Commentary thread for tim's "NDE's" thread

"What is it about the experience that makes you think it was a product of his unconscious mind ? When you are clinically dead you're not supposed to be able to think."

The unconscious mind is capable of elaborate constructions. Stephen Braude thinks the Patience Worth phenomenon was probably creative unconscious fabrication combined with ESP. We just don't know if the unconscious mind is carried over after physical death or during near death into the spirit body.

"Why would it be that when you receive 18 broken bones and a fractured skull you suddenly start subconsciously confabulating NDE's and past lives ? 80% of people who nearly die don't report them. If it was somehow a 'by product' of a medical crisis, shouldn't everybody report them" 

That we don't have knowledge of any actual mechanism is no more mysterious than the fact that for unknown reasons NDEs only happen in 15% or less of cardiac arrests, for instance.

The unconscious mind is capable of elaborate constructions.

Unconscious, yes but not deeply comatose (apparently) at least if one is referring to what the brain is supposed to be able to do. Then again it's a grey area so there's no point in arguing about that.

I don't think we're talking about the same things here, nbtruthman. Therefore I'll leave it there and thanks for the comments anyway.

Very interesting, Natalie Sudman's nde.
Start 2:15 in, ad before that.

Thanks Steve - a really interesting account so far (and I'm not yet half-way through but need to break off to do something).

[EDIT: Finished watching it now - excellent. Thanks again.]

Curious. I listened to most of it. Where she was describing her experience I found it interesting, but she seems to do a lot extrapolating too and it was difficult for me to distinguish how much of it is her theorising and how much actual fact. Thanks for posting it.

Curious. I listened to most of it. Where she was describing her experience I found it interesting, but she seems to do a lot extrapolating too and it was difficult for me to distinguish how much of it is her theorising and how much actual fact. Thanks for posting it.

I think she sort of comments on that during the questions following her talk. She was asked whether she believed in any of this spiritual stuff before her NDE and she confirmed that she has always been aware of spirits since childhood and that this experience kind of solidified her theories into a knowing. 

In that respect, I think I understand what she means (although I have no comparable experience). It is not surprising that she would experience something which reflected her understanding to that point in her life. So the NDE could have been a confirmation that she needed in order to progress. The question of "actual fact" is a difficult one because, as she explains, the experience is, by nature, subjective. She describes how she can remember it in different ways, with beings of light or - if she chooses - beings of a completely different appearance. Yet the message remains the same no matter how the subjective details are manipulated by her memory.

I think she sort of comments on that during the questions following her talk. She was asked whether she believed in any of this spiritual stuff before her NDE and she confirmed that she has always been aware of spirits since childhood and that this experience kind of solidified her theories into a knowing. 

In that respect, I think I understand what she means (although I have no comparable experience). It is not surprising that she would experience something which reflected her understanding to that point in her life. So the NDE could have been a confirmation that she needed in order to progress. The question of "actual fact" is a difficult one because, as she explains, the experience is, by nature, subjective. She describes how she can remember it in different ways, with beings of light or - if she chooses - beings of a completely different appearance. Yet the message remains the same no matter how the subjective details are manipulated by her memory.

Thanks Kamarling, I’ll skip to the questions

It’s not the descriptions of the experience I have any issue with and I agree that there’s no factual content (at least so far) - that doesn’t trouble me when she’s clearly describing either her view of the experience or things she’s actually saying she was told. She’s obviously had a  very important personal experience.

It’s more about the lessons she is drawing from that experience. It created, for me,  an impression that this was some enormous game we’re playing and that nothing really seems to matter, it’s all ‘love and light’ etc. Now it could be that everything she is saying is perfectly true, but it did create an impression of someone who, having had a personally amazing experience, then extrapolates it into some kind of fundamental insight into the way the universe works and what life here is about.

I’ve read a lot of that kind of thing over the years - Seth, Celestine Prophecies etc and although it was interesting it gave me the impression of someone giving me the answer to everything. Something I view with a degree of scepticism.

Thanks Kamarling, I’ll skip to the questions

It’s not the descriptions of the experience I have any issue with and I agree that there’s no factual content (at least so far) - that doesn’t trouble me when she’s clearly describing either her view of the experience or things she’s actually saying she was told. She’s obviously had a  very important personal experience.

It’s more about the lessons she is drawing from that experience. It created, for me,  an impression that this was some enormous game we’re playing and that nothing really seems to matter, it’s all ‘love and light’ etc. Now it could be that everything she is saying is perfectly true, but it did create an impression of someone who, having had a personally amazing experience, then extrapolates it into some kind of fundamental insight into the way the universe works and what life here is about.

I’ve read a lot of that kind of thing over the years - Seth, Celestine Prophecies etc and although it was interesting it gave me the impression of someone giving me the answer to everything. Something I view with a degree of scepticism.

I think it might actually be seen like a game - or at least a creative project like writing a script for a life and acting out that script. However, I think it does matter - indeed, I think that the physical life is probably chosen because it provides such valuable experiences. But the love and light you talk about is the actual reality and from there we can see - as she did - that we return to that unharmed.

I doubt that we can imagine how she really felt and that her description of this life from that vantage point was a kind of best effort because the words available can't do justice to an experience which has no parallel in this life.

I think it might actually be seen like a game - or at least a creative project like writing a script for a life and acting out that script. However, I think it does matter - indeed, I think that the physical life is probably chosen because it provides such valuable experiences. But the love and light you talk about is the actual reality and from there we can see - as she did - that we return to that unharmed.

I doubt that we can imagine how she really felt and that her description of this life from that vantage point was a kind of best effort because the words available can't do justice to an experience which has no parallel in this life.

Hm. I can see that it would be a 'best effort' to describe. Maybe it's like playing a VHS tape back on a Betamax player?  

It is one of those subjects that becomes more complex the more one looks at it isn't it?  When I read after death communications,  there are certainly areas of commonality with NDEs and also seemingly major differences. Funnily enough, a lot of what she talks about corresponds quite well with the teachings of Silver Birch, which I have always found to be pretty sensible and logical really. It's a conundrum.

I find it difficult to resolve the different accounts sometimes. I guess that's why I like to see evidential content where possible but that doesn't mean that the experiences aren't exactly what the person reporting them says they are. I suppose a lot of it depends on the character and experience of the person reporting the event. Such descriptions are always going to be subjective and couched in language that the individual is used to.

Very interesting nonetheless.

I’ve read a lot of that kind of thing over the years - Seth, Celestine Prophecies etc and although it was interesting it gave me the impression of someone giving me the answer to everything. Something I view with a degree of scepticism.

By the way - I agree entirely that her talk includes familiar themes. Some of the language is identical to the Seth Material which leads me to believe that she has at least compared notes with the Seth books and found common ground.

" only forty more years"
Rather captured my fancy.

" only forty more years"
Rather captured my fancy.

I must have missed that...?