is meduimship limited to only seeing the dead?

[Roselove]

or do you view beings on other dimensions? aliens faeres etc etc

does seeing those beings fall under meduimship as well?

[münchen444]

Very good question, Rosewater!

As I have always understood it based upon my experiences in the paranormal and spiritual world in general (and meeting a wide variety of people with talents in a wide-range of various paranormal and spiritual phenomenon), a medium is someone who communicates specifically with the spirit of deceased humans via various extra-sensory means. I’ve personally never encountered someone who communicated with aliens, for example, who called themselves a medium in such a regard.

However, by definition, a “medium” is a means or channel by which to communicate, in a very basic sense. Just as watercolors would be the medium used by certain painters. Thus, I could understand someone who communicates with aliens, for example, using the term “mediumship” to indicate what they do. It’s a term that could have many implications and becomes particularly nebulous when entering the realms of the paranormal, which itself is nebulous (at least from a scientific view-point).

But this is exactly why I think it’s good to clarify what one means when they say they are a medium or speaking of mediumship, in general, if they are using it outside of the generally-accepted (in the paranormal and spiritual realms) context of communication with the spirits of deceased humans. Someone might wish to call themselves an “Extraterrestrial Medium,” for example, to indicate they communicate with aliens.

[spirit72]

Well, in my own experiences I have contacted guides, Angels, Spirit, and aliens, or what I call spirit from other realms...
And also a natural ability to talk to animals... I have also recently experienced fairies, from a reading for someone who is surrounded by them, and I was never really sure they were real but I am left in no doubt now:D

[mac]

I've been running various threads for over two years discussing and asking about what folks mean by medium or mediumship.

Unless one clearly defines either or both then little progress can be made with enquiries such as your own.

I've previously offered definitions for discussion but there is rarely anything fed back.

[Roselove]

i define it as contact with dead human souls, but what do i know lol

[GentleStrength]

I would define channeling as aligning your frequency/vibration to allow another discreet entity to communicate through you using writing, speech or other methods of interaction.

The entity being channeled could be the spirit of someone with human lives, non-physical entities who have never experienced physical reality directly, currently living alien consciousness, angels, faeries, nature spirits, etc.

Just my 2 cents

Love and Light

[mac]

I would define channeling as aligning your frequency/vibration to allow another discreet entity to communicate through you using writing, speech or other methods of interaction.

The entity being channeled could be the spirit of someone with human lives, non-physical entities who have never experienced physical reality directly, currently living alien consciousness, angels, faeries, nature spirits, etc.

Just my 2 cents

Love and Light
The original posting asked about mediumship - not about channelling. :wink:

Do you see them as the same thing?

[mac]

i define it as contact with dead human souls, but what do i know lol

If they were dead, how would you be able to make contact?

[GentleStrength]

The original posting asked about mediumship - not about channelling. :wink:

Do you see them as the same thing?

I do see them as the same thing, I just prefer the channeling term. Hopefully that didn't confuse the issue.

Love and Light

[earthprowler]

Mediumship is the claimed ability of a person (the medium) to experience contact with spirits of the dead, angels, demons or other immaterial entities. A medium is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as the "supposed organ of communication with spirits".[2] The role of the medium is to facilitate communication with spirits who have messages to share with non-mediums. Mediums claim to be able to listen to, relay messages from, and relate conversations with spirit, to go into a trance (it is not necessary to go into a trance, it all depends on the medium's control and knowledge) and speak without knowledge of what is being said, to allow a spirit to control their body and speak through it, perhaps using a writing instrument (psychography or surreal automatic writing).

Mediumship is also part of the belief system of some New Age groups. In this context, and under the name "channelling", it refers to a medium (the channel) who is said to receive messages from a "teaching-spirit". In some cultures, mediums (or the spirits to whom they are connected) reportedly produce physical paranormal phenomena such as materialisations of spirits, apports of objects, or levitation.[3][4]


Channeling

In the latter half of the 20th century, Western mediumship developed in two different ways. One type involves psychics or sensitives who claim to speak to spirits and then relay what they hear to their clients. Clairvoyant Danielle Egnew is known for her alleged communication with angelic entities.

The other incarnation of non-physical mediumship is a form of channeling in which the channeler goes into a trance, or "leaves their body". He or she becomes "possessed" by a specific spirit, who then talks through them.[15] In the trance, the medium enters a cataleptic state marked by extreme rigidity. As the control spirit takes over, the medium's voice may change completely. The spirit answers the questions of those in its presence or giving spiritual knowledge.[16] A widely known channeler of this variety is J. Z. Knight, who claims to channel the spirit of Ramtha, a 30 thousand-year-old man. Others claim to channel spirits from "future dimensional", ascended masters,[17] or ,in the case of the trance mediums of the Brahma Kumaris, God.[18] Other notable channels are Jane Roberts for Seth, Esther Hicks for Abraham,[19] Margaret McElroy for Maitreya, Serge J. Grandbois for Kris, and Lee Carroll for Kryon.

from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediumship

not sure if this helps or not, just trying to help. Mac and I have had conversations and he likes to push for you to figure out what techniques you use and not just use "general" terms that can apply for anyone. (i think :rolleyes: ) I my self am an evidential medium with psychic abilities. :color:

[mattie]

Mediumship has historically been thought of as connecting nonphysical human souls, but this is just one such connection that can be made w/ nonphysical beings. Disembodied human spirits are only one type of nonphysical energies in the Universe.

Mediumship as defined by its historical definition is a type of channeling or a subset of it. It is increasingly a quaint term as it is from an era when nonphysical human souls were thought to be the only nonphysical beings we could contact w/ the exception of prophet types who contacted higher level religious nonphysical beings.

As we become more savvy about nonphysical energy beings we allow for the existence of beings that vary from the long-time widely accepted nonphysical energies of god, angels, & human souls parked in heaven or hell. The difference between the nonphysical energies is likely much slighter than previously imagined as we begin to appreciate the validity of other life forms. Some have said that it is physicality that is the exception in the Universe, that non-physicality for beings is the norm.

As we expand our consciousness we have what is called our psychic abilities increasingly emerge in many ways. Mediumship is one of these abilities. These various psychic abilities are innate in everyone, but largely dormant. As we all raise our frequency we will all have these abilities emerge. We will have the ability to communicate w/ a variety of nonphysical energies, not just the nonphysical souls of dead humans.

[glenos]

Dont tell me .. talking to aliens n' stuff as well. Incredible.


G

[Roselove]

If they were dead, how would you be able to make contact?

bc you have the cons ability to connect with them

[mac]

bc you have the cons ability to connect with them

What is cons ability?

[Roselove]

conscious....

[mac]

conscious....

A conscious ability to connect with 'em?

Then they must be alive and not dead if you're connecting.... One wouldn't be able to interact with anything that's dead.

I think you might have meant contact with the souls/spirits of humans who have died - have I got that right?

[mac]

Mediumship has historically been thought of as connecting with nonphysical human souls, but this is just one such connection that can be made w/ nonphysical beings. Disembodied human spirits are only one type of nonphysical energies in the Universe.

Mediumship as defined by its historical definition is a type of channeling Yes that's right and I used the same comparison in earlier pieces....or a subset of it A subset of channelling - how does that work out?. It is increasingly a quaint term as it is from an era when nonphysical human souls were thought to be the only nonphysical beings we could contact w/ the exception of prophet types who contacted higher level religious nonphysical beings. Quaint it may seem to those without a working knowledge of the subject but you're wrong about "prophet types who contacted higher level religious nonphysical beings" - spiritually evolved discarnates are not higher level religious anyone's - that's humankind's interpretation of them perhaps?

As we become more savvy about nonphysical energy beings really? we allow for the existence of beings that vary from the long-time widely accepted nonphysical energies of god, angels, & human souls parked in heaven or hell. That's been the case for quite some time - hardly us recently becoming "savvy" The difference between the nonphysical energies is likely much slighter than previously imagined I never saw great distinctions... as we begin to appreciate the validity of other life forms. I've appreciated them for quite some time - nothing new here.... Some have said that it is physicality that is the exception in the Universe, that non-physicality for beings is the norm. Again no revelations as the earth environment was engineered for just such experiences as are found here in abundance - possibly a unique physical system.

As we expand our consciousness we have what is called our psychic abilities increasingly emerge in many ways. Far from proven.....Mediumship is one of these abilities. Mediumship's been around for centuries. Even modern evidential mediumship's been around since the later 1800s.... These various psychic abilities are innate in everyone, but largely dormant. debatable.... As we all raise our frequency we will all have these abilities emerge. ditto.... We will have the ability to communicate w/ a variety of nonphysical energies, not just the nonphysical souls of dead humans. highly debatable.... Where is the supporting evidence?

