Theosophy

Charles Wood73 said:That’s just a sign that you aren't in Kansas anymore. 😬

Maybe it's sepia? You know, those lower realms, or perhaps a longing for the past. Or blue on blue... that whole "dreamtime" concept where reality exists before material creation even begins, blending the past, present, and future into one. I’ve heard people talk about shamanic patterns, though I wouldn't know much about theosophical stuff.

I had this one experience where my living room looked exactly like it did years ago, except everything was bathed in this intense blue light. Then another time, I saw the room as it looks right now, but in that weird sepia tint, and there was extra furniture scattered around—stuff that definitely never existed in my house. I've read some stuff suggesting this might be linked to aura colors, but honestly, I doubt if any "Theosophists" would agree with that take. It's frustrating because every time I try to find actual scientific papers on this kind of thing, they're dead silent.

darkraven said:I had this one experience where my living room looked exactly like it did years ago, except everything was bathed in this intense blue light. Then another time, I saw the room as it looks right now, but in that weird sepia tint, and there was extra furniture scattered around—stuff that definitely never existed in my house. I've read some stuff suggesting this might be linked to aura colors, but honestly, I doubt if any "Theosophists" would agree with that take. It's frustrating because every time I try to find actual scientific papers on this kind of thing, they're dead silent.

Science is nowhere near addressing this. We simply aren't the kind of civilization where science and these phenomena overlap; they are two distinct realms. Our current scientific framework, while sound from an epistemological standpoint, remains stubbornly materialistic.
When I say materialist, I am referring to the most basic, physical matter.

One cannot reasonably expect science to investigate such things. Sure, methodologically it could—since those methods belong, to borrow a phrase from Slavinski / Leadbeater, to the world of ideas or at least to what is termed the devahanski level—but the motivation is always experimentation centered on physical matter. It is pure scientific positivism.

The devahanski realm isn't a world built on thought.

Thoughts belong to the reality closest to us. In fact, they're essentially the first thing we encounter when we enter that space through a healthy, conscious lens rather than a pathological one.

Another issue is that most people can't even wrap their heads around the idea of an existence that isn't rooted in thought, simply because our entire daily lives are constructed around them.

It’s much like how difficult it is to grasp the concept of an existence that exists outside of time.

But honestly, these are pretty great topics for contemplation.

Drew Moore5 said:The devahanski realm isn't a world built on thought.

Thoughts belong to the reality closest to us. In fact, they're essentially the first thing we encounter when we enter that space through a healthy, conscious lens rather than a pathological one.

Another issue is that most people can't even wrap their heads around the idea of an existence that isn't rooted in thought, simply because our entire daily lives are constructed around them.

It’s much like how difficult it is to grasp the concept of an existence that exists outside of time.

But honestly, these are pretty great topics for contemplation.

Thoughts and PURE IDEAS are simply not synonymous.

Brian Young76 said:Up until this point, I suppose everything I’ve read from you regarding the intersection of music and mathematics has been focused on the numerical side of things. You know, numbers, ratios, quantitative data... you’ve mentioned before that math is a spiritual discipline just as much as music is, and that viewing mathematics through an exclusively numerical lens is quite limiting, which I think is a very fair point. I wonder, though, if you could perhaps elaborate on that more? Could you try to bridge that spiritual dimension of mathematics with the spiritual essence found in music?

Or maybe looking at it this way: take a solo by Charlie Parker, let's say this one again:

Is there a way to analyze this using mathematics? I mean, why does it resonate so deeply? To my ears, I hear these completely unpredictable rhythms; in those faster passages, he seems to be playing slightly ahead of the beat, then lagging behind, or sometimes he just 'swallows' a note, implying it without actually playing it. He finds this rhythmic unpredictability by varying his dynamics and accents, yet somehow, the whole thing remains perfectly in pocket... it feels more like a language to me. Parker isn't just playing notes; he’s speaking and singing. He’s conveying a message, a spiritual message, and I guess that’s why it sounds so incredible. What kind of mathematics would you even use to analyze something like that?

I'm genuinely curious, so I figured I'd ask. 🙂

And yeah, I realize this is a bit off-topic, but if we allow ourselves a slightly broader interpretation, I really believe it ties back into spirituality, and perhaps even into Theosophy.

Of course it can be analyzed mathematically. But the real question is: why would we bother? If you find Parker compelling, then that is simply the reality. We could attempt to analyze *why* he appeals to you, but that wouldn't be mathematics—it would be psychology.

Paul Ross2 said:Thoughts and PURE IDEAS are simply not synonymous.

"Thought" is a much broader term; it encompasses ideas, concepts, and preconceptions.
Which, obviously, is an imprecise way to put it. You can't really pin it down with total precision anyway.

Drew Moore5 said:"Thought" is a much broader term; it encompasses ideas, concepts, and preconceptions.
Which, obviously, is an imprecise way to put it. You can't really pin it down with total precision anyway.

No. Ideas aren't just products of thought—that’s a purely materialistic, process-oriented way of looking at what an idea actually is. Ideas are concepts. Algebra exists even if there isn't a single human soul around to calculate it. Proportions exist regardless of whether a mind is there to perceive them.

