The Astral Pulse
News: Acceptable Use Policy for the forums. Please read and ensure that you respect these policies. Thank you.

Please note that due to the amount of spam posts we have been receiving over the past few months, we have switched Registration to require you to be approved by a moderator.  We will go through the approval list as often as we can, but if it's been 24 hours and you haven't been Approved yet or you've received a rejection email, please email myself or one of the moderators immediately so we may correct the application.

We apologize for any inconveniences this may cause, but it's the last resort we have to fighting the spam for now.
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. October 27, 2016, 23:45:33

Login with username, password and session length

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 85
76  Astral Chat / Welcome to News and Media! / Re: New Research on Consciousness shows ... on: November 12, 2015, 11:40:55
There is new research on "consciousness" that shows that current scientific understandings and theories of consciousness may be flawed.

It is worth noting though that the past scientific perspective is a materialist paradigm, and the change in understanding referenced in the article is within the same materialist paradigm, so it isn't any kind of change of view at all.

It is akin to saying that I was once a Sunni Muslim, but that I converted to a different sect of Sunni-ism. The change of mind here is completely internal to the pre-existing belief. Put another way, it is like Catholic Cardinals arguing about whether taking wine and taking wafer are identical forms of communion. Neither of the Cardinals is talking about becoming a Buddhist- it is a matter completely internal to Catholic dogmas, and the answer will be a Catholic one regardless.

So not much changing here  rolleyes
77  Astral Projection & Out of Body Experiences / Welcome to Out of Body Experiences! / Re: List of all possible projections on: November 06, 2015, 07:31:50
Experience.  Smiley

Technically... I guess we are in a long-form projection from our other reality frame now  wink

So in a way, I guess people here are trying to learn to project out of another projection, hehe.
78  World Cultures, Traditions and Religions / Welcome to World Cultures, Traditions and Religions! / Re: Should we do AP on: November 05, 2015, 18:14:16
Meat damages our health, of course we shouldn't eat it.

Well, at least we will agree on one point here.

For me... I simply think it is unnecessary, so why cause the harm?

Dead dog's white teeth  wink
79  World Cultures, Traditions and Religions / Welcome to World Cultures, Traditions and Religions! / Re: Should we do AP on: November 04, 2015, 17:25:11
Everything else is propaganda and lies. If you just believe someone who dresses up as scientists, that's your problem.

So a study can be done in multiple locations, for over 27 years, in the present time today, but you know for a fact it is a lie. Why is anything you need to be false a lie?

It clearly implies the question, how do you know your interpretation of the Bible is the right one? The Bible doesn't tell us how to read it.

That just doesn't make sense, and Earth is clearly not millions of years old.

There is clearly evidence for the history of a long earth history. How is it that there are fossils of creatures buried in rock for hundreds of yards down, and not only that, but the deeper down you go, the further back the creatures date to? How is it that the shape of Africa and the Americas lines up perfectly, showing that they were once one continent? If the earth was to be 5000 years old, at what point did those continents move apart, and how fast did it happen? There are dozens of facts like this.

What scientific facts out in the physical world clearly tell you the earth is very young?

I have no idea what Bible school is.

Sunday School.

Very first page, very first verse. It says that God created everything - space, matter, time, living things and everything.

Most people read Genesis as metaphors, but there are those who believe in 7 literal days of creation- so you must believe then that the Bible is meant to be read literally. 

Let us go to Leviticus:


 Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.

 And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.

 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.

 And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you.

The Bible clearly tells us that pigs and rabbits should not be eaten ever. Do you believe and follow this?

Leviticus 19:19

Observe my statutes. You are not to let your cattle breed with a different species. You are not to sow your fields with two different kinds of seeds. You are not to wear clothing made from two different kinds of material.

The Bible tells us that we should not have two kinds of seeds sown in one field. Do you investigate your food to ensure this is so?

Do you examine the clothing you are about to wear to ensure that you are not wearing two kinds of fabric at once?

Leviticus 19:27

Do not trim off the hair on your temples or trim your beards.

I am assuming you have a big beard, right?

If you are ignoring any of these laws of Leviticus, why are you doing that?
80  World Cultures, Traditions and Religions / Welcome to World Cultures, Traditions and Religions! / Re: Should we do AP on: November 04, 2015, 04:15:55
There are no scientific experiments that could verify those assumptions.

