My daughter Lottie's memories

Discussion in 'Children's Past Lives -Age 7 & under' started by Jennywren, Feb 10, 2010.

  1. Charles Stuart

    Charles Stuart Probationary

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2001
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
    Hi Ajones,

    Merely for the sake of terminology, I just wanted to add the thought that it is the Spiritual Body, and not the Soul, that apparently consists of particles of a more subtle and fluidic form of matter present in the Spiritual Dimensions, which apparently consists of some form of "light". To those who might find this theory implausible, I would add the thought that it is about as implausible as the fact that we hold the consciousness that we do in our physical bodies.


    The "Soul", in the way I see it, would be practically immaterial, and would correspond to what we also call our "Consciousness". It is this "Consciousness" that dresses itself and creates by attraction and "conditioning" a Spiritual Body that corresponds to the same shape and format of what was once its physical body.


    You know, "dark matter" keeps nagging at the back of my brain...
     
  2. Jennywren

    Jennywren New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2010
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1
    Thanks for your post, Charles Stuart. I get pretty confused about what is meant but the various words 'soul', 'spiritual body', and 'conciousness'. I find it hard to understand if these words can be interchanged, IE if they are different words for the same thing, or if they represent seperate things. It seems not to be universally agreed upon.


    Thanks for your interest, AJones. I'm glad you think what Lottie has said is fascinating. It is pretty hard to tell which snippets of information relate to which life at times, especially as she gave us a location for two lives (Germany and Africa), but no dates, and gave us a year for Daisy, but no location (although as you pointed out, it was presumably somewhere English-speaking). It's like a big jigsaw with pieces missing!


    As an extra matter of interest, I conducted my own little experiment with Lottie today. I know many people simply dismiss past life memories as being fantasy from the child's imagination. Lottie's memories seemed very realistic to me, and so I was curious as to whether Lottie could deliberately invent a past life story that was historically plausable. I asked her to make up a past life and tell me about it. The results were exactly what I had expected. I will type up what she said and include it in my next post.
     
  3. Charles Stuart

    Charles Stuart Probationary

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2001
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
    Needn't worry, Jenny... :)


    IMO, who we are as individual beings is who we are in thought. I, as a person, am what I think. Our physical body is merely a clothing we wear while incarnated, which is undressed upon the moment of physical death. To me, this "individual thought", which I believe is what for so long has been referred to as the "soul", retains its existence and individuality also after physical death, and in the spiritual realms it is dressed with a spiritual body, the essence of which still remains a mystery.


    As for being "universally agreed upon", well, it never has been, has it? :) But in truth I also believe that it is of lesser importance what we believe in for the evolution and ascending of the Soul. What is truly of importance is how we conduct ourselves during each of our lifetimes... :thumbsup:
     
  4. Jennywren

    Jennywren New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2010
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1
    Hi everyone,


    As it says above, I asked Lottie to invent a past life and tell me about it in order to see if a deliberate fantasy from her could be historically plausable.


    As I thought, the answer was no.


    Straight away her story contained elements of fantasy. She 'remembered' the life of a princess living in a castle, with a dragon. The castle was full of buttons you could press that would make anything you wanted appear, "If you wanted a sandwich, all you had to do was to press the 'sandwich button', and one would appear!". She wasn't serious, and wasn't reflective like she had been when telling me about her real past lives, she was happy and animated, taking great delight in describing every detail, especially what the castle looked like. The colour of the dragon kept changing randomly between green and red; she obviously couldn't remember, or couldn't decide on a colour, between one minute and the next. She then said that the castle was haunted by ghosts and ghostly objects, and she got so caught up with this new idea that she stopped refering to it as a castle and instead it became a 'haunted mansion' for the rest of the story, and her descriptions of it changed from that of the previous 'castle'. She said there were "living jumping jelly beans" in the haunted mansion, and "Flowers with faces" in the garden. I could identify elements from at least one Disney movie, one stage show she had seen, and one book she owns. With her real past lives, we could not identify any sources for her memories.


    Interestingly, she stopped telling the story in the first person and instead the main character just became "The princess". Her character was purely descriptive - she had a blue dress, red shoes, and long hair. Lottie never once identified with the Princess' feelings, thoughts, emotions, likes, dislikes, etc; she was two dimentional in the extreme. There was no mention of her age, name or surname, what she did for a living, her mothers name, a prefered food, any skills she had, or how she died - all things she had mentioned when speaking about her remembered life as Daisy. And one of the things she had not concentrated on at all when remembering her real past lives were what the people had looked like, clothes they had worn, etc. I would say about 95% of her made-up story was purely descriptive, as opposed to, say, 10% or less for her real memories.