You can decide any word means whatever you want it to mean.

It’s about whether you actually experienced a pure idea or you didn't.
And there's no need to overthink whether it was "the thing" or not. You just know with absolute certainty. Call it whatever you like.

Sandra Murphy33 said:On an intellectual and informational level, the best explanations I've found came from Tibetan teachings (The Book of Life and Death) and Steiner’s lectures regarding the interval between death and rebirth.👍

Later, I "supplemented" that knowledge with certain pieces of so-called angelic literature😁—specifically the works of Barbara B. Brennan. Her perspective felt credible to me precisely because she approaches things as a physicist. I’ve never been able to resonate with those gurus from the East; I’ve always gravitated toward Western thinkers. It makes me wonder if I was simply "learning" through a different channel back then.🙄

I think I’m gonna go hunt down some Steiner, though honestly, I’ve only really skimmed a little bit of his stuff online so far. There’s also that Sylvia Braun lady with her book *Life After Life* and a few others that are pretty solid, plus Michael Newton too. And man, Daskalos is just such a totally realized, enlightened mystic—his Truth Seekers group is honestly top-tier. Oh, and Leadbiter as well! I feel like all of them add their own little flavor to the whole mystery of what actually happens between lives. I mean, even that *Emerald* stuff by those two Frenchmen who are like astral travelers... yeah, all that. Anyway, I just really want to dive into Steiner and see how he pieces his version of the puzzle together.

Sandra Murphy33 said:On an intellectual and informational level, the best explanations I've found came from Tibetan teachings (The Book of Life and Death) and Steiner’s lectures regarding the interval between death and rebirth.👍

Later, I "supplemented" that knowledge with certain pieces of so-called angelic literature😁—specifically the works of Barbara B. Brennan. Her perspective felt credible to me precisely because she approaches things as a physicist. I’ve never been able to resonate with those gurus from the East; I’ve always gravitated toward Western thinkers. It makes me wonder if I was simply "learning" through a different channel back then.🙄

So, I was just thinking about why people even use that whole "angelic literature" label, you know? Like, what does that even mean really? Personally, I’m such a huge fan of Barbara B. Brennan—she is honestly just incredible when it comes to all that healing stuff. It feels like she’s the only one who really dives deep into things like Hari, that central star, and those more obscure details you just don't see everywhere else. She has this way of seeing energies that is just... wow, it's so incredibly good. I guess it's just her unique gift or something.

Maybe you could try tapping into that connection with the East, you know? I mean, Meher Baba—he was such an incredible avatar—he had this way of talking about all sorts of heavy topics, like life and death, in a way that just felt so simple and direct. It’s kind of wild when you think about it. But honestly, if there's one big thing I think we should all hold onto from what he taught, it's this: if we can just focus our thoughts on God at the exact moment of death, then we go straight to Him, and I guess that means there's no more being reborn here on Earth. Just total peace, maybe. 🙂 I mean, if we actually want to pull that off, I guess we’d pretty much have to keep Him on our minds every single day, you know? Like, it's not just a once-in-a-while thing, maybe we really need to be thinking about Him constantly if we're serious.

Drew Moore5 said:You can decide any word means whatever you want it to mean.

It’s about whether you actually experienced a pure idea or you didn't.
And there's no need to overthink whether it was "the thing" or not. You just know with absolute certainty. Call it whatever you like.

The reality is, you can't actually "experience" a pure idea. A pure idea simply *is*. It represents a perfect truth. What we experience is merely its echo—a subjective interpretation.

Gregory Jackson said:I think I’m gonna go hunt down some Steiner, though honestly, I’ve only really skimmed a little bit of his stuff online so far. There’s also that Sylvia Braun lady with her book *Life After Life* and a few others that are pretty solid, plus Michael Newton too. And man, Daskalos is just such a totally realized, enlightened mystic—his Truth Seekers group is honestly top-tier. Oh, and Leadbiter as well! I feel like all of them add their own little flavor to the whole mystery of what actually happens between lives. I mean, even that *Emerald* stuff by those two Frenchmen who are like astral travelers... yeah, all that. Anyway, I just really want to dive into Steiner and see how he pieces his version of the puzzle together.

So, I was just thinking about why people even use that whole "angelic literature" label, you know? Like, what does that even mean really? Personally, I’m such a huge fan of Barbara B. Brennan—she is honestly just incredible when it comes to all that healing stuff. It feels like she’s the only one who really dives deep into things like Hari, that central star, and those more obscure details you just don't see everywhere else. She has this way of seeing energies that is just... wow, it's so incredibly good. I guess it's just her unique gift or something.

Maybe you could try tapping into that connection with the East, you know? I mean, Meher Baba—he was such an incredible avatar—he had this way of talking about all sorts of heavy topics, like life and death, in a way that just felt so simple and direct. It’s kind of wild when you think about it. But honestly, if there's one big thing I think we should all hold onto from what he taught, it's this: if we can just focus our thoughts on God at the exact moment of death, then we go straight to Him, and I guess that means there's no more being reborn here on Earth. Just total peace, maybe. 🙂 I mean, if we actually want to pull that off, I guess we’d pretty much have to keep Him on our minds every single day, you know? Like, it's not just a once-in-a-while thing, maybe we really need to be thinking about Him constantly if we're serious.

Steiner describes it with almost clinical precision. He provides a stunningly detailed account of how a person (again) experiences their life within the etheric body before returning that body to the ether, and how the memories of those who have passed actually linger everywhere around us... then he covers how one continues through the astral plane, navigating desires, attractions, and repulsions, before finally reaching the mental realm... where only the "I" remains, stripped bare: the core of a person, their fundamental will.
Compared to Steiner, the other authors feel more like they're writing fiction.

Why call it "angelic literature"? I love B. Brennan; she’s brilliant when it comes to healing. She’s one of the few people you can find insights on Hari, the central star, and other obscure matters. Barbara sees energies, and she does it exceptionally well.

Try resonating with the East as well. Meher Baba, an avatar, speaks simply and clearly on a vast array of topics (including death, in part). The most vital thing to remember from Baba is that if we focus our thoughts on God at the moment of death, we go to God, and there are no more births on Earth.🙂 To be able to do that, however, we have to keep Him in our thoughts every single day.

Brennan suggests that we are God—that we are a part of Him. She doesn't carry that heavy religious undertone that Baba does; there isn't a cult of personality involved, which makes her more credible to me (personally, I am anti-religious and anti-follower 😎 ).

Her description of a surgery was particularly striking; she saw how everything was being handled by angels. She described it so vividly that it stuck with me. Add to that the testimony of Lorna Byrne, who has been socializing with angels since birth (they thought she was slow, she barely got into school, plus she has dyslexia), and the stories of these two wonderful women overlap perfectly. For me, the fact that they both refer to them as angels is a reality.😬
I have this habit—though I'm not sure if it's a serious practice or just my way of finding a laugh—where for any important task, I call upon the angels who specialize in or wish to work in that field to come help me. In fact, I delegate entire tasks to them, leaving it to those for whom that work is a "passion." I can't list enough examples where this has proven how much it helps. They do help. I don't know why, but it simply works.

In one of his critiques of Christianity, Steiner noted that when people pray to God, they are actually just addressing their guardian angel (or perhaps that was Martinus; I don't recall exactly).

Paul Ross2 said:The reality is, you can't actually "experience" a pure idea. A pure idea simply *is*. It represents a perfect truth. What we experience is merely its echo—a subjective interpretation.

The whole world is just a reflection. We are reflections ourselves.
But it still feels real.
So, either you've experienced that echo of the idea, or you haven't.

Steiner pointed out that, at best, people are praying to their angels, but more often than not, they’re actually just praying to themselves—addressing their own higher self. And honestly, he hit the nail on the head there.

The term "angels" comes from Christian tradition. It refers to a specific hierarchy of beings within the third tier, consisting of angels, archangels, and archai. These pure thoughts and ideas are supported by the oldest of the archai.

An angel's role is to provide personal protection and guidance through life, though not quite in the way most people imagine. While we sleep, angels are busy weaving patterns into our astral bodies. When we're awake, however, we are primarily influenced by the spirit of the times rather than by angels. If someone is prevented from doing something they were expected to do, or if they run into someone in a way that feels orchestrated, we usually just chalk it up to coincidence. But that is precisely where angels step in. Furthermore, a person's own nature and spirituality have a reciprocal effect on their angel. Just as in the human hierarchy, a sort of fragmentation occurs within the angelic hierarchy as well.

Sandra Murphy33 said:Steiner describes it with almost clinical precision. He provides a stunningly detailed account of how a person (again) experiences their life within the etheric body before returning that body to the ether, and how the memories of those who have passed actually linger everywhere around us... then he covers how one continues through the astral plane, navigating desires, attractions, and repulsions, before finally reaching the mental realm... where only the "I" remains, stripped bare: the core of a person, their fundamental will.
Compared to Steiner, the other authors feel more like they're writing fiction.

Why call it "angelic literature"? I love B. Brennan; she’s brilliant when it comes to healing. She’s one of the few people you can find insights on Hari, the central star, and other obscure matters. Barbara sees energies, and she does it exceptionally well.

Try resonating with the East as well. Meher Baba, an avatar, speaks simply and clearly on a vast array of topics (including death, in part). The most vital thing to remember from Baba is that if we focus our thoughts on God at the moment of death, we go to God, and there are no more births on Earth.🙂 To be able to do that, however, we have to keep Him in our thoughts every single day.

Brennan suggests that we are God—that we are a part of Him. She doesn't carry that heavy religious undertone that Baba does; there isn't a cult of personality involved, which makes her more credible to me (personally, I am anti-religious and anti-follower 😎 ).

Her description of a surgery was particularly striking; she saw how everything was being handled by angels. She described it so vividly that it stuck with me. Add to that the testimony of Lorna Byrne, who has been socializing with angels since birth (they thought she was slow, she barely got into school, plus she has dyslexia), and the stories of these two wonderful women overlap perfectly. For me, the fact that they both refer to them as angels is a reality.😬
I have this habit—though I'm not sure if it's a serious practice or just my way of finding a laugh—where for any important task, I call upon the angels who specialize in or wish to work in that field to come help me. In fact, I delegate entire tasks to them, leaving it to those for whom that work is a "passion." I can't list enough examples where this has proven how much it helps. They do help. I don't know why, but it simply works.