Why would it be impossible? Several experiments are currently ongoing depicting macroevolution today.

There is an experiment that has tracked a single colony of E. Coli Bacteria and its descendents over 27 years, and 50,000 generations+. Some of the descendents are already so different that they are essentially a new species. They eat totally different food from the original bacteria they descended from, and can now metabolize citrate, whereas E. Coli is famous for not being able to do that. The descendents are already more different from one another than dogs and cats. And that is after only 27 years, with most of the change happening in the earliest years, as the bacteria evolved to suit their fitness to new environments.

All the greatest scientists were creationists: Tesla, Newton, Einstein, Kepler, Faraday, Mendel, Pascal

It is worth noting that you picked scientists exclusively from a certain time period and geographic locus. You of course left out Archimedes, Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, Pythagoras, and Democritus.

Also of note, being that you list Einstein, he is quoted saying that "Religion without science is blind".

We were created. God created us.

You are making an error that creationism and evolution are mutually exclusive. They are not. If God created man, then evolution from simpler organisms is clearly the way it was done.

But that is something you just learned in school.

And how is that different from saying, "But that is just something you learned in Bible school"? And as far as I can see, there is no place in the Bible where it is declared that the diversity of life was not created via evolution. Can you show me some Bible verses that state this?

All modern science  indicates that evolution is a fairy tale, and not much more of that.

I am puzzled by this. Earlier you state that science cannot provide experiments depicting evolution (which it in fact has, as referenced above), but now you are stating that there is in fact experimental evidence that evolution has not happened. Can you provide me with those studies? If all of modern science is saying this, surely there must be a few?
81  World Cultures, Traditions and Religions / Welcome to World Cultures, Traditions and Religions! / Re: Should we do AP on: November 04, 2015, 01:19:00
humans can not at all be proven to have developed from any single cell organism. It's just a wild assumption.

If humans are not descended from single celled organisms, then where did the multicellular organisms we came from develop? And why are the simplest multicelluar organisms incredibly related to their single-celled predesesors?

Suppose you came to a construction site, full of bricks, wood, power tools, and workers, and in the middle of the site, was a partially built building, which the workers were currently visibly working on.

Now suppose there were two people there watching. One person told you that the workers built the building, and that it took them 2 months so far. The other person told you that the building spotaneously came into existence, and the workers and the job site around it were just confusing the matter. Furthermore, this person didn't witness it actually happen, but they knew it to be the case anyhow.

Which of these two people would you be more likely to believe?

Evolution is exactly like that. We can see the bricks and wood. We can see the power tools. We can see the workers. We can see it happening now as we speak, just as the workers were building the building.

The person who said the building sprang into existence has a lot of stuff to explain away, and the other person has a pretty easy time making their argument. Saying evolution didn't happen is about the same situation- it isn't as easy as simply saying it is an assumption, you also have to explain away the evidence which would fill an entire library. That is a tall order.

And this is how “Creation” occurs:

Original matter and cosmos emerge from the absolute, eternal background of God’s and all spiritual beings’ individuality (in cycles), through an “interdimensional evolution” (involution) from the higher, less dense levels of matter down to the dimension where matter is most dense. While the everlasting is always present in the background (immanently and transcendentally), time and space (universe) come into existence through a divine creation and therein firstly the highest, less dense dimensional world. This highest plane, “heaven,” includes all other parallel worlds which then—as time passes by, or rather, in the course of space and time—will evolve from one another through “involution.”  Most mystery traditions distinguish seven levels of dimension.

That is all well and good, but logically if this was the explanation for all the plants and animals on earth, then they wouldn't be closely related. Each one would be separate from the others in its structure. At the very least, they wouldn't have the clear and concise appearance of a common sequential biological history. Why would such a thing be invented, when it would be not only a lie, but a deliberate attempt to purposefully hide the truth?
82  World Cultures, Traditions and Religions / Welcome to World Cultures, Traditions and Religions! / Re: Should we do AP on: November 04, 2015, 01:00:42
I don't believe in millions of years at all.

I don't think we are going to agree about very much if we don't agree on this. Every indication is that the earth is several billion years old.

Also, I don't think that micro-evolution leads to macro-evolution.

If you drop a bucket of sand on the floor every hour for 3 billion years, you will have a mountain won't you? At the very least, you will have a very large volume of sand. Why wouldn't mutations add up over time?

