Messages

If anyone ever decided to experiment with Robitussin (dextromethorphan - DXM) I would really do some detailed research, as this is a substance with a low OD (LD50) level. It's also a substance which in some forms (coricidin etc) can and has killed due to other active ingredients added to stop abuse.
There is also a lot of circumstantial evidence (nothing concrete yet as these substances have only really been taken recreationally quite recently)  that DXM (and it's family of drugs) can cause lesions in the brain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olney's_lesions). These have only been found in animal studies so far, but it at least should make one cautious.

For those not familiar with this drug, it's in the family of drugs known as dissociative anaesthetics (i.e. ketamine, PCP etc), and shuts out external sensory perception. So if you take enough not to knock you out, you might have interesting experiences. But if you take too much, then...

Yes, this might sound negative and serious, but this is a family of drugs which should really be treated carefully. Also, there is a large percentage of the worlds population who are CYP2D6 enzyme deficient. Such people would have very severe effects to even minute amounts of this substance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-medical_use_of_dextromethorphan

Hey Inward,

Thanks for taking the time to reply .

First, I think what you call the brain is in reference to the physical brain. What I refer to as the mental is on a realm that is even higher in vibration than the astral.

I think you are correct in that the brain has consciousness. The thing is, we're multi-dimensional beings, so there's more to us than just physical brain and body. One thing meditation can teach is different types and levels of consciousness. Astral consciousness tends to be more on desires and emotions. Lower mental consciousness is more difficult to pin point and I have yet been able to put it in words, but for me it's more about creating. The upper mental is more about universal agape love. The intuitive plane as far as I vaguely know is about universal knowledge, but I'm really shooting in the dark on that one. The higher planes is far out of my reach.

Meditation has taught me a lot about myself, but I haven't seen a need to move these findings into an external construct (i.e. different planes).
For example, the most obvious layer of the mind is the surface layer, which is mainly occupied with day-to-day reality. The voice you hear on your mind (speaking to yourself, thinking etc) sits on this level. I think this layer relates to critical functioning of the higher brain.
The next level down I notice a layer of 'knowing'. For example, I can think to myself "I know, I'll go to town soon and buy a subway and go to Tesco's for some dinner". But, if you are observant enough, you find you already know what you were about to spend seconds thinking instantly. It's like we occupy the mind with the 'monkey chatter' and wash out the more intuitive knowledge. This layer is more the 'alpha' (passive observance brain wave state). Below this layer one sees emotional layers as we move awareness into the 'subconscious' areas of the mind, these are usually generated from the more primitive, animalistic areas of the brain. Below this layer still, as you said, we see increasingly abstract and creative areas. To me, this is simply moving away from specialised areas of the brain to the areas where data just 'is' i.e. data is experienced without filtering (such as 'this is sight data', 'this is touch data' etc). This is the layer where synesthesia is apparent, and is the source of our creativity. These layers are interlaced with curiosities, such as one noticing a 'gap' between the observer and the observed etc.
It seems to me, people have taken these natural brain areas, which sentiency allows us to observe, and they've created a map of creation – I guess taking on the adage 'as above, so below'. Philosophically speaking, I can see how this adage holds true, but this is more a case of we can only ever experience reality through our interpretation of it. So, while that star 50 billion light years away is constructed and experienced internally, it still has a reality external to the observer. The observer simply experiences his interpretation of it (rather than creates it).

Also I've noticed that when astral consciousness is reached during meditation that astral memories come to the front. In fact, in that state of consciousness you'll suddenly remember your astral friends. When you go back to physical consciousness you'll say, "Who the heck are those people." If one is so fortunate enough to reach higher mental consciousness, then they'll recall their past lives. I'm told that the memories of past lives is within the Soul since it is the Soul that never dies in between incarnations where as your physical and astral bodies both eventually die, unless you become liberated.

I really can appreciate the above, and I did used to hold such views. But I came to the conclusion that my beliefs of such thing was really third hand. That is, I gained such beliefs from others and through books. I also noticed that my experiences reinforced such beliefs, not because such beliefs are inherently true, but because I interpreted my experiences through them. Such as now, my experiences reinforce my new set of beliefs (which are in conflict with what I used to believe). It really does seem we find what we seek, rather than find what is there.

As you've noted, the physical plane seems to far more stable and predictable than the astral. As I understand it, the reason is because the astral is closer to the mental planes than the physical. Therefore, astral energy is easy for the mind to manipulate. Yet this does not make the physical as you might seem. I hope one day you find a person or group that can clearly demonstrate to you just how the physical plane is. There you will see right up before you eyes how the physical plane can be just as manipulated as the astral. The physical is denser than the astral. What if you friend could stand right in front of you, inches, and then instantly vanish right before your eyes? What if your friend could instantly teleport clear across the globe? Perhaps then you think twice about the physical plane. Or what if your friend could fly in the air like Chris Angel.

Regarding the physical planes position to other planes, this holds no truth outside of belief. For example, the physical is supposedly a group belief, so it would sit in the astral. How does this fit in with astral and mental planes? I.e. the physical is just astral energy, structured by a group consciousness in such a philosophy – there should be no separation between the physical and astral.

All I will say about Chris Angel is google him, as you too can do any of his tricks. He is a very talented showman, but all his techniques are 100% routed in the physical. Please go and research him and you will see he uses no extrasensory powers. This doesn't take away from what he does – perhaps adds to it.

On the other hand, the Astral can be predictable. Perhaps people initially confuse the astral with confusion because there might be a tv in the room one moment and if they look away and look back the tv is gone, lol. The reason for that is clearly lack of obe time under their belt as such inconsistent experiences fade away over time.

I've been projecting since earliest childhood, and even now my experiences are pretty random and non-cohesive. Even gurus seem to have trouble with consistency – just read into Charles Tarts attempts to verify OBEs with amazingly proficient projectors and see how little they achieve.

I'm not sure mentalists do not use extra sensor perception. It is taught by the mentalist that if you look into the eyes that you can learn to draw what they are seeing. For example, you ask the person to think of a picture, and the mentalist is able to look into their eyes and get the picture. They teach that the persons eyes is outlining the picture. Have you seen Chriss Angel do this before? Some of the people are wearing dark glasses and he still gets it. Sometimes Chris turns around and still gets it. Personally I think it's extrasensory perception.

All I can say is google Angel, Blane etc and learn exactly how they do their techniques through natural means. Also look into Derren Brown. He's a guy who does amazing things and freely admits he does nothing 'extra-sensory'. This once again comes back to people underestimating what the brain/mind can really do, and what information can be gleaned through body language alone. It also brings up a point I have seen many times, that is imbuing these people's techniques with psychic powers to fit a belief system. Such as once I saw a guy arguing that Derren brown must be a psychic but he just doesn't know it .

You mean like Chris Angel, lol. I can attest there are people who can break free from such beliefs. I don't know if Chris Angel is one, but I personally know of others. When they break free the local group belief they can fly, teleport, levitate, etc. The universal group consciousness does not dictate that you cannot fly around in physical bodies. In fact, you have an energy system the flows from the Divine and eventually makes it way to the Etheric and then trickles to the physical body. With that Etheric energy you could probably light up the world much less fly around. If you grew up on another physical planet where the society was spiritually advanced and you were taught that flying around was no big deal, then you would be able to fly. You fail because you doubt and every cell in your body and every part of your entire being believes it is impossible. You fail because you are surround by billions of similar people. They bind you to their reality. One day perhaps you will break free from this bondage, and there you'll be able to fly over fences, etc., but you'll learn that it is more difficult to perform this ability in front of people. Perhaps you'll begin to think you're crazy, until you find people of like mindedness where you can easily fly in their presence.

I can't agree with this. For example, why do tribes in the Amazon who have just recently been contacted not have the ability of flight etc? They have been separated from our doubt, they don't know it. Why do children brought up in the wild away from all humans not have extra-powers? They really have had nothing but direct experience, and so nothing to fill their mind with doubt. They actually usually don't have coherent thought as they haven't learnt a structured language. Yet all cases of such happens have show people with the exact same attributes as us, following the exact same 'physical laws'. Why don't babies fresh from the womb not have special powers, is the group belief so great it immediately smothers he child's blank mind on birth? Why do we not find species of animal which we never knew existed with amazing powers, such as none-winged mammals having flight? New, unknown species are found regularly, they haven't had belief imposed on them (we never knew they existed), yet, they conform to the same laws as we do.
Also, centuries ago, when the Earth was supposedly flat, the heavens a crystal dome with stars embedded in it and the sun and planets orbited us – recorded observations of physical events match the same events today. Surely, the physical would have mirrored belief, and so certain things would have occurred differently dependant upon those beliefs. In today's world, where physical reality is radically different to such times, things still occur the same way (independently of belief systems it seems). It seems there is a lot more there than belief allows.
There are so many gaping holes in such a belief that I really can't follow it right now.
For example, a while back someone on these forums was stating food is a belief and not needed, that we can happily survive on sunlight. When asked why babies (belief-less) die in their thousands in Africa (plenty of sun 'energy'), they simply stated that all beings are bound by group belief. Such a belief which can never have any form of 'proof', and can be bent to encompass any critique due to this, just seems pretty 'fluffy'. It's no different from stating the flying spaghetti monster (http://www.venganza.org/) does it all. Such beliefs are dead-ends as they encompass everything and allow for nothing – and have no validity outside of personal belief and faith (which one must follow such a belief system to get validity of it – i.e. I don't follow it and none of my astral experiences have backed it up to me).

I think you're right in that they come from the same source, but that source created universal laws. First, the physical and astral are separate universes. The physical plane is dominated by the law of opposite attraction. The astral is dominated by the law of like attracts like. The physical plane is dominated by the atom. The astral is dominated by the anim. I was told that anti matter is closest definition to the anim. Who knows, maybe dark matter is anim. In that case, the astral does affect the physical plane, but to a minute degree, but on a grand scale of galaxies perhaps such forces become noticeable. I firmly believe the astral is detectable from the physical, but the question arises, "How to do it and how does the scientist know when it is astral energies and not Etheric or material?"

But if the physical is a group belief created by group consciousness, it should therefore be seated in the astral. All I can gather from the above is that people created these separations between the physical and astral to create a cohesive belief system – to help explain the raging inconsistencies. So now a hierarchy is constructed of different energy frequencies, levels, beliefs etc.
anti-matter is a purely physical phenomenon. Answers as to why it is less prevalent than matter might be found in something called the 'sterile-neutrino' (although there are a number of other competing theories).
The thing is, energy is just energy. It doesn't have to be specifically astral energy and physical energy. Its just energy (the separation being man made). If it exists, it exist and should be detectable.

Well, Robert Monroe had the desire to bring his work to the world. I truly wish it was my right to send you a phone number of a person who could clearly show you that the astral is predicable, that 1000's of people leave their bodies and meet in designated astral locales each and every night, and how stable and predictable the astral can be. As irritating as this might sound, these people are always hidden from public eye. Perhaps you can tell me why. I can only tell you what I hear. That is, they understand the true nature of Karma, that the veil was placed over Earth for a very very good reason, that it is not their right or power to bring global proof right now. Although they say such proof will come to Earth, perhaps sooner than you think.

Well I belong to groups which are member only and consist of graduates of many of the Monroe institute programs, and I can tell you that none of them can consistently meet in astral locales, and that none of them know of people who can. These people are at the forefront of research into the astral, and such feats are outside of their abilities and knowledge. So I have no idea who these people are who can do such things, or why they remain hidden from the public eye. I've personally never seen evidence of them, so I'd be interested where you get this information from so I can start looking for them .

Group consciousness ... I probably gave you the wrong impression. The group consciousness that I am referring to is far far far beyond the astral. It is beyond the mental. It is beyond the intuitive realm. In fact, you could say our entire cosmic realm is created and sustained in the eye of God, the collective consciousness. So the physical is not in the astral. They are separate parallel universes that simply abide by different universal laws.

The above again is a belief which can never be proven. And this is whay troubles me. It seems I need to turn off my intelligence, curiosity and critical mind if I ever want to accept such thigns as fact, because personally, warning bells scream out at me if I try and accept such things as truth. Such beliefs usually have a very 'human-centric' God, 'human-centric' organisation and hierarchy of reality etc – when in fact God (if such a concept truly exists) is so far beyond what human can ever conceive of as to be unknowable.

-) Yes, and the astral inhabitants can bend our laws so easily when they wish. Most people in the higher astral realms can fly and outperform even advance out of body projectors. That's why they are your guides. Your guides usually follow you in the astral, until you become advanced, to keep you out of danger and trouble, but they simply maintain a higher vibration so that they are out of sink with you and in that way you cannot see them, but they can see you because they are higher in vibration. Although as you've found there seems to be many astral locals filled with people who can't even fly. This is due to their belief systems and limitations. Those are the mid astral realms. You don't want to go to the lower astral realms. Those are the astral hells. You'll probably want to go one day, when your guides think you are ready.

What I meant was, yes astral inhabitants might be able to bend our laws, but they cannot do so while inhabiting a physical body. I have been to locales where people seem as bound to 'physical laws' as we are in our reality, yet I can bend their laws in a body which can be seen by everyone of them. If the astral exists in the form we presume it does, a naked woman could be somersaulting above time square now and will been seen by no one. There are just huge inconsistencies in this philosophy.

As I'm taught, the Soul seeks experience and to express itself on all planes. One thing about karma is that it is easier to release it in the same universe that it was gained. So if you have physical plane karma, then you absolutely positively want to release as much as possible in the physical plane, not the astral. If you have a very small amount of physical plane karma left, then it is not uncommon for the Soul to call it quits on the physical plane and never ever reincarnate again on the physical and release the remaining physical plane karma in the astral, but it does take a long time to do so. The rules are simple. The Soul wants physical experience, so obviously physical plane karma will be gained. That physical plane karma must be release in the physical.

I'll perhaps say something shocking now, but I don't believe karma is a universal law per-se. I have found karma to simply be a self-imposed belief system. That is ones action has effect. For example, to hate someone, I have to carry that hate inside. To love someone, I have to carry that love inside. It's simply a self-fulfilling mechanism controlled and enacted solely by us.

They say we gain is experience. It's just part of spiritual evolution. Humanity here is in the bottom of the evolutionary process. We came from above and fell from heaven. There's no place to go now but up. All the other kingdoms on earth are still falling. Eventually they'll reach our stage, but in their own unique and different way, and they'll eventually rise again as we are. I think the problem occurs when we think in terms of time. I really don't understand time, but I'm taught that time does not exist as we think, that it is an illusion.

Again, this is belief. Evolution has no beginning, end, or goal. It's simply a process of mutation and change. No state being 'more evolved' than another. I don't see why we would need physical experience to do anything. It's like me sending a son off to hunt whales in the Antarctic to gain experience of becoming an accountant. What I mean by this is if we follow philosophies of the astral, the physical is an exception to the rule. It's unlike anything else. The only role I can see 'gaining experience' has is to fit the physical and it's purpose into such philosophies. I see the physical as just being as it is. Mechanical processes have brought it to the state it is today, and we just happen to be here now due to these processes. No purpose, lessons or reasons.

I fully agree time doesn't exist as we thing though, we interpreted it as we do purely because our brain has evolved to perceive it so.

There is one thing for certain, in the highest sense, there was no beginning to anything. M-theory teaches that there was a beginning before the big bang. Sure, there might be a beginning to what we call time, but if so then there was another "time." Consider the highest sense of the word, "nothing." In that sense, you cannot have "nothing" and then suddenly "something." In that sense, this thing we call reality is infinity old. Can you grasp that? Infinity! No beginning! If you have infinity then you'd think that eventually perfection evolves. BUT, since there was no beginning, then it means this perfection has always existed. Think about it. This is exactly what some mystics have told us, that God has always existed, that the above was created before the lower. Material science still has it backwards. Scientists still believe that grander things came from basic matter. Yes, that is the way of the physical plane since it is a reflection of the spiritual planes, but it was the physical plane that was created by perfection and this plane is sustained by that perfection.

An aside I'd like to add is that we can get something from nothing (and this has been detected empirically), the background vacuum is filled with a broiling mass of virtual particles which constantly pop into and out of existence.
Problems I have with concepts of infinity is just that, they are concepts. There are mathematical infinities which mean nothing outside of the math. I also think that at our current stage in evolution, we simply do not have the faculties to conceive of such notions, which is perhaps why they seem so impossible and magical to us.
I also believe that perfection is a human concept and has no reality outside of that. Such as going to a point early that evolution is change, not change towards a perfect state, We might impose the concept of perfection on some states, just as we impose the concepts of good and evil, but outside of the human sphere, they hold no reality.

So in a nutshell, we're taught that ultimately this perfection / God / Collective has always existed, that the lower was created by the upper. In that pure and perfect state we willingly and decided to de-evolve and fall and place a veil over our memories. What scientists see is a minute picture of it all. They see the physical plane which is a reflection. On Earth the scientists see animals evolving. In spirit, it is the opposite. In the beginning our *Spirit* was perfect, but decided to willingly fall. It's almost like God got bored and decided to play. Who knows.

Perhaps one day I will discover such things and have to reconsider all my beliefs, but for now, everything I'm finding is taking me away from such ideas and concepts.
I really do respect you and your beliefs, and I hope you don't think replies such as this are attacking them. I held such beliefs and have read deeply into such philosophies, but my own direct personal experience has taken me away from them and I have to be true to that. I cannot accept something because someone states that is the way it is, I have to discover for myself, and this is what I'm doing. To hold such beliefs as the above as true, I would have accept unverified knowledge as 'true'. And this is something I don't think I could swallow lightly.

I think this discussion might be deviating into belief territory which will never provide us with answers outside of our own experiences .

If you notice, the direction of the 'objects' are moving almost perpendicular to the curvature of the earth which can be seen in the shot. Also notice that they never go off the top of the screen (some seem to get close, but the fade, explained by different altitudes in relation to the Earths surface), but zoom in from the bottom and get notably slower as they move past the earth and then fade out.
To me this suggests it's simply some form of debris which is orbiting Earth, and the angle of the shot (in relation to the debris), is why there is much speed as they come into shot and seem to slow down as they follow the curvature and fade before they hit the top of the screen. They reflect sunlight, (And given its black and white images) which explains their brightness.

They could possibly be dust too .

I think that you have to believe . Just because it can't be proved doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. And i don't see why you can't continue just because no one has proved anything.

I agree totally. It's not about believing (or not) in the experience itself, but about what the experience truly is. There is a world of difference between an experience created in a flesh brain and a brain generated from belief in a shared consciousness.

I think some things do exist but are difficult to prove. When OBE and related stuff are in question there is allways Kirlian photography coming to my mind. And I know some are proving it doesn't work or is not what we see. Still, I think of it as something closest to be the proof that those things are real. It's high frequency, high voltage device which captures emanations from our body onto a photo.
Besides, if there is enough will it can be researched and then used as a diagnostic tool in medicine just like x-ray for example. To me, it may prove existance of our energy body, which is basis for proving OBE?

