Afterlife exists says top brain surgeon

[Enishi]

Hungry Ghosts can be nasty but are easily dealt with. They only ever have as much power as people choose to give them.

;-)

 

Hungry Ghosts yes, but there are others that are consciously, intentionally malicious (though few in number compared to the former).

[JustARandomPanda]

I have a pdf version of Destiny of Souls.

 

Reading parts of it here and there puts me in a very good mood. The only thing I don't like about it is the author rationalizing away experiences some have had with negative spirits, they're not all just 'lost souls', some are deliberately malicious and negative. Other than that though, it's sheer gold.

 

If you liked Destiny of Souls then definitely pick up Journey of Souls. More in-depth than the Destiny book. And as I said the After Death and After Life processes described in both of those books are almost dead-ringer identical to what was described by the mystic Emanuel Swedenborg. I was quite surprised to see the exact same things being described as what Swedenborg did 2 centuries ago.

 

So naturally I'm going to recommend you pick up Swedenborg's Heaven and Hell as well. It too will put a wonderful smile on your face. The interesting thing is that Swedenborg said there is a natural evolution (er..unfolding) of humans beyond the realms described in Journey of Souls/Destiny of Souls.

 

Swedenborg actually describes *very* high levels of Heaven. Each one more perfect, filled with love and wisdom than the prior and he was often stressing that it's a natural unfolding that everyone will eventually 'return to the Lord'.

 

Obviously since he lived in a Christian society he described things in Christian terms. So Highly Evolved Beings are Angels...rather than say..a Taoist Celestial Immortal, Bodhisattva or Buddha. In fact a lot of what Swedenborg describes of a human's afterlife sounds similar to some Buddhist Pure Land teachings imo (or as Swedenborg would say...descriptions of various Paradises). Zen Buddhist D.T. Suzuki was so impressed with Swedenborg he declared Swedenborg to be "The Buddha of the North".

 

For example, Swedenborg says that everyone will eventually become angels and that every angel in heaven was once - waaaay back in their early unfolding process - a human (and just like what one sees in Buddhism and Taoism - he said the universe is filled with many species/beings besides what we see on earth and they too eventually will 'return to the Lord').

 

There are 2 kinds of angels. Spiritual Angels (busy perfecting in wisdom) and Celestial Angels (busy perfecting in loving-kindness/compassion/joy). The very, very, very highest of all Angels are perfected in both. Both Spiritual (wisdom) and Celestial (love). Or as *I* would call these very highest of all angels - Buddhas.

 

And the processes he describes of people evolving/unfolding to that state...is nearly dead-on identical to what is described in Journey of Souls/Destiny of Souls.

[GrandmasterP]

Swedenborg Society in London have free stuff online,or did.

Heavy going, some of it.

[Neophyte]

Also check out Journey of Souls.

 

I read both it and the sequel and of the 2 the first explains things much better. Also I found it interesting that much that was documented in Journey of Souls is nearly identical to the afterlife processes discussed by the mystic Emanuel Swedenborg.

 

Several years ago, I read both Journey of Souls and Destiny of Souls. After reading them carefully, and thinking about them, and reading additional cases of Newton's, I came to the conclusion that Dr. Newton's regression system is total bullshit.

I do like many of the concepts he presented--they seem attractive. But they are apparently nothing more than the subject's imagination. When you logically study the case studies, you'll see that they don't even make sense.

 

There are so many problems with Dr. Newton's books, and his system of hypno-regression, that after I read his books and did further research, I was thinking about writing a book debunking Newton's "research" and his Journey/Destiny of Souls book series.

 

I don't mean to offend anyone (and I apologize if I have), but I read the books, and my conclusion is that although they have attractive--even comforting--ideas, they're merely cases of people's imaginations, not memories.

[JustARandomPanda]

Great find. What books do you have on the gods? I know that we're all gods but the gods of mythology (a horrible term I'll say) you know such as Zeus and Jehovah. Egregores?

 

Apologies - I do not know of any books that discuss these things.

[JustARandomPanda]

Several years ago, I read both Journey of Souls and Destiny of Souls. After reading them carefully, and thinking about them, and reading additional cases of Newton's, I came to the conclusion that Dr. Newton's regression system is total bullshit.

I do like many of the concepts he presented--they seem attractive. But they are apparently nothing more than the subject's imagination. When you logically study the case studies, you'll see that they don't even make sense.

 

There are so many problems with Dr. Newton's books, and his system of hypno-regression, that after I read his books and did further research, I was thinking about writing a book debunking Newton's "research" and his Journey/Destiny of Souls book series.

 

I don't mean to offend anyone (and I apologize if I have), but I read the books, and my conclusion is that although they have attractive--even comforting--ideas, they're merely cases of people's imaginations, not memories.

 

I for one would be delighted if you would present an article or essay pointing out the problems in those books! TTB's articles forum is perfect for exactly that thing.

[Apech]

I have always found that Angels have the vanity to speak of themselves as the only wise; this they do with a confident insolence sprouting from systematic reasoning:

Thus Swedenborg boasts that what he writes is new; tho' it is only the Contents or Index of already publish'd books.

A man carried a monkey about for a shew, & because he was a little wiser than the monkey, grew vain, and conciev'd himself as much wiser than seven men. It is so with Swedenborg; he shews the folly of churches & exposes hypocrites, till he imagines that all are religious, & himself the single (Plate 22) one on earth that ever broke a net.

Now hear a plain fact: Swedenborg has not written one new truth:

Now hear another: he has written all the old falshoods.

And now hear the reason. He conversed with Angels who are all religious, & conversed not with Devils who all hate religion, for he was incapable thro' his conceited notions.

Thus Swedenborgs writings are a recapitulation of all superficial, opinions, and an analysis of the more sublime, but no further.

Have now another plain fact: Any man of mechanical talents may from the writings of Paracelsus or Jacob Behmen, produce ten thousand volumes of equal value with Swedenborgs, and from those of Dante or Shakespear, an infinite number.

But when he has done this, let him not say that he knows better than his master, for he only holds a candle in sunshine.

--- William Blake

 

Just because SB mentioned Swedenborg.

[Marblehead]

Just because SB mentioned Swedenborg.

Now that was a critical critique if I have ever read one!

[Apech]

Now that was a critical critique if I have ever read one!

 

William Blake went from being very into Swedenborg to dismissing him. I'm not saying he's right ... but you know these mystics have trouble getting along ... bit like TBs sometimes

[Marblehead]

William Blake went from being very into Swedenborg to dismissing him. I'm not saying he's right ... but you know these mystics have trouble getting along ... bit like TBs sometimes

Hehehe.

 

Actually, I had never heard of Swedenborg and do know only a very little of William Blake.

 

And it's true, after 3,000 years of philosophical talking nothing seems to have been accomplished.

 

What's left to do? Live.

[Apech]

Hehehe.

 

Actually, I had never heard of Swedenborg and do know only a very little of William Blake.

 

And it's true, after 3,000 years of philosophical talking nothing seems to have been accomplished.

 

What's left to do? Live.

 

Ah but to quote a philosopher ... the unexamined life is not worth living. You must admit that its great fun to talk about what it all means (life that is) even if we have little hope of really understanding. Food for the body and food for the mind ... makes a Taobum healthy, wealthy and wise ....

[三江源]

 

Quote

 

 

I have always found that Angels have the vanity to speak of themselves as the only wise; this they do with a confident insolence sprouting from systematic reasoning:

Thus Swedenborg boasts that what he writes is new; tho' it is only the Contents or Index of already publish'd books.

A man carried a monkey about for a shew, & because he was a little wiser than the monkey, grew vain, and conciev'd himself as much wiser than seven men. It is so with Swedenborg; he shews the folly of churches & exposes hypocrites, till he imagines that all are religious, & himself the single (Plate 22) one on earth that ever broke a net.

Now hear a plain fact: Swedenborg has not written one new truth:

Now hear another: he has written all the old falshoods.

And now hear the reason. He conversed with Angels who are all religious, & conversed not with Devils who all hate religion, for he was incapable thro' his conceited notions.

Thus Swedenborgs writings are a recapitulation of all superficial, opinions, and an analysis of the more sublime, but no further.

Have now another plain fact: Any man of mechanical talents may from the writings of Paracelsus or Jacob Behmen, produce ten thousand volumes of equal value with Swedenborgs, and from those of Dante or Shakespear, an infinite number.

But when he has done this, let him not say that he knows better than his master, for he only holds a candle in sunshine.

 

--- William Blake

Just because SB mentioned Swedenborg.

 

What an interesting quote, Apech, thankyou so much for posting that. Finding out that angels are a bit up their own arse is ... amusing.

[JustARandomPanda]

Well that's an interesting statement Blake made. I was under the impression in his elder years Blake was a critic of many things he'd formerly believed in his middle age. He seemed especially to really dislike Enlightenment philosophy and it's elevation of Reason as the method-par-excellence of discovering Truth (guessing he wouldn't have liked Sam Harris in that regard either since Sam is a huge advocate of Reason).

 

The things I find lacking in critiques like Blake's is that they really boil down to statements of his opinions. I'd rather he'd have "shown don't tell" all the things he states that are b.s about Swedenborg.

 

That's what I'm hoping Neophyte will do in the Articles section of Taobums about JoS/DoS. "Show, don't tell" in an essay all the stuff in Journey of Souls/Destiny of Souls that is hallucinatory make-believe. Because although it may be 'obvious' to Neophyte that it's b.s. it's still necessary to demonstrate it. Otherwise it's just another assertion of beliefs. Which is what forums are full of these days anyway. I am interested in seeing the evidence that one used to come to a conclusion. Even moreso I'm especially interested in the method and pre-suppositions one used to evaluate evidence and thus conclude what's b.s.

 

I rather like the use of Reason to help suss out flaws in presentations although I'm not sure it is capable of being the most excellent of all methods in discovering truth. But then, I discovered ontological naturalism * (which is what most materialists firmly are) is full of so many problems I finally was forced to quit believing in it.

 

I suppose my own position on the matter (JoS/DoS and Swedenborg) is that I won't really know until I die (assuming there even *is* anything left to "know" it's dead. If not...well the matter will be moot).

 

 

edit: p.s. of all the philosophies and sciences I've ever read -

to me personally. I guess if I had to point to anyone else who 'speaks for me' - it would definitely be Sadhguru. The whole reason this thread exists is because the afterlife (and wu wei) is not within people's direct daily experience 24/7, 365 days a year. Hence the arguments back and forth. Example: No one has to teach a child how to pee. It's within his/her direct, daily experience and needs no books, theories, philosophies about it, etc. Not so with the afterlife, wu wei or wu wei wu (or journeys of souls or angels, etc).

 

**************************

*

*Naturalism, in recent usage, is a species of philosophical monism according to which whatever exists or happens is natural in the sense of being susceptible to explanation through methods which, although paradigmatically exemplified in the natural sciences, are continuous from domain to domain of objects and events. Hence, naturalism is polemically defined as repudiating the view that there exists or could exist any entities which lie, in principle, beyond the scope of scientific explanation.

— Arthur C. Danto, The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Naturalism

 

Science, according to the prevailing wisdom, constitutes the very antithesis of myth. As Albert Einstein famously said, it deals with 'what is', in which case myth has to do, presumably, with 'what is not.' It turns out that the matter is not quite so simple. In the first place it turns out science does not refer purely to 'what is' : even in the case of physics, its most accurate and foundational discipline, it refers, finally, not to Nature as such, but to the responses, on the part of Nature, to the strategies of the experimental physicist, which is something else entirely.

 

- Wolfgang Smith, Science and Myth: With a Response to Stephen Hawking's The Grand Design

[Marblehead]

Ah but to quote a philosopher ... the unexamined life is not worth living. You must admit that its great fun to talk about what it all means (life that is) even if we have little hope of really understanding. Food for the body and food for the mind ... makes a Taobum healthy, wealthy and wise ....

The wealthy part hasn't worked yet, some have accused me of having a little bit of wisdom but I have always questioned their authority for making such judgements, but I am pretty healthy for an old man.

 

Sure, we need to regularly check our mental condition. My good friend, the non-denominational Christian, gets checked by me at least once a week. I have to make sure he doesn't lose contact with reality.

 

Indeed, talking about this stuff is fun. But in threads like this one I normally end up stepping on someone's toes and I really don't like doing that.

[Apech]

Well that's an interesting statement Blake made. I was under the impression in his elder years Blake was a critic of many things he'd formerly believed in his middle age. He seemed especially to really dislike Enlightenment philosophy and it's elevation of Reason as the method-par-excellence of discovering Truth (guessing he wouldn't have liked Sam Harris in that regard either since Sam is a huge advocate of Reason).The things I find lacking in critiques like Blake's is that they really boil down to statements of his opinions. I'd rather he'd have "shown don't tell" all the things he states that are b.s about Swedenborg ....

Yes he wasn't really giving a reasoned analysis but just stating his point of view in a typical take it or leave style. Blake was an interesting man ... a great engraver and artist no doubt ... a poet who has stood the test of time over and above his contemporaries ... a natural mystic who saw angels in trees and creation in sunrises ... but he was somewhat flawed as a person and fell out with people on a regular basis and had a bad temper. But he had some gems ... e.g. one of my favourites:

All Bibles or sacred codes, have been the causes of the following Errors.

1. That Man has two real existing principles Viz: a Body & a Soul.

2. That Energy, call'd Evil, is alone from the Body, & that Reason, call'd Good, is alone from the Soul.

3. That God will torment Man in Eternity for following his Energies.

But the following Contraries to these are True.

1. Man has no Body distinct from his Soul; for that call'd Body is a portion of Soul discern'd by the five Senses, the chief inlets of Soul in this age.

2. Energy is the only life and is from the Body and Reason is the bound or outward circumference of Energy.

3. Energy is Eternal Delight.

[Birch]

Excellent post SB!

 

"I rather like the use of Reason to help suss out flaws in presentations although I'm not sure it is capable of being the most excellent of all methods in discovering truth."

 

This was the part I liked the most about your post. The art of wielding Reason is one I really admire and would like to be better able to do myself.

 

When it comes to Blake's rant, I figure same has probably been done with all kinds of ideas.

[Mokona]

Has anyone attempted to explore these subjects via direct experience, either through chi kung, meditation or other means?

 

I have. I think it's more fun than guessing. Is the closest anyone here got "This is what some cultures/or I believe?"

[JustARandomPanda]

Ahh it's ok. In the Secret Teachings of All Ages...

 

If anyone knows Bardon, then read the section in his book about mental wandering.

 

You know...this is so funny you mentioned these books. I actually own a copy of Secret Teachings of All Ages and all of the Franz Bardon books too but have such an incredibly huge pile of books on my "to read before the end of this year" list I've not been able to get to any of them.

[Mokona]

Traveling in your soul requires deep meditation. I'm not going to start doing it till farther down the path I am on.

 

A lot of cultivators look at the afterlife as a no shit that it's real. What surprises me is how little research people really do regarding this reality. I think the reason of this is our hectic life style which requires about 6-10 hours a day at work. So when you get home, a lot of people either go to sleep, play video games, watch a movie, or go out and party. They do those because that is a way to relax.

 

Another main reason why consciousness, afterlife, is thrown out of the box unless you're part of a monotheist religion is the fact that our colleges and school systems taught you to be that way. I never once heard someone talk about consciousness and ect. in school. All they talk about are politics, big bang theory, evolution theory, and drama related stuff. I had to do my own research and go through a bunch of misinformation to get to the good stuff.

 

John Taylor Gatto,a over 30 years experienced teacher, talks about the school system.

http://www.cantrip.org/gatto.html

 

For anyone who has an hour to spend, this video is worth the while. He gives some real good information. Not just a generic video on consciousness. He gets to the deep stuff with deep scientific discoveries made in the field of physics.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvvEEQndu8I&feature=channel&list=UL

I feel this is becuase 90 percent of this information won't help you. Even religious writings are like roadmaps, so you'll hopefully recognize who you run into in the afterlife/void.

[Birch]

Has anyone attempted to explore these subjects via direct experience, either through chi kung, meditation or other means?

 

I have. I think it's more fun than guessing. Is the closest anyone here got "This is what some cultures/or I believe?"

 

Certainly I've had experiences via meditation but in the case of 'after death' it's a tough call to get from those experiences to 'after-death'. I'm too chicken to try any of the really hardcore austerities that would put me actually in the 'after-death' category.

[gatito]

I don't know, I'm still trying to work out what reality is. If you have an experience which feels real and has meaning is that just as real as a daily life experience?

 

I had an experience of interacting with a "spirit" when taking Ayahuasca which felt just as vivid, real and meaningful as an interaction with another human, the scientist may tell me it was a hallucination but if it influences my life and has meaning then maybe it is just as real as anything else.

 

People argue constantly about whether Jesus exited, but even if he did or not he has had more influence on the world than almost any human, so even if he didn't exist in the beginning he does now for all intents and purposed as he has been created by the collective consciousness, so if he actually lived isn't really very important.

 

But the problem is that paranoid schizophrenics also believe their mind hallucinations as being real, which is obviously not a good thing.

 

Sorry not to pick up on this earlier - I've been a bit preoccupied with something recently.

 

People seem to get quite preoccupied with the concept of what's "real". I'd say that what meet's that criterion is that you exist and that you know that you exist. That's beyond any shadow of a doubt (to you).

 

So explore that which you are perhaps? If you do, I'd be quite suprised if you regret it.

 

What's appearing to you in the present moment is also "real" (and is actually you).

 

As for the rest: when people get into social groups, agreeing with consensual "reality" is usually defined as "sanity" (which would make most of us here totally nuts as far as almost everybody in the rest of the world is concerned ).

[Seth Ananda]

Here is Victor Zammits challenge to the skeptics!

 

http://www.victorzammit.com/skeptics/challenge.html

[gatito]

Here is Victor Zammits challenge to the skeptics!

 

http://www.victorzam.../challenge.html

 

Interesting.

 

Here's something else on similar lines: -

 

There is a principle which is a bar against all information,

which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail

to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is

contempt prior to investigation.

 

Rev. William H. Poole

 

The only intelligent position is to be open to the possibilities and to investigate them for oneself.