Those are only assumptions, and a wrong ones.

Where do you take issue with them? What is the alternative, which evidence supports? There is an overwhelming body of evidence that depicts the entire story of the development of life, that we can describe in excruciating detail. I can pull up hundreds of examples that show very close relationships between all of the plants and animals in the tree of life. And the effect is cumulative. You can show that members in the middle of the tree have features that all members following them possess, and that no members prior to them possess. This is on the biomolecular level and the macrostructural level as well. It boggles my mind that all of the life on earth would have very clear and traceable patterns of development between them, and yet not be descendants of one another. If it failed to be true, it would mean that lierally every single organism, including man, was engineered by some being to trick us.

I would have million questions now. May I? Smiley

Sure, Absolutely Wink
83  World Cultures, Traditions and Religions / Welcome to World Cultures, Traditions and Religions! / Re: Should we do AP on: November 03, 2015, 23:31:30
I also feel that it should be obvious that over the course of billions of years, micro-evolutions add up to macro-evolutions. Lampreys become Giraffes. Jellyfish become Turtles. It isn't fast, but I think the fossil record and genetic records clearly demonstrate the passage of the genetic lineage from single-celled organisms to humans.

I wouldn't say we can understand our origins using mutations.

I think we can clearly show the passage of mankind out of single celled creatures. Again, I think you are connecting evolution to mind-body philosophy, from which it is entirely separate. The part of the human that evolution doesn't describe is our minds, but then evolution isn't making metaphysical claims, it is making claims about physical organisms.

Interesting theory about how everything non material is actually a product of material, but I don't think there is something to support that theory.

Not only is it an interesting theory, it is the dominant model between all of the natural and physical sciences for the last 200 years. It is accepted as uncontested fact by more or less the entire scientific community today.

Mind telling me more about your point of view?

Sure  wink

I will preface by saying that I think the primary problem of modern philosophy is the mind-body problem that we have been dancing around in this discussion. In fact, Modern philosophy began around 1641 when Descartes recognized this problem and helped make it the focus of philosophy from then on. The problem is roughly:

How is it that we have this thing called a physical body, that has mass, volume, and physical properties, and that we have this other thing called a mind, that has none of these things, and seems to exist in non-material space? Why does the body seem to have power over the mind, and vice versa? How are they even related? How can something nonmaterial interact with something material?

There are many solutions to this problem, but there are three main ones, and then variations of those three, and then odd special case solutions that are rarely held.

As noted, the solution that modern science espouses is Materialism. Materialism states that we in fact don't have a non-physical mind, but rather some peculiar effect of physical brains, that only appears to be non-physical in nature. This is the most obvious solution, and the easiest one to support; clearly, anything that happens to the brain has a profound effect on the mind. It very much appears that the mind is merely an effect conjured by a functioning brain. Nonetheless, I think this is the wrong answer. David Chalmers' "hard problem of consciousness" illustrates why I feel materialism is inadequate, if you would like to read up on that. Basically, it states that the mind is ontologically distinct from physical matter. It is composed of "first person experiences". There is absolutely nothing in the physical world that even resembles an experience. It is not entirely clear how a brain can get matter to produce experiences when it bears absolutely no resemblence to them. In fact, I think it is impossible to show this, without the use of exotic solutions, such as protopsychism,  which posits that physical matter is actually conscious on some level, and the brain is simply manipulating the consciousness matter already possesses. I find this very strange, honestly.

Now the solution that Christianity supports is substance dualism- namely that we have a mind and a body. I reject this solution too, because it is nonsensical to me. It doesn't make sense that we would have a material and immaterial element, and that these would be entirely separate, and yet somehow still interact. How does a physical object have an effect on an immaterial thing that doesn't exist in spacetime? And if the physical could effect the non-physical, wouldn't that just mean the non-physical thing was in fact physical, and that would in turn bring us back to materialism? For this reason, I cannot support dualism.

The final answer, which is held by few people today, but you will find many on this site supporting, is Monism of mind. That view states that we in fact have only a mind, and that mind is nonphysical. Any appearance of having a body or living in a physical world is in fact just an idea, and not a physical system. I think the more you consider this view, the more enticing it becomes. Consider that we have no way of actually experiencing a physical object such as an apple, except by ideas and sensations. These sensations are the only sense we even have of the apple. Why does the apple need to exist at all? I would say the apple does not exist, at least not as anything but as an idea (I understand the semantic problem with "real" and "exists", but that is a language issue, and let's set that aside for ease of understanding here.)

