We hear a lot of talk in different areas of humanity about saving lives. It leads me to wonder if the concept of saving lives would be so important to us if we no longer questioned that we are already eternal beings.
In the context of living forever, if we save a life, what are we actually saving? It appears more as if we would be extending a lifespan. We would be saving a particular incarnation.
If we eventually determine through scientific study that consciousness relocates rather than goes extinct upon bodily death, there will be a vast number of considerations to make about traditional ways of thinking.
Right now the idea of saving lives is quite noble. We feel good doing things that help people avoid perishing. Yet will people still think so highly of the practice if they get the (perhaps mistaken) idea that it doesn’t matter so much. We just pop from one world to another, and by many accounts, that next world is a pleasant upgrade, particularly if it means freedom from physical pain and disease.
A vast array of books, videos, and presentations from mediums put forth that just about anyone who has died in mortal terms is alive and thriving in another place. I cannot remember any ‘spirit’ saying, “Gee, I’m really, really sad that I died. My life is over. Boo-hoo. Woe is me.”
If some of them are sad about anything, it’s that they learned through their passing and subsequent life review that they fell very short of their pre-incarnation goals. They are sad that they did not make better use of their incarnation and show more compassion and love for their fellow beings. They regret how they used their life as opposed to regretting that it was all over, because surprise, it’s not all over. Life continues. Sometimes their regrets prompt them to hang out as close to the earth plane as possible to see if they can right their perceived wrongs.
Of course, an eternal being is something of a loaded concept. Mediums often say that when we die, or our bodies die, we don’t essentially change personalities. We keep all that. I think this leads to the conclusion that the person we are now grows and changes with the new environments and opportunities we encounter. Who we are now keeps on living.
But then at another level, every incarnation we have on earth starts off with a new brain followed by a whole new upbringing. Every time we are raised anew as children, we in essence become different people, and the circumstances of our new life might be wildly different than the previous go-round.
The person I am now could be quite disgusted with some of the people my soul previously incarnated as. For example—and I am just making this up— what if I was a barbaric slaveowner or unscrupulous business tycoon or evil concentration camp guard? The person I am now would most likely be horrified to learn—at least in the context of this earth life—some of the people I have been. On the other hand, maybe I am horrified now because I learned something when/if I was an abysmal person, which is one reason why souls choose some horrific scenarios to live through.
So in the context of saving lives, if I have lived a hundred lives on earth, saving my life this time would mean saving or prolonging just this one particular life experience.
In this context, it shares much with the common saying that you only live once. Even when your soul incarnates a hundred or however many times, it’s only once with the upbringing you had, the values you developed, the body you inhabit.
However, the difference from “you only live once” as is routinely intended and the new and improved version I hypothesize here is that whoever you are now moves on to other dimensions. Your life does not stop at bodily death. And whoever else your soul decides to become next is paradoxically related but also not related to you. It will have its own trajectory.
Mediums often suggest this as why they can reach and communicate with historical characters who have likely already reincarnated. Thus, a person could channel Thomas Jefferson even though he’s had subsequent incarnations with new brains, upbringings, life events—at least so says author Roberta Grimes who claims to have Mr. Jefferson as a guide.
Perhaps at a soul or oversoul level, all the various incarnations merge into one higher self consciousness. Yet my conscious mind is completely ignorant of anyone else my soul has chosen to be.
Another interesting concept that floats in metaphysical thought streams is that our souls sometimes (if not always) decide when and how we will leave a given lifetime. This concept has intrigued me because it implies that no matter what we do to extend our lifetime, it may have no impact on when our bodies actually die.
I often hear talk about free will and multiple exit points when our higher self has the authority to pull the plug. Yet the bottom line is that what’s ending is not life but an incarnation.
Should we not attempt to save lives? I think this issue requires serious deliberations and of course poses different contexts to consider.
Sometimes the obsession to save lives appears to be too tied in with profit incentives than any pure objective. A major example is so-called end-of-life medical care where expensive procedures are often practiced that may do little more than buy a few weeks or months more, often attached to machines and in severe pain. Is it worth it? Is any extension of life so precious if in reality it turns out that what we do is drain family finances and inhibit the individual from crossing to an upgraded life?
Once we establish objective communication between material and postmaterial persons, it will be fascinating to discover if anyone found positive value in having their incarnations extended. Was it worth it? While this question of medical intervention to prolong lives is full of ethical issues, hearing from ‘the dead’ could change how the majority rules.
Saving lives sometimes seems to be a concept pushed by marketers and propagandists. Great when it is justified but perhaps misleading and even fraudulent when it is fear-based and not in accord with evidence that only our bodies die.
On the other hand, there are plenty of cases where saving or extending lifetimes is well worth it and can be considered a moral imperative. For example, those facing perils due to climate change, wars, social injustices and inequities, pollution, and so on. Not trying to improve conditions to save lives seems like shirking responsibilities to our fellow humans.
Saving lives (or incarnations) from medical emergencies may also be part of a bigger plan. Most people who come out of near-death experienced were saved, after all. It is through their heightened consciousness that we have piles of anecdotal evidence that death does not truly kill us.
Even so, as science may eventually demonstrate—and we might want to prepare for that possibility—part of our role here is to maintain and evolve the planet. In any way that we can make the earth more hospitable for everyone’s sake, the better. We incarnate here for a reason, and learning how to love and care for one another seems to be a big part of it.
Most important, I would think, is that people who wanted to prolong their incarnations for whatever reason should be respected. I vote for it to be a conscious choice of the individual.
To receive Soul Phone Views free by email, click on the Menu icon at the top left corner of the page and fill out the brief form to follow.