• Thank you to Carol and Steve Bowman, the forum owners, for our new upgrade!

Reincarnation Information brought back by NDE experiencers

fiziwig

fiziwig

moderator emeritus
It seems that if anybody really knew what was going on it would be NDE experiencers. (Aside from children who spontaneously recall past lives of course, and possibly some regression subjects, although I remain very skeptical of regression in general)

Here is a collection of statements about reincarnation made by NDE experiencers: http://www.near-death.com/experiences/research35.html It also includes some remarks by non-NDE people like Edgar Cayce, which I tend to take with a large grain of salt.)
 
Hi Fiz,


That was a very comprehensive collection of well-organized testimony by quite a good number of authors. What is most striking is how consistent most of them are. Their observations, when combined with verifiable Past Life cases seem to offer very credible evidence that most of what they are saying is true and acceptable -- at least to me.


-Nightrain
 
I have thought about those and similar ones which I found quite interesting and what I have concluded is that there is one basic theme that is most common.

  • There is an experience of moving to someplace else - perhaps in a tunnel.
  • Someone meets the the person experiencing the NDE.
  • Profound knowledge is transferred to the person - most of which is forgotten.
  • The person having the NDE experience is changed by the experience and their faith in the continued existence of their consciousness is firmly established.
  • The person reports experiencing joy and unconditional love beyond the ability to describe in words.


I think that those things are what you can probably count on experiencing as well. But there does seem to be a lot of variability in recounting the experience. Is that what you have found?
 
But stardis, not everyone who's had a near-death-experience has reported experiencing love and joy. Some have only had the experience of being in hell, or observing hell. Some people tell of seeing heaven and hell, the vast majority tell of seeing only heaven, but some people report being only in hell, of smelling sulphur, hearing the screams of countless millions, and an overwhelming sensation of despair and hopelessness. Not all NDEs are blissful, joyous experiences.
 
Can anyone recommend a good website that deals with NDEs? I've found a few sites myself, but they all seem to be more focused on the pseudo-scientific side of NDEs, they don't offer any real scientific evidence to support NDEs.Metaphysics is fine for entertainment, but it seriously hurts the credibility of anyone hoping to be treated seriously when dealing with topics such as NDEs and reincarnation. These topics have been shrouded in a stigma of pseudo-science for too long, and it's a shame, because I think that were it not for the stigma surrounding these topics, more people would pursue studies in reincarnation and NDEs.
 
sellingmysoul said:
Can anyone recommend a good website that deals with NDEs?
Click to expand...
Hi Sellingmysoul!


Dr. Raymond Moody, who coined the term Near Death Experience has his own site; www.lifeafterlife.com


You'll find links that he recommends like, www.iands.org


I think his recommendations are credible, so you can probably find more links within websites that are linked to his.


-Nightrain
 
sellingmysoul said:
Can anyone recommend a good website that deals with NDEs? I've found a few sites myself, but they all seem to be more focused on the pseudo-scientific side of NDEs, they don't offer any real scientific evidence to support NDEs.Metaphysics is fine for entertainment, but it seriously hurts the credibility of anyone hoping to be treated seriously when dealing with topics such as NDEs and reincarnation. These topics have been shrouded in a stigma of pseudo-science for too long, and it's a shame, because I think that were it not for the stigma surrounding these topics, more people would pursue studies in reincarnation and NDEs.
Click to expand...
Web Sites:

  • Nour Foundation ~ Technology, Neuroscience and the Nature of Being. What are the phenomenological and spiritual characteristics of human subjective experience and the neurophysiological and psychological basis of these domains? And what are the roles they play in the process of practical reasoning and moral decision making?
  • Horizon Research Foundation ~ AWARE Through a variety of psychological and physiological tests as well as cerebral monitoring techniques, we aim to conduct the first comprehensive study examining the relationship between the human mind, consciousness and brain during cardiac arrest. Specifically, we aim to study the relationship between consciousness and the quality of cerebral resuscitation (as measured through non-invasive monitoring of cerebral perfusion) and its outcome on neurological, emotional and cognitive morbidity.
  • University of Virgina The Division of Perceptual Studies (DOPS), formerly the Division of Personality Studies , is a unit of the Department of Psychiatry & Neurobehavioral Sciences at the University of Virginia, in Charlottesville, VA. The Division of Perceptual Studies (DOPS) was founded as a research unit of the Department of Psychiatric Medicine at UVA by Dr. Ian Stevenson in 1967. (see History and Description for more information about the founding of DOPS). Utilizing scientific methods, the researchers within The Division of Perceptual Studies investigate apparent paranormal phenomena.


