Descriptions of the "afterlife"/5th Density

[goyacobol]

I think this thread has raised very good questions and even though some veer off a bit they are still related to aspects of "afterlife" or next life.

My own programming began with a Christian family upbringing and for awhile strong confidence in the teachings of the bible. I think it was after losing my father to atherosclerosis and eventual heart failure that I began to question many beliefs.

One aspect of Christianity that got my attention was the concept of reincarnation which I thought was hinted at with the story of Jesus healing a blind man.

John 9 International Standard Version (ISV)
Jesus Heals a Blind Man
9 As he was walking along, he observed a man who had been blind from birth. 2 His disciples asked him, “Rabbi,[a] who sinned, this man or his parents, that caused him to be born blind?”

3 Jesus answered, “Neither this man nor his parents sinned. This happened so that[b] God’s work might be revealed in him. 4 I[c] must do the work of the one who sent me[d] while it is day. Night is approaching, when no one can work. 5 As long as I’m in the world, I’m the light of the world.” 6 After saying this, he spit on the ground and made mud with the saliva. Then he spread the mud on the man’s eyes 7 and told him, “Go and wash in the pool of Siloam” (which is translated “Sent One”). So he went off, washed, and came back seeing.

This story made me ask how can a person be born blind for a sin if he did not have a previous life to do the sinning.

Many years later after finding Laura's sessions with the Cs and all the books I feel have many more logical answers to life's questions.
They do call such seeking for answers a "quest" and I think anyone who wants answers will continue to seek.

The Cs did answer the reincarnation question for me in this session:

Q: (SV) I want to ask one question: If there is no time, there is no past and no future; there are no past lives and no future lives, there is no such thing as reincarnation, then how can you be us...

A: Yes, there is reincarnation. You are getting ahead of yourself there. We never said there is no reincarnation.

It was sort of well now you are off on a quest to find more answers and here I am years later still looking for more answers.

One aspect of moving to 4D is the question of "lifespan" in 4D.

I think the following session answers that fairly well and also describes 4D's other characteristics in more detail.

Q: (L) Are there any exercises we can use to help our bodies transform into fourth density?

A: Not necessary. It is the soul that matters.

Q: (L) Does this mean that if we focus on soul development, that at the time of transformation that our bodies will automatically be transformed for us?

A: No. It is natural process. No preparation is needed.

Q: (L) So, if you are meant to transform, you will, if you are not you won't?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Does this mean that when my body reacts to certain foods that I should stop eating them? Is my body trying to tell me something?

A: Up to you. Nothing needs to "tell" you anything.

Q: (L) Can you clarify that?

A: Why are you searching for guidance where it is not needed?

Q: (L) In other words, if we just do each day what naturally comes to us as the best choice in each moment, we are on the right track?

A: Precisely.

Q: (V) I find the information of transforming to the fourth dimension very exciting and natural which is why I ask if this is going to be something I will experience in the future excluding death?

A: Vague.

Q: (L) If, theoretically, an individual... I am getting a very unusual feeling right at this moment, why?

A: Metabolic changes enhanced by accelerated learning.

Q: (L) Is this happening to all three of us?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Now, as I was starting to say, if, theoretically an individual was to develop in a natural way by making all the proper choices, and was to arrive at the point in time when the major transition is to be made, would that individual's body pass through into that heightened dimension in a physical state? Remember, this is just a theoretical person...

A: Of course.

Q: (L) Now suppose this theoretical person were to pass through this transition to the other side, what state would they find their body in? Would it be exactly as it is now in terms of solidity? What would be the experience?

A: The key concept here is variability of physicality.

Q: (L) Does this mean that everybody will be different or that an individual will have greater control over the substance and constitution of the body?

A: Not exactly either. Your physicality will be variable according to need and circumstance.

Q: (L) Okay, does this mean that sometimes we will be more of a light body?

A: Close.

Q: (L) Does this mean that sometimes we will be more of a firm body as we have now?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Will our bodies age differently?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) What will be the median lifespan?

