Is the bright white light and tunnel an alien trap for discarnate spirits?

[Laura]

[...] However, my personal experiences with spirit release therapy are that the earthbound spirits, attached spirits, etc, are always entrapped by being afraid of the light and turning away from it. [...]

Could be more than "one" confusion for earthbound spirits? Might earthbound spirits that fear "a" bright white light be feeling some kind of instinctive fear? Might they have some residual memory about what happens when they run "that" specific tunnel? So even without knowing why, might they be feeling a guttural fear in their deep soul?

I think if you watch my videos where I explain how SRT is done, you can quickly disabuse yourself of that notion. Again and again and again the process plays out the same way...

 

[sitting]

I wasn't aware of what the C's said on the topic.

I'm a bit surprised.

You've been around here a long time. And seem to have opinions on everything. And this topic is quite significant. (I assumed you've read all the transcripts.)

But I could be wrong.

FWIW.

 

[Buddy]

I wasn't aware of what the C's said on the topic.

I'm a bit surprised.

You've been around here a long time. And seem to have opinions on everything. And this topic is quite significant.

FWIW.

This is the second time you've expressed surprise at something I wasn't aware of. You also appear to have opinions on everything. At least I don't express them while pretending "I could be wrong" even though I know could be. Is something about me bugging you? If so, why not just say so?

 

[David]

I remember reading a book by a Lorna Byrne, who sees angels and who apparently has met god himself...? in a scene which a song by Queen wouldn’t be out of place.....osit

Anyway this lady says the same as Laura, in regards to dead people being afraid, so they don’t go in to the light, they stick around.... and I guess in a way just add to the primordial soup down here.

However, this lady says she was shown people being taken/guided by angels after death to where two huge angels stood and rolled back a colossal stone door, where the people went in and the door being rolled shut behind them, can’t recall if the guiding angels went in with them ? ... and apparently the Angels neglected to tell her what that was all about, though it wasn’t hell as this lady apparently has seen hell... and her vision of heaven didn’t inspire me it just seemed a little exhausting to be bowing up and down for eternity... sure so long as their happy. (maybe place for soul group, or food storage)

And maybe the hell she saw/glimpsed was what goes on here on planet earth all at once... which might be like taking in fifty years of ‘Behind the Headlines,’ and ‘The Truth Perspective’ shows in a few seconds, without a single ‘Health and Wellness Show’, sorry off topic a bit.

I guess one will do what one can do when one dies, either complete nothingness which sounds great to me, and the other possibility of more cosmic drama... though hanging around as a dead dude until everything goes completely non-functional, and ending up floating around in space with a few rocks, could be extremely boring, might be a long lesson.

So why not take a chances with the light... one could have a look around first, see what’s going down.... can’t a person go into the light when there good and ready... beam me up somebody I get it/got it and/or OMG Laura was sooo right...

Just my two cents... FWIW

 

[sitting]

I wasn't aware of what the C's said on the topic.

I'm a bit surprised.

You've been around here a long time. And seem to have opinions on everything. And this topic is quite significant.

FWIW.

This is the second time you've expressed surprise at something I wasn't aware of. You also appear to have opinions on everything. At least I don't express them while pretending "I could be wrong" even though I know could be. Is something about me bugging you? If so, why not just say so?

Hi Buddy,

A very good answer. Thank you.

What I was getting at, is an apparent lack of effort. On your part. And hence a measure of your seriousness.

I used to take your remarks very seriously, till the dawning realization that you're perhaps not as well studied as I thought you were. (Wahhabism and now this being recent examples.)

But it is not my place to critique your level of knowledge. Or commitment. And I really should mind my own business. But my feelings popped out spontaneously on these two occasions. Hence my unfortunate remarks. And I apologize.

FWIW.

 

[sitting]

You also appear to have opinions on everything.

Yes. This is true.

I do it because I feel it's (in some small measure) my only way of giving back -- to Laura and the group. I'm a late comer to the forum, but I'm so grateful for what it has given me.

Believe it or not, I don't really like to post. And I try hard not to ... unless I felt I had something useful to say. If my postings exceed 2 a day, I feel uneasy. And I shut it down. I believe forum space is a precious commodity. Not a place for self indulgence.

What I wrote some time ago, best expressed my attitude towards Laura and this group. And I like to repost it now:

"I do not think it was pure coincidence, that I came upon Laura's work.
My inner sense tells me it was meant to be.
That somehow, I was destined to play a small bit,
in the Magnum Opus that is her life.
And I embrace this small part,
with eagerness, sincerity ... and love."

For what it's worth, these remarks are my 4th verbal recitation -- in the list of 11. Done each morning at sunrise. A reminder of my purpose and my aim. As well as my debt to those who have so generously enlightened me.

And yes, I could be wrong.

 

[T.C.]

Hi sitting

I've noticed a kind of flavour to your posts that is a bit unpleasant, and when I'm working my way through a thread, as your name scrolls up at the top of a post you've written, there's an automatic thought that goes through my head along the lines of "Oh, I wonder what kind of stab he's going to be taking at someone this time." I don't know... like lack of external considering that comes from a place of barely disguised arrogance, I suppose.

On the topic of posting, it's not how many posts a person makes, but what the signal to noise ratio is.

On the topic of what you can give back to the group, working on yourself is a lot more important than making posts. Someone who isn't working on themselves can post 1000 times and only make forum members feel the need to take a shower after reading them. But a person who's genuinely working on themselves might post once a month and contribute something really helpful to a thread.

FWIW.

 

[Keit]

On the topic of what you can give back to the group, working on yourself is a lot more important than making posts. Someone who isn't working on themselves can post 1000 times and only make forum members feel the need to take a shower after reading them. But a person who's genuinely working on themselves might post once a month and contribute something really helpful to a thread.

FWIW.

Exactly. One of the most important things that Laura, Ark and all the admins try to show us, is how important it is to be hospitable and courteous toward our guests. Doesn't matter if they are only "virtual" or for how long they have been visiting our house. In fact, one of the things that is very insulting not only toward guests but also toward the hosts, is to exhibit an obnoxious or arrogant behavior toward other guests (like, for example, in the same sentence to manage both to give a compliment, but also to insult) and make them feel unwelcome. This is a big no no, and isn't tolerated very well on this forum.

Now, sitting, you say that you are very grateful for everything Laura did for you, and for an opportunity to participate and learn from this forum. We are all very happy for you, because we also feel incredibly lucky and honored to be part of this community. In this spirit, it would be really great if you would try to learn from behavior of our wonderful hosts and help other guests feel welcome rather than insulted. This, I am sure, would be greatly appreciated.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Lynn at PsychicFocusBlog.com
did one or more readings on that question..

Q. Hi Lynn!! I just read an article that reminded me about the man who somehow figured out how not to go to the light when he died. This article explains in detail how to turn away from the hypnotizing tunnel where you will eventually be recycled back to earth so that you can escape the matrix and be free to do what you choose. Does this resonate with you?

A. This does resonate with me. I see that there are a few things that someone can do when they pass to avoid having memories wiped away in the tunnel. First, don't go down the tunnel. I see that you need to have some kind of plan or belief system in place to avoid it. The tunnel is warm and enticing, so it is difficult to resist. It is designed that way to lure you in, but if you have a strong will upon passing, you can turn away much easier.

If you want to incarnate and retain as much wisdom as possible, I get there is a vibration that you need to give off when you pass through the tunnel. It visually looks like this vibration allows you go through the tunnel and pass through the light waves because your vibration works opposite of the natural vibration in the tunnel. I get that highly spiritual people have learned how to do this.

( from Psychic Focus Blog . com )

I think in another reading on this subject She said
Carlos Castaneda knew how to humm something
and go thru the tunnel with out them messing with your
vibration and memory ????

Bolded the interesting part. It does look like people who have a "plan" or "belief system" regarding what will happen after death are in fact the ones who avoid the tunnel. This suggests that if someone has no plan or belief system they won't avoid it. Great! When have assumptions been a good thing?! If knowledge protects and ignorance endangers, then why do what the ignorant/presumptuous people will do? If anything, do the opposite! I'll take my chances and put my faith in the universe as not being out to screw me over with no possibility of gaining the necessary knowledge to protect myself. It's either that or put my faith into every anonymous source who comes along and makes a proclamation about this or that.

Also, highly spiritual people chop wood and carry water. And cook a mean steak. With a side of bacon. MEAN BACON. They haven't learned how to vibrate through light and resonate to the higher dimensional blah-dee blah. They are grounded in this world and simply put more effort into learning more about it than the average joe, and try to make life a little better for those they love and others they encounter who care to partake. Big meaningless words and nonsensical grandiose proclamations are for bruised egos, low self esteem, and people too insecure with themselves to acknowledge the limits of their actual knowledge to themselves and to others. Basically products of narcissistic wounding. And this is why we have so many "special snowflake" movements - starting with the big religions and ending with new-age spirituality and any other kind of crap peddled by snake oil salesmen. Broken people buy into broken concepts. And since we're all broken to some extent, therein lies our global predicament. Luckily, we still have bacon.

 

[Buddy]

Hi Buddy,

Hi yerself. :)

What I was getting at, is an apparent lack of effort. On your part. And hence a measure of your seriousness.

Then allow me to explain. I've mentioned this before and I'm willing to say it whenever needed. There was a point in my 'career' here where I began to see part of myself as phony. Some of my posts gave me the feeling I was making a fool of myself because my knowledge of the material was fragmented and not very integrated. I decided to go back to the beginning. My goal was to start over from the ground with the basic psychology material. My own job environment was conducive to this effort. I told myself that if I really accepted that C's comment regarding the karmic and simple lessons, then this is what I should be doing first and everything else would have to wait. Some of this 'everything else' is still waiting for me to get to it.

I used to take your remarks very seriously, till the dawning realization that you're perhaps not as well studied as I thought you were. (Wahhabism and now this being recent examples.)

This dawning realization of yours is fine with me. I have been a reader of books for as long as I can remember. I was the kid in Junior High who pulled a paperback from his back pocket and was reading it in the lunch line and have been reading and studying ever since. Coming from all this exposure to other people's words, word usage, thought streams and expression patterns, apparantly I developed a manner of writing that was giving some people the impression I was in academia or whatever. I'm not. It would be closer to reality to think of me as a blue-collar country boy but not a redneck.

I did do some college but I turned down an offer of a scholarship for an English degree based on the A+ and glowing essay my college prof wrote in the back of my journal, inviting me to join the ranks of the teachers and leaders of "the great unwashed." That was a huge turn off. I'm not above anyone and don't want to be and I don't feel I deserve any more consideration, in any way, than anyone else.

So, I might be 'studied' in a manner of speaking, but maybe not as well-studied as you thought I was and this, combined with the explanation above, is probably why.

But it is not my place to critique your level of knowledge. Or commitment. And I really should mind my own business.

Well, I don't know. Maybe it's not your place and maybe you should mind your business but, being a fellow member, presumably some part of what goes on is your business. Thing is, I don't mind critiques as such and I've taken some. Maybe it's all in how it comes across when it's offered. Maybe I won't know for sure until it actually happens.

But my feelings popped out spontaneously on these two occasions. Hence my unfortunate remarks. And I apologize.

FWIW.

I don't see any necessity to apologize in this case or to say "I apologize" in any case, if an accurate explanation is offered for a behavior. The explanation IS the apology, IMO, but maybe I'm just weird that way and others wouldn't agree. Also, I couldn't tell by the way you write that you had such shyness and insecurities or whatever, so, FWIW, I accept and I offer my explanations and apology in return if it's worth anything.

----------------------------

You also appear to have opinions on everything.

Yes. This is true.

I do it because I feel it's (in some small measure) my only way of giving back -- to Laura and the group. I'm a late comer to the forum, but I'm so grateful for what it has given me.

Then why make a point of mentioning that I have opinions? I figured you meant to imply something but weren't willing to say what it was. Not that it matters, since it's hardly possible to have no opinions.

Believe it or not, I don't really like to post. And I try hard not to ... unless I felt I had something useful to say. If my postings exceed 2 a day, I feel uneasy. And I shut it down. I believe forum space is a precious commodity. Not a place for self indulgence.