Professionals:

 
Hi Fiziwig,


Upon reading Edgar Cayce's testimonies, I must say that to the best of my knowledge what he stated is 100% correct.


When I refer to "spiritualist circles", what I am referring to is the multitude of mediums who access spirituality. What is astounding is that they ALL maintain a coherence in their messages (though naturally there may be differences in "interpretation") which independs location or prior beliefs. Here in Brazil, at least, many, but not all, do indeed follow the philosophy of the foundations based on Allan Kardec's five psychographed books in the 1850s; from which continuity has been given particularly regarding the mediumnic techniques and preparation indicated in his "Book of Mediums".


In his "The Genesis", there is ample explanation concerning the "physical characteristics" of the spiritual realms. I would certainly recommend Kardec's books to anyone interested in understanding reincarnation. Contrary to what some may have thought here over the years, it has never been my intention to "found a sect" or convince anyone to adhere to any religion. It is just that, as a medium myself, what is contained in Kardec's books is 100% coherent, and extensively and coherently explanatory, to everything I have ever encountered in my mediumnic experiences.


In my story, I tell of some such mediumnic encounters...


:thumbsup:
 
Charles Stuart said:
Hi Fiziwig,
Upon reading Edgar Cayce's testimonies, I must say that to the best of my knowledge what he stated is 100% correct.


...
Click to expand...
The world's best scientists and engineers are NEVER 100% correct. NOBODY is ever 100% correct.


I respect Cayce, and I think a lot of what he said should be studied and taken seriously. But to simply believe it is 100% correct is the kind of blind fundamentalism a good scientist just cannot accept.


If Cayce is 30% correct that still makes him one of the most amazing psychics of all time.


I've been tricked and lied to by too many "experts" and "advanced souls", so personally I will NEVER believe what I'm told by some "authority" I've never met unless I can verify it independently. That's bad science, and this IS the "Science of Reincarnation" forum where we are supposed to discuss good science, not faith.
 
Hi Fitz,


What is good science when it relates to Reincarnation.?? In my case it's all meditation and dreams. Knowings and one regression. In that one regression, I did state my fathers name, that he was a Doctor and we lived in Maryland. I gave my age as 5 and my name as Marnie


I found a man named Doctor Francis Phelps did live in the 1800's in Maryland...but I found no child named Marnie


So what is that? That is interesting but it is not science...


Even with all of the information that Baby_rn has listed,,,,without a name for that Fireman to prove he existed....is that science??


It's Difficult ....most of us have little scientific proof....


If you erace all of the threads that contain no proof....the board would be almost empty I think.
 
In matters of science and history, I think most of us are aware of differentiating between first-hand sources, second-hand sources, and so on. I think Fiz would readily agree that observation can play a part in science; and theories, though not proven, can also be the stuff of science. But, for the sake of science, it cannot engage in treating second-hand or third-hand observations as anything other than distant possibilities that may bear investigation, depending upon the quality and quantity of the sources.


The efforts of Dr. Ian Stevenson and his camp can be considered as something that bears further scientific investigation. Certainly, I think this Section of the Forum was established for people, like myself, who would be most interested in more stories that can be verified. I have to humbly admit that the only reason I've had great interest in Edgar Cayce is because of the sheer volume of readings that have been supposedly verified. I believe he has been decidedly wrong about some things, such as the discovery of Atlantis in 1968, the discovery of ancient millenia-old records that point to Atlantis, and his prediction of the Third World War. But, if several doctors can agree that his medical diagnosis and treatments were, indeed, advanced; then we are probably in the realm of acceptable science.


