OBE or Lucid Dream?

Discuss paranormal activity linked with sleep and dreams, such as out of body experiences, astral projection and psychic dreams.
danmc
Posts: 37
Joined: 02 Dec 2012 03:27

Re: OBE or Lucid Dream?

Postby danmc » 15 Dec 2012 02:35

HAGART wrote:I think I know what would happen and come to think of it it has happened to me before. Without opening my dream eyes and looking around I would instead sense other things with my other senses.


This is interesting. I have a list of experiments to do in LDs that I keep. When I think of a good one, I put it on the list. This one is on the list. I want to try laying down, shutting off my senses, and see what happens. The problem is I can never think of what's on the dang list, or I always feel like I'd be wasting a perfectly good LD!

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 3642
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: OBE or Lucid Dream?

Postby Summerlander » 20 Dec 2012 02:59

You still haven't proved anything, Hagart. Just because Robert Bruce comes out with a hypothesis that happens to resonate with one or more than one of your experiences doesn't validate the notion of "buffer zones".

There are, in fact, a number of ways in which what you just described can be interpreted - not just from a mystical point of view but also a neurological one. People have numinous experiences all the time and yet that does not mean that something divine is truly at work or evidence the existence of spiritual/astral planes.

There is a false assumption in your claim here regarding my take on things, particularly where science is concerned. I don't adhere to hypotheses. I don't hold mere ideas to be true and I am not inclined towards materialism because it seems more attractive or because it is some dogma that has been unfairly ingrained in my mind.

As much as some people out there like the idea of debunking the scientific method, I'd like to say something here...

Science is not committed to the idea that the mind equals the brain or that there is no afterlife or even that materialism/physicalism is true. That is a misconception. In fact, science has considered both physicalism and vitalism as it has always been open to whatever is in fact true.

If it were true that ectoplasm or some unknown substance (or something that we don't yet understand) could dissociate from the physical body, then that would be part of our growing scientific understanding about reality. If such existed and interacted with physical matter, then it would have been discovered by now (like dark matter - nobody has ever seen it but we can see what it does in space and we are close to finding it) and there are a number of ways in which it could have been discovered. So far, they managed to find one of the most elusive bosons in quantum physics which gives everything its mass and yet no trace of that which is purported by many religiously or spiritually inclined individuals to be the source of life and consciousness (or, in the versions, the root of all existence).

To add to that, there are very good reasons to think that consciousness arises from the brain in all its complexity and that consciousness exiting the body or even surviving death is simply not true. This is not based on hypothesis, it is based on scientific theory and observations (check the difference between the two if you are not familiar with this). The scientific community have drawn their inclination towards materialism from over a century and a half of neurology. If you damage areas of the brain, you will lose mental faculties. You can cease to recognise faces, forget your name, the names of animals and yet remember the names of certain objects, lose some memories, lose the power of speech, lose the concept of words, lose subjectivity or even lose consciousness indefinitely while you are still alive. Everything about your mind can be lost by damaging the brain. And yet, some people still think that when you damage the whole thing at death you can really exit the physical body with all your faculties intact, recognise deceased relatives and communicate with them with words, telepathy and whatnot!

How do we explain this? Lucid dreaming is a human capacity. As such, we would expect to find individauls who spontaneously have a lucid dream without knowing such a thing is possible. The literature is chock full of such examples. This is different, though. This is a structure within that capacity that many have come to know. It might be true that most only verified after finding out about it, but my experience shows that doesn't have to be the case.


Have you heard of a double-blind experiment in science? Nothing like that has occurred in your case and you certainly show no understanding of how fair trials are conducted. Again, what you described proves nothing. Just like people who have never heard of OOBEs CAN have one because their brains are quite capable of creating dissociative states - like an anomalous thalamic function can be triggered by a slight alteration in sleep patterns and create the sensation of floating which subsequently forces the brain to concoct a botched-logical environmental scenario (i.e. floating near the ceiling looking down at where the body was and seeing it in a bedroom simulation which might not be that accurate given such short notice and the unusual cerebral activity) - one can also experience a series of events which happen to coincide with those of another sentient being who also has a similar brain (same species), same capabilities and has already labelled them and coloured them with his views and according to his beliefs and published them in an esoteric book. :mrgreen:

Which leaves you looking somewhat unoriginal and lacking imagination. Why not figure out your own definitions of what you experienced instead of just taking what somebody else said at face value when it doesn't even hold any water? The author himself has already been influenced by much mystical literature and has used much of the same belief-centric terms whilst coming up with some of his own. If indeed your experiences correlated with reality, have you ever considered that you may have a photographic memory instead or visiting some "real-time zone" or whatever he calls it? You see where I'm coming from? Why not give the brain credit in creating virtual realities in light of scientific evidence?

