Towards a new flipside language.
In the headlines every day, we hear or see the terms “So and so dead at age..” “So and so has died” or people refer to their loved ones as “Lost” or the “tragic loss” or “dead, died…” — I grew up with the term “Kicked the bucket.” An old midwestern term, it was the “last thing someone did before departing God’s green earth.”
In the movie “It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World” the film opens with a fellow driving recklessly through the desert, then he drives off a cliff. All the cast members run down the hill to see if the guy’s alive. (Jimmy Durante). With his last breath, he reveals that he’s buried a fortune “under the sign of the X” in Santa Monica, and then promptly kicks a bucket that magically appears next to his foot.
So the audience knows he’s gone. He’s “kicked the bucket.”
Term appears in old English in the 18th century, no one is sure why — perhaps when hanging a poor sod, someone puts him on the bucket, then kicks it to end his journey. Or perhaps he kicks it. Accidentally? No one knows.
If I had any influence over news media editorial, i would issue a fatwa to use certain words when describing those who leave the stage early. Not they’re “dead, died, killed, tragic, lost”… all those word imply they are gone, presumably unaware of where they are, what happened, or that they still exist.
“They left the stage” works. Like “Elvis has left the building.” Doesn’t mean he’s disappeared, just that “He’s offstage.”
Based on personal experience, based on data, based on research, based on studies that show consciousness is not confined to the brain, everyone offstage knows where they are once they leave the stage.
They can be confused at first, reportedly because they were told incessantly things were supposed to end but didn’t, their family, friends, religious practices emphasized something would happen — and even if it does happen (and in 1–3% of NDE case studies when something negative happens) when the person realizes that what they imagined isn’t accurate, the mental construct dissolves and they realize “they’re home.”
That’s the term everyone uses. When asked “So where did you go after the memory of that lifetime?” they always say “Home.” Some might recall “coming back again” — but if they’re asked to “go back to the memory of that previous lifetime. Where did you go just after that?” They inevitably say “I went home.”
As in not here.
They can realize why they chose their path, why they agreed to participate in the play, realize that everybody left onstage cannot hear, see them.. except for pets, small children whose filters haven’t kicked in, or some mediums with altered filters, or the others offstage. They’re aware of us, but can’t change the fact that we’re no longer onstage.
People offstage are not “lost, gone, finished, over, ended.” They know that. We do not.
So why use false language?
My experience is that while they’re offstage, and their role in the play has ended, we can feel the grief, the mental anguish, the suffering of their no longer being onstage, but we can also stop pretending they are gone, lost, or don’t exist just because we don’t “see” “hear” or otherwise “confirm their existence onstage.”
I sound like the “word police.”
But why not?
When the headline reads, “so and so left the stage today” or “we mourn the loss” and at the same time hail the person for their journey — no matter how long or short — and acknowledge that while we may not understand the circumstances around their departure, equally we cannot understand the circumstances around their coming here in the first place until we actually take the time to learn about the process.
Either from our own journey or from asking them directly.
They exist. Are accessible.
Yesterday was looking at a study published via UVA’s Medical School DOPS, Dr. Emily Kelly examines the specific data regarding what people experienced during their near death event. (2001)
In the section about who people saw on the flipside:
“Other Figures Seen Among the 274 cases examined in this study, 189 persons ( 69% ) reported seeing or sensing the presence of someone, whether recognized or unrecognized : 28 people saw only a recognized deceased person, 46 saw other figures in addition to a recognized deceased person, 115 saw only other figures and 85 saw no one at all.
Among the 161 people who saw other figures 18 ( 11% ) identified one of them as a religious figures, usually Jesus. Eleven ( 7% ) Dr. E. W. Kelly reported seeing living persons whom they recognized, but very few reported seeing fanciful or unrealistic figures. Only two saw animals ( both were deceased pets). Many saw a Being of Light, whom they strongly identified with God. For the most part, however, the other figures remained unrecognized and unidentified.”
But they know who these folks are now.
(Data, research, post materialist science demonstrates consciousness is not confined to the brain. See Dr. Greyson’s AFTER, Dr. Tucker’s BEFORE, Dr. Kelly’s IRREDUCIBLE MIND, Dr. Presti’s MIND BEYOND BRAIN, Dr. Beauregard’s EXPANDING REALITY. People can recall previous lifetimes, examples in Dr. Wambach’s 2750 case studies, Dr. Weiss 4k cases, Michael Newton’s 7k reports, the 200 I’ve filmed in the documentaries FLIPSIDE or HACKING THE AFTERLIFE on Gaia.)
So we can’t say (well, we can, but why pretend?) “they’re gone” or “they don’t exist” or “they’re buried in the earth” — because that’s about their costumes. That’s about the props that are left onstage.
When they leave the stage, we should refer to their contribution to the planet — no matter what age. It takes courage, selflessness, humor and compassion to show up here onstage, and we immediately pretend that once they’re offstage they no longer exist. Somebody should fix that.
My two cents.
No comments:
Post a Comment