Hey,

I'm very wary of kirilian photography and what it reports to show. A thread a while back discusses this:

http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21676&highlight=kirlian

Some believe the cosmos was created before their consciousness was created. My only suggestion is that one first needs to get past the material science limitations and understand that consciousness is beyond any physical stuff. As far as I know this is not achievable by any global proof or science, yet. Although this understanding is achievable by personal proof. Once one obtains their personal proof via obe's and such then they can have a better understanding of consciousness and what exactly the universe is.

I really sit on the wall here. I truly did believe in the whole 'consciousness is more than the brain' idea, but as I read more into scientific areas (neuroscience etc) and see just how even innate characteristics of consciousness seem intrinsically linked to brain function, I really have to wonder if consciousness is brain produced or not. If it isn't brain produced, I then wonder in what form it exists independent of the brain (if it has so much of its action in brain functionality that is).
For all I know, the entire astral could be supported by living brains (Which exist within a very strong magnetic field) – and without living brains, there would be no astral.

I'm not sure you read my entire post before replying. At the end I proposed that I have my personal proof, hence the reason I am encouraging others to diligently obtain their personal proof.
The main limiting factor with main stream science is that they do not understand group consciousness. They want to see a psychic prove time after time experiments so they can show this hard core proof to the world, but the problem is such global proof is not allowed yet. There are people that you may not consider a scientist, but IMHO they are the true scientists since they overcame the problem of material science and now seek personal proof or have gathered a group of people of like mindedness and eventually achieve great results.

To reply to the above, I would really have to reference a lot of things which have made me doubt at least our current philosophies of the astral, but I really haven't got the time now (its something I might put together as a separate post, but might take a few weeks), so I'll just condense some thoughts down.
Firstly, this physical reality we seem to find ourselves within is pretty resilient to any personal belief, furthermore, it seems that everyone shares a pretty solid consensus interpretation of actions within this reality. For example, I've never met you, yet, if I suggested we both go away and follow the same set of instructions (perhaps doing a scientific experiment, or mathematical equation) we would end up with the same result. If a hundred people went away and did such a thing, they would all share the same results. The astral seems to have no such consensus what-so-ever. The only remotely shared experience I have seen which seem to share common factors are actually group guided. That is, a person describes what everyone else should be seeing and doing, and this does bring back similar results (yet still slightly different due to personal interpretation etc). But such a thing as this only has shared results due to an anchor in physical reality.
Also, people really underestimate just what the mind is capable of. We have had literally millions of years of evolution with no developed language skills, so we learnt to decipher even minute body language intricately. We still hold these skills now, but people pass off such things as being an 'emptath' or a psychic, and they bestow special powers on such things. Go and see what a mentalist can do, they really do seem to be using psychic gifts in their arts, but really they have just learnt to tap into our innate abilities to read detail information from body language (even seemingly being able to read minds etc).
I have seen groups who have such belief in their philosophies that they unconsciously change their memories to match what they want to believe. The would deny wholeheartedly doing such a thing, yet they have done. This brings me to how fickle our memories truly are. There has been some fantastic (and horrific) examples of how a mind can be made to incorporate false memories into their perceived past.
My point of this is not to sound super sceptical, or to try and diminish results of groups with shared beliefs, I'm just saying that the mind is capable of more than we can ever imagine even on the physical level alone – and we still have barely scratched the surface of this area of science. Personally, I have had a lot of solid beliefs replaced with 'maybes' now, because I want to find the truth above all. I used to be a firm adherent to Monroes view of reality. But, in a somewhat painful (and scary)_ period, I changed a lot of what I took as knowns to be possibilities. And so now I question both the physical and the astral (through my personal experiences).

In a nutshell, material science proof is open for the world. Non-material science proof is open for groups of like minded believers. What separates the two depends on intent and outcome. If a scientist initially intends merely personal proof, but in his or her excitement of success decides to show the results to the world then ... well, the poor scientists would have never succeeded from the start. In such a case, it only makes sense that the poor scientist will never even find their personal proof.

If any of the current philosophies concerning energy bodies, and the astral have truth, then the interplay of energies should be detectable. If the physical is made by a group consciousness, then it is seated firmly in the astral and so something should be detectable of this - even if it is indirect proof, like suddenly someone overcoming the group belief and flying, or doing some amazing, seemingly miraculous act.
More recently, I am actually favouring older occult ideas that the astral is the creative imagination. What the imagination actually is though, I really have no idea .

It is not the uncertainty principle. Try the experiment as you might. Try as many times as you wish. You and many others will fail to bring global hard core proof to the world until the group is ready for such a change.  Uncertainty principle is based on probabilities. If a group of scientists try to achieve experimental success over and over and get the same failing results then it is fairly certain, lol. Many have tried such experiments on national live T.V. They failed and would fail a million times over. Yet these poor people have performed the exact same tests in private or in front of their friend(s) have succeeded dozens of times in a row. Yes, in a few cases we are dealing with very unscientifically minded people who performed bad test. Yet there are people such as myself who are very scientifically minded and have performed good tests, successfully. As stated, I have performed many out of body experiments.

What experiment is this that you are on about? The reason I mention the uncertainty principle (most famously the double slit experiment regarding wave-particle duality) is that it is the only experiment which has ever suggested that the observer has an effect on the outcome of the experiment (i.e. Schrödinger's cat). Everett's 'many world theory' was created to possibly explain the results of this experiment (although Everett admitted he hadn't thought out any details of the theory).

Perhaps you might be under the impression that I follow the Quantum Mechanics. I am not a follower of any main stream science. Such theories are material science theories and work on the physical material universe.

I apologise if I came across that way. I guess I see a lot of spiritual philosophies trying to gain credence by piggybacking on scientific theories, and so I might rant when I come across something which I perceived to be doing such a thing .
What I don't understand is that there really is no separation between the material and non-material universe. It has the same source, so why can't one detect the other? Why can't proof be gained? (Actually the astral seems to interact freely with the physical which confuses matters) I just see a lot of reasons why we can never know the spiritual, but none seem to add up.
The only possibly way I could see the astral and physical being (possibly) irrevocably separate, is if the astral was purely brain generated, so its reality would be a series of seeming nonsensical electrical impulses and interference patterns in a flesh brain. I don't truly believe this, so I carry on asking why we cannot gain proof.

As stated, it is a group consciousness. I was told that the human life wave on this planet consists of over 60 billion Souls. Most are in the Astral and Mental realms. How many of those follow the Christian Bible? But that is irrelevant because of the following. As stated, a human being is multi-layered. One needs to ask if they have a Soul and a Spirit? I believe we have a Soul and within the Soul is a spark called the Spirit. The Spirit is connected to all things. The Soul and Spirit could be perceived as ones parent. Have you heard the term Lower Self? As they say, your personality is the lower self, which basically consist of a material, etheric, emotional system called the astral body, and a lower mind. That's what you know as your consciousness, your lower self. Similarly you have a higher self. Furthermore you have a Divine self. As the teachings go, it is the Divine self that forms the collective, the group consciousness, which forms the bigger picture on Earth, the outermost boundaries if you will. One boundary seems to be non-material global proof. For now it seems a real boundary, but in 20 years, who knows.

What I have learnt from my experienced to date (not getting indoctrinated into others belief systems) is that there is no soul or spirit (I am coming to see these a belief systems in themselves), that everything we ever interact with is manifested by our brain/mind (i.e. we live within an 'internal' representation of a perceived external locale). My main questions lie in if the mind has any created reality than a psychically created phenomenon. You will probably think my view is very wrong (and so would many others), but it has no lesser or greater truth (proof) than the Christian view of creation, or any other religious or spiritual view of creation and reality. There is nothing which holds one above the other. We could state that personal experience gives us truth, but if you are a devout Christian, your personal findings would pretty much match the indoctrination of your religion (and so with all spiritual/religious paths). I really wonder what one with no intrinsic beliefs would find. We have an indication with Robert Monroe's journeys – which are radically different to any other authors to date (most authors being hung up with energy bodies and chakras etc).
Also, regarding this group consciousness, why was reality created in this way? In the astral one has no true form, one can manifest the object of any possible desire, yet this physical is so drastically different to the innate workings of the astral and higher planes, it seems almost incomprehensible to a viewpoint of a being in the astral. It's easy to say such things as 'it was created to teach us lessons', but why this way. Why the need for gravity, why the need for heat/cold, reproduction, food etc? Also, being created by a group consciousness would put the physical firmly into the astral. Why have no other astral locales I've visited been bounded by such laws?
I've been to locations where the inhabitants are very much like earthlings, yet, they cannot bend any 'physical' laws in their locale but I can. I fly and amaze the inhabitants, and seem not to be restricted by whatever beliefs created such a locale. So why are out physical laws so unbend-able. What is special about our location in the astral? This really makes very little sense to me.
Something else which really confuses me is people say the physical was created as a learning environment. Yet, in the astral, experience can be shared directly (i.e. Monroe's ROTE), rather than through the very inefficient 3rd hand method we have in the physical which seems to mangle shared knowledge rather than preserve it. If experience can be given directly on the astral as if one had gained that experience themselves, then why do we even need the physical? On a similar vein, all spiritual practices seem to see enlightenment as a 'throwing off' of the human condition, rising above it, becoming more than it. With this viewpoint, we actually reduced ourselves in the physical, and we have to spend a lifetime (or many) trying to throw off what we gained by coming here i.e. we were more spiritually advanced by this definition before setting foot in the physical. All I can say is why? Seems like a pointless exercise. Some might argue that we learn invaluable knowledge here – yet, in the astral, energy follows thought – we literally can have anything or be anything – so the physical lessons seem pretty redundant.

As I suggested in the post, it is that higher force within that is connected and forms the group consciousness, and it is that force in totality that makes the big decisions if UFO's may make a mass landing, or if a Christ shall come in the sky and change the world, or if Bruce may provide the world with hard core global proof.  

I can appreciate the idea of group consciousnesses, but I really have to question why. Why do we need this idea? Why is such an idea 'more true' than a literal biblical interpretation of reality. They are both based on faith and belief.
Why couldn't the physical have started with no consciousness? Atrophy triggered by the big bang (interpreted as time) producing a universe where consciousness spawns. Why cannot the physical be the 'source' i.e. inanimate reactions producing consciousness (over vast time), which reached a certain critical mass and produced the astral, which housed the 'consciousness' of the deceased and spawned the subtler plains. I see no reason why this view of reality hasn't as much truth as a consciousness spawning denser plains until the physical is produced.

I agree, but don't you have to be a little careful to first see if the person is truly pushing such quantum theories? In my case I was only making the point that spirituality can realistically no longer be considered weird since mainstream theories have surpassed many spiritual theories in the weirdness factor. Therefore, anyone considering such material theories should also consider the existence of group consciousness. But I can fully understand how one without the personal proof of obe's could resist such a theory. Hence, in that case, I would merely recommend such a person diligently work on obtaining at least several obe's per week and eventually obe experiments.

I apologise again if I seem to misinterpret what you were saying .  As yet, all my experienced to date have not validated the physical being created by a group consciousness, I'm actually seeing very little need for energy bodies and such (Monroe did remarkably well without his) and I'm finding many areas and actions of the astral as being belief generated (even if this belief is preconceptions or fears on a subconscious level).
I really do agree with you that people should work to gain their personal proof, but I still think the astral should have some trace in the physical which could be detected.

Sorry if this is indecipherable, I've just got back from a weekend away and didn't have much time to reply fully right now . I'll perhaps try to clean it up later.

Hey Steve 2B,

I've been considering doing a retreat at TMI too. Have you planned any dates etc when you might be going? For me, I can say for certain it wont be within the next 6 months. I think I'd be going for the 6 day gateway voyage program.

I wouldn't say the dreams with devils and demons in are more fascinating or appealing than others for me. What I do find interesting is that I can see a lot of conditioning from a Christian upbringing in my reaction to these dreams (my family were not religious; it was a school/self thing). Certain dreams (containing devils etc) seem to produce physical symptoms when I think of them which seems to suggest deeply ingrained beliefs regarding evil/devil which manifest as physical tension etc. I guess it's something which will be worked through as time goes on .

Hey Misha,
Welcome to the forum, its great have you here .


P.s. I moved your post here as it seemed more appropriate .

Hmm, I'll have to check my journal, but I don't think I've ever projected on a birthday. Have you?

The question asked in this thread might seem very complex.

I think first one must ask what's the nature of reality. Some might be surprised how modern science theories have surpassed most religions & philosophies in the weirdness factor. Did you know that most scientists now believe in the MWI, Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Yes, MWI teaches there are infinite realities. Right now you can move your finger left or right or any position. MWI teaches there's a reality for all possibilities. That is, there's a reality where you moved your finger left, there's a reality where you moved your finger right, there's a reality if you sneezed, and on and on. Infinite possibilities.

