Messages

I'm glad you agree with what is true because your friend Selea seems to live in la-la land and claims that science doesn't acknowledged them - only has an interest! LOL - science continues to explore OOBEs just as they explore lucid dreaming, sleep cycles and brain activity in general.

As they explore other so called "paranormal" activities, as telepathy, mediumship, etc. I used the term "so-called" for a motive. Now the use of the term "paranormal" is much less common than before, because science has began to understand more some functions of the brain and so they are now understanding that "paranormal" is not that paranormal in realtiy.

But still, in the science field there's not a comprehensive view on OBEs and what they are (as with every other thing of this nature), and surely nobody of science, if speaking formally, will tell you that OBEs are real. So, your "acknowledged" is just my "interest". They are "acknowledged" in the sense that science knows that they can be replicated given the right circumnstances (that are yet to be defined fully) but not that they are a "real" phenomena that has objective parameters in its results. For this, given the context, my use of the term "interest", because you tried to imply that OBEs are treated different from other similar phenomena, when they are NOT.

You just want to try to divert the discussion on semantics and this petty argument on "acknowldeged vs. interest" because you have nothing of concrete to say and you have done, yet another time, the figure of the guy speaking of things you don't clearly either know from personal experience as if you were an expert and that you don't either know how to have a coherent line of working and thought on what you do. You neither have a coherent intellectual approach, because, if you did, you would consider OBEs a "waste" in the same way. In that case I would not agree with you but at at last I could respect your pow because it would coherent in that point, differently from now.

And then stop talking to me in 3rd person replying to another. If you want to speak with me reply to me. How old are you? Seriously. Neither my granddaughter acts as you do, and she's only 9 years old.

As for being "paranormal", there is nothing paranormal about it. Even if some experiences prove to be telepathic, this may actually be a normal function of reality as our minds could be quantum entangled. Nothing magical about it as your friend has implied...I don't bother with the nonsense he posts any more anyway.

And you still continue to read everything as you like and insist to talk about it as if I said it. Where I said that OBEs are "magical"? Can you quote me? And, no, I didn't "imply" anything, I'm not you. I used OBEs as a reference to demonstrate that you have not a coherent intellectual view on the things and how you approach them intellectualy. I never implied that OBEs are not "normal" or anything else of the babbling you are speaking about now.

Good work btw, on not replying on nothing at all of concrete, as for example your use of two weights and two measures depending on what you like and what you don't, either if they share the same background and they function in the same thing, practically.

What a pathetic excuse of an "educated" man. If you want to debate and prove me wrong or that I what I say is an idiocy then do so fully and reply to SPECIFIC points, as I always do. Replying to generic arguments without entering in the specific and remaining on the vague it is the well known, (and pathetic) last excuse at having a point when in reality you don't know what to say.

Maybe you should ask your God Raduga if that's so, analyzing the way you behave, and let me know what will he say about this. I'm sure he will agree with me, on the fact that you have nothing of "educated" to say, but you are just someone that thinks he "knows better" on a given, yet you cannot either have a coherent argumentation without resorting to personal attacks, generic and meaningless confutations that never goes to specific and practical points, and using words the other never said to try to discredit him/her.

I said this to you once, also if you probably didn't take me sersiouly, but I was: if the way you behave is the result of something you do or are, then change it, dramatically; it does you more bad than good.

[same]

OOBEs are acknowledged by science...

And I repeat: they are as other "paranormal" activities. (Pherhaps you did miss the "", isn't it?. Paranormal was a term invented by science, btw, not by me, for this my use of it. Again, your wanting to look "educated" is not going well. You either now confute a term constructed by the those you try to use as a backup. Oh well...)

Science has an interesest in them, but they are not considered real. There are studies and tests that try to acknowledge how they work etc., same (again) as with other "paranormal" activities (including, guess what, and again, interactions with "entities" - did you miss it this point, isn't it? you completely discarded it. I don't know why it always happens with you...).

And please, stop always referring to Raduga as if he should know the truth of the matter just because he pretends so. Apart that nobody knows it, then either if you practically cannot discern all the wrong or partial things he pretends to know everything about, everbody but a biased individual can see that his method of working is faulted from beginning, because there's no structure on it. He decides what needs to be tested and explored on an intellectual basis, he only cares to do what it is seems "fine" and "good" for him, and what he cares upon to learn. Given this obviously faulted approach, he knows less than nothing in the end. If you learn Karate it's good; if you don't learn Karate it's good the same; if you learn Karate so and so, in a fight you will be probably more in trouble than not knowing it at all. *Practical* truth.

I already demonstrated to you why this approach doesn't give you nothing, no matter how much time you put in it. If you either pass 20 years wanting to learn chess but you just do what you find good or interesting or intellectually affine to your pow there you will learn absolutely nothing, in the end. Another individual doing eveything, and learning in a structured manner, especially those things that s/he doesn't care about or find boring or unuseful, will have a much wider understanding on it and it will be much better at it, in the end, there will be no either comparision. The first individual after those 20 years will be at most 1500-1700 ECO (and the worser is that that ECO will be not stable; a such individual could lose either to someone of 500-700 ECO lower, for example), the second will be already an IM after 2-4 years.

This applies to EVERYTHING, every field, and if you really were educated as you think you are you would know already, since it is the basis on how the teaching process is structured in every academy worth its name.

Selea...

OOBEs are acknowledged by science.

No, they aren't. There's only an interest in them, as with many other so called "paranormal" activities, including, guess what, interactions with "entities".

They are often purported to be many things by the scientific community, but, what they are remains elusive. And yes...they could all be in your head. I never claimed to know anything for sure.

I just let you notice that you use two measures when you interact with things. OBEs can be all in your head (as you yourself admitted here) and yet they are perfectly fine in your view and you use them to do what you want. The same can be said of "demons" yet those things are not fine with you, for your intellectual approach.

Make-up your mind. You cannot decide yourself what's "real" and what's not just on what you like more or it is more close to your personal intellectual view. And before all else, you cannot decide yourself what's "real" and what's not without either having experienced it yourself.

The only person claiming to know it all here is yourself and I'm giving you the opportunity here to look at yourself by holding a mirror up to your face.

I just write what I know, but, differently from yours, my knowledge is very ample and includes also those things I didn't intellectually believe or care to. My experience is based on practical things, yours in intellectual dabblings of no practical value whatsoever if not to believe you are so sure of everything already.

Again, OOBEs are a real phenomenon, what they are is what eludes us.

Also "demons" are. OBEs are "real" because you can use the experience they create, and in the same way "demons" are real for the experience they create. Both experiences can be used, this is the only thing that matters. Are they really "real"? Who knows and who cares. Only you do, just that you do so only for what you care to, and you are a total contradiction either intellectually. Your logic has no sense.

The same thing cannot be said about the Goetia demons. There is absolutely no proof that such sentient beings exist and can be interacted with in the Phase.

There are many "proofs", in fact, of the same character of the "proofs" that OBEs are real. They are in the same category. Many people doing certain things have experienced the same things, exactly as with OBEs. But I suppose that since these people don't conform to your intellectual pow then they must all be "deluded", differently, naturally, from those that share it. What you don't like is coming from "deluded" individuals, what you like comes from "wise and pragmatic" people, no matter if those people then, either admittedly never ever tried those things they insist they are experts upon.

And the fact that a minority of people (that usually, as you, care to do only what they intellectually find fine discarding all the rest as if it naturally doesn't exists because they say so), cannot experience those things in the "phase" it doesn't mean that they cannot be encountered and experienced there by people that know how to do it.

The fact that some people can only drive a car with all assists on it doesn't mean that all people cannot control a car without them. I imagine what Ken Block would think if somebody a day will write a book in where it is written: "a car can be controlled only with ABS and automatic gears, elsewhere you certainly go off-road on an overtake and everybody that says the contrary is just deluded".

You seem to have an interest for esoteric writings but you completely disregard that that is just someone's view being expressed (and usually with ulterior motives).

I have interest only in what I can experience, and, differently from you, I experience EVERYTHING.

He also engaged in esoteric practices and his view was somewhat different from that of, say, Aleister Crowley, for example.

On the contrary, on the structure the experiences are almost the same. You should read a little better and not just stop on the external part. Look at the structure of the experiences, they share many similarities.

In the intermediate state, upon death, one may experience scores of demons, which, as it is stated in the Bardo Thodol (and I have it!), have no existence but a subjective one.

Also OBEs are a "subjective" experience as they aren't. Same as "demons". They are subjective as they aren't.

You are focusing on that and moving right towards it. I'm telling you...you are moving towards your own mental gunk as you allow yourself to be impressed by all this Goetian nonsense.

I focus on what works. You focus on mental dabbling. You continue to discard all the time that I repeat that I don't care if they are "real" or not. I DON'T CARE. Do you know the meaning of the word? I care only about if a thing works and if I can use it or not.

But instead you still continue insisting that I say that they are "real" (in the sense you give to the term). Would you please stop debating on things I never said to begin with?

Demons don't exist like people do. They are aspects of your psyche and some are from your imagination. there's a reason why we have nightmares too...to help us face our fears.

Again, what they are and what they aren't doesn't concern me. I don't care what an OBE is, only the way I can use them. Same way I don't care what a "demon" is, only how I can use them.

And I repeat it to you: since you are so sure they don't exist, why it's that so that every people as you that I've met that say the same things then tinkle in their pants (*literally*) when  they are shown what happens?

Since you (and others like you) are so sure it's just "imagination" (that yet you didn't define the meaning of the word, you discarded it altogheter, isn't it?) why I bet as much as you want that you will *never* dare to try doing a thing as the one I've mentioned?

All you are doing is telling the newbie that entering the Phase can be dangerous...not so! Not at all.

Listen, you can do whatever you want but stop pretending you know what I've done and stop pretending I wrote something I never did. You continuosly do this: you make up stuff I never said and then you either try to "confute" it.

I said exactly the contrary, read well next time, I expressedly said in the first message that in the "phase" (as you call it) these things are never met if you don't do something specific and you know how to do it. So no, I instilled fear in anybody, and on the contrary I either wrote to the OP that I was talking of all another thing.

Maybe, I always repeat it to you, if instead of having an orgasm at the sound of your voice you will for one time READ what I write you will acknowledge that your supposed pedestal is just the chair that doesn't let you hang from the rope.

Have you ever experience one of the Goetia demons? Even if you think you have, what makes you think you didn't hallucinate the experience?

Because I have practical results by the experience. Namely: I ask a thing from a "demon", that thing happens. If when I turn the key my car ignites everytime, coincidence or not it's irrelevant.

Again, I'm not interested at all if I'm "hallucinating" (what is an hallucination, btw, oh wise one? care to explain?) or not. I care about the use of the "hallucination" and what it brings me. It brings me nothing of a *practical* value? I discard it. It brings something I can use in a practical way? Fine, I use it.

Selea, if you want to remain in your ignorance you are quite welcome.

My "ignorance" is built upon personal knowledge on what works and what it doesn't. Your "education" is based on suppositions about what's real and what not, without ever having either tried for yourself and not caring to.

Guess whom of the two I prefer...

And I already said it to you once: you are pretending you are more "educated" than me, but that's really so? If I would place a bet in your position I would be careful...

I'll let you believe in your demons and engulf yourself in fear while I carry out my Phase studies and occasionally enjoy rich and interesting experiences that will invigorate my artistic inspiration. Don't bother replying to tell me how much I'm wrong because, the next time I post here, it will be in reply to someone else's post.

And you can continue living in your boring world made of certainities of everything you don't either personally know for yourself as if you are an expert in them. I guess you can go in a martial arts forum, pretend you are the next Bruce Lee just because you've read a book that does make intellectual sense to you (without either knowing how to do a side-kick) and then insist that all people experiences are just fabrications of their mind, either if they are experiencing those "fabrications" everyday.

Do you think you will look "educated" to those people?

I tell you a little thing Xanth.

In more "ancient" times when students approached "visualization" in occidental "occult" schools the teaching was structured more with the student having to effectively visualize an object, as an apple, actively, and this was the primary way of doing it. Nowadays the thing has, indeed, much changed. When a "visualization" excercize is approached, at beginning, the student is usually advised on expecting to see the thing s/he tries to "visualize", until it's not there. You don't "actively" try to visualize nothing, you let your "will" do it.

The difference is that in doing so you utilize the subconscious part of the mind instead of the conscious one and the creative subconscious "power" is much more than the conscious. "Active" visualization is nowadays only used to teach the student certain specific things, but not more to "create" visual images in the mind and their applications.

Everybody does this, unconsciously. If for example with the eyes closed you relax and listen to sounds "images" will arise in your mind tied to that sounds, by themselves. This is also why it is said that "language creates" (apart some other "mystical" motives) and all the theory of fenomenology behind this. When someone uses the term "house", for example, you visualize the object and create a "structure" of what you see, so you can share that interpretation and its meaning with other people and agree on it.

An year ago I posted about this in reply to you speaking about Phasing. I said to you to try something: to "pretend" you were seeing an object in your room (or the whole room) as if you had the eyes open. Just pretending, nothing more. You didn't notice the difference  *consciouly* at that time (you didn't focus on it, thinking it was just a"noticing" excercize as you did always do, where the "images" arised by themselves, instead of your will creating them), but I was sure that "subconsciously" the difference would have reached you, one way or another. You have now mixed (so to speak) the two: you let first an "image" (or a sketch of an "image") form by itself and then you "strengthen" or "structure" it with your intent.

As for little "secrets" on how to do this effectively: the more your mind doesn't wander, the more it is calm and you don't have internal dialogue, the more powerful the "intent" is setted and fidelity of "visualization" will be. It also helps in being "absorbed" in the thing you "see" so that your "reality" shifts.

This is also tied to what I told you about using the "light" to create a "vehicle". It is used in the same way, only the "medium" is different. You actively "visualize" nothing, it is your will/desire/intent that does it, only this time instead of with so called "thought forms" with somenthing else.

As for not putting too much "force" on the intent, that's a thing you learn with practice. It is a sort of equilibrum of passive/active that you have to reach and learn by practicing. It is like when you first learn on how to stop the internal chatter and you put a lot of concentration doing it at beginning, until "you" (or better, something inside you) doesn't learn the "trick" and you actually relax when you do it.

Indeed it is. Maybe these entities do exist in the non-physical and they prey on the fearful or those that go looking for them. Such mischievous entities can go by many names. The religious would refer to them as "demons", of course. I have no interest in going there though. I still think that Buddha's story illustrates what they are quite well, though. Mara wasn't really a sentient being. He was a product of Gautama's mind. The devil in all of us. My experiences seem to indicate that they are not real ever since I stopped running. Perhaps my mind isn't really there.

The problem, as I see it, is that you just lose yourself always on what is "real" and whatnot, instead on focusing on the experience. I already told you at last twenty times but it seems that you don't want to listen: "it doesn't matter what's real and what's not, what matters are the practical results you get by doing certain things".

The Goetia is a piece of writing bound to excite the imagination of those who read it.

And what's "imagination"? Why do you consider it any different than what is "real"?

It's a bit of an oxymoronic statement - don't you think? One minute you say you can assure me and then in brackets you practically say that there is still a chance that they might be... - Either they are or they are not. I'm not scared of them and I don't believe in them, hence I don't experience them.

The fact that you *cannot* experience them (because you don't know how to) it doesn't mean that they are not there. If you will do a stupid thing as the one I mentioned (and please, I repeat, don't do it) you will then "experience" them, no matter if you are not scared of them and don't "believe" in them and if they are just a "belief construct" brought on the "imaginination" exalted by the cermenony, and you will have to deal with it. Will be the "dealing" all a product of your "subconscious"? It could be. Will be the "dealing" just a product of your fears? It can be. Still, no matter what the dealing will really be, the results and the "encounter" would be devastating, both for you and those near you, and it will have a real impact on your life, practically.

"By doing certain things, certain results happens". You care too much on if the "result" is "real" or "not real" instead of caring about both how to reach that "result"  and how to use it.

Also, is there a correct way of approaching demons? I didn't know that! why would you want to approach them anyway (supposing that such things even exist)?

There are motives why you may want to approach them. Goetia "demons" are usually approached to acquire material things or material informations. In more general terms "demons" are to be used for specific, practical things of less "spiritual" nature.

Everything has its uses.

Yesterday I sent my children to bed before putting Nightmare In Elm Street on. I have no doubt in my mind that had I let them watch Freddy Krueger, they would have had nightmares about him or something just as horrible and scary to them. Why? Because it would have made an impression on them. The fear would further fuel the nightmare. Adults are not so different with their mysticism, Goetias , religious beliefs and astral projection...

Sure, and the *practical* difference where it is? Your children could either die by a strong fear (as everybody can), unchecked. Will it then be "real" or not "real" that "fear" for you?

The difference, in this case, is that Krueger will be a product created by the fear of the child, it does not "exists" as an archetype already. Certain "demons", as a Goetia demon, already exists as such, so having "fear" of it or not it doesn't change the status and "impact" it has on you.

Having a fearless attitute is a very good advice, as it is, however, to *respect* everything, especially those things you know nothing about.

I can assure you that they are only strong if you believe them to be strong - which you already do - so you are deluding yourself there.

And I assure you that some of these "demons" aren't, in the terms you are seeing it, the difference here is that I have personal experience in dealing with them, while you don't, so guess what? I think I have more experience than you on the matter to know what's what.

You start always from the arrogant presumptions that I am "deluded", as if I would be a sort of "believe anything just because I have to". This is what makes you feel better with yourself, in this way you can discard everything I say thinking you "know better". It is a sort of automatic protection you have; but, if you need a shield, is because something inside you knows it has to be protected.

Yet, also if you "know better" and you are so sure these things are not "real" and are "delusions" or cannot do you no harm if you are as you are (naturally supposing you are "better"), all your "security" will melt in practice because I could bet everything you want that you will tinkle on your pants after just about 10 minutes if in practice I would let you do a thing as that, seeing what it "happens". I know because I've been there, with similar individuals as you.

I repeat: all pragmatic people I've met are really good at talking, but when they have to show their "security" on certain things, they always avoid doing them. It is because they really don't care or just because also if they put down everything they consider "bogus" in forums they know perfectly they cannot be so dogmatically sure, one way or another, of what's "real" and "not real" so it's better to not awake the sleeping dog?

Do you know it happens in the same way for OBEs? Also them can be just a construct of the mind, isn't it? Yet you are *using* them, isn't it? So what's different?

The only "protection" you need is a stable mind and a good head about you. That's all.

Sure.

But you suppose I'm "mad", isn't it? Or a "deluded" individual, not knowing what's what.

[please]

In them, pale-skinned beings would chase me and violate me. They looked sentient but now I've had enough experience to be able to tell that such scary episodes are fear manifested. That's all.

Naturally, they "can" be, and usually they are, in the majority of cases, and in the majority of cases they are just a nuisance (as in this one).

However there are many of these so called "demons" that are much stronger than you think, and much less "non existent" (whatever that word means)  than you think. If you are interested you can try reading the Goetia, then try "evoking" (properly) Bhaal without a so-called circle. "Fear manifested" or not, "aspects of the subconscious" or not, after you will have to deal with it, and it will not be a pleasure, I assure you (at all, it will either be very dangerous, so no, please, don't do it, it was just a provocation; I've personally known only a supreme butt that did a thing as that and he died two days after throwing himself from the sixth roof, and for what? He wanted to win the hearth of a girl and was so sure of his grandeur as to not either care about everyone telling him it was a really bad idea; usually people are not so idiot, either if they want to "try", and they go safe, "evoking" something "minor", with much lower consequences).

There are various "degrees" in the power of these "demons". What you encountered are just the so called "lamias". Those are what you usually encounter on the "astral" and they mean very little. They are so weak as to be easily overcome and not cared upon. However there are some types of these "demons" that are all another thing, and not to be toyed with if you know not what you are doing.

Practically speaking the probability of encountering one of these "demons" is bar none if you don't voluntarily go searching for them and you know not how to do it, but they exists, and they are just not only "fears", I assure you (or, even if they are, they are so strong as such that whatever they are, you are anyway in great trouble if not approached correctly, so it doesn't really matter).

Naturally you can think otherwise but all of the "pragmatic" people I've met (as your friend Beekdkin) also if they are so sure of what is "real" and what's not, never dared doing a thing as I mentioned before. Maybe because they don't care? It can be. Maybe because also if you show here that you "know better" you cannot be so certain of nothing in reality and it's better to just avoid coming into trouble just for bullying in a forum? (Luckily, I must add).

To the OP; this was not directed at you, naturally. In your case people here are right, you should not put too much weight on it because the more you have fear the more "power" what these "things" have. I was speaking of something specific, not your case at all. So don't become impressioned. Mine was academical talk, not related at all with yours.

I've encountered such "beings" as well during my experiences.
It can be hard to discern sometimes what's potentially real and what isn't... but, you are your best judge.  Use your intuition and whatever answer/conclusion you come to, stick with it.  

There are some practices (teached in so called "esoteric" occidental schools) that make you learn some "tests" you can adopt for this scope.

Gibberish or not, belief structures or not, as always, it doesn't really matters. "Everything that works"..

They can help at beginning, depending on what you care to do.

...the accuracy was incredible, because I set my goal to staying realistically in the physical.

That's one of the motives why some "methods" make you create a "vehicle", among others.

The more focused you are in the sensations of a "body" (and the more this "body" is "real"), the more lucidty and "control" on the experience you have. Naturally the practice has also some drawbacks, as for example limiting the consciouness, and at beginning it's either really tiring.

Still, depending on what you want to do (as always) it has many practical applications.

My questions:

What was this an OBE or a Liquid dream?

"Liquid dream", I like the term, you should TM it

As for you question, I suggest at beginning to don't care what's what but just on having the experience. Confining yourself in intellectual boundaries just limits your attempts when you want to learn.

After, when you have a bit of personal experience to back-up an intellectual structure on the phenoma for yourself (and not in the word of others), then you can start researching on how to obtain a thing in confront to another and what are the differences and how to "work" with those.

In my experience in some practices as OBEs, what you think is what limits you more than anything else, and it does more "bad" than "good". Same it goes for what is is called "sleep paralysis", "vibrations" etc. and why many suggest to don't care about them at beginning.

Ok, Selea.

Good debate and good points, as always.

P.S: If you want you can bring your friend and we can do a "race" on whom has the most years of experience. "I have 25", "I have 30", "No, but I have 31 considering that I was already doing it when I was a child", since these are the only things you care about. Surely this will make everybody see who is the "best" one.

Ahh...I see. So that's your problem. My apparent popularity...

Again missing the point, totally. Why don't you ever read instead of being so wrapped up in your words?

As for popularity in this forums, that's an easy thing to get. If I was interested (and I was, many years ago, being like you) I would act totally different.

Selea, I think you should think before you post.

If only for once you would follow your advices to others for yourself....

Another piece of advice...try not to say "shame on you" to others so much and quit pointing out their egos because you've one too.

The difference between my ego and yours is too much evident in the posts here. If you weren't not so full of yourself you would see the the difference in how I behave and how you do.

You are right that it's not Raduga's method, sure...but he's highlighted the main areas and he's helped many. There is someone else who has many decades of experience and he undoubtedly understands the whole process better than I do.

I would be curious to know this guy, but, just for your information, having years of experience doesn't really mean anything at all, on itself. If you have 20 years of experience in "chess" it means nothing. Another guy who has "experience" in it for 2 years it is has become a GM while your ECO has grow at most to 1500; there are a lot of these cases around on the net.

Do you know the difference? The method and what you do, experience without structure means nothing at all.

Reread my example on music, maybe you will get what I mean here.

He also agrees with Raduga. If he saw the things you've been posting here - especially about the Body of Light method being superior, he would most probably urinate from his eyes. He's working on a film at the mo though...

Let him come here and debate about the method. I hope he's better than you on seeing how it works because, elsewhere, he will just make a silly figure as you have done.

Urinating on things you know nothing about thinking you are so smart just wastes urine and make a fool of yourself.

@ Rudolph:

Don't stretch yourself. I think Selea only brought up the Body of Light to contradict me. I don't think he even knows what he is talking about there but, I'm not making any accusation, Selea...just thinking out loud.

Again a personal attack, I see. Still pretending to talk badly about a thing I already demonstrated you know nothing about, I see. But if you still pretend to know better I will be more than happy to oblige. Post a thread were you "analyze" that "method" and how it should supposedly works and I will let you see that what you think you "know" about it it's all completely and irremediably, WRONG, and that, in fact, all your "analysis" is just silly talk of an intellectual nature. Naturally this will make you do a really bad figure in the eyes of all others here and your supposed "popularity" will fall badly, and, since this thing it's very important for you, take it in mind.

You have not been able till now but to try to show your popularity, you have not been able to neither tie act and words, you have never been able to listen because you were more intent on just talking, you insiste on debating on things you did not know from personal experience and just pretending to be an expert upon,  and yet you think you can decide what's "right" or "wrong", you have neither been able to have a conversations without resorting to peronal insults and silly behaviour.

You see, OBEs means very little in the end. The things you are "doing" brings you nowhere, you are full of yourself and pathetically insecure as to always have to attack others personally, having confirmations from your "friends" or backing-up their statements, and to brag you successes around, and what's worse is that these are neither "yours", in the end.

So, all in all, everything you say about yourself and what you think you "know" it is contradicted by how you act and behave.

You know the saying: "by their fruits you shall know them"?

I asked because you made a rather bold claim and if true I am sincerely interested in your method. But it is clear to me that this "superior" method of yours (Light Body, Middle Pillar, Raja Yoga, hand waving, smoke blowing...etc.) is just exaggeration.

All methods that can make you "exit" voluntarily are "superior" than those who employ sleep on the things I've explained. Nothing is "superior" than "another" on a whole. Different things brings you different results, it's just this.

You see, Selea, you came in here and talked down the Raduga obe4u method and made a claim to having a better method.

It's not "my" method. I never claimed something is "mine", differently from Raduga, in fact.

Now, I personally am familiar with the Raduga method and I know by personal experience that it is excellent. For me, it worked as advertised. Now someone comes along and says they have something even better?! wow! I am definitely interested.

