Unexplainable.Net

Understanding the Spirit World

Understanding the Spirit World

New empirical discoveries

To describe the spirit world would seem an impossible task for a mortal. After all, it doesn’t seem to be of earthly origins and is such a mystical place, seemingly full of ghosts, angels and spirits. This strange place, as if a world of dreams, also seems responsible for all the unexplainable phenomena and miracles which occur. It is a place without substance and, we’re told, where God surely dwells. Of all things we believe to exist, even theoretically, the spirit world is by far the most bizarre. It has always been beyond the capacity of almost every human to make sense of it. It is so absolutely alien that just the reason for its existence is baffling. In fact, the spirit world is so far removed from our ability to logically comprehend it”¦ it is often dismissed as mere fantasy. After all, since it defies all logic and can’t be rationally explained, most any intelligent person would think it couldn’t possibly exist.

Well, there is something these ”˜intelligent’ people are overlooking. Even though it took most of my life to figure it out, it seems so simple now and should have been obvious. Albert Einstein once said “If it is beautiful, it must be true” and in my pursuits I’ve always kept that in mind. Therefore I knew there had to be a simple answer and not something complicated. I also knew spiritual realizations would be available to anyone who sought answers, not just reserved for the brilliant. It’s something I thought God would set-up.

Before I address why virtually no one has been able to comprehend the spirit world, metaphysics in effect, I need to point out a few things first”¦ otherwise to prematurely relate what I’ve discovered wouldn’t make sense. It probably isn’t a new discovery though, thousands, if not more, should have thought of it before. The reason it isn’t well known is because this discovery is practically impossible to explain, so few tried. Metaphysics is also something many people don’t like to talk about in public. Anyway, this discovery has to do with mankind’s ‘frame-of-mind’ which I’ll try to explain next… and while my approach may seem unusual, it is necessary.

Faith

While faith is paramount for all religions, practically the foundation, I’ve always had a problem with that. I always thought beliefs should be backed up with facts, at least some. I was always critical of religions for pushing the faith thing, in other words”¦ don’t question it, just believe. Now I understand why they do that. The spirit world and all that associated has, for centuries, been almost impossible to describe in comprehensible terms. That perhaps explains the reason for all the Biblical parables. Still, it seems, only a few clergy within each religion actually understand it, otherwise, it seems, they’d try harder to teach it in more straightforward terms.

I can also understand why many intellectuals have long dismissed the spirit world as being a fantasy. But now I realize they weren’t so exceptionally intelligent after all, especially for boxing themselves in”¦ limiting themselves to a constricting frame-of-mind. Primarily that is the fault of science. While scientific thinking has been proven extremely effective since it was introduced 2,500 years ago, systematic and calculating, backed-up with basic research in almost everything, with standards of proof, testing and verifying”¦ but this only serves the physical world. It utilizes a train of thought and logical disposition that can’t incorporate such things the spirit world is comprised of, or for that matter, what it has to offer. Besides the spirit world’s indescribable essence, of incredible proportions, it still remains physical nothingness, the ethereal. It isn’t incorporated because any rationale suggesting its existence wouldn’t logically follow applying the same standards which faithfully apply to the physical world. The spirit world just doesn’t fit anywhere utilizing scientific thought and those who subscribe to scientific thinking find it sensible only to rationalize in a scientific manner. Compounding their problem, science has prematurely determined what is real and what isn’t.

Empirical thought

When scientific thought began to dominate just prior to classical times, or about 500 B.C., empirical thinking was being tossed aside as being unproductive. It was true; proceeding with projects without factual knowledge was getting mankind nowhere. It was a time of trial and error, of limitations. Yet there was a benefit having an empirical mind, yet long forgotten”¦ importantly being a way to more accurately fathom metaphysical matters. That shouldn’t be surprising, after all, without due regard means unrestricted thought, not bound by any rules. Rules have a tendency to limit creative thought, to discourage thinking outside the box. They’re not really rules though, just a group-think mentality to stay on track. keep in step. At any rate, however badly empirical thinking proved itself for the physical needs of civilization, it, without question, is more suitable for metaphysical and spiritual matters. As I’ve often pointed out, the combination of the two mentalities can be dynamite, profoundly effective as the ancient Greeks once demonstrated.

Before scientific thought came along, early man hadn’t yet realized the benefits of carefully plodding along, to first understand fully the makeup of things from which to systematically build upon. Yet, in the meantime, our ancestors were pondering life itself in a way the scientific minded, being more ”˜practical’, can’t. The conclusions of science are based on the laws of physics, not metaphysics. The result is the inability to comprehend a diametrically-opposed mentality (effectively) that is sound. While empirical thinking may not be systematic, and indeed often unsound, depending on the person, it can reach greater heights. If one can consider thinking as an art, and it is largely, then it shouldn’t be hard to imagine that, as in a classroom, a controlled environment will never create a masterpiece.

Believe it or not, the spirit world actually has an active logical disposition. It thinks, has a mentality and operates at the highest possible intellectual level. On the other hand, in our world, we have adjusted to and merely live by the laws of physics, which is, in effect, a subjacent reality and a lower form of existence.

The realities of the spirit-world

First of all, with all the unknowns surrounding metaphysics, which humans have forever struggled with understanding, that should be saying something. While everyone subscribing to the existence of the spirit world would agree there is a greater intelligence, but of an unknown quantity, it obviously follows there must also be another reality out there. Within realities as bizarre as a spirit world, we should realize the mentality of the spirit world would also have to be quite different. And, if the spirit world is intellectually superior, as seems the case since we have virtually no knowledge of metaphysics, then that reality would be more ”˜real’ than ours. Moreover, it would take a superior logic to function effectively in that environment. In other words, realities determine the appropriate type of mental processing necessary to function effectively, not the other way around. It is not logical the world would conform to how it is envisioned except for someone into the confusing concepts of realism, nominalism or conceptualism. A single logical disposition does not fit all circumstances and must be adjusted accordingly. Somewhat similar would be adjusting for the differences between living in Cleveland or Memphis, however subtle, or being an investment banker versus being a ranch hand in Texas, however great. The differences between the physical and ethereal are vastly greater however, indescribably separated yet indescribably close. Also, since attitudes are the steering mechanism for one’s logical disposition and since attitudes are subservient to moods, moods are largely in charge of that territory.

In short, there is another mentality within the spirit world that scientists should recognize as existing. They need to look at metaphysics in a different way, not as if the vestiges of creation, an ancient process once set in motion and left unattended, abandoned. Metaphysics is active, alive and thus the mentality I’m talking about. The manner in which the spirit world is logically driven may not resemble our idea of logic, not even remotely, but that doesn’t testify that it must therefore be illogical. However, contrary to popular belief, metaphysics, at least some aspects, is actually fathomable after all, but it isn’t any easy task and it takes a quite a commitment. I explained how to go about this and the commitment necessary in my book STD LEX .

The evolutionists would still doubt the notion of a supreme mentality however. After all, they don’t even subscribe to Divine Creation, so naturally a pervasive superior mentality wouldn’t fit into their model of how the universe and life began. Well, I’m not a preacher but I should say this”¦ the evolutionists should consider, by the very fact so many unanswered questions remain concerning life itself, something must be lacking within scientific logic. I suggest it is largely a matter of their established parameters because from the very beginning, the spirit world was excluded. And, it would seem logical that any self-respecting, worthwhile logical disposition should have been able to figure out metaphysics after 2,500 years. That’s not to say metaphysics was unknown 2,500 years ago, it’s just that science choose not to include that knowledge. That’s why ancient wisdom still has a popular appeal. Actually, this amounts to merely convincing science because the Creationists, while perhaps unable to fathom the spirit world, they know enough to be convinced it exists.

Scientific shortcomings

Let’s take a quick look at the shortcomings of science”¦ First of all, scientists cannot even explain electricity yet, its basic nature. They have no idea what the ”˜spark of life’ is, much less the associated phenomena. In short, about all scientists have been able to do is explain the physical world and, when we’re not looking, brush the unexplainable aside… because unanswered questions assault their credibility. Worse, they lead us astray by trying to explain transcendental phenomena scientifically and thus are forcing a fit, as if jamming a round peg into a square hole, entrenching their erroneous conclusions into the mindset of civilization. Science has not the tools or mentality to tackle such questions and hence, erroneous conclusions are left to stand, and they’ll stand for centuries. The arrogance of most scientists would allow this rather than look beyond their established premises or outside their circles for answers. As to these unanswered questions I earlier referred to, answers aren’t answers unless they are correct answers.

Putting things in perspective, a few centuries back we had religions telling us what to think”¦ that the earth was the center of the universe and the world was flat. It was heresy to state it differently. Today, it is almost the same thing, scientists might as well be wearing priestly robes. As it was with the priesthood, unless you’re a fellow scientist, a layman’s point-of-view has no merit. When one attempts to suggest something different to their clique it is automatically dismissed, deemed unworthy for even a millisecond of consideration. That’s especially true if you don’t use their terminology, their lingo.

It is astonishing to me that a superior mentality, effectively juxtapositional to our own since it occupies the same space and surrounds us, has not been recognized. It is odd they can hypothesize on an invisible top quark or tachyon but the logic of an overriding and supreme mentality, pervasive and ever-present, practically sitting on one’s shoulders, apparently never occurred to them. If science claims to be efficiently ascertaining facts in a systemized manner, it should have been obvious long ago certain things were just not being explained scientifically. A true scientist would have concluded their system was lacking and would have sought the reason for its failures which translates into fundamental inadequacies. He would have asked himself “why can’t we comprehend metaphysics?” and, after 2,500 years, that should have told him the scientific frame of mind was inadequate for the job. Of course, like everyone else including me (for decades), assumed it required an intelligence much higher than man was allotted. It didn’t dawn of me for quite some time that it wasn’t a matter of intelligence but rather one’s frame of mind, thus the differing logic as a result”¦ and ultimately, the way to find the truth.

At various times we’ve all experienced how different moods can affect our frame of mind and often, to some degree, how that affects our reasoning. That by itself should demonstrate that, at certain times, a different mentality can exist. Doesn’t any mood-induced logic always seem sound at the time? Of course moods usually only induce subtle changes, not nearly as drastic as necessary to think spiritually, or I should say, in the spiritual dimension.

These various frames-of-mind that exist can be demonstrated by those differences within each and every classification of animal phyla, but to a lesser degree between species of the same Genus. Each has a different way of perceiving things, and their frame-of-mind, while varying drastically in almost all cases, still manages to exist and thrive. Doesn’t that suggest a mentality can be vastly different and still be effective? Doesn’t that say logical reasoning comes in many forms? Animals may seem stupid beasts to many but contraire, they merely perceive things differently and their modus operandi reflects that harmoniously. What may seem important to us may hold no importance to them. They couldn’t care less about a Corvette or Mercedes. Their life, in effect, revolves around different circumstances than ours and yet to them and the Creator, still perfectly sound. Their survival has proven it as sound. We cannot say, just because we have the ability to construct things, etc., etc., that overall it is a superior mentality, or that our brand of reasoning is. Because many of the things we construct have a negative side and can be deadly, it could be said that by not living more in harmony with nature, like animals do, but instead by altering it”¦ we’ve dooming our species. Not too smart, but at this stage, with our population, it’s too late to drastically change our ways.

Comparing logical thought

In comparing our reasoning to other creatures, if to determine a ranking, we should consider efficiency. The intelligence to create does not mean a creation was intelligently created”¦ therefore being an inefficient use of resources. A beaver does not build six dams if he needs only one nor would a goose consider attaching a jet engine to its back. While six dams and a jet engine would be more efficient, some things, like a jet-engine for a goose, would be ridiculous. Yet humans do things like that so I’m hesitant about ranking them in the top ten. While everyone knew, all along, that animals had a different frame-of-mind, but what that really meant, as that would apply to our ability to understand and relate to the spirit world, has been lost to almost everyone.

This superior mentality which exists I have been calling ”˜spiritual logic’ but it probably deserves a more apropos name, although that doesn’t really matter now. Anyway, I first realized it existed about 15 years ago while sitting on my back porch watching a doodle-bug go about his business. As if a bolt of lightning struck me, I realized his world was as ordered and sound as the universe itself. While we often refer to animals which can perform tricks or understand commands as ”˜smart’, indeed they are”¦ with few exceptions they’re thinking outside their inherent boundaries by communicating with humans. A few creatures can relate to humans but most can’t, especially not insects and reptiles. It didn’t always come naturally though, they usually had to be trained and thus a regime necessary for thinking spiritually.

Summary

In that it may remain unclear why I so often referred to all of this as being a matter of ”˜logic’, let me explain this in another way. First, one must understand that realities dictate what rational manner of thinking would be most suitable to function within those realities, so the manner in how one thinks must fit the circumstances within that reality”¦ and the most prudent and effective course of action would be considered the logical course. Now, if tomorrow you acquired realizations from a greater understanding of true reality that caused a shift in your priorities, what became more important”¦ then what seems a rational methodology today wouldn’t tomorrow. That’s because priorities are also the children of reality and thus, influence logic. In other words, if you discovered time didn’t exist as we understand it or if our sun and all others were actually living creations, an entity, and not ‘nuclear’ in the way scientists believe, then reality as you would then understand it would be quite different affecting your entire outlook, especially if you pondered the significance of those realizations. Logically then, you would proceed with life in a different manner with a completely different outlook based on a reality as you now understand it. Knowing true reality, or at least to the extent whereby it was determined to be vastly different than you previously understood it, would cause a marked shift in how you think. It is not heightened knowledge unless, to some degree, one’s actions reflect the pure logic of the universe.

From only this supreme mentality can true logical thought flow, it cannot flow from any other source. What might be considered logical reasoning is appropriate only to that given circle of circumstances. To have less than this all-encompassing knowledge means any thoughts considered logical aren’t really, they merely fit the circumstances when in truth they could be far removed from being rational outside any circle of limited knowledge. And while knowledge reveals realities, it also widens the circle causing a person to think differently. This can be seen in everyday life, the mentality of an intellect is certainly different from a street thug with a sixth-grade education. What I’m saying is… by incorporating the spirit world likewise broadens one’s knowledge and vastly increases the size of the circle one chooses to operate in. For the doodle bug, he doesn’t need this supreme knowledge or true logical thought, his largely pre-programmed knowledge (instincts) is quite sufficient for the parameters of his world. Humans, on the other hand, we’re given the ability to establish their own parameters and if one was doubtful that the spirit world exists, or believing it shouldn’t be foolishly incorporated until proven, that person is wearing blinders. They are choosing instead to stay in their little circle, their comfort zone.

In yet another way to describe this”¦ one must first determine the logic of the universe and it can’t be done by ignoring the spiritual aspects, being content with leaving metaphysics a mystery. First-things-first though, if one doesn’t have a feel for the logic behind all things then it’s impossible to think logically. Men would like to believe they think logically but they can’t while being unaware of so many things. Enter now the juxtapositional logic I’ve been talking about, from which only true logical thought can flow, relegating scientific logic to a subjacent position. Unlike the doodlebug, God intended the parameters for the human race to be wide, to include the spiritual, but instead science tries to exclude it, keeping man on a lower level. No wonder scientists think we’re just another species of animal.

Scientists must recognize that they are working within a sphere, but, granted, a place where their reasoning power is sufficiently capable of tackling difficult questions, where the laws of physics are reliable. In their world, reverse engineering is what scientists are now doing trying to unravel the mysteries of life. At some point they will realize that it wasn’t necessary to build centrifuges, all they have to do was adopt a more effective frame-of-mind which encompasses more than just the physical world. At some point they will understand the limitations of scientific thought and broaden its scope. In part, it is to incorporate the mentality of both a savage and mystic, which incidentally, are largely one in the same. Full circle almost?

A.O. Kime

http://www.matrixbookstore.biz