More on Boondock Saints

I rewatched The Boondock Saints over the weekend (I first wrote about it here). It gave me a headache. I forgot how violent the movie is- every scene has blood, fighting and/or screaming. It never dawned on me that as much as this is an “angel film” it’s also a mobster film in the vein of Bronx Tale or Donnie Brasco. If you combine Wings of Desire, The Godfather and WFF Wrestling, you end up with something akin to The Boondock Saints.

While the script clearly points to Murphy and Connor MacManus as angels- Agent Smecker even directly calls them “angels-” Rocco’s role is vague. Is he an angel, or human? Something in between? If human, are Murphy and Connor his guardian angels? Why is Rocco always screaming and freaking out? Bad acting or is there a deeper meaning? My sense is that Rocco is an “angel in training” because he tells Murphy and Connor “See ya on the flip side” – an allusion to heaven? But their strange allegiance and protectiveness of Rocco makes me think perhaps they are his guardian angels. Then again, why would an Italian mobster have Irish guardian angels?

I remain cringingly puzzled by Willem Dafoe’s weird performance as a gay FBI agent. Was the portrayal his choice or was he following Duffy’s direction? If it was at Duffy’s direction, what was the reasoning behind it? Is Agent Smecker, too, supposed to represent something larger than life?

While rewatching I asked my husband what other films Troy Duffy has directed; he looked confused and said he wasn’t sure beyond the Saints sequel. This surprised me as my husband is a human encyclopedia for all things Hollywood.

It turns out Duffy never did make any films beyond the Saints movies, in large part because he was blacklisted by none other than the now infamous Harvey Weinstein! Weinstein was first to purchase the rights to The Boondock Saints, only to drop it after various falling outs with Duffy. Saints was eventually produced by Franchise Pictures with half the original budget proposed by Miramax. There’s actually a documentary about the whole ordeal that I’m dying to watch, but it’s not on amazon, netflix or youtube.

One detail I picked up: in “the cat scene” Murphy (played by Norman Reedus of Walking Dead fame) refers to himself and his brother as “7-11.” This immediately brought to mind the Matthew 7:7-11 passage that is well known to christians: Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door shall be opened… If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!

Not sure if the reference is intentional, but it’s certainly apropos to this wildly dark film.



13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi

13 Hours is a 2016 film depicting the 2012 Islamist siege on diplomatic and CIA american compounds in Benghazi, Libya. I kept noticing it on amazon prime so decided to give it a try. It took me three days to get through the film, in part due to my ankle biters, in part because the film is long- nearly 2 1/2 hours.

While watching this film what amazed me the most is that it was made at all. How did this get through liberal Hollywood? (No matter what your politics, you have to admit Hollywood is quite liberal!) While not directly addressing politics, the film depicts the Obama administration’s response to the Benghazi siege as at best inept, and at worst willfully indifferent to the lives of its ambassador and agents.

The first 45 minutes of the film are slow and choppy. The cinematography employs an annoying “shaky cam” technique which I guess is supposed to make us feel close to the action, but to me it just looked sloppy. Interspersed with the shaky cam are sweeping panoramas backed with melancholy music. I guess this was supposed to make the film feel atmospheric. But instead of atmospheric or edgy, the end result is discombobulated. However, the depiction of the siege begins around 0:43 and the remainder of the movie functions as a much better executed “film within a film.”

13 Hours is based on a book of the same name by Mitchell Zuckoff, written in cooperation with the annex security team that single handedly defended the compound where nearly two dozen CIA agents, including women, were housed. These men were former special forces now employed as private military contractors– a controversial phenomena that is increasing worldwide, with nebulous moral and legal boundaries.

While the overview of the battle is likely accurate, I’m not sure if smaller plot details really happened or if they were interspersed for dramatic flavor. Was there really a beautiful CIA agent with a french accent, who brattily rebuffs attempts to save her life? Was the CIA chief really a thickheaded blowhard? Did Boon really quote Joseph Campbell?

The slow opening notwithstanding, this is a good film that provides a fascinating and tragic glimpse into the events of the siege. If you’re curious about the events of Benghazi, 13 Hours comes highly recommended.

Ugly Delicious

David Chang and his “boyfriend” Peter Meehan return to the screen in foodie series Ugly Delicious. I feel a special connection to Mr. Chang as the google search “is david chang gay?” used to have my blog as the top hit [he is not, and we meet his lovely wife in this series]. Now it’s at the top of page 2. Unlike PBS sponsored The Mind of a Chef (which I reviewed hereUgly is a netflix original, which means Chang’s copious F-bombs and other vulgarities are not bleeped out.

I have mixed feelings about the new series. Chang has great stage presence, his bromance with Peter is fun to watch, and it’s addictive as ever watched Chang devour food. The cartoon segues concerning food history are cute. But the pacing is horrible- in the “Tacos” episode we are constantly jumping back and forth between Mexico and Los Angeles, and Chang’s ultra liberal politics are sledgehammered on viewers. In one scene Chang tries to convince a conservative Vietnamese American on open borders. The conservative Vietnamese American politely points out that if they followed the rules, why should not everyone else? Chang later sputters over his failure to “make people more open.” I don’t care what your politics are, but it is ALWAYS a mistake to “lecture” in a documentary. So I take points off for that.

I’ve watched only three episodes so far- “Tacos,” “Shrimp & Crawfish” [squeamish viewers beware, crawfish are cooked alive!], and “Stuffed,” but there is less cooking than in The Mind of a Chef which is a disappointment. There’s more talking in Ugly, mostly food experts and other foodies philosophizing on food and dissing commercialized food. In one scene Chang & Co snobbishly jaunt through a Taco Bell drive-thru, mocking the lowly fare they purchase. Other scenes are just stupid- the xiaolongbao VS tortellini “debate” felt like a badly produced middle school skit.

If I were to give Chang and Meehan documentary advice, it would be to slow the pacing down, focus mainly on the two of them visiting fewer restaurants/ food carts, talking in depth to the chefs and closely examining their kitchens. Drop the blowhard politics. The cartoon segues are cute but don’t overdo them. Stop the silly skits! And show more cooking, especially of Chang cooking.

News From the Front

The Great Mouse War continues. We caught the stupid ones forthwith. As in, within minutes of setting out the traps. How dumb do you have to be? But the remaining mice are, to varying degrees, clever about avoiding traps. I’ve even seen some navigate around them like a lightning-paced dressage. We set them out with disposable gloves so they don’t smell human, and armed them with peanut butter. How do they know? Are the survivors spreading intel? Is my animal rights activist daughter sabotaging the traps while we sleep?

I’ve noticed a pattern with the clever ones. They’re quiet for a day or two but eventually venture out, I assume they get hungry. After enough venturing one or two ultimately get caught, then it’s quiet again. Each ‘wave’ is trickier than the last to dupe. One kitchen mouse in particular is proving quite shrewd, darting from island to cabinet to under the sink like a fearless laser beam.

Yesterday an epic battle took place that will be sung by bards for generations to come. My son- to help you envision this let me describe him- 6’2,” lanky, and the second or third nerdiest human being on the planet- caught sight of a mouse in the kitchen (no not ‘the’ kitchen mouse). He grabs the lid off my countertop roaster, slams it down on the mouse pinning it by the tail, and with his free hand grabs a glue trap and sticks it the beast. Humans, one, mice, zero!

When I picked up my daughters (not the animal rights one) from school I regaled them with the tale of how their brother caught a mouse with his bare hands. Well almost.

I will admit, they are cute. When they get ‘glued’ they make sweet, birdlike chirping sounds that are even cuter (I know they’re crying out in terror, I get it). But goddammit they are pooping all over my house and breeding like mormons.

Life on Zero Carb: What I Eat

When I was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes I immediately began eating what would be considered a moderately low carb diet, around 50 net carbs a day. I was able to control my blood sugar without medication or insulin, but as time went on I noticed my numbers creeping up. In response I restricted carbs further and further until I was at a zero, or very near zero carb level of food intake. I’ve been a ‘zero carber’ for two years now, eating only meat, fish, eggs, fats and hard cheeses. If I ever ‘cheat’ it’s the occasional bite of vegetable, and occasionally I fall into a jar of peanut butter. But 99% of my food consumption is of the aforementioned foods.

Turns out I’m not the only one. There’s an online subculture of zero carbers who embrace an all meat diet. They have a subreddit, a facebook page, and various bloggers detail their ‘zero carb journey.’ Vegans hate us!

