Life after death

Posted April 9, 2011 by Fallensoul in Open

Anonymous Icon

commented on July 28, 2014
by dustproduction



Most of us here have come to appreciate that consciousness survives the death of the body. In this thread we can help those who may wish to know how we came to discover this truth either through our scientific research, personal experiences and/or knowledge from ancient wisdom. Why then we do survive the death of the body and what lies ahead? Whats the purpose of it all?

"I find it very hard to picture life after death (seperate conciousness), I once had a lot to drink and lost all recollection of a night and it made me terrified of death, I feel my existence is ponitless and meaningless and that conciousness is localised to the brain and when I die that's it. I don't want it to be true but it is sometimes how I feel, plus if conciousness is seperate, why are people mentally ill, why when we drink a lot is our conciousness distorted, when we sleep, we blink one moment and the next we are awake. I hope someone can help me out here and maybe offer me some comfort because at the moment I feel incredibly low, and pessismistic about life" - marcusantonio91

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jul 28, 2014

    Another conversation worth reexamining:

    Re: Most of us here have come to appreciate that consciousness survives the death of the body.

    "Appreciate" seems to be a curious word use here. "Believe" is perhaps the intended meaning.

  • NoetPoet Jan 04, 2014

    "Is this not double standards, you have never demanded this from Dusty or anyone else for that matter. If you feel so argumentative try it out on a dumber creature for once please as you are not doing yourself any favours continually arguing & going off topic with me & others on IONS."

    Double standards have nothing to do with it. I have not asked for Dusty to explain his reasoning process because he has come to the same conclusion about OBEs as I have, and his reasoning process on this matter has been self-evident. You however have somehow come to a completely different conclusion, and I want to know exactly how you came to that conclusion.

    "NoetPoet I would pull my head in!!"

    We both know that you wouldn't Mrmathew...

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 04, 2014

    G'day NoetPoet

    RE:” You are clearly avoiding the question because you are afraid that I will spot flaws in your reasoning process.”

    Once again you are attacking me personally by making me the topic, how many times is this now? I’ve lost count at 51.

    I know I have flaws in my reasoning process, you are a good example of this & yes I do mean it, I do have flaws obviously. I'm not being narky here, I do have a real problem with this particular flaw because it makes no logical sense to listen to people like you trying to drum up arguments all the times.

    Re:” You gave me a description of your reasoning process, but that's not what I'm asking for. What I'm asking for is a step-by-step description of how you arrived at your particular conclusion about this particular matter (i.e. that OBEs really are out-of-body experiences).”

    Is this not double standards, you have never demanded this from Dusty or anyone else for that matter. If you feel so argumentative try it out on a dumber creature for once please as you are not doing yourself any favours continually arguing & going off topic with me & others on IONS.

    NoetPoet I would pull my head in!!

  • NoetPoet Jan 04, 2014

    You are clearly avoiding the question because you are afraid that I will spot flaws in your reasoning process.

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 04, 2014

    G'day NoetPoet

    RE:"You are not being demanded, you are being *asked*. Quite politely might I add. You are being asked to explain how you came to the conclusion that OBEs are genuinely out-of-body, because you said that you came to that conclusion and I want to know how you came to it."

    Count how many times (you) was used here? The discussion once again isn't about me or is it, I thought it was about life after death, silly me!!

    It is obvious I did answer the question quite adequately but it was insisted that I explain myself step by step which by my relocation no one else has done or been asked to do previously which denotes a more demanding stance.

    Do you have any idea what a step by step explanation of my reasoning process would entail & what would be the point when the people concerned have obviously no idea how deductive & inductive reasoning used in unison work.

    “We have a president who stole the presidency through family ties, arrogance and intimidation, employing Republican operatives to exercise the tactics of voter fraud by disenfranchising thousands of blacks, elderly Jews and other minorities.”
    Barbra Streisand

    Desists with the obvious intimidation please NoetPoet as I will no longer put up with rot within the system because then that rot becomes but another accepted trait like lying has, deception & corruption aren't far behind by the way!!

  • NoetPoet Jan 04, 2014

    You are not being demanded, you are being *asked*. Quite politely might I add. You are being asked to explain how you came to the conclusion that OBEs are genuinely out-of-body, because you said that you came to that conclusion and I want to know how you came to it.

    You are clearly avoiding the question because you are afraid that I will spot flaws in your reasoning process.

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 04, 2014

    G'day NeotPoet

    How many people on here have explained step by step how they have reasoned to come up with a formulation on a particular topic? Please answer, that's what I thought so why am I being demanded to do so?

    Sorry but I answered the question put forth quite adequately if one had a good understanding in how inductive & deductive reasoning work in unison. It's pointless discussing this any further if one has little understanding of inductive & deductive reasoning as is obvious here otherwise such a question wouldn't have been asked in the first place.

    Sorry NoetPoet I just don't trust the way some people have conducted themselves on this discussion board, their motives are very noticeably unsavoury to me.

    "Wisdom lives in the shadow of the unwise until one is wise enough to realise this". Think on this NoetPoet!!! See, this is where philosophy comes into play because it would be hard for a non-thinker to work out what this quote is saying in reference to this whole thread.

  • NoetPoet Jan 04, 2014


    Okay then, please elaborate on how one would use deductive/inductive reasoning processes in this matter?

    You gave me a description of your reasoning process, but that's not what I'm asking for. What I'm asking for is a step-by-step description of how you arrived at your particular conclusion about this particular matter (i.e. that OBEs really are out-of-body experiences).

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 04, 2014

    G'day NoetPoet

    RE: "Could you please spell out your deductive/inductive reasoning process on this matter? I would be *very* interested to find out about it..."

    Suggested rephrase to get away from personalising our questions & answers:"How would one use deductive/inductive reasoning processes in this matter if that is possible to explain please?"

    See the difference, one is a personally suggestive believe it or not the other isn't. Maybe we need to think more carefully in how & what we wright. Don't worry I'm still learning myself & make the same mistakes time & time again especially when pushed.

    I'm really not sure if it's wise I do because there's usually a lack of constructive criticism happening between us.

    I use inductive reasoning to formulate a question/theory & then in unison I use deductive reason to formulate an answer. Inductive reasoning allows me to look at my experiences as being fact before they are proven otherwise & then deduction allows me to look at other forms of info to formulate a valid conclusive evaluation however deduction at this stage will only invalidate what inductive reasoning has given me in the first place if utter absolute proof can be found. Induction still allows me to look outside the limitations of deductive reasoning. If I just used deductive reasoning I wouldn’t have bothered formulating a theory/question in the first place myself so I wouldn’t have bothered inquiring any further. The links below will explain it better.



  • NoetPoet Jan 04, 2014

    "I still think it most probably could have been a real OBE, that is my deductive/inductive analysis of the matter."

    Could you please spell out your deductive/inductive reasoning process on this matter? I would be *very* interested to find out about it...

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 04, 2014

    G'day Fallensoul

    Very good sensible advice indeed.

    I think using capital letters which denote aggression should be minimized & the words you & your should also be monitored by ourselves as this usually denotes that we just might be discussing a particular person instead of the said topic. We really do need to become more aware.

    In regards to this thread, it is obvious that we have all sat down & sorted through all the info & if anyone still thinks real OBE's are facts of life or their is a life after death that is their right to think that way because as far as I'm concerned nothing was proven conclusively outright in what has been presented on this thread.

    Thanks for your insight Fallensoul.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jan 03, 2014

    @ Fallensoul

    In regard to your points 1-3: points 1 & 2 are right on the mark and all here must set these objectives above personal disagreement. Because there is agreement between us on these first two points we can afford each other the discussion of our difference perspectives; we can have our say, and invite and allows others to do the same.

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 03, 2014

    G'day NoetPoet

    RE:"LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!! Oh the irony!!"

    You do know what being civil to each other means don't you, this isn't it trust me!!!!! Your going the wrong way about this, this is a friendly warning!!

    In relation to OBE's your still talking about speculations in relation to research. Yes most OBE's are probably delusional glitches in some way & probably mine was as well but I have my doubts because even after reading what has been presented here I still think it most probably could have been a real OBE, that is my deductive/inductive analysis of the matter. Yes I can understand your stance which I find isn't open minded enough for me but others don't see it your way even after all the info has been collated in this thread.

    Please accept that not all people are going to reason like you & leave it at that.

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 03, 2014

    G'day NoetPoet

    RE:"Do you even realize how incredibly ironic you are?'

    Yet another personal attack, the topic again isn't about me or Fallensoul or so I thought. You did get the email from Michelle didn't you?

    RE:"Um, those comments about wilful irrationality and my questions were directed to Fallensoul, not you."

    We are on an open discussion board aren't we or so I thought. I can't get anything right can I? Anyway this was my mistake that I did apologised for making.

  • NoetPoet Jan 03, 2014


    Apology accepted. But as I said, I am just asking someone questions. Asking someone questions does not equate to personalising my comments, especially when my questions are in fact on topic.

  • NoetPoet Jan 03, 2014


    OBEs can and have been precisely recreated in laboratory conditions by certain kinds of neurological stimulation. Moreover OBEs that occur outside of laboratory conditions can either be shown to be all in the experiencer's head or simply do not have enough information to determine whether they were genuinely out-of-body or not.

    Furthermore, while neurology proposes a compelling and plausible *mechanism* for how OBEs occur, advocates of "genuine" OBEs such as yourself have not been able to propose a credible mechanism for how OBEs occur.

    "give me science over fairyland speculative beliefs"

    LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!! Oh the irony!!

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 03, 2014

    Sorry all I wrote the last comment to NoetPoet incorrectly. The heat of the late afternoon is breaking through my barrier to control my pain without pain killers, sorry for that.

    However it still shows how personalised some people on this discussion site are personalising their comments towards people instead of commenting on the said topic I believe.

  • NoetPoet Jan 03, 2014


    Um, those comments about wilful irrationality and my questions were directed to Fallensoul, not you. Yet you then go on to say that you are not the centre of discussion.

    Do you even realize how incredibly ironic you are?

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 03, 2014

    G'day NoetPoet

    RE: "Sounds pretty silly doesn't it. You might even say that such a statement is the very epitome of wilful irrationality!"

    This statement isn't personally pointed at me is it because it sounds like it & in fact it is. I'm not the centre of the discussion NoetPoet, this thread is supposed to be the thread not me personally.

    RE: "Science doesn't say that OBEs don't occur, sciences says that OBEs can be explained as neurological glitches in perception and memory"

    Science denounces all actual experiences of OBE's putting them down to one sort of delusion/glitch or another which is pure speculative to say all OBE's are a delusional glitch in one way or another because that is what they are saying especially with the links you have supplied on this matter. Yes I agree they are a natural process there's absolutely nothing mystical about them but what you call mystical to what I call mystical is quite different like it is with everyone.

    RE:"Let me repeat my questions, and this time I'd appreciate it if you didn't just deny and avoid them:"

    This remark is utterly uncalled for remembering in the warning you got from Michelle to be a little more civil to each other. You & Dusty keep personalising the issue, if you have a problem with me there is plenty of info on the net to help you cope in a more civil way with me.

    How often have you avoided answering my questions & queries but I don't a make such demanding remarks to you, please show a little more civil behaviour towards me in the future. I actually thought the questions you posed were already answered in the links supplied.

    It’s good you have had an OBE yourself but just because yours was a glitch doesn’t prove all OBE’s are delusional glitches or are you saying this!! The research being done on OBE’s in particular seem to be speculative to me. Give me actual experiences over scientific speculative theories any day however also give me science over fairyland speculative beliefs. I’m not just into one kind of source of information, I take all into serious consideration, it would be highly ignorant of me if I didn’t.

  • NoetPoet Jan 03, 2014


    Once again you are attacking straw men. Science doesn't say that OBEs don't occur, sciences says that OBEs can be explained as neurological glitches in perception and memory. No one is saying that people who experience OBEs are delusional or that they haven't really had an OBE; some people are just saying that OBEs are perfectly natural, in no way supernatural, and explainable as purely neurological processes.

    For your information, I have actually have had an OBE. It occurred one night in bed when I was 5 years old. Even though it's a long time ago I can still remember it clearly. Nonetheless, my own *personal experience* of OBEs is completely consistent with neurological explanations of how they occur.

  • NoetPoet Jan 03, 2014


    Here is a slight rephrasing of what you said in your second point. Tell me what you think:

    "However I'd tried to clarify that the intention of the thread was not intended for answering the question: "IS THE WORLD FLAT OR ROUND" but rather the fact that there are many people who are convinced that THE WORLD IS FLAT (for whatever reasons -- scientific, ancient wisdom, personal experience--), and this thread is meant to be a place for these people to share their views on their convictions to help others expand their consciousness in appreciating this idea."

    Sounds pretty silly doesn't it. You might even say that such a statement is the very epitome of wilful irrationality!

    Let me repeat my questions, and this time I'd appreciate it if you didn't just deny and avoid them:

    1) Why should we persist in trying to quell the fear of death by making promises about life after death that we can’t back up?

    2) Why should we claim that there is life after death when it panders to people’s narcissism, reinforces their illusory sense of self, and encourages them to devalue this life?

    3) Why *should* we react to the prospect of no life after death with despair and anguish when we can instead react with a profound gratitude for the radiant spark of existence we have been given, a renewed zest for life which says “carpe diem!”, and a determination to make our own and each other’s time on this planet as pleasant, fulfilling and long as possible?

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 03, 2014

    To this date unless you have experienced an OBE yourself science is still unable to give a firm affirmation that OBE’s don’t occur at all. To say to anyone who has experienced an OBE they are delusional in anyway without scientifically proving these people haven’t experienced actual OBE’s is fraudulent & outlandish to say the least.

    What research conclusively says that all OBE’s are delusional in some way & if it did how would this come about if they haven’t examined everyone who has experienced an OBE, any such research is obviously speculative to say the least.


  • Fallensoul Jan 03, 2014

    Thank you @dusty @noeticpoet @mrmathew.

    I'd like to clarify the situation and try to move forward. We seem to be dealing with three issues.

    1. The first, and perhaps most important, is that we are exchanging ideas with each other and its really the ideas that we are attempting to challenge rather than any individual personal attacks. So personally I have nothing against anyone and if I someone has taken my comments personally, I apologize for the misunderstanding. I may not fully agree with their point of view, but that doesnt mean I'm attempting to belittle or attack them personally. I know dusty see's things similarly and I hope others don't take things too personally and become disturbed. Respectful, polite challenges, I think/hope we can all agree is okay.

    2. The second issue is staying on topic. Although its not stated explicitly, the person who started the thread ought to have a say in clarifying the nature and topic of the thread and hopefully members of the forum try their best to respect that. This doesn't mean that the thread owner can tell people what to say or not, but a gentle reminder or clarification of the thread topic may be required if things go a little off topic. Now this particular thread seems to be a little ambiguous in the sense that its entitled Life after death, so one may have the expectation of a dialogue of ideas for arguments for or against life after death. However I'd tried to clarify that the intention of the thread was not intended for answering the question: "Is there life after death?" but rather the fact that there are many people who are convinced that there is an afterlife (for whatever reasons -- scientific, ancient wisdom, personal experience--), and this thread is meant to be a place for these people to share their views on their convictions to help others expand their consciousness in appreciating these ideas. Now some people may not appreciate the views presented and feel them irrational or "pure belief" and have the desire to challenge these ideas as unscientific, and they are fully valid in their right, but what seems to be causing tension here is that this thread isnt meant to become the "Is there life after death debate". If you wish to have that debate, perhaps look to open another thread specifically on that topic and we have no issues with you discussing it there. This thread is more for those who already have that conviction and have a forum to share it.

  • Fallensoul Jan 03, 2014

    (3) What seems to be happening and this is the third issue: Everything has to be scientifically proven otherwise its nonsense. Someone shares something and immediately the response is "But wait, guys there is no life after death. read this scientific paper..." and then someone else shares something and then "But wait, guys cant u be rational, there is no life after death, check this book out." Now its not that your challenge is trying to be ignored -- Neotic science values scientific research over blind faith and belief, but one has to appreciate that science doesnt have all the answers, nor can it have why answers. Besides this limit, not everyone subscribes to the materialistic reductionist point of view. Science is more than this limited worldview. Certainly Neotic sciences is. We have discussed this at length in other threads and Noetic sciences appreciates that reality isnt only what mainstream scientists claim it is. In this sense its a narrow view of reality and for those who seem to constantly feel the need to push "the truth" that only something that is scientifically empirically proven by the establishment is what we would term a fundamentalist. One has to learn to appreciate that outside of this strict view, there are other forms of knowledge, ways of knowing and broader scientific principles that forms rational reality that do not fall into the "pure belief" category as claimed. This sort of pure belief vs strict science is certainly fundamentalist thinking. If you havent matured to expand your consciousness to see how preaching scientism isnt very much different than any other fundamentalist preacher -- which the world has had enough of, you may want to take a seat in this thread and listen to the others. And if you feel the need to propound the truth, my humble request is to do it on topic somewhere else.

  • NoetPoet Jan 03, 2014

    More quantum woo again.

    The Pam Reynolds NDE case is actually not as compelling as it might initially seem, because:

    1) During this period she retained some nominal brain function, it was her heart that was stopped. Under such conditions, the brain can function for some time. It has been reported that children who fall into the ice can be fully alive (no brain damage) after over one hour underwater. In fact brain surgeons will take precautions to keep the brain functioning so to minimise the chances of the patient getting brain damage from the operation.

    2) She had the NDE when she was put under general anaesthesia, not when she was supposed to have "died". Some people have a degree of resistance to anaesthetics, and can remember much of the operation by way of what they heard during it and see shortly after being anaesthetized.

    3)Her NDE "vision" may have been deemed accurate because of 'memory hits' (similar to a cold reader getting positive hits), i.e. she actually had a whole bunch of ideas about what happened, and some of that stuff just happened to match up with what took place in the surgery room. The mind tends to connect data and make educated guesses after the fact, which is what happens in cold reading. So what may have happened was that there was a cold-reading style situation when she relayed her experiences to hospital staff after the operation, and they selectively (but inadvertently) corroborated a seemingly impressive story about her NDE.

    For more information on Pam's NDE, see: http://infidels.org/library/modern/keith_augustine/HNDEs.html

    Regarding the Dr Melvin Morse quote: on the contrary, neurological substrates to religious experiences support the idea that such religious experiences are really just another variety of hallucination alongside hearing voices and seeing disembodied faces floating around the room. Moreover the fact that religious experiences are highly dependent on the cultural and psychological context of the people who experience them (e.g. Hindus see Hindu gods, Christians see Jesus) also suggests that these hallucinations are largely informed by power of suggestion and not a genuine representation of some higher or ultimate reality.

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 03, 2014

    Biocentrism proving life after death, interesting stuff but only to those who are able to think outside the square & for themselves I believe.


    Extrqact: The answer, Professor Robert Lanza says, lies in quantum physics – specifically the theory of biocentrism. The scientist, from Wake Forest University School of Medicine in North Carolina, says the evidence lies in the idea that the concept of death is a mere figment of our consciousness.

    Professor Lanza says biocentrism explains that the universe only exists because of an individual’s consciousness of it – essentially life and biology are central to reality, which in turn creates the universe; the universe itself does not create life. The same applies to the concepts of space and time, which Professor Lanza describes as “simply tools of the mind”.


    Extract: In 1991, Atlanta, Ga. resident Pam Reynolds had a near-death experience (NDE). Reynolds underwent surgery for a brain aneurysm, and the procedure required doctors to drain all the blood from her brain. Reynolds was kept literally brain-dead by the surgical team for a full 45 minutes. Despite being clinically dead, when Reynolds was resuscitated, she described some amazing things. She recounted experiences she had while dead -- like interacting with deceased relatives. Even more amazing is that Reynolds was able to describe aspects of the surgical procedure, down to the bone saw that was used to remove part of her skull [source: Parker].

    Strange delusional episodes especially when one can describe exactly what happened to them while undergoing major surgery while brain dead, how often is this documented? It is interesting when you read on in this link that no conclusion can be deducted but some people are still adamant that there is no life after death no matter what the science findings are, strange reasoning indeed.

    Extract: As physician Dr. Melvin Morse wrote, "Simply because religious experiences are brain-based does not automatically lessen or demean their spiritual significance. Indeed, the findings of neurological substrates to religious experiences can be argued to provide evidence for their objective reality"

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jan 03, 2014

    Thank you for the reply NoetPoet,

    Allow me to add this. Many assume that I am opposed to the work done by this group and that is perhaps because I have chosen the roll of "devil's advocate in most of these discussion. However, those that think that I am oppositional are themselves against the scientific endeavors of IONS, "advocates of woo" (for lack of a better term), or old school spiritualists, in search of a new God to worship and grant them access to immortality.
    Whether people like it or not we are stuck needing to examine, understand, and explain the limitations of the physical being. It is either this or dwell solely in the realm of belief. There is even the question of whether our subjective experience is capable of comprehending consciousness. To this I respond that we can understand what consciousness is by understanding what it is not, and what it is not is dualistic.

  • NoetPoet Jan 03, 2014


    Everything you say is correct in my opinion. However, even if it is a futile endeavour, I will continue to press others on their unscientific ideas of consciousness in this thread because I believe the whole point of this forum is to foster intelligent dialogue and scientific understanding about the human mind and human capabilities. It's the principle of the matter, and I am tired of seeing this particular forum fall so very far short of what it could and should be.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jan 03, 2014

    This comment is address to a specific person for their response.

    @ NoetPoet,

    I see that you are as frustrated as I am in dealing with the comments of individuals that present arguments that are, in a word, inaccurate, at the very least from a linguistic point of view. For example, the discussion here as it is framed, says, "Most of us here have come to appreciate that consciousness survives the death of the body..." You and I might challenge this very point. Indeed we might write, "Most of us here....." think just the opposite, but we know that there is not point to such an argument.
    Firstly, there is nothing that supports the statement; no poll, no survey, no total head count. Nothing most than the assertion itself. It is a statement in search of evidence to the contrary.
    Secondly, the word "appreciate" is a little more than a substitute for the word believe. And we would both agree that the mere act of believing does not make something true. (those in doubt can read about "the Inquisition).

    I might go on here as you have and ask about other such assertion of "scientific research," but it is a mute point. This is a dualist, non physical view of consciousness that can only offer an incomplete, and unscientific explanation.

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 02, 2014

    G'day Dusty

    Here you go again on the attack again, you are proving me right about people who use capital letters at times.

    Again reread the first two lines before you are kicked off. You are obviously stating quite strongly not that just the comments are wrong but the people are wrong /inaccurate who are on the receiving end of your wrath.

    Dear NoetPoet, Dustproduction and mrmathew1963,

    I am writing to ask you to please keep your comments on the IONS discussion boards limited to a subject other than what's wrong with other people and their posts, and to be civil to one another.

    I have removed The Vaccine For LIfe thread because it is a promotion of another site that feels mostly like it's just an excuse for you to argue. There are probably many threads like that, but I happened to notice this one after receiving more complaints about how you use the site.

    Although you have posts on a variety of subjects and I know you can each defend yourself 'till the cows come home, overall the impression you give is that you just like to argue. While it's clearly something that works for you, it's off-putting to many people, which is a good part of why there are so few others in these discussions. Please give it a rest and engage in civil discussion with other people, or go somewhere else to argue for the joy of argument. I am asking you to consider the forest and not only the trees.
    thank you,

    Michelle RIddle

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jan 02, 2014

    @ NoetPoet,

    I see that you are as frustrated as I am in dealing with the comments of individuals that present arguments that are, in a word, inaccurate, at the very least from a linguistic point of view. For example, the discussion here as it is framed, says, "Most of us here have come to appreciate that consciousness survives the death of the body..." You and I might challenge this very point. Indeed we might write, "Most of us here....." think just the opposite, but we know that there is not point to such an argument.
    Firstly, there is nothing that supports the statement; no poll, no survey, no total head count. Nothing most than the assertion itself. It is a statement in search of evidence to the contrary.
    Secondly, the word "appreciate" is a little more than a substitute for the word believe. And we would both agree that the mere act of believing does not make something true. (those in doubt can read about "the Inquisition).

    I might go on here as you have and ask about other such assertion of "scientific research," but it is a mute point. This is a dualist, non physical view of consciousness that can only offer an incomplete, and unscientific explanation.

  • NoetPoet Jan 02, 2014


    I have started my new thread as promised, but that thread is not about life after death. I do not see any reason to spam the IONS forum with duplicate threads about the same subject. So I will continue to discuss the scientific reality of life after death on this thread, thank you very much.

    I will reiterate my questions, this time in more detail. Given that:

    1) We have no compelling scientific evidence of, or plausible mechanism for life after death;

    2) All alleged evidence for life after death put forward so far can be explained as either quirks the brain’s perception process (out-of-body experiences), physiological effects (the tunnel and bright light effects in NDEs), hypnotic auto-/suggestion involving memory fabrication (past life memories), communications from one’s own subconscious mind (non-fraudulent psychic communications, Ouija boards, and other means of supposedly communicating with the dead), neurologically generated hallucinations (encounters with spirits), misunderstood natural phenomena or hoaxes (photos of ghosts and other types of paranormal beings), outright fraud (cold reading), or as unverifiable hearsay; and

    3) Common sense, everyday experience, and available scientific evidence overwhelmingly suggest that both consciousness and one’s sense of self are produced by the brain under certain conditions and will therefore cease when those conditions cease to be in effect

    ….then why should we persist in trying to quell the fear of death by making promises about life after death that we can’t back up? Why should we claim that there is life after death when it panders to people’s narcissism, reinforces their illusory sense of self, and encourages them to devalue this life? And why *should* we react to the prospect of no life after death with despair and anguish when we can instead react with a profound gratitude for the radiant spark of existence we have been given, a renewed zest for life which says “carpe diem!”, and a determination to make our own and each other’s time on this planet as pleasant, fulfilling and long as possible?

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 02, 2014

    RE: "The suggestion of life after death is either wishful thinking or a verbal illusion."

    Continually strongly suggesting people are delusional isn't sticking to any said topic I believe? How many topics have been based on delusions/illusions but delusions/illusions have come into many said topic most often than not without scientific proof that any said person is actually being delusional? Very suggestive remarks without proof.

    RE:"What is important to observe is that in the absence of a moderated discussion, others including me, have encouraged a more focused conversation."

    What has this comment got to do with the thread/topic in question? You better start moderating yourself I think to start with. Your last two comments are way off topic!!!

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jan 02, 2014

    What is important to observe is that in the absence of a moderated discussion, others including me, have encouraged a more focused conversation.

    I believe the real focus here is still whether of not this conversation is limiting the comments to consciousness in general or a dualist notion of consciousness for which not scientific evidence has been presented.

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 02, 2014

    G'day Dusty

    RE:"Look at my comments and one will see that I have REPEATEDLY stated that others need to 1) stay on topic, 2) not make it personal, 3) all are afforded their views and perceptions. 4) own personal beliefs for what they are, BELIEFS, and not facts. (see my comment regarding, linguistic qualification)."

    To me this sounds like a moderator to me, your not actually saying others must not become moderators of their own thread but others like yourself can & of any thread because that's what it sounds like to me?

    Using so many capitals also denotes aggressive behaviour believe it or not.


  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jan 02, 2014

    First and foremost: Since this is IONS's website there can be no expectation that the originator of a discussion can act as a moderator.
    Let's not waste time debating this as it is the nature of the game.

    Re: Dustproduction and I have not forbidden anyone else from sharing their views in this or any other thread (which is more than I can say for certain other posters around here!). Questioning and challenging another person’s views does not equate to intimidating or supressing them - not even remotely. As far as I am concerned others are welcome to share their views as much as they like, but if they say something that I think is questionable or fallacious then I will scrutinise them about it – politely of course :)"


    Look at my comments and one will see that I have REPEATEDLY stated that others need to 1) stay on topic, 2) not make it personal, 3) all are afforded their views and perceptions. 4) own personal beliefs for what they are, BELIEFS, and not facts. (see my comment regarding, linguistic qualification).

    There are certain other issues I might add. Comments, as the one directed here toward my position, "narrow minded" is inflammatory, yet there is no 'recommendation' here to curb such condescension. Instead the focus seems to be allowing those with a dualist agenda a free reign. There isn't even the suggestion of a compromise on limiting non dualist commenting on threads that are of a more scientific nature (see Consciousness Without a Cortex). I see this as an intent to establish a double standard.

  • Fallensoul Jan 02, 2014

    Noetic-poet: Thank you for respecting the convictions of others. Looking forward to your constructive dialogue about the scientific reality of life after death on your new thread.

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 02, 2014

    I'm utterly dumb founded, surly not!!

  • NoetPoet Jan 01, 2014

    Dear Fallensoul,

    Excuse me, but Dustproduction and I have not forbidden anyone else from sharing their views in this or any other thread (which is more than I can say for certain other posters around here!). Questioning and challenging another person’s views does not equate to intimidating or supressing them - not even remotely. As far as I am concerned others are welcome to share their views as much as they like, but if they say something that I think is questionable or fallacious then I will scrutinise them about it – politely of course :)

    I am trying to start a constructive dialogue about the scientific reality of life after death. To my mind, a “constructive” dialogue aims to find the *actual* truth about a situation – i.e. REGARDLESS of our individual personal preferences about how we’d like things to be – and then find optimal ways to deal with that actual truth. A dialogue is neither reasonable nor truly constructive if it takes as its starting point an assumption which is highly questionable at best. Yet that is exactly what you are trying to do when you say that this thread is “for those who appreciate that consciousness DOES survive the death of the body”.

    In the opening post of this thread you posted a quote from a fellow forum member in which they expressed their fear and despair about the possibility that there is no life after death. So it seems pretty clear to me that the real motivation for starting this thread was to help people deal with the fear of death (albeit in a way which is based on denial). Did it occur to you that perhaps there was a different and more sensible approach to this problem? That perhaps instead of denying the finality of death, we should instead learn to appreciate the silver lining that is our fleeting conscious existence on this planet? That maybe the fear of death is actually the result of our egotistically ignoring the (very likely) possibility that ‘it’ is not, and never was, really about this illusory “me” anyway?

    Now that I think about it, I will take you up on your condescendingly-worded recommendation to start another thread...

  • Fallensoul Jan 01, 2014

    dusty and Noetpoet: We appreciate your comments and viewpoints. However this particular thread is for those who appreciate that consciousness DOES survive the death of the body. I'm sure the two of you can start another thread with your viewpoints for those, like yourselves, who do not yet appreciate it or are not yet convinced more than a "belief" that there is an afterlife. Maybe even on another website or forum outside of Noetic sciences.

    So kindly allow the others to share their views, if you don't mind.

    @mrmathew1963: thanks for sharing how you realized there is an afterlife. it resonates with many others I know.
    @theta: thanks for sharing, yes please elaborate.

  • mrmathew1963 Jan 01, 2014

    To everyone

    Be very careful in continuing to strongly say & insinuate people are delusional when you disagree with them or you personally dislike the way they reason, this has happened numerous times in these discussions. Neurology/psychology are but one avenue of evidence which doesn’t make other evidence null & void especially from actual experiences. You cannot state that all people who see ghosts or are spiritually aware are delusional which does seem to be the case here, at times, in these discussions.

    It makes no logical sense to accuse others of having delusional episodes when they just might not be. We must also take into consideration that Neurologists & Psychologists who conducts these studies could be trying to make a name for themselves as has been previously discussed on IONS before about how some scientists commit fraud to big note themselves. All possibilities should be considered not just the ones we want to personally consider because of our biases!!

  • NoetPoet Jan 01, 2014


    Perhaps you could describe some of these past lives in detail for us?

    The brain is very good at making up information that seems extremely convincing. For example, people who are blind in part of their field of vision often hallucinate the rest of their field of vision in real-time. The hallucinated part of their field of vision seems extremely plausible and every bit as detailed as the genuine part of their field of vision, however it is actually the brain’s best guess of what should be there and it is therefore frequently incorrect. There have been reported cases of people seeing characters from a TV show spilling out of a TV screen and start walking all over a nearby coffee table; these hallucinations often seem even more “real” and detailed than real life, even though the person who sees them has no doubts about their hallucinatory nature.

    So maybe you really do have genuine memories of past lives, despite the fact that there is no plausible mechanism as far as we know to explain how you could have those memories. Or maybe your brain, confronted with the terrifying possibility of its own final mortality, decided to fabricate elaborate self-deceiving past-life “memories” when asked to recall past lives, using sophisticated guesswork plus subconscious memories of: your own early-life experiences; experiences of people you’ve interacted with in this life; books you’ve read; TV shows and movies you’ve watched; computer games you’ve played; and your own fears and fantasies.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jan 01, 2014

    While others here may hold a different view, perhaps as narrow minded in its own nature as mine appears, these "views" are little more than beliefs. We currently have the opportunity to further our biological understandings about the nature of our humanness, and viewing the mind, or do I say, continuing to view the mind, as a nonphysical phenomena, discontinuous with the biology that creates and sustains it, subjects it to a discrimination that other brain process are not usually subject to, if I might paraphrase Damasio.

  • Anonymous Icon

    Theta Jan 01, 2014

    After experiencing and returning to very many past lives (in detail and completely aware) I can assert that life after death is not a belief. It is a fact.
    Find out for yourself.

  • NoetPoet Dec 29, 2013

    Science CAN explain it and it doesn't require quantum physics to do so.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 28, 2013

    G'day Fallensoul

    What influenced me that consciousness is eternal & infinite was first of all ghosts, in three houses my whole family experienced ghosts to one extent or another & the other experience was when I could ask any question & get an immediate correct answer out of thin air. Because I had never read any books or heard of anyone being connected to this infinite eternal consciousness in my mid-teens I didn't actually realise what I was experiencing.

    How could ghosts interact with us without a brain & where was this newly found knowing of mine coming from? Science couldn't explain it then but is starting to explain it now especially through quantum physics. I've actually gotten to a stage it is no big deal to me, it's quite natural which has taken me some years to realise.

  • Fallensoul Dec 28, 2013

    dusty: thanks for the narrow-minded academic view of consciousness. we're not unfamiliar with it, but i hope it doesnt disturb you to know that not everyone, and especially the folks here, don't subscribe to that as the truth of reality; so I'll be glad to hear others contribute their views, if you don't mind.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Dec 28, 2013

    This is yet another discussion that uses the term 'consciousness' in a somewhat illegitimate way, in that it seeks to attribute scientific findings and evidence where there is only belief in spirituality. There is NO science of 'higher consciousness' however there is a science of the biological phenomenon of the conscious experience like photosynthesis, digestion, mitosis. Consciousness is a process that is, as John Searle points out, ".. consists of all those states of feeling or sentience or awareness. It begins in the morning when you wake up from a dreamless sleep, and it goes on all day until you fall asleep or die or otherwise become unconscious."

    Consciousness as it is being applied here refers to a tradition of religious dualism: "Consciousness is not a part of the physical world. It's a part of the spiritual world. It belongs to the soul, and the soul is not a part of the physical world. That's the tradition of God, the soul and immortality."

    Life is defined as the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death. The suggestion of life after death is either wishful thinking or a verbal illusion.

  • Fallensoul Dec 28, 2013

    Greetings. Folks. Getting back to the topic. Would be nice to hear from the new readers their personal experiences, research and ancient knowledge on survival of consciousness after death. Please lets allow them to speak. This thread isnt meant to be a showdown of how many scientific papers you've read. The idea is this: What is the value of a prolonged life which is wasted, inexperienced by years in this world? Better a moment of full consciousness, because that gives one a start in searching after his supreme interest. Bhagavad Purana 2.1.12

    Lets learn from the ones who have gained that experience/truth and are living it, afterall noetic science started as a result of Edgar having a moment of higher consciousness.

    Less dust, more purity of experience please.


  • frequencytuner Dec 06, 2013

    If you were a caterpillar, your body is the cocoon and death is the shedding of it..

  • Anonymous Icon

    wbilly3814 Dec 05, 2013

    I have a text which describes a unique definition for consciousness that I am making avilable to all IONS members for free. It is 800 pages of Quantum Theory, the history of it, most particularly where and how the idea that consciousness plays a role in 'painting the universe into being' came from, and how it got lost along the way, bringing about speculative approaches to Quantum Physics that exclude consciousness from the equations altogether, even mocking the idea.

    It is a great history lesson in Quantum Theory and Physics mellowed down to the lay reader's ability to fully grasp.

    The second half of the text puts this unique defintion back into Quantum Theory, and describes the physics as the founders had saught to do, but didn't live to do, because they could not find this definition for cosnsciousness suitable within the framework of Quantum Physics, the Religions and Philosophies of Man.

    If you would like a copy (free) email me at wbilly3814@yahoo.com, put IONS Memebr in the subject line, and let me know if you would like a pdf, kindle, or epub.

    thank you

    william joseph bray

  • bestearth Jul 06, 2013

    The only thing that they could see was that the state the 'shudder' had put the man in, was different to theirs.

    The corners of his mouth were up-turned whereas theirs were still down-turned. They had never seen a man with an unusual face like that. And he seemed to have momentarily transformed into something that resembled the gentle fires they stared into every night. And they knew there was something different about him. Something that made their thoughts stir up as yet unlabeled fears which he had seemed to transcend. And it made them want to experience whatever it was that caused that shudder.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jul 05, 2013


    I found references to Bucke's theorizes "that the rapidly evolving Aryan people have more incidence of insanity due to this rapid mental growth and "very few would claim that the negro mind is advancing at anything like the same rate." Doesn't this weakens the author's credibility.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jul 05, 2013

    Re: of feeling at one with a benevolent universe, of knowing there is a creator and 'experiencing' the love of that creator.

    This is ALL subjective BELIEF. There is no knowing evolved

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jul 05, 2013

    Re: The book “Cosmic Consciousness” by Richard M. Bucke.

    The was written in 1901. While it may have been cutting edge at the time, might someone like Antonio Demasio's book "Self Comes to Mind" be slightly more scientific given the advances that have been made?
    Science has only been studying consciousness for 20 years, since Frances Crick turn his attention to the topic. We now know how various parts of the brain function in concert.
    Even if one chooses to ignore these advances, it still requires that an alternative framework that can provide details that would explain the physical interfacing of spirit and material being. Where is this framework?

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jul 05, 2013

    This is a recent mainstream article about Geller.
    See what they say about him.

    “Sometimes, you wonder whether Uri’s entire public career has actually been a front for his shadow world activities.”

    Geller's public career has been controversial, especially after magicians like James Randi have shown that his signature act of bending spoons psychically can easily be replicated, according to the Skeptics Dictionary.

    But sample the comments here. http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18597

    They 're random and wide ranging.

  • charliet Jul 05, 2013

    Bestearth - nice post, thank you.

    Dustproduction - re Uri Geller - magician, not credible, etc. Once again wikipedia has let you down. Two very well respected and experienced researchers at Stanford Research Institute find him to be extremely accurate and possessing psychic abilities, not magical tricks or mind reading. They are Russell Targ and Harold Puthoff, but I am sure you will find them not to be credible too.

  • bestearth Jul 05, 2013

    The book “Cosmic Consciousness” by Richard M. Bucke.

    It has some points that are related to this question of the difference between animal and man in terms of the types of consciousness involved. There is no doubt that man was once enmeshed with the animal world and was not much more than a more refined version of the simple consciousness of an animal. What were the refinements and how did they happen? We can see that simple organisms are sensory only but animals have perceptions that enable them to make more complex decisions.

    Bucke describes another layer that developed out of percepts which he termed 'recepts' , which were a more complex amalgam of percepts. The next leap was 'concepts' and ever more complex arrangement of the previous types, sensations, perception, receptions, and conceptions. Humans share with animals the first three but made a break because some individuals started to develop the ability to conceptualize, that is to start labeling things. This came from a refinement from simple- consciousness to self-consciousness. The first is the animal state, the world of blind instinct. The second still has this need but the information available to this type of mind enabled it to start to innovate with tools and methods that made surviving easier, liberated time, It is likely that man's first deity was fire. And that staring into it at night allowed this newer mind to freewheel on the gathering of new concepts. This ability to conceptualize and think about thinking is why man is not an animal. It's clear though that some men behave like animals because their consciousness is not very fine.
    The author uses the description of a tree branching from a thick trunk to separate branches that become finer and finer as they go up. The next up step from self consciousness, where mankind is still generally at, is cosmic consciousness this is a further refinement. This type of mind has it's finest tendrils reaching out into the cosmos, beyond being planetbound and the experience is what we have labeled as 'epiphany' and other related descriptions like 'heavan'. It is currently rare.

    In Buckes' case he states the poet Walt Whitman had this effect on him. It is very similar to the one Edgar Mitchell describes in 'Way of the Explorer”. It seems these experiences are common amongst artists, Bucke is basically documenting the phenomena of epiphany. This book is considered a classic investigation of consciousness.

    The ability up from conceptualization is 'intuition' according to Bucke and should not be considered paranormal but just a highly complex development of the previous states, ie,sensations, perceptions, receptions, conceptions, intuitions etc.

    What's it to do with life after death? One element common with this 'experience' is the knowing of immortality, and the feeling of boundless joy, of feeling at one with a benevolent universe, of knowing there is a creator and 'experiencing' the love of that creator.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jun 26, 2013

    Let me ask a third time; Re: "We are not animals." Please explain this.

    Let's just address the question and not make this a narrative about you, or me. Any explanation of consciousness that science has to offer is a theory or hypothesis. Any thoughts you have are merely beliefs, even just claims of experiences are subjective.

    I didn't offer any opinion about Bobine, I presented the comments of "an occult scholar and a researcher of the paranormal."

    Geller is described as "a magician, television personality, and self-proclaimed psychic." Not very credible.

  • bestearth Jun 26, 2013

    That's right, Echo Bodine is not a scientist and therefore can't explain what she does in a way that gives it credence for you. I have and you have specific interests. I gather that you are 'epiphenomalist' a word I just picked up in "Way of the explorer" by Edgar Mitchell. He worked with Uri Geller at SRI and now I've bouht some of Uri's books too. I am also playing guessing games at www.psiarcade and Russell targ's Boundary Institute. Why because my experiences not my beliefs tell me that there is something significant going on here that is worth 'experiencing' not believing. There is a documentary film called Staya Erusa which may be of interest to people here, I just found out about it.

    Classical physics is subscribed to epiphenomalism which says consciousness is a by product of biology.

    I didn't feel out of control about Echos book, she is very grounded. Also religion doesn't own God they just think they do. There's nothing stopping you from connecting with God in your own unique way. It can be totally private and you don't have to reveal the nature of your connection to anyone. It can be as simple as a an everyday conversation. Religion has turned people off God because of the corruption and hypocracy of large organisations. They only need cut the association in their mind between religion and God.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jun 22, 2013

    Nothing that was added here explains the remark that humans are not animals.

    The complaint that I read about the book you've mentioned is:

    *"A Still, Small Voice" relies almost completely on anecdotal material to "teach," reading more like an inspirational memoir than a guidebook.

    * Bodine never addresses the theories or principals behind psychic experience, except to say that all intuition comes from God. Readers are encouraged to rely on spirit guides for their actual instruction, thus encouraging them to feel somewhat out of control of their own powers."
    (Michelle Belanger, an occult scholar and a researcher of the paranormal.)

    There has to be a physical basis for the experience Bodine is writing about, and all we have by way of explanation is more "beliefs."

  • bestearth Jun 22, 2013

    If you're all ears you must look very strange then.

    What makes us human? How about humour? The ability to understand metaphor is a distinctly human trait. What's metaphor? A good description is, metaphor is, simultainaeity of indirectly related ideas. Actually absurdity is the basis of humour.

    I agree, I believe in evolution, creatures do change and adapt and develop capacities over long periods.

    I'm reading a book by Echo Bodine called "A Still Small voice" A psychics guide to awakenning intuition. A quote from chapter 3.
    Florence Scovel Shin,
    "Intuition is a spiritual faculty and does not explain but simply points the way"

    Also I'm reading "Way of the Explorer" by Dr. Edgar Mitchell. On this question of the validity of belief he writes this on page 78,

    "In classical physics, the individuals belief system does not matter. However in this realm of science(intuitive side) I would later discover that it not only comes into play, but is also fundamental."

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jun 22, 2013

    Re: "We are not animals."

    Can you expound unto this, I'm all ears.
    It is certainly a different thinking than most of us have, to the point of being patently absurd.

    "Just what is it that makes us human?"

    Theory of Mind
    The Golden Rule
    Pleasure in anticipation and gratification

    Would you be surprised to know that all of these traits are evolutionary in nature?


  • bestearth Jun 22, 2013

    We are not animals. Animals cannot conceptualise they are in the world of sensations turned into perceptions only. They can never go beyond survival. If beliefs bring comfort to people I don't see a problem. That includes belief in the afterlife. We have the task of building the conceptual framework for studying intuition and consciousness. So that the rational and intuitive platforms can dialogue and find balance. We all have our own way of contributing.

    From Einstein,

    "The intuitive mind
    is a sacred gift
    and the rational mind
    is a faithful servant
    We have created a society
    that honours the servant
    and has forgotten the gift."

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jun 21, 2013

    Re: "it's about proving the existence of a divine power"

    Why is "it" about this at all?
    We are here in a material reality, and yet we as a species, have spent thousands of years speculating about some other realm we are not a part of at this point, as if will guide us toward a better material reality. No other animal has this problem, and yet we want to "believe" that other animals share in consciousness, as if there are other animal gods, or that all animals, humans included, have "beliefs". We can't have it both ways can we?

  • Anonymous Icon

    science01 Jun 21, 2013

    being a skeptic that i am, i feel logical reasonings can satisfy our questions on life after death topic in a much better and convincing way.. it's not about being a theist or an antheist, it's about proving the existence of a divine power that is beyond our understanding, that we humans call god! i would be happy if we can have a healthy debate on this very important topic which is the very base of the noetic science existence itself instead of discussing someone's personal illogical point of view and issue relating the topic.. being a firm god believer and a science person myself, i would be glad to see if we can open the door for the humankind towards divine powers, god and life after death by answering mystical questions..
    have a good day to all :) ..

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jun 20, 2013

    Re: "offer me some comfort"

    This is why "Most of (you) here have come to appreciate (believe) that consciousness survives the death of the body.

  • Anonymous Icon

    science01 Jun 20, 2013

    nice post

  • Joseph Smith Jun 14, 2013

    I suggest that fallensoul is one of the uncounted millions who have been dumbed down by external factors. The world is going up in flames. There is now an ongoing separation of the sheep and goats. We cannot be separated from consciousness. We can voluntarily disconnect, in which case we feel "incredibly low." I would suggest that burying your head in the sand is why you feel so low.

    I can tell you from personal experience that facing the reality of who you are and what you are about will make your life as good as it gets. Of course authority doesn't want you to do that. But who am I? I'm just a nobody from nowhere whose life is as good as it gets.

  • Fallensoul Jun 12, 2013

    bestearth: nice posts. According to Vedic understanding, the mind is a sense. Its the chief of all the 5 senses and controls them. Email me we can discuss more.

  • bestearth Jun 01, 2013

    There is a case in this same book which suggests there is life after death. A car accident in the Minnesota woods in which a boy was killed when the car veered and hit a tree. The photos taken by the trooper at the accident scene were processed at the police lab and revealed unusual inclusions which could not be camera faults. This case and the photos can be seen here,


  • bestearth May 28, 2013

    Just some points from "Origin of the Soul". I liked the seven ray system of temperaments that humans can exhibit. I like that it related perfectcly to the music scale the seven notes. It seems the structure of the realms is like music. With the seven chakras within the body plus the five above ( the 5 black keys above the seven white keys on the piano) that is 12 all together. In music there is no note more important than another and therefore in the human there is no temperament more important than another by the same logic. The temperaments are basically these, as listed in Walter Semkiw's book,
    Ray 1: The energy of will, which produces a focus on power and exerting influence.
    Ray 2: The energy of love-wisdom, which produces a desire to better understand the human condition and to uplift humanity.
    Ray 3: The energy of creative intelligence, which produces a desire to create objects of practical value.
    Ray 4: The energy of art and beauty (artists of all kinds)
    Ray 5: The energy of science, which produces a desire to understand how the world works.
    Ray 6: The energy of devotion which produces a desire to serve a religion, a cause or other people.
    Ray 7: The energy of organization, which produces a desire to create working systems.

    We all have a unique energy signature made of these. The analogy is of the 'monad' that splits Gods white light into it's constituents. The monad is like a prism which serves as an interface between our soul and that of the creator. There are other temperament systems, like astrology(12 temperaments), Kabbalah Seraphot(10), enneagram (9) but I like the ray system for it's simplicity and relation to music. Semkiw uses the analogy of a yo-yo that comes down from the monad into physical form by projecting a hologram into the growing fetus. The hologram serves as a template for the growing body providing the 'shaping ' information and also the temperament signature of the person to be.

  • bestearth May 26, 2013

    The man who started this thread how are you doing? Marcus?

    Why is their mental ilness? I believe this world is a character forge. I have a soul ( and you, all of us) that is on an unspeakably long journey of growing in understanding and knowledge approaching that of maybe the prime creator itself or himself. You are a spark and ember if you like from the heart of the prime creator. You are on a journey also, adversity is necessary to form character. It is neccessary to understand the consequences of our choices and the best way to experience that is in a forge, an intense place where both evil and good and all shades of them are present. This drives the choice dynamic. If you use your mind to make life meaningful even if seems ridiculous at first then you will experience the consequences of that which is likely will eventually lead to a better state of joy and less unnessary suffering. It is maybe not possible to remove every bit of suffering but it is possible to reduce the unnessary suffering by changing how you react to life. You may have to examine your code for living. If youv'e posted here you likely are an intelligent and sensitive fellow.

    I have been through what you are experiencing, if you still are, and come out the other side from the suicidal state. The less physical realm where our soul resides has a self tempering feature built into it which keeps the whole of existance in balance. The creation is so intricate and unfathomly intelligent that it can organise things for you according to your predominant thoughts. Do you think about what virtue is or do you concentrate on the depravity of life? Do you think the state of admiration is better than the state of envy? Do you think guilt is better than righteousness? Do you have heroes who embody the qualities of virtue? What are your highest values? In other words what do you care about most, things or principles, or a mixture of them?

    Here's a couple of books, not more books!
    Targ , Hurtak " The End of Suffering"
    Walter Semkiw " Origin of the Soul"

    Hope your doing ok and looks like Joseph has been through quite alot also.

  • Joseph Smith May 19, 2013

    By the way, the picture is of me standing next to a large stump, red faced and sweating. I've just hacked out a place on the stump to hang a sign. On the carved piece of cedar I hung is an image of Mt. Hood under which are these words: "Peace & Plenty," the name we've given to our home in the tall timber a few miles from Mt. Hood. All my dreams came true. With my soul mate, I live a trouble free life. God helps those who help themselves.

  • Joseph Smith May 19, 2013

    In 1975, with my life in ruins at age 49, I felt "incredibly low and pessimistic about life." The government wrecked my life. I acted. I studied the Constitution and the legal procedure for taking the IRS to court. I had a personal stake in the outcome. The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution says I have the right to due process of law. Most Americans fear the IRS. I gave the IRS my middle finger.

    Every now and then our elected representatives, to let us know they are for us, put the IRS on the carpet. It's all a game. The consequence is clear. The situation looks hopeless. We Americans are becoming Pavlog's dogs, with conditioned reflex. It all began during the Great Depression. President Franklin D. Roosevelt said that government had an "inherent duty" to the people, even if it was not written in the Constitution.

    I proved I'm right and Roosevelt wrong. Government has no duty to me. Government is my servant. The IRS ate crow on the front page of The Palm Beach Post. I can only speak for myself. I believe that I was meant to be self-governed. In 1975, was reborn the individual I was meant to be. My good life is the result. In short, the purpose of it all is to know you are a God-self and capable of making yourself what you will.

  • Joseph Smith May 18, 2013

    It goes without saying, there has to be a purpose. There is a certain order to the universe. Science has at last conceded that without consciousness nothing could exist. We are inextricably connected with the Supreme Consciousness of the universe, receivers and yet in control of receiving. We can be externally influenced to dance to the tune of others. I'm here to help you people out. There is a progressive order and an increasing purpose that runs through the ages, linking them together. Augustine said: "Distinguish the ages and the Scriptures harmonize.
    We are presently leaving the age that depended on external influences, according to the ancients, and entering an age when we become our brother's keeper.

  • Elaine Heiby May 18, 2013

    My realization that consciousness is an eternal non-physical energy came foremost from my intuition--psychic and spiritual experiences that felt right. Being an academic psychologist for over 30 years, I was consoled that my intuition conforms with quantum physics. Dean Radin's books on using quantum concepts as an explanatory framework for the extensive empirical support for psychic abilities does an excellent job in that respect. Psychic abilities, like all personality characteristics, are inferred. Science does not prove. It provides a relative degree of supporting and refuting evidence. I think too many researchers in psychic and spiritual experiences get caught up in attaining the unattainable goal of providing 'proof'.

    After reading Radin's books, I came across the extensive literatures on near-death experiences, pre-death experiences, after-death communications, verifiable reincarnation memories, regression hypnosis, experimental evaluation of the accuracy of mediumship, and the manipulation of psychic energy and invocation of spiritual energies in healing. But what persuaded me the most that the converging evidence is convincing of the eternal nature of consciousnesst is the controlled demonstration of materialization of discarnate entities (e.g., Scole) and the teachings of materialized entities. These teachings conform with what is taught by people who have experienced NDEs, PDEs, ADCs, reincarnation memories, regression hypnosis, mediumship, and healing.

    This convergence of messages regarding the necessity of a science that explicitly integrates material and non-material energies is why I agreed to edit a recent book by Martha J. Barham R.N., Ph.D. "47 Billion Years of Evolution: A Case Report", which relays the teachings of two materialized entities.

    The book is available on Amazon.com as both a paperback and an e-book. If you are interested and cannot afford it, let me know and I'll gift the e-book version to you.I am sorry but I am unable to afford to gift the paperback. If you do not have a Kindle but do have a smart phone or tablet (or read books on a computer), you can download the free Kindle reading software here: http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.html/ref=dig_arl_box?ie=UTF8&docId=1000493771

    A description of the book is available here: http://www.amazon.com/Billion-Years-Evolution-Development-ebook/dp/B00CCVRE3G/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1368921640&sr=1-1&keywords=heiby

    For a gift of the e-book version, please email me a <heiby@hawaii.edu>

  • bestearth May 15, 2013

    I don't know why the mind is not considered a sense. I have experienced in myself, which is not scientifically valid, that I experience sensations in my body when a certain type of thought touches the mind. If a thought is some'thing' and the mind is some'thing' then isn't that another sense door?
    You've got things touching each other even if they are waves or energy fields of some kind. They generate sensations in the body, the brain automaticaly forms them into perceptions which it then presents to the mind and then can be included or excluded in conceptualisation as part of more complex mental activity. Just llike the other sense doors. Whether it be the touch of a photon on your retina, or the touch of a chemical on your tongue or nose, or the touch of air on your skin or the touch of sound, which is also air on your eardrum. It seems like it's all touch based in a way. So do we have at least six senses then?

    I observe that the physical universe is made of opposites and the range or spectrum or cycle going between them. But some of these physical properties are not self existant. Like the property "dark" for example is not self existant and requires the absense of it's opposite to exist. The same goes for 'cold'. Does that mean that all properties are paired? And therefore that the other must exist somewhere even though it can't be perceived easily? We know for example the opposite of 'soft' is 'hard ' and the opposite character of 'moving' would be 'still'. If somewhere in the earths weather system it is 'dry' does that automatically mean that somewhere else it must be 'wet'. Would this form something that could be termed a 'law of consistancy'. That the opposite must exist somewhere.

    I was trying to prove by reason the concept of God and the afterlife because I'm more a philosopher than a scientist.

    So is this decent logic? By this idea of consistency of opposites we can see that all of nature runs on cycles. The seasons for example, the tides and the life and deaths of creatures including ourselves. So in other words the cycles are characterized by the property 'temporary'. So if by my way of thinking everything has an opposite where is the opposite of 'temporary' then? Where is the eternal? Or what is eternal?

    So if the scientists say that the universe began about 15billion years ago in a big bang , that's the beginning of a cycle and all cycles in the temporal universe are temporary. So technically there must come a time when it ends though it may be considered virtually eternal but technically it's not eternal. So if this physical universe is an example of a temporary universe it's opposite kind must exist somewhere. An eternal universe must exist somewhere to furnish this 'law of consistency' idea that I'm using. And maybe the laws of physics inside this eternal universe would be opposite also or at least very different.

    It's this question of where is this eternal universe?

  • NoetPoet May 11, 2013

    Recollection is a critical component of consciousness and personal identity: recollection makes it possible to compare present stimuli with past stimuli and thus form a moving conscious picture of reality, much like a film reel can create the illusion of a moving picture. It also allows a person to accumulate information which feeds back into their sense of self. But even if there is no recollection, that doesn't mean that the person isn't aware. A person can be aware when they are drunk and partying, even if their ability to remember it is disrupted. So although recollection is vital to a coherent consciousness, it is not a pre-condition of awareness itself.

    A thought experiment might be helpful: think of ordinary waking consciousness. What features does it have? Clearly there is short term and long term memory, stimuli to the senses, thought and cognition (including abstract about the future), habits of perception (what you choose to acknowledge and how you choose to acknowledge it), and there is a meta-awareness of one's self which is informed by these other features. Now start take these features away one-by-one. What are you left with? By my reckoning you are left with pure bare awareness, utterly devoid of features like a sky devoid of clouds.

    Because it is utterly devoid of features, pure awareness is itself a void. Is this so bad? Perhaps our confusion about the mystery of consciousness arises precisely because consciousness itself (i.e. pure awareness) is the primal voidness. But it is this very voidness which makes consciousness so marvellous and useful, much as an empty jar or an empty room are useful because they can be filled with various items.

    So if pure awareness is of the primal void, and all the other factors of mind are conditioned phenomena working together to create a "motion picture" illusion of personal consciousness, is there any room for life after death? Possibly. What we can fairly say is that each mind is like an agglomeration of complexity and differentiation which wells up from the underlying voidness "fabric" of reality/ the cosmos. When the body dies, that agglomeration of complexity and differentiation collapses and merges back into the fabric of the cosmos. It's like a carpeted floor with lumps in the carpet: each mind is a lump, and physical death is like a foot stepping on that lump. But stepping on one lump can cause another lump to emerge in another part of the carpet. Similarly perhaps there is a kind of momentum or information burst realised by a mind at physical death into the underlying fabric of the cosmos, which in turn conditions the arising of a new mind elsewhere in the cosmos. This process could be interpreted as "rebirth" or "reincarnation" of a mind which is ultimately made from voidness anyway.

    So when thinking about how/if there is life after death, remember that "it's not actually about you!" It is about a natural process of which your small "I" ego-consciousness is but one part.

  • bestearth May 10, 2013

    What a treasure trove. Thanks everyone, lots of links to explore.

    I had two books arrive. One is 'Origin of the Soul' by Walter Semkiw and just on page 100 there is an image of a man named Freidrich Juergensen who during his life was a pioneer of ITC 'Instrumental Transcommunication' I guess that's related to EVP, Electronic Voice Phenomena. Anyhow at his own funeral he is said to have imprinted his own image on the TV of his friend Claude Thorlin. The work of Semkiw seems to say that ones appearance stays very similar from life to life and that experiences and skills stay intact inside the soul and build on each other. The other is 'The End of Suffering' by Russell Targ and J.J Hurtak Ph.D.

    I have been thru mental illness, was labelled schizophrenic. What helped me was not drugs but nutrition and the right attitude to life. We can use our mind to make life meaningful or make it meaningless, I know where nihilism can go- to the abyss of depression and mental illness. It's helps to look at everything as if it is a miracle, not just life but breathing, sunshine, food, water, family, friends, flowers and why stop there? Every particle and non particle of existence is a miracle. I'll finish with a quote from Gangaji which I saw in 'The End of Suffering'.

    "The meaning of your life depends on which ideas you permit to use you. Who you think you are determines where you put your attention. Where you direct your attention creates your life experiences, and brings a new course of events into being. Where you habitually put your attention is what you worship. What do you worship in this mindstream called your life?"

  • Fallensoul Apr 14, 2013

    mathew: one has to be careful with the wording. theres an idea that to become spiritually enlightened one has to give up all desires and remove the ego completely. that kind of teaching is dangerous in the sense that its not really possible to be desireless. Niether can one give up his sense of individuality. We remain individuals eternally. This is the actual teachings of the Vedanta. The difference is that we are minute individuals and the Supreme Being is supremely individual. Whereas we only have conscious awareness of ourselves, the supreme being has conscious awareness of everythings and everyone. Some people have the experience of connecting to the Supreme being and experiencing this oneness in vision, but that does mean that one has become the Supreme Being. The Supreme Being is always the Supreme Being and not subject to the being under the illusions we are under. So it is not a fact that we have to become ego-less. We have both desires and ego, but in our current situation those desires and ego is misdirected and wrongly influenced into thinking that we are material beings. This wrong conception is what needs to be removed, not the pure ego and desires. So the idea is to change the desires, not nullify them. Change the consciousness/ego not nullify it.

    Pure ego and desires exist, and so do our individuality. So does our spiritual form. That is the beauty of reality, we have our limited free will. We have to ability to love one another and on an ultimate scale, love the Supreme Being. So in the oneness theory, the teaching is misunderstood, that everyone is one and we are all simply God trying to express ourselves in different ways. Everything is Brahman, all is one. This is a popular spiritual idea being propogated by various "spiritual" teachers and they do this in the name of the Vedic knowledge. But the real teaching is that we are part of the Brahman or Supreme Being, we are equal is quality but we are not on the same level. We arent God in full, we're a spark of a fire vs the fire. Thats the difference.

    The other idea that we are manifest only here and in the spirit world we dont have any form, therefore we cant enjoy. That is also another ignorance. The spiritual reality is the source of this reality. How can it be that something is lacking in the source? We have forms here, so why wouldnt we have forms there? We have spiritual forms in the spiritual world and experience and enjoyment is far superior than this temporary place of ignorance.

  • mrmathew1963 Feb 03, 2013

    G’day Fallensoul

    To me Fallensoul this physical life isn’t our natural life or state in actual fact it’s not living at all it’s just experiencing being through the ego self for without the ego we wouldn’t exist. You take away the ego you then have no desire to live or evolve as a species but the ego isn’t who we really are, you take away the ego & you are a lot closer to your truer self so dying from this physical reality to me is living as the being I am not what I perceive I am.


  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jan 28, 2013

    In her paper, "EMOTIONAL SENSE: The Emotional Sense: A Moral Compass," Katherine T Peil puts forward some interesting thoughts.
    Her writing is dense and well referenced.
    Since you did not respond to any of my points I am wondering why it is I am supposed to read about emotion guidance. Have you read and comprehended this paper?

    Originally, you said, "To answer your question"

    I believe we are eternal beings.
    I do not, however, believe.......
    I have looked at the science and compared it to my newer beliefs.....

    My point is that you are only writing about you, and your subjective experiences and beliefs.
    This is not a discussion, it is a narrative.

  • Jeanine Broderick Jan 25, 2013

    @ Dustproduction

    Look at the research regarding emotional guidance here:


    I have referenced it in other posts here and did not want to be overly repetitive.

    Also, the post by FallenSoul asks for "scientific research, personal experiences, and ancient wisdom" so I do not understand why you are critiquing my post for not including the scientific basis of the emotional guidance feedback system. Is the original post wrong to ask for personal experience and ancient wisdom? I am new here so if I am missing something about these discussions I would appreciate beneficial feedback. Thanks.

    Thanks for asking. No, my world view is not based on Swedenborg. Swedenborg's work was something I stumbled on long after my world view was developed. The documentation he created of his experiences--including science that was not know for centuries after his death--is evidence that he was able to access information on a different realm. That is much more believable to me than that he was so brilliant he was able to leap centuries ahead in scientific knowledge using the scientific method and it took the rest of the world centuries to catch up - even with access to his 19 volumes of work. His story includes interactions with the Queen's deceased brother. To me his credibility on that is strong, #1 because the Queen verified he was able to communicate to her things he said he learned from her brother (after his death) that only the Queen and the brother were privy to, and #2 His documentation of some scientific things has proven to have been accurate as science caught up with it.

    He is a piece of the puzzle. I don't need proof of life after death for my personal experience but when someone says they want evidence he is somewhere to point and ask, "How else would you explain the work he left behind?" While it is not proof--it can open the door a bit to at least have an open mind about the subject.
    ♡ Jeanine

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jan 24, 2013

    This was posted at another discussion regarding NDE

    The title of Alexander's book is "Proof of Heaven," a rather assuming title when he cannot answer my simple question. Alexander tells us he believes, "The purest and most extraordinary part of his journey happened deep in coma." How can he possibly claim to recall this. He was in a coma, "his earliest recollections were strange and involved no recall of his life before coma. Like a newborn, he had no functioning language, nor knowledge of this world, our culture, or the loved ones surrounding him."

    The fact remains that we do understand how long term memory is produced from short term memory. What I am not seeing here is a discuss about brain processes. Sam Harris's point is that the brain did not stop functioning, and this is accurate, leaving the opening for further explanation and doubt about Alexander's story. Other neuroscientists, such as Daniel Kahneman tells us that the unconscious mind plays a bigger role than we imagine. The focus here is the conscious mind, and that may be the error. Much of what flows into the consciousness starts in the unconscious. (see Benjamin Libet) I'll give Alexander's book a look just to see his appendix discussions. I did heard him interviewed and he was not informative or convincing. He has no proof, just a good story to tell. The bottom line is that Alexander's asking us to BELIEVE in what he cannot explain, and religion already does that.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jan 24, 2013

    We cannot have a discussion about your personal subjective experience and beliefs (I gather they involve Swedenborg), so they fall into the realm of conjecture. You write, " I also believe that our societies train us away from much of the innate wisdom we are born with (to the detriment of individuals and society)." Haven't you yourself fallen into this same trap by employing language, oriented in a way, that externalizes your experience of the world by repeatedly claiming what "is?" For example saying the day "is" nice speaks not about the day, but your experience or perception of the day. You repeatedly use "is" in the this manner.

    IONS seeks to document experiences scientifically. Before you can make statements such as " Emotions are guidance (communication) telling us to adjust course," or the conflicting statement, "negative emotion creates static," we need to see the research you are basing these statement on, or they are little more than belief. i.e. for every drop of rain a flowers grows

  • Jeanine Broderick Jan 24, 2013

    Regarding marcusantonio91 comments:

    Drinking- understand your brain is part of your body and impacted by alcohol. Your brain is not what most believe it to be. It is actually a sending and receiving transmission tower and alcohol impedes the transmission.

    Likewise, negative emotion creates static (and neural pathways that do not serve our well-being). That static interferes with the receiving of the well-being that is flowing to each of us. It is our own thoughts (no, I am not blaming the victim - I am empowering all of mankind. Any so-called "victims" did not know this information - if they had they would not be called "victims" because they would have made different choices.)
    Each cell can have the flow of well-being to it decreased via negative emotion. The negative emotions decrease the flow of well-being because the well-being flows from Love (what our Source is - forget about an angry,, vengeful and judgmental God - that is man creating God in man's image).

    Emotions like Love, Awe, Interest, Passion, Excitement, Enthusiasm allow the flow fully while emotions that feel worse than those pinch off some of the well-being. Ever feel like you are on fire (in a good way) with a new idea - energized and excited? That is you allowing the fuller connection. When you feel sluggish you are pinching off some of the well-being. It is still flowing but you are not allowing yourself to receive it.

    All of this can be easily verified with your own thoughts if you pay attention to how you feel and especially when you begin making a conscious effort to adjust your perception to better feeling thoughts.

    Mental illness is often caused by complex negative emotions. Emotions are guidance (communication) telling us to adjust course but complex negative emotions are constructs of man and may not have a path that leads to feeling better. They are bogus from the big picture but when one has been trained to believe the underlying false premises they can get caught in an inescapable loop.

    Some things--like voices--if the person is feeling negative the voices will match that vibration. Those who are sensitive and raised where such a trait is frowned upon or feared are far more likely to develop what we call "mental illness" because the sensitivity does not diminish but they become tuned to worse feeling vibrations so that is what they hear. Those who are more positively focused are tuned in a different way and are often called intuitive. I could write a book on this but this is the basic gist of the explanation.

  • Jeanine Broderick Jan 24, 2013

    @ Dustproduction

    To answer your question:
    I believe we are eternal beings. That we did not arrive in our infant bodies as brand new entities and that we will have many more experiences, both in physical bodies and while in non-physical. I also believe that our societies train us away from much of the innate wisdom we are born with (to the detriment of individuals and society).

    I do not, however, believe in Karma anymore. I did, for most of my life. But my new understanding is from a much broader, eternal perspective, and I understand that who and what we are at our core (each and every one of us) is Love. Any deviation from that is from beliefs, expectations, and experiences we picked up during our physical life time - this time. When the broader perspective is taken the judgments we make from the more limited perspective no longer make sense. There is much science does not yet know. In some areas we are moving in the right direction but there are many who have no idea where the real answers lie and their paths divert from the one where the answers are and sometimes delay the answers with their attention to false premises.

    I have looked at the science and compared it to my newer beliefs and find it is consistent with known science and answers many of the questions when a finding says, "We observed this but don't know why" my spiritual beliefs know the answer. I have also looked at the core tenets of what I believe and found them in the texts (if not the interpretations) of all the major religions and in the words of the most brilliant thinkers throughout recorded history.

    While I can't prove to another that death is just a transition I know it and live my life accordingly. I can also help another gain the knowledge that I have if they will approach it with an open mind. My definition of an open mind is not "believe what I tell you without proof." It is, "Be willing to consider the possibility and explore the ideas in your own experience."

    If you are interested in details of the path I followed to gain this degree of certainty I am happy to share. Contact me if you are interested. I do not proselytize and posting detail here would feel as if I was.

  • Jeanine Broderick Jan 24, 2013

    I explored a variety of religious and spiritual beliefs before finding one that not only answered all my unanswered questions but that provided a foundation that makes all of life make sense.

    Death is not less. When you dream you can see, taste, smell, feel, and hear as well as experience emotions yet your eyes are closed and the sensory experiences you experience are not happening in your current reality. Have you ever wondered how you see without eyes?

    Our bodies are like a car in many respects. Our bodies are not us. They are vibration interpretation devices designed to give us (spiritual being) an experience of being human. We are more specific in our interpretation of vibration using our bodies but there are many practices and situations that show us that we are far more than our bodies. They include shamanistic experiences, meditation, OBE's, NDE's, and other practices. There is plenty of evidence that we have access to greater information, intelligence and experiences outside our bodies than we do in them. Swedenborg created many journals describing what he learned and experienced during his OBE's -- much of which is verifiable by science now but was not verifiable until recently although he was accepted due to his demonstration to his Queen that he was able to accurately relay information from her "dead" brother that only her brother would have known. I think it is great that the Queen was open-minded enough to test him instead of burning him as a witch or some other response that was not uncommon throughout the ages.

    I have had an OBE but not commonly although I have friends who have developed the ability to a greater degree and have even spoken of how much more satisfying intertwining with another is while out of the body. That one sort of blows me away--that what many see as one of life's ultimate pleasures could be more OBE.

    What I do experience, often, is communication with loved ones who are no longer in their bodies.
    ♡ Jeanine

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Sep 16, 2012

    re: "Most of us here have come to appreciate that consciousness survives the death of the body."

    How have others come to appreciate this?

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Aug 31, 2012

    One more reference for you, well, actually many reference.


  • KYRANI Jan 06, 2012

    If you meditate you will find that life after death, so to speak. In meditation the conscious self, the personal self vanishes but there is not complete extinction. What is left is universal self. It is this that is everlasting. It surpasses death because it is unborn and undying. We are aware of this "higher self" or what Krishna calls atman (as opposed to jiva -the personal self) in daily life. We are aware that we are aware. This is being aware of being aware is not the one entity but yet it is! The universe is nothing but pure awareness -the universal or impersonal self. The personal /conscious self has come into being owing to experience of the physical reality. It is nothing other than a collection of ideas that are associated with emotional responses (ie body processes). It is an ephemeral being and seems conscious of its own when really it is the universal awareness that has become localized.. sort of. If at the time of death you can enter the state of full awareness, forsaking the personal self, then you enter Nirvana or Grace or whatever else you want to call Eternal Life. It is all too hard to try and explain in words. Words and language and the dialogue that takes place between personal selves is all very limited and cannot describe the mystical experience. Meditate and reach that experience. Let go of the thoughts so that there is no more reactivity in the body. Then the personal self i.e., the conscious familiar self slowly vanishes (sometimes abruptly and the more experience you gain the more it can happen abruptly). You can do this by means of the Observing self or the higher self. Stay in the observing state (pure awareness) and forsake the personal state (conscious/ personalized awareness). Meditate.. meditate.. meditate forsaking all.. just meditate. Once the mystical experience.. enlightenment is attained (you have it already really so it is not really “attained”), then all fear of death vanishes.

  • Fallensoul Jan 04, 2012

    oO0o0Oo: Right.

  • Fallensoul Jan 04, 2012

    oO0o0Oo: Thank you for sharing. Pretty heavy karma, but karma is not eternal, it can be purified very quickly through spiritual practices like bhakti yoga or devotion to God as described in the Bhagavad Gita.

  • charliet Nov 01, 2011


    My eldest daughter passed way this Spring, age 33, no warning, just gone. Yes it is hard, what gives me (us) comfort is the communications I have with her.These are real, not imaginary as many will say. What you are experiencing is real, Daniel is communicating with you, he is alright, your son will some day move on and you must let him, he will never be really gone, your spirits will always be connected.
    Does the name "Godiva" as in Lady Godiva mean anything to you, or have you heard it spoken or seen it written lately? Let me know and I will reply to your answer.

  • Anonymous Icon

    Boblight Oct 31, 2011

    My son Daniel passed away at age 19, about a year ago.. This has been the most difficult experience I have ever gone through.. There have been a few times I believe Daniel has visited from beyond this world.. I have a message that both my wife and I believe is from Daniel on our answering machine which was recorded a few months after he died.. There have been dreams, visits to professional mediums and my daily practice of (Semi) automatic writing during the evenings.. A few evenings ago Daniel communicated to me at 5:06PM about what happens to a soul when they leave the body( die).. He explained it as the soul leaving through a wormhole.. He than told me to read this again after we come back from the Compassionate Friends Support Group( 7:30-9:00) The last Wednesday of the month we meet .. So I got back at 9;45 and turned on my favorite show on the History Ch, Ancient Aliens.. At 9:56PM the show started talking about after death experiences.. I said ," Wormholes", that"s what Danny wrote to me about 4 hrs before.. So I took out his letter for the day and there it was," Wormholes" A few seconds latter I hear on the TV, "WormHoles".. Just like Danny said I would.. I know this proves nothing, but I don't believe in coincidence..

  • ProtectiveAngel Oct 22, 2011

    I too have seen death as terrible emptyness. Since I have been searching more for myself. Who I will be is the question that lifts me up. We will be in spirit form way longer that physical form. The IONS site has helped me with my search for me. Rearch yes, but rearch inside yourself. Become more than you are. I feel my goal is mentioned by my username. I want to be a protector of all I can. Make sure that all that can be good will be good.
    When I look inside myself, I find that I'm doing everything possible to meet my goal and that is where I'll be after death.

  • Anonymous Icon

    EthanT Oct 21, 2011


    Have you ever looked at the web site for The Division of Perceptual Studies at the University of Virginia.


    This is the org that Jim Tucker heads up.

    More great info found there.

  • Fallensoul Oct 21, 2011

    Another great reincarnation video by Dr Jim Tucker. http://vimeo.com/1451665

  • Fallensoul Oct 02, 2011

    Heres some fascinating evidence by Dr Ian Stevenson where he presents cases of children who claim to remember previous lives
    and cases of Birth marks/defects linked to a persons previous life's death wounds


  • Anonymous Icon

    Thedeafening Sep 24, 2011

    Fallensoul, I guess I had the idea that all reincarnated people get those memories from previous family members kind of like Assassins creed. But now I've seen people that have never been related anywhere close to assuming a biological connection, thanks again.

  • Fallensoul Sep 24, 2011

    Really must reiterate that Victor Zammits afterlife Friday report is a great resource for afterlife information. His latest report (week5a) has a segment on precognition by Dr Gary Schwartz and a segment on after death communication. Fantastic resource.

    Scott: Great post. In the spirit of "honest inquiry" *grin* why not open a thread discussing some of your realizations from your past lives. We would love you hear them, inquire and learn.

    Saoirse: Why not start another thread discussion on this point of how being a scientist doesn't equal being a good control maker, and some of the issues in this area.

    F_Alexander: Great analogy with the radio.

    Thedeafening: Reincarnation directly challenges this idea.

  • Scott Ware Sep 13, 2011

    Hello this is my reality and i can only speak for myself. I have seen many of my past lives and sometimes the visions are so real. I have not just had visions of past lives but story's about those lives that seem to co-inside with events in my life here again in this life. I know who i was before without a dough. The learning experiences that i have had in my past lives has tough me to Love unconditionally in every aspect of LIFE. because LIFE is to learn to love purely and wholly without anger. A life without Anger WOW! what a concept. If you can understand your visions about who you where in the past there is only one way thing to determine from that experience is that you where there. When you see more to a life the more you learn to love one another.

  • Saoirse Sep 11, 2011

    Hmm. Looking back at that, it seems that posting when I'm in a hurry makes me sound rather abrupt and dismissive. I wasn't meaning to be -- I was just short on time!

  • Saoirse Sep 10, 2011

    To be honest, I'm not impressed by Windbridge. There are big issues with their studies, but since their use of "blinding" has been mentioned, I think it's important to note that (as they admit on their website) there is "no correlation" between their definition of the term and the definition used in standard research, so a person would have to examine the method for the individual studies to be sure of their controls.

  • F_Alexander Sep 10, 2011

    Using the model of the brain as simply a mechanism for the consciousness to work through is a good way to conceptualize the matter. In this model, abnormalities of the physical systems inhibit one's capacity to express their full self through said hardware, but it is only hardware nonetheless. The core "us" will shed the physical body just as we shed the quantum body, fully living out our accumulated patterns of vibration which could not fully exhaust themselves through those denser vehicles, until its time to do it all over again :)

    It's like a radio set. You'd be hard pressed to find where Led Zepplin is in the radio, and if the radio dies that isn't the death of the signal. And if your radio has defective pieces then your song is going to come out garbled.

  • Anonymous Icon

    Thedeafening Sep 07, 2011

    There are a few theories in science today that accepts that consciousness survives death. But these theories ask how long, the conscious battery is the idea that the spirit can survive because it used the body to stay alive and will drain slowly after death. Does anyone have anything can challenge this idea?

  • Fallensoul Aug 18, 2011

    Great resource here: http://michaelprescott.typepad.com/michael_prescotts_blog/2007/09/better-evidence.html

  • Fallensoul Apr 20, 2011

    The oldman: That was a great experience you had. Thank you for sharing that.

    Regarding the fear of death. It's comforting to know that we to not cease to exist at the time of leaving the body, but its equally important to know what happens after death. The vedic version says that just as one continuously changes ones body, even in this life, from boyhood to youth to old-age, similarly at death one changes into another body. A sober person is not disturbed by such a change.

    Depending on ones state of consciousness or desires, one gets the corresponding result in line with our past karma (actions) good or bad. Our desires at the time of death, in general, are that thing(s) that we have absorbed our consciousness the most throughout our lives. Those deep impressions come out at the time of death and we think of that and our next body is chosen based on that. The results of our karma, good or bad action is then calculated and this maps out, in general, to a certain amount of suffering and happiness in the next life which details in particular circumstances or situations we have to face in the next life. We have the free will to decide how to act right now and thus incur karmic good or bad reactions and the resultant destiny is handed back to us in the future. As you sow, so shall you reap.

    Based on these laws of karma and reincarnation, we are the responsible party. If our actions are pure in nature, pious and for the benefit of others, we ascend to a higher realm within the material universe. To a heavenly place to enjoy. And the opposite is also true, if our lives is filled with violence against others, we descend to the nether worlds to pay off our karmic debt. While we are in the heavenly or hellish worlds we simply spend our karmic credit or debit and no further karma is created. But once our karma is paid off, either good or bad, we take birth again in the earthly realm, where actions here determine our future live higher or lower. And the cycle continues. All the while we cycle through various different types of bodies with varied experiences in an attempt to enjoy this world.

    We are not born equal. There is a difference between a child born to become a wealthy man and a child who may not live to see 2 years of age. Why the difference? Who is to blame? Even a hardened criminal may by various means escape the noose of the government and live a life of full opulence. Why is that good things happen to bad people? Does a convicted rapist who gets out scott free and lives a great life -- is our destination the same as his? These things are to be considered.

    So it is a fact that consciousness survives the death of the body -- but thats only part of the story, the result after death is determined by our actions the corresponding fear of death is warranted based on that. But more importantly is there a way to get out of this cycle of death and rebirth and karma altogether??

  • marcusantonio91 Apr 20, 2011

    Strangely enough when I was about 8 or 9 I did wonder if i'd had a past life, and since I was about 6 or 7 i was terrified of existenial annihilation. I'm ok now, but at that age I was terrified of the human skull and avoided any site of it that I could. I'm wondering if this could be from a previous life because I doubt many 6 or 7 year old children would be pathalogically afraid of skulls and death

  • cprize Apr 19, 2011

    The point in our life where the frequency of information is highest regarding our future life (reincarnation) is towards the end of our days. A few years ago PBS had a 3 part dream series 'The Power of Dreams' on TV. One of the dreams retold by an elderly woman on it told of her being in the womb prior to her birth (by analogy). If you want to read a number of examples of similar 'proofs' read "Reincarnation: The Scientific Evidence is Building". (Available as an ebook). If you want to know about a previous life then get into them via past life regressions, or ask preschool children what they can recall of their past life (from dreams). Many can tell you numerous incidents in their lives.

  • PonsAnimus Apr 19, 2011

    @TheOldMan Just curious, you mentioned "the blue star" in your profil. Are you pointing at the "Blue Kachina Prophecy" of the Hopi indians there ? Just curious, because not many out there 'dive' into the indian "wheel of medicine", most have not even heard about it.

  • Theoldman Apr 19, 2011

    Belief is a symptom of not knowing and faith is the medicine we take to rationalize it. Experience is the shedding of preconceived belief systems, realized in your experience or glimpse of the fabric of creation, where you continue beyond the reaches of science and religion.
    The greatest mystery of human consciousness is also the basis of all philosophy and religion. IS THERE CONSCIOUSNESS BEYOND DEATH. Every culture on the surface of this planet, back to the ancient cave paintings of Northern France, inscribed their perception of this question! At the age of 17 I was driving to a remote logging camp in the winter. The day was one of those magical snow falls, with large slow moving puffy snowflakes; the road I was on was not much more than a single lane logging road with about 7 inches of the fresh fluffy snow ahead with no tracks. I turned a corner and ahead of me was a group of people - Natives - men, women and children, three dogs that looked like huskies, each with a yoke style sled pulling supplies. I stopped the car, shut of the engine and gazed through my windshield. The group was crossing the road in front of me, gracefully moving as one group, they slowed and looked in my direction, then turned together and moved off into the forest. I was Irish borne and in awe - I never thought Indians were still out here living as they had before Europeans arrived. I got out of the car and walked up to the point they had crossed the road, and stood there as they faded into the snowy distance. The last of the group turned and looked at me one more time and then he too faded into the background of snow. I was dumbfounded - alone - and the world seemed to have stopped turning. It was then I looked down and saw my foot prints from my car - they were the only tracks on the undisturbed pure blanket of snow. I thought I was stunned by the previous revelation of Natives in the wilderness - but now something else arrived in my consciousness. I felt a very deep sense of calm - and through this observation - a realization and removal of primal fear - of death. How odd the gift of life for some can only be realized in death - and for me the greatest question of humanity had been answered with and affirmative yes. Consciousness continues - not the question - and life seems so much more. I learned in that moment of EXPERIENCE the origin of all religions, philosophy, and the mechanics of gross political manipulation of the people on this planet - through the imposition of "THE LIE" by church and state concerning - THE FEAR OF DEATH. You have heard of the book and movie called the Secret - well it would have been better if we called it "The Lie." Blessings - each step a heart beat, each breath a prayer - for Peace in a world where we respect all life and do no harm. - Eamonn

  • PonsAnimus Apr 19, 2011

    Very well said, Charliet !! I would sign that.

  • charliet Apr 18, 2011

    Science needs to re-think itself. When man first began to look at the world and science came to be the guide by which it was all measured, it worked, very well as a matter of fact. But we have moved on from why does an apple fall, past the world being the center of the universe and beyond. Look at where we are now. Unbelievable! But all these things are measurable and can be seen, heard and sometimes touched. Science has been trying to figure out man since it's inception as the be all and end all way to find answers, but it has failed. Sure, we know how the body works, cells, molecules etc. But we can't cure or stop cancer, we are still finding things that cause it. We can't figure out if man has a soul or if there is life after death, we can't prove the existance of a God. Not with science atleast. Those of us who dare to wonder and poke and prod have noticed things that occur all the time, are repeatble and defy explanation, other than they are other worldly if you will, but they are of this world and of us. Because science cannot put it in a bottle it is deemed nonsense. Logic tells us that there is something there and that something is happening, it is undeniable. Science needs to find it's inner child, to wonder why, to dream, to speculate, to say "there is something here, and I must find it", We need to evolve science to a higher level, never forget what you have learned, always be willing to dream, wonder, poke and prod, as Spock would say, "it is logical".

  • Fallensoul Apr 18, 2011

    Hi Husnisse

    I would like to comment on your last line before answering your question. "Because this is science. The rest is still belief...."

    One has to be very very careful to say that the modern science through research, experimentation, rigorous method etc. is the only way to establish fact and that everything else is a belief. Modern scientists depend upon gross sense data to obtain information about reality. But our gross senses of seeing, hearing, touching, etc are quite limited and imperfect. We are also subject to get things wrong, to make mistakes and also to be illusioned. So scientific facts are certainly subject to many imperfections that if you place your belief in, you may well be misdirected.

    When modern scientists with imperfect senses tries to acquire knowledge and says "This is now a fact". At some point later, it may well change and the rigorous method may prove truthful only after we're dead and long gone. All the while we've been believing the current scientific facts until science can prove something with rigorous studies I shall accept it as a fact. It places one is a very narrow box. There are other methods of establishing facts about reality that one can build upon and one should try to be open to these with an inquisitive mind. You can make more speedy progress in understanding reality while you're in this life and through your own study of higher knowledge, personal experimentation, common sense logic and reason which will enable to you realize facts far beyond what current modern science is presenting. IONS is presenting some of these cutting edge ideas.

    We should note that everything in one sense is belief. Justified belief. You can't say that science is 100% correct. We believe that the scientific authorities are conducting the experiments correctly and we have faith that what they are presenting to us is "good science".We have never personally seen a man on the moon, but we believe that scientists have gone there. Practically all the experiments science has done, we have not personally seen them, but we accept on faith that they are not cheating us -- but actually they may well be cheating us by saying that only our scientific facts IS reality. IONS recognizes that actually there is quite a large bias in the scientific community, even if rigourous scientific data is presented, it is rejected if is not in line with current scientific ideas.

    So when it comes down to these ultimate questions of life, like how we came to exist and is there a soul or life after death, modern science doesn't like to admit that it doesn't know very much -- and yet makes elaborate often contradicting theories that require huge leaps of faith to accept. So we're not getting the whole picture and one should explore other forms of knowledge to get a better understanding of reality in this short life.

  • Fallensoul Apr 18, 2011

    Yet even if we have to limit ourselves to rigorous scientific fact, to answer your question you can take a look at Ian stevesons and his contemporaries research on reincarnation. Where physical birth marks are the same as death wounds by someone who provides detailed facts that are verified to be true about his previous life. Young children providing facts about their previous life. Near death experiences and other things like the Afterlife experiments. I'm sure others can cite their research and sources for scientific life after death.

    Regarding the knowledge I cite. It is not considered imperfect knowledge. It is considered perfect knowledge coming from a perfect source or God. That is the best way to understand reality by learning from that type of knowledge, because it is not subject to change - past, present or future. The knowledge is the same throughout. The research is already done. One simply has to learn from a teacher and move ahead. Now one may be skeptic about this as a source of knowledge, but those who have sincerely gave it a try can appreciate this knowledge is practical and true.

    It is not that one simply has to accept this knowledge blindly. Using all your sense perception and logic you can realize the facts as given by higher knowledge. Perform the scientific method on yourself. One can observe that the body is changing over time. We are reincarnating even in this body. As a young child I am still the same person even though my body has changed completely and all the cells in my body are different. So if everything material has changed in my body and im still the same person, then who am i and what is my nature? If a blind from birth person can come to see himself for the first time, from outside his body that means that he is not that body and there are senses outside of the senses of the body.

    It is so unfortunate that modern scientific method limits us so much. The facts that we inhabit this machine of a body and that the consciousness continues after death is the basic steps in spiritual life, there is alot more to it, but we're stuck into thinking, we must have scientific facts, and the result is that we suffer due to ignorance. Even with all the scientific facts, still there are no answers to the why and people are no more happier than before so what is the point of so much scientific advancement?

  • marcusantonio91 Apr 17, 2011

    Ian stevenson and Jim Tucker have 2500 individual cases which are growing steadily, the windbridge institute conducts mediumship experiments that are quintuple blinded; google windbridge institute to find out more, I can't prove the soul but I'm told a book called the irreducible mind puts forward a good case that conciousness is not localised to the brain

  • Anonymous Icon

    Husnisse Apr 17, 2011

    What you cite is a kind of knowledge that has been collected on different occasions by different persons. But do you know of any experiment prooving the existence of soul? On a scientific base I mean, something reproductible with a rigourous method and significant results? And is there any scientific way of prooving that we reincarnate? I mean, except from the Dalai Lama who seems to have full control and tell where and how he will reincarnate, who else can say that he will reincarnate in this and that, and actually do it in a way which can be controlled?
    Because this is science. The rest is still belief...

  • marcusantonio91 Apr 16, 2011

    I have just purchased and am currently reading Jim tucker's book 'life before life' it seems to me that these cases woud validate the NDE and mediumship studies, I still have some doubts and skepticism then again I'm only human

  • SeVryn Apr 09, 2011

    A few weeks ago I had an epiphany. The pain of thinking of eternity was just too much. Then, in a flash I understood WHY I did not understand...

    The brain is a temporal device (time machine). Using this hardware, it's impossible to comprehend "timelessness" or eternity. This is one of the greatest sources of pain in people like us who seek to know the Great Truths. How can God have always been? We don't understand because we are using our brain (limited hardware) to understand the Great Mysteries. It's like trying to use a 1950's radio in an attempt to view a blu-ray disc. Because of this (conscious mind limitation) our only recourse is to collect observations from the non temporal part of our mind - the subconscious.

  • Fallensoul Apr 09, 2011

    The idea is that this material universe may be 15 billions years, but consciousness is not material in nature and therefore not limited to the creation of this universe. It is of a different nature that is beyond the purview of our material faculties. The vedic knowledge tells us that there never was a time when we did not exist nor in the future shall we cease to exist. So consciousness is eternal and individual and not created as material things are. When one understands that I am separate from the body and then one opens the door to spiritual life.

    You can appreciate this fact in many ways, from your own introspection. e.g. Am I the hand or the owner of the hand? Am I the eyes or the person seeing through the eyes. You can also appreciate this by seeing that the body is changing over time. We're reincarnating even in this body. The body we had as babies is different than the bodies we have now. Every 7 seven years all the cells in our body changes, a new body, but I am the same person experiencing life through these changes. Therefore I am separate from the body. So consciousness cannot be finished by the death of the body or the death of the universe

    You can read this nice article here by Pim van lommel:
    Here's the intro:

    "First I want to discuss death. ...Most of us believe that death is the end of our existence; we believe that it is the end of everything we are. We believe that the death of our body is the end of our identity, the end of our thoughts and memories, that it is the end of our consciousness. Do we have to change our concepts about death, not only based on what has been thought and written about death in human history around the world in many cultures, in many religions, and in all times, but also based on insights from recent scientific research on NDE?

    What happens when I am dead? What is death? During our life 500000 cells die each second, each day about 50 billion cells in our body are replaced, resulting in a new body each year. So cell death is totally different from body death when you eventually die. During our life our body changes continuously, each day, each minute, each second. Each year about 98% of our molecules and atoms in our body have been replaced. Each living being is in an unstable balance of two opposing processes of continual disintegration and integration. But no one realizes this constant change. And from where comes the continuity of our continually changing body? Cells are just the building blocks of our body, like the bricks of a house, but who is the architect, who coordinates the building of this house. When someone has died, only mortal remains are left: only matter. But where is the director of the body? What about our consciousness when we die? Is someone his body, or do we “have” a body?"


  • marcusantonio91 Apr 09, 2011

    I could argue that I didn't exist 15 billion years before my birth, but as the evidence for reincarnation suggests I have probably have had numerous past lives

  • Anonymous Icon

    EthanT Apr 09, 2011

    Looks like Fallensoul pointed out much of what I would have said. There really is a lot of empirical evidence starting to point in the right direction to support the idea that life does go on. Some of that can be found by reading through this site.

    Also, you can look at the above loss of memory from another angle too. Many people ask "if I really lived before and/or if reincarnation is true, why can't I remember it?" Well, hardly any of us remember the first few years of our life, but we were alive and we were conscious. Hardly any of us remember most of the night while we were asleep. But, if you hook up some instruments to a sleeping person, his brain is plenty of active. We dream for a significant portion of the night (i.e. have some level of consciousness) yet we don't always remember.

    So, memory doesn't necessarily equal being ;-)

  • marcusantonio91 Apr 09, 2011

    thank-you so much for helping me out, I really appreciate it

  • Fallensoul Apr 09, 2011

    Practically all levels of knowledge point to this fact.

    The scientific research:
    (1) Near Death experiences: www.nderf.org. The movie The Day I Died, some videos on youtube. Most striking evidence of NDE was completely blind people from birth able to come out of their bodies and see their own bodies was clear evidence that we have senses apart from the senses of the body and that the body actually limits our sense perception.

    (2) Reincarnation evidence: Ian stevensons books are astounding, his lecture video summarises it all: http://www.virginia.edu/uvanewsmakers/video/stevenson.ram. Most striking are children remembering their past lives and the death wounds of a person carries forward to the next body as birthmarks.

    (3) www.victorzammit.com has such a huge collection of experiences and cases for the afterlife.

    Ancient wisdom: The Bhagavad Gita and all other eastern and western spiritual movements alike accept we're not just material entities. The body is simply a vehicle for the soul. Just as one throws away old clothes and puts on new ones, similarly the soul takes on new bodies when it has to give up the old or useless one. This is the basic ABC of spiritual knowledge.

    Regarding why people are mentally ill. The mind is the interface for the consciousness, just like the keyboard is an interface to the computer. If some of the keys on the keyboard are damaged it is not that the person using the keyboard is faulty but the interface prevents the person from interacting with the computer properly. Similarly if there is some problem with the brain then the consciousness cannot interact with the body and world properly. That doesnt mean that the consciousness is faulty, but the interface prevents the pure consciousness from fully expressing itself.

    Drinking again affects the processes in the brain and this will prevent the consciousness from interacting properly with the body. Like the monitor screen becoming hazy. Its not the person seeing the monitor screen thats faulty but if by drinking the "screen of our mind" becomes hazy that prevents the person from interacting with the "monitor of the body and world" effectively.

    There are different states of consciousness and this includes dreaming, sleep and deep sleep.

    Marcus there is life after death as the people on this forum will surely help you discover. And besides that being spiritual in nature means theres a whole spiritual reality outside of this one that you can realize through various means. Simply it requires a little sincerity, devotion and higher knowledge like the Bhagavad Gita or other types of yoga or knowledge. Start your spiritual journey and be happy. Good luck.

Stay in touch with IONS