My Deceased Mother Visits Dec 26 2012

Continued from above…

 

That is the question. Many people are saying that you will have a choice.

 

Unfortunately these magnanimous souls are not in charge of Nature and nature will not give a hoot about their freewill proposals.

 

So Nature has to decide if you will need a body and it will do so taking your social security contributions into consideration. If you know this, then it makes sense to work to suit.

 

======================================

 

Caroline wrote:

She tried very hard to push off as much of her mother work onto me as she possibly could, even when I was at an age when I was hardly capable; the result for me was that I swore I would never have children in this life, and I didn't.

 

MiBeloved’s Response:

Usually this happens to a child who was a capable parent in the past life. Even though this infant is using a child’s body, the new parent intuitively senses the past life content of the child, and feels instinctively that this particular child can carry the weight of responsibilities for its siblings.

 

In the old cultures, this burden usually fell on the eldest child, because then actually the family lineage in the astral world was not as disordered as in modern times when there is jet travel and so much moving away from home. In the old cultures for the most part, the eldest child was an ancestor who was the most capable.

 

I am not saying that this is your situation with your Mom. I am just explaining it in a general sense.

 

Now in the case where a person is proficient as a parent in the past life, material nature itself will put that person into positions of responsibility which is larger than life, larger than what it will demand of others.

 

But some persons who are like this do develop a resentment towards their parents and also they carry a residual resentment from past lives when they were used and used as a parent in many past lives.

 

This is actually a resentment towards time and circumstance, which really means a big disagreement with the all-powerful Nature. This even applies to births in animal life, like among other species like cows, lions, apes and the like.

 

Whatever we do not like which was imposed on us by Nature in previous animal or human births, we carry with us in our individual psyches as a resentment of I-am-not-going-to-serve-Nature-in-this-way-any-longer. And so the parent who tries to impose those responsibilities on us becomes frustrated due to the predisposition we carried over from the past lives.

 

As a teenager of 16 years of age, I made up my mind not to have a family. I had seen what my father did and his father before. I saw how awkward it was for men to be tied down in monogamous relationships. I was at the time somewhat aware of some of my past lives as a yogi ascetic. I knew for sure that I took this body for purposes of practicing yoga as the priority.

 

But some of my ancestors who were already departed (ancestors of my body) met me astrally and warned that if I would not have any children, they would pray to God to fix me in some way or the other. These were Christian people for the most part because I grew up in a Christina household.

 

Because I took this body from them, they felt that I owed them a favor, so I figure that was a fair deal. If you owe someone it is only fair to pay up without complaint.

 

Later I was again hesitating. This was around 1969. At the time I thought that I would just be wasting my time to write books about yoga. This is because I used to speak to people about astral projection and they would not take anything I said seriously.

 

I got discouraged and thought that there was no point in continuing with this body. Then however there was a voice in my mind which said that whatever I did not complete would be accredited as my irresponsibility.

 

After this then I decided that okay, I will raise children and also do my yoga mission as best as I could.

 

It really comes down to understanding how material nature operates on the natural and supernatural levels and working to suit in one’s long ranged interest, irrespective of what others (parents included) did or did not do.

 

Suppose I commit a grievous crime. Suppose I am never discovered. That means that human beings won’t confront me. I would not be put before a court. I would not be punished by human agency in this life.

 

What then?

 

Has Nature not taken a note of my activities?

 

Will nature not react in its own time?

 

The problem we have is that we just see this one life. And we think that everything is under the thumb of human agency but the reality is quite different.

 

======================================

 

As I wrote above, I was not discussing your individual situation but only giving a general purview of that sort of situation where a person reacts to a new life circumstance with instincts developed in past lives.

 

However you hit the nail on the head in that if someone is a monk or nun who served the community through prayer and spiritual comfort, then that person automatically has pious credits (Sanskrit – punyas) which would qualify for taking birth in any of the families where they deposited those services.

 

We see that in the developed countries, people who were born in those locations have certain rights as citizens. And yet foreigners sometimes are awarded those rights. Under certain conditions such as having a university education, having lots of money, marrying a native of a developed country, having a specific skill, seeking asylum etc, others come into the country and live with the same rights as those who are native to those developed lands.

 

Similarly even if someone did not contribute by begetting progeny in a certain family line, that person might successfully take a body in that line, through having performed a service to that family, or through have a karmic skill set which that family desires to have.

 

-------------------

 

Your Question about whether a family line would deny a monk or nun was written like this:

 

-------------------

 

I am thinking of Tibetan monks especially in this. Do you think their ancestors would be so mean as to deny them bodies if they still need to incarnate?