‘Zero carb’ is a bit of a misnomer. Eggs and hard cheeses have carbs, albeit negligible amounts, less than half a carb per serving. I occasionally eat all beef hot dogs, which have a few carbs apiece. And when I cook meat in the slow cooker, I add vegetables for flavor but discard them after cooking. Probably a few carbs leech in.

A better term would be ‘meatarian’ or ‘animaltarian’ since most if not all of our calories come from animal products. I personally consume mayonnaise and vegetable oils, but many zero carbers do not.

So what exactly do I eat? For the past two days I took pictures of my breakfast and lunch. These are typical meals for me: some meat, some fat, sometimes eggs or egg yolks. I take it easy on dairy, more for taste reasons than anything else.

Clockwise you see: kosher hotdog and slow cooked egg; kosher hotdog mixed with full fat mayonnaise, on the side egg yolks, rotisserie turkey and more mayonnaise; slow cooked pork; bacon, slow cooked egg and vermont cheddar.

Three and a half years into type 2 diabetes my A1C is normal, my triglyceride-HDL ratio is superhuman, my morning glucose is never over 85 mg/dL, I rarely get sick and I maintain a slightly underweight BMI without trying. I am not on any diabetes medications nor insulin.

I sincerely believe this way of eating is saving my life, and may well have saved my young son’s life by sparing me any complications from gestational diabetes while pregnant with him. I have also spared the healthcare industry a tremendous amount of money on medical bills, diabetes supplies and prescriptions.

In closing I would aggressively recommend this diet for diabetics, and for anyone who wishes to lose weight. I quickly went from BMI 19 to 17 without trying. If it worked for me at such a low BMI, surely those with more pounds will have even greater weight loss effect. So go ahead and try it for a few weeks! Worst case scenario, you enjoy a few more bunless hamburgers than you would have otherwise.

Thoughts on Fasting

Today is Ash Wednesday, marking the beginning of Lent for Roman Catholics. The Orthodox Church has a different start date for Lent- Coptic Lent is already underway, and Greek/ Russian orthodox Lent begins next Monday.

The Catholic Lenten fast is pretty light- you just abstain from meat for a handful of days, and if possible, eat only one meal plus two snacks on those days.

The Orthodox Church is much stricter, requiring a vegan diet for the duration of lent, but is ambiguous about how many meals a person can eat each day. Only the Coptic Church is specific: those who are able to must abstain from all food and drink (including water) until a single evening meal- similar to the Ramadan fast but without the pre-dawn breakfast. Children, sick and elderly are exempt and can eat throughout the day.

I always found the “vegan fast” kind of odd. Having been a strict vegan for many years I know it is entirely possible to eat sumptuously on a vegan diet. I got damn good at cooking “fake meat” dishes- they rivaled the real thing. I could bake mountains of cookies, breads, cakes, muffins and churn out delicious pilafs with quinoa and brown rice. My salads were fantastic- a carrot raisin salad with peanut dressing was my favorite. YUM!

Fast forward to my diabetes diagnosis and I had to ditch the vast majority of vegan foods. Even “healthy whole grains” like brown rice, and the health-food-worshiped bean spike my blood sugar astronomically. Practically overnight I went from a bean, fruit, veggie and grain devouring vegan (I was a “healthy vegan,” having eschewed sugar for years before my diagnosis) to an all out carnivore.

Ironically I find eating a meat based, very low carb diet far more restrictive and spartan than my vegan days. I mean, technically I was following an orthodox Lenten fast for years! Funny, right? I never felt deprived in any way. But for three years now I have eaten nothing but meat, fish, egg yolks (I don’t like the whites) low carb vegetables, mayonnaise and the occasional binge on peanut butter. That’s it, and yes, it can grow taxing being boxed into such a restrictive diet by fate of health.

Another puzzle for me is that without restricting when you can eat, I don’t see where the fast is. Not to be a bible thumper, but when the bible mentions fasting it means NOT EATING! In some cases it means not even drinking water! How is having three square vegan meals a day “fasting?” There is a running joke in the Orthodox Church that people gain weight during the Lenten fast- Greeks are amazing cooks.

As a diabetic I am exempted from the fast, but would like to try the once-a-day eating if I can handle it. I’ve never done that before in my life, so one more thing to cross off the bucket list. Technically this is intermittent fasting which is all the rage these days.

Orthodox Christians are annoying. Try asking one about fasting rules, or what their personal views are on fasting. All you will get is “Ask a priest!!” Jeesh. God forbid you have an autonomous thought.

The Ditches

Sunday morning I had to visit someone in the hospital. I parked on bard ave- it being sunday morning I got a great spot- then traversed toward the hospital.

In order to do so I had to leap over a churning current of rain water pouring down the side of the road. It was a miniature river! Staten Island has been crazy rainy the past few days.

In doing so I had a flash of memory from my childhood, so vivid it left me shaken.

When we moved into our second home in new england, my beloved paternal grandmother decided there were drainage issues with our yard (no one else saw this, but she did). A steep hill behind our house sometimes sent rain water barreling toward the front yard, which in turn sent water tumbling into the street. Never mind there were exactly three houses on that street, and rain water emptied down a further steep (uninhabited) hill.

My grandmother took it upon herself to design an elaborate network of ditches that would otherwise conduct the water. That’s right: my 70+ year old grandmother, shovel in hand, dug a network of ditches around our house to redirect rainflow. It took her more than a year, with me occasionally assisting.

I was seven years old.

Hay que encontrar la manera! she would often say, panting for breath, in a jumble of english, spanish, and german. That was how she spoke.

She was ultimately successful. Those ditches redirected the water from our property into uninhabited woods. They criss-crossed  back, front, and side yards. She dug into the forest, emptying into burrows of pine needles and desolate woodland.

Last I checked, twenty years after she dug those trenches, and many years after her death, those trenches are still functional. Miniature manmade rivers redirecting rainwater around the property in neat, obedient currents.

She had an 8th grade education, forced out of school by world events. I often feel my own lavish education was an utter waste and would have been better spent on her. But it is what it is. God is weird.

I heard this song driving back home. My poor grandma is the antithesis of irish (no offense to irish) but she does ‘live on’ through me. Even the atheists out there can understand this: if a person impacts your heart, you carry their mortal legacy.

Mystical Allegory in The Good Catholic

[contains spoilers]

On the surface The Good Catholic is a sweet if awkward story of an unconsummated romance between a catholic priest and a free spirited, artistic young woman. Yet while watching, I kept catching hints there might be an intentional deeper, ‘supernatural’ secondary narrative, not unlike Boondock Saints. Like Boondock, The Good Catholic sprinkles easter eggs pointing to a hidden meaning, some more obvious than others.

The most obvious ‘hint’ that this is more than a simple love story is the bingo scene. Strangely in this scene the only person who seems to be able to see Jane is Father Daniel. Even when they burst into an argument, and Jane storms out after throwing a bible at him, no one looks up from their bingo cards. Believe me if a catholic priest was seen in public arguing with a beautiful young woman, people would notice!

Then it occurred to me: in both cafe scenes where Jane is singing, again, the only person who seems able to see her is Father Daniel. In the second scene Jane even makes a point of chastising the crowd for ignoring her.

With the theme of ‘seeing god’ introduced early on in the film it becomes clear that the Jane character is meant to represent more than an attractive young woman: she represents god, or belief in god. So the ‘relationship’ that develops between her and Father Daniel is, on this deeper level, in fact the story of his evolving relationship with god.

If Jane does in fact represent god, her strange assertion that she is dying suddenly makes sense; it is a nod to the nietzschean ‘god is dead,’ a nod to loss of faith in a relentlessly secularized world. And it is only after Father Daniel has fallen in love with her that she ‘comes back to life’ and admits she is not, in fact, dying.

There may be a further, even more wild mystery to the film regarding the priests. Note how many times the three priests are shown eating at the table in the exact same position. This is an unmistakable nod to the famous “three angels” holy trinity icon:

(note the three frames, and the three panes of glass in the background door)

The origin of this image is Genesis 18, where Abraham is approached by three angels who tell him his wife will conceive a son. Abraham then feeds them a meal. Christians believe these “three angels” represent the holy trinity, thus why you often see three angels sat around a table in orthodox icons.

The only scene where Jane is recognized by anyone other than Father Daniel is when she visits the rectory for dinner. Why does such a small parish have three priests? Even huge Staten Island parishes only have two priests. And why are the three priests repeatedly visually referenced to the holy trinity?

For non-christians out there, the catholic concept of the trinity is “three in one.” So while you may have three separate aspects to the trinity, they are ultimately considered one entity. An argument could be made here that, allegorically, these three priests are all aspects of Father Victor’s personality, and Father Victor is in fact the only priest in the parish. There are hints to this too scattered throughout the film; note how Father Victor tells Father Daniel that he “reminds him of a younger version of himself.”

Furthermore Father Victor is the only black person in the entire film (I would have to rewatch it, but I’m pretty sure even the crowd scenes are all white). Why was Father Victor cast as a black man? Was it the chance of catching a famous actor (Danny Glover) or was this deliberate and part of the script?

The reason this is important is because both catholic and orthodox churches have a mysterious tradition of depicting the madonna as having black skin- the “black madonnas.” These vierges noires are associated with miracles, mystery, and spiritual revelation.

If you watch (or rewatch) the film with these two points in mind: Jane as a representation of god/ belief in god, and the three priests as aspects of a single priest’s personality and struggles, I guarantee you will start picking up on the many hints and easter eggs scattered throughout. Pointedly the final dinner exchange between Jane and Father Victor lays it out plainly:

Jane: Was that, like, supposed to have some sort of deeper meaning?

Father Victor: In our work, everything has deeper meaning.

When viewed through this lens the film is not about a priest who abandons his faith for a romantic attraction, but rather about the psychological turmoil of a priest who ultimately ‘falls in love’ with god. It’s no mistake that the final scene is of Father Daniel about to knock on Jane’s door. Even casual christians will know Jesus’ famous statement: Knock and the door shall be opened.




More on Astral Projection

When this first began happening to me frequently (october 2016) I was reluctant to talk about it even with people close to me, even more reluctant to talk about it publicly. Not so much for people’s reactions which are typically uniform across factions- atheists think you’re crazy, christians and muslims think you’re worshiping satan, hindus just shrug- but more for the fact it’s really, really weird. Yet since it shows no signs of letting up- by this point I have projected hundreds of times- I have decided to talk about it more in depth for those who might be interested. I also feel duty bound to tell people, whether they can believe or not, that there is more to existence beyond this physical world.

So I will try to summarize succinctly my experience with astral projection, how it happens, what happens once I’m out, where I am, and the implications for our collective human experience. Let me be clear I do not have all the answers, and in many cases I’m as clueless as the next person, left only to postulate.

(For the record, I do not use, nor have I ever used, any type of recreational drug. I did try pot a handful of times in high school, hated it, and failed to see any appeal.)

How I Project
I do not project intentionally. It happens “to” me. If you are looking for an instructional guide I can patch together some advice as best I can, but short of that can only describe what happens.

1: The “classic” projection with a vibrational stage. This is when the body gets what feels like an electric pulse running through it- not really painful but not pleasant, accompanied by a roaring sound in the ears. Then a pressure builds up either in my forehead, back of neck, or top of my head [these are the sixth and seventh chakras, though I did not know this when I began projecting]. The soul then exits into what looks like a tunnel of light.

As for what this tunnel of light is, is anyone’s guess. I’m pretty sure it’s what people having near death experiences report- “the light at the end of the tunnel.” But the tunnel is made of light and looks like a vortex. Also, there is not just one tunnel. I say this because many times I have gone through one tunnel only to go through another, and another. They seem to be infinite. I’ve seen these tunnels/ vortexes described elsewhere as wormholes, but have no idea if this could be true.

However there have been times while in the “tunnel of light” I see what look like stars or planets around me. Am I in space? Some dimension of space? I don’t know.

This “tunnel of light” is described in detail by other projectors, so is definitely a shared experience.

2: “Push forwards.” As I projected more and more, I began experiencing what I call “push forwards.” This is when a dream turns lucid (when you have awareness that you’re dreaming) and I am instantly “pushed forward” into the astral. I can literally feel a “shove” going forward.

3: “Stand ups.” This is when, from a state of mild sleep paralysis, I can will my spirit body to stand up. I can then walk around in spirit form in what I assume is the spirit world/ astral, though this form of projection seems to lead to “levels” closer tied to the physical world.

Where am I after I project?
I can tell I’m in the “astral,” or whatever you want to call it (I prefer to call it “the other side” but it’s faster to type astral) mostly because I can feel an atmospheric change, kind of like when you’re in an airplane. There is also a different “look” to everything- to draw another comparison, like the difference between video and film. There is a visual “shift.” I also almost always feel an emotional, even cognitive shift within myself. All the stupid, selfish stuff falls away and I feel a direct sense of calm, love and general positivity (compare this to my grouchy, pessimistic self over here).

