Nos
New
After many months of catching up on the literature regarding mediumship, OBEs, NDEs, and etc. I was surprised to see a fair amount of consistency among all the accounts, especially concerning out of body experiences. After having experiences of my own, I have no doubts that these anomalous phenomena occur.
I've finally gotten around to Tom Campbell's work with his "My Big TOE" and how everything can be explained in terms of virtual reality. In this framework, most of the anomalous phenomena can be explained somewhat well. However, there are some inconsistencies that do occur in the theory that I have not seen addressed elsewhere when the theory runs into other accounts of out of body experiences and perceptions other than Campbell's own.
Namely, in Campbell's idea of a "saved entity." Essentially, what a "saved entity" is, to my understanding, is the universal database (same idea as the akashic records) mimicking a deceased/discarnate being (could be a relative, spouse, etc.) in the afterlife realms. Campbell believes that during NDEs, mediumship, and OBEs, it is not actually the consciousness (or the essence, soul, of a person, same thing) communicating or interacting with the individual experiencing the OBE/NDE, but is in fact the universal database creating a mechanistic replica, or an illusion, of the discarnate to provide comfort. Campbell claims in his experiences the entities he encountered in his OBEs (his deceased relatives) were mechanistic, soulless beings and illusions, rather than the real consciousness of the individual.
Cyrus Kirkpatrick's (OBEr) critique of Campbell's view can be found here (http://afterlifetopics.com/tom-campbell/ ).
In other out of body experiencer's accounts, they are sure they are communicating with the actual consciousness of the deceased and frequently report how they have checked in on them over the years to see how they have "progressed" on their journeys (Robert Bruce, Jurgen Ziewe, Graham Nicholls, etc. all report this phenomena), which would seem to me at least, in contradiction with Campbell's idea of saved entities (why would they do this? why not just stay the same?). Additionally, Julie Bieschel's mediumship research strongly suggests (from the medium's own accounts) that retrieving psychic information from the living (which they likened to retrieving information from the akashic records) is starkly different from communicating with the dead in their experience (they insist that they really do communicate with the deceased's consciousness).
To be fair to Campbell's theory, some NDE accounts do support his view, where the NDEr will say that the deceased relative (typically greeted by a singular relative, not a family) is "God" in disguise and takes on a form comfortable to the person. However, there are other NDE accounts where the person is positive it was their deceased relatives and in some cases sees people that they have no idea were dead at the time of their NDE, which seems to refute the latter (if the goal is to make the NDEr more comfortable, you'd think it'd be best to not shock them with the recent death of their friend they haven't talked to in a few years).
So the question comes down to, is it the universal database replicating the deceased or is it the real consciousness of the individual interacting in NDEs, OBEs, mediumship, etc.?
An even better question to contemplate and discuss, I think, is where the heart of Campbell's real interpretation lies, which is that these "afterlife realms" do not have objectivity to them in the sense that they do not hold a "consensus reality" similar to the physical world. They are in fact, subjective experiences (but real to the individual nonetheless) that are generated by the universal database to facilitate "evolution" in the individual experiencing it. I have heard how OBErs sometimes can meet each other in the astral and discuss what happened after the experience in the physical world together, which would negate the viewpoint of "subjective experience" entirely, but I have not personally seen any accounts of these myself to say one way or the other.
Do these realms really do have a "consensus reality"(meaning communities or worlds that the authentic consciousness of individuals or "souls" come together and reside in for however long they wish) or is it all an illusion generated by the universal database/akashic records for the individual, ultimately for Campbell's "evolutionary purposes"?
While it may seem clear to some, to avoid any confusion on the concept of what a "consensus reality" is, what I mean is what Jurgen Ziewe (http://www.multidimensionalman.com/...r_death_-_a_description_of_the_afterlife.html "consensus environments") and other astral travelers and mediums assert; that there is objectivity in these realms and consensus environments where the deceased entities come together in these realms (exactly as how our world works, but in an extended consciousness realm), in the sense that the deceased entities are indeed the authentic, irreducible consciousness or souls of the individuals whom are deceased (their "self"in their entirety) and not an illusory machination put together by Campbell's universal database (akashic records). Hope that clarifies what the contextual definition is!
