The Higher Self and transcendent experience, including OBEs

[TraineeHuman]

Posted by Highwhistler (here)
Friends -- thank you for all the contributions to this most fascinating topic.

You are invited to download this essay that I wrote several years ago:

Introduction to the OBE

If you find something interesting in it ... please share here.

Lovely ideas, Teka, expressed so nicely. I'm 100% in favor of emphasizing the wholistic view at all times, and the Oneness -- which is the glue that holds everything else together. It may not help us do our budgeting at all, but it's what keeps the Higher perspective alive in us.

Yes, the everyday world we live in as an intermeshing of the physical, astral/emotional and mental worlds, like some tightly woven tapestry. And we often notice only what's on the surface. I'm continually amazed that people are even able to say things like: "I walked through a wall, so then I knew I must be OB", because it's amazing that we're able to disentangle the physical from the other strands. And yet we learn to do that naturally.

I'd love to hear more specific details, but in non-scientific terms, from someone out there regarding how the physical world is a hologram, and what does this mean for us? Maybe HaulinBananas or someone can give us a link to something by Tom Campbell or whoever on this subject? I don't necessarily agree with Tom Campbell that the physical world must be digitally generated by some supercomputer in the sky. Long ago I did read a book by Karl Pribram called (I think) The Holographic Universe, written in the 1970s I think. Although that book was intellectually fascinating, I'm not sure it taught us anything specific about how to master the physicality hologram -- how to be in it and yet not part of it.

There's a sense in which the physical is a hologram of the Oneness. We can use meditation, astral projection, bilocation, and various psychic skills to trace back more of our ultimate origins to the Oneness. So, how does the notion of a hologram relate, for example, to our being a small copy of the Whole, even though we (think we) are only a small part? How does this relate to our capacity to be the Oneness -- free from any need to demand or desire or grasp at anything, because we already have it all?

[Finefeather]

Posted by TraineeHuman (here)
I happen to have had direct one-to-one conversations and encounters with a few of the greatest Gods who did incarnate, such as Shiva and Gaia.

This statement is incorrect and without truth or reality.

The ‘God’ Shiva is a mythological figure...no such Being exists in a single form because Shiva cannot exist without Vishnu and Brahma. Shiva, the destroyer, is the (motion) aspect of the Hindu Trinity...together with Vishnu the preserver (consciousness) and Brahma the creator (matter)...just as in the Christian religion we have Father, Son and the Holy Spirit...or Spirit, Soul and Body...or Motion, Consciousness and Matter...Father, Son and Mother etc etc. Each cannot exist without the other...at any level. If we look at this from a physical point of view we will see each of these aspects depicted in the manifestation called the human Being.

These are not separate manifestations but the 3 aspects of every state in the entire manifested cosmos.

Objective Consciousness...in any plane, or dimension, or state, or world is only possible because of the manifestation of objectivity...by the 3 aspects of the trinity...in some permutation or aggregate...there are 7 such levels each having 7 sub levels making a total of 49 levels of different aggregates of motion, consciousness and matter.

The fact that we cannot perceive such objectivity, in higher realms, is only due to our lack of objective consciousness in that level of consciousness...a common downfall in Indian philosophy and most of the so called gurus, who so many follow, and accept as the highest source of knowledge and attainment.

What is perceived by most is merely subjective consciousness...and the perception is thus dependent on the state of the perceiver...this is commonly known as the great illusion...because the mind can only perceive what it is capable of. Objective consciousness in all the subtle worlds beyond the physical is attained through the growth and evolution of consciousness.

“Maya”, or the “great illusion”, means that the individual without esoteric knowledge inevitably takes the physical world, then the emotional world, and later the mental world, accordingly, as his envelopes of incarnation (emotional, mental) dissolve, to be the only existing reality. This should be a clue to the more advanced esoteric student that the level reached by the average guru is not very high...especially when many of us still think that Nirvana is some great state of enlightenment when all it represents is Causal Consciousness or what some incorrectly call their Higher Self...a non existent entity which some have the impression they own. We are Monads...Individual primordial atoms...evolving our consciousness to become a 'Higher Self'...we are not Higher Selves yet!

Those who have not attained objective consciousness in higher worlds, like the emotional or mental, will create their own emotional illusions and mental fictions such as the example depicted in the above statement. It is a sure sign of the ego at work.

Take care
Ray

[Highwhistler]

Posted by Finefeather (here)

Posted by TraineeHuman (here)
I happen to have had direct one-to-one conversations and encounters with a few of the greatest Gods who did incarnate, such as Shiva and Gaia.

This statement is incorrect and without truth or reality.

... It is a sure sign of the ego at work.

Ray

If the Multiverse is infinite, then the statement above can be correct, true and real.

On the other hand, if the Multiverse is not infinite, then Finefeather may be right.

But, what the heck? What if Traineehuman actually had "direct one-to-one conversations and encounters with a few of the greatest Gods who did incarnate, such as Shiva and Gaia"?

It wouldn't get me upset. I'd think it's terrific!

What if Shiva, Gaia, Jesus, Whosits, or who ever else in the whole Multiverse decides to break the rules just a little bit, and comes to Traineehuman to have a little conversation? ... well ... why not? Good for both of them.

What if some of the ancient scripts, holy books, Masters, Teachers, gurus, saints, and brilliant people who express incredible ideas so eloquently (like yourself) ... what if they have some of it wrong? In fact ... I expect that's the case.

I would just shrug my shoulders and say "OK."

Final question: What if a person who is pointing at another person and saying that his ego is at work ... what if that person was actually projecting? That is, his ego was at work and he didn't realize what was going on, and it made him feel smart and powerful to point away from himself and call someone else egotistical.

That sort of think happens all the time.

I've done it myself. When I realized that I was projecting, I felt like a fool and I apologized to the person that I insulted.


Click to Enlarge.

[Kalamos]

..........

[TraineeHuman]

It sounds like both Joy_P and sway may have been experiencing the same variety of astral helpers/healers/guides -- ones who, as I say, I suspect are from a certain ET race. There are many different kinds of such beings.

There's one type that's particularly interesting, and significant. Astral projectors may at some point notice that at least sometimes when they project they are not alone. Rather, they may come to notice, there's a subtle benevolent being there with them, gently guiding their journey. They may also nortice or conclude that this being is not their HM -- not that it's important for everyone to "identify" their HM as an individual being (supposedly), rather than as certain Higher Forces to which they have some kind of special connection.

Such very subtle guidance will in fact often be coming from one or more guardian angels. As these come from a similar level of existence to the HM, it may be very hard to "tune in" to them, except through intuitions (or maybe through synchronicities or -- yes -- certain voices in your head). In this way we have help and guidance/advice available to us not only from our HM but from our GAs also. But we need to develop the skill of listening at that somewhat rarified and subtle level. Some people -- and presumably most people --, when they die, discover that a GA whom they had vaguely considered to be an inner part of themselves actually wasn't part of them.