A) It's NOT Raduga method. Those things have been written in Shaman's texts from a lot of time, really a lot. He just took them and recycled with pseudo-scientific terms mixing them with some research of others (as LaBerge) pretending he invented something. If you did read a little more you would not not have needed to read Raduga and you will now be able to know that what he says is really nothing special (and not for what it is, but for the fact that's not HIS).
B) I never said it doesn't work. I just said that all methods that require sleep give you no control and they are tied to the physical body sleeping. They have naturally some positives too, one for example is that they are really easy to learn and adopt, and everybody can do them without previous training in nothing else.
C) It's "better" if you want to put the effort on learning it. If you just want results immediately and don't care about what type of "result" you get then not, it's not "better", at all. You will just waste time.

So... Regardie's Tree of Life. oh.... That. okay. Why it took so much to get that out of you is a mystery.

OMG. I told you immediately, it's you that started the diatribe in all "variations". If you did a bit of research instead of attacking me you would have come to the source of the technique, that's obviously the "better" in the sense that's not corrupted by every other person he thinks he knows better without neither understanding how things works, isn't it?

As for the LBPR, again, it is one of the most complete rituals. Archaic or not it doesn't matter. Believing on it or not it doesn't matter. What matters (for the now 100th time) it is that doing certain things certain things happens. And doing the LBPR *many* things of a various nature happens, no matter if you think it garbage or not. Just trying doing it for about six months, two times a day, with an open mind, not caring to "believe" or not "believe" or if it is "garbage" or not. Just do it, then probably your point of view on it will change dramatically, as it has changed for everyone that thought the same as you at beginning.

Things are never that simple as they look. You just watch name of angels, gestures and think: "this is pathetic", but there's much more to it that you cannot know because you just try to decide it intellectually.

Well, I read as much of that book as I could long ago and the archaic style is tedious at best. I really could not take it seriously after reading the "Banishing Ritual". I also consider it one of the worst resources out there for learning the Middle Pillar exercise. For those not familiar with it;

Again I see how do you really want to learn. You already know what's "garbage" and what's not. Good to know. Now, please can you just reply to someone else? I have no time to waste with your ego, I already told you.

You people are hilarious. You ask but then you don't want to either try what I told you to do. Again, why did you ask me if you already did know what was "wrong" or "right" therein and that had not intention of doing anything I said anyway?

You just wanted an intellectual discussion on what's "right" and what's "wrong"? If you care about these things I'm sure you will find a lot of people around really interested, as your friend. I'm not. You asked for directions, I gave you them. If you are not interested on acting but just debating then I'm not the person for you, I'm sorry.

This is a rather involved exercise and takes quite a while to learn how to do it properly.

It's obvious, or did you expect everything for nothing. Did you expected a course of 30 days in where you became a master? Good luck on your search.

This plus 2 to 4 hours a day Raja Yoga and then maybe, what?, 30 minutes to an hour  a day developing the "Body of Light"? ... hmmmm. Do this for a few years and the chela will 'soon' be Astral projecting "at will" ??

You have neither reasearched a bit on the things you are talking about and I've told you to do, this already shows everything about how much you really cared to begin with .

If you did at last try instead of growing up your ego on silly things you already would understand what Raja Yoga is and what it does. As for the Body of Light it's a method that does something specific, and, also there, you, as your friend, cannot and will never understand how it works because it's not a thing that you can understand just by "thinking" you know how it works.

Sorry Charlie but that does not even begin to compare to the efficacy and results of the obe4u approach.

If you say so...

A shame that the thingsI told you to do goes well beyond simply "exiting" the body.

Now just to put this in perspective I had been doing the Robert Bruce MAP work for almost two years and had been getting OBE about once a month before I stumbled across the obe4u method. But when I tried it, it took my success rate to a whole new level in about a week. (And as I already said, I had been practicing a branch of Surat Shabd yoga for decades before the Baba Fakir Chand revelations and I became disillusioned with the entire Hindu yoga culture and methods).

Your "success" rate means nothing. You were just intersted in "results" on the experience of an OBE and sleep methods give you that very fast. But you have no control when you are out and this doesn't interest you, good to know.

As for Surat Shabd, that has nothing to do with Raja Yoga, and, in fact, it is just sillines brought upon by yet another "guru" and it will never bring you to an OBE (if you cared about it) because, apart being really weak in itself, it's not either meant for it.

Then what's Hindu Yoga? You don't either know of what the hell you are talking about. Hindu Yoga has so many branches, everyone of them doing something specific and with a different results, converging only on the end of the path, but "sidestepping" all the others, depending on the method. Hatha Yoga, for example, will never bring you to "OBEs", nor it will Bhakti Yoga, etc. but they will bring you to Samadhi that's the end of the path for every type of yoga. After, when you have reached Samadhi you can do everything you want but you usually care no more since it suffices for itself.

As you see, your "knowledge" on the things being talked is really, really low. You didn't either know what you were doing and what to expect when you started doing it and now you blame the method instead of yourself. If you try to go to Rome via inland you cannot then blame the road for not letting you see the sea, blame yourself for not doing something that would bring you to that path and more than anything else blame yourself for caring about what you didn't "saw" instead on coming to Rome.

Raja Yoga is netiher "Yoga" (or, better, it is, in the meaning of the term, it isn't for what people consider "yoga" nowadays) it's just a term to indicate a series of practices that have the scope of giving you full concentration, ranging from the physical to the mental. Again, if you would have researched instead of figthing me, you would already know.

So, your ambiguity and general hand waving and claims to needing to know more a out the individual level of development is not holding water, Selea.

As you like.

Still it's not me that asked you something and then pretended I did know better. It's not me who pretends to discern what's "garbage" and what's not without clearly either knowing of what I'm talking about. As I said you, either if it was garbage, you would not have the knowledge nor the experience to understand it, so why pretend you do?

Make up your mind. If you really did do some yoga (garbage style or not) and your ego is still so strong I wonder what the hell you have really done...

You made a bold claim but you have backed it up with basically nothing.

And naturally you can judge this with your... knowledge? OMG.

I believe that people can project at will, but this projecting at will thing requires a little effort (that's how I do it - I once projected in less than two minutes from employing my method and I don't call that "projecting at will").

You do like so much to fabricate things I never said and pretend that you are "confuting" them, isn't it?

Please tell me where I said that it doesn't take effort because I'm curious.

And then "effort" means nothing at all, as time. It is the structure of the method that counts.

Selea said he knows people that project while they are walking. I disagree with this. It may be possible in the distant future, but not yet, in my mind.

You have changed your tone, I see. First it was "impossible, they are lying", now it is "I disagree".

But anyway also intellectually what you say makes no much sense, really. All the resources you have are within you already, no need of "evolution". The matter is only if you care to understand how to use them or if you don't care because you just debate if they are "bogus" or not instead of acting a little more.

"All we are saaayiiing, please give 'bogus' a chanceeee!"

Selea,

You have failed Rudolph too.

So you either think someone can fail someone other, good to know.

Your last post has just shown me that you are clearly not interested in having an intellectual debate, but rather, more focused on contradicting me at all costs. You need to realise that if you continue like that, people will lose interest in anything you have to say.

A) You are contradicting yourself from thougth to action, *all the time*, not me.
B) Yes, I'm not interested in an *intellectual* debate because that means nothing. I'm interested on practical applications.
C) I don't care, differently from you, about other people being interested or not in what I say. I just tell what I know, as little or as much as it can be, and people will then decide for themselves. I'm not interested in being popular or being liked.

By the way, go on Viewers and you will find two threads called "Where's Summerlander gone" and "I miss Summerlander", I have my sources and evidently there are people who think I was wronged...go there...check!

You are so interested in these petty things, I see. Do you care so much to let know to all others how good you are that you cannot avoid repeating these things over an over in any post?

The woman you use as reference can go to the same places as anyone can...as I said before...it also depends on where your mind is at.

If it was so simple... there's more than just "belief" as many researches on the argument (anthropological and practical) have demonstrated.

You pretend to have an intellectual debate but either your knowledge on these things, academically speaking, it is very low.

You have a thing for aliens then you are likely to see/visit alien worlds. You have a thing about deities then you are likely to experience this. If you have stray thoughts in the Phase, then you are likely to land in random places.

It's not so, but if you want to believe this then fine. I never asked you to believe what I said, I just asked you to not be so sure of everything and act as a master before either trying. You have not the slightest intention of doing it because you think you already know everything just because intellectually a thing make more sense than another to you (but you have neither so much academical knowledge as to really have a real intellectual choice therein). This approach will only limit you in the end and it will bring you to a world of self-delusion where you think you are the "king" while neither being able to do a joker's work.

When you learn an art, as music, and you want to learn it well you don't focus only on what it's intellectually near to you POW or do you think it's "right". You do everything in there until you are a master doing everything, both what you care and what you don't care, both what you think is necessary and what it isn't. In fact a good "master" is not one who teaches, because there's nothing to "teach", but it is one that gives you discipline and doesn't care about what you "want" or "like" but just on making you learn everything, especially things you don't like or care about.

