The Astral Pulse

I am interested in seeing what most Astral Pulse members think about this.  In my opinion, I have used the same method (using a pre-nap/sleep as a primer before induction) to experience that which I call:

Mode 1 OOBEs - Where environments appear to match the objective world and no anomalies are spotted.  This would be a more advanced version of remote viewing because you experience the sensation of being out of body

and...

Mode 2 OOBEs - Where the environments can display structural anomalies, where reality can outdo the physical one in appearance, and also where things can turn entropic. I consider DILDs and WILDs to be included in this category too.  Again, you can also experience separation here or, in the case of DILDs, you suddenly realise that you are not laying in bed (at least your perception tells you so).

For more distinctions between the two:
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/welcome_to_out_of_body_experiences/how_to_have_an_out_of_body_experience_composed_by_summerlander-t34339.0.html

In BOTH, you may experience various degrees of focus.  They can either be fuzzy or crystal clear.  Neither concretely prove that one really leaves the physical body or that there is a separation.  I consider them to be the same in that they are two sides of the same coin, and, possibly, expressions of the right and left brain hemispheres.  But the entrance is the same whatever method you use.  I call it the Phase state.

Some people don't see any distinctions and the "Modes" above don't mean anything to them.  Some might even have accepted it once but decided to make such view redundant and argue that, even my belief system is clouding my judgement and making me perceive two types of experience where there is none.  After all, considering the nature of the metaphysical realm, anything can pretty much be created there (and usually from belief and expectation).  It could all happen in the same state of consciousness where the environments that manifest can closely match the waking world or be completely alien in appearance.  We could also be manifesting belief constructs deeply lodged in the subconscious mind.

In the end it could all be the same.  Just the Phase...where our imagination comes to life and, apparently, the possibility of telepathy could present itself.  It could just be a trip to the realm of thoughts which could be translated by the brain as though it is some sort of physical reality.

VOTE and post your opinions!!!  Try not to be biased by what your favourite author might have written to get people excited and make his dough.  Post and vote from experience only!  What do your experience and instincts tell you?

Thank you!

8-)

I said absolutely, but I say absolutely not at the same time.

It's not necessarily a different place, perhaps just a different way of perceiving than we are used too.

And therein lies the real answer to your question and the retort to your model.

Another thread asking if LD are OBE  :| :roll: :cry: :x :?

I like to think the keyword in the question is "entrance".

And the answer is... if you can get there, who cares how you get there.  ;)

Honestly, I'm not sure we need another thread of this nature.

Quote from: NoY on July 15, 2011, 14:44:28
Another thread asking if LD are OBE  :| :roll: :cry: :x :?

Actually, no.  This is not "another one".  This is the only one on the Welcome to Dreams page.  The other "LDs vs OOBEs" threads (by Pauli2) were not "asking"...they were "affirming".  And this is a poll.  My thread is fairer and you are all welcome to express your opinions without arguments.

@ personalreality:

Thank you for your input.  It is a very mature answer.  8-)

Dreams = in a box, unconscious you're in the box
LDs = in a box, conscious about the box
OOBEs = out of the box!

But in a way, the box exists outside the box! Sooo... Hmmm...

The question and the possible alternative answers are convoluted.

How so?  Everyone else understood,  Pauli2.  The top one means you think both OOBEs and LDs are the same state, or entrances into the same realm.  The last answer disagrees with this and states that they are completely different.  what's in between marks a spectrum.  You decide.

Quote from: Ssergiu on July 15, 2011, 15:28:57
Dreams = in a box, unconscious you're in the box
LDs = in a box, conscious about the box
OOBEs = out of the box!

But in a way, the box exists outside the box! Sooo... Hmmm...

:-D

Great answer.  Perhaps there is no box?  :evil:

I pretty much said the same thing as pauli and you bestowed the honor of maturity on my response.  lol.

It's all about presentation guys.  Respect begets respect.  lol!!

Quote from: Summerlander on July 15, 2011, 15:44:23
Great answer.  Perhaps there is no box?  :evil:

The box is a lie! Actually a hallucination in a way... Hmmm  :-D

Quote from: personalreality on July 15, 2011, 15:58:54
I pretty much said the same thing as pauli and you bestowed the honor of maturity on my response.  lol.

It's all about presentation guys.  Respect begets respect.  lol!!

From what I understood, PR, you said that you think the experiences are the same, just different ways of perceiving - which pretty much agrees with how I perceive it and seems to reinforce the theory that the two brain hemispheres could come into play...

I know for a fact that Pauli2 opposes this and he claims that they are projections to two different places.  where have you been in the last few days?

Quote from: Ssergiu on July 15, 2011, 16:00:55
The box is a lie! Actually a hallucination in a way... Hmmm  :-D

More likely,  the box is real and all happens inside it...until you look inside and the infinite collapses into the finite.  And the cat is dead, not alive!   :-D

Quote from: Summerlander on July 15, 2011, 16:03:09
I know for a fact that Pauli2 opposes this and he claims that they are projections to two different places.  where have you been in the last few days?

i'm just fuxin with you.

and it's not the last few days, it's always.  but pauli is entitled to the opinion that his experience affords him, just like you or i.

Is he?  He may be entitled to his own opinion in general but I am not too sure about his opinion here.  The opinions here have to come strictly from experience.  He tends to quote too many authors for my liking.  It must be from experience otherwise your vote here means zilch.

Capisce?  :evil:

The problem here lies in definitions. Some people have different definitions of what an OBE is and encompasses. Summerlander, you deliver a definition with mode1/2 and "the phase", but it's your own (or rather leaned on Radruga's models?), not used by others. So many people who have different definitons or use categories differently might not be able to relate to it. Don't get me wrong, I actually like your model, but it is actually one way (belief?) of looking at things only.

As to the question: normally I'd go for LD=OBE, but as said, that depends then on "my" definition of them, they might not be exactly what is presented here by your post or Radruga's teachings. So it is still difficult to vote for me. (I'm on the fence and thus have not yet cast a vote).

Well, actually I don't have a definition for a Lucid Dream anymore, if I think right about it. I just differentiate between the non-lucid/dream state and the lucid state. So it is all about the "state continuum" (that might indeed come near to your described "phase" in a way).

And both, for me, are real. They are "realties" to be experienced within one super-reality, so to speak. Some still argue that dreams are "less real" which I decidedly oppose all the time. I even take more or less the occultist view now, that poses that dreams are just filtered-down (and thus scrambled) memories of experiences in higher states of our multidimensional (higher) self, which we mostly cannot really understand due to their complexity.

I think, not just from other authors' but also from my own experiences now, that in dreams/non-lucid state you are nearer to your sub- or superconscious (which esotericists call Higher or Monroe called Total Self / I-there). My dreams tell me the same story, I have the impression now that I even get better insights about (or from?) my (higher) self from dreaming.

Then there is varying degrees of lucidity in-between when you flicker between lucid and non-lucid. So there is no clear-cut boundary.

On the other side of the continuum, the complete lucid/self-conscious analytical state (which I call lucidventure when not experienced in betawaves-brainstate / the 'physical') is more externally geared, away from your Higher Self / subconscious. Your conscious / lucid incarnated ego-self is then in full control and experiences the (physical, astral or whatever) environment, collects data from there and ... well ... lives and learns, all for the benefit of the Higher Self.

So, dreams and lucidventures (OBEs if you like) are in the same continuum of consciousness, you just change focus and state on this wide-ranging continuum, voluntarily or involuntarily. So yes, dreams and lucidventures they are actually THE SAME. A 'lucid dream', however, does not fit into this model for me anymore. For me there are either dream adventures or lucidventures / lucadventures.  8-)

Both are valid and valuable experiences for me because either way can lead to precious insights and even validations of some sort. I had now certain validations as pre-cogs and clairvoyant insights in "normal" dreams, but also a kind of telepathic manifestation and ensuing validation from a lucadventure ("OBE / AP" or I guess you'd call it Mode2 due to the telepathic thing). Therefore I do not believe from my experiences (and that's what you asked for: own experiences) that one side (state/focus) of the same thing (continuum) is "better" or "more real" than the other.

duly noted summer.

