To describe the spirit world would seem an impossible task for a mortal... having no earthly attributes whatsoever and is such a mystical place. Its obtuseness - somewhat resembling a world of dreams - also seems responsible for all the unexplainable phenomena and miracles which occur. It's without substance and, we’re told, it's a place where our creator dwells.

Of all things, the spirit world is by far the most bizarre... and that includes everything under its jurisdiction. Even life itself is under its spell. It is so absolutely alien that just the reason for its existence is baffling. In fact, the spirit world is so far removed from our ability to logically comprehend it… it is often dismissed as mere fantasy. After all, since it defies all logic and can’t be rationally explained, most any intelligent person would think it couldn’t possibly exist.

Well, there is much that ‘straight-line thinking’ has overlooked... the type scientists commonly use (such as Darwinism). While a dawning usually takes a lifetime - for me nearly 60 years - it seems so simple now and should have been obvious earlier. Albert Einstein once said “If it is beautiful, it must be true” and in my pursuits I’ve always kept that in mind. Therefore I knew there had to be a simple answer and not something complicated. I also knew spiritual realizations would be available to anyone who sought answers, not just reserved for the brilliant. It’s something I thought God would set-up.

Before I address why only a handful have been able to comprehend the spirit world so far,metaphysicsin effect, I need to point out a few things first… otherwise to prematurely relate what I’ve discovered wouldn’t make any sense. It probably isn't a new discovery though, thousands, if not more, should have thought of it before. The reason it isn't well known is because this discovery is practically impossible to explain, so few tried. This discovery has to do with mankind's"frame of mind."

However, pointing out anything ethereal is like trying to describe a fogbank in detail ... not easy and a matter of semantics  (the lack of terms). So, in order to try flushing out this picture I'll need to beat around the bush first.

Who knows... sometimes beating around a bush will yield other unexpected gems.

Faith

Although faith is the basis of all religions - the apparent accepted reality - it still seems only reasonable to expect their tenets be backed up with indisputable facts. At least some. I've always been critical of religions for pushing the faith thing... you know, don’t question it, just believe. Yet, they do have their reasons. The spirit world and all that associated has, for centuries, been almost impossible to describe in comprehensible terms. It explains all the Biblical and ancient Greek parables. Nonetheless it seems religions ought to try harder to provide solid evidence. But, since they wouldn't dare - being that their tenets are already chiseled in stone - they're no help in expanding our knowledge. They're content using faith as a substitute.

Given the scope of the mystery, I could also see why most intellectuals have long dismissed the spirit world as being mere fantasy. But now I realize they weren’t so exceptionally brilliant after all, especially for boxing themselves in… limiting themselves to a constricting frame-of-mind. They should have known better. While scientific inquiry has been proven itself extremely effective for the past 2,500 years - longer if to include the ancient Egyptians - wholly systematic, with standards of proof, research, testing and verifying… but this only serves the physical world. It utilizes a train of thought and logical disposition which can’t comprehend the spirit world... much less incorporate its truths.

Of physical nothingness, the ethereal isn’t incorporated because discourses suggesting its existence wouldn’t logically follow. The spirit world just doesn’t fit anywhere utilizing scientific thought and those who subscribe to scientific thinking find it sensible only to rationalize in a scientific manner. Compounding their problem, science has prematurely determined what is real and what isn’t. Evidently they don't know yet that 'real' is a relative matter. So, science is of no help either.

Empirical thought

When scientific thought began to dominate just prior to classical times - or about 500 B.C. - empirical thinking was being tossed aside as being unproductive. It was true - proceeding with projects without factual knowledge was getting mankind nowhere. Except for the ancient Egyptians who adopted it earlier, it was a time of trial and error, of limitations. Yet there is a benefit in having an empirical mindset yet long forgotten… importantly being a way to more accurately fathom metaphysical matters. That shouldn’t be surprising however, without 'due regard' means unrestricted thought, not bound by any rules. Rules have a tendency to limit creative thought, to discourage thinking outside the box. They're not really rules though, just institutional pressure to stay on track, keep in step.

While empirical thinking (alone) failed the physical needs of civilization, it wasn't completely abandoned. It was still around for awhile. As the ancient Greeks demonstrated, the combination of the two mentalities can be dynamite.

Before scientific thought came along, early man hadn’t yet realized the benefits of carefully plodding along, to first understand fully the makeup of things from which to systematically build upon. Yet, during this time, our ancestors were pondering life's mysteries in a way the scientific minded, being more ‘practical’, can’t. Sadly, this ability is no longer institutionally recognized and much of the insightfulness it produced - the written accounts - was lost or destroyed. It could be called the 'natural mindset' or the 'God-given' one.

That doesn't mean this God-given mindset is easy to recapture however... but at least empirical thinking steers one back on the right heading. If one can consider thinking as an art, and it is largely, then it shouldn't be hard to imagine that, as in a classroom, a controlled environment will never create a masterpiece.

Sooner or later the empirical thinkers will discover the spirit world has a logical disposition... which indicates it's 'operational' (alive). Of course, in referring to this particular aspect of the spirit world we're really talking about God. And, obviously, the recognition of a logical disposition is evidence of another mentality... a pervasive ethereal mentality. While the human mentality is also ethereal, it isn't pervasive. Furthermore, in that the human mentality is focused more on the physical realities, and since the physical is subjacent to the ethereal, it's a lower form of mentality.

The realities of the spirit world

While creationists would agree there is a greater intelligence - a given - almost anyone ought to be able to envision its realities being bizarrely different. But - as bizarre as the ethereal (spirit world) may seem - it's 'more real' than our realties. After all, since we're talking about it consisting of a greater intelligence... it must be more real. It certainly wouldn't be a subjacent reality. As previously stated, 'real' is a relative matter. Shortly expanded upon, perhaps the minds of animals will help point this out.

Although semantically difficult to explain, the spirit world would take a different (superior) logic in order to understand. Generally speaking, it's the realities which determine the appropriate type of mental processing necessary... common logic will only go so far. One could say it is to think in another dimension. Human logic of physical persuasions is only suited for the physical world. Largely it's due to our languages... developed to reflect the physical and the 'human experience'. Human logic - today's common type - can only get us to the border whereas beyond the border it's practically useless.

A single logical disposition does not fit all circumstances and must be adjusted accordingly. Vaguely similar would be the differences in the mentality of a scholar compared to a thug with a sixth-grade education (how they look at things). The physical realities and the ethereal realities would generate vastly greater differences however. Also, in that attitudes are the steering mechanism for one’s logical disposition and since attitudes are subservient to moods, moods play a big role.

Note - there's more to 'moods' than meets the eye... they're not a simple phenomenon or necessarily 'innocent'.

In short, there is a pervasive intelligence within the spirit world scientists should recognize as existing. They need to look at metaphysics in a different way, not as just the vestiges of creation.... an ancient process set in motion but left unattended, abandoned. Instead, the spirit world (metaphysics) is active, alive and thus possesses a mentality. However - for the reasons stated - the manner in which the spirit world is logically driven does not resemble our idea of logic, not even remotely.

Most revealing is the logical disposition of divine intelligence (it's accessible). It automatically makes many things fall into place... making aspects of metaphysics more fathomable. Except for a few things, they don't necessarily fall into place instantaneously however. It's mostly gradual... over the course of months more and more things begin to sink in. A recognizable attribute others might also recognize is 'tough love'. And, from the very fact of getting an audience, one should also be able to ascertain 'purpose' (evidence a 'plan' for us exists). However, contacting divine intelligence isn't so easy... it takes quite a commitment. The above link explains.

The evolutionists would still doubt the notion of a supreme mentality however and failure to make contact would only fortify their doubts. And, with their mindset, they will fail. But likely they wouldn't try anyway... a pervasive superior mentality wouldn’t fit into their model of how the universe and life began. Except, scientific models are nothing more than forced fits. Forced fits are largely due to their established parameters (along man's dotted lines) because from the very beginning the spirit world was excluded. If scientific pursuits were credible they should have gotten a handle on metaphysics after 2,500 years.

More scientific shortcomings

So pretentious these institutions… science cannot even explain electricity yet, its basic nature. They don't even know yet it's ethereal. They have no idea what the ‘spark of life’ is either much less the associated phenomena. As for the deeper questions of light and life... nary a utterance. In short, about all scientists have been able to do is explain the physical world. The unexplained is continually being brushed aside... apparently because unanswered questions assault their credibility. Worse, they lead us astray by trying to explain transcendental phenomena with forced fits... entrenching their erroneous conclusions into the mindset of civilization.

Science has not the tools or mentality to tackle such questions and hence, erroneous conclusions are left to stand, and they’ll stand for centuries. The arrogance of most scientists would allow this rather than look beyond their established premises or outside their circles for answers. As to these unanswered questions, answers aren’t answers unless they are correct answers.

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

It is astonishing that a superior mentality, effectively juxtapositional to our own since it occupies the same space and surrounds us, has not been recognized. It is astonishing they can hypothesize on a top quark or tachyon but the logic of an overriding and supreme mentality, pervasive and ever-present, practically sitting on one’s shoulders, apparently never occurred to them.

If science claims to be efficiently ascertaining facts in a systemized manner, it should have been obvious long ago certain things were just not being explained scientifically. A true scientist would have concluded their system was lacking and would have sought the reason for its failures which translates into fundamental inadequacies. He would have asked himself “why can’t we comprehend metaphysics?” and, after 2,500 years, that should have told him the scientific frame-of-mind was inadequate for the job.

Of course, like everyone else including me (for decades) assumed it required an intelligence much higher than man was allotted. It didn’t dawn of me for quite some time that it wasn’t a matter of intelligence but rather one’s frame-of-mind, thus the differing logic as a result… and ultimately, the way to find truths.

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

These various frames-of-mind which exist is evident in every type of animal too. Each has a different way of perceiving things, and their frame-of-mind, while varying drastically in almost all cases, still manages to exist and thrive. Doesn’t that suggest a mentality can be vastly different and still be effective? Doesn’t that say logical reasoning comes in many forms?

Animals may seem stupid beasts to many but contraire, they merely perceive things differently and their modus operandi reflects their realities harmoniously. Their lives, in effect, revolve around different circumstances each of which requires a different logical disposition yet all are perfectly sound. Their survival has proven them sound. We cannot say, just because we have a different brand of intellect, that it is necessarily superior. It could be said that by not living more in harmony with nature, like animals do, but instead by altering it… that we're the most stupid of species. However, at this stage, with our population, it's probably too late to drastically change our ways.

The point is, of the different sound ways to look at things 'spiritual logic' is one of them. Scientific inquiry is only a 'brand' of reasoning... although the only one that dares butt heads with nature. It is both arrogant and foolish.

Comparing logical thought

Perhaps comparing our reasoning powers to animals in a different way will yield something more. Admittedly though, it's just a theory. Namely, the greatest difference seems to be that the reasoning power of creatures is tethered to the spirit world whereas ours isn't (the spiritual-minded excepted). While largely driven b yinstincts - as an ethereal matter certainly a good reason to consider them tethered - these instincts appear so incredibly powerful they may have an effect on intelligence (our idea of intelligence). While I was tempted to think this might explain the 'subpar' intellect within the animal kingdom - since no good reason has ever surfaced - certainly brain size means nothing - I think instead it just makes them 'appear' less intelligent. I suggest these powerful instincts alter their intellect therefore not being comparable. It's apples and oranges.

Again, this underscores the fact it's all about realities, their implanted realities versus our implanted realties which make a difference in how one thinks and must think.

These thoughts had their beginnings about 20 years ago while sitting on my back porch watching a doodle-bug go about his business. As if a bolt of lightning struck me, I realized its world was as ordered and sound as the universe itself. In short, that there wasn't anything stupid about this bug's thinking.

Summary

Since the lack of terms (semantics) for metaphysical matters makes it very hard to be clear - I should restate a few things in different ways. First, realities dictate which (or what) rational manner of thinking would be most suitable to function within those realities. For example, a chicken wouldn't act or think like a cat because it has its own realities. While instincts make a chicken a chicken and a cat a cat, it amounts to an 'imposed' frame-of-mind to fit their attributes (their physical makeup). Likewise, humans have a frame-of-mind to fit their attributes. Now, if humans were born in an ethereal environment their frame-of-mind would be different... they'd have to think differently.

But since we weren't, in order to discover the ethereal one must 'think ethereal' (utilize its logic and 'language'). Yes, although unspoken the ethereal has a language. Basically, in the mind's eye, it's like walking in dense fog. Helpful too is dismissing everything you know because our understandings and logic isn't applicable there. No more than a chicken's frame-of-mind would be applicable to a cat.

If not for instincts, perhaps all creatures including humans would think alike... THEN their intelligence could be compared. Likely they'd prove much smarter than commonly believed.

As other examples, if tomorrow you acquired a greater understanding (of true reality) that caused a shift in your priorities - what became more important - then what seems a rational methodology today wouldn’t tomorrow. That’s because priorities are the children of reality and therefore influence logic. Or, if you discovered time didn’t exist as we now understand it. Or, if our sun was discovered to be alive, a living entity, and not a sterile nuclear device as scientists now believe, then reality, as you would then understand it, would be quite different affecting your entire outlook.

From only this supreme mentality (divine intelligence) can true logical thought flow, it cannot flow from any other source. What might be considered 'logical reasoning' (by man) is appropriate only to his given circle of realities. Incorporating the spirit world, therefore, broadens one's knowledge and vastly increases the size of the circle they choose to operate in.

We shouldn't be content with leaving metaphysics a mystery. But more importantly, the discovery process is what puts one closer to God.

A.O. Kime

http://www.matrixbookstore.biz/spirit_world.htm

-------------------------------------------------------------------
 © A.O. Kime (2003)
A.O. Kime is the author of two books plus 70+ articles on ancient history,
spiritual phenomena, political issues, social issues and agriculture which
can be seen at http://www.matrixbookstore.biz