Home Pharos Fiction Site Map Updates Search


                                                                                                                        Back Next

Halexandria Foundation
Sacred Mathematics
Connective Physics
Chronicles of Earth
Justice, Order, and Law
Extraterrestrial Life
Creating Reality
Tree of Life

It’s About Time

Updated June 1, 2003

Chapter 12:

Shari already regretted her decision.  Asking advice from the very weird lady across the table from her did not seem to be the best idea in Shari’s young life.  Paying fifty dollars for the session seemed wildly extravagant, especially when the potential for worthless advice seemed so likely.  Of course, it was too late now.

The lady smiled as she looked over the cards.  “I see a long trip for you.  Possibly near a great body of water.  And very soon, I think.”

Shari frowned.  “I’m going back to school in three weeks.  Long Beach, California.  Maybe that’s it.”

“Possibly.”  The very weird lady was apparently not yet convinced.

Shari wasn’t either.  The old lady probably knew Shari was a student, and she might well have seen her college sticker on her car when she arrived.  But Shari had already paid her; she’d have to get her money’s worth somehow.  “What else?”

“Don’t go riding in a red pickup for the next month.”

“Excuse me?"

“Especially with a short, balding man.  He is a careless driver.”

No sweat, Shari thought, I don’t like short men, bald men, and/or pickups.  “No red pickups....right!”

“And avoid the short, balding man.”

“No problem.”

“However, I do see a tall, six foot man, whom you will soon meet.”

“Oh?”  Shari was suddenly interested.

“I see you in some sort of class room together.’

Wonderful! Shari thought, One tall six foot man in a class of about two hundred students!  Good luck meeting him!  Shari’s momentary enthusiasm waned as quickly as it had occurred.

“He will be wearing a blue suit, when you meet.  I see him with a neatly trimmed beard, and light brown hair.  You will know him when he says ‘I’m in communications.’  He’s very nice looking.  You will be immediately attracted to him.”

“Is he rich?” Shari asked, with just a hint of interest.

“I see you with him in a convertible.  A Mercedes I think.”

Shari was now definitely interested.  “Great!  I’ll take him!  What’s his name?”

“I am not sure the car is his.  Might be his parents.”

“No problem.  I’ll take him either way.  Just tell me his name!! 

Predicting the Future

How can an otherwise intelligent young lady go from critical skepticism to eager anticipation of a highly improbable future event?  Is it her eagerness to find a desirable mate, or just simple gullibility?  More importantly, is it possible for someone such as a psychic to predict Shari’s future?  Would you change your mind if the events predicted actually came true?

Obviously, there are plenty of short, balding men and even a few with red pickups. There is even a reasonable supply of tall, nice looking bearded men driving Mercedes. If Shari manages to avoid the former and actually meet the latter, does this prove anything?  Probably not.  Shari may beat the odds, but it may have little to do with a foreknowledge of the future.

Mind you, predicting the future is not always that hard.  Forecasting that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow morning is easy enough.  Forecasting rain is simple, if you have access to the right kind of information -- which apparently ninety percent of weathermen don't.  Predictions of other people entering one’s life is not that difficult either, unless the person is a serious recluse.  The fact of the matter is that many predictions are odds on favorites to begin with.

In other cases, the predictions may be self-fulfilling.  If you are told you will take a trip to Hawaii and then subsequently do exactly that, is the prediction itself partly responsible for your actions?  Did it give you the idea, which you later acted on?  Conversely, if you avoid driving a red pickup in order to avoid an accident, can you ever know if the accident that didn’t happen, would have happened if you had not taken steps to avoid it?

The difficulty is in the statistics.  The odds of two people meeting and falling in love is quite good, if you are working with a large number of people.  On the other hand, if the entire sample of people all met and fell in love, that's a different story.  Isolated statistics simply don’t prove much of anything, whereas 100% predictions being correct might very well prove at least the possibility of predicting the future.  Alternatively, predictions which effect large groups of people or the entire world are more noteworthy in that they are seldom “self-fulfilling prophecies” and may occur for reasons other than simple statistical probability.

