Messages

new here, nice to meet you all...I'm Adam
peace

hello, I am new here, will post a general hello above.  But, for now I had a pressing, metaphysical question.  While reading Astral Dynamics I came accross an interesting thought about astral beings.  Bruce says that anything with a consciousness has an astral body or double.  To tell the truth, I haven't worked my way entirely through the book yet.  So, the entity he spoke of as having an astral double in the astral landscape in question was a rock.  My question pertains to the question of composition (if any of you have read Peter Van Inwagen it would be of much help).  So, is it the rock itself that has an astral double as per its consciousness?  And then what of its proper parts such as the molecules that compose it?  Do they have their own consciousness as well or merely compose the physical presence of the conscious body within the rock?  I can see where if they did have their own consciousness, they would be doubled in balance with the real-time doubles and even in the astral world.  But then there is no end to conscious beings.  And it is also then difficult to say whether I am a seperate consciousness or whether I am the composition of many consciousness, such as the composition of the consciousness of my arms, my legs, my torso, my heart, the atomic and subatomic particles that so divide them, ad infinitum.  

I know I might seem difficult, but this is not my intention...I am merely very, very detail oriented with many questions about theories that I believe can lead us to even higher states of understanding.  I am no skeptic.  I am also but a novice astral traveller.  

Back to my questions...Van Inwagen talks about the only objects that exist are those that are a life.  And nothing is a part of something unless it composes a life.  Such it is that a rock, for instance, is simply stuff of the earth arranged rock-wise.  This is an interesting take, but clears up many of my questions in that I am one consciousness, with physical parts constituting the physical whole in which my consciousness resides.  And also, the rock does not have a consciousness nor do its parts proper.  Very difficult, indeed.  Of course, I could simply intuit, and say that an object is simply what I see as seperate from another thing.  For example, there is a thing that is the cliff...a rock on one of its ledges is a rock, not part of the cliff like the ledge itself is.  The ledge is not itself, but a proper part of the cliff.  But how, then, can I say there is such a thing as the ledge?  Would I not have to say something like: it is the ledge-like feature of the cliff to keep my language correct?  And how do we justify circumscribing this problem?  Anyway, any thoughts, ideas, ponderings, and questions, of course, would be much appreciated and are greatly encouraged.  Please don't let my post sit alone left unthought about.  I do fear that people will not take me seriously, but I am wholeheartedly serious.
thanks
peace be with all

I've also heard that something lke only 10% of all males in the world dream in color.  I've never actually had a black and white dream...all of my dreams are always in full color and I can't imagine anything else.

As for photographic memories, I've heard that many people who think they have photographic memories do not actually have them.  My memory is a funny one, I've spent a lot of time concentrating on it.  I can remember smells vividly as tho they were present, I can remember tastes the same.  When I remember passages from a book, I remember all things about it, what I was smelling, how I felt, what the page looked like, the discrepancies in the lettering, etc...everything.  I've been told I have a true photographic memory, and I can remember all of these things about most occasions except those I don't choose to, which is all too often tho not as much anymore a subconscious decision.  

Vivid imagery I'll just call fantasizing.  I've always had the ability to daydream up any situation I want, as long as nothing calls me away from it.  Sometimes I find it easier to do while my body is preoccupied by a thoughtless task like doodling or following lines of writing on a page.  But it can be almost as real as reality, the only exception being that I know it's not reality.  I suppose if I believed it were simply another reality it could be, but I think of it as a dreamscape in my mind.  Perhaps there are many capabilities inherent to such an ability, like astral projection.  I've never consciously astral projected, Bruce says we do it subconsciously all of the  time.  I had one dream where I met an old friend, and it was as if it were really her, and she was explaining things to me like how I was in a dream, and that astral projection is real and it was really her.  I didn't know what to think at the time, but I let myself believe it.  We caught up on old times and her energy was as comforting as it had always been.  I don't know what mine is like to her, but I'm not sure it's so comforting.  Then I slipped from it into a dream, and I forgot I was dreaming and it just went on, we all went skiing!  It seemed weird throughout it, but I was preoccupied with activity too much to focus on the reality of it.  This is as close to anything I've been to AP.  I haven't talked to my friend about it, but it felt real.