    The Princess character wasn't the focus of the story either, she was secondary to everything else, including the scenery, and was all but forgotten by the end. Details changed accidently as Lottie couldn't remember details from even several seconds ago. Compare this to the fact that more than 2 years ago the details of her past lives never once changed, even over the course of months!


    In her orginal memories you got a sense of the whole lifetime - what she did on a daily basis, up until the day she died. In her fantasy story the life of the princess was mearly a snapshot of what she looked like on one day. The whole story consisted of a visual description of the princess, ghosts, dragon and castle/mansion, and happened in realtime. It wasn't a past life, it was a past 10 minutes. It lacked anything even remotely credible.


    I found this experiment to be very telling. A friend of mine once said that Lottie's past life stories were invented, as she has a very good imagination. I couldn't argue about that - her imagination is amazing. But I struggled to believe that a two year old would


    a) come up with the theory of reincarnation on her own and out the blue (she had never been exposed to the idea),


    b) decide to make-believe she had been someone else in the past, and convince her parents she was not making it up,


    c) come up with historically accurate information about common first names, surname, methods of sheep shearing, and music from the 1700's, and invent her own cause of death by starvation (she knew neither what death was, nor starvation),


    and d) not change the story or details at all, even over the course of months.


    And now I have asked her to make up a past life story, it didn't have the same elements as her real memories - not even slightly.


    I am more convinced in reincarnation than ever.
     
  5. ChrisR

    ChrisR Administrator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Messages:
    88
    Likes Received:
    89
    Location:
    England, UK
    That was a really interesting experiment Jennywren, thanks for sharing :thumbsup: And the results don't surprise me at all! It would be good if other parents with children who remember their past lives, could also try this experiment, and then compare the results.
     
  6. IrisG.

    IrisG. Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    4
    Fascinating experiment, indeed! And I totally agree that it would be useful if more parents gave such an experiment a try (I will, no matter if my daughter is going to have past-life memories or not - she is 18 months old, thus not verbal enough). Also, this a fun, creative game for both parents and kids and certainly will not do any harm. Maybe it is useful to start a thread about this so that those findings become more abvious?
     
  7. Nightrain

    Nightrain Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2009
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Connecticut, USA
    I sincerely applaud your ability to encourage Lottie's descriptions, and to interpret them in contrast to her earlier stories. A touch of genius, I think!
     
  8. Jennywren

    Jennywren New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2010
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1
    More from Lottie!


    Hello everyone,


    I hope you are all well! It has been some time since I have had any reason to post on here. I tend to assume that each time Lottie brings up her past lives it will be the last time, but this seems not to be the case!


    Again, I managed to transcript the conversation (which is getting harder as I'm having to write faster now she is older and more articulate). I was really excited, as there is often such a long time between these conversations that I always wonder whether that might be the last of it. But the memories still seem to be there, deep inside, and they pop up unexpectedly from time to time!


    Anyway, it began after Lottie got home from school. She asked me if it was silly to believe in something if their isn't any proof. (I thought this was a great question!). So we had a discussion about what proof is, how hard it can be to get hold of, and that some people need proof to believe, and other's don't. I used a belief in god as an example, IE that his existence has not been proven or disproved, but that people can still choose whether to believe or not. She then said, "When I was Daisy, I believed in god". (I grabbed the nearest scrap of paper and pen).


    Me: Did you?


    Lot: Yeah. Because I used to go to church.


    Me: Oh, right. What did it look like?


    Lot: It was a big place, and it was a church. People used to go there to pray.


    Me: I wonder why you used to believe in god, but don't now?


    Lot: Because I'm a different person now.


    Me: I suppose so... I just thought that maybe you had the same personality as Daisy had?


    Lot: No. This is a different life. A different body.


    Me: Oh. So how come you can have a different personality now, but used to be Daisy?


    Lot: Because the personality is gone, but the person is still there.


    Me: You mean that a 'person', and a 'personality', are two different things?!


    Lot: Yes.


    Me: Wow. I didn't know that.


    Lot: Everyone had to believe in god. Otherwise – dead.


    Me: What do you mean?


    Lot: Everyone had to believe in god, even if they didn't, otherwise they would be killed.


    Me: I don't think that would happen!


    Lot: Well it did when I was alive.


    Me: So, did you really believe in god, or did you just say you did?


    Lot: I really did believe in him.


    Me: Did everyone believe?