 

-------------------

 

This question is like passing a loaded gun to me while you have your finger on the trigger. So as not to get shot, I have to be careful with it. You never know because there can always be an accident when a gun is loaded.

 

First of all this question is based on the assumption that the ancestors can arbitrarily make such decisions.

 

They cannot. They can only decide that based on the resultant karmic credits of the person concerned. In fact the charisma of the person might nullify all of their objections and the person might get the body anyhow, purely on the basis of the person’s influence over them and over circumstances.

 

Right now we see that there is a black race person in the White House. How is that possible? The guy’s mother was white but still how did the person come out of nowhere and get into the White House in a politically white-dominated culture.

 

So this person’s influence overrided the culture.

 

Where did he come from?

 

What are his credits in his past lives which gave him such charismatic power?

 

Was he a white man before and now as a black man his past life race is hidden but his past life political influence is exposed?

 

The easiest way to get into the White House used to be that you had to be white first of all, and possibly you had to have political connections and be in a family which peddled in politics. But this individual broke the mold.

 

So even though the most frequent method when transmigrating is to do so on the basis of being a parent in a particular family line, there are all sorts of other methods on breaking that mold.

 

Thanks for your views on this.

 

======================================

 

Narendra  on Linkedin Wrote:

This subject does not benefit me personally as I wish to be 100% dependent child or friend of Lord Krishna but it is of immense benefit to most of present day individuals. I have sent your views/experience to most of my family members. I agree with you in general.

 

As I understand from my individual life, our scriptures speak a lot about ekadasi fasts. Specially Moshada ekadasi is very good for deceased parents. You can hold ekadasi fast for your parents for their better life in astral body. Whenever you perform ekadasi fast you offer the benefits or virtues of the fast to your parents. These will overcome their shortcomings.

 

Thanks for sharing your great experience.

 

MiBeloved's Response:

Narendra,

 

You are making those statements about ekadashi and mokshada ekadashi based on guarantees in the Vedic scriptures. I am a bit familiar with ekadashi particularly with how it is serviced in the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition.

 

I do however want to assure you that even through these guarantees are given in those very genuine scriptures, modern Indian cannot extract those guarantees until they can adjust their cultures to be exactly as it was in the genuine brahmin families at the time in history when their traditions were introduced. So I cannot buy into what you are saying.

 

In this respect we may take a hint from Christianity, where there is a statement to the effect that God is not mocked and whatever a person sews, so shall he reap. It means that one cannot conveniently exploit a scriptural guarantee.

 

There is a nice discourse in the Mahabharata, you may be familiar with it, the one between King Dhritarashtra and Vidura, where Vidura called Sanat Sujatiya to answer a very touchy question which was of interest to the King.

 

Sanat explained that no one can exploit the Vedic mantras and also be living a life which is not totally consistent with the Vedic information. He cited the case of birds on a tree, where if the tree is disturbed all the birds fly away.

 

It means that the promised effects of Vedic mantra and procedure will escape from those who try to exploit the statements and who are not in the tradition in a satisfactory way.

 

I lived in an ashram once, where we observed the ekadashi vrats. What I experienced is that we did not get the effects described? But what we got were promises about what we would get in the next life.

 

Each religion issues post-life benefits which cannot be realized during the life time, which really means that it cannot be verified because mostly we do not remember our past lives and have no idea of what we were doing or what happened after we left the last body.

 

But if the ekadashi pledges concerning the benefits we can reap now while we have the body, are not effectively manifested, I do not see how they will be manifested after death, or how they can be transferred to someone who is deceased.

 

My challenge to you is for you to present one single advantage like this which you got in this life, as a result of following ekadashi vrat. Please do not misunderstand this. Do not think that I lack faith in the Vedic pledges. I have confidence in it but I do not have any confidence that it will work if the devotee is not fully compliant with the cultural habits and behaviors which are required.

 

Dean 6 years ago

Michael wrote:

Then however there was a voice in my mind which said that whatever I did not complete would be accredited as my irresponsibility.

 

After this then I decided that okay, I will raise children and also do my yoga mission as best as I could.

 

It really comes down to understanding how material nature operates on the natural and supernatural levels and working to suit in one’s long ranged interest, irrespective of what others (parents included) did or did not do.

 

Dean's question:

Is this what Krishana speaks about karma yoga?

 

MiBeloved 6 years ago

Basically yes, one has to master the obligatory cultural activities. If one does not do it in the karma yoga way which Krishna explained to Arjuna, then one will make many mistakes and further ruin's one's situation.

 

Cultural activities have to be met but if we meet them in ignorance then it will be our undoing all over again.

 

To learn how to manage them effectively, one has to apply karma yoga techniques.

 

======================================

 

From Sonia on LinkedIn:

Thank you Michael, i hope it was helpful to you hearing this from her, like you i go to the astral planes, i find how we see and think on that level is so different than when we are in our body, my mother and father give so many messages, it is fulfilling and sad at the same time. Your mothers comment brought back to me 28 yrs ago when my ex husband kidnapped my son and i lived without him for a year, the pain was horrific, and for some reason your mothers comment led me to relive it, maybe now i can clear it.

GOD bless your mother.

Namaste

 

MiBeloved’s Response:

As a male I have no idea how a female feels when she is deprived of the opportunity to raise her child, but I do know this much, that even for those women who are spiritually advanced it may be very traumatic.

 

In the animal kingdom I observed once that a nanny goat was unconcerned and completely ignored her kid during the first three hours after birth. But then after that if you took the kid out of the nanny goat’s sight, she shouted in defiance and ran here and there screaming off the top of her lungs as if someone was pushing a sword through her.

 

My conclusion was that in her case, the instinct for mothering was delayed but once it kicked in, anyone who got between her and the kid goat was accursed as far as she was concerned.

 

It is seen sometimes also that if a woman gives up a child for adoption, then soon after she regrets it and goes through the rest of life, thinking about it and feeling an emotional emptiness because of it.

 

Once I knew this woman who had one daughter. The father was an irresponsible drunk. She then had another daughter by a responsible man. After that delivery she swore that she would never again get pregnant because of the pain of the labor.

 

Soon after she got a tubal operation which blocked her fallopian tubes. But then some years after she used to complain about it, saying that it should never have been done because she felt the need to have more children.

 

There is a nice story in the Srimad Bhagavatam where Krishna was born from a woman named Devaki (day-wuh-kee). This lady was in a political family. As the story goes, she was imprisoned with her husband at the time of the birth. They were what we could call political prisoners, today.

 

Anyway just after the birth, her husband, Vasudeva, took baby Krishna to another’s house and switched out the infants. Another woman gave birth to a girl child just about the same time that Krishna was born and Vasudeva knew about it.

 

Since they were imprisoned, Vasudeva escaped from the prison, went to the other’s woman’s house and took the woman’s child and placed his child by the side of the sleeping woman who had just fell asleep due to the exhaustion of labor.

 

He did this because he was imprisoned because of the fear of the King that Vasudeva’s son would be the King’s assassin.

 

Shortly after, the king found out that Devaki had a child. This king rushed to the prison. He demanded the child, explaining that since the death of his life was born, he would immediately kill the child as a matter of self-preservation. But this king then noticed that it was a girl child. The parents told the king that since he was expecting a boy child who would kill him, there was no need to hurt the female infant. But the king did not care about that. He was paranoid for his life and so he took that female child and dashed it to the stone floor killing it.

 

Continued from above…

 

Later on after Krishna grew up, Krishna killed this king and released his biological parents from prison. He was not raised by these parents but he felt the obligation to get them released. When he did this, then his biological mother asked him to please return the other six male children, who were killed by the King and who were born before Krishna. These infants were all dead and gone, and still Devaki remained attached to them, so much so that when Krishna asked if there was anything he could do she said something to the effect that she was still attached to the infants and wanted them to be again in her arms as living infants again.

 

As the story goes Krishna miraculously brought back those babies. Devaki nursed them for a while before they again went back to other dimensions where they were living.

 

This story gives even men, some idea about the strength of motherly affection, where Krishna’s biological mother felt attachment to infants long after they were deceased from this world.

 

======================================

 

Narendra from LinkedIn:

Michael -- first I thank you for answering our questions. Second I want to write something about Ekadasi Vrat. It is a really a strange Vrat in itself. If performed as written in scriptures, it gives a big benefits. This is my opinion and thought. I perform this Vrat and try to do as mentioned in scriptures but I am not able to do everything. I follow Bhakti Yoga and therefore worship Lord Krishna in the night of ekadasi. First I get physical benefits which I don't care too much. Second, I think, my intelligence and self control is gone up quite a bit. This is mental benefits. Third I enter into Sattvic state on Ekadasi. This helps me quite a bit to understand Bhakti Yoga, our scriptures in the right way, and gives me a great pleasure and happiness. This is big benefit for me. My stress level remains low even in bad times. Peace resides in my mind. Ekadasi once in 14 days changes me for 2 days (Ekadasi and Dwadasi). My behavior changes towards sweetness. I have a great faith on Ekadasi.

 

Lord Krishna says that everything "Vrat or karma or meditation or Yagna etc." makes a dent in our behavior (Tamsic, Rajsic, or Sattvic) and knowledge. Then our changed nature gives us hell or haven. I believe, it is not the karma but human nature decides -- what one should get "suffering or blessing". Karma is one of the major cause of our behavioral changes. What you wrote -- is perfectly correct. Many times, scriptures describe stuff based on perfect conditions. People are not able to perform Vrat in the right way at right place at right time. For example, people should have perfect faith in Vrat. Very Difficult. Faith comes over time. A person performing not so perfect Vrat is also quite useful. A lightly taken Vrat have very light effects.

 

MiBeloved's Response:

I am in full agreement with what you wrote in the second response. This is because you explain the partial compliance of the devotee.

 

Thanks very much!

 

MiBeloved 6 years ago

MiBeloved wrote:

Once I knew this woman who had one daughter. The father was an irresponsible drunk. She then had another daughter by a responsible man. After that delivery she swore that she would never again get pregnant because of the pain of the labor.

 

Soon after she got a tubal operation which blocked her fallopian tubes. But then some years after she used to complain about it, saying that it should never have been done because she felt the need to have more children.

 

Caroline wrote LinkedIn:

this has been bugging me since I read it.

 

Nobody asked to have her tubes tied except the woman herself. How can she then complain about it as though it was something that had been done TO her. This is total denial of responsibility and making the self out to be a victim. This is the sort of behaviour that makes it so difficult for women who know their own minds and do want the operation to get it. I know some women like that, though I was never one myself.

 

MiBeloved’s Response:

Being a male, I can only be speaking of this from the outside. Therefore my opinion may be unfair. It is noteworthy however that you as a female are puzzled with this behavior of making a decision, executing it, and then feeling as though one was a victim due to the execution of the desire.

 

I think what is happening here is that we are taking the premise seriously that an individual can make decisions without being under an influence, and we are saying that even then, the individual should carry all responsibility for the action.

 

This functions under the premise that freewill occurs only with mature consideration.

 

Actually there is no one single human being who can exhibit total free will. It is just not possible. Secondly there is no such thing as not being under an influence. We may agree to accept responsibility even though we were under an influence(s) but that still does not mean in fact that we are ever influence-free.

 

There is no way, that coming into existence as a human being after a universe has progressed for 13 million years, that one cannot be under influences. That is not possible. And yet for us to run a decent humanity, we have to accept responsibilities even when it is downright obvious that we are not the cause of what happens to or about us.

 

If a child makes a decision to take an operation to cut his right hand off because once that right hand was burnt and it hurt him terribly, then if later as an adult he regrets it, should we say to him, that he should just man up because he made that decision of his own free will?

 

I think you would agree that he did not have sufficient maturity at the time to really make a so called free-will decision.

 

A woman may decide for a permanent infertility action at a time when she could not really understand how such a decision would impact her future life. And then rightly so she may regret it later on, when her nature begins to demand of her a pregnancy.

 

The more important observation I made however is that a decision before full sexual mature is made by the individual without being aware of what they will become at full maturity. In other words In the caterpillar stage the butterfly may make decisions which do not take into account what it will need and how it will feel once it passed through the pupa stage and then finds itself as a creature with wings.

 

Whose fault is this? Well I feel it is the fault of Mother Nature, because she failed to inform the caterpillar that it would develop wings. Unfortunately arresting Mother Nature and putting her before a court is not possible. She is the one agency which is immune from prosecution.

 

Most people are not born with an understanding of their future needs. Hence they cannot make informed decision (free will decisions if you like) early on and unless they are guided by others who have the insight or by social restrictions which prevent them from disenfranchising themselves in the future, they may make decision which they will regret later.

 

In such cases they are the victims of innocence or immaturity.

 

But in a way you are right, because there is a saying that who should be blamed when the tongue bites the teeth?

 

Who should be punished then?

 

Should we hold a trial and blame the cruel teeth?

 

Should we confront the tongue for being between the teeth of its own freewill?

 

It is a dilemma.

 

Tommy skipped school and subsequently he did not get a diploma. The result of that was that he could not get a decent job. So who is to blame? Should Tommy not be held accountable for his school absence?

 

Does that depend on Tommy’s maturity at the time of making the decision?

 

======================================

 

Statement of Caroline on Linked In:

I'm impressed with your answer, it is an accurate description of the human condition, the paradox between free will and as you say, influence. We feel as though we have choice, a lot of the time, but we are constantly under the influence of various things, family, society, the time we live in, belief systems, not to mention the internal spiritual influences that may be unique to each individual.

 

I just read something a couple of hours ago about this. Our parents and previous generations had much fewer choices than we have today, those of us in developed countries, at least. They took pretty much what was put in front of them. So in that way, they were a lot less free than we have come to perceive ourselves to be, but this may only be a perception on our parts.

 

I think a good way of putting it would be to say that we choose what we are compelled to choose. I chose to become a Moonie in 1971, but in another sense I was compelled, not by another person, or outer circumstances, but by an inner imperative of soul. I had to do it, I felt compelled to do it based on everything I believed to be right at that time.

 

And then there is grace, which I think is what Narendra is saying in a different way. Grace is sort of outside the equation, whatever choices we have chosen or been compelled by influences to make, however 'good' or 'bad' those choices may have been I feel, based on experience, that once you stop being a victim in your own mind, once you open yourself consciously to God, or Great Spirit, or whatever you want to call it, that it brings you to a whole other level of cause and effect. I think you explained that very well when you described how someone like Obama was able to make it to the White House.

 

I have experienced this grace first hand many times. For instance when I left the Moonies in 1985, from an external viewpoint my life looked like a train wreck, but internally I was buoyed up by an internal feeling of love and rightness that I can only call grace. And the key to accessing that grace is to take responsibility for your decisions, whether you made them under influences or you made them from free will. Once you start taking responsibility it is a whole new ballgame. That is what I have experienced.

 

Carlos Palacios 6 years ago

MiBeloved wrote:

"After this then I decided that okay, I will raise children and also do my yoga mission as best as I could."

 

Carlos Palacios reply:

If you ever decide to write a commentary on the Bible, you should include the above statement for Matthew 22:15-12.

 

This is where Jesus says, "Give Caesar (material nature) what is Caesar's (ancestral duties/family responsibilities/job/dues/taxes) and give God what is God's (Spiritual Practice/Krishna/ Sadana/Yoga/Magic etc)."

 

I guess you discovered at that point in your life that you had to strike a balance between material nature and Krishna.  So you decided to pay your dues to both masters who were exerting their influence on you.  And in so doing you caused Jesus to bite his tongue because in Matthew 6:24 he said that "No one can serve two masters."

 

You proved him wrong! LOL

 

MiBeloved 6 years ago

That is why we have to study Karma Yoga from God, from Krishna, because by ourselves we cannot do both the social life and the effective spiritual disciplines.

 

It is very confusing but if you study Karma Yoga, you can take lessons from Krishna and then you can serve the two masters.

 

This really means service to Krishna on one hand and serving the social obligations on the other hand under the direction of Krishna.

 

This is reduced to only servicing Krishna, because then service to relatives and to society is done under Krishna's thumb.

 

Arjuna in Bhagavad Gita is the example of this.

 

At first after Krishna explained buddhi yoga in chapter two, Arjuna said to Krishna that he could not follow a dual path of serving society and also maintaining the spiritual perspective within. Arjuna asked for one thing and said that Krishna should offer one or the other.

 

But Krishna said to Arjuna that he has to do both things, maintain spiritual perspective and render social service but that Arjuna should render the social service as supervised by Krishna.

 

Since you can’t serve two masters and you must complete both services, then you have to agree to take supervision from God as you render the services, and then you are in fact only serving one master.

 

But if you take directions from your social associates to render services to family and society, and then you run to God for advice on spiritual discipline, there will be a problem.

 

Take advice from God for both matters and then only one master is involved.

 

Make a detailed and lifelong study of Bhagavad Gita to learn the methods of Krishna’s karma yoga teachings.

 

unlimitedsun 6 years ago

Thank you Carlos for that question.

The answer provides most definite clarification,

It’s like a final nail in that coffin!

 

Sharone 6 years ago

It is a fact that one cannot serve two masters. By serving God foremost, both masters would ideally be served. But just as an Ekadasi fast done without the purity required, or with improper motivations, will not yield the full benefits, any action that one takes with ulterior motives will have a karmic result. There are many people who think they are serving God but forget that higher calling and get karmically entangled again. There are all sorts of karmic consequences of not being of "one mind."  A woman who either aborts a child or who decides to give it up for adoption might regret their decision later on, but can find some fulfillment in assisting children in other ways.  Unfortunately, for your mother, the clock ran out and she didn't get a chance to fully pursue an alternate means of assisting children; thus the dissatisfaction after death of the body.