one with New Age ideas. This is a refusal to consider and really look at human evil. Just to cite a few recent examples, how about wonderful "flawed" beings like recent mass shooters Adam Lanza, William Spengler, James Holmes, and Jared Loughner?
Perhaps the purity and perfection of the diamond is preserved by simply extinguishing or dissolving those evil personalities after physical death, rather than to allow contamination of the oversoul.
Such examples of extreme human evil may be exceptional or rare, but any valid spiritual system has to be able to handle all the circumstances of life and all the humans in it.
Posted by: David | December 27, 2012 at 06:26 PM
"Perhaps No One could recall roughly how long it took him to complete and post his latest contribution....."
Not too long. As is painfully obvious, I don't sweat the grammar or spelling or even, sometimes, the cogency/appropriateness of what I'm posting. I just shoot from the hip. Maybe two or three minutes tops - to post a comment that is ;-)
I am certain that disappearing comments are due to the time it takes between reading, writing and hitting "post".
Posted by: no one | December 27, 2012 at 06:31 PM
If taking too long to write and post a comment is the problem, then the solution is to use an application like Notepad or TextEdit to write the comment, then copy and paste it into the comment box. This way posting the comment will take almost no time, and if something goes wrong, you will still have the comment saved as a text file.
'Just to cite a few recent examples, how about wonderful "flawed" beings like recent mass shooters Adam Lanza, William Spengler, James Holmes, and Jared Loughner?'
It's a conundrum, all right. But here's one way to think of it. Suppose you had been born into the circumstances of any of those killers. Suppose you inherited whatever mental problems they had, were exposed to the same influences, and were subject to the same emotional triggers. Would you have acted differently than they did?
Even extremely bad behavior may be logical and inevitable given certain preconditions. How large a role, if any, is played by free will is an open question.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | December 27, 2012 at 08:08 PM
"How large a role, if any, is played by free will is an open question."
How true. If a life is pre-planned or directed from above, freewill is severely reduced. And if, as many like to say, in the end "we're all one", we must own the bad behavior.
Posted by: The Gipper | December 28, 2012 at 02:21 PM
"Would you have acted differently than they did?"
Excellent point, Michael! None of us can ever be in a position to judge another.
"And if, as many like to say, in the end "we're all one", we must own the bad behavior."
I agree, Gipper. But the good news is that by the same logic, the reverse is also true. At some level, each of us plays a role in all the greatest accomplishments and most loving acts.
Posted by: Bruce Siegel | December 28, 2012 at 03:20 PM
Barbara,
Thank you for your reply. But you have triggered my curiosity again: When you say 'IMHO, the best anaesthesias are creative in nature', what do you have in mind? Are those creative anaesthesias good or bad? So far, I have been sure that, e.g., pharmaceutical anti-depressants (almost inevitably given to bereaved people) are very harmful. My thinking has been that the pain of grief is not depression, and that, in any case, the pain in grief has to be accommodated, even welcomed. Am I right in thinking that you would not agree?
Posted by: Sophie | December 28, 2012 at 03:41 PM
"Even extremely bad behavior may be logical and inevitable given certain preconditions. How large a role, if any, is played by free will is an open question."
There is also the point of view expressed by Robert Schwartz, Michael Newton, and dramatically articulated most recently by Natalie Sudman, that we all plan our current life path in advance, and most (tho not necessarily all) of the things that happen to us - bad, good, and in-between - are things we ourselves have specifically chosen to experience beforehand?
Posted by: tsavo | December 28, 2012 at 04:39 PM
"My thinking is that the pain of grief is not depression, and that in any case, the pain of grief has to be accomodated, even welcomed."
We all suffer grief Sophie, usually from loss of a loved one at some stage in our lives.Yes grief cannot be ignored, and unless the individual doing the grieving elects to 'end it all', then grieving does need to be accomodated.But I don't understand your thinking that grief should be welcomed.
I would not wish the grief that I have been experiencing these past months on my worst enemy. But I would very much welcome the day that grief has passed.
Posted by: snorkler | December 28, 2012 at 05:26 PM
"Suppose you had been born into the circumstances of any of those killers. Suppose you inherited whatever mental problems they had, were exposed to the same influences, and were subject to the same emotional triggers. Would you have acted differently than they did?