Hope this provides some insights

So, I was thinking about this today after a long while of not, and had a couple of questions regarding Wisp's response, if anyone can clarify for me:

Regarding God liking thinkers: When I introspect upon this subject, I find myself in a bind with language that grants God sentience as if he were a seperate entity with extrenal powers.  If this is what you mean by "God" then let me know, as my quarrel with the thinking regarding this is with a different sort of "God."  So, for me to analyze I come up with something like this: God's liking of thinkers translates to an objective statement that sounds like "Thinkers are more able through their thought to move circumstantially around the particulars of the universe."  It's beneficial if and oly if the thinker finds it beneficial to have said results from his or her thinking.  We say "God likes thinkers," because we assume that thinkers find the results of thought as said to be beneficial, and thus enjoy the fruits of their labor.  

I understand this all to be very abstract stuff, and yes, Wisp, it is about being CLEAR.  It's about using a language that fits for everyone, a terminology, if you will.  It can have multiple languages, but what is the most streamlined terminology?  I find this an interesting subject not only because I have myself become confused in interactions with others, but also because of my research about astral travel.  Perusing this site I find all kinds of news about telekinesis, astral travelling, lucid dreaming, etc...and I find myself wondering if what is being spoken of is the same thing imagined when I hear these terms.  I cannot astral travel, I cannot move objects with my mind, and I have not been able to lucid dream...as of yet.  At least not in the sense I have imagined it (Lucid Dreaming is the only one I think I am correct in imagining tho I have yet to experience).  Could "Astral Travel" be a metaphor for something else?  Could it be more easily spoken of in a common sense language that doesn't mislead the general public into imaginings of the mystical and magical?  Or is this the entire point?  Perhaps I am right in my imaginings and it is all mystical and magical.  However, I'd rather people be blunt and to the point.  

Further introspection has led me to a much different perspective of what "Astral Travel" is and what the "Astral Dimension(s)" is/are.  I see it as a focus thing, an attention thing.  We can focus our attention on the external around us, reality as it were in front of our waking, open eyes.  We can focus our attention on daydreams, fantasies and theories.  We can introspect on definitions, logics and sensations.  All of these are different "planes" so to astrally speak, of reality.  Each of these different categories of our experience, if we so choose to divide them, are divideable into black, white and grey areas.  I could go on and write a common sense language book on this if I knew I was right.  So, I begin to write this book in hopes to gain a response telling me whether I am right or wrong or both or nothing.  In hopes that I have at least spoken of it, told something or someone my feelings on the subject.  Hell, they needed out.  

So, without further adieu, I leave you all, and let me have it!

agreed about the not noticing the tensions.  For me my first conscious OBE happened quite randomly, without my even willing it.  It was almost as if my double, my spirit, whatever one may call it, were wanting so badly to tear away from my body, but my fear kept it from leaving because of how odd a sensation it was.  I was watching TV and my muscles kept randomly spasming as if I was cold.  I knew I Wasn't, though, that it was just a mood...I was in the trance state, but obviously not deeply relaxed.  Then I thought about my muscles, and remembered I could control them, and my comfort.  So, I sat comfortably, relaxed and suddenly I was floating above my body about four inches out.  I didn't do much, because I immediately noticed other beings around me in a similar dimension(s), so I just floated there, amazed for a while, and then dropped back in to drive home.  I probably floated in and out for 45 minutes.  It was quite interesting indeed!  
peace
p.s. I was 22 when it happened

You make some very good points.  I actually answered something like that to my metaphysics professor and he just about thunked me on the head...anyway, they're not always the best.  Pieces of paper seem to matter more than their true ability sometimes.  Anyway, I like to ask these kinds of questions, I think metaphysical thinking about the perceived and the perceiver are difficult for me at times, hence my interest.  
take it easy
peace