Hello all,
In another post I said I would probably talk a bit about my little experience with so called Astral Projection and OBEs. I must admit that I come from an esoteric tradition and I used different methods to approach the argument. I knew nothing about Phasing till I read it in this forum. However I find interesting to note how so different looking approaches are in the end the same thing, as always seems to happen.
Take for example the "Body of Light" technique, also called "Rising on the Planes" of the G.D. and A.A. tradition (and others). On the first look the method of operation seems completely different from what it is used in "Phasing". Yet, in reality, the method is almost the same. What looks different are self-made obstacles, also if you can think now that I'm saying idiocies. I must admit that many of these obstacles are created also by authors (naturally trying to help others and not understanding it) with the intention of explaning what it's "felt" by them to let others recreate the feeling. While doing so can usually seem beneficial to people trying to understand how to do the same, more often than not these sort of explanations tend to have the opposite effect. This has to do with a threefold problem principally (for how I see it): primarly the mind has the bad habit of focusing on what it is told to discard from its focus, secondarily the process of trying to recreate what it's said usually has the effect of focusing only on the "external" part of it, and thirdly not all people are the same and expectancy on what it is to happen usually create a sort of subconscious effort to recreate the same instead on focusing on what it is really, individually, felt.
This is the motive why many experienced authors when exposing "techniques" try to remove from them as many particulars as they can. The first approach is believing that these authors try to be as cryptic as possible, or that they are not divulgating too many informations because they are bounded by some sort of secrecy given by their oaths. However that's not so. They remove as many particulars as they can, making the technique and the informations in it as barebone as possible for the aforementioned problems. These sort of states are all within the person. In reality there would neither be need of a technique at all. What methods are used for is only to focus the untrained mind in a certain direction. When this last is clearly understood and the experience is internalized the person would do well to adapt the same to him/herself because not two individual are alike, and the most refined ritual of another is never so effective as the most gross personal one.
To external obstacles then you must add, as I said, the obstacles made by people themselves. As I've anticipated in a precedent post one of the most commons obstacles made by those who approach these "techniques" is usually a subconscious "fear of success". Most of the time this "fear" is not noticed and on the contrary completely discarded. However it is usually experienced as a sort of "jumping" from the state one so hardly sought to the normal consciousness at the moment one notices that what is wanted is actually happening. The "fear" can have many faces, as for example excitement of what is about to happen.
But, sorry, I'm divagating. Let's return to the "Body of Light" technique and its analogies with "Phasing". To begin with let's first try to understand how is usually viewed the BoL technique and how it is performed. The person tries to visualize a body outside and then try to transfer the consciousness in it. The usual approach to the method is trying to recreate a feeling of being in that "other" body. Who have tried the technique probably know the difficulty of doing so. The effort of trying to "feel" in the other body actually makes one think only of his/her body or people tense themselves to no end trying to concentrate on that "feeling" with the result of feeling exausthed or thinking the "technique" too difficult to do.
However let's see the thing from another point of view. Let's put aside all that is usually understood about it. First of all let's see what an author says about how to approach the method (namely Crowley):
- ...The first thing to do, therefore, is to get the body outside your own. To avoid muddling the two, you begin by imagining a shape resembling yourself standing in front of you. Do not say: "Oh, it's only imagination!" The time to test that is later on, when you have secured a fairly clear mental image of such a body. Try to imagine how your own body would look if you were standing in its place; try to transfer your consciousness to the Body of Light. Your own body has its eyes shut. Use the eyes of the Body of Light to describe the objects in the room behind you. Don't say. "It's only an effort of subconscious memory" ... the time to test that is later on.
As soon as you feel more or less at home in the fine body, let it rise in the air. Keep on feeling the sense of rising; keep on looking about you as you rise until you see landscapes or beings of the astral plane. Such have a quality all their own. They are not like material things --- they are not like mental pictures --- they seem to lie between the two. -
So let's see the analogies with Phasing, and (hopefully) removing the "only for experts" tag from the method. The effect of trying to tranfer the consciousness on another figure has the same effect of letting you focus inward in Phasing, in reality. The transfer of consciousness is done slowly, it doesn't happen immediately (at last at first). If you think that if you do the technique in the "right" way you will immediately find inside the other body or if you concentrate with all your might to feel completely in the figure at beginning you create difficulties to no end, you are actually trying without knowing to go against the flow instead of with it. As I said there are many analogies with Phasing, the method must be done in steps, in a gentle way, the transfer in consciousness (be it real or not) is created automatically by and by. Only much later (also with other ways) the subconscious (and also the adopted way to do the "method" in your personal way) will actually "switch" instantly the senses in the other body.
