Contradictory afterlife descriptions

Thursday, July 6, 2017

3:40 a.m. Rita, I made a note to ask you to say more on the subject of how it is that people can come up with such detailed reports of “the afterlife” that nonetheless contradict yours.

They don’t. They merely seem to contradict what I’m saying. It is all a matter of perspective. You are thinking of the healing and rejuvenation center, for instance, that Monroe Institute participants are sent off to experience, and which they do experience.

That’s right. That is what specifically came to mind overnight.

You need to keep in mind that the non-3D world may be experienced as it relates to the 3D world, or as it relates to itself, or as it relates to the next higher level. You could look at your familiar 3D world the same way, and you would find it radically different, even though it is the same reality being described. For instance, the 3D world considered in relation to the next lower level would show you a world of “individuals” being actually communities of cells grouped into organs. The only thing of 3D you would witness and describe, from that level, would be matters of pumping blood and circulating lymph and adjusting blood sugars, and so on. The 3D world could be accurately described in this way, as long as you confined your attention to its relations with its constituent levels. Looking at it as it functions peer-to-peer would reveal your familiar world of politics, careers, romance, etc. And looking at your 3D world as it relates to the next higher level would show you the cloudy, unsatisfying situation you do experience in trying to visualize the next layer up.

So hold that in mind when weighing reports. People are usually – not invariably, but usually – describing the non-3D world as it relates to the 3D life they know. so they report healing centers, thought-created communities of like-minded souls, various extensions of 3D life translated to new conditions. To compare such descriptions – most particularly the matter-of-fact secular versions – to religious descriptions such as Swedenborg’s, for example, or Cayce’s is to come across a significant disconnect, for the latter descriptions are not exactly describing the same thing. The former are describing non-3D life as it continues to relate to 3D; the latter are describing it in its own terms, or as it relates to the next superior level.

That difference seems clear enough to me. It raises, though, an image of our constituent organs living in a state of reverence toward us as their higher being.

Do they not willingly lead a life of service to a higher order of things that they do not understand but do feel?

The guys did tell us (I think, or maybe it was after you had passed on to non-3D life) that we are the higher self of the organs and cells that comprise us.

And, as above, so below.

All right. Well, I think I’ll get some more sleep and maybe we will continue this later.

If not today, there are other days. And don’t forget to schedule days off.

Okay. (4 a.m.)

5:30. Okay, another sleep cycle, and ready to go again.

Remember that what we have been doing – maybe we’ve never said so explicitly, though I think we have – is stitching together the basis, the underlying reality, behind so many contradictory reports of “the afterlife.”

Without a consensus on the facts of life 3D and otherwise, there can be no consensus on the meaning of life, thus no consensus on the appropriate regulation of social life.

Yes, as long as consensus is not taken to mean unanimity, which is impossible. But a lack of a commonly accepted explanation of life renders it impossible to come to agreement on what life should be. This is not to say that the non-3D is dependent upon 3D understanding, though it can be made to look that way. But we do have a vested interest in clear communication, so we do what we can to bridge the gap among you.

Doesn’t look much that way. Why doesn’t every person’s unconscious mind, or larger being, push in a certain direction to achieve harmony? If everybody’s inner voice were saying the same thing, everybody’s convictions would tend to become more congruent.

To the degree that this does happen, you experience it as the zeitgeist, the spirit of the times. People tend to experience and to think in a certain way, and that defines the era. But remember, everybody’s higher self, larger being, unconscious mind filters through the personal mind, the 3D-person, the specific consciousness, and thus comes filtered by the assumptions and prejudices and blindnesses of the 3D self as it was created and has lived. A Viking is not going to be getting the same message, after it goes through those filters, as a chemical engineer or a hired gun or a Greek Orthodox priest.

I do see that.

The difficulty stems from the nature of life, which is set up to achieve relative independence of action for each 3D being, and does achieve it. A system designed to produce individual free will is not going to produce army ants, even if some of us sometimes wish it.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.