Lucid Dreaming Resources

[personalreality]

I just found this site, it's got a butt load of Lucid Dreaming articles, including theory and practice.

http://www.sawka.com/spiritwatch/tableof.htm

[Xanth]

Wow! Lots of big names in there too.

...funny, I notice a lot of people named "Robert" into this kind of thing... Hmmm LoL

[ingerul9]

This comes from the main original site in which you can find more of this info

http://www.spiritwatch.ca/

I really like the content. It's so good that I can't stop reading. It has many parts that didn't make it into the books of LaBerge.

[AstralBlogger]

Hopefully my website one day will be peoples one stop shop. Not really buying anything but just relaxing and having a good time!

[Pharoah]

This comes from the main original site in which you can find more of this info

http://www.spiritwatch.ca/

I really like the content. It's so good that I can't stop reading. It has many parts that didn't make it into the books of LaBerge.

I sincerely wish I could peruse this site.  Judging from your comment, it seems like it's full of good reads.  However, since I am a professional web designer.... I can't look at it. 

I simply won't.

[personalreality]

I sincerely wish I could peruse this site.  Judging from your comment, it seems like it's full of good reads.  However, since I am a professional web designer.... I can't look at it. 

I simply won't.

lol, i feel your pain

[bluremi]

I sincerely wish I could peruse this site.  Judging from your comment, it seems like it's full of good reads.  However, since I am a professional web designer.... I can't look at it. 

I simply won't.

I feel you, man. Help is at hand, though. If you use the Chrome browser, create a bookmark with the following URL in your bookmark bar:

Code:

javascript: (function(){ var newSS, styles='* { background: white ! important; color: black !important } :link, :link * { color: #0000EE !important } :visited, :visited * { color: #551A8B !important }'; if(document.createStyleSheet) { document.createStyleSheet("javascript:'"+styles+"'"); } else { newSS=document.createElement('link'); newSS.rel='stylesheet'; newSS.href='data:text/css,'+escape(styles); document.getElementsByTagName("head")[0].appendChild(newSS); } } )();

When you click it while viewing a terrible page, it removes all styles and just makes it easy to read.

[Rudolph]

Wow! Lots of big names in there too.
...funny, I notice a lot of people named "Robert" into this kind of thing... Hmmm LoL

heheh... I was noticing this same thing a couple years ago, also in the Astrology and occult world. "Hmmm" indeed....
 

[Summerlander]

"I am making an appeal for a more scientific, critical-minded approach to the relationship of OBEs to lucid dreams. It is not enough to claim, as Monroe (1985) does, that OBEs are simply not dreams or that "those who have actively participated in [research at the Monroe Institute] have inescaped [sic], and conclusively accepted the reality of the out-of-body experience." Monroe asserts that "the protocols, meth-odology, and measurement systems may be different from conventional scientific process, by necessity. Physiologic parameters are not necessarily the major gauge of non-physical events." Unfortunately, Monroe appears to simply assume that the OBE is non-physical, occurring "without the support mechanism of a physical body and physical sensory stimulants [sic]." If this is science, where is the evidence? If it is not, as I fear, it may be like—Monroe’s words—"trying to measure and analyze electricity with a coffee cup." Incidentally, what psychophysiology is trying to do is correlate mental events with brain physiology, not an altogether absurd undertaking unless you believe your brain is nothing more than a cooling system. Anyone more than "somewhat aware" of the recent developments in the study of lucid dreaming will know how successful the psychophysiological approach has been in shedding light on a phenomenon previously no better understood than the OBE. I see no reason why OBEs could not be efficiently studied by the same signal-verification methodology that is now standard for laboratory investigations of lucid dreaming.

I would like to leave readers with something to think about regarding what it might mean to "leave your body." First of all, what exactly does "being in your body" mean?

Being in the body means constructing a mental body image. Because it is based on sensory information, it accurately represents the body’s position in physical space. While dreaming, we are out of touch with our bodies and consequently liberated from the physical constraints imposed by waking perception. Thus, no awkward sensory facts are present to limit our movement in mental space, and we are free to move out of the spatial orientation defined by "being in the (physical) body." The part of us that "leaves the body" travels in mental, not physical, space. Consequently, it would seem reasonable to suppose that we never "leave our bodies" because we are never in them. Where "we" are when we experience anything at all—OBEs included—is in mental space. Milton’s famous phrase, "The Mind is its own place," goes not quite far enough. The mind is not merely its own place, the mind is its only place (LaBerge, 1985, pp. 220–221)."

http://www.sawka.com/spiritwatch/comments.htm

I couldn't agree with Stephen LaBerge more.  This guy is on the money!! 

[Xanth]

I think you just blew Pauli's mind. 

Thanks Summerlander, I think you've just successfully scored my next read.
It's refreshing to see someone of LaBerge's caliber accepting the POSSIBILITY of the aforementioned idea, instead of just blindly accepting anecdotal evidence as being gospel.

[Summerlander]

Anecdotal indeed.  I admire Robert Monroe, I really do, because it was him that got me into this in the first place.  It is because of him that I am able to have OOBEs today.  But the man made many assumptions and had a tendency to jump to conclusions.  This is evident even in his first book when he had just started to explore the phenomenon.  He could have put his ideas across as just that,...ideas... rather than blatantly telling people that they MUST accept the OOBE phenomenon as evidence of the continuity of consciousness after death while promoting his hemisync product - as he does in Far Journeys!

Then we have scientists like Thomas Campbell, who worked with Monroe and want to make an impression as he did, and publish trilogies such as My Big TOE which is based on the anecdotal evidence you speak of, Xanth.

LaBerge considers the possibility that Monroe and Co appear to reject altogether.

[moker]

we all have our own personal physical body.
but we share the physical world together.

we all have our own personal mind.
maybe there is a mind world that we share together.

[Xanth]

I think one of the defining differences between men like Robert Monroe and Tom Campbell is that, as you said, Monroe tended to view his experiences with an Objective eye... while Campbell viewed (perhaps albeit later on) with a more Subjective eye. 

In the end, when you really strip down all the discussions to their most basic level... that is the only difference.  Objective vs Subjective. 

[Summerlander]

we all have our own personal physical body.
but we share the physical world together.

we all have our own personal mind.
maybe there is a mind world that we share together.

Yes, to me it is very much a mind world that we enter upon separation.  When we are moving out, we are not really moving out because physical space is irrelevant there.  Space in the Phase is a thought like everything else, it is a different reality there.  There are some instances where we do appear to share it and they may prove telepathic one day. It is even possible that our minds are quantum entangled and thus why many OOBE visits bring validations.  It may be true that it even exists in its own right apart from the physical, who knows.  The Phase reality COULD be where we will reside when we die physically, but, Monroe had no right to state it as a fact without concrete proof.  This is where he made a mistake.

I think one of the defining differences between men like Robert Monroe and Tom Campbell is that, as you said, Monroe tended to view his experiences with an Objective eye... while Campbell viewed (perhaps albeit later on) with a more Subjective eye. 

In the end, when you really strip down all the discussions to their most basic level... that is the only difference.  Objective vs Subjective. 

Objective vs Subjective...absolutely.  I will agree with one thing that Campbell has said though...all that is experienced, including the physica reality, is subjective.

[Kestrel]

Wow,thanks for the site info