Better be. :-D

the answer to the topic title is clearly not the same, obviously...

as i'm sure those on their journey/developement/awakening this will become clear to them...

not all is as it seems...

i would have thought you would know this man :wink:...

good luck

love all

Actually, ether... no, not "obviously".  Sorry, but you've entirely missed the point from the last THREE threads on this subject.

Quote from: Ryan_ on July 15, 2011, 20:34:54
Actually, ether... no, not "obviously".  Sorry, but you've entirely missed the point from the last THREE threads on this subject.

hay, thanx for the reply, good name change man, Xanth/Ryan same to me man :wink:...

actually i said:

"the answer to the topic title is clearly not the same, obviously..."

so your wrong, again :roll:...

good luck

love all

It's Saturday, 16th July 2011, 1.30 pm, and the "My experience seems to indicate so" (more in favour of the opinion that OOBEs and Lucid Dreams are the same) is winning at 33.3%.

8-)

My experiences lead me to believe that dreams and OBEs are nothing more than reference markers on a spectrum of awareness in the non-physical. Lucidity is a secondary characteristic. Where one falls on the awareness spectrum in combination with their lucidity (or lack thereof) dictates the possible nature of the experience.

Quote from: Summerlander on July 15, 2011, 14:31:19
Mode 1 OOBEs - Where environments appear to match the objective world and no anomalies are spotted.  This would be a more advanced version of remote viewing because you experience the sensation of being out of body

and...

Mode 2 OOBEs - Where the environments can display structural anomalies, where reality can outdo the physical one in appearance, and also where things can turn entropic. I consider DILDs and WILDs to be included in this category too.  Again, you can also experience separation here or, in the case of DILDs, you suddenly realise that you are not laying in bed (at least your perception tells you so).

I still don't get why you think the differnence from "LDs" and "OBEs" should be what you call "Mode 1" or "Mode 2". What makes you think so?

If I would give explain it in my terms the difference is that in a LDs you are in Yetzirah of Assiah, while in OBEs you are in Yetzirah (and in the case of what you call "Mode 1", in Assiah or Yetzirah). It is the "plane" that's different, not the "subplane" (or what you call "Mode").

But mine was a rethoric question, in reality. It was just meant to let you notice that the approach to the experience has no term at all in the terminology you (and others, as Raduga) uses because probably thought as having no impact, while, on the contrary, on my experience (and not only mine) the approach is what changes the structure of the experience (i.e. the "plane"), while where you "go", what you call "Mode", it is just a direction, and not the structure itself (that's the most important part, and the difference in what we are talking about here).

Like referring to a street in a city. You care not about the city, thinking it irrelevant, while caring only for the street. Problem is that the street can be there also in other cities.

Quote from: Selea on July 17, 2011, 07:03:57
I still don't get why you think the differnence from "LDs" and "OBEs" should be what you call "Mode 1" or "Mode 2". What makes you think so?

If I would give explain it in my terms the difference is that in a LDs you are in Yetzirah of Assiah, while in OBEs you are in Yetzirah (and in the case of what you call "Mode 1", in Assiah or Yetzirah). It is the "plane" that's different, not the "subplane" (or what you call "Mode").

LOL! :-D  

Selea...first of all, you have massively misunderstood my post and I think you should re-read it.  I don't say it should be and besides I never said Mode 1 = OOBE and Mode 2 = Lucid Dream.  This is what you never seem to be able to get.  I am saying that they are all OOBEs.  In case you haven't noticed there is usually a word in front of the type of mode:

Mode 1 OOBE
Mode 2 OOBE

I think the only one who hasn't understood this so far is you.  Secondly, what you say is your terms aren't really, are they? The terms you just posted are Kabbalistic terms, not yours, and I care not to address them because they are rooted in Judaism and I despise religion altogether. You have to give your opinion based on your EXPERIENCE, not religious belief or esoteric teaching.

On the meaning of Modes...whoever said I was talking about "planes" and "subplanes"?  Whoever said they were places or regions or zones? :?  The Modes I talk about have more to do with perception than anything else, and, as I've said to you before, I never claim to know for sure that separation from the body really occurs.  You are talking to me about something which is so theoretical (such as planes and subplanes) while I have repeatedly mentioned the possibility that Modes might have more to do with the activity in the brain hemispheres according to experiments performed on split-brain subjects.

