OOBE - the easy way

[Xanth]

@Xanth: I was starting to suspect that may be what you were all referring to There's a lot of new vocabulary for me to take in - I'm more used to the astral body separation type talk than this, and all the focus areas are new to me, so yeah... Confused (Still can't quite wrap my head around the LD vs OBE debate either. So many opinions.) Thanks for clarifying. I think I need to scratch my head and read a little more to figure out what I've been doing, lol.

Yup!  It's just all everyone's separate metaphors for how they describe their exits and such.

An important skill I find to have is being able to sort through the metaphors others use and connect them to your own.  For example, like above, I can take someone mentioning that they do "WILDs" on a regular basis to mean that they're extremely proficient in what I call "Phasing". 

I think you're doing great. 

[bluelily]

@Xanth, that's it, metaphors. I still don't know what the objective process really is - people experience such different things and different from mine. I'm not sure how to even tell whether how the process tends to work for me is a simple shift in consciousness (i.e. phasing) or a shift from one body to the other with me missing out on parts of the process...

So I'm hoping to figure all that out eventually. I'm familiar with 'my' process but it's kind of old data from before I stopped practicing, it's been at least a year now since my last OBE of any kind. These days I'm still stuck in the pre-blackout stages, but I haven't been at it that long. Just don't want to create my own answers. But it'll be interesting to see if the phasing approach leads to a different exit method than what I'm used to Sounds about the same but I'll have to see.

[Contenteo]

An important skill I find to have is being able to sort through the metaphors others use and connect them to your own.  For example, like above, I can take someone mentioning that they do "WILDs" on a regular basis to mean that they're extremely proficient in what I call "Phasing".

I like that Xanth. That is so true.

I developed my mental model by adhering to the one Monroe set forth and continuously asking, hmm what did he mean about "this" or "that." And constantly looking for correlations. Tom's F10 post helps put a solid foundation in there too. From there it is simply experiencing getting to F18. And then you know all the parts. I made a conceptual framework to help solidify my understanding of these lower realms. I mean this guy founded the discipline. You know he got the lower level parts of it spot on at least. You have to trust the founder to at least that degree. It just took a little bit of research and trust and bingo, it's grand, you can interpret all the metaphors you want because you can but this experience into a sequential model. Yeah, some deviates a little, but the core tenets capture the key success factors.

My Old Conceptual Framework
http://i1109.photobucket.com/albums/h438/Robert_Carbone/Contenteos2011ConceptualFramework.jpg

Cheers,
Contenteo

[todd421757]

I had two obe's in the last two days. One was with a deep sleep paralysis state and one was with a partial sleep paralysis state. There were significant differences between the two experiences.

Deep sleep paralysis:
-- very mild vibrations
-- very easy exit separation (feels like just falling out of your body in a very easy way)
-- less intense sounds upon separation
-- less intense heart beat and breathing

Partial sleep paralysis:
-- very intense vibrations
-- took more will and energy to separate
-- louder sounds at the moment of separation
-- felt my heart pounding and rapid breathing

Both projective experiences were good in there own unique way. Sometimes I like the real intense separation symptoms and sometimes I prefer the milder sensations.

[Tessie]

I am enjoying this thread to no end!

I a beginner in that I have experience spontaneity SP & OBE's but have only recently been able to induce them AND put a 'vocabularic' context to them wia this forum and certain books. So far, if I induce or experience what I understand to be called SP, I can 'lift/float' out. But I think it ist true exciting how many methods there are for this.

It ist great to be a part of a community vhere every one appears to have a common objective/end-goal but yet are so accepting of other own experiences & methods in achieving said objective. Vhere I hail from in the world, acceptance is not common-place. By read this, anything is possible & I vill continue read, learn, experience the astral (so to spek) in new ways.

Again, I am wery much a beginner so I haven't anything to add other than a thank you insofar - particularly to those who vork to clairfy vocabulary & continually explain to newcomers that there are many viable method!

XO

Tessie

Post S. Pardon my English again... I have trouble still to write non-phonetical. Sorry...

[Quentin]

I just love this forum 

Just to ad to the first post, I also use that method of projection quite frequently.
The only difference is that I don't stay awake for an hour before trying to get back
to sleep. I just turn around in bed and focus on my breathing to keep my mind awake.
It works 90% of the time.

Thank you everyone for sharing your knowledge  It's great to be here!

[Major Tom]

@Xanth, that's it, metaphors. I still don't know what the objective process really is - people experience such different things and different from mine. I'm not sure how to even tell whether how the process tends to work for me is a simple shift in consciousness (i.e. phasing) or a shift from one body to the other with me missing out on parts of the process...

Personally, I'm eager to get rid of the term phasing as it is often used now, and it will eventually, because phasing has always been primarily a theory and metaphor, not a method.

It was mostly simply introduced as a theory and metaphor by Monroe, not really as a verb for doing something (i.e. "to phase").

Some redefining is sorely needed, as right now, a lot of people are confused, for good reason.

For example, the classic OBE is phasing in a theoretical sense, since after you all, you are "phasing out" of the physical during a regular OBE.

So there is a disconnect between the theoretical and practical use of the term. In the latter case it is considered different from the classic OBE, while in the former, they are one and the same thing.

So something has to give, which in my opinion is the the term phasing as a particular method for moving beyond the physical body.

Where the practical usage of the term is useful I think, is to relate it directly to the "quick-switch", as originally described by Monroe.

Here, one environment was quickly replaced by another by moving your attention after the out of body state had already been established. Usually, this is done most effectively from the void.

In those circumstances, there is indeed a sense of "phasing", and the term describes the process quite well.

However, to use the term for anything that occurs before the out of body state has been established, in terms of practice, leads to confusion, because it cannot really be distinguished from the classical OBE on a theoretical level. It also does not describe the process that well.

So a new terminology is needed, to distinguish between the various transitions that may lead to the out of body state, where eventually you find yourself at a different location than that of your physical body, or at least, you are no longer synchronized with it.

In the past six years, I spend a lot of OBE time trying to figure it out, and also to make sense of it on a conceptual level.

In the end, I came to conclusion that the only way to properly conceptualize the experience, without conflict between theory and practice, is to distinguish between parasomatic and asomatic transitions.

During a parasomatic transition, body awareness is maintained during the transition, which leads to what many think of the "classical" OBE.

During an asomatic transition, no body awareness is maintained during the transition, which leads to a more visual type of "exit."

For more info on this (yes, I'm still shamelessly plugging):

http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/welcome_to_book_reviews/explorations_in_consciousness_book_release-t36545.0.html

[bluelily]

^
Good post.

What confused me about the term "phasing" (quite possibly my fault and nothing to do with the explanations, I'll admit) was whether it referred to the consciousness shift i.e. basically teleportation out of the body, or the technique I've also seen referred to as "noticing" (from the beginning until fully out). At first I thought it meant the latter. Still not really sure and I'm not sure people use the term in the same way.

I agree it would be useful to have consistent and intuitive vocabulary to distinguish between the classic astral body projection vs the consciousness jump method of moving around and getting out in the first place. It's confusing for me and I've gone through the process before - I can only imagine how confusing it must be for beginners.

[Major Tom]

The term is used in multiple ways, which is what makes it confusing.

It's used to refer to a metaphor or theory, a method, and an experience, and all three are quite different.

I think the term is okay as a theory or metaphor of moving through consciousness. As an experience, it also sometimes fits, in terms of the quick-switch.

Not sure whether it offers anything new as a method if all it involves is noticing.

[Szaxx]

Hi,
Being conversant with electronics and its inherent terminology. The phase state is referenced to your conciousness based on its location between the physical 0 degrees and astral 180 degrees.
This is ok in principle but no one has defined any values in between these states with a reference numerically attached to any of the recognised signposts.
This could be addressed but would cause further complications to anyone unfamiliar with the terminology.
It would make perfect sense to ascribe a percentage to this with referenced points like vibrations placed accordingly.
Who would like this job?
Everyone understands percentage so.....

[Major Tom]

Actually, Monroe already did that in his second book Far Journeys, in terms of percentages, even before he introduced the phasing metaphor.

In some ways, I suspect Monroe's second book is more in line with his personal thinking than his last.

[catmeow]

Hi,
Being conversant with electronics and its inherent terminology. The phase state is referenced to your conciousness based on its location between the physical 0 degrees and astral 180 degrees.
This is ok in principle but no one has defined any values in between these states with a reference numerically attached to any of the recognised signposts.
This could be addressed but would cause further complications to anyone unfamiliar with the terminology.
It would make perfect sense to ascribe a percentage to this with referenced points like vibrations placed accordingly.
Who would like this job?
Everyone understands percentage so.....

I don't think a percentage (or angle) can be assigned to each signpost. That's because such correlations do not exist. The signposts do not all lie on one simple continuous "phase scale" imo. And what signposts do we assign to angles greater than 180 degrees?

I don't think the term is an accurate model for any mechanism which might be taking place. Some people report being fully conscious in the astral, whilst their physical body retains consciousness too, carrying out complex tasks, eg taking a driving test. How do such dual and even multiple consciousness experiences fit into the phasing model? They don't!

From an engineering point of view, it's an appealing metaphor. I'm an engineer myself. I'm actually attracted to the model. For example we would have a "phase relationship" between any two realities. But in practice it isn't that simple. The universe isn't that simple. It seems that people are constantly trying to find really simple models or metaphors for the large spectrum of astral experiences. Hence we get phasing and focus levels. But it just isn't that simple. There are so many aspects to the astral experience.

So I just think of the term "phasing" as a metaphor for a switch in consciousness, nothing more. I don't see it as a practical model for any actual mechanism which might be taking place.

[catmeow]

Hi MT, it's been a little while!

In some ways, I suspect Monroe's second book is more in line with his personal thinking than his last.

So what are you saying about his last book!

[Major Tom]

Hey Catmeow  . I guess some people stick around for decades, right?

I love his last book, since he really pushed the bar there on a personal level, moving beyond what we generally refer to as human consciousness.

But there are also some inconsistencies with his previous work I think. From what I remember reading his biography, he had difficulty completing the book, struggling with several things, including on a conceptual level perhaps.

What stands out for me, for example, is how in his second book he considered the influence of the time-space continuum to slowly diminish as you move further out in the wider of spectrum of consciousness.

He puts it there in terms of percentages, which is attractive in some ways. It even includes a nullpoint, which I find very interesting, since I have encountered it once.

Yet, in his third book, the notion of focus 27 pops up, which is very "physical" in many ways, and seems to go against the idea of diminishing time-space influence in his second book.

I'm not really sure what is happening there, or what went through his mind in doing that, but it conflicts in some ways.

Maybe it is because he did need some outside help finishing the book, or he was trying to placate the general crowd, which may have put some pressure on him. I don't know.

He was in a tough position, often sacrificing his own personal development for the sake of helping others.

In either case, the inconsistency has never been quite explained.

My sense is that he considered it quite real as he experienced, but at the same struggled to allign it with his previous work. But I'm only speculating here.

He left a great legacy either way, far surpassing the abilities of anyone else I know, and I think he is still underestimated.

Nice to see you still here btw  

MT

[todd421757]

It would make perfect sense to ascribe a percentage to this with referenced points like vibrations placed accordingly.

Yes, this is a great idea. I have been working on it for awhile. I think this type of road map could make projections easily understandable in a scientific format that could be reproducible among other projectionists.

When you subtract all the visualizations and hallucinations, you are left with the core OBE phenomena that is actually reproducible among other projectionists when you know the exact sequence of events. This could be studied scientifically, just like they have studied the stages of sleep.

All they would need to scientifically prove the OBE phenomena is a study of the brain waves along with sensitive electromagnetic equipment to pick up changes to the energy body. Maybe someday this will happen.

In the meantime, I would welcome anyone to start up a thread that discusses this projection road map in detail, and others can add input to it. Once the entire road map along with how it relates to different projective phenomena is known, then others can easily see where they are at along the road map. Then the new forum members can decide what experience they would like to have, then they can follow the particular road map for that experience.

Contenteo has a phasing road map on astral pulse, he posted a while ago. It is very good. Adding other road maps for all the possible projections would be greatly helpful to others.

[Major Tom]

Yes, this is a great idea. I have been working on it for awhile. I think this type of road map could make projections easily understandable in a scientific format that could be reproducible among other projectionists.

But like I said, has this not already been done before?

I'd have to agree with Catmeow, that the actual "mechanism" will turn out to be quite complex, not easily reducible to a percentage.

It's okay as a working model or metaphor, but I don't think anyone really knows which way it will turn out at this point, except for pointing in potentially fruitful directions.

Personally, I feel that the only way forward is going back to the experience, which tends to be too quickly sacrificed when it comes to theory.

Only then, you arrive at something which can be called a "theory" perhaps.

It's messy, unclean, and dirty, but quite beautiful at the same time when you get into it.

MT

[todd421757]

But like I said, has this not already been done before?

I don't entirely trust Monroe's classification. The reason is because Monroe said towards the beginning of his second book that he lost the ability to project using his methods from his first book. This leads me to believe he cannot reproduce the exact state he got in the first book.

Waldo Vieria in his 1200 page "Projectiology" book probably has the best classification of all the possible projection phenomena. Unfortunately, the book is hard to navigate since he came up with his own nomenclature.

[Major Tom]

I think you are referring to Monroe mentioning somewhere that the Hemi Sync technology did not work for him, because he developed it, and therefore his analytical mind was triggered everytime he listened to it?

This consequently interfered with his ability to get into the right state.

That is something completely different from him losing any sort of ability.

[todd421757]

Major Tom,

You're right. I went back to the book and re-read it. He lost the ability to project with Hemi Sync.

[Major Tom]

Hi Todd,

It's an interesting phenomenon I think, where too much attention to the process tends to interfere with the process.

Ofcourse, he never lost his ability, but he couldn't do it with the technology he developed himself.

The way he developed the technology is an interesting thing itself. He started with sleep learning, perhaps with the idea of finding some commercial use, playing tapes so perhaps he would remember it the next day.

In essence, he screwed up his natural sleep cycles. From my perspective, it is not that surprising that he started to experience OBEs much later.

What continues to baffle me, however, is how he got to be so very good at it with extremely high levels of lucidity.

So in that sense, he did appear to be a "natural" of sorts, as well as what he with did with it afterwards of course.

MT

[todd421757]

Hi Todd,

It's an interesting phenomenon I think, where too much attention to the process tends to interfere with the process.

I think this phenomenon happens with many of us here with our techniques. I notice many people have great success with a particular technique for a little while, then the technique somehow stops working for them.

The only way I found to avoid this situation is to change up to a different technique for each day. It has improved my success.

[catmeow]

I love his last book, since he really pushed the bar there on a personal level, moving beyond what we generally refer to as human consciousness.

But there are also some inconsistencies with his previous work I think. From what I remember reading his biography, he had difficulty completing the book, struggling with several things, including on a conceptual level perhaps.
...
I'm not really sure what is happening there, or what went through his mind in doing that, but it conflicts in some ways.

Hi MT, thanks for that very detailed reply!

I was a little shocked, having read Bob Monroe's first book many years ago, to look at the follow ups, years later and to see such radical changes in substance and style. It is a little suspicious. Never the less I have no doubt that he is describing real experiences. It may be that he was pressurised by his publishers to "sex them up" a bit for the popular market.

There is also a question mark over his first OOBE experiences. In his first book he describes these as occurring spontaneously, after experiencing stomach cramps (I think). However, there is an early publication in which BM admits that his first OOBE was drug induced. I tried to find the article on the www but couldn't, so it's just something in the back of my mind, which I seem to remember.

So a couple of question marks there. However, if there are inconsistencies and question marks, it doesn't matter to me. The books are still factually based imho. I remember reading "Journeys Out Of The Body" as a teenager, and being captivated by it. It was ground breaking and packed with information. There was no other book like it at the time. Being scientific myself, his analytic style really appealed to me.

Bob Monroe was really the father of this whole field. He is still one of the greats, and deserves huge credit for driving this field along.

[Major Tom]

Hi Catmeow,

Yes, there was a book or article by a scientist where that claim was made. Monroe has always denied this was the case, however.

The biography by Ronald Russel goes deeper into that affair, which is a really interesting read.

I agree it was ground breaking, and I still come across original ideas in his books that I had not noticed before.

TM