UFOs & the After Life

[amor]

Several times I posted on Avalon references to a seeming beatific vision outside of time experienced many decades ago as I was about to begin my adventure into independent adult life. Now, I realize that my consciousness was hijacked by a being in a UFO. Although the experience was sublime and had long-term aftereffects on me, I do not wish to delude myself. I now wonder what they were really doing to me during this episode outside of time. Pleasant as it was, delusion is not something I wish to substitute for reality.

[Michel Leclerc]

Thank you Edina. I will answer your question and add a few things to your notes.
Your questions.
There is this sort of precise research happening regarding telepathy? Yes. The research started from the fundamental finding that sentences, or rather sentence meanings, are presented in the brain neuron firing patterns in a uniquely recognisable way. As far as I remember, these patterns are in "nanoseconds‘” advance on the actual saying of the sentence meaning, and more specifically follow a path of "meaning configuration” --> "choice of language” --> “linguistic configuration” (words in syntax, but yet unspoken) --> muscular activation and phonic expression as an utterance that can be heard (incidentally vindicating the Aristotelian description of the process and Naum Chomsky’s presuppositions of his transformational generative syntax). The experiment was a variant on the numerous experiences of telepathy as in two people (a sender and a receiver) being in separate rooms, one sending an "idea" (a geometrical figure for instance) and the other drawing, or noting, what she/he received received: with the sender and the receiver each being in a dedicated MR scanner, the sender "sending" a sentence, or sentence meaning, to the receiver and the receiver registering it. It was found that the brain activating patterns were similar. The idea of "mirroring" is a continuation of the idea of neuronal mirroring of emotions that had been found earlier. Experiences of joy and sadness corresponding to patterns similar in both the "expresser" of the emotions and the person witnessing the emotions.
How can I find the papers written based on this research? A justified question. I remember seeing that somewhere, probably on the Internet, in this millenium but I do not remember where. Meanwhile research may, or will rather, have gone beyond that – and do we know? Probably I was more interested in applying those discoveries as a language learning coach. To students who needed to acquire a new language in a limited timespan and were quite stressed about it, I told this story and pointed out that this implies that "angelic conversation" is continuously taking place between people (or, in other words, that we cannot NOT communicate – a refusal to communicate is communicated). So instead of convincing ourselves that there are so many formidable hurdles to take we may be helped when we try and accept that we are always communicating (or transmitting telepathically) anyway and that we can welcome that, and that as a result of that we can also find joy in "dancing the language dance" with the person – for beauty’s sake and as a token of our profound acceptance of our embodiment. (We do not so much, I think, need to be “spirited” out of the body but to embody our acceptance of our spirit's love for the body we are in. Our coming here on Earth is divine incarnation, and that we should love and accept even if it involves dying on a cross.)
Question, considering this and the descriptions of communication once the body has died; it appears that this mirroring of brain patterns happens without need of a physical body/brain, so … it’s not necessarily brain dependent? I guess it is not. Maybe there is a conceptual error in the word "dependent". I was once given a visionary experience in which the "superior being" communicated and showed to me that my body and "his" body were the same – although representing, or presenting, this "same" in a different medium so to speak (I am trying to find words for the ineffable..) – or to use a modern analogy maybe, the relationship feels like the identity of two "parts" of a fractal hologram. My suggestion of “permeatingness“ of the "higher" dimensions into the "lower" ones tries to verbalise the intuition in another way. People who relate mystical experiences often tell that there is no real "hierarchy" of dimensions, chakras, consciousness levels etc. The "lower" vibrations are not less good than the "higher"; the divine created them all. (Incarnating is a sought-for prize among the more "spiritual" "beings".) The chakras can be represented as a ladder, but equally well as a wheel. When my dog and I communicate telepathically and we add to that our languages of tail-wagging and turning-about dances and sentences gently spoken, is it not wise to assume that our inner worlds "in love" are equally rich?

If so, what is the mechanism for it, sans physical body. Just like "dependent", I think, Edina, if you allow me to say so, that "mechanism" is not the best choice of words to express what our intuition allows us to conceive. The Greek mechanè, the Latin machina.. what Heidegger calls das Gestell, how terribly "just 3D+ and nothing more".. are those terms. We need different metaphors to describe what is happening. But, as I wrote elsewhere, we have to get out of the desire to "operationalise" what we "intuit".. We can lengthen and strengthen what our arm muscles can do and make a hammer to use; but how could we "use" what "consciousness sharing" allows us to access or be graced with and hence, what could we then "make"? If it is only feasible through creation (creating both the Creator and the creature), we can make ourselves readier maybe, worthier, opener for these transforming, "trans-creating" experiences...

[edina]

Posted by Michel Leclerc (here)
Thank you Edina. I will answer your question and add a few things to your notes.
Your questions.
There is this sort of precise research happening regarding telepathy? Yes. The research started from the fundamental finding that sentences, or rather sentence meanings, are presented in the brain neuron firing patterns in a uniquely recognisable way. As far as I remember, these patterns are in "nanoseconds‘” advance on the actual saying of the sentence meaning, and more specifically follow a path of "meaning configuration” --> "choice of language” --> “linguistic configuration” (words in syntax, but yet unspoken) --> muscular activation and phonic expression as an utterance that can be heard (incidentally vindicating the Aristotelian description of the process and Naum Chomsky’s presuppositions of his transformational generative syntax). The experiment was a variant on the numerous experiences of telepathy as in two people (a sender and a receiver) being in separate rooms, one sending an "idea" (a geometrical figure for instance) and the other drawing, or noting, what she/he received received: with the sender and the receiver each being in a dedicated MR scanner, the sender "sending" a sentence, or sentence meaning, to the receiver and the receiver registering it. It was found that the brain activating patterns were similar. The idea of "mirroring" is a continuation of the idea of neuronal mirroring of emotions that had been found earlier. Experiences of joy and sadness corresponding to patterns similar in both the "expresser" of the emotions and the person witnessing the emotions.
How can I find the papers written based on this research? A justified question. I remember seeing that somewhere, probably on the Internet, in this millenium but I do not remember where. Meanwhile research may, or will rather, have gone beyond that – and do we know? Probably I was more interested in applying those discoveries as a language learning coach. To students who needed to acquire a new language in a limited timespan and were quite stressed about it, I told this story and pointed out that this implies that "angelic conversation" is continuously taking place between people (or, in other words, that we cannot NOT communicate – a refusal to communicate is communicated). So instead of convincing ourselves that there are so many formidable hurdles to take we may be helped when we try and accept that we are always communicating (or transmitting telepathically) anyway and that we can welcome that, and that as a result of that we can also find joy in "dancing the language dance" with the person – for beauty’s sake and as a token of our profound acceptance of our embodiment. (We do not so much, I think, need to be “spirited” out of the body but to embody our acceptance of our spirit's love for the body we are in. Our coming here on Earth is divine incarnation, and that we should love and accept even if it involves dying on a cross.)
Question, considering this and the descriptions of communication once the body has died; it appears that this mirroring of brain patterns happens without need of a physical body/brain, so … it’s not necessarily brain dependent? I guess it is not. Maybe there is a conceptual error in the word "dependent". I was once given a visionary experience in which the "superior being" communicated and showed to me that my body and "his" body were the same – although representing, or presenting, this "same" in a different medium so to speak (I am trying to find words for the ineffable..) – or to use a modern analogy maybe, the relationship feels like the identity of two "parts" of a fractal hologram. My suggestion of “permeatingness“ of the "higher" dimensions into the "lower" ones tries to verbalise the intuition in another way. People who relate mystical experiences often tell that there is no real "hierarchy" of dimensions, chakras, consciousness levels etc. The "lower" vibrations are not less good than the "higher"; the divine created them all. (Incarnating is a sought-for prize among the more "spiritual" "beings".) The chakras can be represented as a ladder, but equally well as a wheel. When my dog and I communicate telepathically and we add to that our languages of tail-wagging and turning-about dances and sentences gently spoken, is it not wise to assume that our inner worlds "in love" are equally rich?

If so, what is the mechanism for it, sans physical body. Just like "dependent", I think, Edina, if you allow me to say so, that "mechanism" is not the best choice of words to express what our intuition allows us to conceive. The Greek mechanè, the Latin machina.. what Heidegger calls das Gestell, how terribly "just 3D+ and nothing more".. are those terms. We need different metaphors to describe what is happening. But, as I wrote elsewhere, we have to get out of the desire to "operationalise" what we "intuit".. We can lengthen and strengthen what our arm muscles can do and make a hammer to use; but how could we "use" what "consciousness sharing" allows us to access or be graced with and hence, what could we then "make"? If it is only feasible through creation (creating both the Creator and the creature), we can make ourselves readier maybe, worthier, opener for these transforming, "trans-creating" experiences...

This is extraordinary. Thank You. Heartfelt thanks.

[edina]

When I was hiking the Appalachian Trail, there was a time toward the end where I kept hearing in my mind's ear, "You are still thinking inside the box." I'm a rather outside-the-box thinker, so this surprised me.

One morning, very early, in the soft gray dawn, I saw a yellow butterfly beside the trail.

I stopped to take a photo of it, but I couldn't get a clear angle. I thought to myself about this, and the butterfly, lifted and moved slightly to a better angle.

I tried to take the photo again, and thought again to myself, "I need you to move just a bit more."

The butterfly lifted again, slightly, into a good spot for me to get a decent photo of it.

In my mind, I thought to the butterfly, thank you.

Later, I realized how unusual the situation was. I had admired this particular species of butterfly for days.
They always flew in the sunshine, in the warmest time of the day. The sun wasn't up just yet. It was unusual for the butterfly to even be out at that time of day. And, it seemed responsive to my thoughts.

As I continued to walk the trail that day, I often thought to myself, I'm missing something here? It occurred to me that there was some sort of message that I didn't quite hear. Then I asked myself, What was happening just before I saw that butterfly?

As I asked myself that question I remembered, I was hearing repeatedly, the inner thought, "You're still thinking inside the box." It was probably it's most intense just before this butterfly experience.

The more I thought about it, the more I thought of how humans and nature communicate. There seems to be a dynamic (is this a better word, Michel?) involved in our relationship to creation, inwardly and outwardly that we have yet to fully explore.

I feel that the whole purpose of that Appalachian Trail adventure was to experience that moment. To realize that insight in the way that I did.

I walked away from that moment with a whole new direction for my life.

Thank you Michel, for showing me some edges of the box I think within.

PS: (Like with some of Anu Raman's comments earlier in this thread, it's going to take me a bit to sit with this and let it's deeper meaning unfold. I could almost see patterns enfolded in the words/sentences.)

[edina]

I'm trying to understand, amor, how was this experience delusional?
Did it happen?
Did it not happen?
Or was the meaning you originally assigned it what you consider to be delusional?
How did you come to decide that the experience as you first understood was instead your consciousness being hijacked by a being in a UFO?
And then, when you decided that was the case, did your new understanding invalidate the experience for you?

Posted by amor (here)
Several times I posted on Avalon references to a seeming beatific vision outside of time experienced many decades ago as I was about to begin my adventure into independent adult life. Now, I realize that my consciousness was hijacked by a being in a UFO. Although the experience was sublime and had long-term aftereffects on me, I do not wish to delude myself. I now wonder what they were really doing to me during this episode outside of time. Pleasant as it was, delusion is not something I wish to substitute for reality.

[Spiral]

Posted by amor (here)
Several times I posted on Avalon references to a seeming beatific vision outside of time experienced many decades ago as I was about to begin my adventure into independent adult life. Now, I realize that my consciousness was hijacked by a being in a UFO. Although the experience was sublime and had long-term aftereffects on me, I do not wish to delude myself. I now wonder what they were really doing to me during this episode outside of time. Pleasant as it was, delusion is not something I wish to substitute for reality.

They are very keen on "screen memories", either that or they just delete your memories.

I'm now of the opinion that their main objective is to make people "open up" to them, and by talking & posting online to get others to "open up" as well, this seems to allow them more access, like it's our "belief" that creates their means of entry into this realm.

I've met abductees that have mediumistic abilities or things that have happened to them, myself included, have you ?

[norman]

edina, it's good to read you.

That inside-outside the box thing is intriguing. In an earlier post someone mentioned the transference of words along with their meaning.

Inside the box, a word carries a meaning, as a payload. Outside the box, a meaning carries a word, like a ball and chain (with "property of the box" stamped all over it).

the 'thinking' itself is garbled by wording out all meaning. Between meaning and a word is a lingual translation process that loses something ( quite a magical lot, really ) in the translation.

I have a hunch we somehow ( maybe not by our own natural choosing ) swapped direct untranslated ability of sharing meaning, for lingual coding, losing meaning both by translation losses and by function replacement of cerebral assets.

[Agape]

Somehow, I don’t feel too good to step to this debate at the moment despite having my share of worthy experiences. But I enjoy reading you all very much here.

As Anu Raman said somewhere in this thread: please do not forget that most of the topic ( both ET Contact and NDEs) covers experiences rather than beliefs or human sciences.
If someone want to be quite scientific about it all they can but will inevitably end up in the area “native to humans”, including neurolinguistic programming and decoding standardised human behaviour and its patterns.

Many people can’t think or work from “out of the box” of their linguistic programs without losing their integrity. That itself poses almost absolute disadvantage in communication with any true ET but some of us did it number of times.

The shift from natural human intelligence towards programmed intelligence happened very fast through past centuries and recent decades, moving some people’s minds and images towards perfected but almost robotic status. Recall the poor dears who work as assistants in various institutions from banks to phone companies , supermarket counters, or worse , medical personnel following protocols , phraseology , list of methods allowed to them and list of medicines they frequently prescribe.
Even teachers and priests repeating the same prayers and phrases everyday just adding new ones times to times to attract more audience.

How many people feel “allowed” to create their world the way biblical Adam did, nearly none except for few poets and drunkards around midnight ,
unfortunately even those
want to sound rather posh and well understood.

And that’s “only” about being human.

Some people need to re-translate everything to the way they think, their own program or one of and feel “excited” for life time about getting everything twice or thrice but at the end they too turn frustrated, confused about which R is tighter and sad about the ambiguity of being “just human”.

True nature of mind is not a term and most certainly not a collection of letters.

True communication happens through own minds: whether you talk to a flower , animal, child of different tribe or entity from outer space,
you may discover this potential in yourself : talking in languages or sound you’ve never made before and yet, conveying the precise meaning you’ve intended to convey.

But it rarely seems to happen to humans nowadays. In fact I’ve never seen such a “wordy civilisation” as we are witnessing now and people talking 90% of their days and turning depressed for having to be alone or quiet even for few hours.
That in turn ( enjoying their talking mind) makes them completely dependent on linguistic programming available.

It even scares me considerably that this civilisation trend should evolve further and become more sophisticated turning humans say to imperfect coding machines,
more likely ticking off options from endless questionnaires in order to reduce processing time .

Where are these digitalised, well programmed humans with perfect phraseology going to end up is not openness and freedom but some may say “easy going, well planned, precalculated, drone like” state of existence. Dummies in short

Sounding “posh and articulate” is huge part of the overall problem. If you are in interview or important dialogue between partners for example , notice that speaking “the truth” is usually far less important than “the way you’ve said that”.
In business strategy it again translates as “the better trick to make”.

Plenty of people lost their soul, their religion ( not referring to any in any strict sense) and the access to their own original spirituality in exchange for perfectly looking, articulate, almost artificially sounding communication.

Let’s presume than someone out there ( other than me) arrives at that crossroad in life when you can but have to choose between mental freedom or spiritual path and perfectly looking communication skills that can be turned to a business,
make you a “teacher of humanity” , the best comic , journalist or entrepreneur :

it’s entirely upon you which path you choose at any given moment but again 90% of people do the mistake of choosing the later against being alone in it for a timebeing : that may last long in human life or fear of losing yourself and your precious mind and so forth..


“What is freedom ? Chuang”tzu dreaming of Being butterfly”.

“What is freedom ? Freedom to share your Being”.


My dream of future human civilisation would be of one that did not forget its poetry, it’s dreams of other worlds, who did not forsake its seemingly irrational imaginations , who did not forget its respect to its own timeless soul that rejoices and rests in Silence the most ,

and now

I wanna go home


🙏

[Anu Raman]

Posted by Michel Leclerc (here)
Thank you Edina. I will answer your question and add a few things to your notes.
Your questions.
There is this sort of precise research happening regarding telepathy? Yes. The research started from the fundamental finding that sentences, or rather sentence meanings, are presented in the brain neuron firing patterns in a uniquely recognisable way. As far as I remember, these patterns are in "nanoseconds‘” advance on the actual saying of the sentence meaning, and more specifically follow a path of "meaning configuration” --> "choice of language” --> “linguistic configuration” (words in syntax, but yet unspoken) --> muscular activation and phonic expression as an utterance that can be heard (incidentally vindicating the Aristotelian description of the process and Naum Chomsky’s presuppositions of his transformational generative syntax). The experiment was a variant on the numerous experiences of telepathy as in two people (a sender and a receiver) being in separate rooms, one sending an "idea" (a geometrical figure for instance) and the other drawing, or noting, what she/he received received: with the sender and the receiver each being in a dedicated MR scanner, the sender "sending" a sentence, or sentence meaning, to the receiver and the receiver registering it. It was found that the brain activating patterns were similar. The idea of "mirroring" is a continuation of the idea of neuronal mirroring of emotions that had been found earlier. Experiences of joy and sadness corresponding to patterns similar in both the "expresser" of the emotions and the person witnessing the emotions.
How can I find the papers written based on this research? A justified question. I remember seeing that somewhere, probably on the Internet, in this millenium but I do not remember where. Meanwhile research may, or will rather, have gone beyond that – and do we know? Probably I was more interested in applying those discoveries as a language learning coach. To students who needed to acquire a new language in a limited timespan and were quite stressed about it, I told this story and pointed out that this implies that "angelic conversation" is continuously taking place between people (or, in other words, that we cannot NOT communicate – a refusal to communicate is communicated). So instead of convincing ourselves that there are so many formidable hurdles to take we may be helped when we try and accept that we are always communicating (or transmitting telepathically) anyway and that we can welcome that, and that as a result of that we can also find joy in "dancing the language dance" with the person – for beauty’s sake and as a token of our profound acceptance of our embodiment. (We do not so much, I think, need to be “spirited” out of the body but to embody our acceptance of our spirit's love for the body we are in. Our coming here on Earth is divine incarnation, and that we should love and accept even if it involves dying on a cross.)
Question, considering this and the descriptions of communication once the body has died; it appears that this mirroring of brain patterns happens without need of a physical body/brain, so … it’s not necessarily brain dependent? I guess it is not. Maybe there is a conceptual error in the word "dependent". I was once given a visionary experience in which the "superior being" communicated and showed to me that my body and "his" body were the same – although representing, or presenting, this "same" in a different medium so to speak (I am trying to find words for the ineffable..) – or to use a modern analogy maybe, the relationship feels like the identity of two "parts" of a fractal hologram. My suggestion of “permeatingness“ of the "higher" dimensions into the "lower" ones tries to verbalise the intuition in another way. People who relate mystical experiences often tell that there is no real "hierarchy" of dimensions, chakras, consciousness levels etc. The "lower" vibrations are not less good than the "higher"; the divine created them all. (Incarnating is a sought-for prize among the more "spiritual" "beings".) The chakras can be represented as a ladder, but equally well as a wheel. When my dog and I communicate telepathically and we add to that our languages of tail-wagging and turning-about dances and sentences gently spoken, is it not wise to assume that our inner worlds "in love" are equally rich?

If so, what is the mechanism for it, sans physical body. Just like "dependent", I think, Edina, if you allow me to say so, that "mechanism" is not the best choice of words to express what our intuition allows us to conceive. The Greek mechanè, the Latin machina.. what Heidegger calls das Gestell, how terribly "just 3D+ and nothing more".. are those terms. We need different metaphors to describe what is happening. But, as I wrote elsewhere, we have to get out of the desire to "operationalise" what we "intuit".. We can lengthen and strengthen what our arm muscles can do and make a hammer to use; but how could we "use" what "consciousness sharing" allows us to access or be graced with and hence, what could we then "make"? If it is only feasible through creation (creating both the Creator and the creature), we can make ourselves readier maybe, worthier, opener for these transforming, "trans-creating" experiences...

You write better than I can!

Tip: There is a such thing called the "mindlink" in the brain. All humans have this. It was given when the final prototype of man was developed. Just a matter of properly accessing it.

[Michel Leclerc]

Thank you Norman. I agree with your description.

I would go a little farther, maybe. In English, which is not particularly distinguished by its meaningful echo effects between words, being naturally disposed to Wittgenstein’s (erroneous) definition of the meaning of a word: "the meaning of a word is its use" – there exists this extraordinary echo between the two meanings of "to mean": things mean things, and we mean things. Two different meanings, one might say, but.. given that the same verb is used for both, does that not hint at the fact that they may be one and the same?

If it is true that we tend to find words in dictionaries, we do not frequently find entire sentences in them except in order to illustrate the listed meaning of words. But when we speak, we do not ordinarily speak in just a few words – although it happens of course, as a kind of shorthand for more “complete” sentences. But mostly we speak in sentences, however elliptical they may be. And even in entire sequences of sentences. Doing so, "we" mean — something. And this meaning of the entire chain of sentences is what we really mean. Intend. Meaning as intention, or intent. Would it then not be logical to say that the meaning of a word that we use is just the “local” portion of our intention which we transmit with the whole set of sentences? Or – if we use my interpretation that communicating what we mean happens telepathically and that the wording is only a "dance" – that they are the local apparition of beauty and of our acceptance of the incarnation/embodiment of meaning into words?

It is not so much, I think, that we "just" use words instead of conveying "untranslated ability of sharing meaning" as you say, it is that we somehow “forget” that we – always, anyhow – communicate meaning directly (because even intention not to communicate is still communication: refusal to convey to people what we mean does convey our meaning (intention) not to convey our meaning). That in parallel, I guess, with our “forgetting” that we are also "fully-grown" "spiritual" beings.

As said many times, direct telepathic communication would render lying impossible. Does it not seem logical then, when we consider human exchanges of their "meaning" as telepathic in nature, that lying is impossible to the extent that we communicate telepathically and are aware of it? Because if we are true to ourselves, we do have this experience of immediately sensing it when we allow ourselves to lie, and we do immediately sense it when the other person is lying to us. On the Internet, one finds interesting descriptions of the cues we can recognise to discover that out conversation partner is lying to us. And although this is valuable, I believe that this discovery or awareness is even more directly created in us by the telepathic nature of the process. Living more than ever as a hermit for three years now, I have discovered that even the smallest lie or half lie (about quantity, time etc.) has become practically impossible for me because it is metaphysically painful. You may know the saying "politeness is the friendliness of the hypocrite". Being polite is a quality, I think, especially when it is actually friendliness. But we all know the perfunctory politeness expressing an absent friendliness – mocked intention is intention to mock.

[Michel Leclerc]

Posted by edina (here)
When I was hiking the Appalachian Trail, there was a time toward the end where I kept hearing in my mind's ear, "You are still thinking inside the box." I'm a rather outside-the-box thinker, so this surprised me.

One morning, very early, in the soft gray dawn, I saw a yellow butterfly beside the trail.

I stopped to take a photo of it, but I couldn't get a clear angle. I thought to myself about this, and the butterfly, lifted and moved slightly to a better angle.

I tried to take the photo again, and thought again to myself, "I need you to move just a bit more."

The butterfly lifted again, slightly, into a good spot for me to get a decent photo of it.

In my mind, I thought to the butterfly, thank you.

Later, I realized how unusual the situation was. I had admired this particular species of butterfly for days.
They always flew in the sunshine, in the warmest time of the day. The sun wasn't up just yet. It was unusual for the butterfly to even be out at that time of day. And, it seemed responsive to my thoughts.

As I continued to walk the trail that day, I often thought to myself, I'm missing something here? It occurred to me that there was some sort of message that I didn't quite hear. Then I asked myself, What was happening just before I saw that butterfly?

As I asked myself that question I remembered, I was hearing repeatedly, the inner thought, "You're still thinking inside the box." It was probably it's most intense just before this butterfly experience.

The more I thought about it, the more I thought of how humans and nature communicate. There seems to be a dynamic (is this a better word, Michel?) involved in our relationship to creation, inwardly and outwardly that we have yet to fully explore.

I feel that the whole purpose of that Appalachian Trail adventure was to experience that moment. To realize that insight in the way that I did.

I walked away from that moment with a whole new direction for my life.

Thank you Michel, for showing me some edges of the box I think within.

PS: (Like with some of Anu Raman's comments earlier in this thread, it's going to take me a bit to sit with this and let it's deeper meaning unfold. I could almost see patterns enfolded in the words/sentences.)

What a beautiful story Edina.

Something similar happened to me. Near Brussels (where I used to live for forty years) is a beautiful area, half park, half wood of mostly quite tall beeches, which is called Zoniënwoud in Dutch and Forêt de Soignes in French. In the middle of it is a holy area. Along ponds that are actually local “thickenings” of a brook called the Ijse, the 14th-century Dutch-Language mystic Jan van Ruusbroec lived as a hermit, gathered a few followers, meditated, prayed and wrote, and founded an abbey. The natural harmony of this blessed place was in the early 20th century cut into pieces by two ordinary motorcar roads, a railroad and a highway: four straight lines crossing the brook and, in hindsight, cutting ruthlessly the 500-meter walking path Jan van Ruusbroec used to take every day, at the end of which was a lime-tree where he then sat and meditated. At approximately the place where he used to sit, there is an actual lime-tree, probably replanted a few times every century.

During the last years of my friend’s life, the daily present was not that happy and once in a week I drove to that area. The rare other people I met knew what I was doing there and I knew why they were there. Once when I was walking there the perfect greenness of all the leaves and plants struck me. Empathy and hope of Anahata chakra, breathable. A thought struck me: “I am missing red..” (Muladhara: survival, acceptance of death as life). I walked a few meters further and suddenly I saw like a red flashing gem sitting on a plant. A deep crimson red beetle as large as my thumbnail, which I did not recognise as a local species, a living ruby. (I had been translating for years the Persian mystic Hafez: the ruby lips of the b/Beloved...). I stopped there and started a little conversation with the beetle, mainly thanking It, telling It how much I had wanted it to be there — and then after a while walked away. It stayed where it was, the concentrated incarnation of the will to live in a forest of empathic hope.

All those mantid or insectoid beings may not be so fear-inspiring as many fear.

[norman]

Posted by Michel Leclerc (here)

. . . . when we consider human exchanges of their "meaning" as telepathic in nature, that lying is impossible [I]to the extent that we communicate telepathically and are aware of it . . .

I keep wondering if we are advancing or a crippled version of something we once were. Anecdotal stories tell me that the universe is populated by mostly telepathic beings. Are we heading that way or are we a 'clipped' version of having once been like that, or even, was there a "fall of man" ?

When I'm considering what is or could be the biological/cerebral difference between us lingual code talkers with the even crazier written text from those codes, and a fully telepathic species, I always end up at a notion that we've either previously switched some of our cerebral functioning capacity from an enhanced telepathic ability into a lingual code database, or, we are yet to make that cerebral resource switchover in reverse.

I may not ever have pondered on this if I hadn't heard the stories of telepathic 'space visitors'. Maybe those stories will turn out be all false but that won't put that genie back in my bottle, it's there now and I think about it from time to time and always will.

NDE reports also tell of the same kind of telepathic phenomenon but I assume that doesn't involve having a physical body at all.

Everything seems to point to a natural 'telepathic' nature that we are, for some reason, very removed from. edina's story was a little ray of sunlight.

I think we might be a lot better at receiving telepathy though. I sometimes feel like I'm doing a bit of that but it's not something I have mastery over and I can't turn it on or off. I don't think I would want to even if I could.

[TrumanCash]

Posted by Michel Leclerc (here)
Thank you Edina. I will answer your question and add a few things to your notes.
Your questions.
There is this sort of precise research happening regarding telepathy? Yes. The research started from the fundamental finding that sentences, or rather sentence meanings, are presented in the brain neuron firing patterns in a uniquely recognisable way. As far as I remember, these patterns are in "nanoseconds‘” advance on the actual saying of the sentence meaning, and more specifically follow a path of "meaning configuration” --> "choice of language” --> “linguistic configuration” (words in syntax, but yet unspoken) --> muscular activation and phonic expression as an utterance that can be heard (incidentally vindicating the Aristotelian description of the process and Naum Chomsky’s presuppositions of his transformational generative syntax). The experiment was a variant on the numerous experiences of telepathy as in two people (a sender and a receiver) being in separate rooms, one sending an "idea" (a geometrical figure for instance) and the other drawing, or noting, what she/he received received: with the sender and the receiver each being in a dedicated MR scanner, the sender "sending" a sentence, or sentence meaning, to the receiver and the receiver registering it. It was found that the brain activating patterns were similar. The idea of "mirroring" is a continuation of the idea of neuronal mirroring of emotions that had been found earlier. Experiences of joy and sadness corresponding to patterns similar in both the "expresser" of the emotions and the person witnessing the emotions.
How can I find the papers written based on this research? A justified question. I remember seeing that somewhere, probably on the Internet, in this millenium but I do not remember where. Meanwhile research may, or will rather, have gone beyond that – and do we know? Probably I was more interested in applying those discoveries as a language learning coach. To students who needed to acquire a new language in a limited timespan and were quite stressed about it, I told this story and pointed out that this implies that "angelic conversation" is continuously taking place between people (or, in other words, that we cannot NOT communicate – a refusal to communicate is communicated). So instead of convincing ourselves that there are so many formidable hurdles to take we may be helped when we try and accept that we are always communicating (or transmitting telepathically) anyway and that we can welcome that, and that as a result of that we can also find joy in "dancing the language dance" with the person – for beauty’s sake and as a token of our profound acceptance of our embodiment. (We do not so much, I think, need to be “spirited” out of the body but to embody our acceptance of our spirit's love for the body we are in. Our coming here on Earth is divine incarnation, and that we should love and accept even if it involves dying on a cross.)
Question, considering this and the descriptions of communication once the body has died; it appears that this mirroring of brain patterns happens without need of a physical body/brain, so … it’s not necessarily brain dependent? I guess it is not. Maybe there is a conceptual error in the word "dependent". I was once given a visionary experience in which the "superior being" communicated and showed to me that my body and "his" body were the same – although representing, or presenting, this "same" in a different medium so to speak (I am trying to find words for the ineffable..) – or to use a modern analogy maybe, the relationship feels like the identity of two "parts" of a fractal hologram. My suggestion of “permeatingness“ of the "higher" dimensions into the "lower" ones tries to verbalise the intuition in another way. People who relate mystical experiences often tell that there is no real "hierarchy" of dimensions, chakras, consciousness levels etc. The "lower" vibrations are not less good than the "higher"; the divine created them all. (Incarnating is a sought-for prize among the more "spiritual" "beings".) The chakras can be represented as a ladder, but equally well as a wheel. When my dog and I communicate telepathically and we add to that our languages of tail-wagging and turning-about dances and sentences gently spoken, is it not wise to assume that our inner worlds "in love" are equally rich?

If so, what is the mechanism for it, sans physical body. Just like "dependent", I think, Edina, if you allow me to say so, that "mechanism" is not the best choice of words to express what our intuition allows us to conceive. The Greek mechanè, the Latin machina.. what Heidegger calls das Gestell, how terribly "just 3D+ and nothing more".. are those terms. We need different metaphors to describe what is happening. But, as I wrote elsewhere, we have to get out of the desire to "operationalise" what we "intuit".. We can lengthen and strengthen what our arm muscles can do and make a hammer to use; but how could we "use" what "consciousness sharing" allows us to access or be graced with and hence, what could we then "make"? If it is only feasible through creation (creating both the Creator and the creature), we can make ourselves readier maybe, worthier, opener for these transforming, "trans-creating" experiences...

This is a very interesting subject to me. It's a mystery to me how an ET can communicate with me telepathically and I "hear" it (in my mind) in English. So I have speculated that maybe the ET is simply communicating concepts/ideas with intention and my brain plugs in the English translation of the ETs intention.

What is also quite amazing to me is how precise the communication is "translated" in my mind. That is, the words that I "hear" are the exact words that the ET intends to communicate. There seems to be no room for misinterpretation because the communication is so precise.

For example, upon my deaths in the past twelve millennia since I was captured and forced into the Mantis artificial reincarnation system, I go through the tunnel toward the light at the end of the tunnel and then find myself in a Mantis mothership, which I have also referred to as a "soul sucker" or "implanting mothership" or "implant station", like the train station that I go to, to get on the train to go to another place, then come back to the station and do it all over again, lifetime after lifetime. Initially, I had never read anywhere about Mantis ETs so I just referred to them as "insectoids" or "insect guys" due to their appearance.

In three of these captures by Mantis I found myself in a body in a big WHITE LIGHT room, milling around aimlessly with other people in bodies. I hear a soothing voice saying things like "SLEEP. DON’T WORRY. WE’LL TAKE CARE OF YOU. DON’T REMEMBER. YOU HAVE NO PAST. YOU WILL NOT NEED TO REMEMBER YOUR PAST. BE HERE NOW. NO MORE THOUGHTS OF THE PAST. FORGET THE PAST. MOVE FORWARD INTO A NEW LIFE. YOU WILL BEGIN A NEW LIFE IN THE LIGHT.” Also, "GOD LOVES YOU. YOU ARE LOVED (like whisperings in my mind, soothing.) "JOY and LOVE." I can "ALWAYS RETURN TO THE LIGHT. BE IN PEACE. BE IN THE LIGHT. SAFE REFUGE. NO FEAR."

I can see why people are drawn to it. It's like taking a vacation, milling around in the WHITE LIGHT. There's no pain there. You're being programmed to be a sheep. You aren't exposed to stuff. There are other parts of the ship where you are rammed into bodies with force beams.

The memories of being in these Mantis ships revealed the religious programming that takes place between lives. I later found out they were directly tied to the religious and satanic rituals that took place in the Great Pyramid. The Mantis were even using the same flying saucers as Ra of the Anunnaki and they "flew" me down to the Great Pyramid where they programmed me to be a priest performing the Anunnaki blood-drinking, human sacrifice rituals. [Initially, when I wrote my books I had never heard word "Anunnaki" so I referred to them by their symbols, "Serpent Staff Pleiadians".]

The chapter describing my experiences in these Mantis motherships starts at p. 98 of "THE EYE OF RA" PDF book, in the chapter entitled "IN-BETWEEN LIVES IMPLANTS & OUT OF BODY ABDUCTIONS".

[Even small Grays use this kind of religious programming and “Jack Wylie” reported small Grays telepathing him in abductions as a young child to BE RELIGIOUS, JUST BELIEVE, DON’T QUESTION, JUST OBEY: “THERE IS A GOD; HE 'S ALL POWERFUL, ALL EVERYTHING. And I CAN 'T DO; I DON 'T DO ; I 'M NOT CAPABLE. I’M HIS CREATION.” This is a very revealing chapter about the religious manipulation of ETs entitled “The Attic” in my first book, THE PROGRAMMING OF A PLANET, p. 128 of the PDF]

In another interesting example of ET telepathy I was a German pilot in 1942 and I in my Messerschmitz were pulled by a tractor beam into a Reptilian mothership. The Reptilians were telepathing to me in German. So in this memory recovery session I did not "hear" them in English. Luckily, I had taken classes in German so I understood the German words. (However, I don't know whether I would have understood the German words if I had not taken German language classes.) Anyone can read the whole Reptilian experience in "Reptilian Programming", p. 96 of "THE EYE OF RA" PDF.

I’ll cover the WHITE LIGHT programming in another post to show how the dots connect.

[Anu Raman]

Posted by TrumanCash (here)

Posted by Michel Leclerc (here)
Thank you Edina. I will answer your question and add a few things to your notes.
Your questions.
There is this sort of precise research happening regarding telepathy? Yes. The research started from the fundamental finding that sentences, or rather sentence meanings, are presented in the brain neuron firing patterns in a uniquely recognisable way. As far as I remember, these patterns are in "nanoseconds‘” advance on the actual saying of the sentence meaning, and more specifically follow a path of "meaning configuration” --> "choice of language” --> “linguistic configuration” (words in syntax, but yet unspoken) --> muscular activation and phonic expression as an utterance that can be heard (incidentally vindicating the Aristotelian description of the process and Naum Chomsky’s presuppositions of his transformational generative syntax). The experiment was a variant on the numerous experiences of telepathy as in two people (a sender and a receiver) being in separate rooms, one sending an "idea" (a geometrical figure for instance) and the other drawing, or noting, what she/he received received: with the sender and the receiver each being in a dedicated MR scanner, the sender "sending" a sentence, or sentence meaning, to the receiver and the receiver registering it. It was found that the brain activating patterns were similar. The idea of "mirroring" is a continuation of the idea of neuronal mirroring of emotions that had been found earlier. Experiences of joy and sadness corresponding to patterns similar in both the "expresser" of the emotions and the person witnessing the emotions.
How can I find the papers written based on this research? A justified question. I remember seeing that somewhere, probably on the Internet, in this millenium but I do not remember where. Meanwhile research may, or will rather, have gone beyond that – and do we know? Probably I was more interested in applying those discoveries as a language learning coach. To students who needed to acquire a new language in a limited timespan and were quite stressed about it, I told this story and pointed out that this implies that "angelic conversation" is continuously taking place between people (or, in other words, that we cannot NOT communicate – a refusal to communicate is communicated). So instead of convincing ourselves that there are so many formidable hurdles to take we may be helped when we try and accept that we are always communicating (or transmitting telepathically) anyway and that we can welcome that, and that as a result of that we can also find joy in "dancing the language dance" with the person – for beauty’s sake and as a token of our profound acceptance of our embodiment. (We do not so much, I think, need to be “spirited” out of the body but to embody our acceptance of our spirit's love for the body we are in. Our coming here on Earth is divine incarnation, and that we should love and accept even if it involves dying on a cross.)
Question, considering this and the descriptions of communication once the body has died; it appears that this mirroring of brain patterns happens without need of a physical body/brain, so … it’s not necessarily brain dependent? I guess it is not. Maybe there is a conceptual error in the word "dependent". I was once given a visionary experience in which the "superior being" communicated and showed to me that my body and "his" body were the same – although representing, or presenting, this "same" in a different medium so to speak (I am trying to find words for the ineffable..) – or to use a modern analogy maybe, the relationship feels like the identity of two "parts" of a fractal hologram. My suggestion of “permeatingness“ of the "higher" dimensions into the "lower" ones tries to verbalise the intuition in another way. People who relate mystical experiences often tell that there is no real "hierarchy" of dimensions, chakras, consciousness levels etc. The "lower" vibrations are not less good than the "higher"; the divine created them all. (Incarnating is a sought-for prize among the more "spiritual" "beings".) The chakras can be represented as a ladder, but equally well as a wheel. When my dog and I communicate telepathically and we add to that our languages of tail-wagging and turning-about dances and sentences gently spoken, is it not wise to assume that our inner worlds "in love" are equally rich?

If so, what is the mechanism for it, sans physical body. Just like "dependent", I think, Edina, if you allow me to say so, that "mechanism" is not the best choice of words to express what our intuition allows us to conceive. The Greek mechanè, the Latin machina.. what Heidegger calls das Gestell, how terribly "just 3D+ and nothing more".. are those terms. We need different metaphors to describe what is happening. But, as I wrote elsewhere, we have to get out of the desire to "operationalise" what we "intuit".. We can lengthen and strengthen what our arm muscles can do and make a hammer to use; but how could we "use" what "consciousness sharing" allows us to access or be graced with and hence, what could we then "make"? If it is only feasible through creation (creating both the Creator and the creature), we can make ourselves readier maybe, worthier, opener for these transforming, "trans-creating" experiences...

This is a very interesting subject to me. It's a mystery to me how an ET can communicate with me telepathically and I "hear" it (in my mind) in English. So I have speculated that maybe the ET is simply communicating concepts/ideas with intention and my brain plugs in the English translation of the ETs intention.

What is also quite amazing to me is how precise the communication is "translated" in my mind. That is, the words that I "hear" are the exact words that the ET intends to communicate. There seems to be no room for misinterpretation because the communication is so precise.

For example, upon my deaths in the past twelve millennia since I was captured and forced into the Mantis artificial reincarnation system, I go through the tunnel toward the light at the end of the tunnel and then find myself in a Mantis mothership, which I have also referred to as a "soul sucker" or "implanting mothership" or "implant station", like the train station that I go to, to get on the train to go to another place, then come back to the station and do it all over again, lifetime after lifetime. Initially, I had never read anywhere about Mantis ETs so I just referred to them as "insectoids" or "insect guys" due to their appearance.

In three of these captures by Mantis I found myself in a body in a big WHITE LIGHT room, milling around aimlessly with other people in bodies. I hear a soothing voice saying things like "SLEEP. DON’T WORRY. WE’LL TAKE CARE OF YOU. DON’T REMEMBER. YOU HAVE NO PAST. YOU WILL NOT NEED TO REMEMBER YOUR PAST. BE HERE NOW. NO MORE THOUGHTS OF THE PAST. FORGET THE PAST. MOVE FORWARD INTO A NEW LIFE. YOU WILL BEGIN A NEW LIFE IN THE LIGHT.” Also, "GOD LOVES YOU. YOU ARE LOVED (like whisperings in my mind, soothing.) "JOY and LOVE." I can "ALWAYS RETURN TO THE LIGHT. BE IN PEACE. BE IN THE LIGHT. SAFE REFUGE. NO FEAR."

I can see why people are drawn to it. It's like taking a vacation, milling around in the WHITE LIGHT. There's no pain there. You're being programmed to be a sheep. You aren't exposed to stuff. There are other parts of the ship where you are rammed into bodies with force beams.

The memories of being in these Mantis ships revealed the religious programming that takes place between lives. I later found out they were directly tied to the religious and satanic rituals that took place in the Great Pyramid. The Mantis were even using the same flying saucers as Ra of the Anunnaki and they "flew" me down to the Great Pyramid where they programmed me to be a priest performing the Anunnaki blood-drinking, human sacrifice rituals. [Initially, when I wrote my books I had never heard word "Anunnaki" so I referred to them by their symbols, "Serpent Staff Pleiadians".]

The chapter describing my experiences in these Mantis motherships starts at p. 98 of "THE EYE OF RA" PDF book, in the chapter entitled "IN-BETWEEN LIVES IMPLANTS & OUT OF BODY ABDUCTIONS".

[Even small Grays use this kind of religious programming and “Jack Wylie” reported small Grays telepathing him in abductions as a young child to BE RELIGIOUS, JUST BELIEVE, DON’T QUESTION, JUST OBEY: “THERE IS A GOD; HE 'S ALL POWERFUL, ALL EVERYTHING. And I CAN 'T DO; I DON 'T DO ; I 'M NOT CAPABLE. I’M HIS CREATION.” This is a very revealing chapter about the religious manipulation of ETs entitled “The Attic” in my first book, THE PROGRAMMING OF A PLANET, p. 128 of the PDF]

In another interesting example of ET telepathy I was a German pilot in 1942 and I in my Messerschmitz were pulled by a tractor beam into a Reptilian mothership. The Reptilians were telepathing to me in German. So in this memory recovery session I did not "hear" them in English. Luckily, I had taken classes in German so I understood the German words. (However, I don't know whether I would have understood the German words if I had not taken German language classes.) Anyone can read the whole Reptilian experience in "Reptilian Programming", p. 96 of "THE EYE OF RA" PDF.

I’ll cover the WHITE LIGHT programming in another post to show how the dots connect.

Fascinating!

I've been investigating the "Mantis" people, in which I personally call them "Mantids"...for the past 4 months, for ethics violations on this planet. Decision has not been made to banish them as of just yet. There has been some numerous complaints given in regards to these Mantids, impersonating other physical beings, such as the "grays", "annunaki" and many others. In fact, I had a complaint come in a few days ago, stating that some individual was impersonating me.

Please keep in mind, I have no care for the physicality of individuals of any species, race, and so on because we are a society of many different species out there.

Just thought to share this with you. Thank you for sharing.

-An.

[ExomatrixTV]

• UFOs & the After Life: Part 2

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=XGuZGp-ha2E