On the approach to the experience that you talk about.  Of course it changes what you call "plane"!!! Erm...duh!  Belief and expectation come into play... :roll:

In case you haven't noticed, the term Phase is very pragmatic.  There is no real evidence that OOBEs and Lucid Dreams are not the same phenomenon.  But that is not what was intended with this thread and I think you missed the whole point.  This thread is for statistical purposes and an opportunity for people to voice their opinions, not oppose and ridicule the opinions of others to reinforce their beliefs as the absolute truth.

As for your street and city analogy, it made no sense whatsoever, it looks misplaced and it is uncalled for here.  You tend to speak as though you know exactly what one encounters upon entering the Phase.  It's amazing...

By the way...what did you vote for?  If you haven't, do it because I will be locking the poll pretty soon.  And next time, please ask decent questions and make sure you have read my posts properly.

Quote from: Astral316 on July 16, 2011, 14:06:11
My experiences lead me to believe that dreams and OBEs are nothing more than reference markers on a spectrum of awareness in the non-physical. Lucidity is a secondary characteristic. Where one falls on the awareness spectrum in combination with their lucidity (or lack thereof) dictates the possible nature of the experience.

Now this is a more logical way of looking at things...and I can tell this is definitely from experience.   :-)

My experiences indicate that they are different.Not radically different, but different.

When in the RTZ I notice if I drift into a dream environment. I know the feel of the RTZ and notice when that feel is replaced with a dream feel. So I cant accept that LD's are the same as etheric projections.

If you want to say they're the same as astral projections though, I'm fine with that. It's too hard to draw a line location-wise.

But personally I dont reach for my AP journal unless the place's energy felt different to that of my dream environment. I dont get a WOW factor from the energy in my lucid dreams. I do from what I consider astral locations. Also, I dont sense any foreign energy from dream charcters and I definately do from "real people".

To me, saying all these things are the same is like saying SG-1 is the same as the Simpsons. They're both TV shows so I can see where you're coming from but I put them in different categories.

It's all subjective. 

I simply don't understand how this isn't understood...

Quote from: Ryan_ on July 17, 2011, 15:49:10
It's all subjective. 

I think thats about the only thing we all agree on.

Out of curiosity, what, if anything, would constutite being "different" in your opinion? Have you had any non-phyisical experiences that you would classify as being different from a very lucid dream?

how much of this is just people wanting to sound clever,
does any of it help a beginner, or support anybody in there travels

:|


:NoY:

Quote from: NoY on July 17, 2011, 18:19:45
how much of this is just people wanting to sound clever,
does any of it help a beginner, or support anybody in there travels

:|


:NoY:

That's really the end point here... this website is about teaching beginners how to astral project.

Limiting them by telling them that their experience is in "this" or "that" category really doesn't help with that goal.

And seriously... we have people here whom either can't project or who have lots of trouble doing it telling other people what their experiences are!
I'm sorry, but honestly... who the hell are you (not anyone in particular) to tell someone else what their experience was?  You can make suggestions to them, definitely... but TELL THEM?  No... if you're telling anyone anything, you're on the wrong forum.

Let's work together on getting beginners to experience the non-physical, not dividing our time trying to defend our beliefs, because doing that is asinine and helps nobody but yourself.  And that's an ego issue.  Drop the ego... help others before yourself.

Thank you Noy for bringing that up.  :)

Yes, I agree. Feel free to express your opinions but don't force them on others...especially when the experience is not yours. You have no right to tell someone what their non-physical experience was when you are not even 100% sure about your own.

By the way, I have visited my stepfather, who is dead, in an OOBE. He felt sentient and real. He has also surprised me in a lucid dream. Again he felt sentient and real. How characters feel does not determine what is an OOBE and what is a lucid dream. This sounds more like preference to me and a belief for personal comfort. The more you fuel a belief the realer it becomes and let's not forget that anything can be simulated.

Also, in non-lucid dreams characters can seem pretty sentient and convince you that they are real as you are immersed in the plot. Your reason for believing what you believe in is completely baseless to me, blis.