You suppose here, in these things, the story it is different, but that's not so.

If you have focused intent, then you will get where you want to be (particularly when it comes to visits). It is all mind, selea. If the belief in energy systems that you believe in helps you, then by all means use it - perhaps that is what you got used to - but don't start saying to others that they are incapable of this and that if they don't do as you do because that is completely inaccurate.

Probably you don't really want to read what I write, because I expressedly defined the way control works and what it means. You can set an intent *before* with a sleep method so that it *can* (but, also here, it is not a certainity, so it's has little of "control") but when you are out you cannot. What you talk about can work only before, to set an intent, nothing more.

So no, you cannot do it.

As for "believing" or not believing you are missing the point again. If you did read a thing of what I wrote instead of wanting to feel good hearing your voice and pretending you are popular you would understand that I stressed that the only things that matters is what you can do, not what you believe or not believe.

You can think a shaman "undeducated" and believing garbage but the fact is that if he takes peyote, for example, he can use that experience in ways that "educated" people will never be able to. Yes, they think they know what's "right" or "wrong", yet this serves them nothing practically and all they have taking the drug is nonsense and silly things, of little value outside of "it was a blast!". So, who do you think it has the upper hand in the end? The "uneducated" shaman that can work practically or the "educated" man that can do nothing also if s/he thinks s/he knows how eveything works and it is so sure about what's "real" and what isn't?

Then I teach you a secret. Good shamans, as Matsùwa (Don José, the individual on whom Castaneda created his imaginary Don Juan) knows exactly what is what, they are not "uneducated" at all, it is just that they know how to use both things, instead of none of them just because they are more intersted in what "works" instead of what is "real".

You didn't get my sentence on the sun and Tatewarì, obviously, but that's what it meant.

Here's a few sayings, which funnily enough are found in the Big TOE, and may serve as a basis for deeper thought:

Totally... missing.... the point... at.

Oh well, whatever.

I usually am not interested on debating "intellectual" and wide range arguments because I prefer speaking about practical applications but since you insist with this fable of a thing being "truer" than another, I will let you consider this:

By doing certain practices until a certain point you will learn (practically, not intellectually) that EVERYTHING is an illusion. Speaking about phylosophy, then, Wittgenstein and Husserl have already demonstrated quite too well that our "certainity" on the things we see, hear, touch, etc. is just a conventionality given by the socialization and a certain univoque employ of the senses. In recent times Ouspensky and Csikszentmihalyi have espanded on the concept either more, demonstrating how a new born child learns to conform to a certain "structure" in what s/he perceives. Science, then with Quantum Physics has already began demonstrating the fallacy of the concept of space/time as defined by both our society and our senses, and the preconcepts on "solidity" we have therein, either on the physical body.

So, you see, all your wanting to debate on what is "true" and what is "false" in the end is just like debating who is more powerful of Superman and Spiderman and then starting behaving (deciding a course of action) on who you like more, pretending that your point of view is more "real" than another.

A) No, you didn't. I explained that very clearly.

The "fact" that you think you explained it clearly it doesn't mean that it happened. I told you that it is possible to do and I told you the way on how to begin doing it.

B) I did not ask you about a 'better" way. I asked if you if you had an "effective" method.

And I replied you that it's not a thing pertaining to only a *specific* method. You have to train different aspects.

Selea, I think you underestimate the knowledge and ability of many of the contributors here. When you say "The Middle Pillar is a method that treats chakras in a specific ways done appositedly for projection. When you will have mastered it you will be able to control at will the "light" formulated by using it" -- it sounds like you are caught in your own little world of SeleaThink and you can't get out long enough to simply grasp what others around you are really saying and asking.

I told you what happens if you want to try. You asked me how to do it and I replied, but now you don't care not to try nor to listen. What's this? Do you want all for nothing?

You can think it's garbage, fine. You can think it doesn't work, fine still. But if you ask me for a way to do it I tell you what you must do to begin learning doing it the way I know and I have done. But now you say that what I told you is not correct and it's garbage. It is you that asked me how to do a thing and now you pretend to be an expert that knows that I'm telling you an idiocy? If you were an expert already why did you ask me?

I asked you about your "method" of Middle Pillar because I am aware of about a half dozen significantly different variations on the central them which you lightly touched on.

The variations means nothing. The central structure is always the same, but, if you want a reference then the best way (being the full) to do it has been written by Regardie in "The Tree of Life".

I am trying to get very specific and you keep returning to generalities (which makes it look like you really don't know what you are talking about).

I'm speaking in generalities because how can I do elsewhere if I don't know what you have done in the past? Can I talk about chess specifically with someone that I know not if he either knows the rules on how to move?  What you say really makes no sense and if instead of wainting to act rude and try to prove I am just telling garbage (that in anyway you would not be able to discern neither if you wanted) you would have reflected a bit on the thing you would have known it already.

Begin doing what I said (if you are really interested, and I already did know you weren't, but still...), when you will have some experience on those things then you can return to me to ask about clarifications on how to go on from there. Every learning process is to be taken in steps, you pretend for me to give you detailed instructions from beginning, without either seeing how you behave on certain things, but this not how it works, no matter if you pretend it's so.

Naturally there are some things that are "easier" than others, and can either be resolved in a single "instruction". This is not one of them, if you think the contrary I suppose, again, that you already know better, so why ask me?

As I've said, if you really do have applied knowledge that arrives at a specific result, I am all ears.

Yes, I saw.

So... Raja yoga can require six months or a lifetime... or something inbetween, heh. Not real helpful. I know one school in India where they teach that if you follow their system of Yoga for Four Lifetimes the devotee will attain Liberation from the Wheel.
 

No thanks.

As you like.

Maybe if you did want to read instead of just replying something idiot you would have understood what I said. I said that if you just care for the result you want (in this case learning how to "exit" voluntarily) then it can take a certain amount of time, if you want to go on (as many does) then it requires a lifetime because you will live by it and the "results" will never end.

It was not difficult to understand if you really wanted to hear, but, no matter if you insist that's not so, you just don't care. You just asked me a way to do it at beginning because you wanted to demonstrate that I know nothing, isn't it? I did know it already but in any case I replied you seriously since I decided to reply to you at all.

So stop wasting my time now that you supposedly have "succeeded" in your mind, I'm not interested in your ego war. Think what you want.

Where did I claim to know it all and of being a "master"...this is all coming from you, not me. I'm the first one to say that the Phase is elusive. As I've said to you before, you are deluding yourself with Chakras and energy work. Just because you feel the sensations (the mind has the power to create anything) does not mean that chakras and the energy system you speak of exist.

You say you never insisted you are a "master" but you then insist a thing exist or not without either having researched on it or having tried it yourself.

I'm sorry but there's a great gap in the way you write about yourself and the way you behave.

If you act as if you did know everything already what good it does continuing insist that you know "nothing"? At last be sincere and say openly that you think you know everything already because this is how you act.

This is the difference between me and you. You claim that things exist without proof.

Of the series: "turning around the thing". I have always mentioned things that I know from personal experience. I have always insisted on researching on everything, also what you don't think it is "right" or what you think it is "bogus".

You instead insist that some things are "hocus-pocus" and they don't exist and yet when asked if you have researched on them you obviously say you don't care because they don't obviously exist for how you see it. Where's the "proof" you talk about here? I see only someone that thinks that he already knows that some things are right and some things are wrong, that some things exists while some are obviously just "illusion" just because you say so.

And an important thing is this: it doesn't matter if a thing is an illusion or not. The thing that matters is "can this illusion serve me for what I want to do"?

I don't claim to know about the existence of anything. As for higher and lower realms...pfft...higher and lower are individual perceptions. For me it all happens in the same realm. Pleasantries and unpleasantries happen in the realm of thoughts during the Phase.

Again, all of this naturally coming because you actually researched on what you are talking about and not just because you want to think they are this way, I see.

There is also a major misconception when it comes to Campbell being expressed here. His trilogy is his interpretation. It's a Big TOE - and the "T" stands for "THEORY"...that's right...theory. There is no evidence that you experience other realities whatsoever! The Many Worlds interpretation of in quantum theory is not yet proven. It could all be in people's heads still.

Campbell has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. Put him aside. I'm not interested on debating others' concepts, true or not.

Read things properly Selea and you will find that unlike you, I never claim to know anything for sure. Go back to my pervious posts and notice how they've been worded. You will find words like "apparently" for example. I never dismiss other venues as possible explanations - like coincidences or cryptomnesia, for example - so...where you claimed that I said I have proof...LOL...I don't know where you got that from.

Are you serious? All you have written till now is just your interpretation a priori of what things are. You never cared to research on them. You just insist things you don't think exists are jut "hocus-pocus" and "garbage".

Really it seems to me that you have truly some problem on what you think is the way your behave from how you really behave. You should read your messages again because I don't see any openess in them about things that for you don't exists.

