What does Death mean?

[garry brunt]

death doesn't mean death of self but it simply means life of this body is finished and you have to move to new body and this process is called re-incarnation.
correct me if my answer is wrong with your answer

 

[mac]

death doesn't mean death of self but it simply means life of this body is finished and you have to move to new body and this process is called re-incarnation.
correct me if my answer is wrong with your answer

welcome to ALF

You're correct in saying that death means the death of one's physical body but you don't have to move to a new body. We lived before we came here, we will live one in a different dimension after we pass over.

Reincarnation - the process of undertaking a further life as an incarnate human - is something we are able to choose to do at a time that's right for us.

 

[bluebird]

garry,

I respect your view, but for me it's all "up in the air" -- I'm agnostic. I don't know if there's an afterlife -- maybe there is one, and that's where we go when we die, or maybe we just die and that's it. As for reincarnation, that may exist or it may not -- if it does, I just hope it's not something we're forced into doing, because I never will if I have the choice.

 

[STEVEN LEVEE]

LOL! Blue. Do some investigating there's tons out there & come to your own conclusions. A bunch of us can tell you what we know...not think...but know to be true & it wouldn't mean a thing to you...Go seek & ye shall find!
Blessings,
Steve

 

[bluebird]

Steven,

I have done; that's why I am agnostic.

 

[mac]

LOL! Blue. Do some investigating there's tons out there & come to your own conclusions. A bunch of us can tell you what we know...not think...but know to be true & it wouldn't mean a thing to you...Go seek & ye shall find!
Blessings,
Steve

bluebird has been on ALF and 'at this stuff' for a very long time hoping to find reassurance she so dearly would like.

She's done all the researching you could reasonably expect but it's not helped her feel convinced about survival et al. I have another friend on another website who knows at least as much about death, survival and Spiritualism as I do, and has sat with mediums and watched demonstrations of mediumship. Yet he remains unsure.

We need to respect the effort folk have made and not assume that because they don't believe that they haven't tried their best.

 

[STEVEN LEVEE]

Very true...yet baffling, Mac. It's all out there. Obvious even:-/ It's good to doubt and be skeptical Blue...just keep an open mind when the time comes...You will have your answers then.

 

[Ruby]

I am open-minded both ways and also to the appeal of an afterlife. A lot of us have someone special in mind we would like to see again, but at the same time there are others in our close family we don't feel any kind of wish to see. Not speaking from personal experience here; my sister irritates me within five minutes in her company but that is nothing compared to those who spent their lives with violent and abusive parents and partners. How would they feel about the prospect of an afterlife? They might fear it more than anything.

 

[mac]

Very true...yet baffling, Mac. It's all out there. Obvious even:-/ It's good to doubt and be skeptical Blue...just keep an open mind when the time comes...You will have your answers then.

I don't find it baffling. We are individuals and react as such. What works for one doesn't automatically work for another whatever field you look at. Survival et al is - I suggest - an even more individual issue.

Neither are things necessarily obvious. Many things I find easy to see - obvious to me - and then resolve aren't automatically obvious to others. I once worked in science and electronics and consider myself analytical by nature and training but if that's not your nature then you may struggle. A similar principle obtains when I'm working a spiritual problem, something where I have to consider issues in different ways.

As for bluebird finding her answers "when the time comes" we can only pray her time does soon come and that she does find her answers but thus far it's been a tough journey for her.

ps What I mean by her time soon coming is the time she accepts survival - I didn't mean her passing. Sorry if it came over wrong, bb.

 

[mac]

I am open-minded both ways and also to the appeal of an afterlife. A lot of us have someone special in mind we would like to see again, but at the same time there are others in our close family we don't feel any kind of wish to see. Not speaking from personal experience here; my sister irritates me within five minutes in her company but that is nothing compared to those who spent their lives with violent and abusive parents and partners. How would they feel about the prospect of an afterlife? They might fear it more than anything.

Surviving death and the so-called afterlife isn't a matter of appeal - it's gonna happen whether or not it has any appeal for you. Same for everyone else - they don't get to choose whether they survive hence the afterlife is just a matter of fact - even if individuals don't get it.

After you pass over it's simple. Those for whom you have love - and who reciprocate that - will find themselves drawn to one another if it's what they'd like. If it ain't then they won't. Abusive partners won't be able to perpetuate their previous abuse and the one abused won't be stuck with 'em.

