Tom Campbell

[Lumaza]

Then by all means, worry about it. Do something about it. Perhaps in some years you will come to believe something else and worry about that. So your life becomes worrying, searching, and doing. Sounds like your not alone. Sounds like me!

That should say "Don't worry about it, instead do something about it". There is no need to worry. Your life is all about experiencing and reacting to said experiences. The way you react shows whether or not you received the true message from the experience or not.

Some hear about Astral Projection and think "wow this would be cool to do". They put a weekend of work into it, see no results and move on to the next "flavor of the day". Others awaken to it and see it for all it can offer. They learn everything they can about and apply the time and effort that it takes to be successful with it and still others will go for the "full Monty". They will attempt to delve as deep as they can. They will learn how to be somewhat proficient in navigating the new realms they find themselves in. They will engage in grounding techniques to lengthen their own "other realm" experiences. They may even go as far as reaching out to teach others as many people on the Astral Pulse do. It all has to do with your current mindset and if you are willing and ready to "allow" this new way of thinking into your reality or not. Once you do though you open yourself up to extraordinary adventures. This is and always has been a personal Journey. This is the reason that we get so many different perceptions on what is "really" occurring from so many different people. A Scientist views it through the eyes of a Scientist. A Guru from the eyes of a Guru and so on. Robert Monroe perceived it in "frequencies". But his occupation involved frequencies and the understanding of them. Tom Campbell being a Physicist saw it through the eyes of a Physicist.

[Bluebird]

the personality that I had was completely different from my personality here.

This is fascinating! I always thought whatever state of awareness I would be in, I would always feel the me...or the personality of me, underneath it all.
Well how then, did you know you were you?

Why does a insect not show the intelligence of a Human? It all has to do with the size and capability of the filter/computer and what their current "vessel" will be physically able to do. Are they conscious as well? Does every living thing have consciousness or is it more like is every either living or thing period consciousness itself? These things we will never know until one day we find ourselves again devoid of any kind of "vessel" and just "are" once more.

And another epiphany I had when reading your post, is that, this sate of is-ness that is so rare, is our core experience while inhabiting an insect? After all, an ant body is not much of a vessel.

Could it be that an anthill is just a million enlightened souls digging in the dirt?  [edit: I forgot to put a smiley face behind this one]

[Bluebird]

Then by all means, worry about it. Do something about it. Perhaps in some years you will come to believe something else and worry about that. So your life becomes worrying, searching, and doing. Sounds like your not alone. Sounds like me!

That should say "Don't worry about it, instead do something about it". There is no need to worry.

I agree, I'm not telling anyone to worry. I'm just being practical. Most often the motivation for wanting to know about the afterlife is fear.

Your life is all about experiencing and reacting to said experiences. The way you react shows whether or not you received the true message from the experience or not.

Yes your reaction shows if you can see the truth in an experience. That truth, is that the experience is nothing. You provide the truth to it. In fact you don't need experiences at all. This is the state if is-ness.

[Lumaza]

This is fascinating! I always thought whatever state of awareness I would be in, I would always feel the me...or the personality of me, underneath it all.
Well how then, did you know you were you?

When reading through my post above the thought came to my mind that I wonder if this is what is actually responsible for "possession". Could it be that a person from another reality is in conscious control of another person in another reality. I became I was me I guess because I was aware of being in a another body period. That's kind of hard to explain. But the people I saw, the place I was living, things like that were always different. Many times I found myself in life and death predicaments that this other me had gotten me into and it seemed like I was becoming aware at a very crucial time in the scenario.

And another epiphany I had when reading your post, is that, this sate of is-ness that is so rare, is our core experience while inhabiting an insect? After all, an ant body is not much of a vessel.

Could it be that an anthill is just a million enlightened souls digging in the dirt?

I think the ant in this case would also have this "filter", otherwise it wouldn't be able to have it's "ant" life experience. But I don't remember ever being an ant, so I really can't answer that question, lol.

[Lumaza]

In fact you don't need experiences at all. This is the state if is-ness.

That is why we need this "filter". We came here to experience and learn from those experiences. Could you imagine everyone and everything here being in the state of constant "is-ness". That's not why we incarnate in any one of the many realms we could find ourselves in.

The state of "is-ness" that one will find themselves in would be the opportunity to finally assess all that was learned and experienced as the previous incarnated body.