Actually, as far as I know GAs invariably assist whenever a person is successfully projecting OB, and also even when they're unsuccessfully attempting to. I wonder if maybe that's one thing that subconsciously attracts some people to OB projection -- the feeling of actively experiencing OB company.

I consider it's interesting how all the Schillers and the Goethes and the Keatses and the Wordsworths said that their creations came via the intuitions of their "angel" (or their "daemon", which a few centuries ago meant "angel" in a good sense). On the other hand we have all the channelers. In reality it's often very hard to hear or grok what GAs or the HM is saying, partly because most of the time they don't "talk" in words. And yet the channelers claim to be getting "truth" word for word, even arranged into grammatical sentences. Doesn't add up, I suggest.

There are guides and there are "guides". Any discarnate being or entity, at any level, is capable of attempting to guide you. Unfortunately, many such beings may be too heavy with ego to be able to see clearly. Some may have the best intentions, but their "help" may often be counterproductive. Some may even be so possessed by their ego that they deliberately attempt to misguide you.

The usual model of how a channeler does their deed is that they supposedly go temporarily unconscious and allow the channeled being to take over their physical body. Unfortunately, I can assure you that any channeler who works in that way is of necessity a fraud. Any truly High being will always have way too much respect for the "vessel" of their messages to do anything but allow that "vessel" to consciously hear their message, and to retain conscious control of their physical body.

[Highwhistler]

Posted by Calamus (here)
The problem is that many people have conversations in the higher worlds with many gods and the like. We have to question whether these beings are the original consciousness or a representation based in our mind or a 'being' impersonating other beings.

Buddha said something like, "If you meet me on the path, kill me."

Hey may have meant, slay or subdue that impression, as it is not the Real Buddha (but a projection, illusion)

Ray and TH both explore higher worlds, so I pay equal attention to their experiences and knowledge.

Amen Calamus. Thank you.

One could say that to an Observer, the entire physical universe is empty and an illusion. After all, we think that the trees, people and everything in the physical world is "out there" ... but all our lives we've actually just been looking, hearing and sensing the physical world, from inside ourselves.

For instance, when you are looking at a tree in your yard ... what is actually happening is that the light coming from the tree has traveled to your eye ... it has entered your eye and the gone into your brain, and you are literally looking at an image or movie of the tree that is being projected inside yourself.

Years ago I became fascinated with this understanding when I was using a telescope and looking for the Andromeda Galaxy. Now most people think that through a telescope, your vision is going way out into space to see distant objects. But what's really happening is the light from stars and galaxies have traveled for thousands and millions of years, and tiny bits of their light has fallen on the front lens of the telescope, which sends the light down the tube and into the eye piece. But the light does not stop there, as the observer bends over the eye piece and looks at it, the light of stars and galaxies enters through her eyes and is projected back into the theater of her brain. And so the person is actually and truthfully looking at the stars and galaxies that are being reflected inside herself.

And so if you extrapolate this knowledge and understanding to the entire physical universe ... you will realize that you have been seeing, feeling, hearing and interacting with your family, loved ones, pets, wildlife, gardens, ecosystems, clouds, rivers of stars ... all of it, every bit of it, every second of your life, from inside yourself.


Click to Enlarge.

Then a meditator, upon realizing that the physical universe that she has always known, throughout her entire life -- has just been a projection, a beautiful unfolding reflection WITHIN herself.

Lost in contemplation, she asks "What are those images and movies inside myself, that I am seeing and feeling, and that I am a part of ... what are the raw materials that compose those images?" That is: what are those inner pictures and movies of the so-called "outside world" made of?

Off the top of her head she makes a list:

light
light is shaped into forms
sound
meaning
energy
consciousness
emotion
space
seen and experienced in a theater of present time
emptiness
me, the observer

She notes that there probably are other raw materials that make up the inner pictures and movies ... but that's all that comes to mind in this moment.

The meditator then notices and becomes aware that all thoughts, feelings, dreams, memories, inner visions, imaginative movies and psychic pulsations -- all are made of the same raw materials of consciousness (that reflections of the "outside world" are made of) ... and the outside and inside worlds are being seen in the same inner theater.

Then she asks: "What pictures, images and inner movies are real? ... and what are not?" ... She replies to herself "Every observer can figure that out for herself, if she cares to do so ... or she can leave it open to be answered in the future when more understanding and knowledge from first-hand experiences come our way."

She also notices that memories, thoughts and imagination are made of the same raw materials of consciousness ... and that they are often hybrids of one another. That is: parts of memories are mixed in with imagination, dreams and so on ... and she cannot, exactly, categorize them into nice little boxes with pretty little explanations.

She realizes that Jesus, Buddha and all the saints, sinners and everyone in between ... they all, in a very real sense ... have just been stories and energies passed along by others, that she has been interacting with, inside her self.

Sometimes images of the Buddha emerge from the depths of inner space ... they live for a while ... and then they slip back into the infinite depths of inner cosmic wonder.

But now she does not ask if that version of the Buddha is real or not ... she does not grasp it at all ... she just lets it be. She allows it to exist in infinite forms ... coming and going freely ... but always returning to the vast inner fields of silence, space and emptiness.

[Joy_P]

Thank you, TH, for your comments. I love this thread. I'm slowly reading every post from the beginning. There is so much information.

I was very interested in your comments about the blue humanoid. I have received a lot of instruction from other beings in the astral realms. I wish I were a better student! Still learning after all these years. Thank you again, TH!

[Finefeather]

Hi Dear Highwhistler
Well you sure are a ‘what if’ person now aren't you?

Posted by Highwhistler (here)
If the Multiverse is infinite, then the statement above can be correct, true and real.

On the other hand, if the Multiverse is not infinite, then Finefeather may be right.

Well, first...you are asserting that there is such a thing called the Multiverse which, according to many, is a hypothetical set of infinite or finite possible universes. I like your mind, because I also think that that is true, but with just one exception. I think the name is incorrect and should be termed, Muliple Cosmos’s. The word Cosmos was first used instead, of Universe, by Pythagoras because it is an ordered version of a Universe...there is order in the Cosmos. Just a little trivia

Infinity, on the other hand, is impossible to prove by any means because it is an abstract concept describing something without any limit...endless. I wonder who actually invented this word because it means nothing...yet it means so much ... and practically it does not exist because no one can prove it and reach it...even the ‘Gods’? Even when calculations end up as infinity it tells us nothing...everyone is still in the dark after getting the answer...despite the attempt to resolve the equation and enlighten us.

In esoterics the term absolute is used to signify a manifested Cosmos and it has bounderies which we, with our limited minds, cannot grasp.

Posted by Highwhistler (here)
But, what the heck? What if Traineehuman actually had "direct one-to-one conversations and encounters with a few of the greatest Gods who did incarnate, such as Shiva and Gaia"?

It wouldn't get me upset. I'd think it's terrific!

What if Shiva, Gaia, Jesus, Whosits, or who ever else in the whole Multiverse decides to break the rules just a little bit, and comes to Traineehuman to have a little conversation? ... well ... why not? Good for both of them.

What if some of the ancient scripts, holy books, Masters, Teachers, gurus, saints, and brilliant people who express incredible ideas so eloquently (like yourself) ... what if they have some of it wrong? In fact ... I expect that's the case.

I would just shrug my shoulders and say "OK."

I am delighted to read of your nonchalant attitude towards others. When reading this I was wondering at what point you might take some interest in the person, or subject, you might be considering...so let me add one more ‘what if’ to your list for possible consideration:

What if there is a reality out there, that can explain the phenomena, which many experience, which leads them to believe, and be convinced, that what they are subjectively experiencing, is real and a fact...yet it is not the real reality but just an illusion?

I guess from your easy going attitude you might just “shrug your shoulders and say "OK.""
Or would you be interested to learn more about it?

Posted by Highwhistler (here)
Final question: What if a person who is pointing at another person and saying that his ego is at work ... what if that person was actually projecting? That is, his ego was at work and he didn't realize what was going on, and it made him feel smart and powerful to point away from himself and call someone else egotistical.

That sort of think happens all the time.

This is really an example of an old and common, emotionally devised, form of twisting the situation around to take the focus off a point of contention.

When does criticism become constructive to you? Never? Are you the type of person who cannot handle criticism because it might just wake you up one day? Or are you frightened that criticism might threaten your belief system?

Do not seek praise. Seek criticism. [..] If, instead of seeking approval, you ask, ‘What’s wrong with it? How can I make it better?’, you are more likely to get a truthful, critical answer.

Although receiving compliments is far more satisfying in a superficial kind of way, I learned to value criticism more. Most of the times, it improves my work and when I don’t agree, I can always reject it.

Finally...my mind is far from consciously choosing to criticize and be nasty to any human. When I notice a statement, in this forum, which I have a right to respond to, which I might be able to shed some light on, I do. In this post I spent the majority of time giving my idea and knowledge of why this statement is incorrect, untrue and not real. You can choose to accept it or not. I made no claim to it’s authenticity or correctness...other than that it is knowledge which I have gained from my experiences on this earth and beyond. I have realized many years ago just how little I know...and how far we are from our goal because of ignorance.

As far as TraineeHuman is concerned...I am aware of his large contribution to some peoples growth and I respect that and wish him well. My love for him is not, and will never be tainted by some statement which is made, possibly in the 'enthusiasm' of the moment.

I love your pictures on your posts...thanks.
Take care
Ray

[Highwhistler]

Posted by Calamus (here)
Buddha said something like, "If you meet me on the path, kill me."

Some people may not of done this, or know what this means, and I would like to make a contribution ...

"Slaying the Buddha" is an understanding and meditation technique that has been passed along from Buddhist to Buddhist down through the centuries. I, personally, do not think that Buddha actually ever said those words (in his native language of course), but the idea was conceived by Buddhist meditation teachers several centuries after Buddha passed away, and then passed along to everyone ever since.

The "slaying the Buddha" technique is widely accepted to be connected to great Buddhist meditation teachers, monks and Lamas, and so many meditators think: "Well, of course it's true, correct, good, and a very advanced technique."

I personally, have used the technique every day for over 40 years. But in my opinion, it is just a run-of-the-mill technique and should be used wisely ... being guided by you, through you own personal intuition and from your own direct, everyday, ordinary, first-hand, continual, inner experiences. Please take the technique out for a test drive and see what it's like.


The technique

During meditation, here is what "slaying the Buddha" entails (this is just one example, and it can take an infinite number of forms):

The meditator begins meditation and turns her attention from the so-called "outer world" to the inner universes. She becomes peaceful and quiets her body-mind-emotional complex. Her relaxed presence uses the tool of attention, to be completely focused in the inner theater.

The "inner theater" is composed of her non-physical presence as the observer, and an infinite space of emptiness, silence and peace that the presence is aware of, is a part of, and lives in. The space of emptiness, silence and peace is like the home for who and what she is -- the awake presence. In this theater, in the empty areas all around ... stuff begins appearing: inner content like thoughts, feelings, dreams, imaginative movies, lights, sounds, psychic pulsations and so on ...

As she -- the fully awake, alert presence -- is chilling out in the silence of the inner theater -- fully focused, absolutely relaxed -- she starts noticing thoughts, feelings, dreams, imaginative movies, memories and psychic phenomena rising out of the emptiness. Each stream of thoughts and movies live for a while ... and then each of them disappear back into the vast field of silence and emptiness, within. It's like each thought and memory has its own life cycle in the field of her awareness. Each thought can also be recalled out of the depths of inner silence, just by her wanting it to appear before her presence, so that she may experience it again, and again, and again ...

The meditator simply allows all the inner content to come and go, come and go, come and go, without becoming involved with any of it. "Becoming involved" in this case means attaching her attention, emotions, and/or subtle energies to certain thoughts and movies that arise from the inner stillness ... because when she does, those thoughts and movies will live on, and on, and on ... as attention, energies and emotions are powerful creative fuels that run the rich content of the inner worlds that she, the meditator, the Presence ... is viewing.

One of the most powerful techniques for the meditator is the skill of letting go. "Letting go" is an art and a science. She learns how to let inner content rise up out of the stillness on its own, live for a while, and then naturally disappear ... without her giving the thoughts, memories, psychic stuff and imaginative movies any of her extra attention, her energies, and certainly not her emotions.

She just allows the inner content have a normal life span ... to come and go like clouds in the sky. Just as she is not attached to pushing a cloud this way or that ... all the inner content is treated in the same way. She lets it all go.

OK now: some of the imagery and movies that appear in her inner world are of the magnificent, beautiful and wise Buddha! They appear because she loves Buddhist teachings, philosophy, techniques, culture, ideas, dominant feelings and world views ... and all this stuff that have been passed along to her from others. She is tuned-into the same energetic frequencies as Buddhism, and so the collective Buddhist community is naturally pulsing with Buddhist imagery-teachings-feelings that are telepathically floating to Buddhist everywhere, for them to share and experience in their minds and hearts.