    Lot: I don't think so. I think some people must have said they did, when they didn't, because otherwise they would be killed.


    Me: Did you live in a big city?


    Lot: I lived in a little town.


    Me: Do you remember the name of it?


    Lot: ...no.


    Me: What country was it in?


    Lot: England.


    Me: And what was the capital city called?


    Lot: I don't know; I didn't live there. I only lived in a little town. Most people around lived in little villages where everybody knew each other. There were a few shops. You could buy bread, cheese, meat.


    Me: Right. And was there a McDonalds in the town?


    Lot: (Laughs) No, that wasn't invented yet!


    Me: Are you sure?


    Lot: Yes. We didn't even have cars – only horses.


    Me: Right. Do you remember anything else at all?


    Lot: Um... not much. I remember the money had the king on it.


    Me: Did it?


    Lot: Yes. There was only a king in the country, no queen.


    Me: What did the money look like?


    Lot: It had the king on them.


    Me: What else? Was it paper money?


    Lot: No! There wasn't such thing as paper notes. Only coins.


    Me: Oh, I see. And what did the coins look like?


    Lot: The coins were bumpy on the edges. And they were very flat. Not like the $2. They were very flat.


    Me: What do you mean, 'bumpy'? Like, bashed about?


    Lot: No, they were... bumpy.


    Me: Do you mean like raised, or ridged? Around the edge?


    Lot: Yes.


    Me: How do you know all this?


    Lot: I don't know.


    Me: Have you heard it somewhere? Have you been learning history at school?


    Lot: (Incredulously) Impossible!


    Me: What do you mean?


    Lot: That would be impossible. I think only the year fives get to do history. NOT kindys, or year ones. No way.


    I was so pleased to hear all this from her! And I even had some statements to check! I did some research, based on the previous date she had given for Daisy (1787). In the following post...
     
  9. Jennywren

    Jennywren New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2010
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1
    Continued from last post


    This is what my research shows:


    Firstly, she was right about there being food shops in towns back then, and the items she listed would have been available.


    She was also correct about there being a king on the throne (King George III) as he reined from 1760-1820.


    I wasn't able to find out if atheism or heresy was still a crime in the late 1700s, but I think you were more likely to be murdered for it in the 1600s? There was loads of information on the witch trials, but nothing much from the late 1700s. Can anyone help with this? Perhaps her town was particularly religious and threatened death as a punishment for atheistic views?


    I looked up the history of paper money in England, and although it had been invented and was being printed in the late 1700s (the Bank of England first printed five pound notes in 1793), they were not widely used, and would have rarely, if ever, been seen by the working classes. Bank notes did not actually become legal tender until 1833.


    I investigated what Lottie had meant by coins being 'bumpy' around the edges, and discovered that from the 17th century, coins were 'milled' (made with serrated edges to prevent people removing precious metals). Before this, they had been made with smooth edges.


    And there's more. I decided to show Lottie pictures of a variety of coins (52 coins in all), ranging from ancient Celtic and Roman coins, through Tudor and Stuart, and all the way up to modern day money. I thought there might be a slim chance she recognised one of the coins. I expected no results.


    I asked her if any of them were familiar. She looked though them all, immediately dismissing the modern coins, and the old style hammered coins from before the 1600s, pointing out that the coins she remembered had not been made like this (hammered). She was right about this too, they had stopped using that method by then.


    When I showed her a page of milled coins from 1662-1816, she pointed to the dots around the edge of one of the coins and said that's what she had meant by 'bumpy', although she didn't recognise that particular coin. She dismissed the William III five guineas from 1701, the James II half crown from 1685, the George I shilling from 1723, and a George I halfpenny from 1717.


    But she immediately pointed to a George III shilling from 1787! She said she strongly recognised that coin, and she recognised the picture of the king on it. Needless to say, I was amazed at such a hit! But she astounded me even more by pointing out three other coins she recognised – a George III 'spade' guinea from 1793, a George III farthing from 1799 (which was vaguely familiar to her), and a Somerset Bristol halfpenny token from 1793 (which she said she had, “seen before”).


    To me, this is incredible! I don't know how else she might have come by this information about coins, if not from direct experience of them in a past life. I know she is correct when she says she is not doing history at school as she is only 5 years old, and history is not on the curriculum yet. She does not watch any history programmes on the TV.


    And no matter how hard I try and lead her into saying something historically incorrect, such as trying to get her to agree to there being a McDonalds in an 18th century town, she so firmly won't be moved.


    Thank you all for your continued interest. You will all be the first to hear if she has anything more to say! I feel so privileged to have her for my daughter. Who knew that a 5 year old could so completely turn your world upside down?


    xx
     
  10. Nightrain

    Nightrain Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2009
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Connecticut, USA
    Jennywren, I am so impressed at the way you are pursuing this experience with your daughter. Thank you so very much for keeping us in the loop.
     
  11. Mama2HRB

    Mama2HRB Senior member Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2003
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Western PA USA
    Jennywren,


    Thank you for sharing Lottie's information. It is true your child's memories can change your life. My daughter's totally changed mine, and I am certainly glad it changed.


    You are doing very well by not asking her leading questions and allowing her to show you what she means.


    I love how she shows attitude about McDonald's. My daughter used to show attitude sometimes, too.


    I have been fortunate to learn about several past lives with my daughter and have found proof to back up what she says, both by asking here and by spending time in my local library.


    In her most recent past life she was someone that I knew in this life. Now THAT threw me for a loop LOL


    Best wishes to you
     
  12. ChrisR

    ChrisR Administrator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Messages:
    88
    Likes Received:
    89
    Location:
    England, UK
    Thanks for the update Jennywren :thumbsup:
     
  13. Lady2

    Lady2 Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2011
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Williamsburg, VA
    Jennywren –


    I have greatly enjoyed reading about your daughter Lottie’s memories, and found the most recent addition to the story fascinating. The connections with the period coinage are just down right amazing. I think it very likely that even as late as 1787 people would still be fearing for their lives if they didn’t make God happy, or more likely, the church.


    I love how you research everything while keeping an open mind. Keep up the good work, your daughter is very special, but then, you are a special mother to listen so well. I am lucky enough to have a mother like you, who listens to my brother & I when we talk about past lives. It makes all the difference in your self confidence, instead of growing up and being told not to talk about'those things'.


    I think because you listen, she will keep telling you more that she remembers. :)


    Keep us posted!
     
  14. Jennywren

    Jennywren New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2010
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1
    Thanks for your interest everyone, and your kind words. I feel so lucky to be on the receiving end of all this! It's just amazing. I am all ears when I'm with her, and that notebook and pencil is never too far away, just in case...
     
  15. Jody

    Jody Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
    That was funny! :laugh:


    What a fascinating conversation. I'm particularly intrigued by how Lottie says you can have a different personality, but the person is still there. I'm also really curious as to why she believed in God before, but now she doesn't. Thank you so much for recording your discussion and sharing it with us!
     
  16. Mama2HRB

    Mama2HRB Senior member Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2003
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Western PA USA
    Thanks for checking back in, Jenny. I cannot wait to read more about Lottie.
     
  17. Jennywren

    Jennywren New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2010
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1
    I know! Baffling, isn't it! I've been thinking about it and the best way I can explain it is that by 'person', she may mean consciousness, and by 'personality', she may mean chartacter/temperment. IE that the consciousness remains the same and unchanged from life to life, but that your personality is the result of your parents genes, and your experiences and environment. Does that make sense? That could also explain why she used to believe in god, but doesn't now; it could have been environmental factors that decided it. She may have had a religious upbringing in that time, but in this life, she hasn't.


    Please someone tell me if they think I'm barking up the wrong tree with this one, but it's the best way I have thought of to explain what she said!
     
  18. Lady2

    Lady2 Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2011
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Williamsburg, VA
    Jennywren

    Absolutly makes sense! She does a great job with her limited vocabulary to explain it all as well as she does.
     
  19. usetawuz

    usetawuz Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2010
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    7
    Jennywren, your thread is fascinating and I envy your having the forethought to be ready to document Lottie's disclosures...amazing.


    Like Jody, I am very interested in the above cited quotes regarding the difference between person and personality, and while the dialog slightly mixed the terminology ("I'm a different person now" instead of "different personality now"), it seemed to me (I got a warmth emanating from my heart) she was speaking clearly of a soul (person) living on while a body (personality) has its lifetime. It dovetails with my sense that the soul is the actor while the body/personality/lifetime is the character in costume.


    From the mouths of babes...
     
  20. Jennywren

    Jennywren New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2010
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1
    Hi Usetawuz,


    That's an interesting way to think about it! I too am sure that she means to convey a sense that part of you never changes from lifetime to lifetime (the 'person'), whereas other aspects of you are confined to the body (the 'personality'). I never would have thought about it that way if she hadn't explained it to me. For her age, I think she does a wonderful job! And I am left in the fairly strange and uncertain position of feeling like I know a lot less than my own young daughter! :confused:
     

Share This Page