[mac]

" Mac and I have had conversations and he likes to push for you to figure out what techniques you use and not just use "general" terms that can apply for anyone. (i think :rolleyes: ) I my self am an evidential medium with psychic abilities."

That's about right. :hug3:

I meet few who can clearly describe and define what their attribute(s) is/are. Many squirm when asked and retort that they don't like labels but can't/won't explain what it is that they are unable to explain.

If they could explain their difficulties I'd be happy to help them find the right descriptor...:smile:

[Roselove]

A conscious ability to connect with 'em?

Then they must be alive and not dead if you're connecting.... One wouldn't be able to interact with anything that's dead.

I think you might have meant contact with the souls/spirits of humans who have died - have I got that right?

yes that is what i meant.

souls and spirits dont die, humans do, we all have the ability to connect with living human beings, i use dead as in deceased/departed souls

[earthprowler]

yes that is what i meant.

souls and spirits dont die, humans do, we all have the ability to connect with living human beings, i use dead as in deceased/departed souls


can you go more in depth of how you go about connecting with them? what are some of the processes you have learned to do this?

[Roselove]

connect with the dead? oh i don't connect with them, at least not willingly lol, i was just describing what i defined as meduimship

[Toolite]

or do you view beings on other dimensions? aliens faeres etc etc

does seeing those beings fall under meduimship as well?


I believe mediumship is just of level of the gifting.. If a person so desires to just stay at that level.. But, if they can see and hear spiritually then they also can travel in spirit, heal etc..

All The Glory Belongs To God Forever!

[dennisoc]

An interesting note to this topic:

During a standard 1 hour reading, with the usual group of loved ones in spirit showing up , my wife also had an Indian Guru guy floating on a carpet who came in as "teacher" to her client...and he was not dead...in a coma... suffering from alzheimers or any of the usual "out of body but not dead" reasons a person shows up who is not dead.

This guy IS very much alive and did communicate a simple but timely message with my wife for his "student" on the other side of the planet.

Sooo....once again the answer is "No...mediumship is not only limited to seeing the dead"

neat stuff
den

[Lynn]

Hello


Mediumship is working with Spirit Beings ( that does not mean just humans ) . All things living have a Spirit.

Working with both the Spirit World and the World around one's being Guides , Gauridans ect there are many layers. I more see the "dead" as being transformed from the physical body is all as we do not truly die.

I can have a chat with a living person I have yet to meet. I stopped one from stepping off a cliff to meet there physical body end, to later come to know them. As we can read energy with the other they knew well it was me. Our names simply had wondered on the same site.....thus creating a connection.


Lynn

[mac]

An interesting note to this topic:

During a standard 1 hour reading, with the usual group of loved ones in spirit showing up , my wife also had an Indian Guru guy floating on a carpet who came in as "teacher" to her client...and he was not dead...in a coma... suffering from alzheimers or any of the usual "out of body but not dead" reasons a person shows up who is not dead.

This guy IS very much alive and did communicate a simple but timely message with my wife for his "student" on the other side of the planet.

Sooo....once again the answer is "No...mediumship is not only limited to seeing the dead"

neat stuff
den

I had to read this piece several times. I hope I've understood it fully.

You say the "guru guy" telepathically communicated a message through your wife (presumably sitting as an evidential medium?) to her "client".


Firstly why did he do that rather than speaking to his "student" directly?

Did your wife realise the guru was incarnate? Was she surprised or is this commonplace for her?

[Emmalevine]

I read that there's a difference between 'clairvoyance' and mediumship, with the latter being only one part of it.

Taking this perspective, seeing lights, particles, dimensions etc would come under clairvoyance, whereas mediumship is defined as actually making contact with spirits.

But this is one view. I guess it's all semantics anyway.

[dennisoc]

I had to read this piece several times. I hope I've understood it fully.

You say the "guru guy" telepathically communicated a message through your wife (presumably sitting as an evidential medium?) to her "client". Well....I guess you could say it was "telepathic communication". I have no idea what vehicle he used...mental...spiritual...southwest airlines ??? I have more trouble getting my mind around this than I do accepting her talking to the dead.


Firstly why did he do that rather than speaking to his "student" directly?Again...no idea. ...only assumtions. The relationship between teachers and guides and their students is a special one. The openess of the student is an important element. Maybe it was the "best" time for her to hear his message.

Did your wife realise the guru was incarnate? Yes. At the start of the session when she tells the sitter who the various folks are that are "coming through" she indicated that she thought this guy was not dead. Was she surprised or is this commonplace for her?Yes, she was surprised. It is not uncommon for people who are in coma, have alzheimer etc to communicate out-of-body with her...but this guy was doing this consciously.... purposefully choosing to communicate in an out-of-body way. He has sparked many interesting discussions between my wife and I as we try to appreciate the implications of the event.

Obviously you understand our interest.

[mac]

I read that there's a difference between 'clairvoyance' and mediumship, with the latter being only one part of it.

Taking this perspective, seeing lights, particles, dimensions etc would come under clairvoyance, whereas mediumship is defined as actually making contact with spirits.

But this is one view. I guess it's all semantics anyway.

Clairvoyance - and, similarly, clairaudience - are modes of mediumship.

Seeing lights etc. isn't clairvoyance.

"making contact" with spirit forms is not in itself mediumship....

[mac]

Obviously you understand our interest.

Yes. It's a curious situation. It begs more questions if you don't mind...

Does your wife know this guru-guy's student and the location/address? How did your wife discern him? Clairvoyantly?

What was the student's reaction to having a message conveyed in such a manner? Accepting, understanding? Convinced about its authenticity?

"He has sparked many interesting discussions between my wife and I as we try to appreciate the implications of the event."

What have been your reactions/conclusions? Are there any implications?

What have been the reactions of others to what you've reported here?

[dennisoc]

Yes. It's a curious situation. It begs more questions if you don't mind...

Does your wife know this guru-guy's student and the location/address? I doubt it. This was by phone and she only gets a name...oftimes not a real one due to the desire for annonymity by the sitter How did your wife discern him? Clairvoyantly? Well. To define terms. The dictionary says...clair·voy·ance 1. The supposed power to see objects or events that cannot be perceived by the senses.
2. Acute intuitive insight or perceptiveness.

My research deems her to be one of the worlds finest mediums. She sees and hears the spirits with astonishing clarity. She saw this guy in full form sitting cross legged on a rug floating right in front of her and heard his voice speaking very clearly with an Indian accent. He laughed a lot also. Would you consider that clairvoyant?

What was the student's reaction to having a message conveyed in such a manner? Accepting, understanding? Convinced about its authenticity?Very convinced and accepting. She identified him for my wife as one of her teachers. Obviously she is aware of his powers and seemed casual about his appearance like this.

"He has sparked many interesting discussions between my wife and I as we try to appreciate the implications of the event."

What have been your reactions/conclusions? Are there any implications? I freaked out hearing about it. My wife was surprised but not blown away. She takes paranormal events and her abilities very humbly and matter of factly. I ,on the other hand, am researching anew eastern mystisicm and astal projection which is what my mind tells me happened here. The more I learn about what she does and how the "otherside" works...the less I find I am able to use my concepts of reality that I have depended on for 60 years.

What have been the reactions of others to what you've reported here? This conversation is the farthest extent I have gone with it....for now.




wage peace
den

[Jules]

Clairvoyance - and, similarly, clairaudience - are modes of mediumship.

Seeing lights etc. isn't clairvoyance.

"making contact" with spirit forms is not in itself mediumship....I'm begging to differ here a little mac ;)

Clairvoyance, audience, sentience, cognizance, etc are also used on the lower vibration when reading psychically. NOT just mediumistically. Whenever we 'see' anything not visible to a 'human' eye we're seeing clairvoyantly - developing the third eye. same as the rest of the 'clairs'. It's only through developing these senses can ones mediumship achieve greater results. But not only that, it also enables one to see everyday situations in a clearer light.

As for the original question .. and going back to Dennis's post - one has to remember we are ALL spirit. The body is just the overcoat as you know.
I myself have brought through 'Spirit' that is still of the earth plane, seeing, feeling, hearing, sensing etc just as if they were deceased when in actual fact they have been very much alive, and these have been the communicators too. Albeit some have been at the latter stages of life, but others have been very much 'with it' so to speak.

It freaked me when it first happened I can tell ya!

Namaste
Jue :hug3:

[mac]

wage peace
den
Thanks, den, for your further responses. What you've described suggests she's a person who's unusually perceptive. Yes I'd see your wife's attribute as clairvoyance - and clairaudience - and I haven't heard of a similar account.

It's interesting to consider 'where' this guru-guy actually was or, more accurately, where he was projecting himself or his image. On the face of things it certainly sounds like Astral Projection so it's nothing too unusual except for his ability to link to your wife so clearly and dramatically - and her ability to link to him.

Having said that I don't know if anything much is changed by this unusual encounter other than, perhaps, to emphasise that caution should be shown by psychic practitioners who have less clear indications about who their disembodied communicators are.

[mac]

Jules: I'm begging to differ here a little mac ;) I welcome your input. :smile:

Clairvoyance, audience, sentience, cognizance, etc are also used on the lower vibration when reading psychically. NOT just mediumistically. Fair comment. I should have been more specific by saying 'clairvoyant evidential mediums and mediumship'. Whenever we 'see' anything not visible to a 'human' eye we're seeing clairvoyantly - developing the third eye. same as the rest of the 'clairs'. good point It's only through developing these senses can ones mediumship achieve greater results. But not only that, it also enables one to see everyday situations in a clearer light. You'd have to explain how that works....

As for the original question .. and going back to Dennis's post - one has to remember we are ALL spirit. absolutely! That's a point I've had to make myself in many other types of threads.... The body is just the overcoat as you know.
I myself have brought through 'Spirit' that is still of the earth plane, seeing, feeling, hearing, sensing etc just as if they were deceased when in actual fact they have been very much alive, and these have been the communicators too. You'll already know that I try to use incarnate and discarnate when trying to differentiate between in-the-body and no longer in-the-body ('spirit').

Speaking about 'spirit' is just too vague and confusing for anyone seeking to learn or who (understandably) expects psychics and mediums to be 'speaking' to those who are not alive in this world....

I wonder how many times I've banged on about loose, ambiguous usage of 'spirit' and 'spirits'? Too many some would say! :D If one does not differentiate, though, between the incarnate spirit form and the discarnate spirit form, and if 'psychic' and 'medium' are used to mean the same thing, then there's no way that others are going to be able to understand the differences..... Albeit some have been at the latter stages of life, but others have been very much 'with it' so to speak.

It freaked me when it first happened I can tell ya! Yes I can see how startling that would be!

Namaste
Jue :hug3:[/quote]

[Jules]

G'Mornin mr mac :hug:
It's only through developing these senses can ones mediumship achieve greater results. But not only that, it also enables one to see everyday situations in a clearer light. You'd have to explain how that works....
lol I'll try but I've got a bit of brain fog this morning :wink:. Developing all the 'clairs' intensifies a medium/psychics perception. It naturally follows during the process that one starts to recognise and 'see' things in everyday life that one has seen during 'readings', therefore being able to equate thoughts and feelings into 'real' life. I can only talk from a personal pov here so bear with me. When I'm dealing with certain people it's now got to the stage where I can 'read' a situation without actually linking in, I suppose the best way to describe it is I have a heightened awareness. Does that make sense?

You'll already know that I try to use incarnate and discarnate when trying to differentiate between in-the-body and no longer in-the-body ('spirit').
Yep I do .. but other's who haven't read your posts won't :D hehe sorry couldn't resist :tongue:

To me, when communicating with Spirit one goes beyond the realms of the 'human' aspect of the spirit .. and dead or alive that spirit is discarnate anyway.
Speaking about 'spirit' is just too vague and confusing for anyone seeking to learn or who (understandably) expects psychics and mediums to be 'speaking' to those who are not alive in this world....
It's vague and confusing enough when it first happens to an experienced medium trust me - never mind joe bloggs down the road! lol.

if one does not differentiate, though, between the incarnate spirit form and the discarnate spirit form, and if 'psychic' and 'medium' are used to mean the same thing, then there's no way that others are going to be able to understand the differences.Lol I'll TRY not to get on me soap box .. this is why it's IMPERATIVE that people shouldn't try to develop on their own. Like I've said time and again one HAS to learn to differentiate between psychic and mediumistic energies. It's not fair to the sitter otherwise and although the evidence that comes through may be very very similar, there's a vast difference.

What some people fail to realise when starting development is the importance of a 'mediums' job and how much personal responsibility is involved. You are taking someone's (sitter) life into your hands. A sitter usually appears when they are either at a crossroads in their life, can't move on, in grief etc so you're dealing with peoples emotions. To try and pass off a psychic reading as a mediumistic one is wrong in my book. But by working with your guides and helpers, learning to trust and understand what is happening to you, and recognising the differing energies, only then should you offer to give evidential mediumistic readings. That's just my opinion of course.

Namaste
Jue :hug3:

[mattie]

i define it as contact with dead human souls, ...

I assumed 'dead human souls' actually meant the souls of dead humans, referring to their physical presence as dead, not the spirit/soul actually being dead.

[mac]

I assumed 'dead human souls' actually meant the souls of dead humans, referring to their physical presence as dead, not the spirit/soul actually being dead.

I already made this point in posting #16....

[mattie]

... Like I've said time and again one HAS to learn to differentiate between psychic and mediumistic energies. ... To try and pass off a psychic reading as a mediumistic one is wrong in my book. But by working with your guides and helpers, learning to trust and understand what is happening to you, and recognising the differing energies, only then should you offer to give evidential mediumistic readings. ...


While your reply makes it obvious you’ve discussed this previously, please bear w/ this request from a site newbie to post the difference between ‘psychic and mediumistic energies.‘

I’ve not seen the prior discussions & am curious about this. A link to the discussion would be OK.

[Jules]

Lol hi Mattie :) .. apologies - I suppose I did get a bit carried away .. oops :D

No I'll explain it here as best I can....
Working mediumistically, you are communing directly with Spirit, offering evidence to support that you are actually 'talking to the dead'. Over in the UK we follow something that's called CERT. Communicator, Evidence, Reason, Tie it up - so basically we identify the Spirit who'se communicating with the medium by the info they are presenting. This is usually shown by the personality of them, distinguishing marks, names, appearance etc. Evidence is then presented, ie memories that only the sitter would know about, what is happening around the sitter atm, dilemmas they are facing etc, the reason they came - ie to put the sitters mind at rest, apologise, send love, the message basically and then tie it all together ending the reading with love.

Now working psychically is different in the respect that you don't communicate with Spirit - you're picking up the energy of the actual sitter. The psychic will still pick up through the vibration, some of the evidence that Spirit bring forth - ie certain situations around atm. How the person is feeling etc but it won't be a Spirit energy that's communicating nor will you get an indication Spirit are present.

The only way to recognise this is trust .. in yourself and spirit, working with guides and helpers to show different ways to help you yourself recognise when it's Spirit or not. And 9 times out of 10 you'll notice a slight change. This could be a 'hot' or 'cold' feeling around you, a tingling of your fingers, your head, feet, etc, or even a feeling of butterflies in your stomach - but something will make you aware that Spirit are with you. For instance, when I first started I used to get an itchy left palm. But the more you develop the more you recognise and just KNOW instinctively when Spirit are with you. But the one thing I WILL say is this .. every single Medium works differently - and what may sit right with one won't with another. Make sense?

[mac]

Jules - G'Mornin mr mac Now it's good afternoon to you, Ju :smile:
lol I'll try but I've got a bit of brain fog this morning . Developing all the 'clairs' intensifies a medium/psychics perception. It naturally follows during the process that one starts to recognise and 'see' things in everyday life that one has seen during 'readings', therefore being able to equate thoughts and feelings into 'real' life. I can only talk from a personal pov here so bear with me. When I'm dealing with certain people it's now got to the stage where I can 'read' a situation without actually linking in, I suppose the best way to describe it is I have a heightened awareness. Does that make sense? maybe... I'm pleased to hear that's how it is for you on a personal basis but whether that happens generally would be speculative....

Yep I do .. but other's who haven't read your posts won't :D hehe sorry couldn't resist :tongue: No, that's fine. I realise that although I'm constantly banging on about it many will not have read my rantings. I made the point, though, to emphasise how important I feel it to be...

To me, when communicating with Spirit one goes beyond the realms of the 'human' aspect of the spirit .. and dead or alive that spirit is discarnate anyway. not as I use the terms - incarnate = alive in the body, discarnate = alive but not in the body. Yet one more reason to be precise about what 'spirit' really implies.
Lol I'll TRY not to get on me soap box .. this is why it's IMPERATIVE that people shouldn't try to develop on their own. Like I've said time and again one HAS to learn to differentiate between psychic and mediumistic energies. absolutely! It's not fair to the sitter otherwise One might say it's dishonest....and although the evidence that comes through may be very very similar, there's a vast difference. agreed absolutely But if evidential mediumship resembles psychism then there's something fundamentally wrong. Working at psychic energy levels and getting information is NOT (as well you know) evidential mediumship. If it ain't evidence (through identification in some manner) of a discarnate communicator (a 'dead' person) who is connected or related to an enquirer (sitter) then it ain't evidential mediumship.

What some people fail to realise when starting development is the importance of a 'mediums' job and how much personal responsibility is involved. You are taking someone's (sitter) life into your hands. well, sometimes....:wink: A sitter usually appears when they are either at a crossroads in their life, can't move on, in grief etc so you're dealing with peoples emotions. Yes that certainly can be but isn't always the case - again we're back to what folks think that mediums are and what mediums do.... To try and pass off a psychic reading as a mediumistic one is wrong in my book. wrong and dishonest....But by working with your guides and helpers, learning to trust and understand what is happening to you, and recognising the differing energies, only then should you offer to give evidential mediumistic readings. That's just my opinion of course. I'd say it's more than just your opinion, Ju. It's how the Modern Spiritualist church would teach what evidential mediumship is. Getting to that point will take folks different paths but the journey is less important than the destination.

Namaste
Jue :hug3:

[mac]

Lol hi Mattie :) .. apologies - I suppose I did get a bit carried away .. oops :D

No I'll explain it here as best I can....
Working mediumistically, you are communing directly with Spirit, offering evidence to support that you are actually 'talking to the dead'. Over in the UK we follow something that's called CERT. Communicator, Evidence, Reason, Tie it up - so basically we identify the Spirit who'se communicating with the medium by the info they are presenting. This is usually shown by the personality of them, distinguishing marks, names, appearance etc. Evidence is then presented, ie memories that only the sitter would know about, what is happening around the sitter atm, dilemmas they are facing etc, the reason they came - ie to put the sitters mind at rest, apologise, send love, the message basically and then tie it all together ending the reading with love.

Now working psychically is different in the respect that you don't communicate with Spirit - you're picking up the energy of the actual sitter. The psychic will still pick up through the vibration, some of the evidence that Spirit bring forth - ie certain situations around atm. How the person is feeling etc but it won't be a Spirit energy that's communicating nor will you get an indication Spirit are present.

The only way to recognise this is trust .. in yourself and spirit, working with guides and helpers to show different ways to help you yourself recognise when it's Spirit or not. And 9 times out of 10 you'll notice a slight change. This could be a 'hot' or 'cold' feeling around you, a tingling of your fingers, your head, feet, etc, or even a feeling of butterflies in your stomach - but something will make you aware that Spirit are with you. For instance, when I first started I used to get an itchy left palm. But the more you develop the more you recognise and just KNOW instinctively when Spirit are with you. But the one thing I WILL say is this .. every single Medium works differently - and what may sit right with one won't with another. Make sense?
Sorry but I've got to do this.

you said earlier: "I myself have brought through 'Spirit' that is still of the earth plane, seeing, feeling, hearing, sensing etc just as if they were deceased when in actual fact they have been very much alive, and these have been the communicators too."

But now you're saying.....

"Working mediumistically, you are communing directly with Spirit, offering evidence to support that you are actually 'talking to the dead'."

By using this word "spirit" in such an ambiguous way how do we sort out 'dead' and 'alive' forms? Now I know that you know, and you know that I know, what's meant but that's not helping those who are new to the subject or who don't understand....

[Jules]

Sorry but I've got to do this.

you said earlier: "I myself have brought through 'Spirit' that is still of the earth plane, seeing, feeling, hearing, sensing etc just as if they were deceased when in actual fact they have been very much alive, and these have been the communicators too."

But now you're saying.....

"Working mediumistically, you are communing directly with Spirit, offering evidence to support that you are actually 'talking to the dead'."

By using this word "spirit" in such an ambiguous way how do we sort out 'dead' and 'alive' forms? Now I know that you know, and you know that I know, what's meant but that's not helping those who are new to the subject or who don't understand....
LOL no need for apologies I'm glad you've pointed it out :) - I was just typing away and never even thought about it doh!
What I should have said was .. we're bringing evidence through to say we're 'talking to Spirit'. However, how to discern the two is where the difficulty lies. But you see mac, and maybe this is wrong I don't know - but for ME PERSONALLY there is no seperation. So NOW I need to try figure out
how to explain it to newbys ..hmmm .. in the words of Arnie .. I shall be back!! :D

[mac]

LOL no need for apologies I'm glad you've pointed it out :) - I was just typing away and never even thought about it doh!
What I should have said was .. we're bringing evidence through to say we're 'talking to Spirit'. However, how to discern the two is where the difficulty lies. But you see mac, and maybe this is wrong I don't know - but for ME PERSONALLY there is no seperation. So NOW I need to try figure out
how to explain it to newbys ..hmmm .. in the words of Arnie .. I shall be back!! :D



I wouldn't say there's anything wrong in you feeling no difference in separation but plainly it would be very difficult for an inexperienced sitter to comprehend.

And I will readily admit I'm puzzled why the spirit-form of someone incarnate would appear in seance conditions, presumably when working for an inexperienced enquirer. (as with the posting from Dennis)

If it's generally believed that a medium (in the sense we both understand) will have helpers, guides, guardian angels, gatekeepers (or any other noun) to support the communication business, one might be tempted to ask (which is what I'm doing!) why it is that discarnate and incarnate spirit-forms would be allowed to enter the aura of the medium during a presumably evidential mediumship sitting. It's likely, I suggest, that working with the spirit-forms of discarnates and then the spirit-forms of incarnates is likely to cause confusion and it seems pointless.

Now if this were to happen under test, research or closed circle conditions then there might be a value in the experience but why would it happen outside of such conditions?

Or have I got it all wrong?

[Jules]

I wouldn't say there's anything wrong in you feeling no difference in separation but plainly it would be very difficult for an inexperienced sitter to comprehend.
I can't argue with that lol.

And I will readily admit I'm puzzled why the spirit-form of someone incarnate would appear in seance conditions, presumably when working for an inexperienced enquirer. (as with the posting from Dennis)

I'm not sure, but to my way of thinking (and this is just about popping in!) Spirit are evolving, as are we sooo there's a possibility that they are helping to raise the awareness that we are all spirit?

If it's generally believed that a medium (in the sense we both understand) will have helpers, guides, guardian angels, gatekeepers (or any other noun) to support the communication business, one might be tempted to ask (which is what I'm doing!) why it is that discarnate and incarnate spirit-forms would be allowed to enter the aura of the medium during a presumably evidential mediumship sitting. It's likely, I suggest, that working with the spirit-forms of discarnates and then the spirit-forms of incarnates is likely to cause confusion and it seems pointless.

I don't see it as being pointless to be honest. Ultimately the spirit form is still giving evidential proof and putting the message across for what the sitter needs to hear.

Now if this were to happen under test, research or closed circle conditions then there might be a value in the experience but why would it happen outside of such conditions?

As you are aware, Spirit will use whatever means the Medium has, given their abilities.

Or have I got it all wrong? Who's to say who is right or wrong? Spirit, incarnate or discarnate will find a way of getting a message across I suppose. When it happened with me, the Spirit was the grandmother of the sitter, who played a massive part in his/her life. Albeit she was in her 90's she was still a force to be reckoned with within the family although a lot frailer. The person had grown away from her as young ones tend to do when they're finding their own feet so didn't have as much contact with her as when he/she was younger. (Please note, I'm using he/she his/her by means of privacy.) She spoke to the sitter with clarity, understanding, compassion but with a harshness they recognised.

I think what I'm starting to understand as we're discussing this is the fact I'm communicating on a higher vibrational frequency if you like. And as one wise man once said to me, I'm working from inside the cube as opposed to outside of it! lol.

[mac]

Jules - Who's to say who is right or wrong? What I meant about myself is am I misunderstanding the situation? Spirit, incarnate or discarnate will find a way of getting a message across I suppose. hmmmm...we're back with 'spirit' when actually it seems that it's the solid, living individual who is determined to get a message across....When it happened with me, the Spirit was the grandmother of the sitter, who played a massive part in his/her life. Albeit she was in her 90's she was still a force to be reckoned with within the family although a lot frailer. So let me make sure I follow. The spirit of the still-living grandmother of the sitter used you as medium to reach her grandchild? The person had grown away from her as young ones tend to do when they're finding their own feet so didn't have as much contact with her as when he/she was younger. (Please note, I'm using he/she his/her by means of privacy.) She spoke to the sitter with clarity, understanding, compassion but with a harshness they recognised. So the sitter recognised that the message was from the now-estranged grandmother and could clearly identify that it was definitely the grandmother and not just someone purporting to be her....?

I think what I'm starting to understand as we're discussing this is the fact I'm communicating on a higher vibrational frequency if you like. You'd have to explain that, Ju And as one wise man once said to me, I'm working from inside the cube as opposed to outside of it! And you'd have to explain that too.....:wink:

[Jules]

What I meant about myself is am I misunderstanding the situation? Possibly? lol

hmmmm...we're back with 'spirit' when actually it seems that it's the solid, living individual who is determined to get a message acrossYes and no. It was the live woman's Spirit that wanted to get the message across.
So let me make sure I follow. The spirit of the still-living grandmother of the sitter used you as medium to reach her grandchild?That's exactly right.
So the sitter recognised that the message was from the now-estranged grandmother and could clearly identify that it was definitely the grandmother and not just someone purporting to be her....?
Absolutely recognised 100% who she was. At this point it wasn't revealed to me she was still alive! In fact, the sitter had been talking THAT MORNING about career direction to a friend .. and she brought it up. The sitter hadn't even mentioned it to the parents .. so no1 knew anything about it except this one friend.

[mac]

Possibly? lol

Yes and no. It was the live woman's Spirit that wanted to get the message across.
That's exactly right.
Absolutely recognised 100% who she was. At this point it wasn't revealed to me she was still alive! In fact, the sitter had been talking THAT MORNING about career direction to a friend .. and she brought it up. The sitter hadn't even mentioned it to the parents .. so no1 knew anything about it except this one friend.

This topic is making me re-consider 'stuff'....

[mac]

Possibly? lol

Yes and no. It was the live woman's Spirit that wanted to get the message across.
That's exactly right.
Absolutely recognised 100% who she was. At this point it wasn't revealed to me she was still alive! In fact, the sitter had been talking THAT MORNING about career direction to a friend .. and she brought it up. The sitter hadn't even mentioned it to the parents .. so no1 knew anything about it except this one friend.
"Yes and no. It was the live woman's Spirit that wanted to get the message across." So we're differentiating between the spirit and the woman....????

Can one be considered separately from the other in this world?

Could you see this woman/woman's spirit clairvoyantly? As a discrete individual?

Or was it clairaudient contact?

[Jules]

I'm glad its making you look at things slightly differently mac. It's a constant learning curve where spirit are concerned!

No, I'm not differentiating .. I said it like that merely for explaination purposes.

Like I said earlier, to me now there is no seperation between spirit. Spirit is Spirit, is the way I see it. Like you yourself have stated we're ALL spirit anyway and I was communicating with the discarnate grandmother's spirit.

I saw, felt, and heard her as I do when communing with Spirit full stop. I was able to describe how she looked (claivoyantly) what her personality is like, the tones in her voice, even down to the displeasure and pleasure in her voice. When she came through the energy of her was as if I was communicating with a 'dead' person. (for want of a better word) .. I got all the usual feelings I get, the psychic wind and a butterfly feeling in my solar plexus - it always happens like that. When she started to deliver the message .. as is the norm with me when reading online, I'm pushed aside and Spirit take over my fingers. I never know what I've wrote till afterwards when I re-read through. the same thing happened there :).

[mac]

I'm glad its making you look at things slightly differently mac. It's a constant learning curve where spirit are concerned!

No, I'm not differentiating .. I said it like that merely for explaination purposes.

Like I said earlier, to me now there is no seperation between spirit. Spirit is Spirit, is the way I see it. Like you yourself have stated we're ALL spirit anyway and I was communicating with the discarnate grandmother's spirit.

I saw, felt, and heard her as I do when communing with Spirit full stop. I was able to describe how she looked (claivoyantly) what her personality is like, the tones in her voice, even down to the displeasure and pleasure in her voice. When she came through the energy of her was as if I was communicating with a 'dead' person. (for want of a better word) .. I got all the usual feelings I get, the psychic wind and a butterfly feeling in my solar plexus - it always happens like that. When she started to deliver the message .. as is the norm with me when reading online, I'm pushed aside and Spirit take over my fingers. I never know what I've wrote till afterwards when I re-read through. the same thing happened there :).

I'm making enquiries to get this business in perspective.

Has mediumship always been this way? If so then I've missed every reference to the possibility/likelihood of incarnates being involved this way in mediumship.....

If this is a learning curve I need to understand why it's taken this long for the learning to come about - and how significant it is.

It's such a contrast between your example and that of den. His was a case of a guru sending a message through a third party to a student. Yours is a case of an old lady communicating with a grandchild. Of course both incarnates may be highly spiritually evolved and hence know the mechanism of such communication.

I remain puzzled.....

[Jules]

I'm making enquiries to get this business in perspective.
Let me know when you have .. I'll be interested to see your findings!
Has mediumship always been this way? If so then I've missed every reference to the possibility/likelihood of incarnates being involved this way in mediumship.....
As far as I'm aware, Gordon Higginson experienced something similar with a man who was in a coma. Gordon Smith has also experienced it whilst visiting a hospital in Glasgow I think it was. I'd have to find out the exact details as it's been rather a long time since I read it!

If this is a learning curve I need to understand why it's taken this long for the learning to come about - and how significant it is.

I must admit, I hadn't looked at the significance of it lol. But I think it's because Spirit and awareness are evolving that it's happening. I could be wrong though?

It's such a contrast between your example and that of den. His was a case of a guru sending a message through a third party to a student. Yours is a case of an old lady communicating with a grandchild. Of course both incarnates may be highly spiritually evolved and hence know the mechanism of such communication.
Is it such a contrast though when we are all Spirit? I don't know! lol

I remain puzzled.....
I can understand you remaining puzzled mac, so am I.. but I'm also very very privalaged that I've had this experience.

[mac]

"uote: I'm making enquiries to get this business in perspective.
Let me know when you have .. I'll be interested to see your findings! Could take a while but if anything concrete comes up I'll start a new thread...
Has mediumship always been this way? If so then I've missed every reference to the possibility/likelihood of incarnates being involved this way in mediumship.....
As far as I'm aware, Gordon Higginson experienced something similar with a man who was in a coma. That takes the subject back a few decades....Gordon Smith has also experienced it whilst visiting a hospital in Glasgow I think it was. That's recent....I'd have to find out the exact details as it's been rather a long time since I read it! If you do I'd appreciate the reference to read it myself...

If this is a learning curve I need to understand why it's taken this long for the learning to come about - and how significant it is.

I must admit, I hadn't looked at the significance of it lol. But I think it's because Spirit and awareness are evolving that it's happening. I could be wrong though? Maybe this is a significant change but maybe it's just an odd flyer which is down to what I suggested before - individuals who are highly evolved/experienced enough to 'know the ropes' of such communication....

It's such a contrast between your example and that of den. His was a case of a guru sending a message through a third party to a student. Yours is a case of an old lady communicating with a grandchild. Of course both incarnates may be highly spiritually evolved and hence know the mechanism of such communication.
Is it such a contrast though when we are all Spirit? I don't know! lol Yes the two individuals concerned and the cases are very different from each other. And yes it's a contrast because although we are all animated by our spirit form, generally that form appears to be deeply integrated during wakefulness (allowing here for AP/AT during sleep) Actively dissociating into spirit and physical forms while awake seems not to be a common feature - or we'd hear about it....

I remain puzzled..... I can understand you remaining puzzled mac, so am I.. but I'm also very very privalaged that I've had this experience. Yes it must be something that stays with you but my need is to understand why and how. I'm analytical by nature and by training and mentally taking something apart is what comes naturally until I'm satisfied with what I find.

Watch this space....:wink::hug3:

[Jules]

Ooohhh I understand that need allright mac lol. I look forward to awaiting any results! .. I've contacted Gordon Smith direct so see what we get back from it lol. xx

[deepsea]

Such an interesting post.

So you are receiving information from a 'live' relative,as in spirit giving messages?

Just an idea but will mention it,would it be thought transference?

Keep going,lads,I'm learning something here very interesting.

Deepsea

[mac]

Ooohhh I understand that need allright mac lol. I look forward to awaiting any results! .. I've contacted Gordon Smith direct so see what we get back from it lol. xx

excellent! I shall be interested to hear what he has to add, Ju. :hug3:

[mac]

Such an interesting post.

So you are receiving information from a 'live' relative,as in spirit giving messages?

Just an idea but will mention it,would it be thought transference?

Keep going,lads,I'm learning something here very interesting.

Deepsea

Can't comment on thought transference - that's up to Jules.

it's disappointing - but understandable - that this topic doesn't appear to have interested anyone else.....

A sad indictment of the state of modern mediumship perhaps?

[deepsea]

Another idea but sounds a bit silly.
Could spirit be giving information to the grandmother and without realising it,Jules is picking up through the thoughts or mind of grand mother?

No,that is too far fetched!:D

Deepsea

[Jules]

LOL deepsea :) .. and welcome to the convo! And noo you're not being silly at all.

I think all mediumship is thought transference anyway in the form of words, symbols and pictures. So in that respect yes it will be. But on the flip side of the coin, no it definately wasn't coming via a third party.

[deepsea]

Didn't think it was,Jules.
:D

Got to fill the space up on the forums somehow.
:smile:

Deepsea

[Jules]

LOL LOVE IT!! :D ;) x

[Orbie]

Cracking thread !! Just wondering wasnt their a TV programme with Colin Fry where he gave a reading to a woman. He passed messages on from the son but it transpired the son was in a coma at the end of the reading. I think Colin said it was possible to pick up such people in those situations.

Mmm transplant patients, or those in a coma I wonder, blimey its one to ponder ????