"Slaying the Buddha" is a symbolic term, of course, as when imagery of the Buddha appears in her inner worlds ... she, with no emotion, just says to it "so what?" She doesn't care at all. In this meditation technique, images of the Buddha, Jesus, or whoever appears before the inner gaze of her Presence ... they are the same value as anything else that appears during meditation. And so she uses her highly focused skill of letting go to simply keep her fully awake presence sitting back in the emptiness ... and allow the imagery of the Buddha, or saints, or holy anything and everything to just come and go normally. She does not reach out with her attention and grab the so-called sacred images with her attention or emotions ... she just lets them disappear in the same manner as every other thought. She does not push against the inner material to make it go away ... and she does not attempt to draw it to her, grasp it, or make it live longer. She just lets it all go.


My experience and POV

If you are a person like me, who's been meditating hours a day for over 40 years ... well, you've literally "slayed" millions upon millions of Buddha's, Jesus's, Shiva's -- whoever and whatever that rises in your fields of inner perceptions.

Again: "slaying" in this sense just means letting go and not caring at all about the Buddha and his imagery, ideas, the feelings and history connected to him. Sacred imagery and spiritual things are really no big deal to the experienced meditator who is using the "slay the Buddha" technique, as you're going to ignore all of them anyway and get back into the inner stillness where you belong.

I've not only "slayed the Buddha" during meditation for decades, but using the same symbology: I've also slayed all the meditation teachers, gurus, and spiritual-types that have passed along their meditation techniques to anyone. I've not read their books, not collected their posters, I don't have their holy beads, little statues, burned candles for them, or whatever -- I've tossed all of their favorite sayings and teachings out of my life. I've ignored them all and have gone my own inner path ... following my own continual, direct, first-hand experiences, developing my own techniques and have grown my own understandings. All the teachers and saints are certainly present, as they are part of the Multiverse. Its just in my inner being, I don't emphasize them more than, say ... a flower in the garden.

During meditation, I really couldn't care in the least about what the saints or the Dalai Lama, or Jesus, or any meditation teacher says ... even those who have suggested that "slaying the Buddha" is a good idea. I let them and their teachings go.

My main love is for the silence, stillness, peace and emptiness of the Universe, and for me, those inner elements has become a significant part of my identity.

Once you have that identity, and you can quiet your mind in less than the twinkle of an eye -- because YOU ARE THE STILLNESS -- then you can take a look at meditation teachers and their techniques with neutrality and without emotion. This has caused me to ponder if some of the great holy people down through the ages, some of the teachers that have students and followers -- I wonder if perhaps some of them were off their psychic-spiritual rockers? Maybe some of the techniques being passed along are not so great. Maybe some of them are flat-out wrong, or truly unhelpful? Maybe the "Slay the Buddha" technique that teachers have suggested is not advanced at all. Perhaps its over-emphasized, no big deal, and sometimes down-right a stupid thing to use during some meditation experience? That's certainly the case for me.

Think clearly about this: what kind of spiritual pervert suggests that you slay every time imagery of the Buddha, Jesus or whoever, appears before your awake presence in the inner Universe? In my opinion -- its insane.

I do appreciate knowing how to do the "slay the Buddha" technique, and I see how using the technique casts big influences over the inner energetic ecosystems as well as the unfolding of inner content. But for me ... it's just a technique. Learn it. Learn how to use it. But it's no big deal. Again: I've used it for decades ... but no freekin' way will I use it all the time, for everything, for every spiritual being that appears in my inner Universe.

For me ... sometimes when the Buddha or any other kind-hearted presence appears, rather than "slaying him or her" ... we merge, we share, we become entangled ... we become lost in one another. I am grateful.

The Multiverse is a big place ... and there's plenty of room for each person to use any techniques they want and to have all the inner experiences they so desire. I invite you to go exploring.

Click to enlarge.

[TraineeHuman]

With wonderful passion and the most extraordinary clarity, Highwhistler has been describing what sort of terrain you discover once you get seriously into meditation. In my experience it seems to take most genuine people at most a few months of meditating an hour a day, every day, before they start having some seriously deep experiences of that same terrain, at least once or twice, if not more, even after several months. And then more and more as they continue.

As she so eloquently and simply explains, the answers to so many of your questions just become apparent once you're in that terrain. You can see the answers for yourself then. They become very obvious, most of them. The basis of meditation is allowing absolutely everything to be exactly as it is. You can find absolutely all you need to know about how to do that -- and I do mean absolutely all -- in the first fifteen minutes or so of the second of the three videos of Adyashanti's referenced in post #1396.

When a person is learning to drive, they don't study the car manual and try hard to get a good theoretical model of how the engineering and the thermodynamics of the car works. They just simply do it -- they turn the ignition key on, and off they go. Although they have an instructor at hand they can ask questions of, they ask the questions as these come up in the action of doing it.

I write posts about stuff like this because to me just to talk about the beloved is exhilirating. It's a bit like a newlywed talking about their partner. I'm sure Teka (Highwhistler) feels similarly.

I guess the kind of terrain Teka has been talking about may only become real to you once you start to get realizations, however small, coming to you in the waking state as you go about your everyday business. That's because at such a point you've changed who/what you are. For example, when you relax you no longer do it the same way as the average non-meditator, but you do it in an aware way, with the "inner" now effortlessly switched on.

If I may take the liberty of trying to echo part of what Teka has recently been saying: consciousness must have the power and the opportunity to unfold completely. Its true nature is to be perfectly aware, and first and foremost it's aware of itself, rather as your eyes can't help seeing part of the nose on your face wherever they may look. Once it's aware of itself it sees directly that everything supposedly "out there" isn't "out there" at all, in reality, in fact. Meditation involves developing your consciousness to make it perfect -- and that's much easier to do than it may sound, though it does take time. Again, another reason to shut up and just do it.

"The ecstasy of the individual who has attained the Silence sets into motion the two births, the human self-expression and the divine, and moves between them. " -- Rig Veda.

[HaulinBananas]

Posted by TraineeHuman (here)
. . . Yes, the everyday world we live in as an intermeshing of the physical, astral/emotional and mental worlds, like some tightly woven tapestry. . . I'd love to hear more specific details, but in non-scientific terms, from someone out there regarding how the physical world is a hologram, and what does this mean for us? Maybe HaulinBananas or someone can give us a link to something by Tom Campbell or whoever on this subject? I don't necessarily agree with Tom Campbell that the physical world must be digitally generated by some supercomputer in the sky. Long ago I did read a book by Karl Pribram called (I think) The Holographic Universe, written in the 1970s I think. Although that book was intellectually fascinating, I'm not sure it taught us anything specific about how to master the physicality hologram -- how to be in it and yet not part of it.

There's a sense in which the physical is a hologram of the Oneness. We can use meditation, astral projection, bilocation, and various psychic skills to trace back more of our ultimate origins to the Oneness. So, how does the notion of a hologram relate, for example, to our being a small copy of the Whole, even though we (think we) are only a small part? How does this relate to our capacity to be the Oneness -- free from any need to demand or desire or grasp at anything, because we already have it all?

