Classic OBE vs. Phasing

[Volgerle]

Summerlander, Bedeekin, et al.

Here is an experience which, to me, could be a kind of description of the _not_ IN/OUT of body concept. It's an image of the Disk related to the world. Campbell fans might call it a metaphor. It still doesn't invalidate that we very well could be IN our bodies in the physical, as Ginny's story could be interpreted either way.

Here, the post by Ginny -> http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/welcome_to_astral_consciousness/a_fireside_chat-t2965.0.html;msg118694#msg118694

I hope that example makes my take on this matter more clear. Blind belief is not my thing, you see.

I think we're IN our bodies and OUT, we're both, simultaneously, we just set a focus and choose frames of reference, it's that simple.

We also need to define what/who is "I" in the first place, then we can talk about "where" "I" is. It is made more difficult since timespace does only apply to this reality. So how do we discuss the "where" when we cannot talk about "location" anymore as we are used to it? It does not APPLY!

Regarding the Ginny-post: Isn't the "I-Disk" an expression of the Total/Higher Self concepts? (I read all 3 Monroe and two of Moen's books, but it is some time ago now, so I forgot the details.) Multiple incarnations leading their own life and having chats with each other? So actually, it is you talking with yourSELF .. and not ... it's weird, but why not? Anything is possible, after all.

But I think that is not solely what the concept of "we're not only (in) our bodies" is about, it is more generally about cosmology and the whole 'set-up' of reality/realities.

I think you might find some answers in Mysticism. Stookie's experience above is, as a matter of fact, called by many a 'mystic' experience. Many NDErs have mystic experiences of the 'unification' / 'all-is-connected/one'-kind, too. Eastern religions and some esoteric/mystic branches of Western religions have volumes of teachings about this. Why do you discount this? These are partially also witness reports by 'pro' meditators and people experiencing visions and obe states spontaneously. The problem is that they could not put it in language because it is impossible. That's why they put it into myths using cryptic and flowery language.
And many of it, esp. in Taoism, is more and more supported by findings of Western science (e.g. read physicist Capra's 'Tao Of Physics' - an old classic already!).

This is why I think that Xanth and others are right when they claim that we are not (solely) in our bodies, meaning at this very moment when we're alive. So actually, we're everywhere (in potential) because everything is more connected than we think (which also Quantum Physicists tells us).

However, you, Pauli, are right with your claims, too. It depends on the viewpoint taken. It is all a matter of FRAME OF REFERENCE.

Outside of timespace / this universe, if we assume (and many of us do here) consciousness to be the basis of all, it is right to say that we are not (in) our bodies (we = consciousness, in potential and self-awareness, but not form).
On the frame of reference of this reality/universe in timespace it is also right to say that we are (in) our bodies. It's a role we chose to play in a multiplayer game called EARTH SCHOOL SYSTEM (and that is what Buhlmann also talks about!). It is a ruleset of this reality according to which we have to play the game.

So, for me it's simple, we are BOTH. In and Out.

[CFTraveler]

Hear hear.

[Bedeekin]

I agree with him... hear hear...

I mean

I agree with her... hear hear...

[Xanth]

Bedeekin, I think you just remote-slapped.    LOL

[Bedeekin]

 

[Greytraveller]

Greetings
I am getting into this thread a bit late. However, in accordance with good forum ettiquette I did read all of the preceding 5 pages.
Pauli has appealed to someone to spell this all out. Others think that all has been explained. I agree with Pauli.
So, 1) during a classic OBE (non-phasing, non NDE) does a person's consciousness move outside of his or her's physical body (either in whole or in part)?
I strongly aver that the consciousness Does move beyond the physical body. If there is disagreement with this belief then now is the time to express it here.

2) In a "phase' experience does the consciousness move outside of the physical body (either in whole or in part)? I have no strong belief about phasing to defend or to oppose BTW.

3) Any debate of consciousness Must include a discussion of how many 'layers' of individual consciousness actually exist. The simplest level would posit only Two layers -- physical brain and superphysical mind. However, there may be many more as, for example, the various Hindu models that posit three, four, five or even more levels (including a causal body, a mental body, a atmic body and others).
So, obviously the physical brain remains in the body during an OBE (and a phase?, yes?). But what about the other layer/layers of consciousness. Do they separate and move outside the physical body during an OBE? (That is/was the classical theory held by the great projectors of the past (Monroe, Fox, Muldoon, et al)) Or are the other layer/layers of consciousness ALREADY located outside the physical body and the concentration focus is simply transitioned from the physical brain to another layer/layers during a classical OBE? (and ditto for a Phase).
I terminate this post here in order to allow replies of reasonable length.

Regards 
Grey

[Bedeekin]

1) during a classic OBE (non-phasing, non NDE) does a person's consciousness move outside of his or her's physical body (either in whole or in part)?

If I theorized based upon experience... then there is no simple answer.  Suffice to say I think that a kind of sensory perception is externalized... or 'out' so to speak. But... this is not consciousness... it isn't a mass of thinking matter... it is an externalized sensory remote controlled perception that relays information to the source - your conscious mind. This is far less complicated than imagining it as a non-traceable or recordable subtle mass of energy that is in the form of 'you'.   


2) In a "phase' experience does the consciousness move outside of the physical body (either in whole or in part)?

No!! for a few reasons...

A) phasing seems to create a more LD/2nd Phase/AP type projection... whereas when we say classic OOBE we mean RTZ or 'the wider reality' or locale I. Both of these types are entered through SP. Only subjective projection is accessed through phasing... why do I say this? because...
B) If those who do phase have no reason to believe that they are actually outside the physical body.. then it's fair to say that because they are basing their theory upon experience... their theory of complete subjectivity is probably correct. 

3) Layers...lol I am starting to see a computer and the user as a good metaphor for consciousness. Very simple idea...

Think of you playing WoW...
You (the user) are the Superself/super-consciousness... the computer is the layered mind/consciousness... the avatar (grayhawk the elf) is the physical earthly 'you'....

that's as far as I got before I actually started nodding off! 

[Greytraveller]

Hallo Bedeekin
I am somewhat surprised about your answer to my first question,
1) during a classic OBE (non-phasing, non NDE) does a person's consciousness move outside of his or her's physical body (either in whole or in part)?

Your (partial) reply was

Suffice to say I think that a kind of sensory perception is externalized... or 'out' so to speak. But... this is not consciousness... it isn't a mass of thinking matter.

Based on my own experiences I must state that I strongly believe that the individual consciousness DOES move apart from and outside of the physical body during an OBE. The idea that only

sensory perception is externalized... or 'out' so to speak. But... this is not consciousness.

is more relevant to the process of remote viewing than OBEs. I can't quite conceptualize the belief that an out of body experience is, in fact, an experience that takes place only inside and never outside of the physical body.
Here is where I separate dreams from OBEs. Dreams occur entirely inside the physical brain and the dream locations, characters and events are all internal creations. OBEs and APs occur entirely outside the physical body (where the complete consciousness or at least a certain layer of consciousness) is outside the body. And most of the beings and locations are Not the creations of the OBEer.
Now I have not had several thousand OBEs and APs. I Have had a few hundred. Yet this is enough to convince Me that OBEs are truly experiences out of the (physical) body. I am certainly open to reading any arguments to the contrary. Such arguments are most probably wasted in my case but I will certainly take the time to read and reply to any.

Regards Phasing. I have no strong opinions either way. Again I have never managed to phase directly out of body. So with no experiences I cannot come to any strong conclusions.

Yes the computer and the user Is a decent metaphor for layers of consciousness. And yet it is too limited in scope and extent. Much like trying to use the analogy of a two dimensional map describing the physical objects (trees, houses, cars, etc) of three dimensional space.

Regards 
Grey

[Bedeekin]

I've just experienced subtleties that lead me to believe that rather than a thinking analysing consciousness that is floating around through walls and people... like a camera in a 3D modeling programme.. you are actually viewing the outside... but not at as a thinking etherial floaty body. Experiments like sticking my out-of-body 'head' into my girlfriend's 'head' and nothing of particular significance happening... or floating into the reactor of a nuclear power station and nothing of particular significance happening.. sort of push me in the direction that whatever is 'out' is inert or is just a point of awareness. Does that make sense.

"Yes the computer and the user Is a decent metaphor for layers of consciousness. And yet it is too limited in scope and extent. Much like trying to use the analogy of a two dimensional map describing the physical objects (trees, houses, cars, etc) of three dimensional space."

Absolutely... I actually started to drift off midway through what I was saying. Seriously. I had a full blown theory... but it sort of drifted away.

I'll write something up about that when it's not 06:19am and I've been to sleep.

[Pauli2]

2) In a "phase' experience does the consciousness move outside of the physical body (either in whole or in part)?

No!! for a few reasons...

I could think of one third alternative to being IN or OUT of body during phase. The concept of 3-D space may not be applicable in the case of phasing, so it may not be possible to talk about IN- or OUT-of-body. If you have no space, you have no place where to be IN or OUT.

Phasers are like 2-dimensional creatures in a 3-dimensional world, who can't grasp the concept of UP & DOWN.  You could of course define _exactly_ what you mean by space in the astral, but I haven't read any such valid definition yet.

Could the concept of no valid space in the phase be the reason to a possible mis-concept about IN & OUT?

[Xanth]

I guess my entire stance on this debate of "Are we in these bodies to being with?" is... that it doesn't matter in the slightest.

What's important is that you have experiences and determine the answer for yourself.  Having someone provide an experience of theirs in an attempt to answer a question doesn't help the other individual to project.  Knowing that we're "in" or "out" of these bodies, doesn't help you to project.

That's my entire problem with it... people are putting the carriage before the horse here. 
Don't worry about the "why" or "what"... worry about the "how".  Worry about the "how do I have experiences of my own?". 

[Pauli2]

That's my entire problem with it... people are putting the carriage before the horse here. 
Don't worry about the "why" or "what"... worry about the "how".  Worry about the "how do I have experiences of my own?". 

Xanth, you're almost saying that people should not question concepts unless they have experiences of their own.

[Xanth]

Xanth, you're almost saying that people should not question concepts unless they have experiences of their own.

In a sense, yes.  Everything you read here on the Astral Pulse, or written by any author can only ever be a belief to you.  You can only ever "believe" it to be true... what good is that to you?  The only benefit it has is that it should motivate you towards experiencing it for yourself, to determine if you can change that belief into a "known" or toss it aside as something not true to you.  You can only do this through having your own experiences... there's, literally, no other way.

As Stookie posted...
He recanted a wonderful experience that opened him up to new knowledge, but as an experience, he can TRY to share that knowledge, but it will only ever be HIS truth.  There's no way for him to get across at the 'being level' of what it was he experienced.  He can only pass it along on the 'intellectual level'.

In the end, it's important to realize WHAT it is you're questioning and WHY you're questioning it.  You're questioning someone else's experience... and honestly, you and everyone else on this planet aren't qualified to do that.  Because your questioning is the act of you placing a judgment upon it.  You're not qualified to make that judgment... I'm not qualified... NOBODY is qualified.

And honestly, I don't think that helps anyone... and it certainly doesn't help a beginner learning to project.  All it does is further divide a community that is already divided enough.  It's true when they say that this really is an Individual path. 

Now, I'm not saying don't ever discuss stuff like this... I'm saying, don't get hung up on it as being the only way to learn.  You can read a million books on this subject, you can watch a million videos and lectures... but you'll never really know until you put down the books, turn off the videos and TRY TO DO IT YOURSELF. 

[WASD]

Are the other techniques for AP that differs much from phasing or are they all basically the same? Most techniques I have come across seems to be for classic OBEs.

[personalreality]

In a sense they are all the same.  It's just about different ways of turning off your awareness of physical sensory input.  Some people do that by becoming captivated by their imagination (phasing), while others do it by going so deep in trance that their body falls asleep (kind of) while they maintain a thread of conscious awareness that carries over to "the otherworlds".  But, the actual mechanism is the same. 

[Pauli2]

Xanth, you're almost saying that people should not question concepts unless they have experiences of their own.

In a sense, yes.

Seems like an excellent way to get Sai Baba followers.

That's not my way to go about it. If a concept seems faulty, I feel that I have the right to question it.

[Xanth]

Seems like an excellent way to get Sai Baba followers.

That's not my way to go about it. If a concept seems faulty, I feel that I have the right to question it.

First things first... quote my entire post please, because it was really more than just "yes, in a sense".

Secondly, I'm telling people not to follow anyone.  I'm telling people to have their own experiences and form their own opinions on more than someone elses experience.

Thirdly, read what you just said... "If a concept seems faulty, I feel that I have the right to question it."  If YOU deem it faulty. 

Well, ask yourself, why do you feel you're qualified to make a judgment call upon what someone else experienced?

[Pauli2]

Thirdly, read what you just said... "If a concept seems faulty, I feel that I have the right to question it."  If YOU deem it faulty. 

No one wants to DEEM anything faulty. But it would be nice if _something_ backs up the claim, as it seems hard to believe without substance.

Well, ask yourself, why do you feel you're qualified to make a judgment call upon what someone else experienced?

I don't.

I don't make a judgment.

The lack of experiences to back the claim is nevertheless a burden to the claim in question.


---

My feeling is that you are attacking me on a personal basis, instead of discussing the target of the question:

What experiences did Frank (or any other) have to back up the claim that we are not IN our bodies?

[Xanth]

Well Pauli, the only answer you'll ever get, at least from me, is that "it really doesn't matter"... and one day, I have no doubt, that you will eventually come to that answer as well.

Perhaps, as I told you on IRC yesterday, everyone has to come to this realization themselves.

[Greytraveller]

Pauli2, you wrote

I

could think of one third alternative to being IN or OUT of body during phase. The concept of 3-D space may not be applicable in the case of phasing, so it may not be possible to talk about IN- or OUT-of-body. If you have no space, you have no place where to be IN or OUT.

Phasers are like 2-dimensional creatures in a 3-dimensional world, who can't grasp the concept of UP & DOWN.  You could of course define _exactly_ what you mean by space in the astral, but I haven't read any such valid definition yet.

Could the concept of no valid space in the phase be the reason to a possible mis-concept about IN & OUT?

Yes, I concur.  And this is why I still have major doubts about phasing being an actual out of body experience. As I posted earlier here I consider phasing to be quite similar, perhaps even identical, to remote viewing. Remote viewers perceive external environments from afar yet they do Not (even according to the remote viewers themselves) ever leave their physical bodies.

Xanth, you wrote

I guess my entire stance on this debate of "Are we in these bodies to being with?" is... that it doesn't matter in the slightest.

Let me here state a very important reason why this DOES matter. The concept of a consciousness existing apart and independently from a physical body has Huge implications for the belief of survival of bodily death.
Now you have made a continued and strong argument for personal experience being the only true bases for belief. That is fine and for the sake of this argument I can concede that point. My argument here is that OBEs and NDEs ARE just those personal experiences that provide personal belief in survival of physical death. NDEs are especially powerful and convincing experiences.
Fortunately I have never had a NDE. Yet I have read a lot of account by people who have had an NDE.
Here is the important point - regardless of how I perceive these NDEs MANY people who have had NDEs believe absolutely and unconditionally that they have been shown that there IS a continuing existence after physical death. To them this is Proof and Many say so plainly and unequivocally in their accounts. So, to summarize these NDEs accounts - a person has a medical emergency, they nearly die, their consciousness leaves their physical body during this time, they (sometimes) see and hear events that they would not normally be able to see and hear, sometimes they meet deceased relatives or friends, they eventually survive and return to their physical body. Sometimes the NDE is immediately recalled and integrated. Sometimes the NDE is not recalled or integrated (understood) for days, weeks or months. Eventually though, for the person involved, the NDE Is the personal experience that provides Belief in life after death.
This is a major life changing event. And, I can also confidently state that some people are convinced about survival after death once they have had an OBE.
This is why the "debate of "Are we in these bodies to being with?" ("to begin with?) Does indeed matter. It matters Very Much in fact. Even if it Only provides proof to the experiencers themselves and nobody else it is a Vital question that should not be overlooked or trivialized.

Regards 
Grey

[Bedeekin]

I guess my entire stance on this debate of "Are we in these bodies to being with?" is... that it doesn't matter in the slightest.

What's important is that you have experiences and determine the answer for yourself.  Having someone provide an experience of theirs in an attempt to answer a question doesn't help the other individual to project.  Knowing that we're "in" or "out" of these bodies, doesn't help you to project.

That's my entire problem with it... people are putting the carriage before the horse here. 
Don't worry about the "why" or "what"... worry about the "how".  Worry about the "how do I have experiences of my own?". 

Actually Xanth... That's so true.

But...
* I have found that those yearning to have these experiences will turn to 'us' to give them some sort of answer. It's only natural.

* Very often someone learning will describe their experience to make sure they're on the right track. This is only natural.

* The experience is predominantly subjective.. we know that... but across the board, do share very distinct modalities... if they didn't... there would be no way of identifying anything and any method would be pointless. Putting it metaphorically; we are teaching people to walk and run... it's their town though... their city... we can't tell them what lurks around the corner, but we can tell them what they may expect and not to be afraid. 9 times out of 10 you have to explain why you are lead to believe that Demons won't harm you... why you believe that you will be able to return... etc...

Theory and explanation are unavoidable.

[Xanth]

Xanth, you wrote
Let me here state a very important reason why this DOES matter. The concept of a consciousness existing apart and independently from a physical body has Huge implications for the belief of survival of bodily death.
Now you have made a continued and strong argument for personal experience being the only true bases for belief. That is fine and for the sake of this argument I can concede that point. My argument here is that OBEs and NDEs ARE just those personal experiences that provide personal belief in survival of physical death. NDEs are especially powerful and convincing experiences.
Fortunately I have never had a NDE. Yet I have read a lot of account by people who have had an NDE.
Here is the important point - regardless of how I perceive these NDEs MANY people who have had NDEs believe absolutely and unconditionally that they have been shown that there IS a continuing existence after physical death. To them this is Proof and Many say so plainly and unequivocally in their accounts. So, to summarize these NDEs accounts - a person has a medical emergency, they nearly die, their consciousness leaves their physical body during this time, they (sometimes) see and hear events that they would not normally be able to see and hear, sometimes they meet deceased relatives or friends, they eventually survive and return to their physical body. Sometimes the NDE is immediately recalled and integrated. Sometimes the NDE is not recalled or integrated (understood) for days, weeks or months. Eventually though, for the person involved, the NDE Is the personal experience that provides Belief in life after death.
This is a major life changing event. And, I can also confidently state that some people are convinced about survival after death once they have had an OBE.
This is why the "debate of "Are we in these bodies to being with?" ("to begin with?) Does indeed matter. It matters Very Much in fact. Even if it Only provides proof to the experiencers themselves and nobody else it is a Vital question that should not be overlooked or trivialized.

Regards  
Grey

I can definitely appreciate and understand that... especially if you're specifically asking those pointed and direct questions.

While asking the question of "are we in our body?" definitely has some applicable merit to other portions of our knowledge as such you've pointed out ( ), I don't believe it helps beginners in their quest of experiencing the larger reality personally.

Actually Xanth... That's so true.

But...
* I have found that those yearning to have these experiences will turn to 'us' to give them some sort of answer. It's only natural.

* Very often someone learning will describe their experience to make sure they're on the right track. This is only natural.

* The experience is predominantly subjective.. we know that... but across the board, do share very distinct modalities... if they didn't... there would be no way of identifying anything and any method would be pointless. Putting it metaphorically; we are teaching people to walk and run... it's their town though... their city... we can't tell them what lurks around the corner, but we can tell them what they may expect and not to be afraid. 9 times out of 10 you have to explain why you are lead to believe that Demons won't harm you... why you believe that you will be able to return... etc...

Theory and explanation are unavoidable.

Definitely!  I 100% agree.

However, I'm also not saying "let's not ever discuss this stuff"... because that'd just be silly, because as you point out... other people can relay their experiences to us in a manner which allows us to tell them if they're on the right track or not.  But then that's experience looking for verification... not verification of the experience.

In essence, what I'm saying is... don't get hung up on other people's experiences to the point where they've blocked you from your own experiences.

EDIT: Removed the information regarding Pauli... cause that wasn't fair to him, and I apologize for that. 

[Pauli2]

To put this into a bit more context... over the past year on my IRC channel, Pauli and I have been discussing his ability to learn to project, to learn to experience the non-physical first hand.  He's been practicing for a long time with almost zero success.  He's related to me that he's experienced vibrations... and supposedly what Monroe and Frank consider Focus 12, but never anything more than that.  He's concluded that perhaps he just can't do it.

Hrmm...

Yeah... Just rub it in.

I guess it gives some kind of satisfaction.

[Xanth]

Hrmm...

Yeah... Just rub it in.

I guess it gives some kind of satisfaction.

You're right.
I've removed the offending statement. 

[Pauli2]

*sigh*

Whatever dude.

Well u relayed things from the IRC.

So, let's take a look at your last statements:

What happens in my IRC channel has nothing to do with this forum and doesn't belong here - Xanth