I can accept the first-hand experiences of most of the members here. However, whether these can be entertained by science can only be judged on a case by case basis. Indeed, some scientists are blind for not investigating what can be investigated. But, science, as a whole is not blind...Just careful. Otherwise, the value of science to most people would be no more credible than any political speech.


-Nightrain
 
The problem is, John, that no matter what 1st hand experience I have had, and attempt to share, will to you and to Gary and everybody else here be second-hand. So what am I to do? I can share what I have encountered, and believe me, I do try. But invariably here on this forum, ever since day one, whatever I have attempted to share has so often come back in the manner of Gary's response. One of the reasons I stopped posting here for so long...


And believe me, I am again wondering if the effort is worth it at all...
 
Oh it's worth it Charles....I love your posts. I used to read them all when you posted 2 years ago? When I joined you were gone and I was very disappointed. Then by golly....here you are again and that pleases me very much....so....Pleae stay.


Fitz is a scientist and he responds as I would expect him to. He does like Cayce or was it Seth...at any rate...I think he really is quite open minded and that is why he posts here...in my opinion


I enjoy reading you both..
 
They DID discover columns in the water off Bimini in 68 or 69. A pilot reported seeing them. Since that time they have discovered much more in the waters off Cuba.


The buried histories you spoke of are to be discovered by 2 men and 1 woman. They are very spiritual people. After that discovery more and more physical changes on earth are to take place. Cayce did not give a year and I hope they don't find them for a long time


The prediction of a 3rd War was what the future held at that time. People can change the future by wanting peace. Future predictions are always subject to change. Cayce was never 100% but he was outstanding in the area of health and I believe he was very accurate in describing peoples past lives.


It was Cayce who spoke of markings on the body in this life from a knife or gunshot wound in a past life. Cayce who said to keep a journal of your dreams because some of your dreams concern your health and some your past lives. I could go on and on about the discussions on this board that all had their birth with Cayce, Seth or Kardec.


When I was 15 and talking about reincarnation, nobody knew what the word meant let alone believed in it. It's all coming into the public's attention just in these last 10 years or so.


As you can see....I'm very fond of Mr. Cayce and would have loved to have met him. We had a black truck that delivered parts to our building. When I would get within 10 feet of this man I could feel the "goodness" seeping out from his body. He was a completely lovely kind person. I think Mr. Cayce would have been another such soul
 
Ha Ha....It was not a black truck...it was a black truck DRIVER....got way ahead of myself and it's late....
 
Regarding Edgar Cayce, I stand corrected. I agree 100% with what he experienced, because they are coherent with my own experiences, but not 100% with his "interpretations". I have shared some of the points I don't agree with here, including the concepts of "no time" and that we ourselves "create" all our realities.


I believe what we must be most observant of in all this concerns precisely the problem of "interpretation". To use the case of the boy who died and "wandered around for a while before choosing a phoetus body to reincarnate into", of course it is possible that he may have "remembered" wandering around, for it is not rare that disincarnated entities might still find themselves attached to the physical realms after disincarnating, and then "remembered" being in a phoetus body upon his reincarnation, but "remembers" nothing at all in between.


I certainly don't agree with everything I hear and read, even what comes through "mediumnically", for even in such cases there is the inevitable interference of the "medium". One must be very observant as to what indeed seems coherent and what does not...
 
Dear Charles,

The problem is, John, that no matter what 1st hand experience I have had, and attempt to share, will to you and to Gary and everybody else here be second-hand. So what am I to do?
Click to expand...
You can post in the community section about spiritual topics such as your religion. This is the Science section. Your posts will be met with rebuttal such as Gary's --who BTW started this thread. Out of respect for his 'space' perhaps you could start another thread in the Community section and allow John, Gary and others to discuss the scientific areas of interest.


Thank You!
 
Deborah, just one of the many misunderstandings here is what you refer to as "your religion". The "religion" I took part in for 12 years was Umbanda, a line of African origin, not Kardecist Spiritism, though I very much respect it...


We were debating Edgar Cayce and mediumnity, and I was referring more to personal experiences than religion.


I am going to be away from the weekend. Please all kindly refrain from any further "detonation" until I get back.


Thank you, and have a great weekend everyone...


Charles
 
Charles Stuart said:
The problem is, John, that no matter what 1st hand experience I have had, and attempt to share, will to you and to Gary and everybody else here be second-hand. So what am I to do? I can share what I have encountered, and believe me, I do try. But invariably here on this forum, ever since day one, whatever I have attempted to share has so often come back in the manner of Gary's response. One of the reasons I stopped posting here for so long...
And believe me, I am again wondering if the effort is worth it at all...
Click to expand...
Sometimes I share your frustration.


Personally, I too have my own faith; things I believe about reincarnation, even though they cannot be backed up scientifically. I respect Cayce, and I am very impressed by the Seth material. But there are other sub-forums in this forum for informally discussing our beliefs. This particular sub-forum was originally supposed to be about scientific approaches, and only about scientific approaches to reincarnation.


The average person responds favorably to the warm personal story with an emotional hook, and is left cold by rows of figures and statistics. But the scientist is left cold by the personal story with the emotional hook, calling it "anecdotal" and referring to it's emotional charge as "manipulative". SO that same average person sees the way the scientist responds to the warm personal story and calls the scientist cold and arrogant.


That's why most people just don't "get" science. They don't respond to the things that are important to science, and get all excited about the things that science considers worthless.


If a careful researcher collects and tabulates first hand stories, for example, about children's past life memories, or near death experiences, that is science. If I tell you a story about something my uncle's neighbor said happened to his mother, that is not science. But if the uncles' neighbor's mother's story is more exciting or emotionally compelling than the first hand account, then the average person will get more excited about that anecdotal story than about the more trustworthy first hand account.


This forum has many excellent categories for discussing those emotionally compelling stories. I, myself enjoy sharing and discussing them. But stories like that really shouldn't be in the science category. Not if this category is supposed to really be about science. And if this sub-forum is all about science, then anyone who posts here has to expect to be met with skepticism and harsh scrutiny. That's how science works.


Maybe I just need to loosen up and get comfortable with the fact that most people who really "get" science are not interested in reincarnation, and most people who are interested in reincarnation really don't "get" science.


That's why the sensationalist titles are the best sellers and Dr. Stevenson's serious academic work has very, very few readers, even among those interested in reincarnation. He is rigorously scientific, and his books, therefore, are VERY boring to people who don't "get" science. A popular author discusses several cases and concludes that they "prove" reincarnation. Dr. Stevenson probes deeply into a collection of much stronger cases and concludes that they are "suggestive of reincarnation" at best. The average person just hates that kind of inconclusive waffling. But that's how science does things.


The truth is science is slow, methodical, plodding, skeptical, slow to believe anything new, intensely detail oriented, and for the average person, very, very boring.


Sure, you might pick up "The Tao of Physics" and read it for fun, but that's not really a scientific book. Would you pick up a physics text book for a little light reading? Of course not. You will read a news article about some scientific breakthrough, but will you look up and read the actual scientific paper that published that breakthrough in the journals? Not a chance! Real science is tedious, mathematical, mostly boring, never definite (everything is always "maybe" or "probably" or "possibly") and very seldom is there anything exciting to say about it.


So I guess I'm just being too fussy and nit-picky. My humble apologies.


:) :) :)


I value and enjoy reading everyone's contributions. Charles: I really do enjoy your posts. Please do keep them coming.


:) :) :)
 
Gary, believe me, I do understand... I have also lost my patience here a number of times and then obviously later inevitably regretted it. I know this Forum is very greatly valuable to both of us, and that we have both extended a very valid effort to work, help, guide and inform about a topic, which for so many is probably just "sheer nonsense", in the best way we can. Funnily enough, very probably because we both KNOW of the reality of the reincarnatory process, even though we cannot "prove" it scientifically or even understand what "physics" and "science" could possibly be behind it.


I shared an event which happened to me here once of when years back discussions were being held here on the Forum concerning the existence or not of God. Some were argumenting that it is "we" who create all that is around us, and at one point I myself began to question His/Her existence, and in fact even truly wondered if this could be so.


A couple of days later, I met the medium who runs the spiritualist centre I used to frequent incorporated by a spiritual entity who presents herself as an old negro slave by the name of "Aunt Rita" (there is a symbology behind the representation of the spiritual entity manifestations in Umbanda), and she turned to me and said: "What was that s*** you were thinking? There IS a God..."


I shared the story here and instantly some started jumping at me saying: "I'm not going to believe that there is a God just because some medium says that there is one..."


But what they failed to see was not the importance of what was said, but the absoluetly wondrous fact that she, in fact the spiritual entity, could possibly know what I had been thinking without my having said absolutely anything to anyone...


But can I prove this event to you or anyone else if not myself? Of course not...
 
I will tell you what....When I had my one regression and I named my father Dr. Francis Phelps from Maryland...further...I described his clothing and said I don't know if he lived in the 1700's or 800's...I was completely correct.


Dr. Phelps was born in 1799 but lived his life in the 1800's. The overcoat he was wearing came into style in 1860.


That is proof enough for me. It was nothing I ever would have thought of prior to that regression.


That's first hand......When I think about it I picture a very correct, rather removed but kind person....
 
Charles Stuart said:
.....


I shared the story here and instantly some started jumping at me saying: "I'm not going to believe that there is a God just because some medium says that there is one..."


But what they failed to see was not the importance of what was said, but the absoluetly wondrous fact that she, in fact the spiritual entity, could possibly know what I had been thinking without my having said absolutely anything to anyone...


But can I prove this event to you or anyone else if not myself? Of course not...
Click to expand...
I once rented an old house in Freemont in the San Fransisco bay area. Shortly after moving in I felt a presence and I suddenly "knew" that the ghost of an old woman named Molly was still in the house. It was a very strong feeling, and I was convinced I was right.


A few days later I asked the landlord if he knew anything about the history of the house. He smiled and said "Oh, I guess you met Molly."


My knees went weak and I very nearly fell over. Hearing him say that was such a complete shock to me. The experience made a very deep impression on me. But, like you said, I can't prove it to anybody. But then I don't really need to. It was my personal experience, meant for me alone.


Unfortunately, however, no matter how impressive that experience was for me personally, it was not science, and nothing about it can ever be made scientific. And you know what? That's OK. Not every truth NEEDS to be proven scientifically.
 
Hi Gary,


I believe "Science" must be very much the art of conclusion based on observation. When I offered what I was, it was not in an intention of going above scientific procedures, but an attempt to offer you some clues, based on what has been possible to observe about spirituality from a mediumnic POV. It was actually done in the hope and intention that it might contribute in some way towards a "scientific" explanation and conclusion.


Just as an example, in some of the NDE testimonies there are narratives of being or having visions of the "Lower Dimensions" (forgive me for the lack of a better word), which are in accordance to what has beeen observed mediumnically. It was this kind of combination I was seeking and was hoping might contribute in some way...


:thumbsup:


Florence, did you get to see the link to Chico Xavier? In case you might have missed it, the thread about him is in the Community Reflections section under the name "Francisco Xavier"...
 
Unfortunately, however, no matter how impressive that experience was for me personally, it was not science, and nothing about it can ever be made scientific. And you know what? That's OK. Not every truth NEEDS to be proven scientifically....
Click to expand...
I love the scientific method. It has brought great boons to our physical well being and prosperity. The advancement of medicine, the breakthroughs with vaccines, many wonderful inventions that make our lives easier and more comfortable, such as the computer. Without careful experimentation, constant skepticism and intellectual rigour we would still be thinking that disease was caused by evil spirits and huddling in caves ...