Considered from another direction, Monism of mind is the only one of the three solutions that isn't burdened by an unsolveable problem. Materialism is burdened with explaining how we have a mind which in no way resembles any physical properties. Dualism is burdened with explaining how physical and non-physical could interact, without the non-physical being rendered physical by the very fact of their interaction, and thus defaulting back to materialism. Monism has no such burden. Because all we have of a physical world are our ideas of it, there is no need for these ideas and sensations to be anything beyond that.

Now since I am a monist of mind, rather than a materialist as most modern evolutionists, why do I support evolution? Well I think that is simple. The appearance of the physical system (I guess you can think of it as a physical simulation) is governed by rules and laws which are both observeable and predictable. It is extremely mechanical in that sense. And if we want to know about its history, we can simply extrapolate those laws in reverse, and there is a mountain of evidence that supports this practice. To be clear, I think evolution explains to humans the history of the physical simulation we are currently experiencing. Explaining the nature of minds, or the simulation itself is another matter, unrelated to merely extrapolating history.
84  World Cultures, Traditions and Religions / Welcome to World Cultures, Traditions and Religions! / Re: Should we do AP on: November 03, 2015, 04:58:16
This is interesting, I didn't know that, thank you. let me see If I understood this correctly, "reductive materialism" (raw patterns of matter moving in space) is not behind the magnificent orchestration that has lead life just here on Earth to the point were it locates today as system? (Evolutionary theory)
If so, could be also possible that, it Should state that it lead, at least, to its beggining? And then, Something took the rails to put evolution where it is located now?

Reductive materialism is probably the closest thing there is to a viewpoint that disallows there being anything like spirit. It is very difficult to have a metaphysical world in this view system. Not only is this view "raw patterns moving in space", but also that there only exists matter, and nothing else. In such materialism, nothing can take the reins, because nothing else exists. In Dualism, spirit could take the reins. In Monism of mind, mind had the reins all along and the matter was a sort of simulation within mind (this is my view).

Evolution, on the other hand, only tells us about the way life developed in stages on earth. It tells us nothing about who or what may have started it, or what spiritual qualities that life might have- thus evolution is compatible with pretty much all the major religions.
85  World Cultures, Traditions and Religions / Welcome to World Cultures, Traditions and Religions! / Re: Should we do AP on: November 03, 2015, 02:08:06
You are a gap theorist I assume, because evolutionist wouldn't admit there is something such as AP. According to evolution, we are random mutations without anything spiritual.

I think I see the thought pattern you are using here. I think the problem is that you are extending the theory of evolution past the claims that it actually makes. Standard evolution does indeed posit that humans are the result of cumulative mutations adding up over time. In fact it doesn't say significantly more than that. It makes no claims, positively or negatively, about any spiritual aspect any being or organism may or may not possess. That is a different part of science and philosophy altogether.

Now while it is true that the majority of evolutionists hold the view you describe, it is not true that that view is part of evolutionary theory. It is an entirely different view called "reductive materialism". What reductive materialism states, is that all a human mind is, is in fact a product of the material world, namely the matter of brains; they reduce all concept of mind to material , in otherwords.

So most evolutionists are reductive materialists, but reductive materialism is not part of evolutionary theory. I can see why people associate the two, but they are in fact distinct viewpoints, neither of which really entails the other if you are honest.

Honestly I think Christians actually mean to take issue with reductive materialism, but don't know enough about the mind-body problem (to which it is one of the alternative answers), and many don't have the language terms to know what their actual target is. For what it is worth, the Christian perspective is generally thought of as a "Dualist" alternative solution, and the solution I support is called "Monism of Mind" (in Christian terminology, this would mean that I only posit the existence of soul/mind, and I think that matter is a kind of illusion created by mind).

I don't think they don't have experience with it. Almost every pope, at least in my country, would have a lot experience to share. Not that they practice AP like we do, but in some other way. All in all, AP is happening every night, sometimes we are aware, sometimes not, right? They can't run from it, they are just saying that we should be careful with all that entities

Yes, many Catholic practices are very much like meditative practices, despite the viewpoint being different. Long form rosary prayer being one famous example, that will lead to some interesting experiences if practiced long enough.

86  Psychic and Paranormal / Welcome to Psychic and Paranormal! / Re: The moon on: November 03, 2015, 01:39:03

Do you have an example of a shot where the moon has the scanline effect, but there is some reference object also in the same frame that is unaffected? All of the ones I have seen were against featureless black space backgrounds, that don't have any reference to see if the wave is occurring outside the moon.

I did see the shot you mention with the pulse effect... that one is harder to explain, but I don't buy his explanation yet.
87  Psychic and Paranormal / Welcome to Psychic and Paranormal! / Re: The moon on: October 31, 2015, 20:17:39
I think you mean this:

The "lunar wave" videos are the result of the camera being used to film the shots being out of sync with the refresh rate of the computer used to process it. It amounts to an artifact of human technology, similarly to how you will see scan lines when a crt monitor is filmed with certain kinds of cameras. It has nothing to do with the moon, and would have occurred for anything passed through the same processing pipeline from the same hardware.

The video poster calls it "bulletproof confirmation". You have to be careful with people who believe their views can't be argued with, because it generally means they are making lots of assumptions in other places too.

88  Psychic and Paranormal / Welcome to Psychic and Paranormal! / Re: The moon on: October 31, 2015, 03:43:06
Hmm... Why not?   huh rolleyes cool
89  Psychic and Paranormal / Welcome to Psychic and Paranormal! / Re: The moon on: October 30, 2015, 03:26:38
Am I the only one who finds this strange?  Or is there an actual mathematical principal behind that?  >_<

I remembered there being a reason, but forgot that reason lol.

It is something about the earth and moon being "tidally locked"- the earth pulls the moon into an egg shape similarly to how the moon pulls the tides up, and the heavy side of the egg faces toward the earth; the heavy side is closer and has more mass, and so the effect of gravity is strongest on it.

Outside of the physics though, the moon is damn magical. It really does feel enchanted somehow...
90  Psychic and Paranormal / Welcome to Psychic and Paranormal! / Re: The moon on: October 29, 2015, 03:23:07

The moon is magnificent, isn't it?

I recall looking up a few weeks back or so, and being surprised to see the giant red harvest moon. Definitely felt supernatural, and I can see how classical aged peoples were in awe of such occurrances.


Was what happened for you significant? I think the structure of this world admits of the possibility for mundane things to hold personalized and intentional meaning for different people.

I am not aware of such a specific thing as you mention here having any special significance, but then maybe it it was a note just for you. If so... you are in the best position of any of us to say what was noted.

Anytime synchronicities happen around me, I take note and examine the moment closely. I have had some wild ones recently.

An example was a time I was painting an image of the medusa for a client, and a new song I had never heard came on, and the lyric, "I will give you a month to see past shadows in your sacred night; I will give you a week to look medusa in the eye" was spoken. Does it mean anything for that to happen? Who can say, but it stops me in my tracks when it happens.

91  Astral Projection & Out of Body Experiences / Welcome to Astral Consciousness! / Re: Without all the B.S... how to experience out pf body experience (video) on: October 28, 2015, 23:47:39
One last thing... if what you say in your post is true, that he "claims himself as a buddha" (I realize you mean he doesn't think of himself AS buddha) just proves that he is completely missing the point.

It's kind of like calling yourself "cool" in high school... if you ever had to call yourself "cool" in high school, you weren't.  Smiley

Yea... pretty much this.

Also, I am a 52nd degree jumbo blackbelt Daoist mindsage, who can sense the number of buddhas there are currently in the world, and where they currently are. Both of them are in West Africa atm, so I call shenanigans.
92  Astral Projection & Out of Body Experiences / Welcome to Astral Consciousness! / Re: Without all the B.S... how to experience out pf body experience (video) on: October 28, 2015, 09:25:27
I mostly agree with the above.

I think he has gotten himself pretty far along the path by leaning on assumptions and 19th century ideas about the structure of the metaphysical world, as well as some vedic notions.

I think it is pretty funny that he calls himself "master of wisdom". If it is a joke, ok, that is fine. If it isn't... that is worrying lol.

Ditto on what Xanth said. My conception of this whole business is more that the entire experience is happening in our physical brains, and that the realities our brain constructs for us to inhabit in those moments may sometimes allow us to get into contact with the greater reality beyond ourselves. What I am sure this stuff isn't, is a silver ghosty leaving a body to go on adventures. I am go more into depth about why I think this later if you would like.

It weirds me out a little that he is doing this talk before "students" of his, which does suggest to me he takes the title of "master" seriously. It is one thing to put your ideas out as a YT video for others to interpret, and I think that is pretty standard.  It is another thing to film yourself proclaiming the truth of your ideas before others, as something they ought to believe. See the subtle distinction there?
93  Psychic and Paranormal / Welcome to Psychic and Paranormal! / Re: The Black Knight Satellite on: October 26, 2015, 17:44:44
I vote Szaxx the projection trainer for the Jedi pre-school.
94  Psychic and Paranormal / Welcome to Psychic and Paranormal! / Re: The Black Knight Satellite on: October 26, 2015, 11:19:34
Yes, I have heard of it.

The "Black Knight Satellite" is largely held to be a closeup of a piece of orbiting debris left over from a past launch.

Satellites and objects like this one aren't the sort of thing it would be likely you would ever encounter, for a few reasons.

The first is that, supposing it was possible to have a projection which was a perfect recreation of the physical world (which I doubt), objects like this are beyond miniscule in comparison to the volume of orbital space they occupy. When spacecraft are in orbit, they never see satellites they haven't expressly manuevered to rendeyzvous with. Imagine how big a basketball looks from 8 miles away. Then multiply that distance by 10. You just shouldn't rationally be seeing things that are that small and distant.

For the next reason, let us now suppose that you were projecting on a mission with the intention to view these satellites. Would you see satellites in that case? Absolutely. But the reality is that your expectation of what you wanted to be up there will probably color your entire experience. It is very difficult to separate expectation from external information, sadly.
95  World Cultures, Traditions and Religions / Welcome to World Cultures, Traditions and Religions! / Re: Should we do AP on: October 19, 2015, 11:32:18
I am an evolutionist.

I never understood why people chose THAT as their battleground. I don't see what there is in modern evolutionary theory that a Christian should take issue with, nor honestly do I see what in the projection experience relates to evolution, and proving or disproving it.

Also, I'm not sure if scripture tells us much about AP.

The Vedic Upanishad scriptures say a good deal about projection. There is also a bit in Jewish Kaballah about projecting via a "Merkabah Vehicle", which I take to mean a belief about projecting with a subtle body.
There are certain Bible passages that are said to relate to projection as well, but you have to use a bit of imagination there. The burning bush, Jacob wrestling the angel, and a few other instances have been interpreted in this context.

I think you need to filter what these folks are saying to you. Don't disregard them, but consider what they are saying carefully. Is it possible that they are merely attributing things which they have no experience with or understanding of to demons? Will they make similar conclusions about any other practices? And if so, what basis do they have for making these claims? Is the reasoning that anything outside of Biblical discussion isn't meant for man? Consider that no scientific discovery over the last 2000 years appears in the Bible explicitly. Wouldn't this make every part of the modern world demonic?

Hope that help! wink
96  Spiritual Evolution / Welcome to Spiritual Evolution! / Re: Is earth the ultimate challenge for spirit beings? on: October 09, 2015, 02:18:02
I am honestly surprised that site still exists. Notice the last new material goes back to 2008-2009, and the design itself belongs to the early internet.

There were a lot of sites like it in the late 90's, when the internet began to widely become used to spread information about alternative metaphysics.

That particular one is concerned with "Instrumental transcommunication" (ITC), which you might know by the more common name "electronic voice phenomenon" (EVP).

The particular movement which emphasizes the value of EVP generally connects itself back to the 1800's spiritualist/theosophist movement. Much of the information there is straight out of that time period too, which should tell you it is pretty dated thinking.

The chart you see is the result of filtering 19th-century thought through the lens of the New Age movement revisited in the 90s. That should tell you all you need to know, but if you want it more plainly, that chart is worse than useless, because it is a claim to know the structure of the metaphysical world, which is utterly beyond human comprehension. Convincing yourself you have knowledge that you don't, as the chart makers did, leaves you worse than ignorant.   

Anyone who uses terms like "mental plane", "causal plane", "atmic", etc is parroting those mid-90's folks.

Any child can draw a treasure map.