I'm gonna be brief here now. I have come across many like you and I know exactly how you operate. Let me give you a piece of advice as this is what I do...question everything, my friend. Even what you think is the truth but have no real proof of it. Have you ever thought that what you have read might be wrong or that it is only someone else's opinion? Just because someone's got a book out there doesn't mean they are right.

Again, are you serious? You are actually trying to tell me that now you are advicing me on to "test everything" when you are the first not doing it and pretending you know what's "hocus-pocus" and what's not? OMG, seriously, guy, you should check a little what you are saying because you are looking ridicolous, I'm not joking.

I already told you I always tried EVERYTHING by myself, differently from you. It's evident in all I written to you. I've insisted that maybe things are not exactly as you see they are, I've always gave you an option, a thing you have never done, and now you want to seriously turn all around and insist you are the one checking everything?

Well, if that's what you like to do, be my guest.

I did not need this chakra and energy work business. You don't need it. That's the truth and I am living proof of it.

And here it ends the fable again of "I check everything".

The fact that you think you "don't need it" it doesn't mean that truly they serves nothing. If one day you will start checking everything instead of pretending you are doing it then maybe you will find out that, as I explained, to have the control you need some of the things you call "hocus-pocus". You aren't interested in control right now but more on having experiences and for this you don't need these things. If one day you will begin to wonder "why I cannot do this or that" and start researching on it maybe you will understand that what you consider "hocus-pocus" or "unnedeed" can make a difference.

If then you discover otherwise good the same. At last you will have tried yourself instead of pretending you know that already.

I have also tried to induce with and without the pre-nap/sleep. With the pre-sleep, it is easier because it primes you phisiologically for the induction. This is fact. Without the pre-sleep, it is harder but I have done it and I guarantee you that, despite the experience being different every time regardless of how you enter it, it is still the Phase state.

You really don't get it, isn't it? Pre-sleep of after sleep the methods you use REQUIRE your body to go to sleep anyway. It doesn't change anything at all. What changes is only the way you employ sleep, not the fact that you need it as a "catapult" to have the experience.

Nothing else. It is like taking the same amount of the same hallucinogenic under the same conditions twice and both times the experience will differ.

A shame that shamans tell otherwise. Maria Sabina for example always did go in the same place when taking psylocibe mushrooms. Don't mistake what usual people can do to what *all" people can do.

Why, because it all depends on where your mind is at. As I said before, and I feel like I am repeating myself here, the experience is subjective and open to an array of interpretations. You seem to refer to Campbell a lot but you also forget that he says that it is all "data".

Campbell? I have referenced Campbell? Where?

Data is not the same as information. Notice the analogy. If you see a light being singing melodiously to you, you may say that it's an angel - someone else may say it's just a figment of the imagination, or a demon in disguise, or an archetypal part of the personality that bears some symbolism.

I already told you I'm not interested on what a thing "is". I don't care at all if an angel is a light for you and an "angel" for me. What matters, the only thing that matters, it is that doing certain things certain things happens. What they "really" are doesn't interest me in the slightest.

They interest only people that like to debate in theories on what it is so and what it isn't without never doing anything and losing themselves in things that have no importance at all.

What difference it makes if the sun is only a planet or Tatewarì? The only difference is that the one not caring can see both, the one caring can see none.

You wanted to have a proper debate? Well, there you go...but you must be prepared to question what you believe in. Consider other angles.

I believe nothing as I believe everything, depending on what part of the "trip" I am in.

My question was about whether you have an effective method for teaching this ability to project at will. Your reply did not answer that question.

?

I told you that there are methods, want to read my message again? I also told you that there is not a *specific* technique to do it. It is not a matter of doing a thing only. It requires training on various things.

If I ask, "Do you know the way to San Jose?" a good answer would be either yes or no. To reply, "point that way and start walking" is not helpful at that stage of the game. First things first. What if it takes two weeks to get there on foot and I only have 2 days?

A) I alredy replied "yes" to you.
B) If you ask me the better way how to go to "San Jose" I could tell you that it's better to take a bus than to go walking.

But.. since you mention it... just curious, which "Middle Pillar" method are you referring to? And if I start learning Raja Yoga how long will it take and how will I know when I have "learned" it?

The Middle Pillar is a method that treats chakras in a specific ways done appositedly for projection. When you will have mastered it you will be able to control at will the "light" formulated by using it.

Raja Yoga is, in little words, learning how to concentrate fully on an object without your attention never faltering. The amount of time it takes it depends on the amount of work you put upon it. Normally, with 2-4 hours a day? More or less two years (if you are using it only as a way to have a willing projection, as many occidental schools do, otherwise your entire life). Naturally it depends but in general good results starts to happen after this period. There are people that can do it either in less than six months but they are exceptions and anyway the "time" doesn't really matter if you are serious about it.

A) Baloney! No-one can do this. Whoever says they can is simply lying.

If you say so...

You can think whatever you want but let me ask you this. What if you would be mistaken? Have you ever asked yourself this. Are you so sure you know everything about the issue to know already what's "true" and what's not therein?

B) Sometimes even in "normal life" you are not fully conscious or even fully aware of what is going on around you. In fact, the unconscious (or subconscious - hate this word as it is misleading) captures a lot more.

That's another thing, don't change topic. When you are not "fully" conscious in "normal" life is because you are not putting your full attention on what you are doing. That's a completely different thing.

If you use a sleep method you cannot decide a priori what it will happen after. Your body will "take control" and you will go on from there. Your impulse of the moment is what will guide you. You miss what it is called the "critical faculty", that's a part of the superconscious.

There's no decision on your part about this. In "normal" life you can either go in "automatic" but if you want you can take full control and behave with full critical faculty. Using sleep methods "outside" the body you cannot, you are always in "automatic" and there's no way outside of it.

There are people that "think" they have control even when "outside" using sleep methods but what they think it is "control" is just a motivation setted before. For example if you think intensely about doing this or that it is probable that your body will carry out the thing by itself (and this, in fact, it is a method to "control" the experience with a sleep method). This is what happens also by taking potent drugs that do the same things and how Shamans for example set their "voyages" before. However the difference is that this "intention" is only a sort of order carried upon, but it's not the same as having full control the moment things happens, and since you cannot know in anticipation what it will happen before how can you setup an intent that will carry depending on what happens?

Naturally this lack of "control" is, at the same time, one of the motives that either if you know how to exit voluntarily sleep methods are always good and necessary nonetheless. You can understand a lot about your "fears", "desires" etc. and how they change depending on what you do from using this "automatism".

C) I don't waste time building any thought body - when I separate, it may be already manifest or it manifests as I simply look to find it. If I don't have a body and I'm a floating point of consciousness, it doesn't even bother me - you don't really need one as it merely manifests because that is what you are used to during the waking state.

The "body" or "vehicle" is created for a motive. You don't know of what you are talking about.

And finally D (not E, Selea ) Yeah, a thought form that you can control with your mind...a do this for fun in lucid dreams. It is only a vehicle if you label it a vehicle. You can view it in second person and make it say "hi"

Again, it's another thing. The "vehicle" you create is NOT your "astral body". What would be the reason on putting the most effort on creating a "body" (since it requires months of work before the "body" is created fully) that it already exists? What you say makes no sense at all, neither on reasoning parameters. The method is not to be done in a single session, at all.

Why don't you stop pretending of being an expert on things you obviously know NOTHING about? If you would be a little more honest both with yourself and others we could have a better discussion.

"Taught"...also, it's called being "pragmatic". He is not claiming that things don't exist...he is merely focusing on what is a given and what's relevant. Get a dictionary.

And tell me, how can you decide before what's relevant and what's not? I'm curious to know.

By pretending a thing is relevant and another is not? By thinking a thing is relevant and another not? I'm sorry to say it to you but that's a "method" that brings only to self-delusion.

You have clearly never tried the pre-nap method and probably haven't ever projected at all because if you had, you'd know that with the pre-nap/sleep (or wake back to bed) method, you don't necessarily experience lapses in consciousness.

The lapse is ALWAYS there. Noticing it or not noticing it it doens't really matter. It is a staple of using sleep methods. If you did know how to do "exit" voluntarily then you would have enough control to always notice the lapse. In your condition, you cannot.

What you call "mind alert" is just your recollection of it but the lapse it's always there.

Btw, many authors very experienced in sleep methods have talked about this "lapse" and that's always there, but I suppose you know better than all of them, isn't it?

You seriously need to try the nap method! Try it! The energy work is a waste of time. There are so many people practising it and most still don't know what they are doing. In my opinion, the scam is as clear as daylight. I asked you to point out the pseudo-science from Raduga and so far you haven't.

I've done both methods from a lot of time already. I never speak about things I don't know first hand and I always research EVERYTHING (especially things I don't like or I think they are "bogus" at first), differently from you. I know the differences in both ways, while you don't, and you tell me I should try something?