Anyway, it's about time I locked the poll.

Quote from: Summerlander on July 17, 2011, 12:38:38
LOL! :-D 

Selea...first of all, you have massively misunderstood my post and I think you should re-read it.  I don't say it should be and besides I never said Mode 1 = OOBE and Mode 2 = Lucid Dream.  This is what you never seem to be able to get.  I am saying that they are all OOBEs.  In case you haven't noticed there is usually a word in front of the type of mode:

Your thread has a title, isn't it? Then in the thread, to start the poll, you list the "Modes". I know you think they are the same, but still, to start the thread you used a subcategorization by the "modes", so this is the way you would look at the issue if you would have to made a difference. I was referring to this.

Morover, my post was not meant explicity for you, personally, but on a general note. Usually, in fact, many authors refer to what you call "Modes" as if they are the only parameter in there. I tried to let see the thing from another point of view, where also the way you enter (or approach, or execute) the experience (what you call the Phase) create a parameter in there that's usually not either taken in consideration (mostly because these authors know only one approach or way to enter it, so they cannot, obviously, have other parameters outside of it).

Quote from: Summerlander on July 17, 2011, 12:38:38
Secondly, what you say is your terms aren't really, are they? The terms you just posted are Kabbalistic terms, not yours, and I care not to address them because they are rooted in Judaism and I despise religion altogether. You have to give your opinion based on your EXPERIENCE, not religious belief or esoteric teaching.

A) Neither your terms are yours. I used the word "mine" in the sense that I think they were the most appropriate in this case, to explain what I wanted to say. Then, if I really used MY terms, how could you understand them? How would you know of what I'm talking about? You can refer to a terminology only if the one you relate to know it too (and in this case it's why I used the Kabalah one, because it is widely know, at last in the terms).
B) From where they come it doesn't matter. You missed totally the point, as always. Terms are just words, not experiences. I used those terms to evidentiate a point, but you instead preferred to dismiss it altogheter and became all tangled up with the terms I used.
C) My experience I've given, I even said it so. Re-read my post. The point was to make you notice that you don't consider at all the approach to the experience (i.e. how you create it) in your parameters and terminology. Then how can you relate an experience if not with words and terms? What you say makes no sense at all, I'm sorry.

Quote from: Summerlander on July 17, 2011, 12:38:38
On the meaning of Modes...whoever said I was talking about "planes" and "subplanes"?  Whoever said they were places or regions or zones? :?  The Modes I talk about have more to do with perception than anything else, and, as I've said to you before, I never claim to know for sure that separation from the body really occurs.

Why instead of becoming all angry at what I said don't you just read?  You are missing completely the point of what I said and continue grabbing up in this battle of planes vs. not-planes, when it has nothing to do with what I was talking about.

I used the terms "planes" and "sub-planes" as a metaphor to let you understand (hoping at last) that you are missing up a fundamental piece in your "categorization" (whatever that is). Instead (and as you always do) you did care about the terms only, discarding their meanings and their use in the message. Oh, well...

Quote from: Summerlander on July 17, 2011, 12:38:38
You are talking to me about something which is so theoretical (such as planes and subplanes) while I have repeatedly mentioned the possibility that Modes might have more to do with the activity in the brain hemispheres according to experiments performed on split-brain subjects.

A) It is not theorical. It is just that experience (as mine) have let some people see that doing some things some results happens. In this particular case they have seen that the way you approach the "astral" changes the structure of the experience, and the structure of the experience can also have "directions" taken inside. For this they used the term "plane" and "sub-plane" and the terminology in there. The term "plane" to describe the structure, the term "sub-plane" the direction. Terms are just terms, they are not important. Go through them and try to understand their meanings, instead.
B) What they are or not, for the now 1000th time I've said it to you, it's not important.

Quote from: Summerlander on July 17, 2011, 12:38:38
On the approach to the experience that you talk about.  Of course it changes what you call "plane"!!! Erm...duh!  Belief and expectation come into play... :roll:

No, that's the "direction" (and only on the external term if it's casual). The structure it's another thing. Using sleep methods (as you do), offers a structure, using concentration another, and so on.