Thomas Campbell, and William Buhlman are good sources of information, as they are relatively free of these types of silliness. After you have gone through the ideas of one of those folks, who have their heads on straightest, Robert Monroe's books might be interesting to you, and you might be in a better place to filter his assumptions by that point.

Hope that is helpful! wink
97  Spiritual Evolution / Welcome to Spiritual Evolution! / Re: Is earth the ultimate challenge for spirit beings? on: October 08, 2015, 15:51:00
What stage do you guys think we are at in our spiritual journey? do you think earth and the physical is somewhere near the start of the journey? or maybe we where at a much higher density and decided to come to earth?

Too rigid, too Aristotelian.

I don't think it is all so structured like that, where it is like a video game, and this is level 4, or 22, or what have you. We are all here... and we may be here for different reasons too. I suspect most of us are here to have experiences for the sake of experiences themselves. Reading more into it, such as that we are on a journey to become better, or more advanced, etc, I think is human thinking trying to apply the hierarchies we see in human society and experience onto reality.

I think we simply don't have the perspective from our current vantage to say what precisely this reality is for.
I think earth has to be one of the most challenging places to live, maybe its seen as a large leap forward for your development if you choose to come here?

Compared to what? Life on Andromeda Six? Existence as a gas cloud being living in a nebula? Or that time you were a geometric shape being in the flashy light plane?

Again, a perspective issue. Most of us don't have access to enough data about our other existences to put our earth experience somewhere on a peg against other existences. I am sure it is much more intense than some, and much tamer than others.

There is something in science called the "mediocrity principle", and it states that if you find one of something, there are probably more of them somewhere, and the one you found is not likely to be a particularly outstanding or unique example. It is generally applied to the earth and solar system, to inductively reason that there are probably many such systems, and I don't see why we shouldn't apply it to our current existence either, which there are probably countless, many of which are likely to be significantly more extreme.

98  Energy Body and The Chakras / Welcome to Energy Body and The Chakras / Re: Is it Kundalini? on: October 03, 2015, 00:40:02
If nothing else, I would urge you to be careful with the term. So much has been written about it, and people with diverse life experiences have attributed everything under the sun to it.

There is basically no common narrative to the whole concept. If you read up on the accounts of others, they will lead you to have expectations of what "Kundalini" is, and those expectation may trouble you needlessly.

I have had my own experiences a couple times which fit the popular notions on some points but not others. But it is worth mentioning that idea now has so many attributes attached to it that anyone could suppose, as I did, that they might have been involved with it.

I would say throw out expectations like that, and let your experiences be your own!

I wish you well with the migraine issue too, that stuff is not fun at all.
99  Astral Chat / Welcome to Astral Chat! / Re: If thoughts affect reality, what is a thought? on: September 27, 2015, 23:01:02
[Axiom #3]
The projection of IDEA from STILLNESS is achieved solely by MIND.

Thanks for the effort Dreamingod...

But to be honest, I don't have the slightest notion what that might mean. It is phrased with quite a lot of authority, and calling it an axiom as Walter Russel does suggests it is a foundational truth that his reasoning is built on. As a foundational truth, he should do better to elucidate what he is talking about I am afraid.

I mean it seems to be a statement about the primacy of consciousness, but it makes no mention about mechanics. It sort of reminds me of the way people get a bit short-tempered with Deepak Chopra because he will use a sequence of phrases that means something to him but is utterly indecipherable to any audience he could expect to have, regardless of their qualifications. That is one of the challenges of philosophy... communicating your ideas in a way that they are lucid to others.

Walter's ideas here are about the way in which consciousness projects the illusion of a physical world.

To me they are expressing THAT thought is building this reality. But they aren't addressing WHAT a thought is. That is Beavis' premise here... that no one has offered an explanation for what the nature of thoughts is. I don't expect the question to be answered here, because it is seemingly beyond any of humanity's best and brightest to offer explanation for at this time.
100  Astral Chat / Welcome to Astral Chat! / Re: If thoughts affect reality, what is a thought? on: September 27, 2015, 07:46:25
Hello Stillwater,
                       I was drinking when I wrote that so you may have to give me a moment to honour you with a plausible reply. Wink

Ha, no worries! I had a feeling you might have been playing there- I gave a serious answer nonetheless because it is one of the central mysteries of existence to me, and is a fundamental question about the structure of reality  wink
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 85
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums

The Astral Pulse Copyright © 2002 - 2014
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM