News:

Welcome to the Astral Pulse 2.0!

If you're looking for your Journal, I've created a central sub forum for them here: https://www.astralpulse.com/forums/dream-and-projection-journals/



Polaris Interviews Robert Bruce

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Killa Rican

Polaris interviews renowned mystic & author Robert Bruce On the subjects of mysticism, life experience, psychic combat, magick, law of attraction, astral projection and out of body experience etc, he answers his views for us from his many years of experience and work in the field. Some of you here might be already familiar with him. He's a really great and down to earth fellow, and I admire his work and many contributions to the metaphysical field.

http://www.polarisrising.net/index.php?/topic/1019-interview-with-famous-mystic-astral-projection-expert-robert-bruce/
For those who believe, no explanation is necessary. For those who do not, none will suffice. ~Joseph Dunninger

Xanth

I don't think it's much of a secret that I'm not a big Robert Bruce fan... there are aspects of what he teaches I absolutely love (the way he teaches visualization, for example)... but there is a lot more I dislike about what he teaches.  Note here that I'm not attacking "HIM"... I highly respect the man for how he's opened people up to the non-physical and I'm sure we could even strike up a wonderful conversation.  I don't dislike him one bit... I dislike some of the ideas and concepts he shares.

My biggest beef with what he shares is that it causes a lot of people to fear... his talks about psychic defense and attacking... is horrid in my opinion.  It doesn't help anyone... it only helps to spread the belief that one requires this kind of "violence" in their life.  You do not need this.

In any case, I'd suggest reading his material ONLY AFTER learning to have your own projections.  Have your own experiences first... gain some solid experience and understanding THEN read his books.  Only then will you be able to separate what is helpful from what is fear-mongering and fear-spreading.

This is also my opinion with Robert Monroe's books.  Although in that case, I'd skip the first two and read his third book first... THEN go back to the other two.

Stillwater

I also share this opinion on Bruce. Stand-up guy, has done great things for people in the awareness area.

But he scares the pollen out of people's buttercups, and needlessly. I have never found projection realities to be the war zone he has experienced. I really feel he may have started out looking for that unfortuneately.

I am an agnostic on energy bodies, and can't really comment on the emphasis he puts on these concepts (although I fully believe practices that developed around these concepts are still incredibly useful, perhaps for different reasons).

Also, welcome back, KR!
"The Gardener is but a dream of the Garden."

-Unattributed Zen monastic

Killa Rican

#3
Hey, no worries guys.   :-)

But I actually admire Robert Bruce and his intellect, as well as his contributions in the metaphysical field. I can't speak so much on the critique concerning AP as that is not my area of expertise, but I find him a good , helpful, and reliable asset in other general areas in Metaphysics.

I don't see this 'fear-mongering' in the same light really. It varies as different people will have different reactions based on their limited knowledge and experience, but I find It's a persons own responsibility alone to not overreact impulsively negative when being exposed or considering new information.

When reading through some of his material my first thoughts were not "Oh no, all this stuff can possibly be real now I'm scared." I'm thinking "Well this Man has been through some heavy stuff that's hard to understand for most people in this area of the world, he can understand others who've been through some of this, and he's actually trying to do something to contribute to  better understanding the nature of this mysterious phenomena."

Some of us didn't need to invest in a particular belief in order for it to lead to or 'project' the 'subjective' perception of an experience be the experience "good" or "bad". Rather an groundbreaking experience itself can be enough for the person to justify why they feel, think, and stand strongly in their views  the way they do. It's something most of us( not all) can relate to.

What I like about Robert Bruce is that he makes an attempt to understand the mysterious nature of spiritual phenomena, be it may on controversial topics. i.e 'Psychic attacks. There's been countless anecdotes on the possibilities and realities of these things for several thousands of years all over the globe in recorded history. I think it's fair to consider more serious , but neutral, and open minded thought on the possibilities(emphasis on possibilities) without putting a person down for it, or think they are trying to spread fear for sharing their experience however 'unpopular' the experience or view might be, simply because some are nothing more than just 'uncomfortable' by the thought of it.

I know Robert Bruce really has the best in mind to assist people, even though many here may disagree with his methods.

I like that He makes effort to translate within the context of a modern day western padagrim of thought. In the end it comes down to using terminology a persons mind might be receptive to when analyzing and speculating on this phenomena.

I personally benefitted and got nothing but good from what he shares and puts work into, and yes I'm already well acquainted with other alternatives of authors working in the same fields.

To each his own, respectfully.

Thank you for the welcome back Stillwater, I'm happy to see you still active here. :) I look forward to engage in more discussions with you and possibly also catch up as well in the near future, if you wouldn't mind. You've always been one of my favorite posters. ^_^ Hope all is well with you friend.
For those who believe, no explanation is necessary. For those who do not, none will suffice. ~Joseph Dunninger

Szaxx

Interesting interview, too much in common with my experiences which made me think on the self defense side of his words.
As the art is in its infancy and since the dawn of time the naysayers have always dictated their nonsense on practitioners being attacked...
Does anyone else see the wider implications of this side of his work.
Having a method of protection, whether required or not, would open the door for many more to learn the art. An inherent safety net would create the mindset of safety for the more nervous.

The guy is a genius...
What more can be said.
There's far more where the eye can't see.
Close your eyes and open your mind.

Stillwater

QuoteHaving a method of protection, whether required or not, would open the door for many more to learn the art. An inherent safety net would create the mindset of safety for the more nervous.

Maybe, but it also gets people asking why the safety net is there, and it gets them thinking about using it, and anticipating when it will be used next. For instance think of going to the mall... and the last time you were attacked there. Could you be attacked at the mall? Absolutely, but it doesn't really factor into your thoughts of what the mall is, or what the experience is like. If you go walking down the halls with the thought that every person you see is a possible assailant there, you are actually opening yourself up to slightly more likely altercation. And not to mention... you are doing it wrong... having the wrong experience. For me, the emphasis Bruce puts on the need for protection puts people into that state, where so much more so than in the mall example, they are inviting a conflict.

When a person wakes into a projection and sees alien bugs nibbling their feet, Bruce tells that these are probably negative entities that must be banished. No other explanations are given, such as the beings being a metaphor for certain fears or insecurities the person might have, or even that they might exist as such, but be downright harmless. In fact, Bruce lists page after page of these experiences, and primes others to have them too by expectancy.

"The Gardener is but a dream of the Garden."

-Unattributed Zen monastic

Xanth

Believing you require protection is kind of like the wedge that opens that small crack in a flawless piece of armor...
The very second you believe you NEED protection is the very second you REQUIRE protection.

Szaxx

Excellent responses, personally the negs are non-existant, I've not seen anything close to the fearmongers postulates.
From within many experiences anything that may be regarded as negative has been within my capabilities to deal with.
I'm sure this applies across the board.
In SP experiences you only scare yourself and these are not included in the above. As they are the initial fear tests from within yourself they have to be discounted as they are self generated.

For the rest of those showing an interest, the indoctrinated fear will require addressing and Robert may be attempting to address this.

Once those initial fears are reduced further reading may tell a different story altogether.
At 4 years of age I wandered around the woods behind my house and nothing negative existed. If these negs were commonplace I'm sure the effect would have been noticed.
The negs are overcooked in my personal opinion and due to a more religious belief biased opinion.
The physical world is many magnitudes more dangerous.
There's far more where the eye can't see.
Close your eyes and open your mind.

Bluefirephoenix

 I think Robert Bruce is struggling to grow like the rest of us. He has talant as a writer and teacher and is very articulate. I think like Robert Monroe did he just needs to mature more. If he breaks through the blocks he mentioned in his book to the areas of Divine energy then we should see some interesting work again from him. His initial work was original and based on personal experience. If he does that in a state of spiritual maturity the work will have good potential.

Stillwater

Part of the issue in this field is that there are no actual authorities.

There are only those who know significantly more, or have significantly better experience with it (Bruce, Campbell, Monroe, Bulhman, etc), but still hold many potentially false ideas.

Because there are no authorities, I think there is a tendency to want to take the writers we have at face value on everything they say; once a person realizes what you said though Blue, I think these writers become a great tool.

The danger though is just by virtue of having a book, people assume someone is trustworthy, or that their ideas hold much more weight. This can be difficult for new people to see past.
"The Gardener is but a dream of the Garden."

-Unattributed Zen monastic

dust8879

Great interview. I really enjoyed reading it. When he mentioned that you actually have to persist and can't give up if you don't get instant results made me think about how impatient I've been with other things. I like his NEW system too. I'm terrible at visualisation and much prefer feeling the actions on my skin instead of trying to see an image of it in my mind.

What Robert said about beliefs is true too. Beliefs have certainly limited me a lot in my life. I tend to look down on some subjects as just primitive, superstitious nonsense without actually testing it out. Thats anti-science, as Thomas Campbell says. A true scientist would be curious about anything unusual and want to find out. I have to stop being ignorant