nowiam,

I presume from your post that you have not yet read Tom's trilogy, My Big TOE. If you had, you should have noted that the TOE presented is a scientific model of a real system. That real things are neither infinite nor immortal is discussed. You would have also noted the discussion of Out of Body Experiences (OOBE). Many other books describe OOBE as well. Study some of these and you can answer your own questions.

Otherwise, welcome to the forums. Your questions about things which you do not understand in MBT or otherwise are welcome.

Ted

Well, if you've ever looked into H.P. Blavatsky or the Theosophical society- she claims that she was taken under the "chelaship" of the "Masters of Wisdom" or what Tom might call the "teachers of humanity." She produced "Isis Unveiled" and "The Secret Doctrine" (her magnus opus) apperantly under the direction of the forementioned masters. According to Blavatsky: these Masters were beyond physical death as an inevitability. Meaning that they can go about producing new bodies at will or healing/rejuvenating/ or indeed leaving (both in the final sense of the word and in "astral" sense) their physical bodies at will. Of course all of this is done with an intent more pure than even the most noble of our often mundane or pretentious intentions. This is because they have such an unimaginable perspective. Imagine the intent/decision space of a dog compared to a human being... big difference. Immortality is granted not to those who seek it (it seems) but to those who renounce it. This is (if true) the most beautiful paradox of all...

This is a good question though; and I'm sure others will be more than happy to throw in their two cents.


Cole

_________________
Never live so certainly as to confuse your own convictions with what is true.

Type 3 is possible, but unlikely to be making a permanent residence here in PMR. Given that learning, growing, evolving is the name of the game, who would want to stay in kindergarten forever? Living forever in one reality frame is something dreamed of by those who doubt the larger reality. Not knocking your question my friend, I have wondered too. Until I learned to wander instead of wonder. You will too. Read the books, they will change you because you will change yourself.

_________________
always, John

Hey guys, wake up. Forget the immortal part and substitute without known end, just as infinite is not real. None of you are really subject to physical death. Remember, virtual reality, return to/merge with your activities in NPMR, merge back into the totality of your higher self. Remember that Tom has described manifesting a physical body in a PMR visited by OOBE. Look for type 3 on television in 'new age' type shows or books.

Ted

Thanks for all your comments! And I look forward to everyone's feedback in this thread as well as any additional thread/post I may initiate or participate with.

BTW: Really great work TOM!

Ok, just a quick overview of where I'm coming from. I have watched and listened to all of Tom's videos and radio interviews. I also have recently acquired the Trilogy and have finished reading Book 1 and am now in 2.

For what's it worth, I have several decades of fairly intensive spiritual, religious, metaphysical and paranormal studies under my belt. Over the years I've studied a wide range of OBE material, videos, audio, etc, (including Monroe's works), and have also had personal success in OBE's myself (Note: "OOBE" might be more accurate but not as efficient as writing OBE while still retaining the same meaning...LOL).

However, I am not strong in some physical sciences and mathematics. Yet I do have a pool of very close friends and family who fill in these gaps for me when needed.

In general, after reading "Autobiography of a Yogi" many years ago I became fascinated with the degree of accomplishment or apparent progress (siddhis, wisdom, love, etc) that some of the yogi's and masters in that book attained. But the immortal Babaji stood out from all the rest. What Babaji seemed to represent , if true, was a person (apparently once mortal like any one of us) who came into an understanding, either through techniques, tools, inner work, etc, and achieved one of the highest levels, if not the epitome of human potential and accomplishment.

So I researched and eventually sought out only those people who were still alive and claimed that they studied directly under Babaji. Two of these people, whom I meant in person on numerous occasions, stood out to me, but one was not too far away from my home. I discovered that this individual meant eight physically immortal masters while in the East and was striving to become a physical immoralist as well.

Without delving too much further into this story/history, suffice to say that the issue of "physical immortality" established some roots into my psyche. Of course I am not trying to broach or debate an "unreal" scenario. More below...

Quick note:

I have delved into Theosophy rather considerably over the years. I do not find them to be of much help in regards to this topic.

Also, there is a slight but significant difference between Ascended Masters and physically immortal masters. For example, if a person dies and only thereafter achieves the power to return in a physical form (learning this ability in the inner worlds while their physical form is dead) they are not the same as those who achieve this immortality ability while still incarnate in a physical form. A subtle but necessary distinction.

Re: Ted's comments

It didn't appear to me that anything in TOE (as I have been exposed to thus far) contradicts the concepts I have set forth. I was trying to make a personal and practical connection to ones conscious journey (as it pertains to our volitional sphere of influence) when I used the word-symbols "immortal and immortality". Whereas word-symbols such as "without known end" or "Infinite" can be a bit impersonal. And as Ted has alluded, a bit too vast to consider practical.