Like-attracts-like and if you ain't alike then you ain't gonna attract one another.

 

[amina89]

death doesn't mean death of self but it simply means life of this body is finished and you have to move to new body and this process is called re-incarnation.
correct me if my answer is wrong with your answer

Depends,in my opinion (and i do not believe in reincarnation) death means moving on,to an other plane,existence,dimensium

Your soul most probably moves on and "reincarnates" spiritually but that is not reincarnation as we see it

I discussed this with a believer of Vedic teachings,and it suprised me that the Vedas do not mention reincarnation nor do the few peoples who still hold on to ancient hinduism believe in reincarnation today he says "the heavenly way is eternal".It is the closes to my personal belief i think...

anyway once you lose someone you always hope they will see you,you will meet them one day..no comfort if you think "this is it,he/she is moving on to an other life and i will live this life for what i have left then i too will move on to an other life" ..depressing to me!
'
but evweryone has their own and i respect it

 

[amina89]

Surviving death and the so-called afterlife isn't a matter of appeal - it's gonna happen whether or not it has any appeal for you. Same for everyone else - they don't get to choose whether they survive hence the afterlife is just a matter of fact - even if individuals don't get it.

After you pass over it's simple. Those for whom you have love - and who reciprocate that - will find themselves drawn to one another if it's what they'd like. If it ain't then they won't. Abusive partners won't be able to perpetuate their previous abuse and the one abused won't be stuck with 'em.

Like-attracts-like and if you ain't alike then you ain't gonna attract one another.

so you wont be able just to look up someone even though he is not that into meeting you? anyone who knows more about this?

 

[kim]

Like-attracts-like and if you ain't alike then you ain't gonna attract one another.

So, Mac, if someone practices tough-love they will be attracted to a tough-love dimension, but on the other end, if a person is compassionate they will be attracted to a compassionate dimension? We are to mature here in this dimension, so as to learn to work together?

 

[mac]

So, Mac, if someone practices tough-love they will be attracted to a tough-love dimension, but on the other end, if a person is compassionate they will be attracted to a compassionate dimension? We are to mature here in this dimension, so as to learn to work together?

I don't do 'tough love' kim..... Love isn't tough so anything that's tough isn't love in my book. But essentially you're right about who will be with whom.

Those who have a 'tough-love' approach - bullying, abusive etc. - will not be with those who are caring. For example, if you had an abusive parent, partner or whatever you'll not be attracted to being with that partner etc. and that individual won't be able to continue his/her abusive behavior towards you.

The ones who care about others will be in the company of others who feel the same way. Totally unlike this physical dimension people with very different behaviors won't be together - there's no attraction. What we learn from experience in this world will vary from person to person and learning to work together might well be an important plan for anyone's incarnate life.

 

[mac]

Depends,in my opinion (and i do not believe in reincarnation) death means moving on,to an other plane,existence,dimensium

Death of the body does indeed signal moving-on of the spirit that animated it - our 'true self'.

Your soul most probably moves on and "reincarnates" spiritually but that is not reincarnation as we see it

Our souls are continually 'moving on' one incarnation after another and in other ways. Reincarnation is often represented in ways that don't appeal to my reason, often appearing (to me) confused and confusing.

I discussed this with a believer of Vedic teachings,and it suprised me that the Vedas do not mention reincarnation nor do the few peoples who still hold on to ancient hinduism believe in reincarnation today he says "the heavenly way is eternal".It is the closes to my personal belief i think...

Adherents to faiths and beliefs hold various views. None have a monopoly-of-truth about the actual situation and even what's taught may be imperfectly understood by adherents to that teaching.

anyway once you lose someone you always hope they will see you,you will meet them one day..no comfort if you think "this is it,he/she is moving on to an other life and i will live this life for what i have left then i too will move on to an other life" ..depressing to me!

All of us 'move on' and any of us may be incarnate at varying times. Those we love and have passed will spend time 'over there' and wait to meet up with us after our own passing if that's what they choose. Thinking about such a situation can make us sad but that's because we're viewing things purely from our human perspective. Before we incarnated we knew more of 'the big picture' and after we pass over we'll become re-acquainted with it again. THEN we'll see things for their true values.

but evweryone has their own and i respect it

I respect the right of any individual to continue believing whatever they wish even when alternative explanations have been offered. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink and if folk choose to continue believing what they always have then that's an end to matters. I certainly have no desire to try to change anyone's outlook against their wishes.

 

[mac]

so you wont be able just to look up someone even though he is not that into meeting you? anyone who knows more about this?

You'll be able to send your thoughts/wishes to anyone you choose but you can't dictate how they'll react. If that individual has no wish to be with you then you can't change that. Again it's the opposite of what someone might do here in the physical where one individual can pester or stalk another.

If, though, both of you wish to 'meet up' then meeting up will be the natural consequence.

 

[kim]

Reincarnation - the process of undertaking a further life as an incarnate human - is something we are able to choose to do at a time that's right for us.

Mac, please help me with the idea of reincarnation, because I don't know anything about it. When we are absent from this body, I assume we have another body that seems real. Is that considered incarnation or is this the only dimension of physical incarnation?

 

[mac]

Mac, please help me with the idea of reincarnation, because I don't know anything about it. When we are absent from this body, I assume we have another body that seems real. Is that considered incarnation or is this the only dimension of physical incarnation?

Teachers and guides tell us that after we pass over we live in our etheric bodies. They don't SEEM real, they ARE real and are as solid as the ones we're living in when we're alive in this world, this dimension, kim.

When I speak about incarnation I often say something like "this particular, physical dimension" but there are other physical dimensions (we've been taught) so you could say we incarnate into any of those also.

 

[kim]

All of these dimensions are made of the same stuff but exist at different frequencies?

 

[bluebird]

Thank you, mac. And no worries, I know you weren't wishing me dead, lol!

Steven, I do keep an open mind. Believe me, I would be so happy if I could believe in the existence of an afterlife (provided that said afterlife were one in which we are reunited with our dead loved ones, are able to be with them, etc.). I don't DISbelieve, I am genuinely agnostic regarding the possible existence of an afterlife. What may be obvious proof to you does not present as obvious proof to everyone -- if it did, no one on the planet would have any doubt.

 

[mac]

All of these dimensions are made of the same stuff but exist at different frequencies?

These are interesting considerations, kim. In the past I've asked what I think is a simple question. Are the sciences of the etheric dimensions comparable to those of this physical one? My guess is that they're not comparable and that 'the stuff' that makes up the dimensions isn't anything we humans could understand.
I'd suggest it's likely that the denizens of the etheric don't understand 'how stuff works' in their dimension any better than most of us ordinary humans understand how stuff works here - why would they?

As for the "different frequencies" aspect well I've been talking about this for years but I have no idea how one could define the frequency of a dimension in the first place. We know from teachers that everything works at a 'higher vibration' than applies here but how that would be expressed scientifically I have no idea. If it ever can be explained then maybe our world's scientists will begin to listen.

All I have at a personal level is a mental impression of the differences and I gained that impression from reflecting on these matters and asking questions whenever I get chance - even though I rarely get a detailed answer.

I still do wonder about these matters but I'm no further forward now than I was several years ago. Before long, though, I'll get my answers after I've kicked my clogs but whether I'll care by then is anyone's guess. I might not even remember - or just might not care - that these issues used to interest me.

 

[frith]

If there is any truth to spirituality and you exist somewhere else after you die, then death represents the end of the hoax you temporarily were in and your entrance back into actual reality.

 

[bluebird]

If there is any truth to spirituality and you exist somewhere else after you die, then death represents the end of the hoax you temporarily were in and your entrance back into actual reality.

I disagree. If there is some sort of afterlife, that is a continuation of the existence we have here on earth, as this life here on earth is a continuation of the life we had in heaven/beforelife prior to this earthly life. This life is not a hoax, nor is it any less real than the afterlife -- every point of every soul's existence is equally real and valid. I would liken it to living in different towns and countries over the course of one's existence -- they're all real, they're just different. One has different experiences in each place, and some places may mean more or have more significance to a particular person, but they are all equally part of that person's existence.

 

[mac]

I disagree. If there is some sort of afterlife, that is a continuation of the existence we have here on earth, as this life here on earth is a continuation of the life we had in heaven/beforelife prior to this earthly life. This life is not a hoax, nor is it any less real than the afterlife -- every point of every soul's existence is equally real and valid. I would liken it to living in different towns and countries over the course of one's existence -- they're all real, they're just different. One has different experiences in each place, and some places may mean more or have more significance to a particular person, but they are all equally part of that person's existence.

Beautifully expressed, bb.

 

[mac]

If there is any truth to spirituality and you exist somewhere else after you die, then death represents the end of the hoax you temporarily were in and your entrance back into actual reality.

Some individuals like to make out that life's an illusion, a hoax if you will, and some even liken it to living in a cyber game.

They may assert that only the so-called afterlife is 'real' without having defined what the word 'real' means. I guess through their eyes it's the way things appear.

But as I always say on this subject - somewhat smugly because nobody has been able to refute it - every dimension, every single state of existence away from source, is as real or as unreal as every other.

And there is no such thing as actual reality - it's simply reality.

 

[bluebird]

Beautifully expressed, bb.

Thank you.

 

[kim]

Some individuals like to make out that life's an illusion, a hoax if you will, and some even liken it to living in a cyber game.

They may assert that only the so-called afterlife is 'real' without having defined what the word 'real' means. I guess through their eyes it's the way things appear.

But as I always say on this subject - somewhat smugly because nobody has been able to refute it - every dimension, every single state of existence away from source, is as real or as unreal as every other.

And there is no such thing as actual reality - it's simply reality.

This is really nice to read Mac. Thank-you!

 

[Miss Hepburn]

Some individuals like to make out that life's an illusion,....

But as I always say on this subject - somewhat smugly because nobody has been able to refute it -
every dimension, every single state of existence away from source, is as real or as unreal as every other.
And there is no such thing as actual reality - it's simply reality.

What I bolded is a bit profound in my opinion.

Now, I would be one of those that says this that we see with our eyes open, to be specific, (from my personal experience -
not theorizing or philosophying) is a dream, an illusion...matter....the chair, my mother, my doggy...

Oh my gosh ---I was shown that at 8 yrs old ...while my mouth was dropped, stunned
looking all around me---
and my little mind saw it like things being like the props in a Hollywood Western's Main St...behind the facades were
2x4s holding it all up.
My first 'altered state' with no drugs, hahahah...I like to add that, ie, "with no drugs" (cuz people ask).
Since then, oh my - so many other altered states - that I call Divine Insights or Cosmic Consciousness...
so many names to say
the Doors of Perception have been opened.
I'm just weird that way ... like some people are psychic...some of us have our weird 'gifts', imo.

PS - Not saying our loves and angers are illusion ---just what we see with our eyes open.

 

[mac]

What I bolded is a bit profound in my opinion.

Now, I would be one of those that says this that we see with our eyes open, to be specific, (from my personal experience -
not theorizing or philosophying) is a dream, an illusion...matter....the chair, my mother, my doggy...

Oh my gosh ---I was shown that at 8 yrs old ...while my mouth was dropped, stunned
looking all around me---
and my little mind saw it like things being like the props in a Hollywood Western's Main St...behind the facades were
2x4s holding it all up.
My first 'altered state' with no drugs, hahahah...I like to add that, ie, "with no drugs" (cuz people ask).
Since then, oh my - so many other altered states - that I call Divine Insights or Cosmic Consciousness...
so many names to say
the Doors of Perception have been opened.
I'm just weird that way ... like some people are psychic...some of us have our weird 'gifts', imo.

PS - Not saying our loves and angers are illusion ---just what we see with our eyes open.

Could you define 'real' or 'reality'? Then we can compare 'illusion' with it....

 

[Miss Hepburn]

Could you define 'real' or 'reality'? Then we can compare 'illusion' with it....

I don't think this is my definition that I came up with ---but
it sure seems correct...put in my words, tho -
What is real lasts; is forever. What is not real changes, is temporary, even vanishes.

Anything that you can hold in your hand is not real.
Anything you can hold in your heart...is.

This is a more poetic approach.

 

[mac]

I get you - thanks.

It's often been argued here on ALF that this physical dimension is not real and based on your definition - "What is real lasts; is forever. What is not real changes, is temporary, even vanishes." - it certainly wouldn't be seen as 'real' because it's an ever-changing environment with ever-changing landscapes and an ever-changing population.

It could be argued that the general environment of the etheric dimensions is never-changing but their landscapes may change, may be changed by those living there, and their populations definitely do change.

So using your definition are those dimensions real or are they illusions?