Quote from: Summerlander on July 17, 2011, 12:38:38
In case you haven't noticed, the term Phase is very pragmatic.  There is no real evidence that OOBEs and Lucid Dreams are not the same phenomenon.  But that is not what was intended with this thread and I think you missed the whole point.  This thread is for statistical purposes and an opportunity for people to voice their opinions, not oppose and ridicule the opinions of others to reinforce their beliefs as the absolute truth.

Where I ridiculed your opinion? You are acting emotively again.

Then, again, I don't care about the "evidence" you talk about, because probably there would never be. What I care is that things are different depending on the way you do them, and this is a fact.

Quote from: Summerlander on July 17, 2011, 12:38:38
As for your street and city analogy, it made no sense whatsoever, it looks misplaced and it is uncalled for here.  You tend to speak as though you know exactly what one encounters upon entering the Phase.  It's amazing...

The street and city analogy was to make you understand that in the way you look at things you care about a general direction, but not from where this general direction come from.

As for what I speak, I tell you what I experience and other people like me experience and what we have found. In this case you, however, was the  one that did not care about the "experience" related in it, but only on the terms used, and now you either pretend that I was the one speaking about theories. If you are the first one caring and looking only at the theoric part, then you cannot blame the other on this approach.

Quote from: Summerlander on July 17, 2011, 12:38:38
By the way...what did you vote for?  If you haven't, do it because I will be locking the poll pretty soon.  And next time, please ask decent questions and make sure you have read my posts properly.

I will no vote because the meaning of the terms as they are don't have the same sense I could give to the words, so my vote could be misleading, one way or another. For example, if I take care of the meaning of the terms on how they are used in the majority of cases then I would vote YES, if I would take care of what the experiences represents in them (and not considering what the terms in general means nowadays) then NO.

I did read your post properly, it is you that never do with mine, or you would have replied something to the point instead of totally missing it and becoming all angry for something that had nothing to do (if not externally and semantics) with what I was trying to let you notice.

P.S: I never asked a question,  it was a rethotic one, not requiring an answer, so it was not question at all.

Quote from: Summerlander on July 17, 2011, 12:38:38Now this is a more logical way of looking at things...and I can tell this is definitely from experience.   :-)

No, that's logical to you just because it is conform to your point of view. You have this bad approach to things that if something relates to your pow then it must be correct, if something is not relating you cannot cope with it, become angry, don't understand nothing of what's being said, and then pretend it's obviously false.

Do you act this way for *everything* you think you know in life? (Now, this is a question).

Quote from: Ryan_ on July 17, 2011, 19:13:34
Limiting them by telling them that their experience is in "this" or "that" category really doesn't help with that goal.

I wonder if people read sometimes instead of pretending they do and just tie themselves around with words instead of the way they are being used. If what you said was not referred to me I apologize, but just in case (and because usually 1+1 = 2):

I say a thing, it becomes all another just because it has to be that way, I see.

But that's a reflection created by yourself about the thing or the thing in itself? Do you ever wonder?

Since, you know, I've reread what I wrote 5 times already and for the death of mine I couldn't see how one can interpret it as a way to imposing something or a way to declare specific "belief systems" or similar. The only way to read it that way is to have already a preconception on what's being written, without neither trying to understand the meaning beyond the terms used. But I guess that since you saw the words "planes" or "sub-planes" in the post you neither either cared about their use or why they were being used, isn't it? It was much simpler to just think "oh, this individual it's using these bogus terms, obviously all it is written it has no sense and it's just an imposition of a belief system", without trying to comprehend the context, am I right?

And this is a thing I've seen in these two years here, over and over again: people that presume and pretend they are more "open minded" and less tied up in "belief systems" usually are the ones that really cannot go beyond them, no matter what. Same as some kind of atheists that, while in theory declaring they should go beyond the concept of God as in the chrisitan view, when hearing the word "God" cannot go beyond the term as being used only in correlation with its christian connotation.

Quote from: Ryan_ on July 17, 2011, 19:13:34And seriously... we have people here whom either can't project or who have lots of trouble doing it telling other people what their experiences are!
I'm sorry, but honestly... who the hell are you (not anyone in particular) to tell someone else what their experience was?  You can make suggestions to them, definitely... but TELL THEM?  No... if you're telling anyone anything, you're on the wrong forum.

