Theos-Talk Archives (May 1995 Message tl00038)

Eldon'

What you're saying is that if you just try to be analytical &
rational, your reasonable thought- castle will eventually fall
apart.  Don't you think that's what the scientists have now found
out, & why more of them have been looking at metaphysics & etc?
It's why I like Assagioli, who invented psycho-synthesis, instead
of psycho- analysis.

What Serge King tried to tell us, & I often forget, is that my
certainty may not necessarily also be the next guy's.  A person's
view of what is out there is relative, subjective.  "Certainty
grounded in exepriementation & personal experience is a healthy
thing." Agreed, It's a lot sounder than listening to someone else
tell you what you should see out there, & you just believing (&
seeing) whatever they tell ya.  Often the experimentation &
personal experience of 1 person overlaps with another, especially
if they're both living in the same culture, but not always.  I've
been told that, since the beliefs of what happens to a person
after death vary so widely, and much of these states are based on
thought, your after death state might be partly just what you
think it's going to be.  People who've had NDE's have seen a holy
figure, just for instance, who was very loving.  They all seem to
have this glorious vision in common.  Depending on the person's
beliefs & inclinations the vision can be Jesus, Mary, The Buddha,
a Master, Moses, or Muhamad & etc.  The ND person is sure of what
it is they experienced, but it doesn't necessarily match exactly
the next guy's experience.  Seems to me that all such experiences
ought to be accepted as valid, because the general outlines
match.  But that is based on my "experimentation" which consists
of comparing several accounts of NDE's.  I've been taught that I
shouldn't go around saying that one experience is right & the
other isn't.  The experiences are right for whoever had them.

Namaste

Liesel