My grandfather describes the after-life in a dream from 1987

....My grandfather was there, a fact that astounded me, since he is dead. The scene was vivid and life-like. No one seemed to see my grandfather except me. I got the impression that he was appearing to me because of my interest in the life-after- death state. We had a long conversation. His main point was that he was staying at a place that was very much like the physical earth. He stated that often the newly deceased will rearrange small, personal items of symbolic value in the homes of relatives to gain their attention and to prove that they are in a state similar to those who are alive. He stated that the dead coexist with the living on the physical earth, that they are aware of the living, but that the living cannot see them. I remarked that his plane must be a very big place, for there are more dead than living, but then I realized that I had read the reason for this elsewhere. Another major point was that the dead and living share the same physical landmarks and features, but they are used by each in different ways. Amazed, I asked whether in his world there was a Canada north of the US, and he smiled as though I had missed his point.

Dream of the after-death state from 2001

This morning I dreamed that I was visiting the after-death world. This was a long and elaborate dream; in the main part, I was hanging around some people, asking questions. There were several people that I was asking. The gist of the information is that in this particular level that I was in, the world was pretty much identical to the physical world. I asked about marriage, and they said that you remain married to the person that you were married to in life. I realized that this is the origin of reports that I had gotten about extended families being close-by after death. A woman said something about not doing something or she would get hurt, and I asked what happened if the body in this after-world got injured or severely damaged; she said that it would have to be "burned" but it would be replaced. I got the impression that there were physical distances of a sort to be traversed; there were locations, etc., which would explain the difficulty in the dead to travel to, and communicate with, the living. However, I got the impression that I could visit this area without difficulty.

Finally replaced the smoke alarm battery

The smoke alarm went off about a month ago; we had to remove the battery to stop it. There was no fire or even smoke. Simultaneously, in another house, another smoke alarm went off at the same time. We think it was tripped by the restless spirit of a woman who died violently in a car crash a couple of weeks earlier. After her death, bedsheets were moved without cause, and children saw her image at a local playground. I have read (somewhere) that an entity has three days after death to "go to the light," and if this does not happen, the entity is trapped in the near-earth astral plane for an indefinite time. I would like to hope that this is not absolutely true. However, the gruesomeness of her death, the vivid signals that she left afterward, and, finally, the smoke alarm, convinced me that she was not only a powerful spirit but also very unsettled, and I have been afraid to tamper with whole experience until now.

After all, what is to stop her from tripping the smoke alarm again?

In defense of Monica Holy

I'm currently back-listening to the Coast To Coast episode with Ian Punnett and Monica Holy. I always enjoy listening to Ms. Holy. I purchased and read her book and probably ought to re-read it; I didn't absorb much from it on first read, which means that I should give it a second look.

However, whilst Googling "Monica Holy" I stumbled upon a blog critiquing the "unholy Ian Punnett" and (by implication) even less holy Ms. Holy. The writer seems quite affronted by the New Agey-ness of Ms. Holy, and the apparent enabling Ian Punnett (who, in my opinion, is the most thoughtful of the C2C hosts by leagues, even when I don't agree with him).

I guess I'm finally too old to become angry over the opinions of others. A writer that I particularly admire, Christopher Hitchens, is bothering to defend atheism by debating a non-athiest in Birmingham tomorrow. I say that he is "bothering" to debate the issue because, sooner rather than later, he will likely find out whether he is wrong or right on the God issue--as so we all shall. I mean, this is just an incontrovertible, inarguable fact. He will find out. And so what his opinion is on the matter is not really important. I think he should be allowed to have his opinion, if it inspires him to continue to write as well as he has. I disagree with him, but I enjoy his writing.

It is for that reason that I've removed several of the "debunking" entries to this blog... those were the entries that were getting all the hits, and debunking is not what I'm about. Most people with a high-school equivalent education can sort out the frauds for themselves anyway, soon or later.

Ms. Holy would probably characterize herself as "New Age," and she references several New Age personalities, which does not add credit to her work. Sylvia Browne has been debunked into the ground; Alison Dubois likewise, though not as publicly; just check out the Phoenix New Times article referenced in her Wikipedia article (which should be required reading for anyone venturing into this field). I remember reading Wayne Dyer's "self-help" books in the '70s, and it seems to me that he is just hitching his wagon to the New Age field in the 00s because this is what sells books now. However, just as I am not bothered by the opinions of others, I try to differentiate between credible actors in the New Age field and those who are mercenary shills. And I find Monica Holy credible. The "fringe-dweller" activities that she describes in her nocturnal experiences has been well-documented in the esoteric literature. I've experienced it myself as well. And for me, the acid test always is personal experience. So... my recommendation is to keep an open mind on the issue. And I will write more later on some of the experiences that can be had in the "fringe."

Dreams?

Been thinking a lot today.  No, not about one of my fav Ben Folds songs; about dreams. In a recent Paratopia (not sure which one, but it was recent), Jeremy Vaeni went to some length downplaying the entertainment value of dreams. He's touched on this a few times before, so I imagine that it's a pet peeve of his. And everyone has a pet peeve. (Mine is Ramtha.)

Regrettably, he's probably right. The dreams of most people are boring because, well, the minds and lives of most people (I won't exclude myself) are boring.

Having kept a fairly complete dream journal for, well... a long time, I can think of only a handful of my dreams that would interest the general public.

Which is not to say that I haven't learned a lot. It's just that dreams--and here is my Joseph Campbell moment--essentially compose a personal mythology, and personal myths rarely translate well for anyone else but that person.

The paucity of merit that plagues much New Age-think is down to that--some Joe Schmoe who, a time or two, had a supernatural insight and thought to parlay this into a universal revelation.

Add that to the fact that most minds--conscious or otherwise--are largely unexamined, and we have a lethal combination of inexplicability masquerading as revelation.

Even brilliant writers fall prey. As many excellent words as have been pinned by Whitley Strieber, my first thought on completing "The Key" was that he should have taken a step or two away from the subject matter and written something better.  Because, to me, much of what his mysterious stranger attempts to reveal, really doesn't make a lot of sense to me, and the part that does, causes me to disbelieve him.  "The Key" is a personal revelation that may, or may not, have universal application.

This is all very subjective, I realize. I've spent years studying the Seth material because I find value there. Many people dismiss the Seth material as indecipherable.

The handful of my personal dreams that I think might be interesting fall into two categories: My precognitive ones, because they prove (to me) that the concept of time that we are taught by classic science is very flawed; and my dream encounters with the dead, because the information that I've been given in them proves (to me) that consciousness survives.  Would these dreams interest anyone else? Maybe.

I can say, however, that in my extensive dream study, I have had to radically adjust my beliefs about physical life and how our world operates, and I think I can persuade skeptics who are wedded to the classic materialistic worldview that there is an alternative.

Just like every other New Age-think person.