(Then if I didn't know nothing about it how could I know that you act in "automatic" when using sleep methods? This is a thing that's neither mentioned usually in books  - differently from the "sometimes lapse sometimes not". Isn't it strange that you take as evidence only some things that for your they would "prove" that I know nothing about it, when then you discard completely others that clearly demonstrates the contrary? Using the well known method of "pointing out only what is good to your cause, discarding all the rest", are you?)

All I see is that you have no intention of having an open mind and instead you continue insisting that this or that is "hocus-pocus" without never having ever tried it once and without either minimally care to experience if that's so or not. How do you call this? I call it being full of it, as you are.

As for Raduga I already told you that he doesn't either know fully of what he talks about (as you), what do you want more?

You need to do some serious research on sleep cycles and it is possible to do it before sleep (you will also find this in the book - do read it because I don't think you have - and if you have...well, you misunderstood its content.

What part of "YOU NEED *SLEEP* ANWYAY" you didn't get in my last message? Wasn't difficult to get. But I see you completely sidestepped all my examples. Good strategy, but it doesn't work.

The truth is that, once you enter the Phase and you believe that the playing with the "energy" has helped you, than that is exactly what you manifest. It isn't the energy or the vibes. It is your BELIEF and EXPECTATION that delivers results.

And you know this from personal experience, isn't it?

You come here pointing fingers and saying that many have no control in their experiences but so far you have shown me that you know very little (reminder: especially about what happens in the pre-sleep method). By the way, the people who enter the Phase while walking...you just believe them?

I didn't "believe" them, I've never believed nobody just because I had to. I've seem them doing it, they have been my "masters" somewhat 23 years ago.

Do you know what's the difference between you and me? The difference is only one of intent, as I already declared. I'm not interested in what is "right" or "wrong". I'm just interested on what works and what it doesn't and the only way to find out, seriously, is trying all the things by yourself, no matter what they are and what you think about them.

You instead are more interested on what you think you know, but the problem is that you know only what you care to know (and so only a part, and, in the end, just for this, nothing) and yet you think you are a master.

Here we go with the voluntary again...do yourself a favour and get a dictionary!

Now you are resorting to personal insults, I see. English is not my native language as I thought it was obvious.

LOL! You make me laugh. If you think he's so bad why did you bother to read the whole book? You did read it all, didn't you?

Would you please stop with this "LOL". Are you a child? Can we have an adult conversation without you here getting all owned by your emotions?

That's why many people are projecting because of him and they claim to have developed a greater control than before - after following Raduga's advice.

Can you please me quote me writing that the methods of Raduga (and btw, they are not HIS methods) don't work? I just said that they only pertain to using sleep.

Actually, this is incorrect. I can testify that you come out fully conscious when you apply this method. Partially conscious may occur but most of the time, you are fully conscious and focused on that reality.

So you tell me that you can decide beforehand to do a certain thing and you will do exactly the same thing after, not being carried aways by "impulse". Good to know, you must be the only one capable of doing so using sleep methods.

Pretending a thing is in a way without nothing else to compare it upon is not the smartest point of start.

Also, I've used this method to visit people and I've got some good results. Talk about having no control, eh?

Have you some problem of comprehension, pherhaps? What this have to do at all with control is beyond me, really.

Control is:

A) Capacity of deciding where to go BEFORE the experience begins.
B) Capacity of deciding what to do BEFORE the experience begins and carry up the plan after (and modify it "on the fly" depending on what happens, without "being carried" away and finding yourself doing a completely different thing if you so not decide to) as it can happen in "normal" life.
C) Capactiy of having full critical faculty as in "normal" life (this is tied to B). Full critical facutly means having full decision on what to do next if you so desire.

What you did is just a banal experience (in the sense that's it has no real practical value outside its own scope) everyone can have (and everybody having done these things have), what's so good about it? And more you either come here with your "proofs" to let me supposedly see how good you are, as if I would care. These things are good to impress your friends but do you seriously think they matter something?

To everybody his/her own ambitions, I guess.

Actually, what I meant by "same result" is that it is all the Phase, the same phenomenon. Not what you experience. what you experience is subjective and majorly dependent on your beliefs and where you mind is at. But I understand...you are looking for ways to discredit me and you feel that I've threatened your belief foundation. I understand...

It's not the same thing. There are many differences. Not all "planes" have ego as the starting point.

I don't feel threatened at all by what you say, I'm just sad that you are so sure of everything without either having tried to go beyond what you think is "correct" or it isn't.

I never said it was a phasing method...I said it is LIKE that. Read properly and stop making assumptions.

If you say that it's like a phasing method then it means that it has the same "structure", the same application on the way it works. Fact is that, on the contrary, it is completely different in structure and on how it works, they are not either minimally comparable. And then, please, stop to act smart, want you? I know exactly the way you "see" the method because you have only a certain structure to compare it to and so necessarily you try to put it in that perspective (and for this you don't understand how it works and you call some things unnecessary), and that structure is phasing.

You know nothing about how the technique works. You know absolutely nothing about it and you have either the presumption of wanting to tell what's necessary or unnecessary in the technique.

From where it comes all this pretending you know something about things you know nothing about? Have you ever tried researching on that method seriously to see if maybe some of the things are different than you supposed they were and then try them yourself if they were so or not? Have you ever tried to test if maybe what you thought "unnecessary" was maybe not so instead of pretending to know everything about it already because you think you obviously know "better"? I think there's neither need for you to answer that, isn't it?

But it's neither your fault. You ask me why I don't like authors as Raduga. You have the answer right here, right there.

Where did you see me say that it was created by Butler? And this is why you need to do some revision of what you claim to have read. By the way, why don't you enlighten everyone with you amazing Body of Light method? LOL!

I already have, read my post on Xanth.

Can you please stop now with personal insults and behave without being transported by emotions so that we can have a meaningful debate? Thank you.

Oh, here we go...I'm trying to target the astral, mental, Buddhic, monadic, moronic...

Ok...

As you want. You can joke with me but can you with yourself?

Yes you can...but in both you relax yourself. Without relaxation (physical and mental) neither is possible. Priming with a nap helps you to relax quicker. Some individuals are good at relaxing regardless.

A) Relaxing is not the same as putting your physical to sleep. A thing that all the methods in those books need.
B) If you say that relaxing is needed then it must be so. Just FYI I know at last 6 people that can project while walking.

Both ways get you to the same place. so what's the beef about this here.

Again, if you say so then it must be as you say.

You see, what makes me sad it is not the fact that you think this way, but that you are so sure about it without giving anything else an option, acting as you already knew it as if you were a master without either having tried or having cared to. Have you ever tried yourself doing what you consider "hocus-pocus" really, with an open mind and not just for a day? If you haven't how can you be so sure it's just "hocus-pocus"?

what is the point in pointing it out? different ways - same result!

And then you say you are not a "leaf in the wind". You have always the same result because you cannot direct your experience.

In both you can play around with the waves and vibes which in mu opinion are nothing but feedback from the polarisation and depolarisation of neurons.

What they "really" are or what they aren't doesn't concerns me in the last. Doing certain things certain results happens. This is the only thing that matters.

The only thing that matters is that I don't care if those things are neurons discharges or not, but if that you use them (among many others "hocus-pocus" things) you can control your experience, while if you don't you cannot, as it is testified by your messages much too well. The rest is just silly talk.

Then the Phase...and I don't need to mention that this place/state is full of illusions, do I?

Also "real" life is, and so? Naturally the more you are out of control the more the illusions are strong, as, again, in "real" life.

By the way, Raduga also talks about doing it before sleep...not just at the onset as Selea claimed!

I'm sorry, but you are wrong. For the methods to work your body must enter the sleep state, or they will never work. In fact why do you suppose they are to be done before *sleep*?

But, who cares. Selea, if you want to adopt another's perspective (from centuries ago) rather than developing your own - be my guest.

Apart that you clearly don't understand the difference of having an "own" perspective and just selecting then one you prefer from those already existent, a shame that the "own" (are you kidding me or are you serious?) perspective of Ragusa is a thousand times worser than the one of centuries ago. It is much less open minded, it is much less grounded on practical results, it is much less interested in personal research instead of "teaching" others.  

So, if just to not abide to a perspective of centuries ago I have to abide to a prospective that's clearly worser in practice in many ways, I prefer to stay in the past, thanks.

Remember the thread about the butler method that I opened on AVers? That's the "Body of Light" method. It involves visualisation and meditation. You create a metaphysical double and animate it so that you can then attempt to acquire a perspective from your double's point of view. This is what Raduga would call a grave mistake for the newbies to start here.

I never said it is a method to start (also if it can be if you have patience instead of wanting immediate results). I said it is much better than all the book of Ragusa. The fact is that you are missing why it's that so.

There's often more about things (especially of a certain nature) than it seems. Have you ever wondered why for example it is usually remarked that the *most important* part of that excercise is not the transfer of consciousness but the actual building of the "body"? It if was simple an excercise of "phasing" it would have been much simpler to just make the student visualize the room from a first perspective from beginning, isn't it? What would be the purpose of you wasting time on buiding a figure?

But I guess since you suppose you know better that's so because they didn't really get what they were teaching about, mistaking a thing for another, and they just wasted time in "hocus-pocus" instead of really caring about "meaningful" things.

You need to be good at visualising and be strong-willed in the belief that it will happen. It is like phasing made more complicated and employing an unnecessary "out-of-the-body" teleport.

A) No, you don't need to be good at visualizing (it can help at beginning but it's not required).
B) No, you don't need to believe that it will happen. You just need to don't have doubts that it will not happen (but this can be said about any method)
C) No, it's not a phasing method.

In short, you don't know how it works and you think you are an expert about it, good to know.

It is commendable that newbies start with the pre-sleep method first before attempting other method which prove to be more challenging. In the end, the result is the same: the Phase (OOBE/AP/LD).

The only thing commendable is not insisting that what you don't know and you don't care to know it doesn't exists or it is as you think it is.

That's the only thing commendable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._E._Butler

So you now want to tell me who Butler was? And just so you know that "method" was not created by Butler but he surely was the first to explain the "full" method (also if in a basic form only understandable by people already knowing it) in one of his books. He was a member of SOL, that was a branch born from Golden Dawn members.

[insisting]

One is done from having primed your consciousness with pre-sleep (indirect) and the other is done from any point during your day (direct) NOT after pre-sleep.  You can essentially use *ANY* method at any point during your day (after sleep or otherwise).

True, but the methods described in that book works only if you use sleep. The difference in that book about "direct" and "indirect" is just one about the time lapse when sleep is used. In the indirect sleep is used inbetween the attempt, in the "direct" sleep is used during the attempt.

Also if you can think the "direct" method as being available all the time, they are not because they still require sleep for them to work; i.e. the physical body must be in a sleep state for them to work.

A real voluntary method doesn't *need* sleep as a "catapult" to reach projection.

I mean, he says some stuff that I firmly disagree with... but, he also says a lot of good stuff which I do firmly agree with.  All the particulars are just his opinion.  Meh... no biggie.  Take what resonates with you and leave the rest... find the commonalities between his metaphors and yours.

As I said many times I don't care about "agrees" or "disagrees". I care about what is correct and what isn't. In this case pretending you are using a "scientific" approach to the thing and then just caring about what you think is "legit" or it isn't, is not scientific at all.

Is this not you "insisting" that this "Body of Light" technique is "better" than anything he teaches?  And I'm rather puzzled by what the length of time that it's been available means... does that make it "two centuries better"?   Your claims puzzle me Selea.

It's "better" in the sense that it does something specific and it's either basic and advanced at the same time. The Body of Light has everything in itself because it is both a projection method as it is a controlling method. For this my remark on it being "better" than all that book togheter. There's no form of control in that book, there's no form of teaching you how to either begin understanding how you can setup your work on a way that you can learn to control the experience instead of being controlled by it, if you are interested on learning it. All that doesn't interest to the author is labeled as "mumbo-jumbo" or nonsense.

The sad reality is that people these days (also in these sort of forums) are usually more interested in having the experience instead of learning how to really control it. But, speaking in Jungian terms, what good it does to open the subconsious if then you become a slave of it?

Sleep methods are very easy to learn, but they don't give you control. You don't know where you will end before you start, and what you will really do out there since your consciousness is only partial. For example you can decide before to do this and that only to find out that you have done all another thing. This because there's always a "lapse", a black-out of your consciousness for a sleep method to work, this is inevitable, and that lapse make you lose a part of your consciousness in the process.

Suffice to say, I used to be quite against Raduga and his ebook... but it's actually a pretty good read, and the fact that it's actually helped *A LOT* of people is great in my opinion.  For the most part, he seems to have a solid grasp of what he's talking about.

What I don't like in that book is not what Ragusa "teaches". Those are things that have been teached in shamanic texts from years and years. What I don't like is the approach he has on the thing. He approaches it as if only what he cares about exists, and the rest is just inexistent, or "mumbo-jumbo".

Also I in these forums usually neither talk about more advanced things because I know they can be an hindrance at beginning and I also know that the majority are neither interested in them.

I don't suppose you'd be open to sharing this "simple" Body of Light method that you speak so highly of?  I think the members of the Astral Pulse would greatly appreciate that.  

It's quite simple. It is the technique of building a body to whom to transfer the consciouness on. The "body" is usually built (on the basic form you see listed normally) from a "tought form". Naturally this is the basic form of the method. Done in its full form it is much more complex and it is done by creating the body from the molding of the light arised from doing excercises as the Middle Pillar till you have mastered it fully. When you have done so you can literally "mold" the "energy" built to construct a "body" on whom to transfer your consciounsess.

The advantages are that: A) you can do it whenever you want when you have mastered it, B) you have full consciousness as in "normal" life, C) you have a controlled vehicle that you can use to do specific things and that it has many more advantages in the control when you are "outside", E) the "vehicle" acquires a sort of "life" of his own, and it can be used to do many more things than simply using it as a container for you consciousness.

edit; and when you say "VOLUNTARY" ... I think you meant "at will"...? This is of course the Holy Grail for APers, imo. If you have a method of teaching this effectively, I am all ears.

It takes training and it's not a *singular* practice. Certainly that there are methods. To begin with: learn Raja Yoga and learn the Middle Pillar excercise in steps, until you master it.

Selea, you can believe whatever you want. I'm just expressing what I think here. As for Raduga, you are wrong about him. You obviously haven't read any of his books otherwise you'd know that he's got more techniques up his sleeve other than using the pre-nap/sleep method. I suggest you read School of Out-of-Body Travel to learn more about his direct techniques.

I've read his book, and well, and I know exactly of what I talk about thank you. ALL his techniques have sleep as the onset. Please quote me a technique of that book that doesn't use sleep and that is done voluntarily, when one wants. I'm curious. If you refer to the "direct" techniques then you should read them a little better, because the only change from them and "indirect" is the moment they are used, not the way they are used.

And what's worse is that in all the book he insists on him knowing better, and that what he clearly doesn't either understand then it must not exists. A shame that he cannot either devise a method to do what he profess being the "best" way in a VOLUNTARY matter, without using sleep, and this thing has been done (and I'm speaking only about literature here) from more than a century. But naturally, he knows more... how not. The simple method of the Body of Light is a thousand times better than all that book at once, and it has been written more than two centuries ago.

Sadly this seems to be the trend lately. All this pseudo-scientific people claiming they know more, and yet when you go in practice I see only people that think they are so smart because they just crossed the river swimming, taking 3 hours, when actually people are already camping on the other side from two hours and 45 minutes because they used a boat that the people swimming insists is only "mumbo-jumbo".

As for energy work. You are quite right - you said it! You don't need it. And may I add, I don't use it and I am not a "leaf in the wind".

You are. However to understand it first you must understand your status as a leaf. You say you are not. I guess you can decide where you will end when you project, isn't it? I guess you can direct your travel BEFORE you start, right? I guess you can direct yourself there as you do in normal life, with all your conscience and not only "impulse" directing you, isn't it?

I can add that "visualization" can also not be visualizing (the word is usually associated with visual imagination, but that's not so). There are many people that are more proficient at creating "visualizations" with other senses. The trick is more to work with your nature at first, then after you begin working with other things, depending on what you want to do.

For example there was a person I know that since she was an artist thought that she was very good at visualizing. She tried to become engrossed in visualizations but it was more difficult than she expected. She asked me what she was doing wrong.

I remembered one time we were in a car toghter, listening to a song. After it was finished I saw her simply "lapse out" for a couple of minutes and I asked her what did she do. She told me that for her it was natural if she liked a song to start earing it again in her head, and the outside world totally vanished for the duration. "Do you *think* the words of the song in your mind?"- I asked - "No, I listen to it in my mind as if I was hearing it at the radio".

I smiled and told her that she did "visualization" that time, and she was perfect at it. She watched me not really getting what I was saying. So I just told her to just forget about "visualizing" in the literal term altogheter and instead start hearing songs in her head. She had no problems thereafter. It was natural to her.

The morale is: "visualization" is a term that can encompass everything, not only visual stimuli. Everyone of us is better at some things at beginning in confront to others, depending on our nature. The trick is to work with those natural predilections at first. Everything that can make you lose in another "reality" is fine, not only visualizing (in the literal term) a scenario. There are people I know that are much better at "visualizing" sounds, some others that are much better at "visualizing" kinesthetic sensations. Very little people I know are really good at "visualizing" in the literal term and to do so effectively they must be in a certain frame of mind.

Also if people are used believing the visual sense the most developed because they are attentive to it the most of the time, in reality in many cases it is not so.