[Bluebird]

That is why we need this "filter". We came here to experience and learn from those experiences. Could you imagine everyone and everything here being in the state of constant "is-ness". That's not why we incarnate in any one of the many realms we could find ourselves in.

The state of "is-ness" that one will find themselves in would be the opportunity to finally assess all that was learned and experienced as the previous incarnated body.

Yes, and I have seen things with this perspective my whole life. Even though I understood this concept early on (one only needs to read one of a million books to be exposed to it) I had to keep hearing it and reading about it. I thought somehow I could get "there" quicker if I only did things correctly or better than I was doing them at the moment.

I think that's the problem I have with people like Tom Campbell or William Buhlman standing up and proclaiming the way. It tends to make people question the validity of their own experience.
I don't think you get as much out of your experience when you think it is "wrong" and someone else has the correct way to experience...if only you could experience things like that...

On the other hand, I think teachers are important and its not the message of the teacher I have a problem with, it the way people interpret the message, judge the message, then proclaim the importance of the message.

Everything is a teacher and everything has a message, and no one thing has any significance over another. It is happening and that is all.

[Szaxx]

I'm 9 posts behind so I'll start here...

I don't think it's being experienced via NDEs though. I think the person that is having the NDE is still too close to their current physical live and it's mindset and conditioning, as in beliefs and things like that, to be able to experience what it's like to just "be" again.

The illness reference I made previously is where the pain in my case became extreme and the physical world faded into total blackness. No sight no sounds or touch etc. I was alone in a singular existence of pure being, I simply 'WAS'. It's not the void either, there you have perceptions and thoughts manifest. Nothing but unalterable blackness, no amount of will or intent created anything. I was alone and thats where the idea of a core initiated from. It's also in your awareness when close to the source. You are, then connect and you become.
The NDE'rs are in an experience or suddenly become aware in an experience. Im not sure if its the etheric or what but some of the NDE'rs describe my early pre-school experiences of things very well, before hitting the tunnel and opening up their personal journey.
You've never been alone until you experience this.

[Lumaza]

I think that's the problem I have with people like Tom Campbell or William Buhlman standing up and proclaiming the way. It tends to make people question the validity of their own experience.
I don't think you get as much out of your experience when you think it is "wrong" and someone else has the correct way to experience...if only you could experience things like that...

But see that's why Tom's book is called "My Big Toe". It's his own personal conclusions. He states often that "you" have to come to your own. He sees nothing wrong with being skeptical. All he does is describes and explains everything from what "he" has personally experienced. William seems to have more of a direct approach though.  But as I said, I respect what they have to say and definitely approve of their videos. I use their teachings and videos often as a "reference" links for new members here. Especially Tom's talks on fear, which is something that "must" be confronted to be able to "allow" a shift in consciousness to occur.

On the other hand, I think teachers are important and its not the message of the teacher I have a problem with, it the way people interpret the message, judge the message, then proclaim the importance of the message.

Everything is a teacher and everything has a message, and no one thing has any significance over another. It is happening and that is all.

I have listened to some other Authors that state it's basically their way or the highway. One that comes to mind is Dr. Bruce Goldberg. I have personally heard him say on a radio station state that his was "the only way". I didn't like that at all.

I like to help to teach how to attain the "shift". There are many ways to do it. People can use my techniques or any other techniques from others to start with, but soon they will adapt to what works for them. You can find a number of them here on the Astral pulse in the "stickies" section of the sub forums. What you experience there is for "you" yourself to experience. This is the reason that I don't share my own adventures here. If I do, I normally use them as "examples" of what could be.

[Lumaza]

You are, then connect and you become.

...and the Quote of the Day award goes to Szaxx!!!!!!!!!!      

[Szaxx]

The point of life for me Is to reunite the motion bound soul with the motionless infinite source  and whan you get the experience of that you realize what it means to express the perfect qualitys of spirit or source. But after that experience you open your eyes and your back to just you.  But its an. Amazing feeling because then your whole life becomes about changing your outer self (the feeling of indaviduality and free will)  to reflect that inner perfectness  that you know exists 

The source appears motionless?
Not sure what you've experienced here. It's anything but motionless from a mental state. I've only ever connected in a mental state of mind. It's beyond form the closer you appear to get. The individuality melts into it and the billions of cores connect overloading our ability to comprehend. The journey is very peaceful, its pure bliss but that's not the source itself. It appears to be emanated like sunlight to a plant. It radiates this unconditional love and you become almost possessed by it. Any darkness inside of you would burn away.
You're correct on the wanting to emulate the inner peace. It almost infects you in a very positive way. Anyone becoming close would resonate with this feeling, words fail.

[Bluebird]

You are, then connect and you become.

...and the Quote of the Day award goes to Szaxx!!!!!!!!!!      

I second that! A primordial statement, way out of my experience, but I can almost feel it.

But see that's why Tom's book is called "My Big Toe". It's his own personal conclusions. He states often that "you" have to come to your own. He sees nothing wrong with being skeptical.

I hear you, I've watched a lot of his videos. I'm not really pointing the finger at him. He was just on the tip of my tongue (fingers) when I was trying to make a point.

I like to help to teach how to attain the "shift". There are many ways to do it. People can use my techniques or any other techniques from others to start with, but soon they will adapt to what works for them. You can find a number of them here on the Astral pulse in the "stickies" section of the sub forums. What you experience there is for "you" yourself to experience. This is the reason that I don't share my own adventures here. If I do, I normally use them as "examples" of what could be.

I know and I appreciate your help. I haven't forgot about the exercise you told me to do. I started keeping a dream journal. Its pretty weird. I am discovering I have a lot of dreams based in my home town. I'm sure that will help me get lucid again.

[Xanth]

Here is a new video put out by Tom which answers a lot of the questions posed in this thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0FuXKHzE2c

[Lumaza]

 Thank You for that link Xanth. I enjoy listening to all of Tom's videos.

We have corresponded back and forth in the last 4 years, but when I asked this question, I never received any reply. I asked him "Why would I still experience a "full separation" while allowing Sleep Paralysis to peak, when I have already learned and practice successfully often the technique of Phasing. I used to completely buy in to his theories on non physical exploration and through Phasing I found I wasn't separating from anything. But then I started having and still do have what appears to be full OBEs, with the actual real feeling of a physical separation.

That is the reason I have my doubts. I practice Phasing often, actually to the point of just being able to close my eyes sometimes and being "there". So I can't see why I still have to experience full body separations. During those I do not and I want to make sure this is understood, I never intend to go anywhere nor do I attempt to exit at all. I just awaken in SP and see it through. Then I feel separation occurring on it's own. He constantly states that people don't "need to or have to" separate anything. Then why am I still experiencing a separation?

I wish I had Facebook so I could actually ask him there myself. But I had Facebook in the past and have no interest in opening up a account there again.

[Xanth]

Tom doesn't seem to interact much on facebook these days.  I don't think I've seen an actual post from him in a very long time now. 

As for your question, I obviously can't answer for Tom... but...
In that video link I posted, one of the first things he talks about is the "intellectual" level vs the "being" level.  I know you understand the two concepts very well. 
Perhaps this is just some part of projection that is known to you on the intellectual level, yet hasn't made it entirely to your being level? 

I can apply a bit of logic to this... the fact you experience projecting both ways (with separation and without), it reinforces the idea that the separation isn't required or you (or anyone really) would never be able to phase like we do. 

It's just a thought.  I know you're MUCH more advanced at this than most people.  So who knows really. 

Do you only get the separation sensations when you awake in SP? 

[Lumaza]

Tom doesn't seem to interact much on facebook these days.  I don't think I've seen an actual post from him in a very long time now.

Thank You, I didn't know that. Last I had heard a couple of years ago when I was on Facebook, Tom was very active.  

As for your question, I obviously can't answer for Tom... but...
In that video link I posted, one of the first things he talks about is the "intellectual" level vs the "being" level.  I know you understand the two concepts very well.  
Perhaps this is just some part of projection that is known to you on the intellectual level, yet hasn't made it entirely to your being level?

I have listened to that recent video 2 times now. 2 and half hours of a video really isn't a lot to me. I normally listen to 3-4 hours of  radio talk shows, like Coast to Coast or Midnight in the Desert at night now.
The way I understood what he was saying about the "intellectual level" and the "being" levels were that these levels are experienced in further progression with this skill in general. First we go in with our current "mindset", we can call that the "intellectual", always needing to know why and how, then after awhile we kind of progress or evolve into the next level or next mindset of just allowing and "being. There seems to be all kinds of progressions that we will experience with "non ordinary states of consciousness", as Stanislav Grof would put it.

I can apply a bit of logic to this... the fact you experience projecting both ways (with separation and without), it reinforces the idea that the separation isn't required or you (or anyone really) would never be able to phase like we do.

Hmm, that is rather vague though. I enjoy Phasing. I had a period due to my "ailment" that made it almost impossible to do. I say almost impossible, because I learned where there is a will there is a way and I just had to find that "new way". But in the meantime my Lucid Dreams began to ramp up. I saw this as another form of progression. First there was the my 3 night experience back in 2011. That created the curiosity to learn more. Then came Phasing, then came me becoming aware of my Dreams, then came me becoming lucid in those Dreams and learning how to navigate those areas. Next came awakening in full SP and spontaneously exiting the body. I have experienced OBEs throughout my whole life, but I became aware only of the actual separation in the past when I was young and that scared me like nothing else. I didn't have any memory recall of where it led to. Now in one each of these "modes" of exploration I found all kinds of progressions as well. Soon I am going to be creating a actual thread on all of this. But at the time I am dealing with a very trying circumstance. My beloved is very sick and it's consuming all of my thoughts and energy right now.  

Do you only get the separation sensations when you awake in SP?  

Yes. When I first began to learn about Astral Projection, I put a lot of time and effort into attempting to physically exit my body. I had a couple of close calls, whereas I became aware of my room and things with my eyes closed. But I soon tired of that technique. Frank's posts really helped me to understand that I didn't need to exit anything, so did Tom's videos. I soon moved on to Phasing and never looked back.

Like I said all of a sudden I would find myself awake as SP was just beginning. I then observed the entire cycle. I hear the Astral winds approaching, get the vibrations, then they stop and my legs begin to rise. The next thing I know I am rocketing down my hallway and out my patio window. Like I have said in the past here, my bedroom has windows in it, so I don't know why I keep going out of my room, down my hallway then out my patio window. I do not have any conscious intent while doing this, other then to observe what is occurring. I have no expectations, I just lie there and allow what's going to happen to happen. But, there is different "realm" per say, awaiting me on the other side of my patio window.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

One last thing, the end of Tom's recent video from the link above has to do with a question and answer period. I would suggest that especially people new to Astral Projection listen to this part if you don't have the "time" to listen to the whole thing. It begins at 1:50:30.

[Szaxx]

Quote
I can apply a bit of logic to this... the fact you experience projecting both ways (with separation and without), it reinforces the idea that the separation isn't required or you (or anyone really) would never be able to phase like we do.

Interesting comment. I've not done a bodily exit since 1974. Phasing came naturally and by experimenting, I've reduced the exit time drastically. I have and still try to do the bodily exit as an experiment, it takes too long once you're accustomed to phasing and the process get switched every time. Bodily exits worked at 4 years of age as they gave the impression of a safe way to go exploring. Had I phased back then I may have confused the whole process with dreaming although incredibly lucidly. I recall having the desire to explore and then the ball started rolling automatically.
I'll eventually get to watch Tom's new video, time is a luxury unavailable with Wi-Fi at present.

[Lumaza]

 The last and rather important progression that I really notice is the difference that I have when I just close my eyes compared to what it is used to be like. Now it seems when I simply close my eyes that my attachment to my physical body is immediately gone and the sense of just "being" is automatic.

It's really hard to explain that concept, other then the constant "entrainment" has shown me that the shift really is a simple "closing of the eyes" away. I'm sure many of you here understand what I mean about difference you may notice now when you just close your eyes to what it used to be like. No longer is there the mental chatter. Now it's just you are instantly focused elsewhere. Even the darkness there looks and feels different now. There is a immediate calming and serenity to be felt.  But it"s a thing that could get easily overlooked. I never really realized that until I was making a list of all the things I wanted to write about in a thread on "progression".

[astralm]

I have studied Tom quite a bit.  I believe he has some amazing points, if nothing else there are two great takeaways in my opinion.  The first is that the best model of this reality we have is it being a virtual reality.  The second is all we have are models, and MODELS ARE NOT REAL.  Tom doesn't believe his views are true, he just thinks they are best model.  But the real takeaway is whatever the model, once you believe it to be real and not just a model of reality you have put a limit on your growth.

Once again to repeat what the model, once you believe it to be real and just a model of reality you have put a limit on your growth.  (If you take nothing away from him than this I think he would be happy.)

The biggest problem I have with Tom's TOE is that he comes from a scientific background and yet does not talk at all, except very briefly at the beginning of his first book about his experiences.  This essentially means he is presenting the conclusion of his experiments without letting anyone see or have any idea of the experiments or resulting data which got him there.  Without seeing the experiment that led the conclusion you really have no way of making a judgement either way on the validity of the conclusion.  I understand his explanation for why he does not share this, but still it weakens his TOE quite a bit.

Second problem in particular that Robert Monroe and Tom Campbell (Who learned under Monroe) seem to have is a very tainted view of the models of reality presented by religion.  To the point of ignorance.  They seem to not grasp the idea behind religion at all.  Best example I can think of is Tom writes about how he dismisses the idea of God and the Holy Spirit and the notion they care about you or interact on your behalf at all.  I believe he says something along the lines of it is as silly as thinking you personally care about a single bacterium in your gut.  However in like the very same chapter he goes on to say how the greater computer or whatever he calls it, is open to and willing to help anyone who asks for it.  Wow an interface with what created us that can give us aid and understanding and help us, sounds like kind of a spot on analogy for the Holy Spirit.  It's not like 2000 years ago they would present the holy spirit as a computer interface, being they had no idea what a computer was.  Tom himself warns against having a predetermined bent against an idea and how that will limit your views, however he clearly has not taken his own advice and I believe this leads to a particular view of his experiences which are tainted by that.  But who knows since like I said he won't share the experiences which he makes his views based on.

Shoot I had one last point but I can't remember it.  Oh yes at the end of the day I really don't think Tom cares at all about giving people a true view of reality.  His goal is to have his Big TOE spark something that leads you to what he calls 'bettering your consciousness.'  His TOE is just the model he uses to try and jump start you to making a change to go about that.  So at the end of the day don't take too many of the fine points of his theory too literally or seriously, because I'm pretty sure he doesn't.

[BranStark]

I'm not sure I can say this without sounding like an donkey's behind LoL, so please forgive me... but, that's because you simply don't understand.
It's the difference between ACTING good and BEING good.  But meh, in the sense of as long as you're doing good, it doesn't really matter THAT much.

One is done as part of the journey, and one is done after the journey has been completed (for the most part).

Sorry for a late reply, I kind of forgot (finals time  ). Anyway, no worries. I think I actually can differentiate between the two and I think I get your point. And I agree. But in my opinion it doesn't contradict what I am saying. You can either act good or be good. Absolutely. But... sorry I cannot help it (I might be a bit of a donkey myself ): when you are good, you still feel good about it in some respect. It just isn't the same feeling like when you are merely "acting." Every interaction of us with this world can be broken down to "feelings." Of course, there is nirvana - an absolute cessation of everthing. But still. Generally it is the case. And even the way to nirvana feels "kind of good."

I realise there is the story about Buddha and his pupil where the pupil asks him: So what is the sense in all of this when the desire not to desire is also a desire.

I see a great paralell with our discussion there. And obviously there is a significant difference between "desiring and desiring." But just like I am saying above, it still feels kind of good to let everything be as it is.

Anyway... I think that the language is a great barrier in this conversation. We are talking about something too subtle and intangible to be put down to words. And therefore, misunderstandings might occur. Especially since I am not a native English speaker. So chances are, our opinions (or rather feelings ) are not so different from each other.

[Ricochet]

The biggest problem I have with Tom's TOE is that he comes from a scientific background and yet does not talk at all, except very briefly at the beginning of his first book about his experiences.  This essentially means he is presenting the conclusion of his experiments without letting anyone see or have any idea of the experiments or resulting data which got him there.  Without seeing the experiment that led the conclusion you really have no way of making a judgement either way on the validity of the conclusion.  I understand his explanation for why he does not share this, but still it weakens his TOE quite a bit.

Good point. I haven't finished the video yet, but I did notice early on that he takes great pains to emphasize that his conclusions are "logically derived". "Logically derived" does not equal "evidence". It was quite logical to believe 1000 years ago that the earth was flat and the sun revolved around it. I understand that he is going on much more than that, yet the point of peer review is probe for weaknesses in the argument and the "whys" and "hows" of how you got there. Being a "physicist" doesn't get you a pass.

That said, if he indeed considers this to be a conversation starter and jumping off point, I have no issues. Someone has to throw something out there.

The second is all we have are models, and MODELS ARE NOT REAL.  Tom doesn't believe his views are true, he just thinks they are best model.  But the real takeaway is whatever the model, once you believe it to be real and not just a model of reality you have put a limit on your growth.

Once again to repeat what the model, once you believe it to be real and just a model of reality you have put a limit on your growth.  (If you take nothing away from him than this I think he would be happy.)

So is there something that is out there somewhere that could be considered to be ultimate truth, or is that limiting?

[Ricochet]

Second problem in particular that Robert Monroe and Tom Campbell (Who learned under Monroe) seem to have is a very tainted view of the models of reality presented by religion.  To the point of ignorance.  They seem to not grasp the idea behind religion at all.  Best example I can think of is Tom writes about how he dismisses the idea of God and the Holy Spirit and the notion they care about you or interact on your behalf at all.  I believe he says something along the lines of it is as silly as thinking you personally care about a single bacterium in your gut.  However in like the very same chapter he goes on to say how the greater computer or whatever he calls it, is open to and willing to help anyone who asks for it.  Wow an interface with what created us that can give us aid and understanding and help us, sounds like kind of a spot on analogy for the Holy Spirit.  It's not like 2000 years ago they would present the holy spirit as a computer interface, being they had no idea what a computer was.  Tom himself warns against having a predetermined bent against an idea and how that will limit your views, however he clearly has not taken his own advice and I believe this leads to a particular view of his experiences which are tainted by that.  But who knows since like I said he won't share the experiences which he makes his views based on.

astralm, having come from a Christian background myself, I'm curious to know what ways you think religion might play in all this. Is it simply an attempt by ancient peoples to quantify deep experiences they had? Or is there something more to it than that? Its interesting to me that much of what Jesus taught meshes with concepts people are learning from meditation and non-physical experiences. And I'm not talking about "Heaven is for real" stuff.

[astralm]

astralm, having come from a Christian background myself, I'm curious to know what ways you think religion might play in all this. Is it simply an attempt by ancient peoples to quantify deep experiences they had? Or is there something more to it than that? Its interesting to me that much of what Jesus taught meshes with concepts people are learning from meditation and non-physical experiences. And I'm not talking about "Heaven is for real" stuff.

Hey Ricochet,
I see religion as models of how everything works.  However many just see the impact of them, for example how they have been used to control countries and oppress people.  Which they have been used for but so has science, however if you look at some of the models themselves, and attach them to the time and place, wow they are really impressive.  For example Tom Campbell didn't make up that this reality is not real and virtual.  Long before computers and science this concept in seen in the bible, Greek philosophy and many many other religions going back who knows how far.  The idea that this reality was created by something, those are concepts that came from the fact we are spiritual being and our spirit resides outside this reality.  We may have forgot and are shielded from much of this knowledge while here, but somewhere deep down we know the basics.  And we explain it with models.

Just because some of the older religions are simpler or more basic models doesn't make them garbage or wrong.  In order for a model to have value it must make sense, a model more advanced than the culture would be just nonsense.  Giving a model like Tom's or Frank's or Monroe's to someone 3000 years ago would not be revolutionary, it would just be gibberish on the page, they didn't have the background to understand it.  So given all that I think it is a little ignorant to look at those models and say they are wrong and dangerous.  That is pretty much the same thing as saying learning about electron clouds is wrong and dangerous because we now know this is a limited and not entirely accurate model of how electrons really behave.

Best Regards

[Ricochet]

astralm; Thanks. That makes sense to me.

[Xanth]

when you are good, you still feel good about it in some respect.

Oh definitely.  No argument there.
It's just that... that "feeling good" shouldn't be the driving force for WHY you did the good act in the first place.

If you had sat there before you did the act and thought "oh, if I help that little old lady across the street, it's going to make me feel good"... then you're not really doing it for a good reason, you're doing it for a selfish reason really.  The INTENT behind the act is paramount to deciding whether it causes spiritual growth or the opposite.

I realise there is the story about Buddha and his pupil where the pupil asks him: So what is the sense in all of this when the desire not to desire is also a desire.

Nailed it.  Exactly.  Even the desire to not want to desire *IS* a desire in itself and, therefore, not really conductive to spiritual growth.
Everyone has to start somewhere though and it usually starts from a position of not wanting to do bad.  That's where what I mention above comes into play... do you have to THINK about doing your good deed before you do it?  Or do you just DO IT without even a first thought?

I see a great paralell with our discussion there. And obviously there is a significant difference between "desiring and desiring." But just like I am saying above, it still feels kind of good to let everything be as it is.

I see the "let everything be as it is" in this regards as not having that initial thought of "is my action good?".  
Learning to allow everything to be as it is, is probably as close to enlightenment or awakening as you can get without actually, fully defining it.

Anyway... I think that the language is a great barrier in this conversation. We are talking about something too subtle and intangible to be put down to words. And therefore, misunderstandings might occur. Especially since I am not a native English speaker. So chances are, our opinions (or rather feelings ) are not so different from each other.

HA!  As it is with everything non-physical we try to discuss here, eh?  

[Xanth]

Astralm, you have some misconceptions regarding Tom and his work... I'm not sure I have the time to fully address them right now, but I'll try to quickly.

The biggest problem I have with Tom's TOE is that he comes from a scientific background and yet does not talk at all, except very briefly at the beginning of his first book about his experiences.  This essentially means he is presenting the conclusion of his experiments without letting anyone see or have any idea of the experiments or resulting data which got him there.  Without seeing the experiment that led the conclusion you really have no way of making a judgement either way on the validity of the conclusion.

The "conclusions" from Tom's big toe are the derivatives.  He goes into full detail in his book HOW you he derives the results of his perspective.  

I understand his explanation for why he does not share this, but still it weakens his TOE quite a bit.

Without sounding condescending here... I don't think you do understand it.

It all goes back to the title of his book (and his perspective): *MY* Big Toe.  It's paramount to understand why that word "MY" is in there.  
Lumaza mentioned it earlier in this thread.  His Big Toe is based entirely (100%) on his own experiences... and you can NEVER have his experience. Never.  Many people try to have the experience which someone else has shared, and you'll never do it.

It's like when people try to visit the same Focus 27 "healing center" that Robert Monroe did.  Those people are trying to have the same experience Robert did, without realizing (or knowing) that they can't.  So when they don't ever visit that same healing center, they believe they failed.  Where by, they might have visited it, yet didn't realize it because they were too zoned into have Robert's experience.

Experience is personal and unique to the individual and should only, really (there are SOME exceptions), be shared with the mindset of entertaining.  You can't really use direct experience as a means of teaching, because you're only setting someone up to fail.

Second problem in particular that Robert Monroe and Tom Campbell (Who learned under Monroe) seem to have is a very tainted view of the models of reality presented by religion.  To the point of ignorance.  They seem to not grasp the idea behind religion at all.  Best example I can think of is Tom writes about how he dismisses the idea of God and the Holy Spirit and the notion they care about you or interact on your behalf at all.  I believe he says something along the lines of it is as silly as thinking you personally care about a single bacterium in your gut.  However in like the very same chapter he goes on to say how the greater computer or whatever he calls it, is open to and willing to help anyone who asks for it.  Wow an interface with what created us that can give us aid and understanding and help us, sounds like kind of a spot on analogy for the Holy Spirit.  It's not like 2000 years ago they would present the holy spirit as a computer interface, being they had no idea what a computer was.  Tom himself warns against having a predetermined bent against an idea and how that will limit your views, however he clearly has not taken his own advice and I believe this leads to a particular view of his experiences which are tainted by that.  But who knows since like I said he won't share the experiences which he makes his views based on.

Again, there is a very strong misunderstanding you have regarding Tom and his perspective. There's a video of Tom's which you should probably watch.
It's him... in a church panel... discussing that very subject with the congregation about god and his Big Toe.  It's very enlightening.  
I think this is the video here:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKQVbL5E6qU

Shoot I had one last point but I can't remember it.  Oh yes at the end of the day I really don't think Tom cares at all about giving people a true view of reality.  His goal is to have his Big TOE spark something that leads you to what he calls 'bettering your consciousness.'  His TOE is just the model he uses to try and jump start you to making a change to go about that.

He wouldn't have written his three books if he didn't care.  
But with that said, he knows/realizes/understands better than anyone else that it's *HIS* perspective.  With that said, you're 100% correct in your assessment.
He is more interested with providing that spark for you to find things out for yourself, because that's just how experience and reality works.  

That FIRST STEP is usually the hardest for people to get past.  He provides you with a quick and easy way to begin the process of taking that first step.  He wets your curiosity. 
At least that's how it worked with me.

So at the end of the day don't take too many of the fine points of his theory too literally or seriously, because I'm pretty sure he doesn't.

I'd say take NONE of it seriously.  But don't dismiss it either.  
Open-minded skepticism.  That's the ONLY thing you should really take away from his books.
Then... just experience the larger reality and see what you come up with.