There's no need to strain the mind trying to recreate the feeling of being in another figure. It will come by itself, naturally, in steps. At first all is mingled, but if the method is approached in a relaxed way by and by the focus will switch, just like in Phasing. Imagining the objects behind the physical body is not strictly necessary, it is meant as a first step to begin to turn off the physical senses and starting to turning "inward". Also in this case no need to strain. It will come by itself. The act of trying to imagine the objects must be done in a relaxed way, as it is done in Phasing in F2. You by and by merge with what you are visualizing. This step can last how much you want (it can actually be perpetuated till the result by itself) or you don't need to do it at all, just try to feel more and more in the figure (again, in a gentle way, turning your senses inward as in Phasing). When you think you are ready - if you notice closely Crowley says "As soon as you feel more or less at home in the fine body", he doesn't say "you must be absolutely feeling as if you are in it", then try feeling of rising in the air and "...keep on looking about you as you rise". Also this part is exactly the same of "Phasing", i.e. you begin to more and more turn inward in the act of observing what's happening.
The act of noticing what's happening around with the sense of ascending (also in this case no need to strain, be gentle, no need to concentrate hardly on this feeling, just know you are rising, after a bit you will naturally start ot feel it) will have the effect of making you more and more concentrate in that "body" (or inward, as you want). The blackness will start to have a "volume", you will start to perceive images or beings after a while. At this point you will "be" in the scene, same as Phasing. You can either notice at beginning that you seem to see the "other" body while also acting inside it. Don't worry, it's fine, it can happen sometimes the first times, don't mind about it (it is actually a dream status).
If you analyze how the method works you will understand that the steps are the same. Much difficulty has been self made (and as I said also by others) about the BoL technique. In reality it's very easy to do. It is a gentle method, not a forced one, again, same as Phasing. It is done in steps. Usually in esoteric circles also names and gestures are made in the "other" body at various points, making one once more focus on "that" body in a natural way. Lastly one finds him/herself step by step completely conscious in this "other" body in an astral plane.
The only real difference of Phasing and the BoL method are the different approach. The method of the BoL uses the approach of creating another "body". This has the benefit that after a while (if the technique is done gently) the person will automatically start to switch off the physical senses while inside the other figure. The "externalization" does this by and by without the person either noticing it. Turning inward is then done faster after the method is mastered because subconsciously the transfer of consciousness is tied to an interiorized input of switching all physical senses. In a certain sense while in Phasing you switch 180 degree changing focus, with the BoL technique the switch is actualized in the act of "exteriorization".
I must then add that the technique was usually learnt after the individual already had some knowledge of conquering a posture (Asana), controlling the breath (Pranayama) and to a less extent control of thought (Prathyara, Dharana etc.). Naturally all of this is not strictly necessary, however Asana and Pranayama above all helps a lot.
The control of a posture for example has the great benefit that when the individual adopts the same the body automatically cease to exists. You can understand that in this way the act of turning "inward" is easier and faster. The control of breath then I think everybody knows its benefits. Apart calming the mind the breath also energize the internal currents of the body.
So, you see, also in the case of the BoL (as in Phasing) there's no reference at all about Trance, mind awake/body asleep etc. All is done automatically. While you can naturally bring the mind to an internalized status using the body, usually it is much easier to do the contrary. Also exit sensations are almost never felt, the only usual symptom it's only a sort of metallic click or a "snap" seeming to come at the height of the neck when you "feel" fully conscious in the "other" body. But also this sound it's not always felt and maybe it's again a subconscious expectancy of the person that knew about the same.
I hope this (lengthy, I admit) post of mine has shed some light on the fact that also at first sight different methods can (and are) in reality the same thing if looked in a more profund way and I hope to have been of help to someone trying something new or approach also the most difficult looking "methods" in a different frame of mind.
Selea.
In another post I said I would probably talk a bit about my little experience with so called Astral Projection and OBEs. I must admit that I come from an esoteric tradition and I used different methods to approach the argument. I knew nothing about Phasing till I read it in this forum. However I find interesting to note how so different looking approaches are in the end the same thing, as always seems to happen.
Take for example the "Body of Light" technique, also called "Rising on the Planes" of the G.D. and A.A. tradition (and others). On the first look the method of operation seems completely different from what it is used in "Phasing". Yet, in reality, the method is almost the same. What looks different are self-made obstacles, also if you can think now that I'm saying idiocies. I must admit that many of these obstacles are created also by authors (naturally trying to help others and not understanding it) with the intention of explaning what it's "felt" by them to let others recreate the feeling. While doing so can usually seem beneficial to people trying to understand how to do the same, more often than not these sort of explanations tend to have the opposite effect. This has to do with a threefold problem principally (for how I see it): primarly the mind has the bad habit of focusing on what it is told to discard from its focus, secondarily the process of trying to recreate what it's said usually has the effect of focusing only on the "external" part of it, and thirdly not all people are the same and expectancy on what it is to happen usually create a sort of subconscious effort to recreate the same instead on focusing on what it is really, individually, felt.
This is the motive why many experienced authors when exposing "techniques" try to remove from them as many particulars as they can. The first approach is believing that these authors try to be as cryptic as possible, or that they are not divulgating too many informations because they are bounded by some sort of secrecy given by their oaths. However that's not so. They remove as many particulars as they can, making the technique and the informations in it as barebone as possible for the aforementioned problems. These sort of states are all within the person. In reality there would neither be need of a technique at all. What methods are used for is only to focus the untrained mind in a certain direction. When this last is clearly understood and the experience is internalized the person would do well to adapt the same to him/herself because not two individual are alike, and the most refined ritual of another is never so effective as the most gross personal one.
To external obstacles then you must add, as I said, the obstacles made by people themselves. As I've anticipated in a precedent post one of the most commons obstacles made by those who approach these "techniques" is usually a subconscious "fear of success". Most of the time this "fear" is not noticed and on the contrary completely discarded. However it is usually experienced as a sort of "jumping" from the state one so hardly sought to the normal consciousness at the moment one notices that what is wanted is actually happening. The "fear" can have many faces, as for example excitement of what is about to happen.
But, sorry, I'm divagating. Let's return to the "Body of Light" technique and its analogies with "Phasing". To begin with let's first try to understand how is usually viewed the BoL technique and how it is performed. The person tries to visualize a body outside and then try to transfer the consciousness in it. The usual approach to the method is trying to recreate a feeling of being in that "other" body. Who have tried the technique probably know the difficulty of doing so. The effort of trying to "feel" in the other body actually makes one think only of his/her body or people tense themselves to no end trying to concentrate on that "feeling" with the result of feeling exausthed or thinking the "technique" too difficult to do.
However let's see the thing from another point of view. Let's put aside all that is usually understood about it. First of all let's see what an author says about how to approach the method (namely Crowley):
- ...The first thing to do, therefore, is to get the body outside your own. To avoid muddling the two, you begin by imagining a shape resembling yourself standing in front of you. Do not say: "Oh, it's only imagination!" The time to test that is later on, when you have secured a fairly clear mental image of such a body. Try to imagine how your own body would look if you were standing in its place; try to transfer your consciousness to the Body of Light. Your own body has its eyes shut. Use the eyes of the Body of Light to describe the objects in the room behind you. Don't say. "It's only an effort of subconscious memory" ... the time to test that is later on.
As soon as you feel more or less at home in the fine body, let it rise in the air. Keep on feeling the sense of rising; keep on looking about you as you rise until you see landscapes or beings of the astral plane. Such have a quality all their own. They are not like material things --- they are not like mental pictures --- they seem to lie between the two. -
So let's see the analogies with Phasing, and (hopefully) removing the "only for experts" tag from the method. The effect of trying to tranfer the consciousness on another figure has the same effect of letting you focus inward in Phasing, in reality. The transfer of consciousness is done slowly, it doesn't happen immediately (at last at first). If you think that if you do the technique in the "right" way you will immediately find inside the other body or if you concentrate with all your might to feel completely in the figure at beginning you create difficulties to no end, you are actually trying without knowing to go against the flow instead of with it. As I said there are many analogies with Phasing, the method must be done in steps, in a gentle way, the transfer in consciousness (be it real or not) is created automatically by and by. Only much later (also with other ways) the subconscious (and also the adopted way to do the "method" in your personal way) will actually "switch" instantly the senses in the other body.
There's no need to strain the mind trying to recreate the feeling of being in another figure. It will come by itself, naturally, in steps. At first all is mingled, but if the method is approached in a relaxed way by and by the focus will switch, just like in Phasing. Imagining the objects behind the physical body is not strictly necessary, it is meant as a first step to begin to turn off the physical senses and starting to turning "inward". Also in this case no need to strain. It will come by itself. The act of trying to imagine the objects must be done in a relaxed way, as it is done in Phasing in F2. You by and by merge with what you are visualizing. This step can last how much you want (it can actually be perpetuated till the result by itself) or you don't need to do it at all, just try to feel more and more in the figure (again, in a gentle way, turning your senses inward as in Phasing). When you think you are ready - if you notice closely Crowley says "As soon as you feel more or less at home in the fine body", he doesn't say "you must be absolutely feeling as if you are in it", then try feeling of rising in the air and "...keep on looking about you as you rise". Also this part is exactly the same of "Phasing", i.e. you begin to more and more turn inward in the act of observing what's happening.
The act of noticing what's happening around with the sense of ascending (also in this case no need to strain, be gentle, no need to concentrate hardly on this feeling, just know you are rising, after a bit you will naturally start ot feel it) will have the effect of making you more and more concentrate in that "body" (or inward, as you want). The blackness will start to have a "volume", you will start to perceive images or beings after a while. At this point you will "be" in the scene, same as Phasing. You can either notice at beginning that you seem to see the "other" body while also acting inside it. Don't worry, it's fine, it can happen sometimes the first times, don't mind about it (it is actually a dream status).
If you analyze how the method works you will understand that the steps are the same. Much difficulty has been self made (and as I said also by others) about the BoL technique. In reality it's very easy to do. It is a gentle method, not a forced one, again, same as Phasing. It is done in steps. Usually in esoteric circles also names and gestures are made in the "other" body at various points, making one once more focus on "that" body in a natural way. Lastly one finds him/herself step by step completely conscious in this "other" body in an astral plane.
The only real difference of Phasing and the BoL method are the different approach. The method of the BoL uses the approach of creating another "body". This has the benefit that after a while (if the technique is done gently) the person will automatically start to switch off the physical senses while inside the other figure. The "externalization" does this by and by without the person either noticing it. Turning inward is then done faster after the method is mastered because subconsciously the transfer of consciousness is tied to an interiorized input of switching all physical senses. In a certain sense while in Phasing you switch 180 degree changing focus, with the BoL technique the switch is actualized in the act of "exteriorization".
I must then add that the technique was usually learnt after the individual already had some knowledge of conquering a posture (Asana), controlling the breath (Pranayama) and to a less extent control of thought (Prathyara, Dharana etc.). Naturally all of this is not strictly necessary, however Asana and Pranayama above all helps a lot.
The control of a posture for example has the great benefit that when the individual adopts the same the body automatically cease to exists. You can understand that in this way the act of turning "inward" is easier and faster. The control of breath then I think everybody knows its benefits. Apart calming the mind the breath also energize the internal currents of the body.
So, you see, also in the case of the BoL (as in Phasing) there's no reference at all about Trance, mind awake/body asleep etc. All is done automatically. While you can naturally bring the mind to an internalized status using the body, usually it is much easier to do the contrary. Also exit sensations are almost never felt, the only usual symptom it's only a sort of metallic click or a "snap" seeming to come at the height of the neck when you "feel" fully conscious in the "other" body. But also this sound it's not always felt and maybe it's again a subconscious expectancy of the person that knew about the same.
I hope this (lengthy, I admit) post of mine has shed some light on the fact that also at first sight different methods can (and are) in reality the same thing if looked in a more profund way and I hope to have been of help to someone trying something new or approach also the most difficult looking "methods" in a different frame of mind.
Selea.