Astral Phasing and WILDs

[Blackstream]

I posted this awhile ago (months), but I never got a response, so I'll try it again.

When I look over the techniques for Astral Phasing and one of the techniques for inducing a WILD (Wake Induced Lucid Dream), they seem completely identical.  In both you stare at hypnogogic imagry until you are pulled into a scene/dream/astral place.  So what I'm wondering is, what's the difference between Astral Phasing and inducing a WILD?  Is there some fundamental difference between the two techniques, or is Astral Phasing based off of the assumption that dreams really take place in the Astral Realms?

Any thoughts would be appreciated, thanks.

[Frank]

Hello:

Phasing is not so much a technique but a term that signifies the entrance into or, more to the point, the focusing within, a particular model of consciousness. This model of consciousness is somewhat different from the more traditional "astral planes" model. The original model was founded by a chap called Robert Monroe, and I have extended it yet further to encompass an even more widely ranging view of subjective reality.

The big problem with this whole thing, is you cannot objectively experience subjective reality. What we do, then, is create a model of that reality and present it to ourselves (and to others) in an objective sense for the purposes of our understanding. This translation is not something we have to "think" about to do. We do it automatically due to it being an action we know very well from our experiences within physical (i.e. objective) reality. In fact, our whole sense of physical being could be said to be a manifestation of the culminations of our actions in translation between the subjective and the objective (in terms of reality).

The other big problem stems from the fact that, it is my contention, the early "explorers" let's say, did not actually realise that what they were viewing was a model of the underlying subjective reality, and not the reality itself! In other words, they looked at the map and thought it was the actual terrain. An understandable mistake I suppose given their limited understanding.

In order to begin to comprehend the differences you first have to realise what a dream actually is. Primarily, a dream is an objective translation of our engagement within subjective reality. In other words, you could say it is a kind of private "model" of consciousness that we have created on the fly, so to speak. Whereas, when we project consciously, what we are engaging is a group model. Which is why there is no real difference between a dream and an "obe". It just comes down to respective levels of conscious awareness and whose model of consciousness you engage in: your own, or someone else's.

Yours,
Frank

[Blackstream]

Thanks for the explaination Frank  Now, I have another question.  How does one using the exact same phasing technique for wilds or for astral phasing choose whether they go into a personal model or a group model?  (And should you go into a group model, how do you know that you aren't in a personal model of a group model of this socalled subjective reality? )

Now, I will have to disagree with you on one thing.  I refuse to believe that the astral is subjective reality.  In all cases that I've seen so far, things that seem random or arbitrary only seemed that way because we didn't completely understand what was going on.  Once we got all the factors in order, once we see the bigger picture, we are not only able to figure out what is really going on, but do stuff with the data we couldn't do before.

A few examples of this, the most obvious one being the weather.  Before we got the ability to moniter the weather, it sure seemed like the weather was pretty random.  It rained one day and shined the next, with pretty much no warning.  People prayed to gods, and had no idea that the weather is really affected by fronts (but the exact nature of how fronts move around is not out of our ability to understand, but outside of our ability to predict due to us not being able to know all factors invovled, as that would require us to factor in every butterfly wing )

Another thing that may seem arbitrary is when a computer generates a random number.  Run the same program over and over and it generates a different number everytime.  Random?  No.  What it is really doing in most cases is using the clock's timer as a seed in a mathematical formula to generate a number, and since the clock goes by ticks (which are like 18.2 times a second, and count sequentially, this gives the appearance of randomness when in fact it isn't.

If 2 people see the same thing in our own objective reality, they can and do report seeing different things.  One example would be a video shown to people of a black guy in a suit mugging a white guy.  People reported after watching the video that they remember seeing a white guy mugging a black guy.

I too remember arguing with a girl over what something in a picture was. We both saw the same exact picture yet I saw swords and she saw something else.  I turned out to be right, but that's another story.

Now there are different interpretations and models of reality in which these subjects experienced, however there is still one underlying truth as to what really happened.

This is what I believe the underlying truth of the astral has to be.  The reason we think the reality behind the astral is subjective is because we don't see the big picture.  Perhaps we aren't capable of seeing the big picture in our current state.  I know I can't see in 4 dimensions.  It's possible that 4d senses are needed to understand objective reality in the astral. Combining the apparent heavily thought influenced environment of the astral with everyone seeing things in their own way, and the butterfly effect of thoughts in the astral making everything seeming chaotic, random, and subjective to the viewer.  After all, 2 people seeing the same thing in the astral will probably see different things when they recall it.

From what I can gather about the astral, the fact that our thoughts influence what we percieve in the astral is what makes the experience seem subjective.  However, there are objective things in the astral, such as beings like you and I, and thoughtforms, although mallible, are most likely objective in a sense as well.  If we had 4d cameras and the such that could peer into the astral, no doubt we too could see the bigger picture and see what is really going on when Joe goes to X and sees a forest and Sue goes to X and sees a desert.

I could go into detail about why I refuse to believe in subjective reality, but let's just leave it at that  And yes I realize this isn't going to change anyone's mind, but I did want to give my reasoning for why I believe what I believe.