Thanks for any input and discussion! :)
I've finally gotten around to Tom Campbell's work with his "My Big TOE" and how everything can be explained in terms of virtual reality. In this framework, most of the anomalous phenomena can be explained somewhat well. However, there are some inconsistencies that do occur in the theory that I have not seen addressed elsewhere when the theory runs into other accounts of out of body experiences and perceptions other than Campbell's own.
Namely, in Campbell's idea of a "saved entity." Essentially, what a "saved entity" is, to my understanding, is the universal database (same idea as the akashic records) mimicking a deceased/discarnate being (could be a relative, spouse, etc.) in the afterlife realms. Campbell believes that during NDEs, mediumship, and OBEs, it is not actually the consciousness (or the essence, soul, of a person, same thing) communicating or interacting with the individual experiencing the OBE/NDE, but is in fact the universal database creating a mechanistic replica, or an illusion, of the discarnate to provide comfort. Campbell claims in his experiences the entities he encountered in his OBEs (his deceased relatives) were mechanistic, soulless beings and illusions, rather than the real consciousness of the individual.
Cyrus Kirkpatrick's (OBEr) critique of Campbell's view can be found here (http://afterlifetopics.com/tom-campbell/ ).
In other out of body experiencer's accounts, they are sure they are communicating with the actual consciousness of the deceased and frequently report how they have checked in on them over the years to see how they have "progressed" on their journeys (Robert Bruce, Jurgen Ziewe, Graham Nicholls, etc. all report this phenomena), which would seem to me at least, in contradiction with Campbell's idea of saved entities (why would they do this? why not just stay the same?). Additionally, Julie Bieschel's mediumship research strongly suggests (from the medium's own accounts) that retrieving psychic information from the living (which they likened to retrieving information from the akashic records) is starkly different from communicating with the dead in their experience (they insist that they really do communicate with the deceased's consciousness).
To be fair to Campbell's theory, some NDE accounts do support his view, where the NDEr will say that the deceased relative (typically greeted by a singular relative, not a family) is "God" in disguise and takes on a form comfortable to the person. However, there are other NDE accounts where the person is positive it was their deceased relatives and in some cases sees people that they have no idea were dead at the time of their NDE, which seems to refute the latter (if the goal is to make the NDEr more comfortable, you'd think it'd be best to not shock them with the recent death of their friend they haven't talked to in a few years).
So the question comes down to, is it the universal database replicating the deceased or is it the real consciousness of the individual interacting in NDEs, OBEs, mediumship, etc.?
An even better question to contemplate and discuss, I think, is where the heart of Campbell's real interpretation lies, which is that these "afterlife realms" do not have objectivity to them in the sense that they do not hold a "consensus reality" similar to the physical world. They are in fact, subjective experiences (but real to the individual nonetheless) that are generated by the universal database to facilitate "evolution" in the individual experiencing it. I have heard how OBErs sometimes can meet each other in the astral and discuss what happened after the experience in the physical world together, which would negate the viewpoint of "subjective experience" entirely, but I have not personally seen any accounts of these myself to say one way or the other.
Do these realms really do have a "consensus reality"(meaning communities or worlds that the authentic consciousness of individuals or "souls" come together and reside in for however long they wish) or is it all an illusion generated by the universal database/akashic records for the individual, ultimately for Campbell's "evolutionary purposes"?
While it may seem clear to some, to avoid any confusion on the concept of what a "consensus reality" is, what I mean is what Jurgen Ziewe (http://www.multidimensionalman.com/...r_death_-_a_description_of_the_afterlife.html "consensus environments") and other astral travelers and mediums assert; that there is objectivity in these realms and consensus environments where the deceased entities come together in these realms (exactly as how our world works, but in an extended consciousness realm), in the sense that the deceased entities are indeed the authentic, irreducible consciousness or souls of the individuals whom are deceased (their "self"in their entirety) and not an illusory machination put together by Campbell's universal database (akashic records). Hope that clarifies what the contextual definition is!
Thanks for any input and discussion! :)
Last edited: