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

[Laura]

I agree, Sitting, that trying to interpret things via several "inspired" pathways isn't very helpful. I find it more helpful to try to find correspondences between empirical observations and "inspired" hints. For example, the correspondences between the ideas of Gurdjieff and modern cognitive science, and the hints of the Cs and actual research. When dealing with Buddhist ideas, there are so many filters and uncertainties to begin with, it's almost useless to try to find matches. It's like trying to determine the nature of the cosmos with the Hebrew Bible: totally useless exercise.

Basically, you can't start out with beliefs, you have to set all that aside and try to engage with observations and reports of actual experiences that are not colored by beliefs.

 

[sitting]

... trying to interpret things via several "inspired" pathways isn't very helpful. I find it more helpful to try to find correspondences between empirical observations and "inspired" hints.

Hi Laura,

You're right. I've caused confusion. I did try to make a conscious effort to adhere to my stated aim. And that was:

"I'm careful not to inject ideas unless directly tied into the C's teachings."

Now it's clear I simply had not done a good job at it.

Thank you for your feedback. And I apologize to all.

 

[sitting]

Sitting, I confess I'm having a bit of troubling following you and the point you're trying to make.

Hi whitecoast,

Kindly see my reply to Laura.

Thank you.

 

[sitting]

What in your opinion/experience is the practical difference between "preferring" and "desiring"?

Hi obyvatel,

It was a mix up on my part. I saw more than what was there.

My bad.

 

[Joe]

...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. [...]

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?

It's so true that people who are 'damaged' or narcissistically-wounded, tend to be attracted to grandiose ideologies (or to interpret some ideologies in that way) both out of a desire to feel 'special' and out of fear and a desire to control the future to avoid 'bad stuff' happening. Basically, attach yourself to some belief system, religious, spiritual or other, and become a a hard-ass proselytizer/adherent of said movement/belief system and use it as a buffer against facing your fears, learning to live with uncertainty, handling your emotions, and as SAO said, acknowledging the limits of your knowledge...and being happy with it (while always striving to learn more).

Thanks to both of you for your thoughts, they are pretty insightful IMO.

 

[Gateway]

[...] I find it more helpful to try to find correspondences between empirical observations and "inspired" hints. [...]
Basically, you can't start out with beliefs, you have to set all that aside and try to engage with observations and reports of actual experiences that are not colored by beliefs.

Indeed! Through experiences we have the higher score of learning IMO. :) Yet likely we all know also that as in modern works (like Castaneda, Gurdjieff, etc.) there are as well some valuable experiences transcribed to ancient texts and then coming to be "inspired paths" or beliefs; and so to a certain degree they may be useful to our learning if we can weed them, as C's use to say. So, moderation likely is the wiser path. So in this spirit, and hopefully under a sober way, this post brings a further mention on the Tibetan mysticism, if is not too much indulgence. :)

I experienced all the normal behaviour programming but I was inquisitive. April fools day 1976 i died? Almost died? A dream? All I remember was blasting through a grey cloud funnel tunnel lightening fast when a pin point of light lay a head and I went a zooming towards it. And it grew... But... But I said, screamed maybe.?.?.? "I am not done." "I am not done." and I woke up with a little but of attitude about what was to happen. Long story short...
So what was that? I dunno, but something happened.

For that pointed out seems difficult to figure if this above quote is either a dream, a physical experience memory, imagination, or copied from something else. Anyway the following quote may have some clues for that case. In that excerpt the spirit has failed its first opportunities to reach the "Clear light", by then follows its second day in the bardo as seen by the mystic Bardo Thodol. BTW, a mention forgotten in the earlier post for those not familiarized with the gist, "Thodol" is related to "Liberation" from the cycles of reincarnation.
So the below excerpt quotes a particular grey light that in certain moment appears to the discarnate spirit:

