What hapens 'after death' according to David icke?

[dalsar]

What happens 'after death' according to David icke??

as he says life is a continuous energy of conscience (or somthing)

so after you die, do you carry on living in another form? (reincarnation) as say another person, or an animal ? (frog for example?)

what are ickes beleifs of what happens after death?

[arty2000]

What happens 'after death' according to David icke??

as he says life is a continuous energy of conscience (or somthing)

so after you die, do you carry on living in another form? (reincarnation) as say another person, or an animal ? (frog for example?)

what are ickes beleifs of what happens after death?

better to ask what you beliefs are;)

[smariot]

I imagine what happens when you die varies wildly depending on the person.

I believe people end up surrounded by people that share common beliefs as themselves, and thus the following happens:

Christians end up in a heaven, probably ruled by some non-physical entity that craves attention, and has found just the people to give it to him/her/it, or hell if they don't think they're perfect enough to deserve heaven.

Some atheists might also go to heaven or hell as well, when they realize that they still exist, jump to the only other belief they know that can explain this (there must be a god after all), and either repent and get accepted into heaven, or don't default to hell or purgatory, or conclude that they must not be dead, and continue living their life in a type of dream world.

In the case of the dream world, they are surrounded by people that share similar beliefs as themselves. For altruistic people, this tends to become a paradise, for the less nice people, they tend to get their asses kicked by other people mirroring their own behavior. With any luck, this will eventually force them to realize the error of their ways, and change. But, of course, since they won't be exposed to anything better to learn from as an example, this almost never happens. . .

Which, I believe, is the point of being born in a physical body. It forces you to interact with people that have vastly different beliefs than ourselves, giving us a chance to change our beliefs and behaviors that wouldn't be nearly as easy otherwise.

[jolinemaria]

What happens 'after death' according to David icke??

as he says life is a continuous energy of conscience (or somthing)

so after you die, do you carry on living in another form? (reincarnation) as say another person, or an animal ? (frog for example?)

what are ickes beleifs of what happens after death?

I cannot tell you what Icke's beliefs are, nor anyone else's for that matter.
My personal conviction is that conciousness never 'dies' it is eternal, the only thing that dies is the notion of 'I' as the 'personalitiy' and/or 'ego'.
So as I believe it one certainly does not go on living on a personal basis for there is no 'I' no more - yet life is eternal and it will continue.
There have been people troughout the ages that have been able to drop this notion of 'I' whilst alive in the body these people are called enlightened or self realised (knowing that one is not 'I'-the person but eternal life itself).
Barry Long has written a nice book that deals with this and with the endtime (end-time:)) we live in now. I believe the english title is 'only fear dies'.

[masonicboom]

Well funny this should come up as I just discussed a theory with someone regarding a possible viewpoint:
We are currently imprisoned in what Dave has described as the matrix... I beleive that this is a computer controlled hi-jacking of our conciousness using biofeedback manipulation rendering us unable to discern reality from un-reality.. this incorporates all the senses,
I was surprised to see a diagram my estranged friend drew that was exactly modeling the technology which I had envisioned being used.
The diagram showed a camera hooked to a signal processor.
The signal processor sends 'sensory info' to the brain via radio and the input is connected to the optic nerve for vision, etc.
People that have experienced complete hi-jacking of their conciousness know this to be true.
I would like to think that in death the "BORG" like system is removed and a real life is then.
Anyone?
:(

[elysiumfire]

when I read or hear of people referring to themselves as 'consciousness', I allow myself a little chuckle, because I know they are interpretating their own sentient experience in error. Consciousness is not what we 'are', it is simply a 'state of condition' we are imbued with due to energetic interactions.

I used to think with all my heart that we survived the death of the physical body, that all our sentient experience of life remained cohesive in memory, and that somehow, by some natural mechanism, what separated from the body at death remained energised (and thus in a conscious state)? Now however, I am not as confident in post-mortem survival. I can offer a very plausible theory on how the consciousness state arises within us, but I cannot conceive the mechanism by which at separation something survives.

The various layers attributed to our so-called spiritual structures, the astral, the etheric, etc, do not provide or afford a basic structure that is both energised and gains energy from its environment to remain cohesive and sentient. I am of the opinion that death is indeed total dissolution!

I know the brain does not generate consciousness, but that it arises in it due to the processes occuring within it at quantum level, but then consciousness does not just arise in the brain alone, it arises within the whole body structure, but the resonant signals are processed in the brain (note: not by the brain), presenting to the organism a particular view of reality determined by its body structure and biological mechanisms. It's a complex subject, and not easy to explain with one interpretating in error. Let it suffice for me to say that we do not have a mind that is conscious, but a conscious that is perceived as mind. Sentience is nothing more than looped feed-back mechanisms cross-referencing intial stimulus with records of past stimuli.

Our true essence is nothing more than a virtual construct arising out of the daily round of life experiences assimilated as memory records.

[darkman]

we dont die our material body decomposes like all things that have cells , our conciouss mind of being .. an energy of within , is endless . our body dying is just a gateway to the next level of being

[masonicboom]

when I read or hear of people referring to themselves as 'consciousness', I allow myself a little chuckle, because I know they are interpretating their own sentient experience in error. Consciousness is not what we 'are', it is simply a 'state of condition' we are imbued with due to energetic interactions.

I used to think with all my heart that we survived the death of the physical body, that all our sentient experience of life remained cohesive in memory, and that somehow, by some natural mechanism, what separated from the body at death remained energised (and thus in a conscious state)? Now however, I am not as confident in post-mortem survival. I can offer a very plausible theory on how the consciousness state arises within us, but I cannot conceive the mechanism by which at separation something survives.

The various layers attributed to our so-called spiritual structures, the astral, the etheric, etc, do not provide or afford a basic structure that is both energised and gains energy from its environment to remain cohesive and sentient. I am of the opinion that death is indeed total dissolution!

I know the brain does not generate consciousness, but that it arises in it due to the processes occuring within it at quantum level, but then consciousness does not just arise in the brain alone, it arises within the whole body structure, but the resonant signals are processed in the brain (note: not by the brain), presenting to the organism a particular view of reality determined by its body structure and biological mechanisms. It's a complex subject, and not easy to explain with one interpretating in error. Let it suffice for me to say that we do not have a mind that is conscious, but a conscious that is perceived as mind. Sentience is nothing more than looped feed-back mechanisms cross-referencing intial stimulus with records of past stimuli.

Our true essence is nothing more than a virtual construct arising out of the daily round of life experiences assimilated as memory records.

Would those be the Akashic Records ??

[jack5]

What happens 'after death' according to David icke??

as he says life is a continuous energy of conscience (or somthing)

so after you die, do you carry on living in another form? (reincarnation) as say another person, or an animal ? (frog for example?)

what are ickes beleifs of what happens after death?

My take on Ickes belief is that we are pure energy consciousness and that we choose to experience this reality as a experience only.Whatever form we take is consciouneses decission.In David own words our true identity is pure consciouse thought experiencing different realities.Hope that makes sense.

[kde_]

DI has said the world is a mental construction therefore the body is a mental construction also. As such death is just a change in consciousness and nothing more. If reincarnation is true then that would be a change in consciousness also. This is the teaching of the great sages thru history. DI has been reading, see mind-body problem / epistemology for details :)

[forestgrump]

The thing that causes me some confusion is that, if this is just a temporary state in a long period of consciousness what is the point of the illuminati going to the extent that they do to control things?

Why is it so important, to them and to us, if we break free once we are dead?

[elysiumfire]

Masonicboom:Would those be the Akashic Records?

No, I do not believe so. Each of our own individual life experiences that as a whole make up the history of our own personal and private life, are unique to our individual selves. We are unable to consciously and sentiently share these experiences with others in the exact same sentient reference we ourselves experienced them. So, our individual experience of life is unique to each of us.

The Akashic Records are allegedly a repository of recordings of all energetic interactions that have ever occurred in the universe. That is to say interactions occurring at both the microscopic and macroscopic levels, are somehow assimilated and conserved by some mechanism within the very fabric of the universe.

If we survive into a post-mortem conscious experience, with all or most aspects of our psychology intact, then our own individual record of our own individual life experience remains conserved uniquely for us. It may hold something of a interconnection with the Akashic records (necessarily so), but at the same time, being perceivingly separate from the Akashic. Of course, if the Akashic Records are a reality, then this leads to the inevitable conclusion that the Universe itself, is in a conscious-state, but this must not be confused with the conscious sentience that life forms in their myriad ways express.

The reason why I pendulate between accepting the probability of post-mortem consciousness (ie, life after death) and disagreeing with it is because my hypothesis is pretty much incomplete...I am missing a key element of understanding that can only be garnered by direct experiential gnosis. If I were to undergo a 'near-death experience' (NDE) then it might be probable that such a gnosis might complete my understanding, but I feel I am not one of those whom will ever gain that gnosis of understanding during my own life experience. One other phenomenon that truly represents a interconnection to the 'life after death' debate are the 'death-bed visions' (DBV). These truly facinate me, and even within my own family, this phenomenon has occurred.

The problem lies in interpretating the phenomenon correctly. Our sciences and philosophies can only get us a little way along the path of understanding, what really completes it is direct experiential gnosis. Even our interpretation and definition of the word 'energy' often misleads us, but my many years of lay research has made of me a 'neutral monist'. I believe there to be only two forms of energy - positive and negative, that are expressed through the manifestations of 'forces'. The energies themselves are not open to our direct enquiries, only through the manifestation of the forces they generate are we able to conclude the presence of energy. Consciousness does indeed arise out of energetic interactions, it is a resonance by-product of interaction between quantum wave fields. It is a resonance of 'excitation, exciting the organism's physical structure into a conscious state. If something of us survives the physical form's demise, it equally remains conscious by the same energetic excitory interaction mechanism.

When two quantum wave fields interact with each other, many things occur simultaneously in the same instance:

a) wave function breakdown occurs (this is the fundamental presentation of the fabric of the universe).
b) cross-correspondence between the wave fields, now expressed as particles occurs (the sharing of informational aspects causing affective phenomena) lasting only as long as the interaction between the wave fields.
c) a by-produced resonance arises that is the sum of the interaction between the wave fields conveying informational aspects (it is this 'resonance' that excites life forms into conscious states, and is also assimilated as memory)

Once the energy wave that brought the separate wave fields together passes, cross-correspondence between them instantly ceases, and each wave field returns to its lowest energy phase, and the 'excitory' resonance disappears. However, another energy wave brings them back into a cross-correspondence with each other very rapidly. This switching 'on' and 'off' mechanism is how reality (or rather a limited spectrum of it) is presented to us. We perceive consciousness as mind, but this is in effect a mental mirage. Consciousness is not one consciousness field, but many billions of micro-fields, switching 'on' and 'off', coalescing and being perceived as one field (ie, mind): our conscious experience is constantly being switched on and off billions of times a second, and this is why we have a perception of that which we call time, even though 'time', per se, holds no existential reality of its own.

Somewhere, in the midst of all this hypothesising lies the answer to post-mortem survival...I just can't see it yet.

[dalsar]

we dont die our material body decomposes like all things that have cells , our conciouss mind of being .. an energy of within , is endless . our body dying is just a gateway to the next level of being

what would that 'next leven of being' be? give some examples of things you recon

[soul_traveller]

You are never really born and you never really die for that is impossible. Its a continual even and morning cycle of creating stories from One to Many back to One again. Birth and Death are all illusions - meaning that the director and the actor are living out a virtual reality game. The Direct-or and the Act-or are really One and the Same. There is no karma or divine sentences or contracts all this was created by the dark or false matrix or fear force to undermine your experience and realisation of who you are - the eternal king/queen. But that fear pole (to some degree) has its role since experiencing an illusion of ex-is-tance (separation from Love) could not be.

[simplysimon]

The more I think about Death and Rebirth... I think we've come to school here on Earth!

Some of us will be graduating soon, others may need to spend a little more time in this continuum. That kind of ties with increased UFO activity, as if we're being picked up from boarding school soon. There's always some parents that turn up early!

Can't wait for the end of this course :)

[cruise4]

"As such death is just a change in consciousness and nothing more."

I'm thinking so is evolution.