A good example of this larger scale forecasting is provided by Dr. Helen Wambach. Dr. Wambach, in addition to regressing her subjects into the past, has also taken them under hypnosis into the future.  In separate efforts, Dr. Wambach told her subjects to go to the years 2100 and 2300, and then describe what they sensed.  The accounts of her subjects seemed to follow four basic scenarios, but otherwise were quite consistent.  At the same time, all of the accounts indicated that the population of the earth in 2100 would be about 5% of today’s population, while the year 2300’s population was about 15%.  [One of Dr. Wambach’s associates, Chet Snow, has published a detailed account of these and other predictions, entitled Mass Dreams of the Future.  If you like to worry about the future, this may be the ideal book for you!]

The obvious implication of a worldwide catastrophe wiping out 95% to 99% of the population of the earth, sometime in the next hundred years or so, is obviously the sort of thing to catch one’s attention.  The potential for near-term or not-so-near-term disaster is certainly a legitimate topic for discussion, and as a consequence, the idea will be discussed in some detail in chapter XV.  For the present, however, our interest will be directed toward the very existence of a predictable future. 

In other words, is the very nature of the future such that it can be predicted?  To consider this question, we must first consider the more fundamental issue of time.  Is time a chronological necessity (providing for maximal free will), and thus are we in fact limited by “the arrow of time” or some other confining structure?

The Nature of Time

On the one hand, Fisher and Whitton, in their book, Life Between Life, note that their subjects are invariably confused “by the utter lack of temporal sequence and three dimensions in the bardo.  From the earth bound perspective, there is no logic; there is no order; there is no progression -- everything is happening at once!”  [The  idea that a believer in reincarnation is confused may not be overly surprising.  But then, there are also a lot of the single life advocates who are, at best, bewildered most of the time.)

Stranger still, in her book, Life Before Life, Helen Wambach has reported on people being counseled prior to their birth, by fathers, mothers and relatives who had either died prior to their birth, or in some cases, those whom they would know later in the coming lifetime.  As Ms. Wambach observed:

“Oddly, there seemed to be no distinction between people who were alive at the time when birth was being decided upon and people who were dead or not yet born.  In the world between lifetimes, our chronological time system and whether one is physically alive or dead seems of relatively little importance.

“Perhaps the very concept of a time period refers to earthly consciousness.  Space and time are different for us when we are dreaming than when we are awake.  In a dream, we may be in our childhood home one moment, and at the office next week in the next moment.  Right brain time is experienced differently; when we are daydreaming or working creatively, time rushes by us.  When people are stoned on marijuana, time slows as thoughts drift through the right brain.  How much time does it take us to dream?  It’s hard for us to grasp.

“Memory is indifferent to ‘real world time’, and our fifth birthday may be remembered more vividly than last Tuesday at the office.”

This lack of temporal sequence may seem a bit disquieting at first, especially to someone still attached to the comfortable time sequences of earth.  The idea of making plans before your birth with parents who were currently incarnated, might seen a little difficult at first, but this seems perfectly plausible in reincarnation theory.  You just have to readjust your idea of time.

In order to do that and, perhaps, better visualize this new concept of time, it might be desirable to consider Richard Bach’s description, from his book, Illusions -- The Adventures of a Reluctant Messiah:

“You can hold a reel of film in your hands, and it’s all finished and complete -- beginning, middle, end are all there that same second, the same millionths of a second.  The film exists beyond the time that it records, and if you know what the movie is, you know generally what’s going to happen before you walk into the theater: there’s going to be battles and excitement, winners and losers, romance, disaster; you know that’s all going to be there.  But in order to get caught up and swept away in it, in order to enjoy it to its most, you have to put it in a projector and let it go through the lens minute by minute... any illusion requires space and time to be experienced.  So you pay your nickel and you get your ticket and you settle down and forget what’s going on outside the theater and the movie begins for you.”

