Past-Life Regression

[Salmonellus]

It's the nearly right that intrigues me, I have read a few cases where the details check out except from one detail that can't be reconciled, in The Siren Call of. Hungry Ghosts. by the late Joe Fisher (great Book by the way) he had the same experience with an entity who claimed to have been a Pilot in WII, everything checked out, and he gave some pretty precise details apart from one major thing, no one of the name given had ever served in WII, and things like this crop up in regressions quite frequently

That's an interesting observation, but it's one that fits with my own theory of past life regression/past life memories/'kids who remember past lives', the whole topic of individuals who seem to be able to access memories of other individuals who are now dead.

And yes, I can almost imagine the groans as posters hear read the words 'I have a theory'...

But for what it's worth, my suspicion is that -

1) There has been enough research into the area to document quite thoroughly the fact that some individuals do seem to be able to access information about the lives of specific dead people. There are too many hits to ignore the many documented cases.

2) But as you point out, there are also misses along with the hits. That's hard to explain if you believe that people are talking about their own past lives.

3) So what's going on ? Are there other examples of people being able to access data that logically they shouldn't be able to access? Especially when some of the correct data gets jumbled in with irrelevant or even wrong stuff? Actually, there is - perhaps the best paradigm is remote viewing. We are always impressed when a remote viewer scores a few dramatic hits. But we ignore it when the data provided is wrong. After all, you can't be right all the time.

So what I suspect is happening is this: past life recall does not prove that you were the person whose memories you seem to be accessing. You are accessing someone else's life. Why that particular person? I honestly have no idea. I'd have to do some hand waving and talk about sympathy or 'vibes'. Somehow you resonate with someone else's life. You get glimpses of their experiences. But essentially you are remote viewing someone else's past. Hence the jumble of good data and mistakes.

I know most people won't like this, because I am essentially rejecting the whole notion of the immortality of the soul. Past life recall does not prove reincarnation, any more than trying to remote view a set of geographical co-ordinates proves you are an island in the South Pacific. The mechanism is essentially the same.

Anyway, on that cheery note, on with the discussion.

 

[escargot]

The boy who said he was reborn after a life spent partly on a Scottish island had this problem; he seemed to get some 'memories' spot-on, but was totally wrong about others.
I s'pose being dead for a while is bound to mess with one's recollection.

 

[Robbrent]

You see I don't think it's a problem of forgetting after a long while being dead, it's quite obvious things like the person did not exist or a place didn't but everything else checks out down to some pretty fine detail

 

[catseye]

You see I don't think it's a problem of forgetting after a long while being dead, it's quite obvious things like the person did not exist or a place didn't but everything else checks out down to some pretty fine detail

I'm just going to say 'low level telepathic field' again. Not even necessarily from people physically close by, more like accessing a 'memory field'.

 

[Endlessly Amazed]

That's an interesting observation, but it's one that fits with my own theory of past life regression/past life memories/'kids who remember past lives', the whole topic of individuals who seem to be able to access memories of other individuals who are now dead.

And yes, I can almost imagine the groans as posters hear read the words 'I have a theory'...

But for what it's worth, my suspicion is that -

1) There has been enough research into the area to document quite thoroughly the fact that some individuals do seem to be able to access information about the lives of specific dead people. There are too many hits to ignore the many documented cases.

2) But as you point out, there are also misses along with the hits. That's hard to explain if you believe that people are talking about their own past lives.

3) So what's going on ? Are there other examples of people being able to access data that logically they shouldn't be able to access? Especially when some of the correct data gets jumbled in with irrelevant or even wrong stuff? Actually, there is - perhaps the best paradigm is remote viewing. We are always impressed when a remote viewer scores a few dramatic hits. But we ignore it when the data provided is wrong. After all, you can't be right all the time.

So what I suspect is happening is this: past life recall does not prove that you were the person whose memories you seem to be accessing. You are accessing someone else's life. Why that particular person? I honestly have no idea. I'd have to do some hand waving and talk about sympathy or 'vibes'. Somehow you resonate with someone else's life. You get glimpses of their experiences. But essentially you are remote viewing someone else's past. Hence the jumble of good data and mistakes.

I know most people won't like this, because I am essentially rejecting the whole notion of the immortality of the soul. Past life recall does not prove reincarnation, any more than trying to remote view a set of geographical co-ordinates proves you are an island in the South Pacific. The mechanism is essentially the same.

Anyway, on that cheery note, on with the discussion.

Ian Stevenson, among others, spent decades researching and documenting the correlation of odd markings or birth defects on a live person, with that person's recollection of his or her death in the former life. This does not refute your supposition, but perhaps nudges the supposition towards actual personal past lives.

 

[Sabresonic]

The most intresting case I alway thought was the Carl Edon case of Middlesbourgh...that was quite mental.

 

[Paul_Exeter]

The boy who said he was reborn after a life spent partly on a Scottish island had this problem; he seemed to get some 'memories' spot-on, but was totally wrong about others.
I s'pose being dead for a while is bound to mess with one's recollection.

The Barra boy...?

A weak case in my opinion, the island is unusual enough to have been featured on a Scottish children's tv show at that time. For example, the scheduled planes that connect the island land on the sandy beach:

Also, it is a small island but he was unable to locate the house they lived in yet there is hardly a history or development on the island like a mainland village or town might experience. I personally believe he watched a Barra family on the tv and either a little boy looked like him or he was grappling with the idea of little like him boys coming from different 'mummies' (he was very young).

There are better cases out there...

 

[escargot]

Also, it is a small island but he was unable to locate the house they lived in yet there is hardly a history or development on the island like a mainland village or town might experience. I personally believe he watched a Barra family on the tv and either a little boy looked like him or he was grappling with the idea of little like him boys coming from different 'mummies' (he was very young).

Yup, that was my point, that it didn't stand up. Everything he mentioned could have come from TV.

Had a regression myself a few years ago. Found myself reliving all the old family rural poverty stories. Great fun.

 

[Sabresonic]

Yup, that was my point, that it didn't stand up. Everything he mentioned could have come from TV.

Had a regression myself a few years ago. Found myself reliving all the old family rural poverty stories. Great fun.

I tried one mysef but it didn't

 

[catseye]

Yup, that was my point, that it didn't stand up. Everything he mentioned could have come from TV.

Had a regression myself a few years ago. Found myself reliving all the old family rural poverty stories. Great fun.

I've said it before and I will say it again - adults continually underestimate children. They are very keen to say 'oh, he/she couldn't possibly know xxxxxx' but unless they have followed that child about 24/7 almost since birth, they have absolutely no idea of what that child may or may not know. Children are like little sponges and they soak stuff up, even stuff they only half understand. In fact, particularly stuff that they only half understand, because it intrigues them and they are learning like crazy about what it means to be a person.

I think the most interesting cases are those from before the time of TV, and in children who didn't have access to books. But even then, there's the chance of half hearing a conversation between adults, seeing a picture in a newspaper, being told a 'story' by a teacher...

 

[escargot]

I've said it before and I will say it again - adults continually underestimate children. They are very keen to say 'oh, he/she couldn't possibly know xxxxxx' but unless they have followed that child about 24/7 almost since birth, they have absolutely no idea of what that child may or may not know. Children are like little sponges and they soak stuff up, even stuff they only half understand. In fact, particularly stuff that they only half understand, because it intrigues them and they are learning like crazy about what it means to be a person.

I think the most interesting cases are those from before the time of TV, and in children who didn't have access to books. But even then, there's the chance of half hearing a conversation between adults, seeing a picture in a newspaper, being told a 'story' by a teacher...

For sure. As a small child I was laughed at for telling the neighbour not to put her washing out because it was going to rain. It rained and her washing got wet.
How did I know?

I wasn't a guru, I was repeating what I'd heard on t'wireless.