Even extremely bad behavior may be logical and inevitable given certain preconditions. How large a role, if any, is played by free will is an open question."
A good point, but there are unpleasant implications and results from accepting such an understanding as the truth. Absolving "evil" people of responsibility for their acts would have disastrous consequences in society generally. The criminal justice system would be overturned - after all, "my genes, my childhood abuse made me do it". The notion of true moral choice is the basis of law and much of our civilization.
Aside from the untenable practical consequences of actually living according to such an understanding that free will and true choice between good and evil are illusions, it would of course immediately invalidate most spiritual teachings and understandings of why we are here. The common notion that learning (mostly from suffering) is the reason for human existence goes out the window, since someone is not really able to truly choose to do differently in response to mistakes.
The result is similar to the materialist neuroscience view that the mind is a deterministic brain machine with of course no free will.
To rescue some sort of spiritual worldview, there would still be the possibility that the soul (but not the human) has free will, and maybe does the learning if desired. This would be the unpleasant notion that the soul uses its human creation simply as an robotic avatar through which to experience earth life. Perhaps the genetic preconditions and early life conditions are chosen by the soul for its own interest and purposes, including for instance those that formed Adam Lanza. Part of the illusion essential to the soul would be that the human avatars have a (false) instinctual sense of free will to do as they please.
Your vision is certainly beautiful, is similar to a number of other sources, and it would be nice if it is somehow the ultimate truth despite its realistic shortcomings. I certainly hope so.
Posted by: David | December 28, 2012 at 05:49 PM
'Absolving "evil" people of responsibility for their acts would have disastrous consequences in society generally. The criminal justice system would be overturned ...'
I'm not trying to deal with the issue on that level. Clearly, from a practical standpoint, criminals must be punished, or at least segregated from society. Still, it's not impossible to envision a time in the future when people will see our present approach (putting people in cages, or killing them) as barbaric. But this will happen (if it does) only because some more effective method for dealing with criminality has been developed - perhaps some sort of psychological therapy that can radically change a person's behavior.
'...there would still be the possibility that the soul (but not the human) has free will, and maybe does the learning if desired. This would be the unpleasant notion that the soul uses its human creation simply as an robotic avatar through which to experience earth life.'
I don't find this notion unpleasant. To me, it ties in with the idea that the human organism has drives, instincts, and reflexive behaviors of its own, which the soul has little or nothing to do with. And I'm not necessarily insisting that there is no free will. Maybe the soul does have a degree of control over the human "host." But if the control is imperfect, the host may sometimes act in ways that the soul regrets but can't prevent.
There's also the possibility of possession - that a confused and lost soul might take over the human being and make him do things he would normally not do. Cases like the Watseka Wonder suggest that possession can occur.
I would say it's appropriate and often necessary to pass moral judgment on a practical level, while remembering that things may look very different from a higher spiritual plane that we can't readily access. We may be like Flatlanders assessing their two-dimensional world without realizing that what is sensible and logical in two dimensions may look entirely different from a three-dimensional perspective.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | December 29, 2012 at 01:13 AM
Snorkler,
'I don't understand your thinking that grief should be welcomed.'
My explanation is a simple one: I think I should go mad if I were not able to feel my grief; it would seem to me as if I am indifferent to the death of the person whom I love far more than nayone or anything. Sometimes (too often), I find myself putting on a cheerful face, for the situation I am in seems to demand it. By the time I have abstracted myself from that sort of situation, I am at my lowest point. I conclude that even pretending to be grief-free does the bereaved person damage.
In my turn, I do not understand your thinking here: 'But I would very much welcome the day that grief has passed.' Do you really envisage your grief passing? I conjecture that one merely becomes used to it, and that other feelings move in alongside it, so that it becomes easier to bear. Anyway, I sincerely wish you every strength and all possible solace.
Posted by: Sophie | December 29, 2012 at 12:21 PM
Just saw this quote posted on Facebook by White Crow Books, and thought it was relevant to my last comment:
'It is because we don’t know who we are, because we are unaware that the Kingdom of Heaven is within us, that we behave in the generally silly, the often insane, the sometimes criminal ways that are so characteristically human. We are saved, we are liberated and enlightened, by perceiving the hitherto unperceived good that is already within us, by returning to our eternal ground and remaining where, without knowing it, we have always been.'
—Aldous Huxley: The Perennial philosophy
Posted by: Michael Prescott | December 29, 2012 at 01:37 PM
“Are those creative anaesthesias good or bad? So far, I have been sure that, e.g., pharmaceutical anti-depressants (almost inevitably given to bereaved people) are very harmful. My thinking has been that the pain of grief is not depression, and that, in any case, the pain in grief has to be accommodated, even welcomed. Am I right in thinking that you would not agree?” -Sophie
No, I agree that the pain has to be accommodated. I say creative activities (eg art, serving others) are the most useful anaesthesias because through them we try to create meaning out of our bad experiences.
Pills are anaesthetics without meaning – but they allow us to build time gaps between bad experiences and the present, and time does bind the open wounds, albeit with scar tissue.
Escapist anaesthesias include change of scene or activity (trying to forget by overlaying the trauma with new experience). The problem is, the pain returns when old haunts are revisited, in fact, memory or dream.
Posted by: Barbara | December 29, 2012 at 01:39 PM
We are saved, we are liberated and enlightened, by..returning to our eternal ground”
His eternal ground was probably full of mushrooms too ;-->
Posted by: Barbara | December 29, 2012 at 01:47 PM
Michael,
I take it that Huxley, saying things like '... we behave in the generally silly, the often insane, the sometimes criminal ways that are so characteristically human', would not have a bar of the view that a reincarnation and the life that would be lived during it is agreed to by the reincarnating soul and that soul's highly evolved spirit helpers. That is, the designed life cannot be 'sometimes criminal', etc., if it is evolved-spirit designed. Or can it, given free will? Then, if it can, whose is the free will: the soul's, surely, since it is a mind matter, not a body matter, unless the body can somehow taint the soul and cause it to exercise free will to do silly and or criminal things? But you say that 'the host may sometimes act in ways that the soul regrets but can't prevent'. This seems to suggest that it is the body (i.e., 'the host') that is exercising free will. Is that odd?
I've always found that reincarnation concept sits terribly uncomfortably with the free will concept, and that both of them sit uncomfortably with 'the Kingdom of Heaven ... within us' concept. In fact, I cannot understand these concepts as possibly compatible. My one guess at how they might be compatible is through the proposition that evil forces (the 'confused and lost soul [that] might take over the human being'?) mount attacks on 'the Kingdom of Heaven ... within us'. And then we are culpable and punishable if we connive with these attacks rather than strive to fend them off? Or are we, at soul level, never culpable?
Barbara,
Thank you for your interesting anaesthesias illuminations.
Posted by: Sophie | December 29, 2012 at 03:24 PM
Posted by: Roger Knights | December 29, 2012 at 07:12 PM
'...there would still be the possibility that the soul (but not the human) has free will, and maybe does the learning if desired. This would be the unpleasant notion that the soul uses its human creation simply as an robotic avatar through which to experience earth life.'
I don't find this notion unpleasant. To me, it ties in with the idea that the human organism has drives, instincts, and reflexive behaviors of its own, which the soul has little or nothing to do with. And I'm not necessarily insisting that there is no free will. Maybe the soul does have a degree of control over the human "host." But if the control is imperfect, the host may sometimes act in ways that the soul regrets but can't prevent.
You give the impression that you identify yourself as the soul, rather than the human self. It seems to me there is a vast divide between the two, where all but a tiny few of humanity live necessarily as their animal human selves identifying themselves as the body and their memories going back to childhood. The soul creates and sets up the conditions of life for this human self, but it is not the soul that suffers, it is the human. I consider this a great inequity or wrongness inherent to most spiritual teachings, especially those that claim life is for soul learning. Of course this unfairness is no reason for it not being possibly the truth.
Contrary to all everyday experience and observation we may somehow actually be our souls in some meaningful sense. In that case maybe there would be less injustice to human existence and the system would not be as bad as it appears.
Posted by: David | December 29, 2012 at 08:37 PM
'The soul creates and sets up the conditions of life for this human self...'
Not necessarily. Maybe the human being's path is predetermined and will be followed no matter what. Then it's just a question of which soul wants to hitch a rider on that particular vessel.
I don't know how far I can trust Michael Newton's hypnotic regressions, but this interpretation would fit in well with his work. His patients reported seeing various earth lives played out, and then choosing the one that seemed likely to teach them the best lessons. The implication was that these earth lives would have played out this way no matter what, and the soul's choice is only which of the various roles to play this time around. The soul doesn't create the human's path; it merely hitches a ride on it (and perhaps tries to smooth out the bumps a little or avoid the worst wrong turns).
This would also fit in well with the idea of the higher self as a witness. By definition a witness merely observes and does not interfere, or interferes only occasionally.
This isn't the idea I started with, but it's the one that is starting to make the most sense to me now.
But whatever theory I come up with will necessarily be grossly inadequate and incomplete, because I am a Flatlander trying to grasp a higher-dimensional reality. As Mike Tymn likes to say, we are "blind gropers."
Posted by: Michael Prescott | December 29, 2012 at 10:36 PM
"I am a Flatlander trying to grasp a higher-dimensional reality. As Mike Tymn likes to say, we are "blind gropers."
Yeah Michael, but you grope better than most.
Posted by: Barbara | December 30, 2012 at 02:56 PM
"The implication was that these earth lives would have played out this way no matter what, and the soul's choice is only which of the various roles to play this time around. The soul doesn't create the human's path; it merely hitches a ride on it (and perhaps tries to smooth out the bumps a little or avoid the worst wrong turns)."
I would just comment that this system implies a profound separation between soul and human, seemingly conflicting with the "diamond oversoul" vision. And it doesn't seem to offer much consolation or inspiration to humans, since what continues from life to life is almost impossible to identify with as the human self. At least on the human level this is a bleak assessment, with an existence with little or no free will and no meaningful sort of survival of physical death. What point would there be for following any sort of spiritual path?
Of course that is no reason for it not being the truth. A determined optimist might just say that this bleak sort of assessment is false for reasons that are beyond human understanding (the flatlander trying to comprehend three dimensions metaphor). The trouble is in sustaining such an act of faith in the face of the world is at it is.
Posted by: David | December 30, 2012 at 07:45 PM
David, I think much depends on the extent to which we identify with the ego vs. identifying with the witness (higher self).
Also, I'm not saying the ego doesn't survive. It seems to me that it does persist in the "lower planes," such as Summerland ("paradise"), though usually with some of its shortcomings corrected, courtesy of the life review and the encounter with the Being of Light (which I take to be the higher self).
My guess is that eventually the ego evolves to the point where it becomes aware of its oneness with the higher self. At that point it is not extinguished, but it is enlarged, perhaps to an almost unrecognizable degree. But this happens only when the ego is ready, willing, and able to take that leap.
Of course I could be completely wrong about all of this!
Posted by: Michael Prescott | December 31, 2012 at 12:54 AM
This is nice post which I was awaiting for such an article and I have gained some useful information from this site. Thanks for sharing this information.
Posted by: business analyst jobs | December 31, 2012 at 01:33 AM
Posted by: Roger Knights | December 31, 2012 at 01:44 AM
I enjoyed every little bit part of it and I will be waiting for the new updates.
Posted by: option tips | December 31, 2012 at 06:43 AM
Just for the record there is a new NDE posted at the NDERF.org site that is pretty interesting. It reminded me of Mellen Benedict's NDE and also what Michelle M said about "one consciousness." I think it explains a lot.
It's Denise V's NDE: (excerpt) "in my vision the river was overflowing with people. People from every nation, culture, and time period in history. The water rushed and gurgled; sparkling about with reflected light. There was an air of celebration and joy about the throng. Shining down upon this sea of humanity was a blindingly beautiful light. Pink, golden and white-brilliantly luminous.
A sort of "voice" or realization arose within me and spoke. Although nobody appeared, I felt the presence of something immense and eternal standing to my right. It informed me that the people I was seeing, were all those who had ever lived. Yet here they were-alive! It told me that all of them..were me! Not only that... but I was each of them! I understood this presence was "God". And then God made it clear that all these people-and I-were God. And that He was us.
He told me that there was no "death". I was seeing life's continuance. A never ending flow of humanity, moving within the stream of Life. a beautiful, eternal flow which we're forever part of."
http://www.nderf.org/NDERF/NDE_Experiences/denise_v_probable_nde.htm
Posted by: Art | December 31, 2012 at 04:27 PM