Fred Hoyle, one of the worlds most famous astrophysicists, has described time in one of his novels, October 12th Is Too Late, as a multitude of pigeon holes, with a light periodically shining on one hole, then another, and so forth.  The concept is time being derived from the progress of the light across pigeon holes, one at a time and in a specific sequence.  However, one never knows which pigeon hole will be next in the light, or whether or not, in fact, each and every pigeon hole will be lit by the progressing light.

Theories of “simultaneity” are quite prevalent in the views of most reincarnationists, but is such a concept of time necessary to the theory of reincarnation?  Probably yes.  The related idea of coincidence combines with simultaneity to represent a fundamental basis for most ideas in this book and website.  In effect, there are no accidents.

In addition, the idea of simultaneity is extended to include living simultaneous lives as an idea which is routinely considered. In other words, an individual incarnated today might remember separate past lives when he fought for the Union in one, and fought for the Confederacy in another.  The two past lives could even have ended up shooting at each other!  [Talk about a split personality!]

Robert Monroe has reported that this question of living two lives simultaneously relative to time has been asked of those beings encountered in the out-of-body state, and that “they” have reported back that “it is not only possible but does take place frequently.” Monroe goes on to say that physical lifetimes “are not sequential in time.  They may indeed be simultaneous.  It is a question of ‘who is doing the perceiving’.”

In his book, Far Journeys, Monroe quotes a dialogue between one of Monroe’s subjects who is allegedly in an out-of-body state and Monroe’s monitor.  The monitor is a member of Monroe’s staff, who is recording the experiences of the subject during the OBE.  At the same time, the OBE subject is supposedly communicating with beings on the other side of consciousness, and reporting back to the monitor the gist of his otherworld conversation.

OBer:  “...part of my energy at this moment may be used to develop a personality and I may have several personalities going on at the same time, being developed at the same time.”

Monitor:  “At the same time in the physical kind of reality?”

OBer:  “Yes, yes.  They tell me right now, one is old, one is crippled, one is male, and where they are I am not ready to know.... and I could feel being old and crippled but I could not feel being male.”

Monitor:  “Is this entering of the physical body limited just to the planet Earth or other planets?”

OBer:  “We go to other places.  There are beings on other places and our energy is aware of all these other places.”

Monitor:  “Do we inhabit physical bodies in these other places?”

OBer:  “Not like human Earth bodies... but... other forms of things or beings.”

Monitor:  “What are some of the other forms on planets?  What are these other forms?”

OBer:  “One’s like a gelatin kind of thing....slimy kinds of things.”

Monitor:  “Are these located anywhere near the planet Earth?”

OBer:  “Thousands of light-years away.”

Just think... The next time you call someone a “slime”, you may be referring to one of his soul-siblings.  On the other hand, for safety’s sake, don’t expect him to take the time to figure out this perfectly rational chain of logic.  Particularly, if he’s big and mean, and thirsty for blood.

Monroe later states quite explicitly that one can go forward and backward in time during OBEs.  Monroe goes on to suggest a few helpful pointers in doing so.  He suggests, for example, that in one’s first attempts one should “travel” only short distances in time.  The concern is that one might have some difficulty in returning to the proper time!  For example, you could be out to lunch on an OBE, and when you returned, find yourself in time for breakfast on the same day.  This sort of thing could completely blow your diet!

Which brings up another.... Oops.  It's paradox time.  Consider just briefly the possibility of reliving a morning.  What would your friends think, if you insisted on doing it over again... perhaps with a few noteworthy changes?

The movie, Groundhog Day, is a brilliant example of this.  It's hero, played by an already strange Bill Murray, provides for a fanciful evolution of a personality from egotist to an opportunist to someone suicidal to a moderately enlightened being.  At one point, the hero bemoans his fate to two drunken lowlifes, by asking, "Do you have any idea what it's like to do the same thing day after day after day?"  One of the drunks responds, "That pretty well sums up my life."

The ability to make some changes is, however, still an individual decision.

Is Time Essential?

Is there, perhaps, a contradiction here?  Proponents of the theory that everything is happening at once, invariably also believe in the concept of the evolution of the soul.  Reincarnation exists in order to allow for successive lives of experience as a means of evolving the soul from one state of being to another.  Even in the case of living simultaneous lives, the soul is simply allowing for more experiences to be gained by providing for more and varied experiences.

However, such evolution of the soul, particularly from a strictly  biological point of view, virtually insists on a chronological sequence.  How can one evolve except over time?

Evolution, as defined by Webster, is an unfolding, opening out, or working out; process of development, as from a simple to a complex form, or of gradual, progressive change.  Process is even more specific, namely “course (of time, etc).”  If in fact our time(s) on earth are for the evolution of our soul, then it appears that some form of time is vitally needed.

In some respects, to eliminate time as a relevant factor might imply that evolution is not the key!  Instead, we may simply be dropping into a variety of different movies -- each one a lifetime long -- and experiencing.  In other words, all those challenges you've faced that your mother told you builds character may not be relevant.  You may not have to build character at all!  [Just don't tell your mother that.  It's not nice.]

At the same time, it seems clear our physical world depends rather heavily on time.  As Richard Bach has noted, in order to experience any illusion, space and time is required.  Presumably any of our illusions within the bardo would also require time and space.  More importantly perhaps, it may be that when we are in the bardo or in an altered state of consciousness (dream, out-of-body, etc.) our souls may not be bound or constrained by the confines of time and space, but that this does not imply that neither time nor space exists in those realms.


Many reincarnation types also believe we can select our lives for specific purposes and can as easily select a 16th century experience following a 20th century experience, as the other way around.  The difficulty with this idea concerns the inevitable time paradoxes that arise.  Science Fiction, for example, has belabored these paradoxes through a hundred years of novels, short stories, and other forms of narrative writing.  Serious students of science fiction will find it difficult to give any credence to the ability to take a step back in time in order to accomplish something you forgot during the first time around.

There is, of course, the exception.  In order to eliminate the inevitable paradox, everything to occur in the future might already be set in concrete, so to speak.  A classic example of this is the movie series, The Terminator and its two sequels, where Arnold Swatznegger gets to prove he has brains as well as brawn.  (Just kidding, Arnie!)

In the first movie (and amazingly enough, in the book as well -- "Never judge a book by its movie!) -- a revolutionary from the future has returned to the present day in order to save the life of the woman destined to give birth to the future hero of the revolution.  The future dictatorship, supposedly a very smart but thoroughly evil computer, has initiated the action of the freedom fighters by sending The Terminator to kill the woman before she is able to give birth to the hero who will eventually overthrow the computerized dictatorship.  The computer is thus attempting to change a single aspect of the past in order to arrive at a very different future.  Rather clever of the computer, don’t you think?  Our revolutionary is of course, trying to outdo the computer and its agent, the Terminator, by saving the woman’s life.

Naturally the good guys win (and the computer loses).  But the critical factor is that the revolutionary sent back to foil the computer’s terminator, turns out to be the father of the future hero who will in the future overturn the computer’s dictatorship!  The initiation by the computer of sending their hit-man back in time, was the cause of the revolutionary returning in order to spawn the future nemesis of the computer!  In effect the attempt to change the past was thwarted by everything being fixed before hand—sort of a rigged game against the computer.  Obviously the mechanical-electronic monster seriously erred when it attempted to change the past.  But perhaps, the error was foreordained.

This raises issues of Predestination and Free Will, and in fact, the very nature of dreams, prophecies, Divinations, predictions, and everything from the Bible Code to Astrology (and the contents of the next chapter) may well be dependent upon everything being fixed.  It's equivalent to Richard Bach's analogy of a film already being in the can and fixed, even before you enter the theater to experience it over time.  Perhaps the only real variable is your decision to choose how to respond to the external stimuli of events, movies, and errant computers.

The Arrow of Time / Entropy

Related to a possible predestination limitation on times past is the concept of cause and effect.  A fundamental aspect of most proponents’ views of reincarnation is karma, in effect a direct result of cause and effect.  Any action taken in the past (the cause) will result in a specific condition (the effect) in the future.  The reference to past and future for the exercise of cause and effect, thus implies time.  There is, in fact, no way around time, if causality, i.e. cause and effect, are involved.

Furthermore, time seems to be an absolute requirement of a physical world.  Modern physics has, in fact, found the need for “an arrow of time.”  This point is heavily stressed in one of the most fundamental laws of physics, the Second of the Laws of Thermodynamics. The second law establishes a very one-directional process for something referred to as entropy, a quantity which measures the degree of disorder in any given system.  In effect the Second Law, of which there has never been a single conflicting piece of physical evidence, decrees that the entropy of any closed system must increase, i.e. the disorder of a closed system must increase.

Order can be thought of as a drop of liquid red dye and a separate glass of water. Initially the dye drop and the water are ordered, in the sense that they are readily distinguishable.  But once the dye is dropped into the water, it mixes and becomes indistinguishable.  This latter state is disorder.  The Second Law implies that no matter how long we wait, the red dye will never return to its non-mixed state with the water, a fact easily conceivable to our everyday experiences.

If, however, the system is not closed, i.e. we impart energy to it in some appropriate way, the entropy can then decrease (order is restored).  However, if we consider the imparted energy and its source to be part of a larger “closed system”, the entropy of the larger system will always increase.  If the universe is considered the ultimate in larger closed systems, the entropy of the universe must always increase.  In other words, the universe must eventually lose all order and in effect, die.  Physically, this can be thought of as the entire universe reaching the same temperature.

Lest anyone should become overly concerned about this, it should be noted that the universe is not expected to cease its functioning next week, or even next month.  Current estimates place it at about 10 billion years in the future.  Hopefully this will be enough time to allow you to finish this book.  Among other things.

At the same time, there is always the chance that our universe is not a closed system and that other universes may be interacting with the one we're currently sensing.  In which case, there are no limits even on a universal scale, and the Second Law may be basically irrelevant.  (But convenient for plaguing students of physics.)

Keep in mind that predictions concerning other significant interruptions of life on the Planet Earth, place the  time frame in a matter of years.  For more on this, refer to the doomsday predictions in chapter XV.  [The good news is that most of the earlier ones didn't happen, and the odds of the newer ones being accurate are accordingly low.]

More Paradoxes

While we may have difficulty eliminating our concept of time from the physical world, is it conceivable that in the bardo, time can in fact be simultaneous?  Can we not in fact have our cake and eat it as well?  Can the bardo state be equivalent to seeing everything at once, while the physical state exists alongside, happily complete with time and space as essential ingredients?  Perhaps we can in fact have it both ways -- sounds just like something that perverse old nature would allow if only for its entertainment value.

The critical question comes down to:  Is the timelessness of the bardo real?  Are the reports of non-time in the space between lives, an accurate perception?  Or is the confusion of those visiting the wonderland of white lights responsible for the illusion of being unable to sense time (not to mention space)?

Interestingly enough there is physical evidence suggesting that our traditional concept of time may be less than self-evident.  In the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox, an experiment generates two elementary particles (particles on the order of electrons and protons) which are moving apart at the speed of light.  An experimenter, who takes action to alter a characteristic of one particle, will then find that the other particle changes its corresponding characteristic as well.  The paradox arises from the unknown, non-local connection between the particles.  With the speed of light being, theoretically, the universe’s absolute speed limit (although generally ignored on the West German Autobahn), the question arises as to how the second particle becomes aware of what happened to the first particle.

We have no clever answers for this one.

Well, maybe one or two possibilities.  Superstring Theory deals with multiple space dimensions (an extra six to as many as an additional twenty one), which are collapsed, and thus the space distances approach zero and everything is easily connected.  Thus, instead of exceeding the speed-of-light speed limit, one simply does an end-run around the limit by taking a here-to-before unknown shortcut.

There is also the idea of Relativisitic Space Contraction and Relativistic Variations on a Theme, each of which in their own charming way do away with the basic problem with relative ease. [pardon the pun]  The EPR paradox is basically a conundrum which vanishes with a realization of the connectedness of all things.  [See, for example, Connective Physics and its many implications.]

Free Will

Clearly time is more complicated than we might have thought.  In fact, as Professor J.B.S. Haldane has remarked, “The universe is not only queerer than we think, but queerer than we can think”.  Nevertheless, our concept of time, no matter how incomplete, must include reference to another staple of our existence:  Free will.

If time is a non sequitur during our stays in the bardo, and if in fact the future is already determined (or in Richard Bach’s analogy, filmed and “in the can”), can we have free will?  It is obvious that if everything is predetermined, then we will not have choices, free will, or even decisions to be made as to whether to believe in free will or not.

If that is the case, why are we here?  Without free will, any alleged “evolution of the soul” would be pretty cut and dried.  (Not to mention boring.)  There would, in fact, be no point in an earthly existence, other than to act out a drama for the benefit of some unearthly audience.  But even in a play, there is ample opportunity for ad-libs and dropped lines.  With predetermined futures, we would not even have the solace of being allowed to forget one’s entrance.  Or exit!

Recall also that the multitude of reports from the bardo all involve the concept of planning our next reincarnation -- not just the selection of parents and sex, but the intention of meeting others in the coming life for any number of purposes.  Planning in the bardo apparently includes the possibility of determining in large part all the events of a future life.

As one of Dr. Whitton’s subjects described it:  “Only the patterns, the outlines, of our lives are ordained, and we ourselves have selected those patterns.  The details we fill in as we move along the broad road of our chosen destiny.”  Whitton subsequently concluded that:

“Self-responsibility leads to self-determination.  To accept the process of reincarnation is to accept that only by taking complete responsibility for ourselves can we hope to achieve rapid personal growth through the cycle of successive rebirths.”

Limitations on Free Will

Clearly our ability to plan our own reincarnations would imply the existence of a soul’s free will.  If we are making our own choices, we are exercising free will.  But are there limitations on our free will?  Is free will available during our time in a physical body?  If so, to what degree?

In choosing our future lives, we are clearly limited by the plans of other souls.  We may cooperate with others in planning for a future life, but the act of cooperation is inherently an act of limiting our own choices.  Free will of the soul is thus not unlike what one might expect from what we apparently have in our physical state of being.

Once on earth, however, are we locked into a particular script?  The answer would appear to be no.  Or perhaps more accurately, the answer is probably.

Future Probabilities

Consider for example a radioactive uranium atom (obviously the sort of thing to which you’ve been looking forward for years).  This atom plans to go through the process of decay, transforming itself into an atom of thorium by emitting an alpha particle, i.e. the nucleus of a helium atom.  The only question is when?  If we have millions of similarly-minded uranium atoms, we can predict with great certainty that half of these atoms will fall prey to their inclinations and decay in precisely four-and-one-half billion years.  The decay of a specific atom, however, is indeterminable.  The best modern physics can do for a single atom is to assign a probability that the atom will decay at some specified, precise time.

The idea is not too far removed from our experiences in an everyday world.  We can assign a probability to virtually any future occurrence.  Most, for example, would be willing to risk their money on the probability of the sun rising in the east tomorrow morning at a specified time (this is not a guaranteed bet inasmuch as their have been notable exceptions -- see chapter XV and/or Sun, Stand Thou Still).  There is also a significant probability that on a very icy day, a specific person will manage to fall on his or her keesters.  (Keisters, if you prefer.)

From this point of view, we are all capable of predicting the future, or at least assigning a probability to the occurrence of particular events.  It would not be tough for example, to predict that a particular person will meet and fall in love with someone within the next few months, particularly when our subject has been known to fall in and out of love at the drop of a hat.


However, there seem to be significant limitations in our ability to absolutely determine specific events.  Electrons, for example, impose severe restraints on our ability to determine this elementary particle’s precise energy at any specific time.  This limitation, known as the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, states that an electron’s energy (within a specified range of energies ΔE) during a specified interval of time (ΔT) is limited by Planck’s constant, h, by the equation:

<  (ΔE) x (ΔT)

The implication of this famous equation is that if we try to be more specific in our time interval (i.e., decrease ΔT), we will be confronted with the necessity of increasing our uncertainty in the electron’s energy (i.e. increase ΔE).  And vice versa.

Admittedly, Planck’s constant, h, is a teeny, tiny number (h = 6.622 x 1027 erg sec), but with respect to an electron, it is quite significant.  From our viewpoint it establishes a physical principle that limits our abilities to precisely define a time-energy relationship for certain aspects of the physical world.  From a macroscopic world viewpoint, we can imagine a corresponding theory, the Inadequacy of the Wild Guess Principle.

Probabilities and Free Will

More to the point is the apparent fact that predictions of future events, whether by psychics, scientists, or any other venturesome sort, must rely for their reasonable accuracy on probabilities.  Probabilities, in turn, allow for a substantial latitude in the exercise of free will.  A soul may not be able to effect whether or not the sun rises tomorrow morning, but he or she may be able to determine if that soul witnesses the event.

Such choices may then act to -- what quantum physics calls -- "collapse the wave function."  What this means is that a decision or choice may turn several possibilities or probabilities into a single event of 100% probability and all other probabilities being now 0%.  In physics, the analogy is that of a cat in the box, whose life depends upon the decay of a single atom.  The decay is dependent upon a probability, and there is no way to know if the cat in the box is alive or dead.  Until we open the box!  Which is equivalent to collapsing the wave function, and taking the odds of a dead or live cat into the realm of one or the other.

On the basis of all of this, it appears reasonable to assume that each soul exercises free will in the bardo, limited only by universal or natural laws (physical and non-physical) and the free will of others.  In our earthly and other physical incarnations, free will appears to continue to exist, but is still limited by the universal laws, the free will of others, and to a lesser degree by the self-imposed limitations of every soul’s planning while in the bardo. 


In summary, we do not yet really know for sure, but it appears that time can continue to exist in some form for any of several reasons.  We may not be constrained by time (and/or space) while in the bardo or in an altered state of consciousness, but time will continue to exist, in some form or another, even in an otherworldly state.  At the same time, future events can be predicted on the basis of assigning probabilities and without a wholesale infringement upon free will, or our traditional view of time.

When time is viewed in this way, it becomes an essential ingredient in reincarnation theory.  As such, it supports the theory, and, in fact, is required by the theory.  Conversely, without this view of time, some of the supporting experiences of reincarnation would have to be considered as invalid.  Karma, being the law of cause of effect, still requires time as a fundamental tenet.

Time and space seem essential to our ability to experience events necessary for our soul’s evolution.  Time may not be felt or sensed by our soul while in the bardo, but some form of time in the nonphysical world would seem to be a critical ingredient if a soul does in fact evolve.  Undoubtedly, our concept of time, based on our physical experiences, is a narrow and incomplete view, but nature has generously managed to provide little clues that tweak our imaginations and keep our attempts to understand Time always interesting.


Chapter Eleven:     Changing Paradigms

Forward to:

Chapter Thirteen:     Divination, Astrology and Dreams



                                                                                      The Library of ialexandriah       

2003© Copyright Dan Sewell Ward, All Rights Reserved                     [Feedback]    

                                                                                                            Back Next