Maybe I should just read the entire trilogy before responding further. But I think it will be interesting to respond to some of the comments from my current awareness/understanding.

These are wonderful observations from Ted.





I guess I see everything as real ("thing" is a misnomer since everything also has to include the unreal or nothingness and beyond). But not everything seems practical, or attainable, or even able to be experience... Of course who knows? The bottom line is that one can apparently either actively (consciously) do and experience something, or not. And apparently some people have the ability to retain their physical form indefinitely (for all intents and purposes of what that word implies). Of course I'm not trying to argue whether or not anyone would actually want to remain in a physical form for 10centillion, centillion, etc.

As an observer starting the TOE exploration according to TOM, I ask myself, (absolutely NO offense intended), how is it that a student of TOM's such as Ted state what he is saying above as if it is experiential fact, (which seems to be the most relevant means of validating "fact")? Is it reasonable for Ted to say that, "None of you are really subject to physical death."? How can Ted say this and also be accurate? In order to say this even on a fundamental personal level of fact (not to mention truth) wouldn't Ted need to have proven that he isn't subject to physical death? And how much more complex does it get when you assume to speak for others in this matter via a perceived consensus reality model?

As I read TOE I also note that there appears to be cumulative speculation involved. Some sections are obviously incomplete and speculative, but we are led to believe that we must wait until the next section in order to discover the validity of what TOM is trying to convey. In fact we must read the entire trilogy.

Yet is not this very process a beLIEf system in and of itself? Of course letters are cumulative and make no sense unto we have a recognizable word. And words do this to express concepts, the same with numbers, etc.

So maybe this cumulative perspective is the best we have for discerning fact and truth. Yet for a consensus model to be valid we must agree on the letters before any word can provide a meaning. And we must experience something before we can ever agree to a consensus. (A sub-set cannot understand a larger set...hmmm...maybe. There may be a micro/macrocosmic realtionship to ALL things that happens in the NOW which transcends considerations of conscious "progress")

Of course intuition, clairvoyance and clairaudience, etc, can discern truth without words or numerical symbolism. I know this from direct experience myself. And I also know that many people have the ability to travel in the inner worlds (OBE) and come to different conclusions, abilities, etc.

I digress...

Back to the immortals. It doesn't seem unreal or ridiculous to consider that if there is such a thing as conscious progression, then the ability to progress denotes that one must never lose the ability of any experience once experienced. They may discard it, as if it has no immediate value towards their forward journey, for instance, however mastery (for lack of a better word right now) cannot be mastery if anything is lost.

So it seems reasonable to me that to die against ones conscious will (which happens as we chronologically age and die, or die in accidents, or through illness, or through murder, etc) is an unconscious death urge of an immature consciousness. While a mature conscious that is truly progressive would always have the choice to remain physical prior to chronological death. Again, this doesn't mean that they would want to. But only that they CAN.

And the issue that there are more mature conscious beings in broader or higher sets than our 3D sub-set may be totally inaccurate...

I'll keep reading the Trilogy...

Cheers!

In Monroe's Books, He asks to know who is the most advanced Human on the planet
and he is brought to that person.

Unless my mind is remembering wrong this IUOC was living a lifespan far longer than any person could imagine.

OM

I think Ted meant that there is no physical reality as you understand it but it`s a virtual reality (learning simulation) and all realities are except consciousness itself. There are two ways to define all virtual realities - all are physical or all are nonphysical. When a person dies, he/she goes to another reality (many call it the astral), but it`s as physical to him as here because he is now focused in that reality. Afterwards when the person processes he`s previous life in the astral, he then joins his higher self or bigger aspect or oversoul and so on. All virtual realities are made for the purpose of learning (becoming more) and eventually you outgrow one of them and go to learn in a different one. In that perspective it is not reasonable to participate in a one particular virtual learning lab forever because you simply outgrow it at one point (gained enough experience and learned enough lessons) and another one has more potetial.
Robert Monroe described an experience in his book, where he asked the Inspec to arrange a meeting with the most developed human being on earth. He met with this human and one of his questions was "how long have you lived on earth or how old are you" can`t remember the exact question and the human replied that 1800 years. From our PMR little picture perspective that`s already immortal. I raised a question in another topic if its even possible or consonace with our rule set to live 1800 years straight in one experience packet and haven`t received an answer. Maybe this experience which Robert described was made only for him or many metaphors involved which I can`t understand.

_________________
On the vast canvas of the Self the picture of manifold worlds is painted by the Self itself. And that Supreme Self, seeing but itself, enjoys great delight.- Adi Shankara

Nowiam,

I logged on today to ask that same question and found your thread! When I think of immortality, I don't think of being infinitely unchangeable. I think of immortality as the ability to maintain any physical or non-physical manifestation in any reality that I like at any time I choose. As someone who continues to learn and grow without the inconvenience of death.
Immortality or not, I believe is should be my conscious choice, but apparently my version of Freewill is less restricted than most.

Tom, How would this play into MBT version of Freewill?

Thanks,
Kevin

Robert A. Monroe "Ultimate Journey"

Page 50

Robert: Yes ... there is one that I would like to visit. You know what I mean.
Inspec: The most mature and evolved human in physical earth, living in your time reference.

Page 52-53

He/she: I am only one of your statistics. One of the one-in-a-million types. Your friend as done well in locating me.
Robert: I perceive you as occidental, yet no one on Earth really believes you exist. But ... we have met before ... just
once ... haven`t we?
He/she: You see? You are answering your own questions.
Robert: Yet ... you have lived only one physical lifetime. You have not been recycled, like the rest of us. But ... how do I know these things?
He/she: You are reading my mind.
Robert: Only a part of it, and with your permission, I`m sure. One continuous lifetime, for eighteen hundred years! How do you stay ... young?
He/she: I keep changing jobs. That keeps anyone young. Is that a good answer?
Robert: A great one. What a pleasure to meet you this way!
.
.
.
Robert: Where do you eat and sleep?
He/she: I gave those up years ago.

_________________
On the vast canvas of the Self the picture of manifold worlds is painted by the Self itself. And that Supreme Self, seeing but itself, enjoys great delight.- Adi Shankara

Yes, I remember that section. That person was virtually non-gender specific in appearance according to Monroe and was taking on the role of a university professor at the time. I believe they had lived continuously for around 1800 years or something?

Anyway, I sort of broach this topic in my last post of how people who can travel in OBE and gain direct experiences but who do not necessarily jive. Of course this also happens in body. For instance, the one gentleman I mentioned who studied under Babaji claims that he knows an immortal who has been in the same body for nine thousand years. And there are others, such a Bhartriji who has been in body two thousand+. Ram and Sita (the ideal couple) who have been around for ten thousand+ years and when he meant them they were living in Holland, etc.

So, why the discrepancies? I can think of the obvious reasons. But still there are many, many cases of such discrepancies, particularly in spiritual or esoteric disciplines. Makes you wonder about the vast complexities of our multi-verse and what exactly constitutes a "consensus reality model"...

Proof is in the pudding I guess. If you can do something then it has substance. If not then it's merely a conceptual or dellusional thing-a-ma-jigger...

Quantum said:


I understand thank you. Yet here's the thing. How can one "out grow" something that they cannot master utterly? For example, if you can't remain physically immortal indefinitely then can you say you've out grown it? It seems more likely that "out grow" means you got bored and decided to move on for a time...

I think that there are many different ways and approaches to lower ones consciousness entropy and remaining physically immortal indefinitely isn`t a lesson which one MUST have to accomplish that. Example - you don`t have to be a good long jumper to be a loving, fearless and wise person. Wiser ones in this forum have to fill in the details, I haven`t got the necessary experience nor the understanding.

_________________
On the vast canvas of the Self the picture of manifold worlds is painted by the Self itself. And that Supreme Self, seeing but itself, enjoys great delight.- Adi Shankara

Quantum wrote: Example - you don`t have to be a good long jumper to be a loving, fearless and wise person.


Quantum,

I agree, but you can be or do all those things and many more - and still be a long ways from outgrowing PMR.
I would think to truly outgrow something you would need to master it. Otherwise you didn't really outgrow it, you just got bored with it. I also believe that you only truly master those things which unchanging.
After all, how can you master something that is always changing, always evolving?
How would someone ever have self mastery unless they have stopped evolving?
I think the goal is to reach your upper limits and continue to push the envelope. I think for me, true Mastery is reaching that limit and keep myself constantly evolving, always in a state of becoming something more.
If I'm always in a state of becoming, changing, evolving, then how can I be finite?

Kevin

My long time thought about reincarnation was that we keep coming back until we have experienced all the different ways of being human, the entire gambit of possible human experience, all ways of being. Before MBT I was perplexed by the concept that once a time frame had past, such as Neanderthal days, then the possibility to experience being one was gone. Now I can understand that my concept does make sense because, well, it just does. If that is the gig my higher self requires, it's on because it is simply a virtual reality. I also used to think everything was energy/matter before MBT, and I used to joke that I wasn't materialistic, but that I was very fond of matter. It's not a joke anymore, it's the truth about me here. Now I understand everything to be an illusion, and that we are our mind, as Ted says. Your "I" Kevin, is constantly evolving because the entire system is evolving, is a process fractal, I believe. The only constant is change, as I've heard.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.