[The Second Day]
But if, notwithstanding this setting-face-to-face, through power of anger or obscuring karma one should be startled at the glorious light and flee, or be overcome by illusions, despite the prayer, on the Second Day, Vajra-Sattva and his attendant deities, as well as one's evil deeds [meriting] Hell, will come to receive one.
[...]
Be not fond of the dull, smoke-coloured light from Hell. That is the path which openeth out to receive thee because of the power of accumulated evil karma from violent anger. If thou be attracted by it, thou wilt fall into the Hell-Worlds; and, falling therein, thou wilt have to endure unbearable misery, whence there is not certain time of getting out. That being an interruption to obstruct thee on the Path of Liberation, look not at it; and avoid anger. Be not attracted by it; be not weak. Believe in the dazzling bright white light; [...]

So "hell" may be either a place, state, or both in which fits the denoted karma of the spirit. And digressing a little more, "Vajra-sattva" on a way may be understood as a kind of disposition to enlightenment (Buddhahood?). In Sanskrit "Vajra" is one of the channels in the spine, a diamond, thunderbolt. And "sattva" or "satya" means Truth or Reality. So some sources translate that situation as "Thunderbolt Mind, Diamond Mind, Diamond essence."


In what concerns the entities or deities mentioned in that work, may be interesting to recall a segment of a quote by Carl Jung on the Bardo Thodol:

The world of gods and spirits is truly “nothing but” the collective unconscious inside me. To turn this sentence round so that it reads: "The collective unconscious is the world of gods and spirits outside me," no intellectual acrobatics are needed, but a whole human life, perhaps even many lifetimes of increasing completeness.

There is still a maybe plainer remark that may help to clarify that latter quote. In short, Jung by means of his personal experiences came to conclude that the beings living in his mind and so apparently belonging to the imagination realm, they were nevertheless real. They had existence and will independent of him:

[...] figures of my fantasies brought home to me the crucial insight that there are things in the psyche which I do not produce, but which produce themselves and have their own life. [...] [a supposed fantasy] confronted me in an objective manner, and I understood that there is something in me which can say things that I do not know and do not intend, things which may even be directed against me.

 

[Joe]

... trying to interpret things via several "inspired" pathways isn't very helpful. I find it more helpful to try to find correspondences between empirical observations and "inspired" hints.

Hi Laura,

You're right. I've caused confusion. I did try to make a conscious effort to adhere to my stated aim. And that was:

"I'm careful not to inject ideas unless directly tied into the C's teachings."

Now it's clear I simply had not done a good job at it.

Thank you for your feedback. And I apologize to all.

Sitting, it might be useful for you to think about the idea that, if the 'lessons' of this life are "karmic and simple understandings", what might they be in your case? It seems to me that, as a general rule for most people, those karmic lessons revolve around the emotional hangups and fears we have that have shaped our lives in ways that have caused suffering to ourselves and others and even today still prevent us from getting what we want.

What do most normal people want? At its core it seems to be that they want the ability to know and be master of their own thoughts and emotions, to the extent that is possible, and from that the ability to craft true, honest and meaningful relationships with other like-minded souls. When broken down, the achievement of this would translate to pretty simple understandings about life. Simple in theory of course, and after the fact, but working through this process is, for some reason, often very traumatic.

But even those traumas are rather simple. Things like simple fear of rejection or not being accepted, loved etc. But large 'monsters' are made out of these simple things because they are often associated with emotionally traumatic events in our lives, past or present, and in order to avoid further wounding, we hide them away deep in our hearts and minds and stick a 'DO NOT OPEN' label on the box. In the place of openness about who we really are, warts and all, we craft a personality that is specifically tailored to prevent the chances of that box ever being opened.

 

[Laura]

I don't have much confidence in the Buddhist approach or the "Bardo Thodol" etc, having read it years ago and found that it had the annihilating approach that is contrary to everything we represent here.

Today I was working on annotating sessions and came across this:

Q: (P) Next question: How does one determine if they are channeling a 3rd density dead dude, or a higher density being?

A: Corrections and clarifications needed: "Dead Dudes" are 5th density beings. Either they are stuck in 3rd density, or they are communicating from 5th density, not 3rd density!! They are not 3rd density! 1st density includes all physical matter below the level of consciousness. 6th density is uniform in the level pattern of lightness, as there is complete balance on this density level, and the lightness is represented as knowledge. 7th density is union with the one... it is timeless in every sense of the word, as its "essence" radiates through all that exists in all possible awareness realms. The light one sees at the termination of each conscious physical manifestation is the union, itself. Remember, 4th density is the first that includes variable physicality!! Ponder this carefully!!! And, remember, there is only one "God," and that the creator includes all that is created and vice versa!

Followed a bit further on by this:

All events leave permanent imprints upon aural energy fields. This explains, for example, some sightings and apparitions. "Ghosts" are sometimes merely spontaneous activations of the aural records of the natural surroundings.

And, of course, one cannot forget this:

Life is religion. Life experiences reflect how one interacts with God. Those who are asleep are those of little faith in terms of their interaction with the creation. Some people think that the world exists for them to overcome or ignore or shut out. For those individuals, the worlds will cease. They will become exactly what they give to life. They will become merely a dream in the "past." People who pay strict attention to objective reality right and left, become the reality of the "Future."

That's what Buddhism seeks: to overcome, ignore or shut out the world so as to "graduate" even higher, so they think. And they are happy enough to think that "the worlds will cease". That's the whole aim.

 

[whitecoast]

I don't have much confidence in the Buddhist approach or the "Bardo Thodol" etc, having read it years ago and found that it had the annihilating approach that is contrary to everything we represent here.
...
That's what Buddhism seeks: to overcome, ignore or shut out the world so as to "graduate" even higher, so they think. And they are happy enough to think that "the worlds will cease". That's the whole aim.

I remember in an early C transcript that "Jesus" existed at 5D as a helper to those to asked, and that Siddhartha Gautama played a similar role to a lesser extent. But if the historical Buddha is at 5D, wouldn't that mean his approach didn't involve him getting stuck and disintegrating like one of G's Immortal Things? Obviously the Bardo Thol came far after the historical Buddha, so I'm sure there was corruption. Then there is the Mahayana and Theravada distinction, with Theravada claiming to be the less adulterated version, which is ironically the more monastic and isolationist. Perhaps if one does their best to become nothing, and have no concern or desires, they will reincarnate into an STO realm where that type of attitude is more compatible, as the C's said once of monks that vanish in a flash of light.

Mind you, a lot of these C references are from older sessions, when certain ideas and perspectives were yet to be fully crystallized.

I want to read a book about the history of Buddhism, preferably from a philosophical perspective that is not invested in this or that tradition. Does anyone know of your ones?

 

[obyvatel]

I am writing this for the sake of historical accuracy, not to detract from the main message.

There is a very big difference between what the Buddha taught during his life - as recorded in the Pali canons - and what is regarded as Buddhism today. Buddha's teachings were concerned with life and suffering, here and now. Afterlife and speculations regarding after-life were the whole focus of spiritual development in his time. Yet, he did his best to avoid answering questions on this topic as much as possible. Instead he brought back attention to the present moment experience, suffering, and how to deal with it skillfully. He talked about the "path towards cessation of suffering" here on earth, not "annihilation". He was accused in the royal courts of "using his own mind and rationality" instead of scriptures and established dogma. He accepted that accusation and said that it was true.

Buddha's actions showed that he was as much (or more of) a social reformer as he was a spiritual leader. He went against established caste system and opened the doors of knowledge and development to everyone, irrespective of their birth. He opened the doors to women to follow the Buddhist path, quite a feat in those times. As a result there were bids to take over his order, slander him with accusations of promiscuity and murder, as well as attempts to poison him and his close followers. He somehow managed to avoid these traps. He dealt with intrigue among the warring kingdoms of his time since in later years many kings and noblemen sought his counsel. His counsel did prevent bloodshed in many occasions. Yet just before he died, he failed to prevent war and slaughtering that commenced between two kingdoms both of whose ruling elites had relationship with him.

The point of the above is to show he was very human. He was engaged closely with the society he lived in. His teachings pertained to this world. In his last teaching to his followers, of all the topics he had lectured on over more than 4 decades, he chose to highlight the quality of heedfulness . Heedfulness is about a sense of danger and the possibility of avoiding the danger through skillful mental qualities.

Contrast the above historical picture with what passes for Buddhism today. I could very well be projecting, but I would think Buddha would be "turning in his grave" looking at much of what has become of his message. Many commentaries have been written since his passing over the years, where people have piggybacked their ideas on an already existing and popular vehicle which the masses accepted because it appealed to them. This is not the place or occasion to get into a debate about the merits of "lesser vehicle"(hinayana), "greater vehicle" (mahayana) or other offshoots (like Vajrayana). All these so-called "greater vehicles" which were formulated after Buddha's passing may have their good points - but they were mostly not what the Buddha chose to teach and emphasize during his life. And that is something I wanted to get off my chest since I am not sure that the majority of the people here are familiar with a non-hagiographic account of Buddha's life and teachings.

 

[Divide by Zero]

At first when I read about Bardo here, I was feeling confused. It reminded me of the New Age lingo, albeit with "authority" and "history" behind it.

The most practical book I've read on this topic is 30 Years Among the Dead. I didn't expect to like the book, thinking it would be psychic mumbo jumbo. However, it showed me that a lot of what causes people to get stuck, confused, or go in some odd direction is based on guilt. ("A dead presbyterian is a dead presbyterian")

I feel/think that this guilt is one of the major "simple and karmic understandings" that the C's have been hinting us to follow.
Even it was said that what Gurdjieff and Casteneda was really teaching psychology- wrapped in mysticism. I also think that a lot of what is talked about with the chakras etc, is actually dealing with a big part of the "second brain" as we learned that iodine awakens processes in many organs that deal with hormones, neurotransmitters, and such which have been "dumbed down" by the PTB who poison us- via proxy of scientists who are authoritarian followers and believe they are doing well (half the time).

We also have the problem of our own perception, which can fool us. Sure, they can see grey funnels or white lights- but what says it really exists or is just a figment of the dying brain? I used to dismiss that argument, until I spoke with a long time childhood friend who claimed was psychic after a breakdown and started to have schizophrenic symptoms. She could swear that these spirits were telling her who was lying to her and so on. I quickly realized that it was her own subconscious playing tricks on her, especially after this: I was questioning her methods- telling her that she should be careful because the police can arrest her on excessive false claims (of neighbors, etc). She started to say that I was evil and the main "arch enemy" neighbor told me to say that. How easy is it to believe what you see/hear over what is real? Sometimes dreams feel more real than mundane reality. So, we can't be sure when it comes to these "unmeasurable" "unverifiable" things. Psychological issues without work to resolve them, chemicals, and other things that muddle our brain can force us in the wrong direction. Heck, even Gabor Mate saw that being too nice can give you MS! I also like whitecoast's analogy of how these things are like a hack. Reminds me of the C's saying that a short cut violates our own free will.

What if it really is straightforward (but not easy!), that we have to live and die like a warrior as whitecoast said? It would make a lot of sense in terms of what Caesar said in a C's session. It might be that exact thing that keeps us connected to what we have learned is objective.

It's ironic that without the STS powers here and now, life would be much better and there would be less of a drive to go past their domain of control. By being STS and controlled by STS, eventually after so many lifetimes, we start to plan an exit/escape- instead of decorating our jail cells to make us feel comfortable. If we don't want more, to live as tramps as whitecoast said, there is no shock or fight/struggle. To return to another cell that might be better would be heaven for those.

It also reminds me of the dogma around reincarnation as some sort of balancing force. However, as the C's have explained, the Nazi's came back as even more cunning fascists in the form of Israelis! So, STS come back even more powerful the next round, while those of us who don't seek to dominate end up coming back wishing time and time again for a better cell. Sheesh.

 

[Laura]

Contrast the above historical picture with what passes for Buddhism today. I could very well be projecting, but I would think Buddha would be "turning in his grave" looking at much of what has become of his message. Many commentaries have been written since his passing over the years, where people have piggybacked their ideas on an already existing and popular vehicle which the masses accepted because it appealed to them. This is not the place or occasion to get into a debate about the merits of "lesser vehicle"(hinayana), "greater vehicle" (mahayana) or other offshoots (like Vajrayana). All these so-called "greater vehicles" which were formulated after Buddha's passing may have their good points - but they were mostly not what the Buddha chose to teach and emphasize during his life. And that is something I wanted to get off my chest since I am not sure that the majority of the people here are familiar with a non-hagiographic account of Buddha's life and teachings.

Pretty much what happened when Judaism and Christianity were each "created." And then added to in subsequent years so that now, no one has a clue what was really going on. And interestingly, it seems that a similar approach was taken with each. In Christianity, you have to overcome the world to get your reward in heaven. In Judaism, you have to follow the law perfectly to be allowed to be part of the final resurrection. It's all about overcoming or shutting out the world so as to get something later.

 

[Aeneas]

Pretty much what happened when Judaism and Christianity were each "created." And then added to in subsequent years so that now, no one has a clue what was really going on. And interestingly, it seems that a similar approach was taken with each. In Christianity, you have to overcome the world to get your reward in heaven. In Judaism, you have to follow the law perfectly to be allowed to be part of the final resurrection. It's all about overcoming or shutting out the world so as to get something later.

This shutting out of the world has been the main focus of all the subsequent "snowflake-movements" as SAO termed it. It seems that each period create their own movements, so that the all those who didn't quite believe in the previous movements have something else to cling to. Important for the elite that the entrapment is complete.

Thanks to SAO; Buddy, Joe, Obyvatel and others to bring it back down to earth, what this whole thing amounts to. Simple lessons that are grounded in the reality. Learning to shift from internal considering to external considering and giving each thing its due.

In addition to the book that DbZ mentioned, "Thirty years among the Dead", by Wickland, I also found the book sold on Red Pill Press called: "The life beyond the Veil", interesting. The core take home message is that the universe is all about learning and that the learning continues ad infinity. That same message was also what I got from the book by Jane Roberts called "The Afterdeath Journal of an American Philosopher; The View of William James".

 

[sitting]

Sitting, it might be useful for you to think about the idea that, if the 'lessons' of this life are "karmic and simple understandings", what might they be in your case?

Hi Joe,

First, I want to say my intentions are pure. So this episode is very easy for me.

As Buddy previously noted, I have opinions on lots of things. And I post them. Viewed in that context, Buddhism is not a preoccupation (or obsession) for me. (But some may think otherwise.)

The only reason I made such references was due to key topics that were raised. One by you specifically (compassion.) Other key topics brought up were:

empathy ... conduit ... meditation with seed ... density transitions ...

There are more.

But note all my Buddhist references -- have specific ties to the C's teachings. Often in corroborative fashion. I don't believe I've ever presented Buddhism as a "package," simply because I don't buy it as a package. I am interested however in their apparent clarity in certain areas. And I present them here as such.

(Some of my remarks regarding Buddhism are actually blasphemous.)

The bottom line is:

Serious ideas were presented (with good intent,) to help along with our discussions. They were discussed -- (led by the able Laura) -- and found wanting. End of story.

That is how I presently read the situation. And it's enough for me.

That said, I believe the knowledge foundation here is more than sufficient & stable, to allow for unusual ideas and concepts. (Within limits.) And for that reason, future references of this nature ought not to be prohibited.

FWIW.

 

[sitting]

There is a very big difference between what the Buddha taught during his life - as recorded in the Pali canons - and what is regarded as Buddhism today.

Hi obyvatel,

Thank you for your thoughtful post.

I do wish to point out one thing: Pali (as in Pali canon) is a bastardized and lower form of the original language of Buddhism ... sanskrit.

FWIW.