Again, the only one "imposing" something here is you, because you pretend to impose that the way you looked at my post it is the way it was. Actually, it was exactly the contrary and, since I always do so, it was meant to help people understanding a point. You naturally missed it, but it doesn't really matters. What I don't usually tolerate, however,  is those people that "defend" others while not really either understanding from what they are "defending" them for. You neithe either really cared to read what I wrote seriously, with no bias to start with, and now you either tell me that I was "telling other people what their experiences are".

In fact, if there are people that REALLY do harm to beginners, they are those that pretend to say what's "real" or not in things they neither either experienced themselves and neither cared to for a personal intellectual approach on the matter, and then pretend to teach others the reality of what they don't either know. People that REALLY do harm to beginners are those that pretend to teach them "how to exit in two days" but then explaining absolutely nothing on what they should do, or they way they should behave to begin a learning process in there, as if that would be a good thing to do. People that REALLY do harm to beginners are those that insist that a thing it's only a way and all the rest, no matter the way you do it, it's the same. People that REALLY do harm to beginners are those that, given the points above, teach a bad habit to them to only care about what they intellectually care to, because all the rest it's obviosuly not "pragmatic" or have little sense, and that throw them in the middle without absolutely no point of reference in there.

The point of my post, btw, was to let understand users (*especially* beginners, in fact) that the way you approach the experience is what changes the structure of the experience and that in the structure there's either a direction (that should be willingly decided, and not on "case"). Btw this simple point is much more important in practice than simply knowing how to "exit", *especially* for a beginner, because they way you approach your work at beginning it is the way you will continue your approach with more "advanced" things, and if you learn to behave without a structured approach in the beginning, you will keep the bad habit till the end, and this will result in an either worse outcome than not learning at all. Without direction and structure you will never have real practical results, only meaningless pieces, interesting maybe, but of little practical value, and those "pieces", outside the structure, would give you an outcome that could do you more harm than good.

It would be like if, for example, if you would strive (paradoxically) to enter the physical body only to find yourself "out" in a late stage of Alzheimer instead of a fully cognitive body. What a great practical value all you experience would have, isn't it? Fun, maybe, at beginning, but only nonsense would come from it, if you want to speak of practical applications, and the "pieces" you acquire will give you a picture that has no sense at all, while giving the outward impression of doing "great things".

What this forum really lacks it is another point of view from just "exit and that's enough" or "exit and experience everything as it comes, then draw your conclusions". If you really care about beginners then let them understand that sometimes having an experience just to have it, it's not the best way to act. Or even better, let them understand that after having the experience there's something more than just "having fun" with it.

A real "scientific" approach is one that explore the experience in a structured way, not on casualities, same as a real learning approach. But maybe people in this forum think that when you go in an academy you are teached to use the tools the way they go by themselves, or on your whim of the moment, without a structured path on the teaching, I don't know.

If you want to act like a moralist, at last know what "unmorality" you fight against. Elsewhere instead of Kant you look as the clochard in the street that yells: "The end is near, repent".

Quote from: NoY on July 17, 2011, 18:19:45
how much of this is just people wanting to sound clever,
does any of it help a beginner, or support anybody in there travels

:|


:NoY:

Oh, it does help beginners, a lot more than just saying "oh, I throw in you in the middle, have fun with it".

in the same way that if you want to teach someone how to swin you don't throw him/her in the middle of the ocean with no points of reference whatsoever.

Well, first Selea, my post wasn't aimed at you.
And for the rest of your post... thank you for the opinions.  :)

Quote from: Summerlander on July 17, 2011, 19:32:38
Your reason for believing what you believe in is completely baseless to me, blis.

Fair enough. I guess we just dont feel energy the same way. I'm always noticing the energy in places and people(physical and non-physical). Different people have a different feel to me.

NoY's right as usual.

I dont know why I even bother reading these threads. Each time I see one I think, "pointless, not going to waste my time". But I always do.

People are going to keep asking the diffence between LD's and OBE's. The question is what are we going to tell them so that we dont keep replaying these same arguments again and again. None of us can claim to know we're right. Maybe we need a sticky outlining the most common views.

Yeah, thank you for the opinions even though your posts are so long and they say so little, Selea.  :-D

Quote from: blis on July 18, 2011, 12:15:46
Fair enough. I guess we just dont feel energy the same way. I'm always noticing the energy in places and people(physical and non-physical). Different people have a different feel to me.

NoY's right as usual.

I dont know why I even bother reading these threads. Each time I see one I think, "pointless, not going to waste my time". But I always do.

People are going to keep asking the diffence between LD's and OBE's. The question is what are we going to tell them so that we dont keep replaying these same arguments again and again. None of us can claim to know we're right. Maybe we need a sticky outlining the most common views.

It's ok.  You believe in what you want.  But there is no need for a sticky.  Look at the poll.  It appears that is the most common view so far.

Quote from: blis on July 18, 2011, 12:15:46
Fair enough. I guess we just dont feel energy the same way.

That's just it.  No two people "feel energy" in the same way.  :)
No two people have the exact same experience with anything.  It's entirely individual, subjective and unique.

I mean, sure, we can describe things to eachother and we might think, "hey, what that person experienced sounds like what I did"... yeah, it may SOUND like it, it might even be REALLY CLOSE too... but in the end, it's still ENTIRELY different. 

Each persons experience is entirely unique to them.  This makes describing this stuff and coming to agreement upon terms and definitions as being *REALLY HARD*.  I mean, look at this thread and the last three... we can't even come to terms on what a Lucid Dream is.  ROFL

From my experiences, they are two sides of the same coin. I've never perceived the real time zone without reality fluctuations. I've become lucid in "dreams" which took me right to the real time zone. I've "rolled" out of my body to the real time zone. I could have been expecting to be in my room or my neighborhood, perhaps subconsciously, and that is why my experience turns out this way. I won't rule out that the RTZ could be, to use an analogy, the subtle body (or energetic counterpart) to physical reality.

I think our spontaneous night dreams are all over the place, or focused into different locals in the non-physical.  Some may be entirely subjective spheres, others somewhere in between, and some even locals which are objective to the inhabitants - or they are OBES in the sense they take place in realms where other consciousnesses creates a degree of objectivity.. Of course these experiences are always being filtered through our minds so there is always a subjective component - i.e, one person may see an ET where another sees an angel.

But yea, in short I don't think there is a fine line between the two. I think we can use lucidity gained in any nonphysical experience as a launchpad to anywhere in the imagination. I'm only speaking from limited experience. My experience may change as I have more experiences.

And that is a very genuine response and great way of looking at things. Shall I unlock the poll temporarily so you can vote?  :-)

I voted "I'm not sure - I have to be neutral."  :lol:

Cool!  Very honest with everyone and yourself.  Well done!  :-D

Let's keep this on-topic please and NOT resorting to personal attacks.
Thanks.

19 July 2011 - 2.37 pm:

Absolutely - 100% = 2 (14.3%)
My experience seems to indicate so = 6 (42.9%)
I'm not sure - I have to be neutral = 2 (14.3%)
My experience seems to indicate two completely different phenomena = 2 (14.3%)
Absolutely NOT! - 100% = 2 (14.3%)

Total Voters: 14

Well, those are the results so far.  I will probably lock it on page five to give others a chance of voting as well as expressing their opinions.  :-)

I don't understand the point of keeping a poll locked? Don't you want to hear everyone's opinion?  :?

yeah SL why ya locking it, ya mis ya Moderators job on AV's or something :-D...

good luck

love all

Quote from: c0sm0nautt on July 19, 2011, 10:07:39
I don't understand the point of keeping a poll locked? Don't you want to hear everyone's opinion?  :?

It's not locked any more.  I thought I'd lock it on page five so that this thread doesn't go on forever.  But if you don't want me to lock it I won't.  :-)

Quote from: ether2 on July 19, 2011, 10:50:58
yeah SL why ya locking it, ya mis ya Moderators job on AV's or something :-D...

good luck

love all

Nah...I'm past it.  I wasn't a very good one anyway.  If I was I would have been picked as a Mod here already and I've already been told my CV is not good.  :-D