From: ur-valhalla!azstarnet.com!mulcybr (Stephen Harris)
Subject: Immortality
Message-ID: <199510141942.MAA20670@web.azstarnet.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 12:42:21 -0700

->  SearchNet's   ruow   Mailing List

>
>->  SearchNet's   ruow   Mailing List
>
>Hello all,
>
>I've been away and I may not be sure who is saying what here but I would
>like to explore a statement below that I believe is from Stephen
>
>>
>>      We all have our own agendas and denial. For instance staying immortal
>>       in the body is a blatant fear of death denied.
>>
>
>This is an interesting question and I may be isunderstanding your meaning
>here ... are you suggesting that there have been folks that have 'stayed
>immortal in the body' ?  And that they are in denial of the fear of death
>for doing so? I'm not sure at all that anyone has ever achieved physical


  This statement means that there are people who have the agenda of
  staying immortal in the body due to the fear of death.

  It is not possible for me to give background for everything I write because
  it would make my posts 50 or 60 pages long. Different people with
  different information in their background read them so there is no way
  for me to specifically know what needs to be amplified. There is a whole
  group of people called Immortalists who are in the cast of Leonard Orr
  who mostly created Rebirthing as a means of releasing past trauma.
  Now Orr claims to get his view from Babaji mentioned in Autobiography
  of a Yogi...Babaji has quite a following from different points of view in
  different lineages. Sometimes called the Ancient of Days some see him
  as immortal. Others see him as a Manu which I think is 26,000 years
  and put forth by the Theosophists. Now according to who they have read
  people argue about who has what Role, their ages and so on based
  on they WANT to believe is an authority in this matter. Of course their
  is conflict, the contention is based upon a matter of opinion. Though
  the devotees of a particular opinion will say they have The Truth and
  another cult will say they have The Truth depending on what they they
  Want to believe and will see others as having opinions but they have the
  real McCoy who I know happen to know is related to Kilroy the oldest. 

  Now I wrote before that denial by exclusion, for instance, agreeing that
  what I wrote describes just about everybody Except me and my cherished
  belief is something we all have in common...what I have written so far
  could offend the IAMers, the Yoganandas and the Immortalists but not
  those of Ashtar Command because someone a little less evolvedmay have
  Tactical and laser my computer. I notice my monitor has been losing pixels.

  I have gone from rebirthing to A Course in Miracles to AA Bailey  to the
  Keys of Enoch to the Book of Urantia and so on. I have noticed that each
  perspective has filled me with enthusiasm for awhile until I got what I
  needed, then the defiency shows, and I move on, and the process repeats
  until I no longer expect to find The Answer in The Book. Each time I had
  to give up some cherished beliefs. It is my view that there is such a book
  is a type of denial. The prerequisite is looking within and the rest serve as
  electives. Even this view is not an exact description of spiritual growth.
  This type of uncertainty goes hard for those who are looking for security.
  To actually may a choice about staying immortal in the body requires
  the actual experience or knowing of life without body. Otherwise one is
  just speculating on information provided by others without verifying that
  what they write about it is not based on what someone else has written.
  We are not in a position to make a choice unless both sides of the coin
  are equally well known to us in our own experience. Tho people justify it.

  People say so and so is an ascended master or a guru, I will follow hir.
  How do they know this if they are not? Many of the gurus say the answer
  lies within do not follow me (some fakes have learned to say this by now)
  but the devotees don't listen to this; this is the one area that the devotee
  is more enlightened than the guru. This is denial at work again. Justifying.

>whose to say that that isn't what God originally (or still?) desired for us?

  I do not think this can be said definitely. But mentioning a possibility
  does not confer plausibility of yes or no 50 per cent. I see this reasoning
  used all the time to justify what someone wants to believe is 50% likely.

>I have often wondered what it means when, after all the religious teachings,
>training, indoctrination, assurance, etc. that tell us hat life 'hereafter'
>is really groovy and 'heaven' is really much cooler than life here 'on the
>physical plane' or whatever we want to call it. When it really comes down to
>giving up the ghost you so often see everyone (regardless of how suicidal
>they have lived their lives ... ie lifestyle and health issues et al)
>suddenly decide that life is precious and will do almost anything to stay
>present in the body.

  Yes. And there are crazy people, not just people with alternate perspectives.
  When it comes down to it, how many people wish to have the insights of a
  person coming toward them with a dripping axe. I think they are most likely
  to lock the door, call 911 and then go to the computer to post on: Do I Exist?


>There seems to be an innate desire to stay physical. This could be due to

  I think this is God given instinct which is quite healthy. It is the distorted
  instincts which cause conflict with people who also have distorted instinct.

>overriding deep subconcious fear of death as you seem to suggest .. but I
>can see also how according to ruow if the physical creation *is* the 4th
>part of God then perhaps, though through all 'the troubles' we have been
>forced to accept death, we were never intended to die a physical death as I

>believe the books suggest. That the seemingly natural innate resistance to
>physical death is the resentment the body has had to hold and eat everytime
>it is asked or forced to give up it's spirit. ....

  Well, I am not sure about this. We are here to live and learn seems likely.
  That we are here to learn how to make the body permanent in the sense
  of immortal is in contrast to the learning experience that I have had so far.
  For instance my experience of spiritual growth has been of shedding old
  conceptions/preconceptions and expanding awareness into new plateaus.

  Which is another way of saying releasing denial and accepting reality.
  Accepting reality  as it is means discarding habituation. Raising the
  frequency of awareness so thatone is awake to more options and to make
  conscious choices more frequently/frequency goes up.

  To me it is more likely we grow a new body perhaps etheric. I do think
  there will be certain analogs of the physical body. I'm speculating.

  That last little part that I sectioned off about 'body resentment'. There
  are parts of RUOW which seem vaguely inconsistent to me. The ideas
  are not as new to me as to some other readers. Like the Jungian and
  Leonard Orr references. I am not able to hold the books in reverence.
  This is why I wondered if I ought to be on the mailing list because I
  know several have the Aha, eureka. feeling. Disillusionment is a
  spiritual blessing. Until this is known apart from the ideal, I see posts
  saying take medication for depression! So I didn't know if this was a
  good place to be in terms of compatibility. I highly regard RUOW for
  the emphasis upon the unseen role of denial in our daily lives. It will
  be awhile before I expand any of this last paragraph. Too much typing.

 Cordially,
 Stephen


->  Posted by: mulcybr@AZStarNet.com (Stephen Harris)

---SnetMgr 0.60 [r0001]
 * Origin: i_ufo-l@world.std.com <-> FidoNet (1:330/202)