Hi TraineeHuman: Recently, for various reasons, have been lightly following your thread and see your request, but it comes at time when I am digesting a lot of information. Tom Campbells' entire trilogy finally is available as an audio book (via Audible) and I have listened to the three books, some parts twice or three times and am absorbing the information. I take breaks by going to other OBE authors or their websites or youtube videos, some of which were posted in your thread. I don't have much to offer in answer to your request, other than a suggestion to read some of the pdf forms found in Tom Campbell's website titled Gems from the Forum and this quote from his book:

(Book 2, Section 3, Chapter 40)

"OTHER DIMENSIONS - The concept of "dimension" is not as strange or difficult to understand as it first seems. Thoughts, ideas, or mental constructs that are held by AUM (in memory) define individuated existence and the dimensions (interaction boundaries) of that existence. One way to think of dimension is that it represents constraints on the allowable interaction between independent reality systems - similar to dividers in a notebook, a wall between rooms, or the glass between Petri dishes. . . .

. . . dimensional separators are often porous. To understand why, we can look at our own multi-dimensional nature. A more accurate description of space-time based humanoids is that they are individuated units of conscious awareness who constrain a portion of their consciousness to a sense-limited 3D experiential physical reality. We can, through the doorway of our subjective mind, learn to transcend the barriers of dimension. Being aware and operant in multiple dimensions is what allows the Big Picture to come into sharp focus through firsthand experience. Exploring the multidimensional properties of your consciousness enables you to examine AUM and he nature of your reality scientifically from the inside, rather than hypothetically, from the outside. Thus, you can see how important it is that you do not allow your ignorance, fear and belief to shut off this incredibly important pathway to a greater understanding. . . . " (AUM = Absolute Unbounded Manifold)

But dear TH, this answer is supplied from within a fog of thoughts. I have been a glutton for OBE information and feel like a full sponge floating in a bucket of water. Yesterday I spoke with someone who goes OBE, and received a very insightful email this morning from that same person who pointed out that I am avoiding the actual experience by spending more time trying to learn more about it. This thread, and others, have had wonderful informative and helpful posts from OBE experiencers. Thus, I thank you for your acknowledgement of my existence, which makes me feel validated in some strange way, and offer up this weak response to your question . . . done more to politely respect your request, but with less to offer than most on this thread. I am dog paddling in place, surrounded by skilled swimmers.

[Highwhistler]

Posted by Finefeather (here)
Hi Dear Highwhistler
Well you sure are a ‘what if’ person now aren't you?

Posted by Highwhistler (here)
If the Multiverse is infinite, then the statement above can be correct, true and real.

On the other hand, if the Multiverse is not infinite, then Finefeather may be right.

Well, first...you are asserting that there is such a thing called the Multiverse which, according to many, is a hypothetical set of infinite or finite possible universes. I like your mind, because I also think that that is true, but with just one exception. I think the name is incorrect and should be termed, Muliple Cosmos’s. The word Cosmos was first used instead, of Universe, by Pythagoras because it is an ordered version of a Universe...there is order in the Cosmos. Just a little trivia

Infinity, on the other hand, is impossible to prove by any means because it is an abstract concept describing something without any limit...endless. I wonder who actually invented this word because it means nothing...yet it means so much ... and practically it does not exist because no one can prove it and reach it...even the ‘Gods’? Even when calculations end up as infinity it tells us nothing...everyone is still in the dark after getting the answer...despite the attempt to resolve the equation and enlighten us.

In esoterics the term absolute is used to signify a manifested Cosmos and it has bounderies which we, with our limited minds, cannot grasp.

Posted by Highwhistler (here)
But, what the heck? What if Traineehuman actually had "direct one-to-one conversations and encounters with a few of the greatest Gods who did incarnate, such as Shiva and Gaia"?

It wouldn't get me upset. I'd think it's terrific!

What if Shiva, Gaia, Jesus, Whosits, or who ever else in the whole Multiverse decides to break the rules just a little bit, and comes to Traineehuman to have a little conversation? ... well ... why not? Good for both of them.

What if some of the ancient scripts, holy books, Masters, Teachers, gurus, saints, and brilliant people who express incredible ideas so eloquently (like yourself) ... what if they have some of it wrong? In fact ... I expect that's the case.

I would just shrug my shoulders and say "OK."

I am delighted to read of your nonchalant attitude towards others. When reading this I was wondering at what point you might take some interest in the person, or subject, you might be considering...so let me add one more ‘what if’ to your list for possible consideration:

What if there is a reality out there, that can explain the phenomena, which many experience, which leads them to believe, and be convinced, that what they are subjectively experiencing, is real and a fact...yet it is not the real reality but just an illusion?

I guess from your easy going attitude you might just “shrug your shoulders and say "OK.""
Or would you be interested to learn more about it?

Posted by Highwhistler (here)
Final question: What if a person who is pointing at another person and saying that his ego is at work ... what if that person was actually projecting? That is, his ego was at work and he didn't realize what was going on, and it made him feel smart and powerful to point away from himself and call someone else egotistical.

That sort of think happens all the time.

This is really an example of an old and common, emotionally devised, form of twisting the situation around to take the focus off a point of contention.

When does criticism become constructive to you? Never? Are you the type of person who cannot handle criticism because it might just wake you up one day? Or are you frightened that criticism might threaten your belief system?

Do not seek praise. Seek criticism. [..] If, instead of seeking approval, you ask, ‘What’s wrong with it? How can I make it better?’, you are more likely to get a truthful, critical answer.

Although receiving compliments is far more satisfying in a superficial kind of way, I learned to value criticism more. Most of the times, it improves my work and when I don’t agree, I can always reject it.

Finally...my mind is far from consciously choosing to criticize and be nasty to any human. When I notice a statement, in this forum, which I have a right to respond to, which I might be able to shed some light on, I do. In this post I spent the majority of time giving my idea and knowledge of why this statement is incorrect, untrue and not real. You can choose to accept it or not. I made no claim to it’s authenticity or correctness...other than that it is knowledge which I have gained from my experiences on this earth and beyond. I have realized many years ago just how little I know...and how far we are from our goal because of ignorance.

As far as TraineeHuman is concerned...I am aware of his large contribution to some peoples growth and I respect that and wish him well. My love for him is not, and will never be tainted by some statement which is made, possibly in the 'enthusiasm' of the moment.

I love your pictures on your posts...thanks.
Take care
Ray

Wow! Thanks Ray. I really appreciate your messages ... and also that the concepts that you express are so clear and detailed. Your points of view are equal to mine ... and maybe even more correct than my angles of vision. And so again: thanks for sharing.