[deepsea]

Nw we seem to be getting somewhere. Um,Colin Fry said that?
I'm off to see him on Frday...........:D

Deepsea

[mac]

Cracking thread !! Just wondering wasnt their a TV programme with Colin Fry where he gave a reading to a woman. He passed messages on from the son but it transpired the son was in a coma at the end of the reading. I think Colin said it was possible to pick up such people in those situations.

Mmm transplant patients, or those in a coma I wonder, blimey its one to ponder ????
I've recently discussed the issue of coma patient contact recently. It's arguable that it's telepathic contact somewhat similar to that of mediumship. It's uncertain, though, if the contact is with the spirit of the coma patient rather than with the person.... Mediumship in all but one aspect - it's not contact with discarnate individuals.

These two cases were very different although the communications were essentially similar - the spirits of living persons communcating through mediumship in a similar manner to traditional mediumship involving discarnates.

[dennisoc]

I will venture a guess that my lack of understanding and comprehension of the mechanics of how my wife can not only see and speak to discarnate (lost the "dead" word for you Mac) but also easily communcate with folks with alzheimers, comatose , the whole range of illnesses which result in spirit seperating from body and most recently an indian mystic in meditation stems from my inability to grok our "oneness".

When I consider how much impossible information concerning the physical, mental,emotional and spiritual aspects of sitter's lives pass through her daily it makes being able to also speak to a master of transcendence pale in comparison.

People with those abilities are able to tap into the "oneness"which my wife has only described as "Love"....god being much to culturally restrictive and oft implies a seperation between us and him/her.

My naivete' tries to impose blinders ....boundaries on what my wife as a medium is supposed to be able to "see", who she is supposed to be able to talk to...silly me. "soooo did you know the sun doesn't actually rise!" says I to Steven Hawkings.

Wage Peace
den

[Orbie]

I am 100% of the following incident. A man in ICU had a heart attack and was "dead" for a short time. He was rescusitated and lived another twenty four hours before passing on. The nurses who attended him befor and after that last twenty four hours of his life were dumbstruck (I dont use that lightly) in the difference between the man. His behaviours, intentions and whole being were completely different. Eg he read the Sun newspaper yet was doing the Telegraph cross word after, from being thoroughly unpleasant individual he went to being the opposite. I need to check something else before I add it. Speak later x

[mac]

I am 100% of the following incident. A man in ICU had a heart attack and was "dead" for a short time. He was rescusitated and lived another twenty four hours before passing on. The nurses who attended him befor and after that last twenty four hours of his life were dumbstruck (I dont use that lightly) in the difference between the man. His behaviours, intentions and whole being were completely different. Eg he read the Sun newspaper yet was doing the Telegraph cross word after, from being thoroughly unpleasant individual he went to being the opposite. I need to check something else before I add it. Speak later x

Are you heading off-topic, N? :wink:

[mac]

Before we get any further along (assuming any progress is made) it seems to me that whatever the outcome of this discussion, the aspect of clearly defining mediumship is as important here-and-now as I've always emphasised in the past....

I'm an unapologetic traditionalist in my use of the word 'medium'. For me it's as found in Modern Spiritualism. A medium is someone who acts as a go-between for communication between the discarnate and the incarnate worlds. One simple example is the passing on of messages from and to loved ones here in the physical world or 'over there' in the etheric. Another is the guidance from spiritually evolved teachers to the world.

Using the simple definition above, the two examples detailed in this thread are not mediumship. They may be highly similar but fail on one key fact - they are not transdimensional communications.

I don't expect that many will agree with my stance because it rules out so many other aspects popular nowadays but until there's agreement on a definition, mediumship for me is as I've outlined above.

[Jules]

mac, can I just ask are you actually a medium yourself?

I'm orf to do some more research so catch up later xx

[mac]

mac, can I just ask are you actually a medium yourself?

I'm orf to do some more research so catch up later xx

A medium - oh no.... If I were I'd have all these unusual occurrences nailed for myself!

[Jules]

LOL that's true enough :D k talk in a bit

[deepsea]

I always wondered about that,Mac.

I have a strong feeling about you if you put your mind to it,I feel you would make a very good medium!


:wink:

Deepsea

[mac]

I always wondered about that,Mac.

I have a strong feeling about you if you put your mind to it,I feel you would make a very good medium!


:wink:

Deepsea
It's been remarked before but what if I didn't want to....:wink:

I'm a free-spirit, a free-thinker who'll challenge anything and everything that doesn't 'ring true'. Wouldn't be able to do that were I more intimately involved.

Have you heard the saying "Can't see the wood for the trees?" That's how it can be for a psychic/spiritual practitioner of whatever sort - too close to the 'stuff' to be able to see the big picture....

[deepsea]

Um! I have my suspicions,Mac.


:D

J.

[Orbie]

Are you heading off-topic, N? :wink:

:D Of course I am you wouldnt expect anything less :D To be honest I just got a push to share this.

[Enya]

I think you're limiting mediumship a tad Mac, by confining it to disincarnate communications. When a person is comatose in some way, their spirit/soul is quite free to roam where it will and thus, it's perfectly plausible for them to be directed toward a medium to pass on a message. Those who are aware of the simplicity of the spiritual vibrations can tap into that knowledge and use it to their advantage.
Evidential mediumship is only one level of what can be achieved.

[mac]

I think you're limiting mediumship a tad Mac, by confining it to disincarnate communications. When a person is comatose in some way, their spirit/soul is quite free to roam where it will and thus, it's perfectly plausible for them to be directed toward a medium to pass on a message. Those who are aware of the simplicity of the spiritual vibrations can tap into that knowledge and use it to their advantage.
Evidential mediumship is only one level of what can be achieved.

It's not I who's limiting anything..... This is evidential mediumship as found in Modern Spiritualism. (I'm merely a mouthpiece for the principle.) If you're not a Modern Spiritualist you may not understand why I say what I do.

Your assertion about a spirit form being free to roam during coma is unsubstantiated - where is your evidence?

I defined the mediumship I understand - it's up to you to define yours if you feel my version is limiting.

[mac]

:D Of course I am you wouldnt expect anything less :D To be honest I just got a push to share this.

Did you find the additional info you said you'd supply later if you could? :smile:

[Orbie]

Did you find the additional info you said you'd supply later if you could? :smile:



Not had chance yet,builders in the house this week. I have yet to visit the nurse who attended him. She has many experiences about patients and what happened before they passed, which she doesnt really talk about, so Im humbled she shared them with me.

Can I take you up on the concept of digression though? I often find that a good digression can often lead back to the original point, a full circle. I do understand though that it can go waaay off track though. Just my two cents :smile:

[mac]

Not had chance yet,builders in the house this week. I have yet to visit the nurse who attended him. She has many experiences about patients and what happened before they passed, which she doesnt really talk about, so Im humbled she shared them with me.

Can I take you up on the concept of digression though? I often find that a good digression can often lead back to the original point, a full circle. I do understand though that it can go waaay off track though. Just my two cents :smile:

OK - I'll look forward to what you have to report later.

I'm pleased to hear that going off-topic works in that way for you. And a quick diversion before returning to the main path does little harm....

But as a regular forum contributor on many websites I see that many members often will pick up on a side issue and the original topic discussion point is quickly lost.

Sometimes that doesn't matter but at other times it's frustrating when no actual discussion has taken place.

[Enya]

No, I'm not a 'modern spritualist' - I'm just a medium who's learning through experience. I have a vague memory of passing on a message from a lady with altzheimers but can't seem to access it at present. Personally, if you accept that our spirit is free to roam while our body rests, then surely the same applies in a more serious comatose state, especially if the person concerned has some subconsious control over their etheric state. I may have someone who may be able to provide an answer or two, if I remember to call her...

[Westleigh]

I think everyone will have different answers to this question. I haven't read the entirety of the thread, but I will say that I think terminology is a difficult thing to manage when discussing spirituality. We try to put classifications on things in a way which makes sense to us as physical beings (categories such as dead people, aliens, angels, guides etc) when I don't think such classifications really exist in the spirit world. All living things are spirit, no matter if or how they existed in the physical, or whether they currently inhabit it or not.

I often use the word mediumship to refer to my own experience because it is the term I think others understand most easily in relation to spirit communication, but I am not a dead-person-to-living-person communicator. My spirit communication is mostly with guides who have technically been incarnate at one time, but are not people who I or anyone I know have known in the physical. I have also communicated with spirit beings who have never been incarnate or who have been incarnate as non-human beings, and had telepathic experiences with animals, plants and living human beings. I suppose communication with living beings falls under the term telepathy, but I don't really see these things as seperate skills - it is all communcation through the same channel so far as I am concerned, and to use different classifications seems to me a bit like wanting to use different words for the telephone depending on whether you are using it to talk to your mum or your Auntie Mildred. :wink: I have no objection to others doing so, but I don't find it helpful for myself.