A: 400 years

Q: (L) And will those who pass through this transition as, say, 50 year olds, will they have an equal opportunity to live an additional 400 years?

A: Will regenerate in youthful appearance.

Q: (L) Now, when you say 400 years, will it be that the plane has a different orbit and that a year will be different?

A: No.

Q: (L) Will the days be different as to length of time light and dark as they are now?

A: Not the point. Planet will be 4th density as well.

Q: (L) But will the days and nights be different and will the orbit be different? Will the axial angle be changed?

A: You are thinking in terms of the 3rd level density. The rules will be so totally different that physical inspired comparisons are moot.

Q: (L) But I like the sunshine and birds singing and breezes. I just want to know if those things will be the same.

A: In some fashion.

Q: (L) Can't you give a few clues?

A: We must let you see for yourself.

Is 400 years enough to complete 4D learning? I kind think we may still have more lifetimes of learning to do after the 400 years but that is just a speculation for now.

 

[genero81]

(Pierre) People's lives are at stake in the sense that they can become possessed when they embrace this ideology. For awhile I've been thinking that there is more at stake, literally the souls of individuals. If you remember in Darkness Over Tibet, when the...

A: Smashing

Q: (Pierre) Yeah, they're right but they didn't let me finish the sentence. In Darkness Over Tibet, the wise man said there's not much that is a sin against the soul - except playing god. And this ideology when you embrace, you are playing god. You deny reality.

(L) We have our problems with organized religion, but it's better than thinking that you yourself are god! To understand that the cosmos out there is a bit bigger and smarter than you are...

(Andromeda) That there's something higher.

(Joe) Is it true that people who gravitate toward that idea of relativism and that there's no truth, and then they effectively put themselves in the place of god, is it because they have no real inner connection or appreciation of anything higher than themselves?

A: Yes

As I'm reading through 'Whitehead's Radically Different Post Modern Philosophy' and also reading again 'Speculum Mentis,' first of all the two thinkers seem to have reasoned out the same conclusions using somewhat different language. Whitehead says every experience contains within it the seed of a previous experience. Collingwood says (in so many words) any abstraction which views itself as complete in itself outside the 'historical consciousness' which is 'concrete' as a whole, is an error in thought. So we have these postmodernist/ materialists/ atheist who for whatever reason want to explain everything without acknowledging anything 'higher' but when they try and reason it out to defend their position, it can't be done. They end up employing all kinds of mental gymnastics to try and make it work and you just end up with a confusing mess. It doesn't matter whether one is trying to reason out ethics/ morality or evolutionary biology while coming at it from an atheistic perspective, the results are the same. So reading again the session quoted in part above, I find it most interesting the C's brought up the Tower of Babel because these people come across as babbling idiots once you see the situation clearly as I think I'm starting to. Also reminds me of the remark by the C's that we would be surprised how clearly we would be able to think once the time was 'now.' Here's a short excerpt from WRDPP:

Basil Mitchel in a book titled Morality: Religious and Secular: In speaking of the "traditional conscience" Mitchell refers to people who still hold that we should obey our traditional moral intuitions even though they have given up the religious basis for morality "was based on a purpose written in the nature of things." The 'dilemma" faced by such people is due to the fact that the various forms of secular humanism have failed "to provide a rationale for morality as traditionally conceived." These people hence face the dilemma of either modifying their conscience or questioning the secular assumptions."

 

[Laura]

I've finished reading "Darwin Devolves" and was thinking about all the implications of what amounts to the most hard-core proof ever for the existence of Cosmic Mind ever, and this discussion about "the afterlife". Most of the descriptions are more or less similar, and some seem to go farther than others, but in general, the principle seems to be that Cosmic Mind/Information Field is not mocked: what you sow, you WILL reap, one way or another, no matter at what level of existence you may be.

It all made me think back to a passage in the book "Heading Toward Omega" or some such title (may have been the other book by the same author), where one person who had come back from a NDE and told what it was like for the short time he (or she) had been in that out of body state, looking back on life doings and experiences. As I recall, the individual was nearly devastated with overwhelming and heavy grief, over what would appear, in this reality, to be a relatively innocuous act: a small, careless, unkindness to a child. If anybody has ever read those books, maybe they can find the passage in question and reproduce it here. I believe that it deserves some discussion. And I think that a good focus for discussion is not so much what we should expect to GET "on the other side," but what we should do to be always ready to make that passage.