I started reading your messages to my partner and she enjoyed them so much, we started reading them out loud to each other and enjoyed that time together.

Both of us took a long time to digested and assimilated your words and good ideas. She asked me to say "thank you" for sharing your personal insights with us.

In peace & with blessings ...

Personal Inner Holograms > symbolic art by Highwhistler.

[Eram]

Posted by TraineeHuman (here)

Henry, you say you aspire to not being attached to beliefs and opinions, because that, you believe, amounts to freedom at the level of the mental plane. So, why all the attachment to (apparently) believing that hylozoics is "the truth"? One thing I would like to mention to you and Eram is as follows.

The history of post-medieveal philosphy has been that for three centuries all the greatest philosophers each tried to construct a "theory of everything", also known as a philosophical system. Through a gradual process of learning from the inadequacies of the attempts of all who had gone before, by the late nineteenth or early twentieth century it became clear to philosophers that no such thing as an accurate "theory of everything" is even possible. So, just on that basis I know in advance that hylozoics, or whatever else you like, will be full of serious flaws. If you want to treat it as a theory of everything, I already know in advance that you're misleading yourselves.

What I write about in posts is mostly based on direct experience. There's no belief in that, but direct and certain knowledge. I don't attach to any belief system. Either I know, or I don't know. And hopefully I'm ruthlessly honest with myself regarding all that I don't know. And I do happen to know as fact, from much experience over most of my life, that what hylozoics says about the formless is altogether a false belief -- no doubt based on inadequacy of direct relevant experience. The truth doesn't need to be defended.

Hi TH,

Just for the record, so there are no misunderstandings about this:
Hylozoics is not a philosophy and it even claims that philosophy will never be able to construct a clear world or cosmic view that is in touch with reality.
It claims that it is a form of esoterics that has been taught by Pythagoras, who was a evolved being when he incarnated here to teach his knowledge in a secret knowledge order to personally picked initiates.
This is the way that knowledge about reality has been shared through the ages since the fall of Altantis according to Laurency. Secret knowledge orders where only people with a certain level of consciousness and responsibility could participate.

The knowledge comes from a higher plane of being and understanding, directly accessed by the incarnated being (Pythagoras in this case) and is shared with the initiates.
Secret because certain parts of this knowledge (especially the knowledge that grants access to magic/manipulation of reality) have been abused in both Lemuria and Atlantis and lead to the destruction of these societies.

The esoterics claim to paint a correct view to reality and one can use this view to develop ones self, but one has to find proof for the claims in esoterics every step of the way.
No blind belief here, but merely a working hypotheses which can act as a guide to understanding and growth in consciousness.
It's approach is one of personal experience above all, just as you advocate, so there is no difference there .

Posted by TraineeHuman (here)

Posted by Calamus (here)
[W]hen we really 'open our mind' and as we go about looking for better answers and ideas, which is the very impulse of our Spirit to do (to KNOW), then we fight against that programing. We fight against our Mental Self, our Mental Body... It takes the effort of True Will and Real/Free THINKING to break free from the chains that bind our Mind.

Then there are pitfalls, as one Ideology or Paradigm might free us from an older, outdated, less expansive one, only to now bind us in a new Meme or Ideology; a higher Place in the Mental World, but still bound to that World.

For instance, Buddhism might free one from Dogmatic Christianity, but then you are bound to the Mental Ideas of Buddhism, and on an intellectual level at first (as no one is Enlightened just by considering Buddhism). The same thing, a philosophy of scientific materialism might free you from Religious Mental complexes.

So the key is to identify this process; to objectify the different functions of your lower bodies as they pertain to your thinking, whether reactive/subjective, or proactive/objective.

This is how I personally see Mindfulness.

What I continue to struggle to do, and it is freeing and yet an awfully scary place to be, is to BELIEVE NOTHING, but just observe things and your reaction to things.

It is difficult to have no belief, and maybe impossible (I might be fooling myself), but as it is, this is how we discover the underlying World View of our Spirit, perhaps how discover The Knowledge of Reality.

So when I get emotional, I immediately look for the cause. Easy.

When I consider a new paradigm or Idea, I realize that I'm comparing it to something else (in my Mind), so I step back. Not so easy.

The way I would put it is, I find that most individuals seriously working to liberate themselves will have rather quickly freed the mental part of themselves at least to the extent that it becomes convinced of the need to work deeply on the inner level, and in cooperation with the HM and Higher Forces.

But very often I find it's on the emotional plane -- in the emotions -- that such individuals are held back. This emotional "self" has not agreed to the evolution the individual has mentally convinced themselves about working towards.

These emotions need not just be pure emotions such as anger or fear. Often they will contain a mental part, but still be emotions. Some examples: greed, addiction to power, narcissism, obsession, and possessiveness, to name just a few. These are what slow most people down. One has to find a way to keep them on the periphery and superficial. One needs to become more strongly conscious of dwelling more deeply inward, calm and at ease there. Then the outer emotions can more easily fall away -- if one faces them. I guess all the stuff you said about mindfulness amounts to a detailed version of much the same as what I'm saying here.

There is actually also a different kind of blockage on the mental level that it's also very important to overcome. This is made up of very negative self-judgments everyone has made at the time of their life review just after their most recent lifetime. These judgments are put into oneself at the time of birth. Often a person is tougher in their judgment of themselves than anyone else is. The trouble with these judgments is that they are lodged in the subconscious. Most people (perhaps secretly) simply don't like themselves, and feel unlucky in life. That's largely because the person is carrying over those judgments from the end of their previous lifetime. The best way to get rid of such self-judgments seems to be through calmly putting oneself into a higher state and yet at the same time being willing to let rip with feeling whatever negative emotions are sitting in your belly.

The other, longer-term way to specifically help free yourself of those negative judgments is by cultivating genuine self-esteem. This means consciously liking yourself or thanking or congratulating yourself more, accepting yourself more, warts and all, forgiving yourself more without neglecting any of your responsibility.

We should appreciate that the body itself, strictly speaking, isn't just physical. It too has a certain level of separate consciousness. To some extent it's able to disobey the mind. The negative emotions mentioned earlier tend to "anchor" themselves to areas of the body, in what is really a form of attachment.

We have had some communication about these issues for the last year, both in this thread and through PM's TH and I have recently had an experience that I'd like to share here.

Both my girlfriend and me have done a session with iboga some time back.
For the ones that don't know about iboga:
It is the bark of a tree that lives in Africa and for some time now people in the west use it for a variety of reasons.
Mostly to end addiction to heroine or other drug like that, since it gets rid of any signs of withdrawal, so people can stop with drugs and have no more cravings for it.
They also call it the reset button, since many people report to feel like they did as in their teens again afterwards.
Also, it is said to cram 20 years of psychotherapy into one session and this is the reason why we both felt drawn to it.

Just so everyone is clear on this:
Iboga is no joke.
It is heavy for the liver and the heart and the experience itself is also not to be underestimated because while in this altered state of consciousness, one is forced to face all self judgments, grief that one has stored in the unconsciousness. Also many trauma's from the past, especially from early on in age are addressed there.
it is a though ride and one has to be able to stomach it (for me, it was almost to much to bare ).
So, there is no risk to getting addicted to it.

How I experienced it was that in this altered state of awareness, the conscious and the unconscious part of me started to communicate freely.
I could focus my intent on certain issues that I wanted to deal with, and the unconscious part of me responded with motion pictures and impressions/feelings that were of concern in regards to that topic. It did so until I found a new understanding (more in line with reality).
Also, whenever I took a little break, it started to bring issues to the table on it's self.... pointing out certain trauma's that I wasn't even aware of.
Looking back now, I'm also quite sure that lots of inherited family issues got dealt with, without being aware of it.

The reason why I felt like bringing it to the conversation here is that it brought me in contact with my self judgments (relentlessly) and ever since, I feel that much of it is resolved.
I agree that underneath, many people are their hardest critics and I have been able to get a taste of it .
Afterwards, in the last few weeks, I have been able to access these self judgments on a more regular bases. Sometimes, I focus on them ans put them on like one would a coat. Just experiencing it, becoming more aware of it.

The whole experience changed me more then I ever expected and still to this day, I am figuring out how and what exactly.
It is a bit like I have a whole new bunch of settings and features and I'm still learning how to access and to operate them.
For instance:

• I have always been pretty lazy (subjective judgment) and now, I can put on my cloths in the morning, drink a cup of tea and start working at the renovation of our house for the whole day, for weeks on end now. I enjoy the whole day that I am working and even have to hit the breaks every now and then to avoid exhaustion.
• I am much more confident about myself, but I'm still working out this if some sort of overconfidence or that I just resolved certain issues in regards to this subject.
• Playing computer games have always had an attraction to me to the point that I had to restrict myself in order to have enough time for everyday life. Now, I couldn't care less about it. No attraction what so ever.
• A lot of PTSD symptoms seem to have disappeared. (we talked about these through PM before). My family couldn't be more happy about this .
• There is an enormous increase in intellectual, mental investigation. Like a new driving force that I never had before. I can't wait to read new material and build new ideas with it etc.
• There is more, but much is still in the process of discovering and evaluating.

Anyway, this experience brought me into contact with my self judgments big time and I'm pretty sure that some of them have been resolved to a certain degree and I agree with you TH, that these judgments are powerful and need to be addressed at some point in life.

[TraineeHuman]

Eram, you've agreed absolutely that "experience is king", so I wonder if Hylozoics is a collection of experiential exercises? If it isn't, then I'm afraid I don't really see how experience really is king. I'm not saying that as a way of trying to put Hylozoics or whatever you are pursuing down. If it's a collection of experiential exercises, I would really be interested in seeing them and doing them, or their equivalent. If it's not, well, my own individual focus is on experience, actually.

Spiritual evolution isn't primarily achieved through intellectual study or debate. Such debate tends to have a harsh edge to it. It's always far easier to criticize others and claim they are wrong than to face oneself. Everyone -- or virtually everyone -- isn't aware of their shadow, but debating of the right-fighting sort ("I am right and you are wrong") is a great way to ignore all those areas within themselves that a person isn't facing, and doesn't even know about. It's not helpful.

The reason why I chose the OB (intended in the broadest sense) as a topic to start a thread about was, it's pretty hard to talk about it except in reference to the experiences of it you've had -- or at least the experiences you've been having of failing to get OB. The only reason I fail to stick to pure experience all the time in this thread is that it seems too many readers, for whatever reason, won't overcome their resistance (mostly originating in their shadow, no doubt) to just do it -- and only talk after they've done something. I've included various exercises in this thread, and if memory serves me, only AwakeInADream and sway have come back with any truly detailed comments about what they experienced in such exercises -- even though I've tried to emphasize that that was what it was all about. (My apologies if I've left someone out.) I've also commented on members' dreams because again, at least that was experience, not theory.

[Eram]

As far as I'm able to judge at this moment (I am still reading the material), hylozoics teaches how to set up ones own experiential exercises.
It teaches how we can use our senses to come to objective interpretations of our experiences and reality.
It also makes some suggestions as to how here and there.

But, it is not all about setting up experiential exercises, just as this thread is not only about experiential exercises.
In order to come to the most essential part (the experiential exercises), there is also a model of reality which is to be used as a guide, just as you explain a lot too about reality with the same purposes.

The problem is, there are some fundamental differences in the explanation of reality in hylozoics (or in esoterics in general) and the more popular view that mostly originates from the east.
Also the exercises that are derived from hylozoics, are less pointed towards getting rid of the mind (the investigative part) as in general the enlightenment movement is.
Hylozoics is more about following the path of logic and the interpretation of sensory experiences in the physical, combined with an explanation of reality derived from an higher point of existence (or so it is claimed).

I have been putting my attention to the enlightenment movement (I don't know a better word to describe it) for more then a year and when I got in contact with hylozoics, I got really upset when I read about some of the different views on reality.
I can only imagine how it must feel for people who invested more then a year (maybe 40 years or more) in it .

Certain reservations and observations that I had about this enlightenment movement, were all explained in hylozoics though, up to a degree that it made perfectly sense to me why I had these reservations.
Íf you like, you can read most of it in two chapters here.
The first is to give the basics of the hylozoic model and the second is for its explanations about al streams of yoga and how they are right in certain aspects, but also where they got it wrong.
the problems of reality part one
yoga in the light of esoterics

I have done a lot of your exercises by the way.
Some with success, some with less
Everything that has to do with meditation though... there is some sort of resistance involved on my part and I'm not so certain that I agree that it has only to do with my shadow (though I agree that a part of it is ).

All in all, I find great value in what you offer here, but well, I stumbled into this material that has a different explanation to certain parts of your explanations about reality.
It's difficult to be a participant here and not to mention them.

As far as I'm concerned, we can agree to disagree (only on some topics) and I'm not at all interested to get into a "my truth is more true then yours" debate .
(I have to confess though, that I sometimes want to bring the hylozoics interpretations to a discussion, just to see if others are able to see flaws in it, because I'm still new to this hylozoics there still some doubt here and there. it will remain till I found objective proof I guess )

I just want to make clear where I stand and that the record on hylozoics is straight.

[Highwhistler]

.
.
Part 1: .Natural abilities I've noticed when Out of the Body

In my OB experiences, I am absolutely and brilliantly awake, clear, completely calm and ultimately centered.

The "I" that I am when OB, is a non-physical functional center of awareness.

The awareness is not spread out over a large area of space, it is individualized into a center ... and the center is me -- a presence -- a non-physical, conscious, alert and fully awake presence that is outside and free of my physical body.

As mentioned in an early post, the center of awareness is weightless ... it sometimes will be in an atmospheric human body made of light (kind of like a ghost), but usually it is without any form, whatsoever.

Me, as this center of awareness outside of the body, naturally looks forward as if the center of awareness has eyes that are looking in 1 direction, but remarkably, with the absolute ease, it can have 360-degree vision if it so desires -- something that is impossible when in the physical body, of course.

When out of the body in a wide-awake fully conscious experience, I find that the center of awareness that I am, is not using the normal terrestrial-oriented mind that is woven into my physical body. And the center of awareness when out of the body does not have the same concerns or interests that my physical body-mind-emotional instrument has.

For instance, one may think "When I get out of my body, I want to go see how my Mom is doing in Florida." But, once you are wide awake and out of the body, you might find that you could care less about visiting your Mom in her physical form, in her physical house, in Florida. You might not even feel that you are related to her in any grand sense. You might feel throughout your being, and know with supreme confidence, that you are more related to other Presences elsewhere on the planet and in other realms throughout the Universe.

When OB and wide awake, you have new abilities. For instance: rather than seeing your Mom at her physical location on Earth, you simply have instant awareness of her. With the knowledge that she is OK, you might find yourself more interested in trees nearby, or meditating when out of body, or pondering spiritual things, or using your abilities to visit other places, other dimensions and so on ...

In my experiences, there are two general ways to travel when fully conscious out of the body. One way is to soar like a bird. This is good for taking in views like landscapes. Soaring also is what I do when I first get out of the body and pass through walls and go to the outside physical world. I often move slowly ... at a human-like pace, or I can speed up and fly as fast as a bird.

But you don't have to be limited to that type of travel when out of the body. The other way is just to be in another location instantly -- as a wide awake, functional center of awareness. There is no time involved. Your presence simply wakes up in a new location, or even another dimension or realm.

Experiencing the mechanics of travel in this way -- instant relocation without any barriers of time and space -- has lead me to believe that the functional center of awareness that I am (and everyone is, I imagine), when out of the body, is quantum field-based.

It is like we are already entangled with infinite locations, and can simply appear in other locations (as a fully awake center of awareness) in less than the twinkle of an eye.

[TraineeHuman]

Eram, I have the following comments regarding the second piece, "yoga in the light of esoterics". I don't claim to be expert on Yoga or on Vedanta, and my own preferred philosophical/metaphysical outlook is probably closer to Taoism than anything else. However, the ridiculous things that the author claims are subscribed to by "the yogis" certainly aren't true of "yogis" such as Sri Aurobindo or Ramana Maharshi. Aurobindo, following the Rig Veda, says that there is a higher and higher level of "Matter" at each higher level of reality, for instance. So it seems to me that the author is quite intellectually ignorant or dishonest when it comes to "yogis" such as these. It seems to me that the author is conveniently setting up a phoney paper tiger. The author also makes many dogmatic assertions without arguing for them. That seems to imply that the author believes such assertions to be self-evident truths. But that's not an OK excuse for not providing any argument to support them.

I happen to have a postgraduate degree in philosophy, and to me the author sounds very ignorant of a great many issues and methodologies from philosophy, yet writes as if he or she is an expert on philosophy and its history, among other things, and frankly makes some errors that would rank him or her a long way below some philosophy undergraduates.

I've recommended the book The Dancing Wu Li Masters to you because it explains in very easy-to-read terms why certain Taoist concepts explain the discoveries/phenomena of subatomic physics much better than if one takes one's primitive concepts to be form, matter and space. In doing so, it also gives the reader some idea of what sorts of foundational concepts one might use as an alternative to the concept of "matter".

But as I've been saying, the number one question is what have you been experiencing, and did it make your life better at some deep level?

[Eram]

Well, the exploration of the shadow self that your recommended have brought great change in my life (on a deep level I would say).
The iboga session that I wrote about in my first post today was a direct continuation of that exploration.

This is the part that fitted me easiest about all that you wrote about.

I guess we are all different in our approach and the way we travel and I would argue that not all the follow up on some recommendations that you make post about them here.
Most of them are not even members to begin with.

So Laurency was wrong in some of his assumptions eh?
That's highly suspicious .

I had downloaded the books that your recommended for future reading btw, thanks!

[Kalamos]

..........

[TraineeHuman]

As far as I've seen so far, from the proponents of Hylozoics, H. is what I would call an ideology or belief system. Also, so far it seems to me to be an extension of, or a New Ageish branch of, something many call scientism, or positivism (which has absolutely nothing to do with being positive). Many analysts suggest that scientism/positivism replaced Christianity as the dominant religion subscribed to at least by academics and the elite and some other intellectuals from about the eighteenth century onwards. Many consider the rise of corporations in the twentieth century and this century, and the destruction of the environment, to be direct byproducts of its influence and methods (plus greed, which some consider it unwittingly also promotes). Think "bean counters", KPIs, downsizing, among others. Up until about 1970ish, the University was scientism's Church, and then Institutes of Technology began to take over. The destructive side of scientism had to do with its narrow view that anything other than "objective facts" is nonsense. For instance, in 1931 one of its leading proponents, Rudolf Carnap at the University of Chicago, organised a huge international conference where he proclaimed that all values and all emotions and all aesthetics are meaningless and nothing but illusions -- and the conference was designed to explore how to systematically apply that dogma throughout society. Hence the "civilised" world became a kind of drab, grey place, particularly in the world of work and education. Scientism/positivism also leads to behaviorism as the model of robotic -- er, sorry, I meant human -- behavior.

Scientism also had many direct or indirect connections with modernism. The basis of scientism was the belief that nothing is true except what can be ascertained from the experience of the physical senses, or through the scientific method. Today we are considered to be in a post-modern era. Partly this is because it became clear that the scientific method contained some false assumptions, and hence is limited and flawed. You might like to read some of the writings of Paul Feyerabend, who for some decades has been the most influential figure in the philosophy of science. One of the things Feyerabend argues for in great detail is that science is simply one game among many, with its own unique rules, but that there are other games which are no less valid/real and no less important. Many of the most influential sociologists discuss and argue for similar conclusions. I don't remember the names of most of them, but Baudrillard and Derida are two I can recall right now. One thing that is a part of mystical experience at a certain level -- and which I have also experienced and know -- is the discovery that there is no such thing as "the world out there". In the worlds of sociology and philosophy this fact is proved through intellectual arguments and considerations, so you guys might like to read up on those arguments.