In one of his critiques of Christianity, Steiner noted that when people pray to God, they are actually just addressing their guardian angel (or perhaps that was Martinus; I don't recall exactly).

So, I guess, does he have any specific book you'd recommend?

Sandra Murphy33 said:Steiner describes it with almost clinical precision. He provides a stunningly detailed account of how a person (again) experiences their life within the etheric body before returning that body to the ether, and how the memories of those who have passed actually linger everywhere around us... then he covers how one continues through the astral plane, navigating desires, attractions, and repulsions, before finally reaching the mental realm... where only the "I" remains, stripped bare: the core of a person, their fundamental will.
Compared to Steiner, the other authors feel more like they're writing fiction.

Why call it "angelic literature"? I love B. Brennan; she’s brilliant when it comes to healing. She’s one of the few people you can find insights on Hari, the central star, and other obscure matters. Barbara sees energies, and she does it exceptionally well.

Try resonating with the East as well. Meher Baba, an avatar, speaks simply and clearly on a vast array of topics (including death, in part). The most vital thing to remember from Baba is that if we focus our thoughts on God at the moment of death, we go to God, and there are no more births on Earth.🙂 To be able to do that, however, we have to keep Him in our thoughts every single day.

Brennan suggests that we are God—that we are a part of Him. She doesn't carry that heavy religious undertone that Baba does; there isn't a cult of personality involved, which makes her more credible to me (personally, I am anti-religious and anti-follower 😎 ).

Her description of a surgery was particularly striking; she saw how everything was being handled by angels. She described it so vividly that it stuck with me. Add to that the testimony of Lorna Byrne, who has been socializing with angels since birth (they thought she was slow, she barely got into school, plus she has dyslexia), and the stories of these two wonderful women overlap perfectly. For me, the fact that they both refer to them as angels is a reality.😬
I have this habit—though I'm not sure if it's a serious practice or just my way of finding a laugh—where for any important task, I call upon the angels who specialize in or wish to work in that field to come help me. In fact, I delegate entire tasks to them, leaving it to those for whom that work is a "passion." I can't list enough examples where this has proven how much it helps. They do help. I don't know why, but it simply works.

In one of his critiques of Christianity, Steiner noted that when people pray to God, they are actually just addressing their guardian angel (or perhaps that was Martinus; I don't recall exactly).

Well, I mean, the idea of us and God within us is definitely a religious element 🙂 Worshipping God is one of the spiritual paths—probably the most important and "widest" one, if you ask me. I suppose you're emphasizing a kind of spirituality that has existed forever, totally independent of organized religion. Like what Meher Baba used to say—"God doesn't belong to any religion; all religions belong to God."

Sandra Murphy33 said:Steiner describes it with almost clinical precision. He provides a stunningly detailed account of how a person (again) experiences their life within the etheric body before returning that body to the ether, and how the memories of those who have passed actually linger everywhere around us... then he covers how one continues through the astral plane, navigating desires, attractions, and repulsions, before finally reaching the mental realm... where only the "I" remains, stripped bare: the core of a person, their fundamental will.
Compared to Steiner, the other authors feel more like they're writing fiction.

Why call it "angelic literature"? I love B. Brennan; she’s brilliant when it comes to healing. She’s one of the few people you can find insights on Hari, the central star, and other obscure matters. Barbara sees energies, and she does it exceptionally well.

Try resonating with the East as well. Meher Baba, an avatar, speaks simply and clearly on a vast array of topics (including death, in part). The most vital thing to remember from Baba is that if we focus our thoughts on God at the moment of death, we go to God, and there are no more births on Earth.🙂 To be able to do that, however, we have to keep Him in our thoughts every single day.

Brennan suggests that we are God—that we are a part of Him. She doesn't carry that heavy religious undertone that Baba does; there isn't a cult of personality involved, which makes her more credible to me (personally, I am anti-religious and anti-follower 😎 ).

Her description of a surgery was particularly striking; she saw how everything was being handled by angels. She described it so vividly that it stuck with me. Add to that the testimony of Lorna Byrne, who has been socializing with angels since birth (they thought she was slow, she barely got into school, plus she has dyslexia), and the stories of these two wonderful women overlap perfectly. For me, the fact that they both refer to them as angels is a reality.😬
I have this habit—though I'm not sure if it's a serious practice or just my way of finding a laugh—where for any important task, I call upon the angels who specialize in or wish to work in that field to come help me. In fact, I delegate entire tasks to them, leaving it to those for whom that work is a "passion." I can't list enough examples where this has proven how much it helps. They do help. I don't know why, but it simply works.

In one of his critiques of Christianity, Steiner noted that when people pray to God, they are actually just addressing their guardian angel (or perhaps that was Martinus; I don't recall exactly).

Yeah, I really love those descriptions and images of hers too. You have to keep in mind that those are all spiritual energies (angels are just some of them) that react to requests for healing or even just to the intention of a healer, provided they're as spiritually developed as Barbara. I hope she's still doing okay; she must be getting up there in years. I actually stumbled upon her third major book recently, though I haven't quite gotten around to reading it yet.

