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

[sitting]

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

When I first wrote it, no. But the impulse to write it was strong.

My present understanding of it came later. It was from realizing that "lessons" and "two truths" were essentially one and the same. This is a rather big statement. And I do not make it lightly. (It came after much thought and examination.)

And it was through the simpler "two truths" -- that allowed me a deeper look -- into the more complex nature of the "lessons."

But I could be wrong.

FWIW.

 

[sitting]

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.

On the contrary.

It was Laura's work -- that first opened the door for me to see the intricacies that was Nagarjuna. And it was Nagarjuna's commentaries that affirmed & heightened my belief ... in what the C's have said.

I found these two avenues, a virtuous reinforcing cycle of sorts -- for me.

But I want to emphasize: "for me" only. It may not be for others. The developmental cycle is different -- for each individual. And I'm very conscious of that. (For that reason, I'm careful not to inject ideas unless directly tied into the C's teachings.)

But I could be wrong.

FWIW.

 

[Laura]

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.

On the contrary.

It was Laura's work -- that first opened the door for me to see the intricacies that was Nagarjuna. And it was Nagarjuna's commentaries that affirmed & heightened my belief ... in what the C's have said.

I found these two avenues, a virtuous reinforcing cycle of sorts -- for me.

But I want to emphasize: "for me" only. It may not be for others. The developmental cycle is different -- for each individual. And I'm very conscious of that. (For that reason, I'm careful not to inject ideas unless directly tied into the C's teachings.)

But I could be wrong.

FWIW.

I very much appreciate where you are coming from Sitting but I want to point out that unless someone is behaving in a rude way, or obviously wasting other people's time, it's not very helpful to get all critical and judgmental. Everybody is working at their own pace and coming at things in their own way - as you are, too. I'm sure glad I don't have to know anything about mathematics since my husband does all that. And that's how it is: every facet of a crystal reflects a different face/angle and together we can see the elephant (love that mixed metaphor!)

 

[Adobe]

Years before I read Baldwin and Wickland’s spirt release books, I had contracted and Protozoa (single celled organism) that was apparently taking me over the rainbow bridge. I was found after 3 days, basically in a deep sleep but not too, as I was able to be awoken, and with an injection revived. Anyway I had this experience while in that state.

I was in a wooded area not far from where I grew up. My father and older brother drove up in the old station wagon we had while I was growing up. Both my brother father were deceased. I went over and hug and shook them all over and told them how good they looked, they did the same to me.

“Hey look, we’re going fishing would you like to come.” I could see the back of the wagon had fishing pole sticking out the back. “Heck yeah!” I said, then looked behind me to where there were some people in robes, just kind of stoically standing there ‘waiting for me’. I understood that I was still here amongst the living and they were passed on. Nauh I can’t right now, I have some responsibilities I have to take care of before I can go. “That’s ok” my dad said “we understand,” and then hugged and punched me all around again, and said good bye. I watched the old ford wagon swaying through the pot holes, each of them with their arms lightly slung out the window and their hats tipped back on their heads and headed into a beautiful light, the one you hear about, warm, bright, but doesn’t heart the eyes. So later, after the Baldwin, Wickland, and LKJ's work I’m comfortable with the light, and believe it ‘can be’ an easy going process.

Now how ‘exactly' do you cross over the rainbow bridge? umm…dunno, you just kind of do it. “But you might make a mistake!” I might: but I’ll have to sort that out if I do. My impression is: it’s kind of just like falling of the log situation, just don’t get in your own way and you’ll be fine.

One thing I notice about the certain dis-info project is they give you copious amounts of ‘what not to do’ or how "hopeless we are" but little or nothing of what ‘to do’ as in: “just turn around and tell the universe what you want’ "just prey the prayer" and all will be fixed. If they are so knowledgeable on what ‘not’ to do, why aren’t they knowledgeable on what to do?

I think in this particular situation were going to have to trust that we are enough to handle it, and the universe can be trusted too. btw: if we have lived other life times, we must already know the way back and forth….right?

 

[sitting]

... I want to point out that unless someone is behaving in a rude way, or obviously wasting other people's time, it's not very helpful to get all critical and judgmental. Everybody is working at their own pace and coming at things in their own way - as you are, too.

Hi Laura,

Thank you for this timely reminder. And I will take it to heart. I'm grateful forgiveness is so freely practiced here. As is patience & tolerance on your part.

Thank you.

 

[lilies]

Bright white light can mean a different thing to people, based on where they come from. For example in a semi sleep state circa 2007 I saw a stone gate glowing with impossible intensity in a bright white light. The light and glowing stone felt alive and intelligent as uh.. maybe a 4thD stone gate could be. I found it very comforting, warming and beckoning. I got such a strong feeling of being homesick to that realm where the thing existed naturally, that I felt depressed afterward, that I'm so far away from that absolutely wonderful thing here in this world.

Even now the memory of it is so vivid that I feel homesick and sad and want to get back to the world, where I was beside that glowing stone and felt so much at peace. My God! I shouldn't have written this, now I feel the longing again in my chest...

 

[sitting]

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.

Hi Buddy,

A bit more on your question above if I may.

There's actually a degree of similarity in the 2 approaches. Both benefiting from "extraordinary" input sources.

Laura's remarkable story we all know well.

Nagarjuna in some ways experienced same. He "went" to the Naga realm (beneath the sea) to retrieve the Prajnaparamita Sutra. (The shorter version.) And logic was subsequently used -- to decipher & analyze this material. But logic was not the source of the material.

What this says to me, is that we simple humans ... do need help, if we're to see the deeper truths. It's a reminder (for me) not to place exclusive reliance on analytical methods only. That approach ... is a dead end.

This is one reason why I approach the word "objective" very cautiously. And with reservation.

It is the same reason why I take the Seth remark "all reality is subjective" very carefully.

(When the C's say -- our awareness defines our reality ... they're saying the same thing.)

I first became convinced of this through Edgar Cayce's work. The over 10,000 readings he gave. After reading all I could about his story, I knew then, that reality is far more than we can imagine.

And Laura's work, has cemented and vastly expanded my original vision. What makes her work all the more valuable -- is it's ongoing nature. With updates and crucial mid-course corrections along the way. It IS singularly unique.

I could be wrong.

FWIW.

 

[sitting]

It is the same reason why I take the Seth remark "all reality is subjective" very carefully.

It is the same reason why I take the Seth remark "all reality is subjective" very seriously.

(When the C's say -- our awareness defines our reality ... they're saying the same thing as Seth.)

------------------------------------------------
(These changes makes it more clear.)

FWIW.

 

[kalibex]

I think in this particular situation were going to have to trust that we are enough to handle it, and the universe can be trusted too.

I think this may be the bottom line. Do we trust the universe / the 'system' in general... or not?

 

[Buddy]

...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.

I think this post is actually brilliant! Working primarily at the level of karmic and simple lessons, it seems to me, the best initial approach to the OP's question is related to fear. Is fear there? What is the fear? What are we afraid of? What is the thought construct involved, whether assumption, belief or whatever. Finding and examining that if possible, and finding it false or baseless, could potentially lead to releasing any emotional charge (fear) holding it together or binding us to it. Releasing the fear, or minimizing it to the point where it doesn't pull on us like one magnetic field can attract another, it would seem to follow that we'd be in a better position to face this, or any other reality, when it presents itself.

To me, this constitutes working with emotions that limit, limiting beliefs, and any other way that idea can be expressed and seems to be directly related to karmic and simple lessons of 3D.

As it stands now in it's form as a working hypothesis, my personal orientation to the subject of the light and tunnel thing, as a general question, is that, worst case scenario, it's like a tractor beam or transceiver such that whoever enters it will simply "wind up" where they fit. I don't see how it could be any other way if there is anything related to "frequency" involved, and that route to the somewhere or the 'other side' still allows for many possibilities.

So, I wouldn't say that I'm personally searching for "the" answer or one specific belief that I can hold onto about it. I'm looking for whatever in me (like fear) that might be in resistance, and that's what I'm wanting to question. It's more like trying to jump outside the question in it's limiting form of: "light or no light?" and into the question: where will I wind up after the journey?

Granted, this sounds somewhat similar to the original question, but it's not the same question because it follows from totally different assumptions and will, therefore, lead to different destinations, I think. Unless I've totally screwed something up. And all the above may be reasoning that applies only to an 'individuated soul'.

More bacon to SAO!

 

[David]

I think in this particular situation were going to have to trust that we are enough to handle it, and the universe can be trusted too.

I think this may be the bottom line. Do we trust the universe / the 'system' in general... or not?

When you put it like that... and when I think with reference to the C’s, that ‘all is lessons’ then in that way, ‘yes,’ then in another way ‘no,’ then I think the system could probably do with an upgrade, or maybe that’s a transition to 4D... I suppose as the saying goes, 'one will cross that bridge when you come to it,' or spend an inordinate amount of what would be considered as time thinking about crossing, and probably learning a bit too late that sometimes, one must take a leap of faith (‘thrust that one is enough’) and hope for self in letting go and trusting the universe/DCM’ that everything will workout for the best, I might need to work on that latter part, if that’s the case.

And could DCM be tinkering with the system on the go... having started something without really thinking it through to the end... just so DCM might learn something new. well, if all is lessons?

 

[Beorn]

I find it quite interesting and I think that if our beliefs are manifested in death then it would be nice to know the actual situation.

Chittick says in The Sufi Path of Knowledge: "Among all the created things, human beings possess the particular characteristic of being able to participate actively in manifesting their own realities. the choices they make have a real effect upon the divine self-disclosure. God in his mercy revealed the Laws in order that people would be able to make the choices which lead directly to their felicity in the next stage of their existence. The touchstone of belief is death, since through death a person comes to witness the object of his belief."

I've been sitting here for the last 20 minutes trying to understand Part 19 of The Sufi Path of Knowledge on Beatific Vision. Ibn al-'Arabi is talking about a man who had a belief which conformed to the actual situation but didn't have knowledge of it.

He says:
"What he believes must necessarily become imaginalized, since he does not have the power to disengage it from imagination. This takes place when death is made present, since this is a state which gazes up on the presence of sound imagination into which no doubt enters. This is not the imagination which is a human faculty located in the front of the brain. On the contrary, this is imagination from the outside, like Gabriel in the form of Dihya. It is an independent and sound ontological presence which possesses embodied forms worm by meanings and spirits. This person will have a degree here that accords with what he believed."

Is not having doubt in that state relevant to this particular man or is it a general state that occurs at death? I'm guessing it's a general thing that occurs when we die because if we don't have a physical brain to doubt and analyze then our imagination/beliefs will take on a "sound ontological presence". In that sense we all have beliefs, we just need to make them conform to the Divine Reality.

Another thing I've heard about is the 'mists' that appear when one dies. I don't know if it's real or not but have had it come up a few times while reading that there's some kind of adjustment period that takes roughly three days. Maybe the mists appear because those who have died where in a confused state and could not 'see' or maybe it does just take some time to adjust.

Was it the C's who said the birth process was more difficult for the soul than dying because of time constraints? If that's so then maybe we've already been through the most difficult bit.

 

[BHelmet]

I find it quite interesting and I think that if our beliefs are manifested in death then it would be nice to know the actual situation.

Chittick says in The Sufi Path of Knowledge: "Among all the created things, human beings possess the particular characteristic of being able to participate actively in manifesting their own realities. the choices they make have a real effect upon the divine self-disclosure. God in his mercy revealed the Laws in order that people would be able to make the choices which lead directly to their felicity in the next stage of their existence. The touchstone of belief is death, since through death a person comes to witness the object of his belief."

I've been sitting here for the last 20 minutes trying to understand Part 19 of The Sufi Path of Knowledge on Beatific Vision. Ibn al-'Arabi is talking about a man who had a belief which conformed to the actual situation but didn't have knowledge of it.

He says:
"What he believes must necessarily become imaginalized, since he does not have the power to disengage it from imagination. This takes place when death is made present, since this is a state which gazes up on the presence of sound imagination into which no doubt enters. This is not the imagination which is a human faculty located in the front of the brain. On the contrary, this is imagination from the outside, like Gabriel in the form of Dihya. It is an independent and sound ontological presence which possesses embodied forms worm by meanings and spirits. This person will have a degree here that accords with what he believed."

Is not having doubt in that state relevant to this particular man or is it a general state that occurs at death? I'm guessing it's a general thing that occurs when we die because if we don't have a physical brain to doubt and analyze then our imagination/beliefs will take on a "sound ontological presence". In that sense we all have beliefs, we just need to make them conform to the Divine Reality.
......
Was it the C's who said the birth process was more difficult for the soul than dying because of time constraints? If that's so then maybe we've already been through the most difficult bit.

Trippy thread. I would like to add another log to the fire. Gurdjieff mentioned the extreme difference between a persons personality and their essence (depending on how fused and developed and evolved they may have become through work). He mentioned that a learned intellectual with all the trappings of civilization (ironic idiom) can have the undeveloped essence of a child while it is possible some obvyatel or even a seemingly course uneducated person can have a much more fully developed essence. So, my suggestion is that perhaps, when we die, the personality evaporates rather quickly and it is the soul essence that is in the light tunnel as the false personality/lower-centered human machine is left behind.

So, my point is that all the conjecture, hypothesizing and rationalizing about the after-death tunnel trip may be basically worthless. That when we go on that ride we are not 'playing with the same deck of cards' that we use in our minds now to think, in advance, of this experience. That our essence goes on the ride, not our personality.

Furthermore, if we are going on the tunnel trip of death, we have probably gone before. We may have access to some memory or familiarity with the process as it unfolds if we have lived several, dozens or even hundreds of lives...and we will know the journey. "Oh yeah! I remember this!"

As for the last point about birth, I had an unusual experience that caused me to remember my birth. The real trauma was my soul realizing I was starting out yet again in a body at 0 years old. Not just that I would have to go through all the stages of life again, but that I would lose my ability to communicate in those early years; AND lose the knowledge/awareness I came back with in the fog of 3D physicality. I think the time constraint thingie is that when we are born we have just come from 5th density where we have an understanding that far exceeds the limitations, time distortions and illusions of 3rd density. We have to go back to taking baby steps, literally. We aren't born as adults ready to make use of the personal insights and awareness of our aims gained in 5th D.

Whew.

 

[WIN 52]

Was it the C's who said the birth process was more difficult for the soul than dying because of time constraints? If that's so then maybe we've already been through the most difficult bit.

That is comforting to know, if in fact they did say that.

However the way that the Iodine protocol seems to be progressing, the times that are at hand and all things considered, it seems like a person will be able to go to the 4D directly from 3D.

Have you gotten your wings yet?

 

[sitting]

Ibn al-'Arabi is talking about a man who had a belief which conformed to the actual situation but didn't have knowledge of it.

He says:

"What he believes must necessarily become imaginalized, since he does not have the power to disengage it from imagination. This takes place when death is made present, since this is a state which gazes up on the presence of sound imagination into which no doubt enters.

This is not the imagination which is a human faculty located in the front of the brain. On the contrary, this is imagination from the outside, like Gabriel in the form of Dihya. It is an independent and sound ontological presence which possesses embodied forms worm by meanings and spirits. This person will have a degree here that accords with what he believed."

I'm curious about the meaning of "sound" in the above passage.

Is it sound as in "reasonable?" Or is it sound as in "inaudible sound" (from Seth.) Or "indestructible sound" (from Kalachakra.)

(It could be a stretch on my part.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think if his belief conformed to the actual situation ... then perhaps knowledge here is implicit.

But I could be wrong.

FWIW.