Dr. Julie Beischel Clearing Up Myths About Mediums |371|

Thanks for that – I'm curious to know what approaches have you tried with the voices? Did you ever try a process to rid yourself of them or integrate them or anything?

If you're willing, I'll respond privately, but no worries if not.

I'm very open to the possibility that some of them could be evil external entities. Just in the way that when phone scammers call and offer to help fix your computer, it's hard to see that they ultimately have your best intentions at heart. I'm also not opposed to the idea of 'casting them out.' If a person is in an abusive relationship then it's of course best to get away from it, same thing here, I don't think it's good to accept abuse from the voices.

At the same time though, if I find myself on the receiving end of abuse, either from another person or from within my own mind, I find it intensely valuable to self examine to see if I feel I invited that energy in in some way. Is there such a thing as an uninvited guest, or just a guest that we don't know how we invited? (I'm quoting Abraham of Esther Hicks here). I don't have a definitive answer to that question, but I can see how I've been in resonance with he experiences that have arisen in my life, good and bad.

Well put. Yes, you could say something like, "The phone scammers taught me to be more careful, which is in my best interests", but otherwise it's hard to see them as having good intentions towards you. And yes, in my case too I am aware of certain things I did that probably led to my problems.
 
If you're willing, I'll respond privately, but no worries if not.



Well put. Yes, you could say something like, "The phone scammers taught me to be more careful, which is in my best interests", but otherwise it's hard to see them as having good intentions towards you. And yes, in my case too I am aware of certain things I did that probably led to my problems.

Thank you, you can reach me at deepstateconsciousness@gmail.com
 
The NDE data tells us how important that love is. And that we are cherished and loved. Spirits, in fact, probably do have nothing better to than contact their loved ones. Not in the sense that they lack important things to do, but in the sense that connectedness, Love, and caring, ARE the most important things. If this is true, which the medium and NDE data (along with all the thoughts of the wise men, shaman, and mystics) tells us, then contacting us would be a high priority.

Leslie Kean talked in detail in her book about the “collective existing record” hypothesis in her book, but I can’t remember her reasons for suggesting that she thought it was an incomplete model which doesn’t fit all the facts,’just some. Of course this model should be considered and tested, if possible. But there’s no reason to accept it a priori when it’s really just as outrageous and bizarre as an afterlife and when the afterlife (survival) hypothesis fits the data just as well and is supported by other modes of understanding.

The survival hypothesis doesn’t come from mediumship as strongly as it does from the NDE data along with extremely compelling reincarnation data, along with the experiences of ghosts. If all we had was the mediumship data, I’m not sure anybody on this forum would be so confident of existence after death.
I come at the survival issue from 3 writers or sources in literature: I Am That by Nisargadatta Maharaj, Thinking & Destiny by Harold W. Percival, & A Course in Miracles. What all three do is offer a way to direct your mind away from all the ways the ego mind works to keep its hold on us. Because the ego mind is puffed up by a sense of separation, that we are not connected to the Infinite Awareness, though we are always, it leads us to play w/ an endless set of forms & thoughts that keep us fearful, b/c our natural state is Love & treating unreal things as real makes us feel separate & anxious.
A steadfast accomplishment of consistently avoiding the traps leads to a 'peace that passes understanding.' That tranquil state is our natural, rightful existence & opens us to the mysteries & miracles of a peaceful mind.
 
The trouble with these science types is that they constantly re-interpret what is perfectly plain and straightforward into gobbledegook so they can seem to each other as though they have a handle on it all. For me this has nothing to do with 'science' - if by that we mean the formalised and standardised inquiry into mostly material things. Its very much the case that such science gathers the horse droppings, examines them and declares that horses are real - and expects people riding the horse to be grateful for the confirmation.

Obviously I can't say that this kind of science has no right to go examining the 'droppings' of mediums. It may even eventually conclude that it is all okay. I have simply declined to buy the proposition that what I experience is likely to be a delusion, a hallucination, a misperception or a misinterpretation until some guy in a lab coat comes along with a seal of approval. We need to remember that Newton didn't 'discover' gravity - just the math involved. Gravity isn't a 'scientific' idea. Did we name it before Newton? I don't know. The point is that the only people who dispute mediumship and related things are [a] people who get bothered by the ideas and use 'science' as an excuse to dignify their distress, and religious types who want to control, or deny, access to spirits. Most normal and sensible folk whose minds have not been traumatised by propaganda don't have a real issue - just sensible questions based on genuine interest and curiosity.

I just can't see that 'science' has anything fundamental to add to the conversation. There is sometimes a value in having an ignorant person asking carefully framed questions, because it can cut through poor thinking and erroneous ideas. And eventually that ignorance can grow into a decent enough understanding to offer new insights. That may comfort those who can't trust their own capacity for inquiry. But the bottom line is that mediumship [a rotten term actually] exists and persists because it is real. The really interesting question is - How useful is it?

I think we are so seduced by materialistic thinking that we automatically privilege "How does it work?" above questions about how we can benefit from it. I have absolutely no idea how my iPhone works. Honest. I can probably burble on with some standard jargon, but I am completely clueless - and I do not care. In an age when science is privileged above religion we use the language of science to convey something that has nothing to do with understanding science at all. It signifies membership of a certain class or group. We don't use science language to convey science knowledge. And I suspect we use 'rational' arguments to convey anxieties about notions, rather than understanding.

Communication with other than physical agents is as old as, I don't know... Tylor encountered 'savages' who thought the dead were still around, and he thought they were mistaken - got it wrong - because their intellects were not up to handling reality like an educated white man. So they imagined stuff that was wrong. That was the latter part of the 19th century. Tylor's scientific conceit remains with us, only now the 'savages' are weak minded white folk who are not blessed with a scientific education.

Well I have 2 science degrees and I have had long conversations with non-physical agents -many hours. What benefit can we gain from this kind of thing? How do we know its stuff we can trust and use? This is what matters way more than the hows of it all.
Thank you for that thorough critique of the arrogance of scientific knowledge & understanding. It's a shame that not everyone has experiences of the existence beyond the Veil, but it is very common, after all. I was a bit disturbed by that 20% of ppl who are resuscitated or emerge from comas w/o a single experience to report. Eben Alexander, MD calmly said that the one-fifth of ppl w/o something to report could have just forgotten what they experienced, just as we so often don't remember our dreams. The tyranny of the minority of persons w/o a recollection of psychic or otherwise "unusual" phenomena is a brazen case of ego mind's widespread rule.
 
Back
Top