 

[Miss Hepburn]

.... your definition - "What is real lasts; is forever. What is not real changes, is temporary, even vanishes."

So using your definition are those dimensions real or are they illusions?

This is fun, probably is for those reading, too - Hi to you guys!! That is,
see great minds discuss Illusion, Reality, ---why, we may even get to why is there anything then?
Hahahaha, LOL Why a Creation at ALL!

Oh, back to ur question. (Note: My take)
Hmm, first, they exist.
(I know from exp - again, not because some one said they do would I ever say they did.)
That being said, They exist.... Well, my German Shep exists, along with my house and trees. Yes.
However, they appear as a tree or dog - as my loved ones appear to be my beloved relatives.
Note: It's call an Illusion because it LOOKS REAL! Hahahahaha - if it didn't look real to fake you out ---it would be called something else --maybe the "Flop". Oh, I make myself laugh.

Also note: Jesus tried to point this out, 'See, guys - you think this is water dontcha?
Nope, it's really anything you want it to be - hard surface? Wine? Something that can hold tons
of fish when you want? Maybe falling from the sky, then not in one second....maybe raging
and scary, then quelled...in one second?
You even think a dead body is a dead body, dontcha...No, on that, too'

So any dimension, with it's cities of gold and spirits living in them, all the rolling pastures and flowers
in any dimension, flying at will - all not real.
AND when we ultimately realize and wake up ...not that this is a dream ---but out of the dream ---it all disappears...
And where are we left? Home back where we started, the Void, Alone, as the One - the Night of Brahman, (They even have names for it!)
The place that isn't a place, where there is no space or time - before the dream of Creation.

I wonder if I should say to this new group - I have been sitting in stillness and silence ---
people call meditation - for 47 yrs. Often 3- 6 hrs a sitting.
Things happen! Things are revealed or veils moved out of the way...that's why i talk this way.
Rem I said I was weird.

We could talk about matter later and the quantum stuff. Always cool stuff.
'Nothing is what it seems.'

 

[mac]

I much prefer to KISS - keep it simple sweetie. Quantum sciences may one day reveal what we don't know about but right now they don't.

Your sitting for meditation shows great dedication, something I can't match but looking at one of your examples (quote) "So any dimension, with it's cities of gold and spirits living in them, all the rolling pastures and flowers
in any dimension, flying at will - all not real." I think we're not far apart anyway.

If I've not already said this, my take on reality versus illusion is that EVERY dimension outside of source is as real or as unreal/illusory as any other. Claiming one is illusory but another is real is a distinction without a difference.

 

[Scott Ryan]

It means you are uploaded to the afterlife and can be born again without memory.

PS I'm a psychic and talk to the dead / psychics in the after life.

The psychics lol and said what's an quantum computer? I said electrons and atom's. They then said what's the human brain made out off? I said electrons and atom's. They then replied look at the receptors called the frontal lobs.

It's hard to think I never fort about it before. Looking at the frontal lobs on the brain hidden under the skin is beyond clear they take in a signal.

So we are computers in this life but also spiritual because if conconcinus... google it.

 

[Miss Hepburn]

If I've not already said this, my take on reality versus illusion
is that EVERY dimension outside of source is as real or as unreal/illusory as any other.
Claiming one is illusory but another is real is a distinction without a difference.

I'm thinking you have come across
people that think one dimension is real, another not? I never gave it much thought, to be honest.

Funny, how one phrase can take this into another direction. Ha.
In bold: Is anything outside of Source?

 

[Miss Hepburn]

So we are computers in this life but also spiritual because if conconcinus... google it.

Hi, I did google that word and everything was in a foreign language --when I clicked "Translate",
I was warned there was a Trojan virus there.
Liked your post.

 

[Scott Ryan]

Hi, I did google that word and everything was in a foreign language --when I clicked "Translate",
I was warned there was a Trojan virus there.
Liked your post.

Haha if only. Better hope you don't get a vires on your upload.

 

[mac]

I'm thinking you have come across
people that think one dimension is real, another not? I never gave it much thought, to be honest.

Funny, how one phrase can take this into another direction. Ha.
In bold: Is anything outside of Source?

Every dimension other than source itself is outside of source. Maybe 'outside' isn't a good word but I can't find an alternative that's any better.

 

[mac]

I'm thinking you have come across
people that think one dimension is real, another not? I never gave it much thought, to be honest.

It's been a constant theme from certain members that everything in this particular physical dimension is illusory, not real, like a dream etc. There are conversations here debating the point.

The nature of the etheric compared with that of the physical is something that's often been raised.

 

[Miss Hepburn]

Haha if only. Better hope you don't get a virus on your upload.

Thanks , my friend - my computer alerts me it's shutting it down pronto...I caught a glimpse only.

 

[UnseekingSeeker]

I get you - thanks.

It's often been argued here on ALF that this physical dimension is not real and based on your definition - "What is real lasts; is forever. What is not real changes, is temporary, even vanishes." - it certainly wouldn't be seen as 'real' because it's an ever-changing environment with ever-changing landscapes and an ever-changing population.

It could be argued that the general environment of the etheric dimensions is never-changing but their landscapes may change, may be changed by those living there, and their populations definitely do change.

So using your definition are those dimensions real or are they illusions?

Each illusion a reality for the consciousness resident therein
What matters perhaps is continuum of awareness unbroken

 

[mac]

Each illusion a reality for the consciousness resident therein
What matters perhaps is continuum of awareness unbroken

Perhaps the notion of illusion is the true illusion? A product of awareness greatly constrained by the systems within which our present consciousness registers.

 

[UnseekingSeeker]

Perhaps the notion of illusion is the true illusion? A product of awareness greatly constrained by the systems within which our present consciousness registers.

Hmmm ... each has his or her own insight. Upon consciousness expanding, we recognise that there is only One and we are That. That makes everything else illusionary or let us say, impermanent.

In Samadhi, we vaporise. We be to become the essence of bliss. My experience. Someone else may transmute into another attribute ... say, awareness or knowledge or power perhaps.

Let us take the waking state, as where we are supposed to be ‘more aware’, as compared to the dream state or deep sleep or Turiya. Even here, our attention is held in quanta of time, meaning each quanta or packet of time is a hypnotic trance. So what is real and what is unreal? We are as at where our attention is at and awareness relevant if only it is held in an unbroken continuum of time in resonation with chosen vibration.

In my view, since our reflex response determines our fulcrum, we need to slowly shift it, nearer to a God consciousness ... which is unconditional love.

I don’t know if this addresses your point. Maybe I have digressed.

 

[mac]

Hmmm ... each has his or her own insight. Upon consciousness expanding, we recognise that there is only One and we are That. That makes everything else illusionary or let us say, impermanent.

In Samadhi, we vaporise. We be to become the essence of bliss. My experience. Someone else may transmute into another attribute ... say, awareness or knowledge or power perhaps.

Let us take the waking state, as where we are supposed to be ‘more aware’, as compared to the dream state or deep sleep or Turiya. Even here, our attention is held in quanta of time, meaning each quanta or packet of time is a hypnotic trance. So what is real and what is unreal? We are as at where our attention is at and awareness relevant if only it is held in an unbroken continuum of time in resonation with chosen vibration.

In my view, since our reflex response determines our fulcrum, we need to slowly shift it, nearer to a God consciousness ... which is unconditional love.

I don’t know if this addresses your point. Maybe I have digressed.

You appear to have been considering the situation somewhat differently from me. I have no understanding of the states you've attributed to Samadhi and no understanding of Turiva. Real and illusory is simpler for me.

Whatever we experience is - to my simple mind - real. That includes dreams and various altered states. Permanence or the lack of it matters little. Whacking a block of granite and telling me it's not real because it's composed of infinitesimally small particles and electric charges with comparatively huge distances between them doesn't change my perception - I experience a block of granite as a block of granite. full-stop, period

Likewise in the etheric after I pass and before I incarnated I will experience - and will have experienced - the transient creations of other discarnate companions as real. Much the same way as apparently-permanent structures created and held together by the minds of elevated entities. From the smallest flower to the largest mountain range I will experience them as 'real'. It won't and didn't matter as it doesn't matter now that both are only as impermanent as their creator(s) decide(s) they should be - to me they will be real.

Extrapolate that to other very ordinary gals and guys like myself and that's the 'real' I'm talking about. The things WE'll feel, the stuff we'll experience.

 

[UnseekingSeeker]

You appear to have been considering the situation somewhat differently from me. I have no understanding of the states you've attributed to Samadhi and no understanding of Turiva. Real and illusory is simpler for me.

Whatever we experience is - to my simple mind - real. That includes dreams and various altered states. Permanence or the lack of it matters little. Whacking a block of granite and telling me it's not real because it's composed of infinitesimally small particles and electric charges with comparatively huge distances between them doesn't change my perception - I experience a block of granite as a block of granite. full-stop, period

Likewise in the etheric after I pass and before I incarnated I will experience - and will have experienced - the transient creations of other discarnate companions as real. Much the same way as apparently-permanent structures created and held together by the minds of elevated entities. From the smallest flower to the largest mountain range I will experience them as 'real'. It won't and didn't matter as it doesn't matter now that both are only as impermanent as their creator(s) decide(s) they should be - to me they will be real.

Extrapolate that to other very ordinary gals and guys like myself and that's the 'real' I'm talking about. The things WE'll feel, the stuff we'll experience.

Alright. Let us look at it another way, more in consonance with your perception. Who is the cogniser, the experiencer? If it is the mind-body, be it the earth body or the body correspondent to any other realm ... is it not the perception of that limited, transient entity?

We are not that limited interface, since we transition. Then what are we? What is that that neither comes nor goes? The underlying singular awareness, which witnesses the images moving?

The apparent ‘solidity’ of crystallised vibration as matter is an input for the clearly limited vehicle/ body. Full of self importance, the ego affirms that it knows, as of sensory perception and fragmented thought. At its level, the earthworm affirms likewise!

This is not to say that experience does not have value. It does. That is why we are here. But the underlying reality is not what we see.

I read somewhere recently something on these lines ‘as long as we have a body ... in any realm, we are looking at an unfulfilled desire’. Worth contemplating.

 

[mac]

Alright. Let us look at it another way, more in consonance with your perception. Who is the cogniser, the experiencer? If it is the mind-body, be it the earth body or the body correspondent to any other realm ... is it not the perception of that limited, transient entity?

yes

We are not that limited interface, since we transition. Then what are we? What is that that neither comes nor goes? The underlying singular awareness, which witnesses the images moving?

The apparent ‘solidity’ of crystallised vibration as matter is an input for the clearly limited vehicle/ body. Full of self importance, the ego affirms that it knows, as of sensory perception and fragmented thought.

Is then my own ego full of self importance when it seeks to keep these issues simple and handleable? Full of self importance when it expresses its owner's simplicity of approach? Full of self importance when it has not affirmed that it knows anything? Full of self importance when it speaks only of what is experienced - not known?

At its level, the earthworm affirms likewise!

I acknowledge your understanding of such matters.

This is not to say that experience does not have value. It does. That is why we are here. But the underlying reality is not what we see.

My contention is that what I experience is reality - I didn't say that what I see is reality, underlying reality or any other.
What I call reality may be little more than a vague representation of 'underlying reality' (undefined) but such is the way of the whole of our existence outside of source. Lives of experiences wherein what we experience and what we perceive is reality - or unreality if source is considered the benchmark of 'underlying reality'.

I read somewhere recently something on these lines ‘as long as we have a body ... in any realm, we are looking at an unfulfilled desire’. Worth contemplating.

The whole of our existence outside of source is driven by the desire to return there. Unfulfilled desire up to the point of fulfillment.

 

[Miss Hepburn]

I experience a block of granite as a block of granite. full-stop, period

Lol, that made me laugh - with affection! Not mocking!
And it's fine, imo, to see granite as granite. It's pretty dense and seems pretty real , that's for darn sure!
It's one of the better illusions ---well,
I think women are actually a better illusion.

 

[mac]

Lol, that made me laugh - with affection! Not mocking!
And it's fine, imo, to see granite as granite. It's pretty dense and seems pretty real , that's for darn sure!
It's one of the better illusions ---well,
I think women are actually a better illusion.

It's fine - I'm used to folk laughing.

 

[kim]

Whacking a block of granite and telling me it's not real because it's composed of infinitesimally small particles and electric charges with comparatively huge distances between them doesn't change my perception - I experience a block of granite as a block of granite. full-stop, period

LOL!!! Mac, that was too much! That is the same way people spoke to me when I told them about this reality not being real, so I stopped doing it. Have you noticed that I don't talk like that anymore? As you know, I did experience something beyond human comprehension, but it is not my responsibility to figure it out, so I've decided to enjoy my life while I'm here. Kim

 

[kim]

Much the same way as apparently-permanent structures created and held together by the minds of elevated entities.

I am able to recall an instance from my childhood when I suppose I was between 5 and 7 years old. I had taken notice of the way my mother baked cakes and cookies and how she would take different ingredients from various boxes. All the different ingredients were mixed together, baked and came out as one entirely whole thing. I laid under the trees and wondered if what the trees were made of could be put in boxes like the ingredients of cakes and cookies. I wondered what held the ingredients, or stuff, of trees together? I wondered what held the ingredients of my body together? So, the minds of elevated entities are what hold us together?

 

[mac]

LOL!!! Mac, that was too much! That is the same way people spoke to me when I told them about this reality not being real, so I stopped doing it. Have you noticed that I don't talk like that anymore? As you know, I did experience something beyond human comprehension, but it is not my responsibility to figure it out, so I've decided to enjoy my life while I'm here. Kim

I at least read everything written here, follow most threads to some degree and particularly the longer-running ones. I follow what 'regulars' say because they're the members we see more of, hear more about. And, yes, I have noticed you don't speak the way you did when you first started contributing to ALF's threads.

I hope I notice how members write generally and if I find anything specially relevant for an individual I try to link it to her/him. What is often the case, though, is that members write about their personal issues rather than about general spiritual and afterlife matters. It's often not easy to open a dialogue unless they then open the subject for discussion, ask questions etc.

Have you noticed I rarely write about my own experiences unless in connection with someone else's piece and only when I think mine is relevant and may be helpful.

 

[mac]

I am able to recall an instance from my childhood when I suppose I was between 5 and 7 years old. I had taken notice of the way my mother baked cakes and cookies and how she would take different ingredients from various boxes. All the different ingredients were mixed together, baked and came out as one entirely whole thing. I laid under the trees and wondered if what the trees were made of could be put in boxes like the ingredients of cakes and cookies. I wondered what held the ingredients, or stuff, of trees together? I wondered what held the ingredients of my body together? So, the minds of elevated entities are what hold us together?

No that's not the case. You've quoted only a part of what I wrote. Below is the whole paragraph with important text included.

Likewise in the etheric after I pass and before I incarnated I will experience - and will have experienced - the transient creations of other discarnate companions as real. Much the same way as apparently-permanent structures created and held together by the minds of elevated entities. From the smallest flower to the largest mountain range I will experience them as 'real'. It won't and didn't matter as it doesn't matter now that both are only as impermanent as their creator(s) decide(s) they should be - to me they will be real.

 

[kim]

Thanks, Mac.

 

[mac]

Thanks, Mac.

 

[Miss Hepburn]

I wondered what held the ingredients, or stuff, of trees together?
I wondered what held the ingredients of my body together?
So, the minds of elevated entities are what hold us together?

Hi, kim,

My thought /belief was there is One doing that. And oh my! The power or force.
No one pays much attention to gravity...
well, once I couldn't stop, ( I say God to be simple), God opened the Doors of Perception again, for days and for some
reason made me aware of this awesome force....and that's just here on this little ole planet!
I know, the power holding everything together is unimaginable! Why, look at what happens when one atom
is split!!! (Albeit, it's a pretty dense one, ha! U235.)
I wonder if an atom from a wood chair could light and heat a city for days?
Very exciting to expand the mind or our awareness to a place of sensitivity to the workings behind all that we can see,
(ha, which is woefully limited on the EM Spectrum! Teeny amount!)
Give me a topic and I can ramble quite a bit!!!! Lol.

 

[mac]

There is only one source of creative energy, of life. You can call it what you like or think of it as a man with a beard but that force created all that exists here. And all that exists everywhere and anywhere. You might say that it's this creative energy that holds US together if it helps you picture the situation. But it's simpler - or more complicated - than that. It depends on your understanding.

This creative energy put in place everything that's needed for universes to exist and function- - that also includes their denizens or at least the systems that eventually led to their existence. The mechanisms aren't important to this conversation although they're interesting enough in their own right. But you could say all that good stuff is what holds everything in this dimension together - it's a near enough analogy.

kim misunderstood what I'd referred to, though, which was the transient nature of some objects created in the etheric dimensions and their 'reality' or not. Her comments followed in the direction the thread had been heading for a while - the consideration of reality and illusion but not of the mechanisms creating either. That could be a different topic for discussion.