What is on the other side?? This is the question people have been asking since time immemorial! I’ll just tell you what I see.

There does seem to be a series of levels or layers. If you can imagine a series of transparent maps layered over one another; they make up a whole terrain but can be peeled back individually one by one as separate layers.

Some layers seem connected to this physical world. In these areas the world looks an awful lot like this one. Some beautiful places, some horrible places, places in between. You see people (though obviously they are souls) much as you see people here. You can talk to them and touch them. But the laws of physics don’t apply as they do here; for instance I can put my hand through solid objects and walk through doors and walls. A few times I can “fly” or jump great lengths.

I have learned through experience that the layers “look back.” For example, say I’m in the fourth layer (I don’t number the layers, but I’m saying this theoretically). I can then see everything in the 4th, 3rd, 2nd and 1rst layer. But someone in the 1rst layer cannot see past that 1rst layer, and will not be able to see me. There have been times I’ve approached someone and have to ask, “Can you see me?” because it’s unclear to me which “layer” they are in- the same layer as me, or a lower one.

But there are other layers not connected much to this world (at least, as far as I can tell). These worlds are heavenly beyond belief, with gorgeous flowers, lush landscapes and what appear to be higher beings (“gods?”). There are also darker places seemingly not connected to this world, housing darker entities.

As far as I can tell, when a person dies they tend to stay in the layers closely connected to this world. This is probably where the christian concepts of purgatory, hell, and heaven come from. I have encountered souls, particularly those who die by violent means, who do not seem to fully understand they are dead. The movie Jacob’s Ladder is surprisingly realistic in this capacity- a world much like this one but with different physical and spiritual phenomena.

Personally, I believe in reincarnation, though how it happens I don’t know. Our perception of time is linear but time may not be linear. So it’s possible all our incarnations are occurring simultaneously. In other words I’m not sure if a person dies, their soul hangs around the “lower layers” for a while, then is promptly reborn (this is the hindu concept of reincarnation). I also have no idea who or what decides how a particular soul’s incarnations take place.

Why don’t I spy on people?
It’s a running joke on astral projection sites that people always want to know what’s in Area 51. If I have this ability to leave my body (even if I cannot control when it happens) why am I not spying on people and amassing valuable information?

First off, it’s rude to spy. I wouldn’t walk into someone’s house without permission and start rummaging through their belongings. Second off, while parts of the astral may be connected to this physical world, that’s all it is- connected. It is NOT the physical world. So what I see in the astral may not match up with the physical. This is why even very experienced projectors such as myself can have difficulty providing validations. I have done some hard validations, so it is possible, but not as easy as one might think.

What do I do when I’m out?
When I began projecting frequently this was my primary dilemma. Here I was, on the other side, seeing with my own eyes what so many people struggle to believe in. Great, right? But what the hell was I supposed to do once there!!

After lots of googling I learned about retrievals from this blog written by another experienced projector.

A retrieval is when a projected soul (i.e. me) approaches a stuck soul. Usually these stuck souls died by violent means (suicide is a very common one), or have some attachment to this earth they cannot let go of. Other times they are just confused and don’t understand what’s going on.

The theory goes that these stuck souls cannot see the helpers (i.e. angels) trying to assist them (the “look back” issue with layers might be at play here). But for whatever reason these souls CAN see projected human souls, perhaps because we are still tied to the physical world. Once they see us, and interact with us a little, they can usually see the helpers and move on. Often the person I’m talking to will simply disappear before me (this happened in my very first retrieval), an indication they have indeed moved on.

What are the implications for humanity?
You are a human being with a soul. Your loved ones are human beings with souls. Your not-so-loved-ones are human beings with souls! The soul is eternal and multifaceted. When you die, your soul will move on, continue to exist, and (hopefully… lol) evolve somehow. All the loved ones you’ve lost to death are not dead. They are gone in body only.

Based on my experience with projections and retrievals I would give this one piece of advice: do not commit suicide. I have encountered many suicides on the other side, and while the soul is not permanently damaged, these souls end up “confused” in a sort of groundhog day type scenario with no sense of time passing. Obviously not all suicides are the same, but those who kill themselves for emotional reasons while their bodies are still healthy will not find the escape they seek, but will continue to face the troubles that bound them in the physical world.


In closing I hope you found this information useful or in some way comforting. If you have any questions, feel free to ask!