Should there be a different word for people who communicate with spirits in ways other than via traditional mediumship? I suppose I would suggest using the term to encompass whatever you would like it to encompass, so long as you explain your usage to others.

[mac]

No, I'm not a 'modern spritualist' - I'm just a medium who's learning through experience. I have a vague memory of passing on a message from a lady with altzheimers but can't seem to access it at present. Personally, if you accept that our spirit is free to roam while our body rests, then surely the same applies in a more serious comatose state, especially if the person concerned has some subconsious control over their etheric state. I may have someone who may be able to provide an answer or two, if I remember to call her...

"Personally, if you accept that our spirit is free to roam while our body rests, then surely the same applies in a more serious comatose state, especially if the person concerned has some subconsious control over their etheric state."

That's no more than a hypothesis and there are major differences between coma and sleep.

Since incarnates are not alive in the etheric, why should they have any control over it? I'm not saying your hypothesis is wrong but that it's unsubstantiated.

A few moments thought about the potential for contacting patients in coma, or in a persistive vegetative condition, would show that it would be a huge step forward in knowing what the patient felt or wanted.

That might be hugely beneficial for medical staff and for families of such patients....

For the moment it's not reliably possible - maybe sensitives should try to work their way towards it?

[dennisoc]

Mac
It happens...very possible and very reliable.Rare only because few are able and few accept.
I have witnessed it.

den

[Jules]

Ok mac. It IS possible because it's been done. I've not heard back from GS (grr) but I'm sure the book was Spirit Messenger where I first read it. Also, I've known a fair few reputable mediums who have also connected with coma patients.

When a Medium is developing, part of that development is letting go of ego, and in doing so, raising your vibration which enables contact with Spirit. As I've previously mentioned mac, we are all spirit and a Mediums' job is to connect with spirit. I KNOW what I felt, saw, heard, sensed. And I still believe I'm right in my thoughts on the subject. It IS the fact there is no seperation and with not seeing that it's enabling me to connect to the incarnate - which technically we're all discarnate entities too when the spirit leaves the body - mediumistically.
Jue x

[Orbie]

Got a copy of it, just run through it, there is a case described on p26, time against me tonight and cant give further details but wanted to find it for you! Speak soon, will hopefully have more on that patient who was resusitated too by the end of this weekend.

[mac]

Jules] Ok mac. It IS possible because it's been done. OK - it appears that communication occurs and I've not disputed that .. I've not heard back from GS (grr) but I'm sure the book was Spirit Messenger where I first read it. Also, I've known a fair few reputable mediums who have also connected with coma patients. OK but is that mediumship or telepathy? And yes I know that communication with discarnates is through telepathy so maybe mediumship should not have the transdimensional element in the definition? Is that what I'm being told, that mediumship can also occur within the same dimension? I'm not objecting just trying to get views....

When a Medium is developing, part of that development is letting go of ego, and in doing so, raising your vibration which enables contact with Spirit. Again it's down to what's meant by 'spirit'. Does one mean 'the spirit' as in the spirit which is found everywhere, in all things? Or does it mean discarnate individuals who are contacted - or the incarnate spirit form(s) of individual(s)? As I've previously mentioned mac, we are all spirit and a Mediums' job is to connect with spirit. You know as well as I, Ju, that in Spiritualism traditionally the link is brought about through the medium between discarnate and incarnate individuals. I'm quite prepared to accept that version may be old hat and that contemporary mediumship has changed... I've made my views plain on this topic many times before. I KNOW what I felt, saw, heard, sensed. And I still believe I'm right in my thoughts on the subject. I accept that it's your belief - no arguments, no dispute about what you've said.... It IS the fact there is no seperation OK I accept that the spirit is intimately integrated with the body but there is a separation when the spirit no longer is using a physical overcoat...Any dissociation before death is still unsubstantiated - not saying it isn't, only that we have no clear evidence - perhaps we will soon? and with not seeing that it's enabling me to connect to the incarnate - which technically we're all discarnate entities too when the spirit leaves the body No. Discarnate is having no material body or form. Incarnate is the opposite. We're only discarnate when the body and soul separate on the point we call death - mediumistically. We're back to the point I made earlier - do you see mediumship differently from what's known of it in Modern (or ancient) Spiritualism?

I'm not deliberately being difficult. I'm simply seeking out what modern society says about this attribute of mediumship....


mac

[mac]

Got a copy of it, just run through it, there is a case described on p26, time against me tonight and cant give further details but wanted to find it for you! Speak soon, will hopefully have more on that patient who was resusitated too by the end of this weekend.

thanks, N. I hope you'll be able to give a few more details so we can move forward with this topic.

[mac]

Mac
It happens...very possible and very reliable.Rare only because few are able and few accept.
I have witnessed it.

den
The various accounts and circumstances still haven't been substantiated so it's impossible to know what to make of them - only now are accounts beginning to surface unless anyone knows of others reported elsewhere in the past?

As there are cases reported over here in the UK - and presumably elsewhere in the world - it may, or may not, be rare. We simply won't be able to tell unless we have reliable information.

Why would it be to do with ability? And whose 'ability' would it be when making contact....? The go-between reaching out (I've deliberately stayed away from the word 'medium') or the discarnate spirit-form 'closing in' to make first contact? Or both? Perhaps it's in all mediums' repertoires but used rarely because such circumstances are rare?

As for acceptance I'd say that it's far more likely that folks would accept this than they would accept transdimensional communication. Why wouldn't they when evidence is potentially so convincing?

My god it's hard enough getting folks to understand and accept the notion of life beyond the grave but maybe they'd accept the notion of a spiritual element of our being which may be reached in such dire circumstances?

Who knows, eh?

[mac]

After a promising start this thread quickly withered.

Seems that no-one has anything more than anecdotes to offer. Looking similar to the Urban Legend situation.

Disappointing but it confirms I was right to be cautious.

[Orbie]

Mac, people have lives to live too and can't get back to the computer quickly, they also may have no more to add or don't want to join in.

I also have nothing more to say at this point as I am unable to visit the lady I spoke of. I will though.

[mac]

Mac, people have lives to live too and can't get back to the computer quickly, they also may have no more to add or don't want to join in.

I also have nothing more to say at this point as I am unable to visit the lady I spoke of. I will though.
That may, of course, be the case for some, N, but I've been in pm contact with others so I know that they are still at their computers....

If they don't want to "join in" that's up to each individual.

It doesn't impact what I wrote.

[deepsea]

I'm back,Mac!:D

Just catching up with the subject again,had a read back to get the point again.

Carry on.

Let's just say there are more things going on in heaven and earth than we know down here.
(so the old saying goes)

The mind as we know it,is beyond comprehension.
Even today,with the knowledge that we have.
Imagine what knowledge the spirit world must have,against our pitiful contributions here.

Imagine the ways and the means they must know to contact us.

Deepsea

[Lynn]

or do you view beings on other dimensions? aliens faeres etc etc

does seeing those beings fall under meduimship as well?



Hello


Lets simply start back at the first place and questions posed.

Taking it word by work here. When I look at the word "aliens" like most the first image that pops into one's head is "Little Green Men". NOW that is but one image or thougth on an alien. For man to think that in all the vastness of space and the universe we be but alone is a very shallow thought. Man too at times thinks that the idea of inter dimentional travel or vast distance space travel is not possible one has to maybe stop and think on another life form not needed a vessel in which to travel in. One might well already be the vessel they need.

We as humans understand so very little on the "mind" we have ( in mind I mean Soul ) we at times can communicate without even knowing it another. Its that little voice at times we hear. A whisper on the wind, a voice that wakes us for seemingly NO reason. Yet most of us simply carry on and do not take the time to open to hear them. Too at times one does not want to hear them.

When one thinks on interdimentional beings such as Fairies one's mind might well go to our childrens nursery rhymes and stories we were told or we read to our children now. What we wonder on at times is did such stores as they have been passed down for many a generation have some basis in fact.

We know from the fossel records T Rex for example was very much real, and if one looks at the image of a Dragon one can see a similarity, yet we feel Dragon's are not real. Just becasue something leaves no physical marks to show us they are real does not mean they are not.

I have many things even in me back yard I can not explain away. Little dancing lights at the first light. NOT insects, flashes of images at times accross the window I sit and look out of. I saw a "Troll" once for lack of a better word to call him. (NO not under a bridge). I was on the way to the grocery store and this man was yelling to me "no one see's it, no one see's it, I was told I was nuts, you, you will be able to see it, be careful." and he got in his car and drove off. I was thinking OK he was in the liquor store and had too much or came out of the pub. I walked on, I rounded the corner and there standing by the trash can was a Troll. He looked right at me and smiled. Other's were going by not noting him there at all. He was picking at his long and very not nice nails. I even too a paper from me purse and went to put it in the trash can to see if he was a physical person. He was not physical but there.

I know some that talk with Gargoyles and they are very much a protector that comes to us at times. How did they come to be place around important buildings if no one had maybe interacted with them ? have to wonder. While I have never talked to a Dragon I have seen them in the sky and flown with them in Astral. In Astral we can travel feely with many a being. For Astral Travel Lessons I often use Pegasus the Winged Horse to safely takes one's out on. Giving them that something solid to hand onto and to transprot them safely. Very much a real interdimentional creature.

Does seeing and communicateing with inter dimentional being or aliens come under Mediumship, I would have to say on some levels YES. The door of what a Medium is of late is being stretched more and more. As it should if we are to take away much of the mystery from one's that can comune with the dead. We on some level can all do that but it might well not be right for our path to do so is all. We fear death at times and the unknown, as we fear at times beings from other Worlds. Its a natural human trait fear.

When I am asked about being a Medium and what I do in that place I say I am but a tool for communications. In that its not all "human" communications. While that rises many an eye brow so be it. I can see and hear many a being at times, I simply embrace that they are as real as I feel I be.

The origial meaning of Mediumship was the sitters that would have a Spirit enter them and they would speak though that one. At times having ectorplasm come from their bodies. Real or not whom is to say, more it was simply communications.


Lynn

[mattie]

Lol hi Mattie :) .. apologies - I suppose I did get a bit carried away .. oops :D

...

No apology necessary. I’ve been in the same position of discussing an issue for the 100th time & having it be new territory to those who have just popped in on the discussion who are curious about more information or another’s perspective.

What you describe about sorting out whether one is communicating w/ a spirit (departed nonphysical human energy) for a sitter or just picking up on the person’s psychic energies is similar to how one sorts out whether a communication is self’s own thoughts or visiting w/ HS.

Thank you for providing more info. about these nuances.

[Georgia]

Allow me to preface this by saying I am Dennisoc's wife. I am a medium, clairveverrything. I am a pretty easy going medium, so I let them choose whatever means of communication works best for them. Them being disincarnates.

In terms of true medium communication, I think we are ok with the defintions of incarnate and disincarnate as long as we include, in the disincarnate definition - the spirit being out of body AND the possibility of the body still being alive. As long as incarnate and disincarnate are only referring to the spirit being either in or out of the body at the moment of communication, regardless of the physical wellbeing of the body - speaking to coma patients etc, does not in any way go against the classical view of mediumship. As for the communication happening between beings on different dimensions, I see no discrepancy there either. If we are again, keeping the focus on the location of the spirit being either in or out of body at the moment of communication, out of body would instrinsically mean in a different dimension.

From a spiritualist perspective, "A Medium is one whose organism is sensitive to vibrations from the spirit world and through whose instrumentality, intelligences in that world are able to convey messages and produce the phenomena of Spiritualism. (1914)" No mention at all of the state of the body. From what I understand, the spirit world is here and there.

So, that means, (to me anyway :)) that mediumistic communication can and does occur with the medium passing on information from disincarnates (whose bodies are still living) to incarnates. It's just that pesky body that is making things a bit confusing.

All that being said, I can usually tell when I am speaking to someone who's body is still living while they are presenting themselves to me as a disincarnate. They have a tendency to blink on and off when I am looking at them. Because their spirit is still attached to the body to varying degrees, they are not as clear nor as strong a communicator for me, usually. I am still able to have quite clear communiction with many of them though. I would be happy to share examples of this if you think it would be of help.

Maybe we should call them incarnates(spirit in living body), disincarnates (spirit is completely out of body and body is dead) and quasi-incarnates (body is living but spirit is in large part out)

Just my opinion for what its worth.

Peace-
Georgia

[mac]

Georgia

In terms of true medium communication, On that point I'd respond by saying what's 'true' vs. 'false' and what's a medium.....? I think we are ok with the defintions of incarnate and disincarnate as long as we include, in the disincarnate definition - the spirit being out of body AND the possibility of the body still being alive. I'm not OK with that and prefer the traditional meaning of 'discarnate and 'incarnate'. To widen it to include the notion of spirit communication when in-the-body is a step too far until it's been irrefutably demonstrated..... As long as incarnate and disincarnate are only referring to the spirit being either in or out of the body at the moment of communication, regardless of the physical wellbeing of the body see above.....- speaking to coma patients etc, does not in any way go against the classical view of mediumship. I disagree from the perspective of traditional 'evidential mediumship' where communication is transdimensional...I speak as a Brit but also know the situation in the US. As for the communication happening between beings on different dimensions, I see no discrepancy there either. see above....If we are again, keeping the focus on the location of the spirit being either in or out of body at the moment of communication, out of body would instrinsically mean in a different dimension. principle still not proven

From a spiritualist perspective, "A Medium is one whose organism is sensitive to vibrations from the spirit world and through whose instrumentality, intelligences in that world are able to convey messages and produce the phenomena of Spiritualism. (1914)" No mention at all of the state of the body. From what I understand, the spirit world is here and there. I think you know as well as I that traditionally the 'spirit world' is taken to be the one in which we live when not incarnate....

So, that means, (to me anyway :)) that mediumistic communication can and does occur with the medium passing on information from disincarnates (whose bodies are still living) to incarnates. It's just that pesky body that is making things a bit confusing. see above....

All that being said, I can usually tell when I am speaking to someone who's body is still living while they are presenting themselves to me as a disincarnate. They have a tendency to blink on and off when I am looking at them. Because their spirit is still attached to the body to varying degrees, they are not as clear nor as strong a communicator for me, usually. I am still able to have quite clear communiction with many of them though. I would be happy to share examples of this if you think it would be of help. I have no reason to doubt what you tell us - only to disagree with your interpretation of what's happening. :hug3:

Maybe we should call them incarnates(spirit in living body), disincarnates (spirit is completely out of body and body is dead) and quasi-incarnates (body is living but spirit is in large part out) maybe.....

Just my opinion for what its worth. Your contribution is welcome. I'd rather hoped there would be more contributions to establish, or not, how commonplace this mode of communication is. Sadly there have been few responses.

mac

[Georgia]

Mac -
"I'm not OK with that and prefer the traditional meaning of 'discarnate and 'incarnate'. To widen it to include the notion of spirit communication when in-the-body is a step too far until it's been irrefutably demonstrated....." I do not want to include the notion of spirit communication when the spirit is in the body either. I do want to include the notion of spirit communication while the spirit is out of the body, but the body is still living. I see that as a gross difference.

Are you thinking that perhaps this is more of a telepathy occuring - a sending of thoughts from one mind to another? Interesting, but I am not sure how the theory of telepathy would hold true when considering those whose minds are dead, bodies are living, and are communicating through a medium. Is a brain dead body capable of telepathy involving complex thoughts and communication at a specific time with a medium thousands of miles away without the communication being from spirit? During communication with these particular cases, they also have knowledge beyond that of the body. They are also entering a session which has been declared as "communication with spirit only".

I have never had medium communication with a spirit in the body. I am psychic and telepathic, BUT information coming from those modalities are very different for me. If I hear someone's thoughts (my poor husband gets accused quite often of being a loud thinker), I hear it in such a physical way, I cannot tell it is coming from the mind. I hear it with my physical ears, or so it feels.

I wish others would add to this as well. I would love to hear what other mediums have experienced.

[mac]

Georgia - italics, mac - in blue


"I do not want to include the notion of spirit communication when the spirit is in the body either. I do want to include the notion of spirit communication while the spirit is out of the body, but the body is still living. I see that as a gross difference." What would you call this communication?

"Are you thinking that perhaps this is more of a telepathy occuring - a sending of thoughts from one mind to another? " Would I be wrong to consider that as a possibility.....? "Interesting, but I am not sure how the theory of telepathy would hold true when considering those whose minds are dead, bodies are living, and are communicating through a medium." I don't remember that scenario in the original discussion but I accept the point... "Is a brain dead body capable of telepathy involving complex thoughts and communication at a specific time with a medium thousands of miles away without the communication being from spirit? During communication with these particular cases, they also have knowledge beyond that of the body. They are also entering a session which has been declared (by whom?) as "communication with spirit only". That would certainly give cause for reflection - do you have documented, authenticated cases?

I have never had medium communication with a spirit in the body. I'm unclear how you define mediumship. I am psychic and telepathic, BUT information coming from those modalities are very different for me.If I hear someone's thoughts (my poor husband gets accused quite often of being a loud thinker), I hear it in such a physical way, I cannot tell it is coming from the mind. I hear it with my physical ears, or so it feels. I guess you're emphasising here that the "medium communication" you experience with spirits not in-the-body feels very different?

"I wish others would add to this as well. I would love to hear what other mediums have experienced." Yes it might add considerably to the discussion. :hug3: