Just wanted to add that the above isn't meant in any negative manner, more a friendly exchange of ideas - trying to clarify where I was coming from with my first post .

though its true that some "ghosts" that linger here close to our plane (physical) are just playing back the actions of the individual over and over, and some others with a measure of interactibility, the idea that all people who died and are left on the astral to interact are all just faded memories of themselves seems shortsighted.

But this viewpoint is coming from one ingrained in the standard view of the astral state. If we take a fresh look at the concepts such as ghosts, physical planes, astral locales etc they are all remnants of dogma from an age when man viewed the weird through superstitious eyes, translating phenomena from outside of their sphere of knowledge as ‘super natural’.
Your first post seemed to be questioning the tenants of accepted astral philosophies, but now I see you were simply switching around a few ideas of an ingrained belief.
My first point concerned the fact that we don’t know what consciousness is, we don’t know what free will or self awareness is (we just presumed to have it), and yet, we suppose fantastical ideas on this non-understanding.
As a crude example, brains can produce multiple personalities (as can be seen with people suffering from such multiple personality disorders), and brains filter and generate our perception of the entire universe. Please note that I am not saying brains actually create it, or even consciousness, I’m pointing out that they can do amazing things. So if they can support multiple personalities on the surface mind, and entire worlds and universe in the sub-conscious levels, it’s not hard to imagine that whatever mechanisms ‘might’ produce self awareness might also easily animate an emotional shell of memories into seemingly autonomous and sentient being. At our core, we are experiences and memories built upon this conscious shell.
If somehow minds are connected, then this vast power house could easily maintain all the dead.
This might sound ludicrous, but no more so than the other philosophies which only have belief as their foundation too.

Everytime we goto sleep we all enter into a low-level astral state for dreaming and psychic balancing. Could it be said that we "die" when we sleep and only wake up because our bodies are still "working"? Sure, I can go along with that. Like those who were asleep when an earthquake hit in india a while back and they never woke up. Their astral bodies severed the connection to the physical and moved on. I'm sure some of those "souls" never even knew they died living in their own reality moving along growing and interacting.

As long as a disembodied astral person can still think, grow, understand, and adapt I would consider them far more than faded memories on the astral who are just playing out a part in a repeating "movie".

One again, the above is viewing my comments from a position ingrained in a belief system – discovery comes from challenging our beliefs, not judging other ideas from the comfort of our own. I was supposing that we might not survive physical death, that the engine of consciousness is the same in every sentient being, fuelled by a brain built in a universe with conscious potential. The only differentiating factor being experiences built from different vantage points and genetic predispositions.

NB these are ideas to be explored, not necessary statements of fact – such as all astral philosophies .

I'm open to the idea that the universe has the potential for consciousness, but that potential is only met in complex structures such as the brain - and so while death might bring oblivion to the individual, the next brain generated will meet the same potential, and so in the cries of another newborn, consciousness will look out over the universe once more.
I've seen too many journals and reports about area specific brain injury causing dramatic changes to a person’s personality, sometimes to the extent that such people commit pretty horrendous crimes, or cannot control themselves in socially acceptable ways any longer.
For all we know, people we meet whilst OBE, including those who have passed on, are simply the remnants of people’s memories of such people echoing in the mental spaces created by the billions of living minds.

Definately a nice thing, as it says the cat usually isn't too sociable otherwise.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6917113.stm


I bet the patients of that home are definately not happy if the Cat decides to come sit by them 

Are you talking about scrying? If so:

scrying mirror

I would like to get free range eggs but now here in EU we have a law that poultry must be closed inside because of "bird flu" danger.

This is sadly true at the moment, although I do have friends who keep their own hens and they are free to be outside (and their eggs taste much better than those from shops or supermarkets).

I dont think meat is unhealthy for human but if you eat meat from sick animals it's not healthy. I still eat it because organic market isn't developed here eventhough there are quite a lot of organic farmers so you it's still hard to buy it. They just dont know how to sell the product.