Sandra Murphy33 said:Steiner describes it with almost clinical precision. He provides a stunningly detailed account of how a person (again) experiences their life within the etheric body before returning that body to the ether, and how the memories of those who have passed actually linger everywhere around us... then he covers how one continues through the astral plane, navigating desires, attractions, and repulsions, before finally reaching the mental realm... where only the "I" remains, stripped bare: the core of a person, their fundamental will.
Compared to Steiner, the other authors feel more like they're writing fiction.

Why call it "angelic literature"? I love B. Brennan; she’s brilliant when it comes to healing. She’s one of the few people you can find insights on Hari, the central star, and other obscure matters. Barbara sees energies, and she does it exceptionally well.

Try resonating with the East as well. Meher Baba, an avatar, speaks simply and clearly on a vast array of topics (including death, in part). The most vital thing to remember from Baba is that if we focus our thoughts on God at the moment of death, we go to God, and there are no more births on Earth.🙂 To be able to do that, however, we have to keep Him in our thoughts every single day.

Brennan suggests that we are God—that we are a part of Him. She doesn't carry that heavy religious undertone that Baba does; there isn't a cult of personality involved, which makes her more credible to me (personally, I am anti-religious and anti-follower 😎 ).

Her description of a surgery was particularly striking; she saw how everything was being handled by angels. She described it so vividly that it stuck with me. Add to that the testimony of Lorna Byrne, who has been socializing with angels since birth (they thought she was slow, she barely got into school, plus she has dyslexia), and the stories of these two wonderful women overlap perfectly. For me, the fact that they both refer to them as angels is a reality.😬
I have this habit—though I'm not sure if it's a serious practice or just my way of finding a laugh—where for any important task, I call upon the angels who specialize in or wish to work in that field to come help me. In fact, I delegate entire tasks to them, leaving it to those for whom that work is a "passion." I can't list enough examples where this has proven how much it helps. They do help. I don't know why, but it simply works.

In one of his critiques of Christianity, Steiner noted that when people pray to God, they are actually just addressing their guardian angel (or perhaps that was Martinus; I don't recall exactly).

Oh wow, thanks so much for sharing that! I totally get that you should probably ask for some support or guidance before diving into anything major, though I’ve only really tried doing that a couple of times myself. I think I might try to 🙂 a bit more often now. You're basically asking them to take over the heavy lifting for you, haha...
Anyway, from what I gather, spiritual energies won't even budge a finger unless a person is already actively working toward a goal; that's when the assistance finally flows in. It's not like they just do everything for us while we sit around; we have to put in our part, at least the small bits that are within our control. Just a little side thought there, but you probably know better than anyone how much they've helped you.

I feel like I should mention that Steiner doesn't really grasp who I'm actually talking to, or really anyone else for that matter. It's just how the universe operates—if I reach out to God and the prayer is sincere, God isn't necessarily going to be the one to jump in immediately because there's this entire spiritual hierarchy beneath Him. Instead, a guardian angel or some other energy or entity that's a better fit for that specific request or need will respond. So, I guess he isn't wrong about how the response happens, but the request definitely went to the right address first. Even though a person could pray directly to a guardian angel, that first method seems a bit better and opens up way more possibilities for getting an answer.

And honestly, I feel like a lot of people who criticize Christianity don't even realize what they're actually criticizing. Sure, you can critique the church, the priests, certain practices, or even the holy books (since they were written by imperfect humans), but at its core, Christianity is a teaching, a roadmap toward God, and a way to find your life's purpose. If someone misses that essence and can't figure out how to direct their own life because they feel the church or the clergy is blocking their view, then they're really just critiquing their own spiritual level.

Look, the term "Christianity" itself isn't some divine revelation; it’s just a label concocted by people and institutions to house their own specific set of dogmas, rituals, and hierarchies. 😉
The whole structure carries about as much divine weight as any other organized group with its own arbitrary rules and ceremonies.

Even the word "God" feels inherently heavy—it carries this subconscious association with fear and punishment 😬 that tricks people into a state of false submission, all while providing endless opportunities for manipulation.

It isn't our place, nor is it within our capacity, to attempt to conceptualize or define divinity. We shouldn't be trying to trap the infinite within human contexts of time and space, or writing about it as if we are the masters of the divine rather than its creation.

I need to dig through my collection to find which specific book Steiner used to describe the transition between death and rebirth. I'll have to refresh my memory on his exact framework before I come back here to weigh in. 🙂

Sandra Murphy33 said:Steiner describes it with almost clinical precision. He provides a stunningly detailed account of how a person (again) experiences their life within the etheric body before returning that body to the ether, and how the memories of those who have passed actually linger everywhere around us... then he covers how one continues through the astral plane, navigating desires, attractions, and repulsions, before finally reaching the mental realm... where only the "I" remains, stripped bare: the core of a person, their fundamental will.
Compared to Steiner, the other authors feel more like they're writing fiction.

Why call it "angelic literature"? I love B. Brennan; she’s brilliant when it comes to healing. She’s one of the few people you can find insights on Hari, the central star, and other obscure matters. Barbara sees energies, and she does it exceptionally well.

