[Clea De Vries]

I’d like to offer something to Mark, and I can’t work out how to post this as a separate comment. I’d love his response, however, even if not, I’d appreciate it if this could be forwarded to him. I understand this is a bit lengthy and I do not wish to waste his time.

I have been experimenting with techniques to gain access to soul memory and eternity. They are based on what I think I know about right and left brain (which admittedly isn’t much). However, my methods have brought me into surprisingly deep and direct contact with beings I now consider to be “soul family” and my own place in eternity. So, I’d like to share how I did this and a comment about how my emerging understanding of eternal systems is changing how I think about absolutely everything.

How I got there began with an idea. If the right hemisphere is our interface with eternity, then to work meaningfully with its experiences, we’d need to be willing to meet it on its own terms. In other words, we’d need to accept that our encounters with eternity are likely to be impressionistic, associative, emotional, sensorily rich, and personal. They may feel very vivid and real and still be metaphorical, imaginative, and dream-like. They may not initially make much sense, especially if they involve recollections of lifetimes in places other than 3D Earth. They might also be very difficult to express in words.

My method began with open-focus meditation (a simple one, just resting my awareness in my inner 3D sensory landscape). On a hunch, I added bilateral stimulation (hand tapping, as used in EMDR) to my process. (It seemed to help.) From there I started feeling my way into some key questions about myself (e.g., my earliest impressions of myself, what I had brought with me into this lifetime, my “soul purpose”, etc.).

I was very careful about how I opened myself to the spiritual realm. I was clear on my intention to communicate only with beings whose expression is undistorted love. Each time, I started with something I knew well (such as an early experience of love) then felt my way into the positive associations. Gradually (over the course of a few months) I became aware of the presence of beings around me. I sensed them first as loving energies, each known to me very personally and each quite unique. My ability to sense their thoughts came in more slowly. I had to recognise that we were sharing at the place where thought is formed. And yet once I realised this, I quickly learned to distinguish their thoughts from my own.

What feels like soul memory has also started emerging, but it is not a coherent narrative. It is more of a diffuse sense of knowing about my relationships with these beings, their personalities, impressions about our home, our shared history, the system I come from… It all feels so familiar to me, and yet, my ability to comprehend it and work with it meaningfully is frustratingly limited. My current theory is that there are two factors at play. Firstly, my own soul development (we can only comprehend eternity at our own level). Secondly, the brain and systems of human thought that are specific to this incarnation (e.g., science, philosophy, religion, mathematics).

It would be logical to assume that we process our spiritual experiences the same way as any other lived experience. That is, our right brain “beholds” them (the experiential encounter) and our left brain turns them into a workable narrative.

This brings me to a remark on Dante and Blake. I’m not a scholar, but I’m wondering if understanding the work of such visionaries might be usefully informed by the idea that they were operating within the same limitations of brain and culture. That is, they had direct encounters with eternity and highly advanced beings, but they could only interpret these with systems of thought available to them at the time.

You made a short youtube video in which you summarised ten key insights from Dante. What stood out to me was that they were so similar to insights I have reached myself after glimpsing eternity. I interpreted my own experiences differently. Mine are more informed by science and science fiction – we are not alone in this physical universe, which is far more richly dimensioned than we realise or are currently able to perceive. Ultimately though, we don’t come to the truth by becoming attached to a particular paradigm or an addiction to empirical data. My opinion is that facts should be in service to truth and not be mistaken for it. Truth is found in themes, resonances, and insights, and tested by its capacity to trigger deep and lasting personal transformation. Working from this perspective would also seem to offer a useful way of gathering and working meaningfully with subjective material (e.g., themes vs facts).

I believe we are sitting at a very important juncture in human history. Understanding the right hemisphere and how it handles information could be where science finally meets spirituality. Then perhaps we can also start thinking intelligently about eternal systems, such as how souls navigate countless lifetimes and epic stories, and how this changes the meaning of absolutely everything – from our interpersonal relationships to different “types” of soul groups (e.g., animals and plants) to philosophical problems that have plagued humans throughout history (such as the meaning of “evil” and what we do with it).

These are just ideas, but my personal
experiences have been so vivid and as real as anything I have experienced
during this Earth lifetime that I felt I had to share. I’d love your thoughts
on this, Mark. I hope it made some kind of sense.