Edgar Cayce once said something along the line that the only luggage you can take with you when you pass over is the love you have given others (words to that effect) and I think that is something to think about.

It seems to me that being unkind, that is, selfishly, self-centeredly, mean, even if it seems to be small potatoes, or even if our brains create elaborate narratives about why we are justified in being mean to another person, is deadly to the soul.

 

[Anamarija]

As I recall, the individual was nearly devastated with overwhelming and heavy grief, over what would appear, in this reality, to be a relatively innocuous act: a small, careless, unkindness to a child. If anybody has ever read those books, maybe they can find the passage in question and reproduce it here. I believe that it deserves some discussion. And I think that a good focus for discussion is not so much what we should expect to GET "on the other side," but what we should do to be always ready to make that passage.

In Life After Life Richard Moody writes that all of his subjects, after returning to the body, experienced enlightenment and looked at their lives differently. And they all experience pretty the same.
I have only Croatian version so I can't copy/paste but here some interesting parts with translation (google translator):

The man dies and at the moment of the greatest physical cloning he hears his doctor declaring him dead. His ears are accompanied by an unpleasant noise, a loud ringing or buzz, and at the same time he senses that he travels fast through a long, dark tunnel. After that he suddenly realizes that he is outside his own body, but still in the area where he was before. Your body looks at a certain distance, as a spectator. From this pleasant position he looks at the reanimation attempts and comes to a state of great emotional excitement.

After a while, he was getting used to his somewhat unusual situation. He notices that he still has a "body" and that this body looks different and different from the body he has just left. Soon, something is starting to happen. There is another encounter with him to help him. He explores the ghosts of his cousins and friends who died before him, and before him "the creature of light" appears - a warm and hearty spirit full of love. Without a word, spontaneous transmission of thought will ask him a question and ask him to evaluate his life. To help him, he shows him, in the pictures, the panorama of the most important moments of his life (everything is happening in a moment). At some point, he senses approaching some kind of obstacle or boundary that should be the line of delimitation of the earthly and other lives. He found that he had to go back because it was not yet time to die. But he does not want to go back because he is already very busy with experiencing life after his death. It is intimidated by the intense feeling of joy, love and calmness. Nevertheless, it joins again with its material body and continues to live.

It should be added that all respondents, without exception, insist that the question is not put in order to judge them. This is one of the deep-rooted issues that everybody has to face when and when. They all agree that they will not question the accusing or threatening tone, and that they know that their response will not affect the full love and acceptance of the light that surrounds them. The purpose of the questions is to encourage them to think about their own lives. That is, one might say, a kind of Socrates question that is not put up for information but to allow man to go through the truth.

The effects of these experiences took on subtle and finer shapes. Many people told me that this experience expanded and deepened their eyes on life. They began to think and look for answers to basic philosophical questions.

Some have mentioned that the encounter with death changed their notions of the spirit and the relative importance of the material body as something that is contrary to the spirit.

In addition, many respondents emphasized the importance of knowledge. While they were dying, they were told that acquiring knowledge continued even after death.
...
It is reasonable to expect that this experience deeply altered the attitudes of the respondents towards bodily death, especially those who previously thought that after death there was nothing left to do.

 

[mkrnhr]

There is a short remark by Kenneth Ring about the so-called life-review in NED experiences:

In the example he gives, the person who re-lives a certain event (a fight) as a spectator, and at the same time as the other person who was the receiving end of his actions.

 

[Matthew]

I've finished reading "Darwin Devolves" and was thinking about all the implications of what amounts to the most hard-core proof ever for the existence of Cosmic Mind ever, and this discussion about "the afterlife". Most of the descriptions are more or less similar, and some seem to go farther than others, but in general, the principle seems to be that Cosmic Mind/Information Field is not mocked: what you sow, you WILL reap, one way or another, no matter at what level of existence you may be.

It all made me think back to a passage in the book "Heading Toward Omega" or some such title (may have been the other book by the same author), where one person who had come back from a NDE and told what it was like for the short time he (or she) had been in that out of body state, looking back on life doings and experiences. As I recall, the individual was nearly devastated with overwhelming and heavy grief, over what would appear, in this reality, to be a relatively innocuous act: a small, careless, unkindness to a child. If anybody has ever read those books, maybe they can find the passage in question and reproduce it here. I believe that it deserves some discussion. And I think that a good focus for discussion is not so much what we should expect to GET "on the other side," but what we should do to be always ready to make that passage.

Edgar Cayce once said something along the line that the only luggage you can take with you when you pass over is the love you have given others (words to that effect) and I think that is something to think about.

It seems to me that being unkind, that is, selfishly, self-centeredly, mean, even if it seems to be small potatoes, or even if our brains create elaborate narratives about why we are justified in being mean to another person, is deadly to the soul.

Yes, one of the big conclusions I have drawn from this thread and my own readings and ruminations is that whatever our subjective experience of reality is, our unique mindset, as it were, there is a definite, inexorable underlying structure and set of rules that govern this life business that we all go through. We can consider ourselves Christians, Muslims, Athiests, post modernist 'there is no truth; it is all subjective' delusionals, or whatever, it does not matter. We are all subject to this structure and these rules whether we like it or not. Objective reality will always win out over subjective reality if you will.

I can empathise with the person who underwent the NDE and their subsequent agonies of remorse and regret. I have been thinking and reflecting on my past conduct a great deal recently, partly due to this thread, and have been dealing with my own agonising feelings of shame and remorse. Like the individual, Laura referenced the intensity of these feelings for even the slightest misstep on my part has been hard to deal with at times. I am grateful, however, for this as I am currently in a physical body and can thus more easily do something about this. I cannot change the past but I can use realisation of my missteps in the past to shape who I am now which will shape who I am in the future. There will be no escaping the agonies of self reflection on my past conduct when I 'die' but the less I add to the ledger from now on the better.

 

[Matthew]

There is a short remark by Kenneth Ring about the so-called life-review in NED experiences:

In the example he gives, the person who re-lives a certain event (a fight) as a spectator, and at the same time as the other person who was the receiving end of his actions.

Wonderful. This process of life review including experiencing the effects of our conduct on others and including their subjective experience of it is as if it was our own is congruent with the Conversations With God material, interestingly enough.

Looking at the bigger picture i.e. there is a divine cosmic mind, God, or whatever word/phrase one wishes to use who is watching us go through this life process without judgement, this post death examination of one's prior conduct is quite brilliant in its conception and execution. 'God' gives us free will, sets up the 'rules of the game' like cause and effect and so on, then lets us do with our incarnation as we will. When we 'die' we review our conduct in this incarnation including how it has affected other people as if we were them but without judging us as we would not judge a small child and their missteps. However, we are free to judge ourselves for our conduct! Talk about an incentive to change, seeing and experiencing ourselves as others see us! From that perspective, there is hardly any need for God to judge. God merely holds a mirror up to us and we do the rest. If we choose to. We still have free will after all. However, as an inspiration to change one's ways without being lectured by God it strikes me as a very effective method. God is effectively saying: "Hey, you can do what you want. I have given you free will after all. However, if you decide to conduct yourself like this then these are the repercussions that follow."

 

[goyacobol]

With all the Work that has been done on the forum in so many fields of study such as psychology, science, ideologies, philosophies and and religions I have been thinking about how we many times don't treat each other very well and our attitudes don't do much in the way of helping or serving others. There is a session I recently read that made me think about the way we often think. I hope it is relevant in at least some way.

Session 28 April 1996:

Q: (L) My mother also fell down and has a black eye. I am trying to find the portal? What is the portal through which all this attack is coming?

A: Discover.

Q: (L) Did we already discover it in part, i.e. SV and her mother and that situation?

A: No.

Q: (L) Are you saying that SV is not a portal?

A: People are not portals!!! They are only victims of the things that come through the portals. Otherwise, many could describe you as a "portal."

Q: (L) Well, I never said that I wasn't. Speaking of that...

A: When you concentrate on the people as portals, you falsely direct negative energy upon the soul units themselves. Rather like treating acne with the therapy to be found in a shotgun!

Q: (L) What is the appropriate response when you are in a situation and you know that the person is being victimized, yes, by the forces coming through the portal, but their victimization is causing you a great deal of problems? What is the appropriate response here?

A: How do you view those afflicted with disease? Do you throw rocks at them?!?

Q: (L) Well, no, you don't throw rocks at them...

A: What do you do, then?

Q: (L) Well, a person with a disease: you send or take them to a doctor or suggest that they go to a doctor.

A: For what purpose?

Q: (L) To discover the diagnosis of the disease, to obtain medicine, to either relieve the symptoms or cure the disease.

A: Bingo!

I think we have a lot examples of "afflicted" humans today. Hopefully we will actually have some cures to offer if asked.

 

[Gaby]

Fascinating accounts of Terminal Lucidity, Gaby. The question is, do morphine and sedatives possibly hinder that process and prevent one to carry a message at that stage? May it keep you wandering a bit more than needed? Although it helps you deal with pain, maybe it doesn't help in accepting the process? I don't know.

The author was speculating that these events occur less because people are not as opened minded to these phenomena as they were in the past. I do think that drugs make a person "less embodied", so it makes sense to me that these events might occur less due to drugs.

However, in palliative care people have more control and free will than what is generally thought around, at least in my experience. Everybody must specify their "advanced will" before they even enter palliative care. Family members decide if the patient doesn't want to know about their disease or if they are not cognitive able. It's generally advised to sign an advanced will before there's even cognitive decline. People often decide when and if they need morphine.

Sedatives are only given in the last stage when there is agonizing breathing, meaning the person is literally passing away. There's always a consent. Relatives often ask for it because agonizing breathing can be very hard to witness. I've seen people agonize and even nod to the starting of the sedation. By then, people often had said their goodbyes.

In other cases I think that people who die of natural causes are aware of their dying process at some level, despite the drugs. From a timely passing away after relatives give their permission that they can go away, to timing their deaths while a relative accidentally left the room for a few minutes, it often looks like too much of a coincidence.

There are those who refuse to think they're dying. But the cases where people wander around a while longer mostly for their relative's sake are the ones that stand out for me. It's hard to imaging someone who is dying saying goodbye to a family member who is not willing to see him or her die. In these cases, the suggestion of "you have to let go, she/he is suffering too much" will often bring things to an end. As soon as there's even a little of acceptance from relatives, the person passes away.

 

[Laura]

Another thing that strikes me is thinking about that scene described in "The Devil's Delusion" where the old Jewish man told his assassin "God is watching you."

Well, yes, in a very real sense it is true. Not only are the dear departed aware of a lot we do, but 4D denizens are too, and I guess depending on our overall orientation, either STS or STO. Then, on top of that, there is Cosmic Mind itself, the great balancing principle that probably connects with our own soul/essence. Since the Universe seems to be mostly about Knowledge, i.e. Truth, I suspect that lies of certain types are a big part of what subtracts "points" from our balance sheet; pretty much as Gurdjieff described it, I think.

Another thing that occurs to me: obviously, those folks who come back and talk about their NDEs are already, by the fact that they had such, and came back to share it, of a certain "type", so to say - probably not OPs or pathological types; and probably not hard-core STS types, either. So we don't have much idea what passing over is like for the latter types. It could be rather gruesome, or, at least to our way of seeing things, unpleasant.

As Strategic Enclosure wrote above:

I have been thinking and reflecting on my past conduct a great deal recently, partly due to this thread, and have been dealing with my own agonising feelings of shame and remorse. Like the individual, Laura referenced the intensity of these feelings for even the slightest misstep on my part has been hard to deal with at times. I am grateful, however, for this as I am currently in a physical body and can thus more easily do something about this. I cannot change the past but I can use realisation of my missteps in the past to shape who I am now which will shape who I am in the future. There will be no escaping the agonies of self reflection on my past conduct when I 'die' but the less I add to the ledger from now on the better.

Absolutely right. That's the awakening of conscience Gurdjieff described, and yes, we are still in the body and that gives us an opportunity to heal the present as much as possible, and thus, shape our future both in this world and in the next. And perhaps, by healing the present, we can change the past, too.

No time like the present to examine oneself, one's deeds, who one has hurt out of selfishness or self-centeredness (some hurt can't be avoided), and to take measures, if such are possible, to confess and make amends. It only takes a few lies, a few mean acts, an overarching selfishness, to subtract serious points and start one on the road to serious suffering either now, or in the next world, or both.

In a very real sense, God is watching us.

 

[luc]

No time like the present to examine oneself, one's deeds, who one has hurt out of selfishness or self-centeredness (some hurt can't be avoided), and to take measures, if such are possible, to confess and make amends. It only takes a few lies, a few mean acts, an overarching selfishness, to subtract serious points and start one on the road to serious suffering either now, or in the next world, or both.

Indeed, and it's crucial I think to learn how to recognize our missteps past and present, feel the pain, shame, guilt and so on and connect with it. Because unfortunately, for events in the past it's often impossible to "make amends" (though it's often very possible and indeed a duty for present or recent misbehavior). But when it's impossible, you can at least "pay" with feeling the pain instead of coming up with justifications, shoving it under the rug etc.

I suspect that all we can "pay" right now, we don't need to pay during or after the transition. And God knows there will be plenty left to pay anyway!! But if you have accumulated too much debt so to speak, the sudden clarity and painful realizations in the afterlife might well be of soul-smashing intensity.

 

[thorbiorn]

While looking for the work of Kenneth Ring, mentioned by Laura, I came across a series of slides converted to pdf
Near Death Experience Research- History and perspectives by Robert Mays and Suzanne Mays May 18, 2011
It is a review of a lot of literature in English on NDE and research into same. Several authors are presented with picture and published works with a few words about the focus of the particular research. Among those mentioned is Kenneth Ring who is found on page eight of the pdf:
Kenneth Ring, Psychology professor
Life at Death (1980)
Heading Toward Omega (1984)
Lessons from the Light Kenneth Ring, with Evelyn Elsaesser Valarino (1998)
Mindsight Kenneth Ring with Sharon Cooper (1999)
Some conclusions from his research are presented here.
Several books by other authors look interesting too, it was tempting to attach the pdf.

 

[BrendaH]

I've finished reading "Darwin Devolves" and was thinking about all the implications of what amounts to the most hard-core proof ever for the existence of Cosmic Mind ever, and this discussion about "the afterlife". Most of the descriptions are more or less similar, and some seem to go farther than others, but in general, the principle seems to be that Cosmic Mind/Information Field is not mocked: what you sow, you WILL reap, one way or another, no matter at what level of existence you may be.

It all made me think back to a passage in the book "Heading Toward Omega" or some such title (may have been the other book by the same author), where one person who had come back from a NDE and told what it was like for the short time he (or she) had been in that out of body state, looking back on life doings and experiences. As I recall, the individual was nearly devastated with overwhelming and heavy grief, over what would appear, in this reality, to be a relatively innocuous act: a small, careless, unkindness to a child. If anybody has ever read those books, maybe they can find the passage in question and reproduce it here. I believe that it deserves some discussion. And I think that a good focus for discussion is not so much what we should expect to GET "on the other side," but what we should do to be always ready to make that passage.

Edgar Cayce once said something along the line that the only luggage you can take with you when you pass over is the love you have given others (words to that effect) and I think that is something to think about.

It seems to me that being unkind, that is, selfishly, self-centeredly, mean, even if it seems to be small potatoes, or even if our brains create elaborate narratives about why we are justified in being mean to another person, is deadly to the soul.