Try resonating with the East as well. Meher Baba, an avatar, speaks simply and clearly on a vast array of topics (including death, in part). The most vital thing to remember from Baba is that if we focus our thoughts on God at the moment of death, we go to God, and there are no more births on Earth.🙂 To be able to do that, however, we have to keep Him in our thoughts every single day.

Brennan suggests that we are God—that we are a part of Him. She doesn't carry that heavy religious undertone that Baba does; there isn't a cult of personality involved, which makes her more credible to me (personally, I am anti-religious and anti-follower 😎 ).

Her description of a surgery was particularly striking; she saw how everything was being handled by angels. She described it so vividly that it stuck with me. Add to that the testimony of Lorna Byrne, who has been socializing with angels since birth (they thought she was slow, she barely got into school, plus she has dyslexia), and the stories of these two wonderful women overlap perfectly. For me, the fact that they both refer to them as angels is a reality.😬
I have this habit—though I'm not sure if it's a serious practice or just my way of finding a laugh—where for any important task, I call upon the angels who specialize in or wish to work in that field to come help me. In fact, I delegate entire tasks to them, leaving it to those for whom that work is a "passion." I can't list enough examples where this has proven how much it helps. They do help. I don't know why, but it simply works.

In one of his critiques of Christianity, Steiner noted that when people pray to God, they are actually just addressing their guardian angel (or perhaps that was Martinus; I don't recall exactly).

Actually, the phrase should have been "clinically precise."
I don't want anyone getting the impression that I consider Steiner (or anyone else) an "expert" on the 😁 otherworldly
in the way we define human expertise.
By the way, word choice matters; the terminology we select when communicating with others isn't trivial. Language needs to be a shared, universal foundation—not a situation where a word means one thing to me and something entirely different to you. If that happens, you aren't having a conversation; you're just delivering a monologue in a kingdom of pure subjectivity...

Gregory Jackson said:So, I guess, does he have any specific book you'd recommend?

Well, I mean, the idea of us and God within us is definitely a religious element 🙂 Worshipping God is one of the spiritual paths—probably the most important and "widest" one, if you ask me. I suppose you're emphasizing a kind of spirituality that has existed forever, totally independent of organized religion. Like what Meher Baba used to say—"God doesn't belong to any religion; all religions belong to God."

Yeah, I really love those descriptions and images of hers too. You have to keep in mind that those are all spiritual energies (angels are just some of them) that react to requests for healing or even just to the intention of a healer, provided they're as spiritually developed as Barbara. I hope she's still doing okay; she must be getting up there in years. I actually stumbled upon her third major book recently, though I haven't quite gotten around to reading it yet.

Oh wow, thanks so much for sharing that! I totally get that you should probably ask for some support or guidance before diving into anything major, though I’ve only really tried doing that a couple of times myself. I think I might try to 🙂 a bit more often now. You're basically asking them to take over the heavy lifting for you, haha...
Anyway, from what I gather, spiritual energies won't even budge a finger unless a person is already actively working toward a goal; that's when the assistance finally flows in. It's not like they just do everything for us while we sit around; we have to put in our part, at least the small bits that are within our control. Just a little side thought there, but you probably know better than anyone how much they've helped you.

I feel like I should mention that Steiner doesn't really grasp who I'm actually talking to, or really anyone else for that matter. It's just how the universe operates—if I reach out to God and the prayer is sincere, God isn't necessarily going to be the one to jump in immediately because there's this entire spiritual hierarchy beneath Him. Instead, a guardian angel or some other energy or entity that's a better fit for that specific request or need will respond. So, I guess he isn't wrong about how the response happens, but the request definitely went to the right address first. Even though a person could pray directly to a guardian angel, that first method seems a bit better and opens up way more possibilities for getting an answer.

And honestly, I feel like a lot of people who criticize Christianity don't even realize what they're actually criticizing. Sure, you can critique the church, the priests, certain practices, or even the holy books (since they were written by imperfect humans), but at its core, Christianity is a teaching, a roadmap toward God, and a way to find your life's purpose. If someone misses that essence and can't figure out how to direct their own life because they feel the church or the clergy is blocking their view, then they're really just critiquing their own spiritual level.

See, this notion of a "right address," along with the idea of a 😉 supreme overlord and a centralized Universe, is something I find fundamentally alien. It feels far too much like a patriarchy and everything associated with that structure for me to accept it.

That said, I’m not insisting that I’m right and that it couldn't possibly be otherwise.

Sandra Murphy33 said:Actually, the phrase should have been "clinically precise."
I don't want anyone getting the impression that I consider Steiner (or anyone else) an "expert" on the 😁 otherworldly
in the way we define human expertise.
By the way, word choice matters; the terminology we select when communicating with others isn't trivial. Language needs to be a shared, universal foundation—not a situation where a word means one thing to me and something entirely different to you. If that happens, you aren't having a conversation; you're just delivering a monologue in a kingdom of pure subjectivity...

See, this notion of a "right address," along with the idea of a 😉 supreme overlord and a centralized Universe, is something I find fundamentally alien. It feels far too much like a patriarchy and everything associated with that structure for me to accept it.

That said, I’m not insisting that I’m right and that it couldn't possibly be otherwise.

I honestly feel like the universe is just one big, centralized system, you know? It’s just the way things are. If it wasn't organized like that, everything would probably just spiral into total chaos, especially when you start thinking about how massive and incredibly complicated the cosmos actually is. I mean, there are endless spiritual energies and these fixed energy centers everywhere, not to mention all the different spiritual beings floating around... it really makes you realize that our entire material world is actually tiny compared to the higher-vibration cosmos that exists above the physical plane. All these connections are so delicate and interconnected, too—it's pretty wild. Honestly, if anyone is actually interested in diving deep into cosmology, it's a super fascinating rabbit hole to go down. I think Ljubiša Stojanović actually tapped into a ton of this information and even wrote entire books about it, mostly just from his own deep meditation sessions, I guess.

So, I was just thinking about how some people find it hard to wrap their heads around the idea that a certain Being, you know, a Creator, might not be exactly what they personally imagine it to be. It’s like, if this Creator isn't the specific God from the Old Testament who rules through fear and all that heavy stuff, then people kind of lose it, I guess. But honestly, that's just nonsense, right? It feels totally absurd to me when someone talks all about reincarnation and angels and different energy levels or the astral plane and Devahans, but then turns around and acts like God doesn't even exist. Like, you can't really have one without the other, maybe? It just doesn't make sense to me.

So, I guess if you really strip everything back to the basics, it’s basically just God and the void, right? Like, there’s only God—this one singular being that exists as this massive, egg-shaped field of energy, which is honestly just this unfathomable explosion of consciousness, power, and pure intelligence. I mean, it's hard to even wrap your head around it, I guess. But then, at some point, this being decided to actually manifest itself, you know? It decided to bring other forms into existence, starting with these other intelligent energy forms that were basically handed certain functions and "rights" by the original source, and that process has just kept rolling along ever since. From what I understand, this whole act of creation happened within about two-thirds of that "egg," and that specific part of God is what we call the Creator. Meanwhile, the remaining third stayed in its original state, which is like this pure "Potential." So, when you think about it, everything that exists—every single thing ever created—is tucked away inside the being of God. We’re kind of like fish swimming through the water, wondering if the ocean even exists, which is such a wild thought, isn't it?

I mean, I totally get where people are coming from, like, all those religious practices and heavy-handed dogmas can really cloud the whole picture, right? It’s kind of like this massive barrier for people who haven't quite reached that next level yet, so they just can't seem to push past it. But I guess, maybe one day when their inner sensors finally sharpen up—you know, when they get better at actually telling what's vital from what's just noise—they'll be able to find something to love in every single religion, since, honestly, every one of them has these little pearls of wisdom tucked away inside. Anyway, at the end of the day, it seems like most enlightened folks actually find their way there by following the actual essence of a religion, rather than just going through the motions of rituals and rules, if you catch my drift.

Man, when I was just a kid, I was honestly such a pain in the neck because I just couldn't wrap my head around the whole idea of God, you know? I mean, I just couldn't see past all that heavy church stuff and those rigid old dogmas that everyone seemed so obsessed with back then. But, I guess, little by little, things are starting to click, and it feels like my eyes are finally opening up to everything.

So, here’s my two cents on "The Right Address"—whatever people want to think about it, I honestly believe prayers definitely work, but there are some catches, I guess. There's this big, overarching rule that seems to be at play: the answer you get from above is pretty much proportional to how much you've actually grown spiritually. Like, I mean, there’s a massive difference between when Gregory Jackson is praying versus when Jesus is doing the praying, right? It’s just not the same level. Sadly, it feels like a huge amount of requests just go unanswered, and maybe that's because someone hasn't quite done the inner work yet, or perhaps—and this is a big one—the prayer isn't actually noble, but is instead just wrapped up in some selfish, ego-driven desire. But, if you look at it, prayer always finds its way to the right destination; even back in the day, when ancient civilizations were praying to the sun, the moon, the stars, or some totem, they still got an answer... though, obviously, it wasn't coming directly from the sun itself, if you know what I mean.

Sandra Murphy33 said:I need to dig through my collection to find which specific book Steiner used to describe the transition between death and rebirth. I'll have to refresh my memory on his exact framework before I come back here to weigh in. 🙂

Oh, please do!

Gregory Jackson said:So, I guess, does he have any specific book you'd recommend?

Well, I mean, the idea of us and God within us is definitely a religious element 🙂 Worshipping God is one of the spiritual paths—probably the most important and "widest" one, if you ask me. I suppose you're emphasizing a kind of spirituality that has existed forever, totally independent of organized religion. Like what Meher Baba used to say—"God doesn't belong to any religion; all religions belong to God."

Yeah, I really love those descriptions and images of hers too. You have to keep in mind that those are all spiritual energies (angels are just some of them) that react to requests for healing or even just to the intention of a healer, provided they're as spiritually developed as Barbara. I hope she's still doing okay; she must be getting up there in years. I actually stumbled upon her third major book recently, though I haven't quite gotten around to reading it yet.

Oh wow, thanks so much for sharing that! I totally get that you should probably ask for some support or guidance before diving into anything major, though I’ve only really tried doing that a couple of times myself. I think I might try to 🙂 a bit more often now. You're basically asking them to take over the heavy lifting for you, haha...
Anyway, from what I gather, spiritual energies won't even budge a finger unless a person is already actively working toward a goal; that's when the assistance finally flows in. It's not like they just do everything for us while we sit around; we have to put in our part, at least the small bits that are within our control. Just a little side thought there, but you probably know better than anyone how much they've helped you.

I feel like I should mention that Steiner doesn't really grasp who I'm actually talking to, or really anyone else for that matter. It's just how the universe operates—if I reach out to God and the prayer is sincere, God isn't necessarily going to be the one to jump in immediately because there's this entire spiritual hierarchy beneath Him. Instead, a guardian angel or some other energy or entity that's a better fit for that specific request or need will respond. So, I guess he isn't wrong about how the response happens, but the request definitely went to the right address first. Even though a person could pray directly to a guardian angel, that first method seems a bit better and opens up way more possibilities for getting an answer.

And honestly, I feel like a lot of people who criticize Christianity don't even realize what they're actually criticizing. Sure, you can critique the church, the priests, certain practices, or even the holy books (since they were written by imperfect humans), but at its core, Christianity is a teaching, a roadmap toward God, and a way to find your life's purpose. If someone misses that essence and can't figure out how to direct their own life because they feel the church or the clergy is blocking their view, then they're really just critiquing their own spiritual level.

I guess I’d probably suggest starting off with this one. I guess I might be overthinking this, but I really feel like we should take a moment to consider how much weight we’re putting on these specific arguments. It seems to me that maybe we aren't looking at the full picture when it comes to how these policies actually affect people on the ground, though I could be wrong about that. If you look at what coastalfalcon61 was saying earlier, it feels like there’s a certain logic there, even if it isn't entirely perfect, and I suppose we have to account for that nuance if we want to have a real conversation. I don't mean to sound dismissive, but perhaps we should be a bit more careful about jumping to conclusions before we've weighed all the different sides of the issue.I'll post two entries, and then right underneath those, I'll include what Derek recommended.

There’s still a whole mountain of Steiner's lectures and books out there; I think I have about fifty of them sitting around somewhere, though I can't really say I'd recommend them to anyone. There is definitely some interesting material in there if you dig through it, but for me, I guess it all just feels like an unnecessary burden.
It doesn't really matter, I suppose; if you actually want to read them, I can just post them here.

I feel like I have to say that Steiner doesn't really grasp who I’m actually reaching out to, and honestly, I don't think anyone else quite gets it either. I suppose it's just how the universe operates—if I direct my prayers toward God and that prayer is considered valid or "accepted," God isn't necessarily going to be the one to step in and react immediately. There is this whole spiritual hierarchy in place beneath Him, so it's more likely that a guardian angel or some other kind of energy or entity, something more suited to that specific request or need, will be the one to respond. So, I guess I can't say he's wrong regarding how the prayer actually gets answered, but the initial intention was sent to the right address from the start. Even though a person could choose to pray directly to a guardian angel, I think the first way is probably better because it seems to open up more possibilities for a response.

I’m not really saying that Steiner actually "knows" who you’re talking to, but I suppose it isn't entirely impossible, either. For instance, if there isn't a God like the one you're praying to, and if the way your mind processes prayer works just like anyone else's when they do the same thing, then maybe a person is essentially just talking to themselves and their own convictions.
I guess I personally don't quite wrap my head around the whole concept of prayer. If you’re truly looking to connect with some kind of higher spirit, maybe it would make more sense to focus on your own actions and let your deeds speak for themselves rather than relying on prayer. To me, prayer feels like it might work as a form of quiet contemplation, but I find it hard to believe it can actually serve as a direct line of communication to the divine.

I guess it feels like a lot of people who go around criticizing Christianity don't actually know what they’re even talking about. I mean, sure, you can criticize the Church, or the clergy, or even the Holy Scriptures—since they were written by imperfect human beings—and you can certainly take issue with certain practices or specific traditions, but that’s not really the point. At its core, Christianity is a teaching, a roadmap toward God, and a way to find the ultimate purpose of one's life. If someone can't see that essential truth, or if they fail to figure out how to orient their own life because they feel like the Church or the priests are getting in the way, then maybe they should just look inward and question their own spiritual maturity instead.

I wouldn't exactly say that everyone out there is criticizing things they don't truly understand. I used to be a Christian myself, but I moved past the phase of attacking the Church or the clergy a long time ago. To me, Christianity is really just the teachings of those specific people and that institution; it isn't some entity that exists entirely on its own. I suppose the only part of Christianity worth holding onto is the actual teaching of Jesus, which is where you might find some genuine spiritual components. Even so, I feel like those teachings still lack the depth and breadth required to justify the massive circus that grew out of them and continues to exist today, even if we assume Jesus became Christ.
Since we’re on the subject, I guess I honestly feel like studying someone like Steiner, or maybe even another spiritual teacher, holds more weight for me than trying to study Jesus, especially considering how much of a myth and legend people have built around his potential enlightenment or devotion.