Messages

I second both posts above, that this is a case of synchronicity, and it will only persist so long as your consciousness is drawn to this particular number.

I used to see "911" everywhere.  Probably not a coincidence, I was heavily involved in researching 9/11 at the time and was one of three administrators of www.studyof911.com, which no longer exists because we ran out of money.  Eventually I had my fill of the subject and moved on and I don't see the number anymore.

If you've never read Carl Jung's work on synchronicity, he's the guy that coined the term.  He thought that there is a link between the contents of your consciousness "inside" of you, and the physical reality you perceive "outside" of you, and synchronicity is just one way that this fact bears itself out.  Not only do I think this is totally accurate but this also seems to be the core understanding of a lot of esoteric traditions and mystical systems.  Rituals are a case in point, since the real purpose of most ritual work, whether the practitioner understands it on this level or not, is to either reprogram the subconscious through ordered symbolism or else to reach an altered, mystical state of consciousness where this inner/outer (or "above/below", ie "as above, so below") link can be used to manipulate an individual's experience of reality, and arguably reality itself in an objective sense.

Another common example a lot of people experience is they'll see a new word for the first time in their lives, and then within the same week see it two or three more times in a row.  Were they already seeing it before and just never paid attention?  Or was the novelty of the situation causing additional experiences to be drawn into their consciousness like a magnet? Synchronicity gets into some deep and powerful ideas.

Yes, Zoroastrianism has a lot of similarities with the Abrahamic religions.  It was common in Persia at least into the early Christian era and was an ideological "competitor" with early Christianity in the ancient Roman Empire.  Zoroastrianism features the deity Mithra who was born of a virgin on December 25th.  Whereas Jesus was a symbol for the Piscean age, Mithra was apparently a symbol of the Age of Aries as he was typically depicting slaying a bull representing the age of Taurus, and Mithra is an older figure than Jesus.

Zoroastrianism is also very dualistic, giving more power to the "evil" powers in the world than modern Christianity does (though the medieval church was so focused on the devil and witches and all that, that the argument could be made that the two religions used to be a lot more similar in that regard as well).

It's also where we get the terms "mage," "magic" and "magician," from their word "magi" which also appears in the Bible in the form of the "three wise men."  The magi were ancient Persian mystics/shamans/etc.

Other than all of that I'm not sure how significant the religion is to us in modern times.  I study history so I'm sure there is lots to dig into, but how interesting it would be to most people is another question.  I actually have a folder on my computer filled with pdf scans of ebooks about Mithra, that I've yet to have a chance to look at.

It's funny you bring that up Xanth because I was just watching this video that I'd bookmarked there a while ago:

http://www.unlimitedboundaries.ca/forums/watch-this-first-t443.html

Embedded in a post. 

I had a long response typed up here but unfortunately I lost it from complications of having to post from this location through a proxy (I still think I triggered the server to blacklist my IP here because I loaded too many pages too quickly and the server interpreted it as a DDOS).

Instead of typing out another lengthy post I'll just say that while I have never met or spoken to Simon personally, I am friends with plenty of people who have, and have seen a lot of drama unfold around him that is characteristic of a wider situation going on within these "whistleblower" communities.  He claims to have been taught from a young age by reptilian and mantid ETs (who he describes as having little to no respect for human beings), and maintains connections with them.  Even if we take him on face value at that, it would already be reason enough to think twice about the things he says, just because the deceptive nature of these beings as he describes it.  He used to do "counseling" sessions over Skype up until within the last few months, and he charged enough money for them that if he did it 40 hours a week he'd be making over $100,000 a year.  There is also more to that story but a discussion about it on another forum led to Simon threatening that website with a lawsuit.

I was interested in Simon's info for a while, and took notes on it just as I have taken notes on the info from several other "whistleblowers."  I try to compare the info from different people when it overlaps, and see how consistent these testimonies are.  For whatever it's worth, Simon contradicts his own self on at least one point, in relation to CERN.  Sometimes he claims it's a portal for bringing evil entities onto the Earth, and in other places he suggests that CERN is a benefit in some way to Earth and a positive thing.

If anybody wants any more info on any of this then you can message me.  I just felt I had some responsibility to say something since I'm about 1 degree removed from this guy through several people.

[2004-2012]

The best way to help the people in Syria would be to end the war and help them rebuild their own nation where they already are.

I can't say I agree with the US's recent policy of funding rebels to overthrow legitimate governments (such as was also done in Libya and formerly in Latin and South American nations, not to mention the US State Department's role in the Ukrainian coup).  Putin makes a good point that there are no international laws that make it okay to just go around unilaterally blowing up the leaders of a foreign nations just because we don't like them.  Saddam Hussein is a case in point, as well as Gaddafi.  It creates an untenable precedent for international diplomacy and there is no international body approving any of this stuff that the US is doing.

Here are some interesting numbers:

1 in 4 Swedish Women Will Be Raped as Sexual Assaults Increase 500%

Sweden now has the second highest number of rapes in the world, after South Africa, which at 53.2 per 100,000 is six times higher than the United States. Statistics now suggest that 1 out of every 4 Swedish women will be raped.
[...]
Sweden's population grew from 9 million to 9.5 million in the years 2004-2012, mainly due to immigration from "countries like Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia". 16 percent of all newborns have mothers born in non-Western countries. Employment rate among immigrants: 54 percent.
[...]
In 2003, Sweden's rape statistics were higher than average at 9.24, but in 2005 they shot up to 36.8 and by 2008 were up to 53.2. Now they are almost certainly even higher as Muslim immigrants continue forming a larger percentage of the population.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/175434/1-4-swedish-women-will-be-raped-sexual-assaults-daniel-greenfield


I suppose Jesus would tell the Swedes to turn the other cheek, but in this case that would make for a pretty inappropriate pun.  

Historically, and in a few recent examples it has been shown that when large incoming populations face major barriers to cultural integration in their host countries, it generates a dangerous situation. An example is Sweden, which took in a number of primarily North Africans totaling something like 3-4% of their total population at the time. These folks in many cases had no way of becoming active citizens, and doing anything other than rely of social service systems there. The rape rate in Sweden has gone up by some estimates by around 800% during this same period, making it the rape capital of the west; something like 75-80% of this increase is attributed directly to the recent migrants. It is also less and less safe to be a Jew, or to have a Synagogue in that area. Other metrics of poverty and human suffering have increased as well across the board. I think the path Sweden has taken indicates that the service of underpriveliged populations is not something that can be done without extensive planning or study. Just giving the greenlight to a similar mass exchange of people, without plans for how to best integrate them into their destination countries should be avoided.

I want to emphasize the term "cultural integration" here.  This is really the heart of the matter, because many of the Islamic states that these immigrants grew up in have very different value systems than the secular west.  Women don't have the same rights for one thing (only recently gained the right to drive in Saudi Arabia), and tend to be looked down upon more, which likely has a lot to do with the increase in rape in Sweden.  Other countries are seeing similar problems and Germany's friendly "welcome culture" has had to take a step back as Merkel's own ministers are having to take a stand to enforce the EU rule that refugees must first seek asylum in the first nation they enter when coming into the EU, which in this case would be nations in the more Muslim southeastern region of Europe.

The clash between the very different cultures interacting here should really encourage people to (1) stop these wars in the Middle East that are dislocating millions of people and destroying their national infrastructure, and (2) help these people in their own nations after we have solved the root problem, which is war itself.  What I mean is that ending western support for the war should be the #1 issue and priority if we really want to help people out.  As unfortunate as it is for so many people to lose their homes, I would rather lose my home than die or have family members killed, but this is exactly what the war in Syria is doing.  Christians, Muslims and Jews all lived together in peace under the Assad regime.  What the US started over there is not helping, and if the "rebels" topple the Assad regime then we are admittedly going to see a fundamentalist theocratic regime, probably like the Muslim Brotherhood that took over in Egypt but was swiftly kicked back out by the Egyptian people.

Thanks Lumaza. 

Nah not so much. 

I'm here to help and if anybody needs anything feel free to PM.

I used to have the same problem.  I had the intention of flying but just couldn't quite figure out "how" to do it.

I've had similar problems with other "impossible" feats in dreams: throwing heavy objects all the way to the horizon, melting snow just by looking at it, etc.

I finally learned to give my mind something to work with.  The first thing that worked for me was imagining a jet pack on my back, and a control on each side of my body.  If I pull my right arm, I accelerate with an arc to the right.  If I pull my left arm, I accelerate to the left.  If I pull them both at the same time, I just accelerate straight ahead.

You might have to think of a different trick that works for you, that's just an example.  I think the major underlying issue with us is that even though we consciously understand that everything is possible in these environments, our subconscious may not understand that.  That's why when I first tried to throw a heavy object to the horizon, it went only as far as it would in real life and then fell back to the ground.  I had to let my subconscious understand through mental imagery and feelings that there are no limitations here.  It's a hard thing to explain removing subconscious limitations but only takes a little determination and creativity, and once you get the hang of it, this becomes an incredibly powerful skill not only in dreams but also in waking life.

This 20 minute video came out just days before the Paris attack:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44vzMNG2fZc

The problem is not with Islam itself.  The problem is these people who are the Middle Eastern equivalent of our Westboro Baptist Church in the US, and there's a lot more of them going into Europe.  The video above shows several of them (including what looks like the Muslim equivalent of a preacher) talking about "out breeding" the secular Christian societies with multiple wives and lots of kids, and making Europe fundamentalist Muslim.  I don't think it's an accident that these people are being pushed out of war zones into Europe either.  The people responsible for creating this mess in the Middle East must know all of the problems they're causing.

I think this question is more of a philosophical one than anything.  Ultimately everything is just different manifestations of the source.  So it can be aspects of yourself if you like or it could be totally foreign to you if you like.  You get to make up your own story on this one.   

test... having problems posting

The style I am using personally is, just tell me there's a target and let's set a date for when I'll look at the image of it.  One person that was practicing with us preferred to have "coordinates" assigned (which really are just arbitrary letters/numbers to give it a specific identification).  Ultimately it's the subconscious that does all of this stuff and the subconscious is powerful enough to not need a whole lot of crutches, in my view.  But however you feel most comfortable is fine with me.  We've all been busy lately and not doing as much as we would like, I'm sure.

You have to do it blind. It doesn't matter if you are oobe or CRV. I have the targets in unmarked envelopes and some targets out of target pools in there mixed in to create doubt. Your expectations will generate the scenes you see.

I agree with this also and if anyone wants to experiment with remote viewing in a group, then message me because I'm in a Skype chat with three other people, two of whom are practicing remote viewing with me.  We set up targets for each other and then reveal them at a specified time after the viewing attempts.  We started not too long ago but have become distracted by other things in life in the past few weeks, but it's something worth investigating.  We do all of it in the blind.

As for the OP I believe that the Moon is probably artificial.  Mars' moons are probably also artificial, particularly Phobos, which has enough obvious unusual traits that the Russians tried sending two probes to it specifically.  The second one (Phobos II) sent back infamous last pictures showing the shadow of a massive cigar-shaped object, and then apparently the object itself, before communication to it was lost.  All of this is on Google for anyone interested.

Check out the two posts here, particularly the one posted under the "bsb22" account: http://realmsofmagick.net/index.php?topic=47.0

That info may be posted on a forum but you can Google the things from those posts and find sources and additional information.  Scientists are quoted on the unusual physical properties on the Moon, its chemical makeup, the fact that it seems hollow, rings like a bell as if it's hollow, has four clear concentrations of mass inside of it that were unexpected, does not rotate in relation to the Earth (same face locked towards the Earth at all times -- not something one would necessarily expect for spinning celestial objects), that it fits perfectly over the Sun to cause total eclipses in the sky, etc.  That is without going into the mythological stories about the Moon appearing at the very beginning of the historical period, and its appearance being recorded in various mythologies and religious scriptures, from Vedic/Slavic texts saying that we had multiple moons in the past that were destroyed in a war and replaced with the one we have now, to the Greeks calling one ancient tribe the "Proselenes" because they are said to have existed before the Moon.  And then also all of the regularly-shaped things photographed on the Moon and the unusual things said by astronauts from the Apollo missions that landed on the Moon.

I kind of like it here actually.  So there's a pretty good chance I will be having more of these human experiences here. 

At the same time, I feel as though the kind of person who would say, "Hell no, I'm never coming back to this hell-hole again" will probably have unresolved issues and emotional attachments that will not allow them to detach from this particular area of experience.  It's kind of like the saying that hate is not really the opposite of love, because there is still too much invested emotion in another person.  Complete indifference is the real opposite.

I've never tried any of these but I have no doubt that they work.  When I first started brewing my own kombucha it also gave me very vivid dreams, and I've come across others who shared the same experience.  Also I have eaten morel mushrooms (a non-psychedelic culinary delicacy) raw, and these also gave me very vivid dreams (of hunting morels in the forest, actually), and I also confirmed this experience with someone else I know.

We were talking about hunting morels (we call them murcles here, an Appalachian corruption of the word "miracle" since they seem to sprout up overnight), and I asked him if he'd ever eaten one raw.  His immediate response was yes, and they gave him "crazy" dreams.  So I'm not the only one to have noticed this from eating raw morels either.

Native Americans and African shamans have used plants like these for various purposes since prehistory, and there is nothing dishonorable or unreal or cheating about the experiences you get from them in my opinion.  It's just another set of tools at our disposal, the "plant teachers" as they are called, and it is what it is.


I've also read Robert Bruce's books on astral projection and I know about his writings on the "real time zone," but I've never experienced anything like that, and though I've had what I consider to be many lucid dreams, I'm a skeptical kind of person by nature and have never been able to convince myself that lucid dreams and astral projection are in reality two different things.  I believe the soul is inherently non-local, and consciousness only experiences the perception of movement and location.  I also believe that consciousnesses "outside" of my own have contacted me within my dreams before, so this is not something limited to astral projection, and further makes me question the difference.  I'll be the first to admit that I could always be wrong.

I use this stuff because it's fluoride free but I wasn't aware of all of this and I thank you for sharing, Xanth.

I should have been tipped off by the fact that it's sold at Wal-Mart.

"Yet it collapses into only ONE absolute"

Yes, from many possibilities that not only physical exist but even give concrete, physical evidence of their existence (the wave-form distribution of electrons before observation)...

...down to a single pin-prick of an electron impact while being observed.

The collapse of the electron's possible locations into a single absolute location happens only when it is observed.  This was a truly revolutionary experiment and it'll be expounded upon for many years to come I think.

And even if the "many worlds" theory was developed to try to get around "spiritual" forces, it's not that simple to get away from. The fact that simple observation causes such a profound change in manifestation is unavoidable in this experiment.  Scientists like Bill Tiller at Stanford are already developing physics models to take consciousness itself into account.

Yeah, there is quite a lot of interpretation in that area. Going by the Buddhist worldview we have been running with in this discussion though, the careless taking of life is seen as strongly negative in all forms of Buddhism I am aware of.

I don't condone any taking of life either, but if I had to pick some popular worldview to summarize my own thoughts on morality or good/evil it would be Taoism, and/or the baby it made with Buddhism, Zen Buddhism.

But I also don't necessarily believe that everyone would have to fall into the bottomless pit, in your example, for all things to be explored.  I think more than a kind of impersonal, purely rational/scientific kind of "exploration of all possibilities," we might have something more like each "oversoul" gets to decide what it explores in each of its physical incarnations, and some things simply may not be useful for these oversouls to explore to get what they want.

I think this also relates to our personal journeys in life.  If we are able to accept something 100% and are at peace with it, then that something will tend not to trouble us anymore.  We've explored what we needed to and there's no use in taking it any further.

[Maybe]

It is terrifying to me because the suffering of other beings matters to me immensely. And to me the many-worlds hypothesis doesn't seem to suggest a zero-sum world, so much as a staggeringly negative one.

I would say that presents a good reflection of your own beliefs about reality.  Out of infinite possibilities why should the sum total of them all be so much more negative than positive or neutral?  Does that say something about the way that you are interpreting reality as a whole, that it is more bad than good?  I know Buddhism puts heavy emphasis on suffering as the basic human condition and trying to escape that, but other traditions like Taoism or even Zen Buddhism don't take things that far.  It's almost like a glass half empty/glass half full situation here, where you can look at this idea and see a reflection of yourself in a certain way.

Consider when you are driving a car, for instance, down a city street. Most of the possible actions you have available to you to take will produce a very negative outcome. You could swerve off right, could swerve off left, could ride your car on the sidewalk, etc. Only a very narrow set of choices will see you producing what really amounts to a modestly neutral goal- getting your vehicle from A to B without catastrophe.

Did you stop to consider the number of good things that could happen in such depth?  Even if you run over something and have a serious tire/wheel problem develop, maybe you'll get more insurance money to repair it than it actually costs, and come out a few hundred dollars on top.  Maybe you'll turn your radio to a different station, to a talk radio show, and hear some mind-blowing idea that causes important changes in your life.  Maybe you'll see someone that needs help on the side of the road, stop and help and change someone else's life. 

Anyway, who picks what's positive and negative?  That's a whole subject unto itself.  Here's an old Taoist story I like:

Maybe

There is a Taoist story of an old farmer who had worked his crops for many years. One day his horse ran away. Upon hearing the news, his neighbors came to visit. "Such bad luck," they said sympathetically. "May be," the farmer replied.

The next morning the horse returned, bringing with it three other wild horses. "How wonderful," the neighbors exclaimed. "May be," replied the old man.

The following day, his son tried to ride one of the untamed horses, was thrown, and broke his leg. The neighbors again came to offer their sympathy on his misfortune. "May be," answered the farmer.

The day after, military officials came to the village to draft young men into the army. Seeing that the son's leg was broken, they passed him by. The neighbors congratulated the farmer on how well things had turned out. "May be," said the farmer.

http://truecenterpublishing.com/zenstory/maybe.html

Hello no leaf clover
You wrote
Yes, indeed !  BTW you will probably pass me in posts soon. I do not post here much, except in exceptional threads such as this one.

My post rate is about the same as yours, you know.  Those extra posts you have on me is because you signed up a few days before I did, though it was over 10 years ago.   

[me]

That isn't necessarily wrong...but it is terrifying even to think the world could be that vast. It is also terrifying, because most of those universes would either be empty, or hells, because for every possible "positive outcome", there are probably dozens of negative possibilities.

My question would be, who would it be terrifying for?  The idea could be terrifying for you but those realities themselves could only be terrifying to you if you experienced them, and as humans I don't know if we can experience them all at once.  Just one at a time it seems.  And some people do experience terrifying realities, and some don't.  The totality of existence, whether it's called God or the source or whatever, probably experiences consciousness in a radically different way than human beings do.  And why not?  We're just a small piece of the puzzle.

I had an intense spiritual experience once where I realized that the source must contain not only infinite joy, but also infinite sadness, infinite anger, etc.  If it didn't, then how could these feelings exist?  I couldn't dwell on it for very long because it made me feel that incredible depression.    Everything is part of the totality.  So it is a very sobering thought, but the most incredibly depressed feeling you can possibly imagine is also part of the sum total of reality, and that's just how things are, just the same as joy or whatever else you can experience.  It's just there and it's something consciousness has to deal with, whether in the form of individual incarnations or whatever the case may be.

Exactly.  In a Consciousness system where the "consciousness" is trying to grow/evolve by making Love-based choices... then having ALL choices actually play out goes completely contrary to that particular goal as there is no sum of grow ever.  It would essentially be a zero-sum system.

And I'm personally convinced that this is essentially what the totality of existence is: a zero sum system.

I'm all for contributing to the well-being of the whole, but there is no question for me that this is still an obviously dualistic role that I'm performing.  If evil didn't exist, we would have no concept of what "good" even means.  Same for any form of dualism.  You can say someone is a tall person, but that would be totally meaningless if there weren't someone shorter by comparison.  You have to have both for either of them to make sense.  That's just how it works.

For the universe to contain pairs of opposites like this, it obviously gives no real preference between one or the other.  It's by the inherent nature of duality that by creating one side of the coin, you have immediately and automatically created the other side by contrast.  So this seems like a pretty zero-sum situation to me.

Then people ask "what is the meaning of life?", but meaning is not something the universe provides people with.  Meaning is something people create for themselves.  So we are free to experience things as we will.

[But]

1. What the hell is magic?

I like Crowley's definition.  It's simple and to the point: It's "the Science and Art of causing Change to occur in conformity with Will."  Also "every intentional act is a Magickal Act."

2. Can I do Magic ?

You already do, by the above definition.    o.o

3. Is it dangerous

It could be, if you prefer.

4. Is it a negative/dark practice?

Only if you take or use it that way!

Negative/dark and positive/light come from a dualistic way of thinking.  For brevity I will say that Taoism and the Tao Te Ching make a pretty convincing refutation of the ideas of good/bad as being anything other than arbitrary opinions.  But, having said that, I would redefine "good" and "evil" as "service to others" and "service to self," respectively.

So my question would rather be, are you using magic to serve others?  Or are you only using it for yourself, at the expense of others?  It's possible to serve others and yourself at the same time, or to serve yourself in a way that doesn't exploit others.

5. Can it bring happiness and light?

That's more of a philosophical question.  I personally think that if you need reasons to be happy, or if you have to do stuff to be happy, then that's not real happiness and it won't be permanent.  You have to be happy for no reason, to really be happy.  But yes magic could bring these things I suppose.


I think this is a great way to explore ideas, with sets of questions.  It can become a game of trying to ask the right questions in this case, because magic is a very broad and diverse subject, and if you can find the core of what it's actually all about then you've found something important and relevant to everything in life.

John Titor's model makes it so that he is both correct and incorrect in his predictions.  Many worlds says everything that will happen, does in some reality.

I tend to agree with this.  I'm not sure if literally everything that is possible occurs (like to the extent of one atom's difference between parallel universes, to infinity), but I think at the very least every individual has the ability to steer his or her own timeline/experience of reality/consciousness.  Probably major group consciousness themes are explored in various ways as well, such as if a war did or did not occur, etc.

I actually don't just theorize about this, but practice employing this kind of philosophy in my life.  Like any good spiritual work it involves a lot of digging through my subconscious for hidden beliefs and habits of thought, but it seems more effective than any other esoteric system of "magic" or whatever you'd like to call it, that I've tried.


PS, Greytraveller, it's nice to see you here.  I remember you from years ago.  I checked your profile and we're like twins!  XD

Greytraveller:
1687 posts (0.376 per day)
Registered January 12, 2003

no_leaf_clover
1676 posts (0.374 per day)
Registered January 17, 2003

Seriously, what are the odds?   

If you're going to interact with people in the non-physical then you may as well try to "feel" or "sense" them in a way that allows you to understand them without language at all, similarly to how a lot of animals already interact with each other energetically in the physical.

The only reason people can't or won't already do this in the physical is because we can't seem to sit still to observe someone carefully enough without our own thoughts and feelings clouding up our minds.  Nonetheless I've had many experiences of knowing what people are thinking or feeling in the same way that you know the grass is green, just by looking at it.  The closer you are with someone the easier it can be, but emotions especially are pretty universally expressed in humans and you can read them on strangers as well.

[This]

Some people need that which they believe in, in order to continue existing.  Be it "god" or "yeti".  LoL

I don't think we can reduce everything that everyone believes into just something they need to maintain a sense of identity.  You know the old Zen koan, something like, before enlightenment you wash the dishes and sweep the floor, and after enlightenment, you wash the dishes and sweep the floor.  Even if someone makes all the most profound revelations possible in the whole universe, lose all of their ego and become one with everything, then what?  Death?  24/7 meditation and fasting?  Of course not, because there is nowhere else to go and nothing else to be.  This is .... well, this.

So someone can come to this point, then stop.  Look around.  And believe in any number of things, for any number of reasons.  And it doesn't have to be a crutch for a sense of identity.  It could just be exploring "all that is," because "all that is" is just as much here on this internet forum as it is in some theoretical state of bliss or enlightenment or heaven or hell or anywhere or anything else.

I believe in God, but then it depends on the definition of God.  Depending on the definition, maybe I don't believe in "God" after all.  Maybe there is no God.  Everything is easy this way.  I don't need one identity, I can use all of them.  And you are right, reality is what we make of it.  I don't think this is just something we say when someone doesn't see things "the right way," but is literally true in just about every way we can make of it, because all we are is consciousness in the first place.  So of course stuff is what we make of it.  That's who we are and what we do.  XD

Bigfoots included.