What I wrote some time ago, best expressed my attitude towards Laura and this group. And I like to repost it now:

"I do not think it was pure coincidence, that I came upon Laura's work.
My inner sense tells me it was meant to be.
That somehow, I was destined to play a small bit,
in the Magnum Opus that is her life.
And I embrace this small part,
with eagerness, sincerity ... and love."

For what it's worth, these remarks are my 4th verbal recitation -- in the list of 11. Done each morning at sunrise. A reminder of my purpose and my aim. As well as my debt to those who have so generously enlightened me.

And yes, I could be wrong.

You could be wrong about WHAT, exactly?

All that said, I still admire the way you express what the group's work has meant, and still means, to you. It does seem to come from the heart.

 

[mkrnhr]

It is interesting to see how these new-agers join traditional religions in introducing confusion and a avoidance of life lessons. They also seem to confuse what personality and essence learn throughout a lifetime.

 

[sitting]

You could be wrong about WHAT, exactly?

Hi Buddy,

Thank you for your most thoughtful reply. I really appreciate it.

I'm hopeful that some good will come out of this exchange. For both of us. I often learn much from "heated" conversations. Good things happen once feelings calm down -- and reflection takes hold. I see my own emotions better when stirred. (Issues come to the surface from their usual hiding places.)

Now onto your question:

This "I could be wrong" signature was initially an enigma to me.

I simply felt the impulse to use it. But over time, it's meaning became clear. I now consider it central in my approach to life.

It's my acknowledgement to Nagarjuna -- and his dictum of Two Truths. Unless one has utter clarity regarding this vital concept, every perceived "understanding" is suspect (and could be wrong.) Obviously I lack this "utter clarity." (I'm not even at the beginning of the beginning ... of seeing.)

I find this signature a powerful reminder ... of just how little I do know. It wipes out arrogance & self importance dead in its tracks. (Even if I appear at times to come across like that.)

FWIW.

 

[monotonic]

Is that what it meant to you at the time that you wrote it?

 

[Buddy]

Now onto your question:

This "I could be wrong" signature was initially an enigma to me.

I simply felt the impulse to use it. But over time, it's meaning became clear. I now consider it central in my approach to life.

It's my acknowledgement to Nagarjuna -- and his dictum of Two Truths. Unless one has utter clarity regarding this vital concept, every perceived "understanding" is suspect (and could be wrong.) Obviously I lack this "utter clarity." (I'm not even at the beginning of the beginning ... of seeing.)

I find this signature a powerful reminder ... of just how little I do know. It wipes out arrogance & self importance dead in its tracks. (Even if I appear at times to come across like that.)

FWIW.

umm, I don't know sitting. Based on my research on the ancient philosopher known as "Nagarjuna", I don't see how you, essentially being a Nagarjuna revivalist, would ever reconcile that one's logical approach towards gaining 'ultimate truth' with the scientific channeling and investigatory method Laura is using and encouraging. And this opinion derives from nothing more than comparing my understanding of Laura's method(s) with the different versions of interpretations of Nagarjuna's method as explained at Wikipedia.

That said, I do now see how something I said to the OP could have triggered your arrival on this thread because I do believe that if a particular search defines one's identity and the particular search happens to be false, then should you manage to gain a certainty of an answer for that, then that would be the end of your 'self', which is the search, which is about what all Nagarjuna's translators are saying or implying as far as I can tell.

 

[Laura]

Lynn at PsychicFocusBlog.com
did one or more readings on that question..

Q. Hi Lynn!! I just read an article that reminded me about the man who somehow figured out how not to go to the light when he died. This article explains in detail how to turn away from the hypnotizing tunnel where you will eventually be recycled back to earth so that you can escape the matrix and be free to do what you choose. Does this resonate with you?

A. This does resonate with me. I see that there are a few things that someone can do when they pass to avoid having memories wiped away in the tunnel. First, don't go down the tunnel. I see that you need to have some kind of plan or belief system in place to avoid it. The tunnel is warm and enticing, so it is difficult to resist. It is designed that way to lure you in, but if you have a strong will upon passing, you can turn away much easier.

If you want to incarnate and retain as much wisdom as possible, I get there is a vibration that you need to give off when you pass through the tunnel. It visually looks like this vibration allows you go through the tunnel and pass through the light waves because your vibration works opposite of the natural vibration in the tunnel. I get that highly spiritual people have learned how to do this.

( from Psychic Focus Blog . com )

Bolded the interesting part. It does look like people who have a "plan" or "belief system" regarding what will happen after death are in fact the ones who avoid the tunnel. This suggests that if someone has no plan or belief system they won't avoid it. Great! When have assumptions been a good thing?! If knowledge protects and ignorance endangers, then why do what the ignorant/presumptuous people will do? If anything, do the opposite! I'll take my chances and put my faith in the universe as not being out to screw me over with no possibility of gaining the necessary knowledge to protect myself. It's either that or put my faith into every anonymous source who comes along and makes a proclamation about this or that.

The need to have a "strong belief" is what I found again and again being the cause of terrible suffering after death both to the discarnate entity and to the victims of attachment/feeding.

Also, that reminds me of this:

On one occasion, at one of these meetings, someone asked about the possibility of reincarnation, and whether it was possible to believe in cases of communication with the dead.

"Many things are possible," said G. "But it is necessary to understand that man's being, both in life and after death, if it does exist after death, may be very different in quality. The 'man-machine' with whom everything depends upon external influences, with whom everything happens, who is now one, the next moment another, and the next moment a third, has no future of any kind; he is buried and that is all. Dust returns to dust. This applies to him. In order to be able to speak of any kind of future life there must be a certain crystallization, a certain fusion of man's inner qualities, a certain independence of external influences. If there is anything in a man able to resist external influences, then this very thing itself may also be able to resist the death of the physical body. But think for yourselves what there is to withstand physical death in a man who faints or forgets everything when he cuts his finger? If there is anything in a man, it may survive; if there is nothing, then there is nothing to survive. But even if something survives, its future can be very varied. In certain cases of fuller crystallization what people call 'reincarnation' may be possible after death, and, in other cases, what people call 'existence on the other side.' In both cases it is the continuation of life in the 'astral body,' or with the help of the 'astral body.' You know what the expression 'astral body' means. But the systems with which you are acquainted and which use this expression state that all men have an 'astral body.' This is quite wrong. What may be called the 'astral body' is obtained by means of fusion, that is, by means of terribly hard inner work and struggle. Man is not born with it. And only very few men acquire an 'astral body.' If it is formed it may continue to live after the death of the physical body, and it may be born again in another physical body. This is 'reincarnation.' If it is not re-born, then, in the course of time, it also dies; it is not immortal but it can live long after the death of the physical body.

"Fusion, inner unity, is obtained by means of 'friction,' by the struggle between 'yes' and 'no' in man. If a man lives without inner struggle, if everything happens in him without opposition, if he goes wherever he is drawn or wherever the wind blows, he will remain such as he is. But if a struggle begins in him, and particularly if there is a definite line in this struggle, then, gradually, permanent traits begin to form themselves, he begins to 'crystallize.' But crystallization is possible on a right foundation and it is possible on a wrong foundation. 'Friction,' the struggle between 'yes' and 'no,' can easily take place on a wrong foundation. For instance, a fanatical belief in some or other idea, or the 'fear of sin,' can evoke a terribly intense struggle between 'yes' and 'no,' and a man may crystallize on these foundations. But this would be a wrong, incomplete crystallization. Such a man will not possess the possibility of further development. In order to make further development possible he must be melted down again, and this can be accomplished only through terrible suffering.

"Crystallization is possible on any foundation. Take for example a brigand, a really good, genuine brigand. I knew such brigands in the Caucasus. He will stand with a rifle behind a stone by the roadside for eight hours without stirring. Could you do this? All the time, mind you, a struggle is going on in him. He is thirsty and hot, and flies are biting him; but he stands still. Another is a monk; he is afraid of the devil; all night long he beats his head on the floor and prays. Thus crystallization is achieved. In such ways people can generate in themselves an enormous inner strength; they can endure torture; they can get what they want. This means that there is now in them something solid, something permanent. Such people can become immortal. But what is the good of it? A man of this kind becomes an 'immortal thing,' although a certain amount of consciousness is sometimes preserved in him. But even this, it must be remembered, occurs very rarely."