There is obviously something going on 'out there' - past physical death. The facts are simply too large to ignore. Of course the story of one's neighbour's aunt, no matter how compelling is not 'proof' of anything. But thousands and thousands of stories for centuries and centuries, across cultural and language and religious boundaries is evidence that there is something going on and death is not the 'end' of anything.


Of course the story of one medium speaking to the spirit of a slave is not incontrovertable proof that God (however you conceive Her) exists. But when the phenomenon is repeated in other parts of the world, by other people - from Edgar Cayce to the oracle of Delphi, when so many people claim to be in contact with the 'spirit world' in so many countries and as part of so many religions (many of them very ancient) - you can bet there is something going on.


So why doesn't the scientific establishment look into these things? Why do they claim that all of this human experience is delusion at best or falsehood at worst?


It is mostly because our science likes to look at the physical world of matter and energy and does not really consider anything outside of that to be within its 'bailliwick'. Perhaps that's OK? Perhaps that's a good thing? Maybe we don't want a bunch of guys with pencils sticking out of their pockets waving butterfly nets around in 'heaven'? :)


Maybe these questions are really more for philosophers anyway?


But, there are actually some people dipping their toes into this issue. This article from a link DDKing provided below is worth a look:


http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/33055601/ns/today-today_health/


New study: What really happens when we die
 
Yvonne Leefkens


Although it remains unverifiable, I investigated (together with Anny Dirven) a really interesting Dutch case of a Near-Death Experience that seems closely related to a possible reference to a previous life.


It concerned Mrs. Yvonne Leefkens who while giving birth to her son Fabio lost a lot of blood on August 25th 1968. She experienced a classical NDE. One day later, as she was holding her newborn baby in her arms, she had a vision of a dead blond young man who had been shot. He looked terribly wounded and maimed. The man was covered in blood and sand. Just a few moments later, the vision was replaced by her son again.


She was shocked by what she had seen, as she feared it might be related to a future death in battle.


However, as a young boy, Fabio turned out to panic when he saw a beach. He also developed an odd fascination for the Second World War and he used to abreact his agression by displaying 'military' behavior.


Around 1975, Jelle Veeman, a well-known Dutch psychic and healer spontaneously claimed to have seen a link between Fabio's phobic response to beaches and D-Day, without knowing anything about Yvonne's vision. Please note that this happened after Fabio had started showing his fascination for World War II.


If we interpret Yvonne's experience as a vision of her son's previous life (akin to an announcing dream), it seems rather obvious that her psychic impressions are somehow related to her NDE of the day before.


Titus Rivas
 
Titus Rivas said:
For a Dutch article about this case, see: Een BDE en beelden uit het verleden: Ervaringen van de familie Leefkens
It is also part of our recent book in Dutch, Van en naar het Licht.


Titus Rivas
Click to expand...
Hi Titus! I very much enjoy your learned posts, and your keen involvement in the research of Past Lives. I have used Google Translate to obtain an English version of "Een BDE en Beelden uit het verleden", but cannot make it accessible to other members of the Past Life Forum. Would you or anyone know, how I can do so? Perhaps, with permission, I can cut and paste the article onto a dedicated thread. Any thoughts?


-Nightrain
 
Hi Nightrain,


Thanks for the compliments! :thumbsup:


Concerning the translation, I suppose you have tried simply copying and pasting the translated text into a word document?


My permission would be no problem, of course.


Titus
 
Titus Rivas said:
Concerning the translation, I supposed you have tried simply copying and pasting the translated text into a word document?
My permission would be no problem, of course.
Click to expand...
Hi Titus!


Yes I could either paste the text (without) images to a Word document. Or, I can reformat the whole thing with images into a Layout application like Adobe InDesign, then save it to a PDF document. However, I would need to know how we can make it accessible to members. Any ideas?


The translation isn't great, but it seems to get the basic ideas across. I would imagine, however, that you might like your article to be more professionally presented. Wouldn't you? It certainly deserves the effort. What do you think?


-Nightrain
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top