The problem of the MWI interpretation is that it offers us no tangible evidence that it exists. It's an interpretation of the uncertainty principle with no way of empirically proving its truth.
Even if the MWI was found to hold truth, I don't see how it helps us in proving the existence of the astral. 1 physical world, or a billion physical worlds, they are still all in the position we are in (physical).

The point is that perhaps the mystics were correct in that this physical existence is not as we might think. We might even go as far as to accept what they say, which is the universe does not and cannot exist without consciousness. If that is true, then we, all beings sustain this existence. Without "Us" there is nothing. So what is "We?" Well, as many of you have discovered, we are multi layered beings. Many of you have dabbled with the Etheric and Astral bodies, and perhaps on occasion the lower Mental body. So that's at least 4 bodies including the physical. Just how many more bodies are there? For those very advanced projection explorers, have you noticed a pattern with each body that is higher in vibration? Is it possible that at such a high realm exists the part of you that some may refer to as god, with the little "g." Is it possible that we have what some call the Spirit within? Is it possible that we are all connected on a high level and participate in a sort of Matrix type experience?

The problem here is that there is no link what-so-ever between a possible (un-provable) theory of the physical and the existence of the astral. It seems that quantum theories are used as proof of spiritual philosophies because they sound outlandish to our 'commonsense', and the astral and such realities sound outlandish too, so a very tenuous link is formed. This is like saying ducks can fly, so can aeroplanes, therefore aeroplanes are a form of duck! A tenuous link produced by a perceived shared attribute.
I also see no reason why the universe cannot exist without consciousness. Unless we discount all scientific evidence to date (how the cosmos formed – which I happily admit is incomplete), then the universe has existed for a very long time with no conscious observers to give it form.
Philosophically speaking, one could state that the universe ceases to exist without consciousness on an individual level. But it still exits outside of that individual's perception.

If we continue this thought, some question might arise. Such as, does a falling tree make a noise in the middle of the forest? Well, how would this apply in a Matrix type environment? For simplicity lets use computers as the force that sustains the Matrix. So you're connected and inside this virtual reality. You travel to a forest and create a tree, but this tree is kind of weak. You leave the tree and over time it withers and eventually falls. The tree inside this Matrix falls, but you are no where near it and have no idea that it fell. Yet, did the tree fall? Yes, of course, because the Matrix is being sustained by computers. The computers continually simulate all things inside the Matrix. It is called a simulation. It would not be much of a simulation if for example you pick up a ball, then drop the ball, and while the ball is fall you turn your head and suddenly the computers stopped updating the falling ball, so the ball suddenly stops when turn your head. No, that's a poor simulation.  

The problem here is that we are building assumption upon assumption to gather more assumptions. The conclusion will hold no truth as it is built upon 'what-if's, rather than known's.
If a tree falls does it make a noise? This can simply be reduced down to what we perceive noise to be. Is noise the vibration waves caused in air, or is noise the interception (and interpretation by the brain) of those vibration waves? So it comes down to personal opinion. If I decide the tree makes no noise, it doesn't change the fact the tree still fell and caused vibrations in the air.

So the same would hold true for our reality as the above computer simulated Matrix. The popular term for this is "Group Consciousness." If it is true that on some higher level there is force, perhaps what many call our Spirit, and all these spirits are connected, and this web of connections is the Group Consciousness, then this higher force would be responsible for our reality, our simulation if you will. Therefore, when the tree falls in the middle of the forest, it must make a noise for it is a higher force that sustains all things. That higher force is aware of that falling tree regardless if there are no physical beings within the vicinity.

Now, for the final thought. If it's true that what we call reality is created and sustained by this group consciousness, and obviously this group in totality would be highly intelligent, then it could be conceived as our parent in some way. Is it possible for instance that this higher force would allow someone to create and detonate an Antimatter bomb that would destroy this planet? Well, if for some reason that is what the group as a whole wills, then I am certain it will happen. What about proof of the projection of consciousness? Such global proof would cause massive changes in beliefs, etc. Perhaps that's what the group now wills, perhaps not.

I have a problem with the idea of reality being created by higher consciousnesses, or being created by a group consciousness. It seems a 'get out of thinking free card'. Hear something you don't like? It's the group consciousness. Hear a scientific theory you don't like? That doesn't matter, because it's not really true, it's just a group belief and nothing more. It seems to pass all responsibility of the individual to a higher force (sound familiar?). It's also an idea which can never be validated or proven in the 'physical', and so it helps us in no way towards learning the truth of the astral.

Did you know that many researchers would tell you there already is proof of projection? There is an interesting phenomenon where the outcome of certain experiments is dependent upon who is present. Who is aware of this phenomenon? If the negativity/disbelief level reaches a certain level then the experiment will fail. What does this mean? It means that you can have the best out of body projector in the universe and if this projector is trying to prove this existence to a room of scientists and if there are enough disbelievers in the room then the poor projector will fail miserably.

This is the uncertainty principle, which seems to assume an observer is needed for wavefront collapse (one possibility being chosen out of all possible possibilities). The uncertainty principle in no way even implies a person's belief or disbelief matters. The observer could be a piece of inert metal. It doesn't have to be a sentient life form.
There is also much (interesting) theory which suggests our interpretation of the uncertainty principle is wrong, and an observer is not needed at all.
I can imagine a person picking up on the disbelief of others, then that disbelief sways their own belief and so they don't project. But I can in no way see how a persons belief can effect a person against their own belief (and the uncertainty principle has never suggested such things).

What does all this mean? I believe it means that when the world is ready for hardcore proof then it may happen. Until then, it will not. I believe it means that the best form of proof for now is Personal Proof. Great if you can prove it to the world. I wish Bruce the best!

I wonder why, if the belief of many can shape reality, Jesus hasn't come back again. There are billions of Christians, yet their concentrated effort on the coming of Christ doesn't make him come. It's not like the rest of the population are actively countering this belief, so they have no opposition to it, and their belief still doesn't change reality. Such things can be seen everywhere i.e. belief of the many having no effect. I really don't think belief changes anything outside of ones own 'interpretation' of reality (not reality itself). We would live in chaos if beliefs did change reality (even on minute scales) as 6+ billion beliefs would be competing for dominance. But then again, this can be explained away with a higher force not materialising those beliefs I guess   .

Consider the idea that to prove the existence of projection of consciousness to yourself is a piece of cake, relatively speaking  . To prove such projection to your friend is a little difficult. To prove such projection to a dozen people is a feat of achievement. To prove projection of consciousness to 1000 people is out of this world. To prove it to nearly 7 billion people is a miracle from God.  

This all might sound like a bunch of theories. Well, consider a recent poll that revealed the Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is accepted by most scientists. So if you believe what some mystics teach then know you are not alone in the weirdness factor. That some of the brainiest people in the world probably have one up on you in weird beliefs.

The problem with brainy people is that their beliefs are no better than the beliefs of less brainy people. More scientists from one specific survey (not indicative of every scientist) stated a preference for an interpretation. That doesn't mean such an interpretation is true, especially when one considers there is no empirical evidence of that interpretation.

I guess I don't like the way many occult philosophies are latching onto quantum and string theories due to their perception of what those theories mean. When our understanding of quantum phenomenon grows, many of our current theories will be discarded, and by association, so will the spiritual theories too.

For me, very good "proof" is that every person in the moment of death looses exactly 21 gramm ( I sad this few times on this forum ).

They don't though. The whole premise of the soul weighing 21 grams was borne from experiments by a Dr. Duncan MacDougall in 1907.
He weighed a number of people on death and noted some seemed to lose a certain amount of weight (grams). It would be amazing if everyone lost the same amount of weight, but as far as I know, some actually gained weight, and those that lost it didn't lose the same amount. The experiments were also said to contain a high degree of error.
To date these results of the experiments haven't been reproduced, so this whole idea is based on the minority of results from on experiment a century ago. I'm a bit reluctant to see that as proof of a soul.
I also know he carried out experiments by killing dogs and weighing them too. He supposedly noticed no difference in weight in any of the dog experiments.

This leads us to a few possible conclusions:
1)   The soul might have a weight, but not everyone has a soul (given some didn't lose any weight and some gained weight). Also no dogs have souls.
2)   The soul doesn't necessarily leave the body on death (or even exist) and the weight drop could be accounted for by the sudden rise in temperature on death causing sweat and moisture evaporation (which accounts for the dogs not losing weight, as they don't sweat). Also, a certain volume of air and gas is expelled from the body on death which would take the weight down too. There have been a few arguments against this, but as yet, it still seems plausible.

For me at least, I couldn't in good conscious take this as proof.

Hey Vilkate,

I've had a lot of dreams with the devil in them (and a lot with God). A memorable one included me being in a landscape dominated by a tower, there was a gigantic goats head floating in the air near it (which I knew as the devil). During the conversation I was having with it, it would occasionally seem to pixellate slightly, almost as if it was computer generated. I've also travelled through time to the birth of everything and I had a meeting with god and the devil there. In other dreams I've been in hell and battled death (the archetypal skeleton in robes – I was trying to steal a book from him) and been hunted by the devil.
A dream which always made me curious seemed to see me in some form of 'dark ritual'. I'll paste what I wrote to another group about it:

I had a strange dream last night and I was wondering if anyone could tell me what it means. It concerned me being in a room at night, it was quite large and I was on a bed. I had a pentagram (pointing upwards) drawn on the back of my hand (the right hand I think) it was drawn in red. I can't remember if it had any other symbols on it. The dream consisted of me trying to do something, I can't remember quite what, but I had to finish a ceremony. There was a single black candle on a desk and it had to be lit, I had to pierce my hand to draw blood before I could light it though. I think I carried this out a few times. But later towards the end of the dream, the candle was a different colour (it might have been white) and the top of it was stretched out into a cup shape, the candle was now stood in a clear bowl which was deeply full of setting clear wax. I then put my hands into the setting wax crumbling it.

I'm still not sure what I was observing in this dream .

the "disorder" synesthesia, "suffer" from synesthesia? since when is synesthesia some kind of disease that people suffer from?  its just when senses kind of "leak" into other areas of the brain, for example hearing a color from someones voice, or seeing colors in letters and numbers...etc etc......cant believe you people used the words disorder and suffer to describe it.  having synesthesia is not suffering at all, its actually interesting to have it....sheesh people, learn the facts?

I sort of made this point above, including it seems all our brains are wired to cross senses (which anyone taking a high dose of psychedelics would experience for themselves ). But people said to 'suffer' from 'synesthesia ' are just more aware of it than others.
Theres been some very interesting research into synesthesias role in language, mathematics, spatial and temporal understanding and construction, and even its role in creativity and our internal interpretation of sound.

For me, tactile sensations come first.  I can feel the bedroom wall quite well before I begin to see clearly.  Vision is dim and grey-like to begin with.  To improve vision I simply concentrate on "seeing".  I do this by scrutinising whatever there is to observe in front of me, and the more I "scrutinise" the clearer vision becomes.  If I try to open my eyes, I run the risk of opening my physical eyes, so I don't recommend this.  I just focus on seeing and vision comes in.  Vision is a mental feat, it's not a matter of opening eyes... (imo).

Hey catmeow,

This sounds pretty much like it is with me. It almost feels that if I don't focus on the sensations they would fade out and the OBE would end (this is just after exit where things feel a bit 'dim').

jalef:

from www.indigochild.com:

and... just in case you heard otherwise from other "indigo" sources, the designated word "Indigo" has nothing to do with the color of an aura! It is the result of scientific observations by a woman who has the brain disorder called synesthesia.

As for the idea that AP and OBEs are exclusive to indigo children... That's wrong... All humans can leave the body. Even animals can, actually.

It's been found that everyone has 'synesthesia', people who are deemed to suffer from it medically usually have more pronounced symptoms of it (so it infringes on sensory perception) whereas the majority of us utilise its effects in an subconscious manner.
Out of curiosity, what would synesthesia have to do with stating people are indigo?

As is said above, it really depends what area of web design you are looking at getting back into. Would it be purely design (graphical and layout) or would there be some client-side/server-side coding involved (php, actionscript (flash), java, asp etc) with possible database connectivity (mysql, ms-sql etc)?

I don't doubt anything I've experienced.. wait, I take thet back.  Once I kept asking over and over if one paticular experience was for real, to only have one of the best experiences of my life happen.  I got my answer too.

That is a shame you guys feel that way, you've sounded so sure when you talk of your experiences in the past.  Do you feel that they weren't real now and just your imagination?

I'm very sure of my experiences, I'm just unsure of what they actually represent outside of myself . I'm very much aware of what the brain is capable of producing (to all extents and purposes it generates our own personal universe from external stimulus), and what need and belief can generate (what we want to be rather than what is). My questions are concerned with if these experiences are an extension of this generated universe (through the act of imagination) or if they hold any greater reality.

Hey mactombs,

As you can tell, I'm in the same boat . I think if I didn't hold such scepticism then I would experience more, but this seems to suggest that the things I would experience otherwise would be belief generated and potentially hold no truth. This is a point of contention. Should I just believe to get more, or should I stay impartial to these experiences and be true to myself?
I also think I hold such scepticism because I have read deeply into esoteric and occult areas, and all the philosophies of the astral I have read either have huge holes or inconsistencies in them, or they just don't feel right in light of other knowledge I hold.
I think this is area one should have an open mind (scepticism) because it seems no one truly knows what it is or what is going on.

Nb I put scepticism in brackets as if it was true scepticism I think we would write OBE experience off and not consider them like we do. I think it is more an open-mindedness than true scepticism.

Usually the vibrational stage also sees body paralysis (sleep paralysis). Sometimes I'm not paralysed when I feel the start of the vibrations, but as they hit I feel like I'm sinking into myself and am then fully paralysed.
I usually wait until the vibrations are pretty intense (I've found that simply focusing on breathing can increase them a lot more than willing them stronger) – although sometimes I think I try and get out too soon – and then I roll over. It does feel like the physical body is rolling, and sometimes I worry that I have actually rolled off the bed (although the paralysis stops this happening). A lot of the time I'm on my hands and knees on the floor with no sight and distant sensory perception, but as I crawl away from my body things become a lot more solid, until I have full vision and tactile sensations.
I don't always roll, sometimes I use visualisations such as there being a ladder over my body and I pull myself up a rung at a time – really feeling my 'muscles' strain as I pull one hand after the other. It seems focusing on a technique (usually tactile visualisations are easier for most) to the exclusion of the body is quite a successful method of getting out.

It's a figment of the mind and normal . It's a very good sign that you are relaxing deeply and staying awake during the onset of the hypnogogic stage. I'd see it as being on the right track.

Wow, that is impressive!   That's like a Republican being with a Democrat..

I think that is wonderful, Jingo!!  Hug her for me, will ya?

Lol. It perhaps does sound like a strange pairing, but it seems to work well . I gave her a hug for you too .

Not going to happen anytime soon because if the scientific community were to "discover" something like this, the implications would be huge. Life after death would be proven a certainty and people would be forced to see the failures of dogmatic religion. The world just isn't ready for it yet.

I don't think science would hold back to save the belief of religious people. Quite the opposite, I believe science will continue to research where it wishes regardless of potential consequences. A prime example of this is the discovery of splitting the atom last century.

You could always lay a card somewhere without ever looking at it, then project to look at the card, then check it once you wake back up. I guess that's still not 100% proof, but its a good 95% lol. Lots of people have done it.

The card experiment is hard to gain any sort of validity from due to the card either being read wrongly, not being clear, not being there or actually turning into another object. If someone could consistently read a card correctly, that would show 'something' I guess. But the bigger stumbling block is the difficulty in projecting at will.

You also have to consider people who have never read ANYTHING about the subject describe identical experiences during the process of an OBE, which greatly decreases the likelyhood that its nothing but a conditioned internal hallucination based on something we've already read. There is some variance between individuals, like a reaction to anything else, but its remarkably consistant.

On the surface it might seem to decrease it, but we cannot ignore that our world is interpreted and experienced filtered through a brain. Shared experiences might actually be produced by the same areas of the brain in each of us. This could explain why the experiences in general are similar, yet there are unique differences to each of us i.e. personal experience and belief systems change our interpretation of certain brain created experiences, and because we share the same brain, we share the same experience structure.
I'm not saying this is true, just that for every example of why OBEs might be more than hallucination, there is an equally compelling reason why they are not. This is why some form of validation would be great. It might answer such questions indirectly.

Searching for answers is great, but I thought I was talking about arguing and trying to convince others of what they believe to be the truth.  There is just no point, at least to me there isn't.  

AH, then I 100% agree with you there. One thing I look down upon is people who try and impose their own beliefs on others, or think they are superior in some way due to those beliefs.
In my own life, my partner of the past 3 years is devoutly catholic; she goes to church weekly and helps run guide groups etc in the church. Her belief is very different from mine, but I respect her right to her own beliefs. We do talk about our own philosophies, but never in a way to 'convert' the other etc. I'd actually feel quite bad attempting to change her beliefs as I know how important they are to her.
I've found it best to never preach, but happily answer questions if asked.

I guess the only reason I can give to such questions as "why analyse?" is that, as we gain more experience, we have more knowledge to re-evaluate fundamental questions in the light of this new knowledge. Just as a child's intellect and understanding grows from probing the world, I think our understanding of self and our relationship to reality grows from such probing too.
Most of the knowledge we have regarding the soul, the afterlife, energies etc comes from a world we no longer inhabit. It comes from a time when mans understanding of the world was radically different to ours (such as reality being made of the 4 elements, the universe being built of water, and the Gods creating thunder and lightening etc). I don't mean this in a condescending way, this was simply the best evaluation based on the knowledge of those times, I just mean we know a lot of reality to be very different, and we should re-evaluate what we think we know in terms of this new knowledge. This has been started by people attempting to link quantum theory to spiritual philosophies – but I feel they are still hanging on to the old ideas and bending the new knowledge to fit.
Regardless of what I believe, I respect the rights of others to believe what they want, and even to believe my views are those of a person walking up a blind allyway .

The Tiger - William Blake

TIGER, tiger, burning bright  
In the forests of the night,  
What immortal hand or eye  
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?  
 
In what distant deeps or skies
Burnt the fire of thine eyes?  
On what wings dare he aspire?  
What the hand dare seize the fire?  
 
And what shoulder and what art  
Could twist the sinews of thy heart?
And when thy heart began to beat,  
What dread hand and what dread feet?  
 
What the hammer? what the chain?  
In what furnace was thy brain?  
What the anvil? What dread grasp
Dare its deadly terrors clasp?  
 
When the stars threw down their spears,  
And water'd heaven with their tears,  
Did He smile His work to see?  
Did He who made the lamb make thee?
 
Tiger, tiger, burning bright  
In the forests of the night,  
What immortal hand or eye  
Dare frame thy fearful symmetry?