Do I Really Disagree With Popular Authors? (Anthony Peak, Tom Campbell, William Buhlman, etc)

Do I Really Disagree With Popular Authors? (Anthony Peak, Tom Campbell, William Buhlman, etc)

I wanted to make this video to clear up some of my positions with popular OBE authors, why I have disagreements, and why a few disagreements are usually “friendly” and not as serious as are alleged (with MOST of them, anyway)

Get involved! View all my videos at THIS link:

“Understanding Life After Death”:

“The Afterlife and Beyond”

Bi-Weekly Classes

The Facebook discussion group:

Say hi to me on Facebook

SUPPORT WITH A DONATION: PayPal address is [email protected] Just send to there.

hello everybody this is Cyrus with a five topics and metaphysics where we talk about life after death out-of-body experiences astral projection extraterrestrials and all kinds of things like that and tonight I want to address some of the points that I make about other OBE authors why I'm sometimes critical of them and to hopefully clarify my positions a little bit I also wanted to address something that's happening with Anthony peek the author so but it'll announcement about that which I'll have as well so I am also making this video because I do receive angry emails angry messages and angry comments or at least disagreeable comments sometimes angry sometimes hate mail but sometimes just friendly disagreements about some of my work in relation to the fact that in my books sometimes on this channel and on my facebook posts I will sometimes disagree with very popular authors and some of their opinions and I think some people are big fans of some of these guys and so if I am poking at some of their theories people will take this the wrong way and become sometimes very upset about this and this is why I've had a surprising amount of people who have who have sent me emails or contacted me to express how much they dislike what I have to say and to that my general feeling is I don't care because I'm no one's going to tell me what I can and cannot talk about but that being said I also think that people jumped a gun too much and make conclusions that are not necessarily accurate about how I really feel because really what's going on is that if I'm criticizing one element of somebody's work I might in the next breath be praising and linking to their books as an example is first begin with Jurgen Jurgen see–we so Jurgen x' work includes multidimensional men and vistas of infinity and I literally recommend those books over my own books multi-dimensional men I read when I was first getting into out-of-body experiences before I began having them back about 2013 I should say when I was getting back into out-of-body experiences and multi-dimensional man connected a lot of dots for me that I hadn't been able to connect before and it may be that reading that book helped initiate all the new OBEs I began having which helped lead me to worry where I am now being able to write so much about the topic I think maybe just the act of reading that book brought some of this to light in my subconscious mind and opened doors juergen books are great I just I have disagreements with some of his conclusions about how reality is entirely internally based so Jurgen believes that if you see a storm or ugly insect walking across the ground both situations are likely the result of somebody's internal thought patterns projecting this into the environment as opposed to something that may naturally exist so as I talked about in the video one video back about the middle astral level I don't believe that's true I believe it's like a half-truth so a little insect walking across the ground may very well be part of nature on that dimension on that density level whereas uragan would interpret anything like that as being internally based something that's being projected out of somebody else's mind so I don't necessarily agree with that point of view so when I've had some friendly debates with uragan like on the Facebook groups usually were debating something along those lines but it doesn't mean I'm not a fan of you're against work next is William Bowman so Bowman was his work adventures beyond the bodies this is one of the first books I read when I was first introduced to topics like this when I was like 13 years old so if we're looking way back like it like the year 2000 and it was actually ventures beyond the body and the journeys out of the body by Robert Monroe and Bullman I thought was I thought his work was much more well-written than Monroe's and it really helped open my eyes to a lot of concept so it always been a Bullman fan I just said later years I've disagreed with his concept of higher self now which I can get into in another video because I don't believe that we can just do a chant and reach an exalted level of consciousness that easily it doesn't work like that and I also disagree with the idea that we have to transcend the astral world altogether because in Bowman's words he doesn't like dealing with his family he doesn't want to meet his deceased family so he's a little bit of like a misanthrope but all due respect like that's kind of how he comes across but not everybody else is you know many of us have deceased loved ones we love and care about so we're not going to implement a strategy like that because if they're in the astral plane we're like the middle astral which I talked about in the last video then that's where we want to be right there there's nothing wrong with that and doesn't make us inferior for thinking this way I don't really buy some of these ideas of like quote spiritual progression that we all have to be trying to get to the highest level possible and that's again a reoccurring theme with some of these authors and it doesn't mean that they don't have the best intentions in my in mind and doesn't mean that they don't have tons of great information but it's something that I just have to I have to take some issue with next is Tom Campbell so Campbell's when I'm most outspoken about I really made this clear in my latest book the afterlife and beyond because just to simplify a very complex subject Campbell believes that when we encounter deceased loved ones and after death States after death contacts near-death experiences because the soul belongs his greater kind of computer matrix of the universe it rejoins that it becomes incomprehensible to us so therefore all after death experiences after death contacts must be some kind of a pre-programmed thing by this greater soul to comfort us or something like that so he thinks after death contacts are illusions now maybe these positions have changed maybe he's written other things that have contradicted this maybe he doesn't 100% believe this I'm just going off of the lectures I've listened to on YouTube I haven't read Campbell's work in a long time I read my big toe a long time ago it didn't quite resonate with me but I did like the book and he wasn't quite saying things of this quite like this back then so you know I'm not saying that Campbell completely dismisses people who have after death contacts but the way he's presented this information would lead somebody to believe that is the case and that when somebody is encountering their deceased loved one I've had many people come to me upset after hearing Campbell's lectures and believing then that you know their visit with their like their son or daughter crossed over it was it was a hologram or an illusion and Campbell is only thinking this way because in my opinion he's thinking in this completely linear three-dimensional way because multi-dimensionally speaking we could have a part of us that part the Oversoul the source consciousness and we can also have a part of us that's the individual we can have it both and Campbell just hasn't quite figured this out yet and I'd be happy to debate the subject with him okay finally this leads to Anthony peek so this is the newer guy who I made a video about a few videos back and he believes that when we die we have to relive our same life over and over again like Groundhog's Day and he does have quite a few people who support this theory in my video I called it out as being ridiculous and I said he was off his rocker and yes I should have said his idea was off to his rocker I'm not off the rocker I'm not I shouldn't be in the business of personally insulting somebody but I will say that an idea that is this destructive has the potential to pull the theorists down with it kind of like people I've known who believed they were the only ones who existed so this is like hardcore sob sysm when people think that they're the only one who exists and I saw that theory pull a friend of mine in college down into an extreme state of paranoia because not only did he he thought he was the only one who did who existed and he also believed Peaks idea of having to relive the same life over and over again and this was basically the result of taking a lot of smidgens and having bad trips and attempting to make models of the universe around like bad I don't know whether he was taking play mushrooms like bad mushrooms bad hallucinogenic trips so Anthony Pete seems to believe this based on a lot of on love quantum theory so I did I I have called it out because a lot of people brought this work to my attention and I just don't agree with it Pete contacted me and he has challenged me to a debate this is on March 24th on his format which is his his podcast and so I did accept so this will be March 24th and with peak when he contacted me basically his main argument against what I was saying was that I'm a nobody he said like you know look at your audience your YouTube videos only getting a couple hundred hits who are you I you know look at me i I belong to International Association near-death studies Society for a second for research I have this big name author let me guess you're a self-published author and on and on just berating me with this idea that I'm a nobody so I have no right to dare question what he has to say and to me this is a very narcissistic way to handle the situation and I certainly hope that mr. peak will have developed his way of debating his point of view by the time we are discussing this on his show because in my opinion doesn't matter how small I am that that's not an excuse to prove somebody's point as being incorrect it doesn't matter if I have no books it doesn't matter if this channel but like almost 500 subscribers has like two subscribers and my facebook page has 55 people on it that doesn't matter what matters is the arguments and the points that are addressed so you can't say well I have a bigger audience and I'm more important than you therefore you are irrelevant that does not the way to conduct oneself in this kind of debate that said his argument that I'm insignificant because I'm a self-published author is really quite silly because I actually for publishing company so in this company we have close to 100 books out there quite a bunch of those were written by myself and most of them were not and I have people who work for me in India Philippines and a couple other countries and understanding life after death is found a lot in bookshelves like Barnes Noble and I think I do have a pretty good audience at this point who follow my work so you know it doesn't really make any sense to say well you know you're a self-publisher so what do you know my disagreement with Peaks work is that every single subject that relates to after death contact whether it's out-of-body experiences or near-death experiences or physical mediumship or reincarnation and research by people like Ian Stevenson even the life between live stuff the Michel Newton stuff which you know I'm not as into that stuff but I'm going to include it on the list so many areas of evidence would refute this premise and if I debate with him it's going be the same as debating with a materialist skeptic and somebody who is so fixated into their idea that they're not going to look at the objective evidence and they'll have excuses for all of it so I attempted to bring up with peek about the concept of mediumship and that there's mediums who are highly tested and highly verifiable who are in contact with the other side and then they can tell us that it's not the case with some ground hogs day we don't have to keep living our same life over and over again and Peaks response was oh look at Helen Duncan she was caught out as a fraud you expect me to believe mediums that's the biggest logical fallacy I've ever heard Helen Duncan was one medium with whom I don't I do not reference Helen Duncan any of my books I'm Helen Duncan an argument can be made in her favor because the photo where she was caught out as a fraud what like I have this big dummy looking saying that that you know I'm supposed to be there revealing that her physical mediumship was using a big puppet well apparently she been asked to construct like a big puppet as a way of demonstrating what a physical mediumship session is like so that was never intended to be one of what it was misrepresented s it was kind of like a smear job but I don't have the full story about that oh that's a whole different subject the point is that was his argument against that so yeah that's the best P can come up with and I'm it's going to be a very interesting debate if all he can do is say Oh Helen Duncan was a fraud and and you're not a credible person so all that being said yes I'm very vain being very harsh to pique based on not only his behavior but it's work but I'm at the moment reading his first book which is called is there life after death I believe that's the name of it and I'm a little bit huh that that title the book frustrates me because if you ask that question based on the answer of his interpretation the answer is no because living your same life over and over again is not life after death that's called a nightmare it's called being stuck into a nightmare so I hate to see the topic of life after death being extrapolated with this toxic idea that said I'm reading mr. peeks book and I find the book to be well-written and as somebody who edits books I appreciate that by fun to be an interesting book and it's an interesting theory and it would be fun to explore that theory especially with somebody who doesn't take it literally as like food for thought but literally believing these things I can't imagine subscribing to such a dangerous metaphysical theory which for one thing I mean it's worse than than extinctions worse than materialist atheism because I would rather not exist and then you know existing guinness some random form in the universe which is basically what materialist atheists believe as opposed to happen to the hat being a hell of just living the same life again and again and again but at the end of day it doesn't matter that much so I'm happy to debate the guy on his show I'm a heart happy to hopefully change a few minds of people listening so that they don't feel like this is their destiny after they cross over but you know it but I do my thing you know and I'm growing my audience and I'm developing this channel and my books have increased by two or three times and above sales in the last few months so you know I'm hoping I'm spreading more knowledge about life after death and most importantly I'm hoping I'm helping more grieving people because that's what I care about I care about helping people who are grieving so that's why at the end of the day I'm critical about some of these people because I don't like unfounded theories that cost people grief and distress because people have these lovely beautiful experiences meeting their deceased loved ones like an after death contacts and things like that and then some of these theories come along basically like people coming along with big hammers to whack those theories back down into the ground to whack those experiences back down and into the ground and and to basically talk about how it's invalid and there's no reason to assume that after death contact is invalid because somebody else has tamiya some idea that contradicts it and so that's why I'm critical sometimes of some of the popular authors but most of them it doesn't mean I have anything against them and you know most of the him I recommend their work you know I recommend is Zoey who's Lou again is you know kind of like a hero of mine and I recommend Baldwin's work I recommend Campbell's earlier work especially as a really interesting like way of looking at the universe especially if you're more of a left brain engineer type person peek well I haven't finished reading the book but spoiler alert I probably won't recommend his book to anybody but that's just because I'm I find his theory to be dissatisfying but I also understand that he's put a lot of investment into that theory and it means a lot to him and I hope that I can present some counter arguments to that but but at the end of the day I'm gonna keep doing my thing and yeah I know I know I'm still stepping on toes some people don't like what I have to say but that's not gonna slow me down it's not gonna stop me from doing the work I do and sometimes you know you have to debate subjects you know I don't I don't believe in just laying down and not engaging people not engaging topics I die I do think that healthy debate is really important for helping society as a whole come into greater understandings about these subjects and with this channel and with my work you can probably expect continued debate the debates are not gonna stop it's gonna keep going and I think it's important just to separate sometimes the material as well from the person and don't let it affect you personally that's it for this video you can check out my stuff check out the group check out my books if you'd like that kind of thing and I'll see you next time

Tags:

  1. I also don't agree with William Buhlman's notion of "higher self now" and transcending the astral realms. He even have a recording prepared for the moment he dies, chanting powerful phrases (something similar as tibetan budhist do) in order to go to the higher self.
    He seems afraid of being traped in a human material reality in the astral plane or here on this earth (he believes in reincarnation, but wants to stop the cycle).
    Apart from this, all the other things he say is absolute gold.

  2. EXPERIENCE IS EVERYTHING. It seems that A.Peake has none, he is just a researcher. Same with Tom Campbell. I dumped both before the end of their vid's because it didn't jive with my experiences. Too many people in my family including myself have had clear, evidential experiences without mediums all unique from deceased loved ones for it not to be real. They are more grounded than I am so I consider their experiences valid. I myself have had a variety of experiences and then validated with a couple healers and pet communicator. I was't looking for validation they simply validated messages from my deceased husband that happened to me that week or day without my asking:) I've read and listened to as much as possible in the last 6 years and my thoughts resonate with your perspective.

  3. But is Buhlman saying that people who want to connect with their loved ones after they die are less evolved, or is he simply saying that it's not a requirement to do so? Some people tend to have the idea that the afterlife should serve as a big happy family reunion, so I think it's legitimate for Buhlman to point out the fact that he has no desire to reconnect with his deceased loved ones. Who knows, his spirit may feel differently after he dies, as maybe his reasons for not wanting to interact with them will no longer be important or relevant on that plane. But I can completely relate too him at this point in my life. I have plenty of family members who have died who I have no interest in reconnecting with after I die. But I freely admit that I am misanthropic, so perhaps Buhlman and I are just kindred misanthropes. Either way, I'd like to think that death would finally allow one the freedom to no longer be restrained by the familial bonds and obligations we have on Earth.

  4. Hm. Ugly insects projecting ugly internal reality … That theory can't be true because in my reality for example spiders are a sign of great luck. When I see a spider I know something reaaally good is coming up.
    Or maybe it is the case for some people. Reality is subjective…

  5. Cyrus literally nailed the afterlife, and exactly what it is. I honestly don't understand why others come up with such narrow-minded theories and just become so entangled within them that it defines their very existence. You literally have personal verification that other people can repeat for themselves over and over again without fail. You're a hero, and you deserve such a greater following. Keep it up, you're an angel and you'll get a great following eventually.

  6. Anthony Peake is an unenlightened character who peddles his sick, dumb theory on every podcast and upsets me and many others.. He is nowhere near your level of intelligence and experience and understanding of the afterlife. You are the best, Cyrus.

  7. I think what he means is that in a consensus reality the realty as a whole is being created by the people that live there. They're not consciously creating every bug and every blade of grass. But they did create the reality and it can somewhat take on a life of it's own. Things like bugs and animals are probably like how bugs and animals are created in video games. They're randomly simulated in different locations. So while the reality as a whole was created by the people who live in it a lot of it is randomly generated. But the people there have control and they can decide there should be more or less of a certain type of animal in the environment. And again I reference games like skyrim. In skyrim if you go up north you know that you'll likely run into horkers and frost trolls. Whereas in the south your more likely to run into deer and saber cats. Different animals show up in different places. But it's still mostly randomly generated. So no most likely someone didn't go the trouble of putting every insect in a certain place. All they would have to is specify a few parameters and wildlife mostly randomly created. I have problems with tom campbell's theories. I've heard him say that people memory wipe when they die. That has actually been tried on me during OBEs but fortunately it doesn't work on me. The memory wipe isn't some natural process that automatically happens after death. It's an ability that everyone. I've actually tried it on myself just to see if I could do it. So anyone who tries to wipe your memory most likely has malevolent intentions. So I would suggest getting the hell out of there. No one has the right to mess with your mind without your permission. To attempt to do so is psychic rape. Anyone who tries to do these kinds of things is a criminal and should be treated as such. So don't put up with that crap. Also I've heard campbell say that people who refuse to reincarnate can be erased from existence. This is total nonsense. I've had my astral body destroyed on several occasions and I didn't just cease to exist. In my opinion this is just another version of the stick instead of the carrot. It's not much different then telling people they'll go to hell if they don't believe in a religion. Well I've been to hell many times and it's paradise compared to this world. So I don't like campbell's work that much. It amazes me the kind of crap I hear from a lot of OBE authers. it makes you wonder if some of them might be making it up. Or if some of them are intentionally putting out disinformation. It's hard to say which one it is.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *