Guest guest Posted January 22, 2000 Report Share Posted January 22, 2000 At 02:10 PM 1/23/00 , you wrote: >Whatever you think happens between incarnations, you can't argue from that >to anything meaningful about the nature of perception in incarnation. It >doesn't follow... or if you think it follows, then its validity depends >entirely on whether the first statement is true or not. Pretty iffy. ) >However... Having full remembering of what happened, what my perceptions were, on the several occasions I was clinically dead in this lifetime ... and having, from that remembering, and that understanding, allowed the conscious recall of what have been the last several incarnations of the entity in this body now and from this, allowing the remembering of what happened in between these incarnations .. I have allowed these perceptions to come together into a conscious awareness but they can only be expressed in the language of perceptions .. based on a learned vocabulary and my language of expression, due to these perceptions will not find resonance within you unless you can shift your own point of perception so that you can see through the "eyes" I saw through whilst in that space. I can only try to find words which have a relevance within your experience to allow you to find meaning in what I write .... and words read from a book or repeated from a "teacher" do not count as experience Christopher Wynter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2000 Report Share Posted January 23, 2000 Hey Chris, >>Whatever you think happens between incarnations, you can't argue from that >>to anything meaningful about the nature of perception in incarnation. It >>doesn't follow... or if you think it follows, then its validity depends >>entirely on whether the first statement is true or not. Pretty iffy. ) >>However... This comment was specifically in answer to the quotation from Xan's friend... I didn't say a thing about you... wasn't talking about you. >Having full remembering of what happened, >snip< >I can only try to find words which have a relevance within your experience to allow you to find meaning in what I write .... So what is it you want to tell that you think I won't find meaning in? You think you're the only one who remembers other lives? I have the memory of other lives... but I was not commenting on that kind of memory. It has nothing to do with the subject under discussion. What I was saying is that I think it's a mistake to try to make statements about the nature of human perception in the body in the present... and try to prove it by citing memories or other knowledge of other lives or, in this case, of the periods of being discarnate between incarnations. It won't hold scientifically or logically, and you won't convince anybody that way. Now you can offer what you know, and if it interests the other person, he may pursue it. But you can't prove something about human perception in incarnation with that kind of stuff. If you confront a scientist doing research in perception or a therapist or case-worker with anecdotal experience... and you tell him he's wrong and you can prove it from what you remember from another life... or from when you were not incarnate but in between lives... they'll laugh you out of the room. And they'd be right, Chris. You'd be talking about experience when you weren't even incarnate in a human body to try to prove something about experience in human bodies... apples and oranges, Chris. It doesn't follow. Love, Dharma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.