Rita — Question 4

Tuesday January 20, 2015

F: Good morning, Rita. Bob [Friedman]’s follow-up questions. Number two I think I could answer from what you’ve given, but I’ll be interested in your response to them all.

[Follow-up questions from Bob:

[“What I mean by specific is more detail about what is perceived (both by the former 3-D person and others perceiving them) when he/she crosses over: 1) Is there a body of some sort resembling the former body? We often read about the “astral body” — is that similar in any way to the physical body, and are others, either parts of the greater entity or other former physical persons, aware of this body/person as “Bob” or “Rita”? 2) Do the memories of “Bob” carry over into a new non-physical-brain consciousness? 3) Does the “Bob” life (and presumably other past and future lives), or any former physical entity now on earth, gradually or ever lose awareness of its memories and traits from the former 3-D life?”]

R: I see. You want to know how the nonphysical part of the world appears to your consciousness when you drop the body. But it seems you really want to know “how is it really” in the afterlife. Is it solid or not, do we have form or not, is it a continuation of this or that aspect of physical life. Believe me, I recognize the question – it is one reason (of many) that led me to suggest to Frank that we do weekly sessions, to explore just that kind of issue. But my agenda got hijacked by what we were calling the guys upstairs, or what I had been instructed years before to call “energies,” and I see now why: to answer my questions as posed would have encouraged me in misunderstanding.

[1) Is there a body of some sort resembling the former body? We often read about the “astral body” — is that similar in any way to the physical body, and are others, either parts of the greater entity or other former physical persons, aware of this body/person as “Bob” or “Rita”?]

Answering what sounds like an easy uncomplicated question in this case is neither easy nor uncomplicated, but we can try. The simplest answer is, people perceive (a) what they need to perceive, or (b) what they are able to perceive – and those two conditions change with time and experience, so their perception also changes; thus, if you are expecting heaven, you may get it, and it may not last! Nor hell, nor nothingness.

But that simple answer does not mean what it appears to mean – that it is all some sort of imagination-game. We have to consider two things more: who is the “you,” as usual, and who is the other, or what is the other.

As to the first, remember, the prime change when you drop the body is that you cease to be unaware of the rest of your being. I put it in that double-negative form purposefully, because “cease to be unaware” has a different set of nuances than “become aware” or even “remember again.” It is not an act of will on the part of the soul departing 3D life, but of perception. It is more like opening your eyes than it is like determining to see.

If the newcomers to life unencumbered by the restrictions of life in the physical world are able to become seamlessly aware that they are part of a larger being, that’s one thing. If they think themselves the same unit, only now deprived of (or relieved of) the body, that is a second thing. And – more usually – if they are somewhere in between, it is a process and so “the afterlife” seems to change around them as they change.

If you will go back and look at Bob [Monroe]’s first book, you will see anomalous descriptions of the afterlife, discrepancies he was unable to account for and was unwilling (bless him!) to suppress for the sake of an apparent consistency. This is less a matter of the afterlife’s nature changing, or of it having different compartments with different attributes, than it was of his approaching it with different attitudes (mostly unconscious of the difference) at different times.

Consider, too, the experiences of Lifeline retrievers. You go to do a retrieval. Your consciousness is inserted into a scenario not of your choosing, you connect to the mind that is lost or stuck, the person has an epiphany and “moves on” as you say. Did the afterlife change, objectively, for that person? It changed subjectively – and in the absence of an anchoring physical body holding you to 3D conditions, the distinction between objective and subjective cease to exist!

Re-read that, please. It is important. Many of the discrepancies and apparent contradictions in reports from the “afterlife” – including descriptions of heaven and hell among religions – stem from lack of realization of this very important fact. “Objective” reality is only possible in 3D, because of its conditions. We were told that in the past, Frank, but not in so many words, only by implication, and neither of us understood it in that way.

This is why in the “afterlife” there can be no deceit, no concealment. This is why there is perfect justice, and why things automatically sort themselves into perfect order. And it is why the 3D world was created (one reason why): to provide a place with perception of separation, and delayed consequences, and the cohabitation of elements of different types [in one body] so that they may similarly associate in the non-3D world in a way they couldn’t otherwise.

The simplest answer to your first question is that there are as many answers as there are experiences, because everyone’s subjectivity is the only objectivity. That isn’t the end of the subject, but enough on that for now.

[2) Do the memories of “Bob” carry over into a new non-physical-brain consciousness?]

Your second question is easily disposed of. Not only your memories but everything about you including facets you have no hint of while you are in the physical world “go” with you, because you are what you make yourself, and making you was the whole point of your 3D existence. In addition, as I said earlier, the non-3D mind is accessible to all. (However, this is true while you are still in 3D, as well, only you may or may not realize it.)

[3) Does the “Bob” life (and presumably other past and future lives), or any former physical entity now on earth, gradually or ever lose awareness of its memories and traits from the former 3-D life?”]

Your third question leads us into very interesting territory, via one of those “yes but no” answers we became so familiar with.

First, no, because why should it. But this answer has two caveats that amount to “yes, in a way.”

First caveat: As you digest experience, you change. That is what absorbing experience means. And something that has been assimilated has no reason to continue to exist as a separate piece of data. So – the Larger Being of which Bob is a part holds his memories as it holds everything about him, but the better it assimilates his life, the less prominent any specific item in that life – such as memories – becomes. Why should your Larger Being remember your old telephone numbers or ZIP codes? They are still there; they are so little needed or consulted that they might be considered to have been forgotten. And this says by inference that the most important things in your life sort out to the top, which is only what you would expect.

Second caveat, a more interesting one: The interaction with the 3D world helps determine what is forgotten or remembered.

This one bears thinking about, and requires background, and then we’re done for the moment.
All minds exist in “the non-physical” and interact according to nonphysical rather than physical rules, as we have said. In 3D, you access your mind primarily through your brain; nonetheless the mind, which cannot be destroyed, exists beyond the confines and accidents of the 3D world

Your consciousness in 3D is limited and bright – the comparison the guys gave us is apt: the difference between star-glow that is all-extensive but relatively dim and a flashlight that is narrow but intense. That your 3D consciousness is narrow but intense is the result of 3D conditions. (Your mind itself remains unaffected, but its expression is focused.)

Therefore, your attention from 3D to someone not in 3D has the effect of lighting up their consciousness. In effect, you provide an energy boost that results in their seeming more “there.” An example is just what we are doing now. This process focuses your attention on me, and so I am more aware, in a way. This is what we outside of 3D get out of this process, over and above what else we want to accomplish. You have heard of the “hungry ghosts” concept, perhaps. That energy boost is what fuels it.

So, you can see that as you are forgotten by those on earth, you in effect lose awareness. Not really, for nothing is ever lost, but in effect. Nor is this necessarily a bad thing. An adult is not necessarily dependent upon being able to remember the details of childhood, and what advantage would it provide?

So, that’s our morning’s work, and thank you for the interesting questions.

F: Thanks, Rita, and we’ll talk again whenever we do.

3 thoughts on “Rita — Question 4

  1. Hello again and thank you.

    This is very good indeed, and it explains a whole lot of the things.
    Many of the NDE`S told of to have experienced “to know it all” before of to be pulled back into the body. And when of coming back into the body, in of to have forgot the WHOLE omnipresent/universal knowledge but bits and pieces of the experience as once before.
    All of the NDE`s have told of never to be afraid of death again.
    Not all of the NDE`s (such as in the book by Howard Storm) telling about bliss and blessings while “over there”. The astral “layers” seems to be a conglomerate of differently thought-forms of energies.

    It is only to learn how to navigate between the layers I`ll guess(as Robert Monroe once did).

    A happy weekend to all from Inger Lise.

  2. Frank,
    I have had a lot of experience with “channeling” or Channeled information over the last 30 years.
    Would it be OK if I asked Rita a question through you? I like the term “intuitively linked
    communication” much better.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *