reading Monroe's FJs ......... I-There question!

[kakkarot]

well, i haven't read the book but i'm sure i can agree with one point: "This sounds complete crap (sic)". []

~kakkarot

[Adrian]

Greetings Gandalf,

I don't entirely subscribe to the Monroe concept of "I here" or "I there" "disks" etc. from what I have read of it. It seems to confuse aspects of what it appears to be actually portraying, and that is the "Higher Self".

The Higher Self consists of the total experiences of all of our lives - past, present and future, and is what constitutes are total "individuality". Although we are only one person, one individuality - each "personality" of the "individuality" has lived and experienced life in a different, autonomous temporal existence at sometime in the past, present or future in the physical Universe - our higher self includes our future existences as well as the past.

I have no idea what Monroe means exactly by his "self destructing personalities", but it is important to remember that the personality is only temporal anyway, usually consisting of a single life. It is out immortal Spirit, our individuality, i.e. who we are, that can never be destroyed, being an eternal part of the Great Spirit - God.

I enjoy Monroe's works, and he has left a tremendous legacy for seeker on the path to follow, but in my opinion he does confuse matters with his "disks" and his "I here's" and "I there's". It does not of course detract from the value of his work as a whole.

With best regards,

Adrian.

[clandestino]

Hi Gandalf !

I'm sure you are not alone in struggling with this concept, I too found it tricky.

Once again, we should all bear in mind that any book on astral travel is the learnings and experiences of one person. Monroe & Moen share much, but their perspectives produce slightly different outcomes.

My interpretation of I - there : Each individual is part of a larger family of individuals....perhaps 1000's in one cluster. In fact, they are NOT individuals,  they are aspects of the same self. The group makes progress by accumulating experiences. Once an "individual" ahs all the necessary experiences, he can join the group. If the individuals do not gain the life-experiences necessary, the group/cluster/disk (whatever) cannot complete and progress. I believe that this is the "destruction" you mentioned.

Again - this is NOT info gained through personal experience, just my humble opinion !

Mark

[Frank]

Douglas: I only ever read part-1 of the book once. This part came across like one big advert for the Gateway residential programs. So when I think about FJ's, to me the actual book begins at chapter 7. I read through the section you mentioned and they seem to be talking about some kind of green slimy thing.

Problem is, I too I cannot fully get my head around this idea of a I-There or a Disk, or whatever, either. From my experience I can get the jist of where these notions come from. But it all just seems a heck of a confusing way of explaining it.

Personally, I'm far happier thinking about the Higher-Self topic in terms of Quantum Physics. But, then again, people may think that is a heck of a confusing way of explaining it and prefer instead the notion of an I-There or Disk.

This link http://home.xtra.co.nz/hosts/Wingmakers/Quantum%20Physics.html gives a pretty good rundown of what's what.

Yours,
Frank

[clandestino]

cheers for the link Frank.

SLightly off topic, but anyone hasn't read Michael Talbot's "the holographic universe" then it might be of interest.

Various aspects of quantum physics are discussed and used to explain various phenomena, including astral projection. One of basic premises is that there is no black and white when it comes to "subjective" and "objective". There is a middle ground - "omnijective" where our reality and perception of reality is influenced by ourselves.

I.e. the strange phenomena of quantum particles appearing to have different properties when they are being observed, compared to when they aren't.

There is no discussion of disk members etc. in the book, but it does make a fascinating / far- fetched read !

[Gandalf]

Thanks for the input guys!

Frank - that was one hell of a great link! The way material science and mysticism are actually approaching one another now is quite breathtaking. I'm still reading through it but so far it makes a hell of a lot of sense IMO!

As for my bit about FJ (esp p56).
The problem I'm having with that part is that it doesnt seem to compute with the overall view he portrays.

If you read that section it is relating the varying status's of 'disk members'. The 'green slimy thing' was an example of a disk member who was not from the ELS but from another planet (about 20,000 light years away apparantly - so heh Frank, I was wrong, Monroe doesnt have a problem with other material lifeforms in our universe!), just to show that a disk can have members in many different enviroments at the same time. The point is though, it is stated that disk members or personalites can fail, if they do not succeed in progressing 'the energy can destroy itself' but if it succeeds and learns it can progress and improve itself, benifiting the whole. The passage is definitly refering to the energy itself not some material body (p56).

However, I have not come across any other accounts of disk members 'self destructing' just because they havnt learned anything this time round. That would contradict everything we know about the near astral realms which are full of individuals who are stuck there due to lack of progress, but can get back on track (or not) with the help of others.

Of course the notion of 'self destructing personalites' wasnt actualy stated by Monroe. That whole section is a transcription of comunications from the astral world, related by other people, but it is in his book.

Is Monroe contradicing his overall picture? or am I just making to much of a throw away line in one part of the book.

The reason it worries me though, is that although it is only a line, it implies that if we don't learn anything or screw up in some way, we might 'destroy ourselves'.

Hmmmmmm...

Regards,
Douglas

[Frank]

Douglas: Again, as much as I would dearly like you give you a definitive answer, I could never get my head around all this talk of Disks and I-There, and concepts like that. I'm not knocking them, nor am I trying to make out they are less-worthy ideas. It's just that mystical-talk resonates with me not one iota.

The analogy given in the Holon paper was that we never die, we simply shed our physical body as a tree sheds its leaves. Which is a good analogy. The problem is, however, while the author of that paper has displayed some good science; there is a distinct lack of talk of the actual hands-on application of the theory.

The science of Quantum Physics together with the Holon notion, is steadily bringing about a sound theoretical structure which serves to explain how multi-dimensional reality exists. But, like with zillions of theories, their outcomes when put into practice can turn out somewhat differently.

If we look at it from the point of view of an individual upon shedding their physical body: if each individual in question looked at the process wholly from a multi-dimensional point of view, death simply becomes a case of, "Oh well, another Physical-realm trip over. Time to go and have a few beers with my buddies in F27." Problem is, in actuality, the transition can often be a difficult one to bear. Particularly in an emotional sense. This can (and very often does!) put a major spoke in the works.

To a certain degree, this is where theory and practice can begin to come apart. And it's all due to the inherent nature of the 4D environment.

You enter a realm of reality where Thought equals Direct Action. Which no-doubt you have heard me say a number of times in the past. People can get "trapped" in this realm from the uncontrolled release of their own thoughts-release-emotions.

Fear is *very* prevalent within the lower planes. As I pass through, even though I can close myself off to a very high degree, its sickening quality can still be felt. Any release of fear will automatically place a person in a fearful circumstance. Now you need to understand these circumstances which can come about, are perceived as being just as "real" as any Physical circumstance. As such, they tend to have the effect of perpetuating an ever downward-spiralling set of worsening circumstances.

Which begs the question: How much Hell can a person take?

Once a person gets caught in an emotion-fuelled loop their development is stunted. They lose all ability to act freely, and to develop and grow in accordance with Natural Law. However, in the early stages, or in mild cases, a person might still have a chance of realising (and therefore breaking) the loop they got themselves into. Thus the ability to make progress returns. In these cases, it can be that the very act of realising they were caught in an emotion-fuelled loop, turns out to be a beneficial event which adds to the person's overall development.

As the situation worsens, however, the person's chances of self-realisation steadily diminish. But they still have a chance of being "rescued" from people, such as those of the Moen-school, who regularly practice that sort of thing. The trick is to somehow interrupt the person's train of thought, which interrupts the outward flow of emotions that are serving to fuel the circumstances the person is perceiving. In other words, the fuel-supply to the circumstances is turned off. So they quickly dissipate and the person can once again think with a degree of independence.

But what if a person's condition can depreciate to the stage where their thinking cannot be interrupted?

For example, I have come across "people" simply squatting on the floor, motionless. They have lost all vibrancy, all vitality, and even have lost the ability to maintain their form. Their form has shrunk to perhaps a quarter of its original size. Their "skin" is grey in colour with a brown hue. Only when you look very closely can you make out the form was once human. There is no outward sign of life whatever. Though deep within that person's consciousness, there is an ever worsening, ever depleting set of circumstances which ensue.

The question is, could a person reach the stage where their energy (or more correctly their ability to utilise non-physical energies) is depleted entirely?

I don't know the answer to that.

Yours,
Frank

[Gandalf]

Thanks for the info Frank, the situation you describe is certainly a  bad one. My speculation is that at some point the person described would 'shut down', and go into a comatose like, unconcious state, as they eventially lack enough energy to remain concious. If they are lucky then at some point someone might come across them, but if not then they just drift indefinatly. Are there not 'recusitation stations' at f27 for similar cases?
These are often used for ex drug addicts and other people who are in a rather odd state after leaving physical, but I suppose they could also be used for the situation that you discussed above. Of course the problem is finding these people as it is probably not as easy as it sounds. Even moving them from their current enviroment may require special skills.


Actually Bruce Moen talks about a rare state of 'permanent death' which some people can get into although he doesn't really elaborate too much. He does say that this 'state' (implying that it is some kind of comatose state or somthing like it) has only been discovered quite recently through his research.

However, Moen believes it is exceedingly rare that people take choices that lead to this result, 'perhaps only one in several billion' in his words.

Intersting anyhow.

Regards,
Douglas

PS JF is a great read so far, highly recomended to everyone!

[Frank]

Douglas: Again I'm sorry but I do not have a definitive answer. Perhaps the Moen-school can offer more info? After all, they seem to specialise in this kind of work. I can say that the seemingly hopeless cases I came across are in a small minority. How much of a small minority is difficult for me to fathom.

Problem is the "retrieval" aspect I more engage in "in passing". I do very much prefer the more far-reaching ideology. Like riding tubes to other reality systems, and so forth, as opposed to involving myself in the near-Earth stuff. Again, not that there is anything wrong in that. It's just (like many areas of life) each to their own at the end of the day.

Yours,
Frank

[Gandalf]

Hi Frank, I did check out Moen's stuff, very interesting if you are into retrieval work (although I'm not really). Basically, according to their research it IS possible in exeedingly rare situations for someone to 'veg out' into a comatose state, for various reasons, some probably as a result of the situation you described, kind of like what can happen here in our world, and it takes special skills to revive them.

To be honest though, and I do appreciate all the good work that these people do, (and I enjoy reading about retrievals), I don't think I could personally be bothered about doing them myself - sounds a bit selfish perhaps but there you go.
As you say, each to their own.

Mind you, knowing my luck, one day in the future I'll probably end up stuck in an emotional loop for a few thousand years and then wish that myself and lots of others were into retrievals after all!

Regards,
Douglas

[Do]

It is perhaps most helpful to view Monroe's discussion of the "I/There" (and much else in his work), or Moen's descriptions of his "disk," as metaphors used to express as nearly as possible their visionary experiences - and not as exact transcriptions of the experiences themselves.  This is not to lessen their reality or their credibility.  But human language itself is very limited when it comes to describing transcendent reality, and visionaries have always relied upon metaphor and myth to express themselves - and their followers, alas!, have interpreted them literally!  Monroe comes across as more pragmatic and scientific than mystic and uses his own unique "jargon," but he is nonetheless a visionary.

I note a lot of similarity between Monroe's experiences (especially in his last book) and the visionary myths of the ancient gnostic writers.  The gnostics spoke of traveling through numbered spheres in their journey from the World to the multi-dimensional reality they called the Pleroma - equivalent to Monroe's Focus levels and his notion of going "Home."  While the ancient gnostics spoke of freeing the divine spark trapped in matter, Monroe speaks of the energy body or energy double and the necessity of freeing oneself from addiction to the Earth Life System.  The gnostic is challenged by threatening "archons" in passing through the spheres and must know how to respond to them - similar to Monroe's descriptions of his being "tested" by his guides.  (Anyway, Monroe always sounds like a wise old gnostic to me when he exhorts his readers not to rely on mere belief, but to attain personal knowledge based on personal experience.)

One of the most interesting aspects of the gnostic idea of 'salvation' – by which they meant simply leaving this World and the round of reincarnation to return to their true Home - is the idea of the Restoration of the Pleroma - each particle of divine light that is freed from matter contributes to the eventual gathering-in of all of the light in the multi-dimensional realm of the Pleroma (thus, pursuing one's 'salvation' by this means is never just a personal or selfish matter).  The teaching of the restoration of the Pleroma is, of course, reminiscent of Monroe's "I/There" with the gathering-in of all the individualities that have gone to make it up - also similar to what Moen expresses as his "disk."

I see these similarities as pointing to an underlying objective reality that has been experienced by each of these visionaries and expressed in the language and images each of them finds most appropriate.  One is not true and the others false.  And each of us, if we continue in our non-physical explorations, will have our own experiences and express them, hopefully, in our own individual ways.  The experiences of those who precede us must be viewed as inspirations to us on our own paths, and not as literal prescriptions.

[Frank]

Do: You make some very valid points and I've always been interested in how the older writings relate to the more modern stuff. Problem is, and I don't know what it is with me, the traditional mystical works just turn me off completely. From what you say your reading up on the works of gnostics has helped you relate more to Monroe's concepts. The benefit of which I do not have.

I'm fully in agreement where you talk about limitations in the language. This is something to which I can easily relate as I very often keep hitting the buffers. Metaphor is a useful tool and, yes, to take a metaphor literally would be an obvious mistake on the part of the reader.

However, the problem with metaphor to describe the nature, qualities, characteristics, etc. of some event, is the event itself is not actually described directly but is merely implied. (Which is pretty obvious as it wouldn't be a metaphor.) This holds open the possibility (as in my case with the concept of Monroe's I-There, for instance) the reader may fully understand the author is communicating metaphorically, but what they don't fully understand is the actual metaphor.

Yours,
Frank

[Gandalf]

Yup, I got Monroe's book FJ yesterday and have finished most of it already, although I am still struggling to get my head round the I-there or 'disk' concept.

According to Monroe (and Moen), we (here) are all mixes or new personalities made up from other disk members. what we experience is shared by all disk members. As we progress we join with out disk eventially, or perhaps become fully aware of being a part of it.

Could someone explain what Monroe is saying about us as personalites here. In p.56 of FJ, a guide explains that some personalities fail in some respect and destroy themselves. Does he mean by that that they cease to exist completely? As this is refering to US, thats a scary thought. Or do I misunderstand the disk concept.

if on the otherhand I (meaning me here)am here is also THERE as well, then if for some reason this personality destroyed itself, I would continue as part of the I-there in any case.
This sounds complete crap, so you will probably have to have read about disks or 'I-there' to have any idea what I'm talking about!


If anyone can share any light on the relationship between 'us' and our 'I-there' I would appreciate it!

Cheers,
Dougie