If you are interested, I could post links to articles which show meat actually isn’t good for people if they eat it more than once or twice a week – especially red meat which causes changes in cells which could cause cancers in certain parts of the body.

I was vegetarian for a year but i lost so much weight i had to stop. Now after two years i'm at the same weight i was 4 years ago. I was doing something wrong or it's not an appropiate diet for me.

When I became vegetarian, I actually gained weight, I used to be a very thin person (6’3” and around 10 stone), so you losing weight suggests you didn’t have a balanced diet at the time.

I try to eat as unprocessed food as possible, though. And i dont have any moral issues about eating meat anymore. I had them during the time i was vegeterian and some time after but i got over it. Here is the answer i got from the eloheim when i asked him about the food.

what is interesting that i heard the same thing from dr. Len who's teaching Ho'oponopono. He also said that guilt is what makes you sick not the food you eat.

I think everyone should eat what's good for their body.

Guilt can make anyone sick, but simply removing guilt doesn’t mean the situation it used to be attached to is moral now. It simply means the guilt free person doesn’t feel guilt.
My moral issues in regards to meat are to do with taking a sentient beings life just to fill a rumbling stomach. As supposedly intellectual (and perhaps enlightened) beings, killing other conscious animals (which each and every one of them are unique in their own right), in full knowledge that they will be terrified as we march them up to the abattoir, seems slightly wrong, especially when we can get better food from less terrible methods.
If people wish to hunt, take their own food, and eat it with respect to the animal’s life – then great, that is following a natural cycle. But to eat slabs of flesh, wrapped in plastic and refrigerated in a shop, it seems quite wrong.
Please note, I respect anyone’s choice to eat meat (my wife eats meat), but this is a debate :p
I also think there is another argument there in regards to humans treating creatures they perceive lesser to themselves as a commodity, to do with as they will. This is very dangerous ground. What would be terrible, and amazing, is if we ever did contact some form of alien life (or perhaps even the rising of a powerful nation on earth), and they decide we are going to become their food source, because we are lesser to them. We would have absolutely no grounds to argue against this because we have the exact same stance on ‘lesser’ animals.

If that's vegeterian or meat it doesnt matter. Plants have feelings too.

If they do have feelings, the fact they have no brain or central nervous system dictates they will feel no pain, terror, or any kind of ‘emotion’ known to humans. Also, plants generally grow to be harvested, it’s their natural cycle, and it’s what they evolved to do.

What we ask is that when you eat something that you pay attention to how your body reacts to it… that you embrace those things, and often times those things will change, that feel good to you in the moment… that you realize that God gave you food to eat… and that you are not a sinner for eating.  But if meat does not make you feel good… don’t eat it.  And if meat makes you feel good… don’t have guilt when you do eat it.  Choose the diet that makes you feel good and eat it without guilt and you will be healthy.  Yes this means you could survive on ding-dongs and twinkies, but very, very few people could eat ding-dongs and twinkies without feeling guilty… and it’s the guilt that makes you sick, or not function at your highest… not the food.

This is actually quite worrying advice from a supposedly advanced being. It negates the whole area of what meat actually is. You could simply change the wording and it’s exact central message would remain intact. Such as:
“But if your neighbours flesh does not make you feel good… don’t eat it.  And if neighbours flesh makes you feel good… don’t have guilt when you do eat it.  Choose the diet that makes you feel good and eat it without guilt and you will be healthy. “
And such as this:

few people could eat ding-dongs and twinkies without feeling guilty… and it’s the guilt that makes you sick, or not function at your highest… not the food.

This is only true if the person has awareness that twikies are bad for oneself, and many do not, so they would not feel guilt at eating them.

The channelled quote simply talks about self importance, EGO, with no regards to anything outside of one’s self (i.e. that fact sentient beings are killed to provide a meal which is very expensive resource wise, on the land, and on peoples bodies). If I was a solipsist perhaps it would be sound advice, but i’m not, and I do believe other sentient beings even those deemed ‘lesser’ (whatever that means) should have the right to live and not be imposed upon by other people’s desire or will if it affects them negatively.

Hi MisterJingo,

I know that there are other ways of producing milk, that are more humane.  But I live in the US, and sadly animals welfare is a lot worse here than Europe.  I am glad to hear that bovine injection (and all animal) are illegal in the EU.  About free range eggs; there is no regulations in the US for this term.  Even worse, a lot of organic eggs and dairy are factory farms.  Yes, this is illegal but the USDA apparently likes to takes bribes.  If you can't even trust organic farms, than I find it hard to believe the term "free range," which means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.  Well at least in the United States of America, "the land of the free."  Its really just a marketing term that anyone can use, and it works.

Cavernstoy

I agree it's really hard to know what you are buying, as even in the UK even things labelled as 'organic' might not be what people think they are.
A few things I meant to add previously to this topic regarded the difference in physiology between herbivores and carnivores. Carnivores usually have teeth for cutting and ripping, sharp fangs, and their digestive systems are quite short and smooth as energy can be removed from meat very easily. A carnivore will actually starve if fed only on plant matters, as they can’t digest such food.
An herbivore has flat grinding teeth (like humans), and will start to break down their food in their mouth (like humans). They also have a very long ridged digestive tract (like humans); such a tract allows herbivores to remove as much nutrients from their food as is possible.

Fortunately, the last generations of human that are coming to this world are becoming more and more allergic to dairy and wheat (which it's genetically modified). That's forcing parents to look for other alternatives: veg diets, ecologic products...

The reverse is happening in regards to milk. Humans used to be unable to stomach milk, but around 10 thousand years ago, a gene mutation occured allowing adults to drink milk. This gene has spread to the majority of the population between then and now. People who suffer from lactose intolerance are in a dwidnling minority as they simply don't have this gene mutation.

[can]

Now, what about dairy and eggs?  Dairy cows, and egg laying hens live in worse conditions than any other animal.  Dairy cows are confined, inside, in veal crates.  No room to move or do anything at all.  They are hooked up to machines that suck the milk from their utter, very aggressively.  They are giving artificial hormones to produce about an extra gallon a day of milk, which is part puss by the way (because of the bruising.)  These hormones, which are fed to almost all factory farmed animals, is present in the animal produce.  Also, antibiotics are fed to almost all factory farmed animals to prevent disease and infection from the severely unhygienic conditions.  About half of antibiotics produced are fed to livestock.  Antibiotics destroy your natural immune system, leaving room for cancer cells to develop, which are a result of the synthetic hormones.

Egg laying hens are confined, inside, in battery cages, without any room to move, and no sunlight to feel, and no fresh are to breath.  At a young age they are debeaked.  The lives of these animals are so stressful, they would peck each other to death if this was not done.  By the way, chicken beaks are made out of hard and soft tissue, with nerve endings.  They are also fed antibiotics, and hormones.  Sometimes to produce more eggs, they are temporarily starved.  Most farmed animals only live six weeks in factory farms.  Egg laying hens and dairy cows live years in factory farms!   

Hey Cavernstoy,
I agree with everything you wrote, but take slight issue with the above two paragraphs. Firstly, I’d like to say that I haven’t eaten meat or consumed animal products for 10 years now – my reasons for doing so are moral.
While I agree that a lot of dairy farms do treat animals badly and keep their cows pregnant to have a constant supply of milk, this is not the only way of producing milk, and many farms choose more conscientious methods.  For example, there are many farms in the UK which have automated milking machines which the cows go to of their own free will. Bearing milk is painful for them, and so they do like to release the excess milk. On such farms, the cows walk themselves to the machines, which then guides probes to the teats, and the cow happily stands there until the milking is over. No bruising, or harmful effect to the cow.
Likewise with eggs; yes there are battery farms, and I agree battery farming is a terrible practice, but there are also many free range farms. Hens will lay eggs even without fertilisation (like human females release eggs) and free range farms allow the hens to come and go at will, and the excess eggs (which would rot) are taken and sold.
In the EU it is illegal to give antibiotics or hormones to farm animals (I don’t think this is the case in the US), so this isn’t an issue either.
This shows it is possible to maintain these practices without harm (physical or emotional) to the animals, and if we look at nature, most species live in a symbiotic  relationship with others – and that’s exactly what egg and milk farming can be (if done in a humane way).
I’m just posting this to show that such matters are not black and white, such as one could argue that modern mechanised farming methods destroy an unimaginable amount of biodiversity and creatures with each harvest.  So even a vegan and vegetarian diet could be tainted with blood too (metaphorically speaking), unless we farm our own produce by hand using natural tools that is.
I do think eating meat is a senseless waste of life, but I don’t preach this, and believe others should make up their own minds.

The thing with rage and anger is, if left unchecked, it feeds off itself. We can be angry or hate others (for whatever reason) but to do such a thing, we need to carry the anger and hate inside ourselves. When I was younger I used to carry such anger and rage that I could feel it physically in my body, even to the extent that my gums seemed to itch and writhe with it.
I reached a point where I could either do something very stupid, or I could attempt to release such negativity. I decided to release it.
It wasn't an overnight thing, it was a continuous awarness of my emotions, and trying to keep a check on them. Deep breaths are all well and good, but unless awarness is kept on the reason 'why', then it's a short term fix. Over time, whatever habits, learnt responses etc which had generated such anger started to dissipate.
I sometimes now get irritible and can be a bit sh*tty for little reason, but in such times I try and look at why. So it's still a work in progress.
As said above, this is something your friends needs to want to happen. Without intent to reduce the anger and rage, it will not be reduced.

If the question is : Anybody thinking Organized Religion is a fake ?   Then YES i am an Athiest

I strongly belief in a Higher Force - Creator

If you look at the various different religions then you will conclude that they all focus on the same subject. Their prophets/disciples are the same etc. So what is the point of different religions in any way ?

Religion = Dogma

Anyway, my 2c worth


With Love

 

I personally don't follow any religions, as I don't see there is a need for 'me' to do so. But I have no problem with people who follow or need to follow such a belief system (my wife is a practising Catholic for example).
I also don’t necessarily believe in a creator, it seems to me that most people’s perception of such a being is born from aspects of themselves projected onto whatever generates such evidence of ‘creator’ in their perception. I can happily conceive of a universe where physical death might not be absolute, but where there is also no creator or overriding coherent pattern or path. ‘Life’ could just ‘be’. People might argue against this, but the source of such arguments would be rooted in their own personal experience and as such would not be indicative of a greater truth outside of their own sphere of experience. I think we all have a lot to learn, and perhaps have a need to look beyond the structures created by societal preconception generated over the course of humanities history.

It's safest to set email to text display only rather than html.

Wow, that's pretty interesting.

As with all things like this, I always wonder the following:

1. Does it have three different minds that all want to do different things?
2. If not, which head does it use, or can it transfer its mind between the three heads?
3. Three souls? 

EDIT:
Well, I found this, proving the story false.
http://www.raygirvan.co.uk/apoth/crapos.jpg

Nonetheless, those 3 things I wonder about are applicable for siamese twins, and other animals that have actually been proven to have multiple heads.
The one that baffles me the most is siamese twins, because humans must have a soul, right?
So do they have two, or one?
If they have one, how do the two different.. members of the body.. each have a different personality?

Good find : http://www.raygirvan.co.uk/apoth/trifrog.htm

I saw it on the bbc.co.uk news most read things and didn't google it before posting *doh*.

I've only just seen this, thanks for sharing .