I’m not sure if this is the passage you are referring to, but I think it relates to what you wrote. This excerpt is from the book Lessons from the Light, written by the same author of the book you mentioned:

Lessons of the life review

When one studies life review narratives, one sees almost immediately that this experience, in its essence, is educative in nature. Life reviews teach and, despite the enormous diversity of the images they contain, each pertaining uniquely to the life of the NDEr under review, what they teach is astonishingly universal. They teach us, unmistakably in my judgment, how we are to live. It is as simple as that. There are certain values —universal values— we are meant to live by, and life review episodes contain vivid and incredibly powerful reminders of these values. No one who undergoes one of these encounters can avoid becoming aware of these teachings, because they are shown to be self-evident and, as we will see, it is impossible not to be affected by them. You see, you remember, and you change your life accordingly. Nothing compels like a life review, and, as we begin to get into them more deeply, you will come to understand why.

Here are some simple, even homey, examples of what I mean drawn from persons I interviewed for my book, Heading toward Omega:

You are shown your life —and you do the judging. Had you done what you should do? You think, “Oh, I gave six dollars to someone that didn’t have much and that was great of me.” That didn’t mean a thing. It’s the little things —maybe a hurt child that you helped or just to stop to say hello to a shut-in. Those are the things that are most important. . . . You are judging yourself. You have been forgiven all your sins, but are you able to forgive yourself for not doing the things you should have done and some little cheaty things that maybe you’ve done in life? Can you forgive yourself? This is the judgment. (The bold part was added from HTO.)​

​

Instantly, my entire life was laid bare and open to this wonderful presence, “GOD.” I felt inside my being his forgiveness for the things in my life I was ashamed of, as though they were not of great importance. I was asked —but there were no words; it was straight mental instantaneous communication— “What had I done to benefit or advance the human race?” At the same time all my life was presently instantly in front of me and I was shown or made to understand what counted. I am not going into this any further, but, believe me, what I had counted in life as unimportant was my salvation and what I thought was important was nil.​

​

I had a total, complete, clear knowledge of everything that had ever happened in my life … just everything, which gave me a batter understanding of everything at that moment. Everything was so clear. … I realized that there are things that every person is sent to earth to realize and to learn. For instance, to share more love, to be more loving toward one another. To discover that the most important thing is human relationships and love and not materialistic things. And to realize that every single thing that you do in your life is recorded and that even though you pass it by not thinking at the time, it always comes up later. For instance, you may be … at a stoplight and you’re in a hurry and the lady in front of you, when the lights turns green, doesn’t take right off, (she) doesn’t notice the light, and you get upset and start honking your horn and telling them to hurry up. Those are the little kind of things that are really important. One of the things that I discovered that is very important is patience toward other human beings and realizing that you yourself may be in that situation sometime. (This bold part was also added from HTO.)​

​

How does one come to grasp these things in the context of the life review? The answer appears to be that you are helped to see and intuitively understand them by the being or beings who often seem to regulate this process, whether they are visible or not. In a word, you are shown and made to understand. Let me give some examples now to make this clear. Göran Grip gives us a particularly instructive instance of the kind of tutelage that is available in this state. Speaking of the being of light he encountered during his NDE, he writes:

His love encouraged me to go through my life up to that point: I saw, relieved, remembered things that had happened in my life; not only what actually took place but also the emotions involved. Being five years old, you haven’t had the opportunity to commit many bad things, but I had a two-year-old-brother of whom I was very jealous, and a lot of times I had been mean to him in the usual way between brothers, and had been punished in the usual (nonviolent) way between parents and children.​

​

Going through what happened to us, my focus was not on what we actually did to each other (or “who started”). The emphasis was all the time on our exchange of emotions. And because of the love and understanding radiating from the being of life, I found the courage to see for myself, and with open eyes and without defenses, what in my actions had caused him pain. And for most of the episodes we went through, the being offered me an alternative way to act; not what I should have done, which would have been moralizing, but what I could have done —an open invitation that made me feel completely free to accept or not to accept his suggestions.​

​

 

[Matthew]

Indeed, and it's crucial I think to learn how to recognize our missteps past and present, feel the pain, shame, guilt and so on and connect with it. Because unfortunately, for events in the past it's often impossible to "make amends" (though it's often very possible and indeed a duty for present or recent misbehavior). But when it's impossible, you can at least "pay" with feeling the pain instead of coming up with justifications, shoving it under the rug etc.

I suspect that all we can "pay" right now, we don't need to pay during or after the transition. And God knows there will be plenty left to pay anyway!! But if you have accumulated too much debt so to speak, the sudden clarity and painful realizations in the afterlife might well be of soul-smashing intensity.

Agreed although my feeling is that one probably cannot avoid the painful self-reflection in the afterlife by doing it whilst one is still alive. However, it is certainly beneficial not to put it off as it can inspire us to make better choices whilst we are still here. If one makes genuine efforts to operate from a pure heart and make amends for one's inevitable missteps then one can at least breathe one's last with a cleaner conscience than if one did not make such efforts. Facing up to one's missteps and allowing oneself to really feel the shame and remorse is a crucial part of the process for me. Otherwise, it feels like a cop-out. An intellectual acknowledgement is not sufficient. Taking responsibility for one's actions or inactions and their consequences including any unintended consequences is crucial to one's growth. At least that has been how I have tried to live. I am no angel and have messed up plenty but knowing that I have made genuine efforts to breathe my last with a clean conscience is what has always guided and motivated me. Throughout my life consideration of this has always come before everyday issues of life. Given a choice between my conscience and inner sense of right and wrong and my situation in 3D Land is no choice at all. Conscience wins every time. Personal circumstances in this 3D Land are ephemeral and not that important. Nurturing the soul and choosing not to harm it by making decisions that are wrong even though they are convenient or easy or expedient or profitable in 3D Land is what counts, for me. I have thought for many years that of all the terrible things that can befall someone in this life none are as terrible as what one may do to oneself, to one's soul. One can be murdered, tortured, raped, abused and so on but none have the toll on the soul than one's own choices can have. Do harm to me if you will but getting me to do harm to another is far more costly.

The idea of soul smashing is pretty terrifying and I can understand the concern. However, one always has the opportunity to mend one's ways and turn from the path that would lead to that. Redemption is always possible. I think that if a soul is to be 'soul smashed' they have probably been on a dark path for quite some time i.e. many lifetimes and that it has been a choice to be so. These souls find being so overwhelming and terrifying that they desire obliteration. A form of ultimate suicide, if you will.

osit

 

[Cleo]

It all made me think back to a passage in the book "Heading Toward Omega" or some such title (may have been the other book by the same author), where one person who had come back from a NDE and told what it was like for the short time he (or she) had been in that out of body state, looking back on life doings and experiences. As I recall, the individual was nearly devastated with overwhelming and heavy grief, over what would appear, in this reality, to be a relatively innocuous act: a small, careless, unkindness to a child. If anybody has ever read those books, maybe they can find the passage in question and reproduce it here. I believe that it deserves some discussion. And I think that a good focus for discussion is not so much what we should expect to GET "on the other side," but what we should do to be always ready to make that passage.

I’m not sure if this is the passage you are referring to, but I think it relates to what you wrote. This excerpt is from the book Lessons from the Light, written by the same author of the book you mentioned:

Also found an excerpt from the same book 'Lessons from the Light' that relates though it may not be an exact match. In the book, the authors Kenneth Ring and Evelyn Elsaesser Valarino refer to a NDE account as described in a Raymond Moody book:

From Raymond Moody, The Light Beyond

[During her life review], I remember one particular incident...when, as a child, I yanked my little sister's Easter basket away from her, because there was a toy in it that I wanted. Yet in the review, I felt her feelings of disappointment and loss and rejection. What we do to other people when we act unlovingly!...Everything you have done is there in the review for you to evaluate (and) when I was there in that review there was no covering up. I was the very people that I hurt, and I was the very people I helped to feel good.... It is a real challenge, every day of my life, to know that when I die I am going to have to witness every single action of mine again, only this time actually feeling the effects I've had on others. It sure makes me stop and think. (pp. 37-38)