The only thing that can be claimed with certainty, as it has already been scientifically demonstrated when it comes to dissociative experiences during sleep - besides the awesome power of our minds (much of which lies unconscious) - is in the following diagram:

Image

In light of the evidence and my own experience, I can confidently say that there is no real out-of-body state in its literal sense, no further than an illusory sensation, and no journeying to other planes of existence either, and those who claim that such really happens, well... the ball is in their court to prove it to the rest of the world (and I fear that you are in the same league as those who claim that fairies and unicorns exist because they have been sighted). So far, I have only seen the conscious experience of virtual realities of the mind and the potential to lucidly access subconscious content amongst other things which can be life-enriching if applied correctly.

I'm sorry to be blunt, Hagart, but I've been where you are... well, not quite because I was more inquisitive and scientifically inclined. Trust me, I was open to the notion of astral projection and wanted to see for myself what all the fuss was about years ago. I'm serious, I was open to it. What I found was something entirely different. Pragmatically, I only see the extent of which I have described in this post. I also deal with many experienced and serious volunteers and coordinate experiments for future publishing at the OOBE Research Center with Michael Raduga - so I am previleged to have a great perspective on things and know what I'm talking about. I'd also be cautious about the astral defence techniques to ward off negative entities that Bruce promulgates in his site and literature. More frightening is his affiliation with crackpot pseudo-scientist Thomas Campbell. Be careful with cults like this under the guise of "science".
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

danmc
Posts: 37
Joined: 02 Dec 2012 03:27

Re: OBE or Lucid Dream?

Postby danmc » 20 Dec 2012 03:45

Summerlander wrote:You still haven't proved anything, Hagart.


I think you are addressing me, not Hagart! In fact, I thought Hagart was more or less agreeing with you. I like the post though, and will respond in more detail later.

danmc
Posts: 37
Joined: 02 Dec 2012 03:27

Re: OBE or Lucid Dream?

Postby danmc » 20 Dec 2012 05:42

Summerlander wrote:There is a false assumption in your claim here regarding my take on things, particularly where science is concerned. I don't adhere to hypotheses. I don't hold mere ideas to be true and I am not inclined towards materialism because it seems more attractive or because it is some dogma that has been unfairly ingrained in my mind.

I don't believe you do either, or you wouldn't be so open to dreaming. Let's face it, the vast majority of science types, along with the general public, chalk it all up to "overworked" neurons, or a brain cut loose from logic as the personality withdraws. I based my statement you are pre-committed on the statements you made in our discussions here and elsewhere:

Summerlander wrote:Consciousness is the epiphenomenon of functioning parts of the brain

Kill the brain and consciousness will cease to be permanently

consciousness is nothing but a brain state

Obviously, if someone makes these statements flatly, it would seem they are, in fact, committed to the idea, scientifically grounded or not, that consciousness arises from the brain. If that is the case, then consciousness could never be apart from the activity of the brain. Thus there would be a tendency to shy away from any possibility that says otherwise.

Now, you may not dogmatically adhere to that idea with no chance of changing your mind, but the reality is that it colors the pursuit anyway.

Summerlander wrote:Science is not committed to the idea that the mind equals the brain or that there is no afterlife or even that materialism/physicalism is true. That is a misconception. In fact, science has considered both physicalism and vitalism as it has always been open to whatever is in fact true.

If it were true that ectoplasm or some unknown substance (or something that we don't yet understand) could dissociate from the physical body, then that would be part of our growing scientific understanding about reality.

Herein the materialist commitment does indeed expose itself! Why does it have to be a substance or some "thing"? If it's not a substance, then we are doing nothing more than barking up the wrong tree as well as missing other possibilities altogether. I realize quantum physics has moved away from matter as foundational, but they've only moved toward consciousness as the basis!

Summerlander wrote:If you damage areas of the brain, you will lose mental faculties. You can cease to recognise faces, forget your name, the names of animals and yet remember the names of certain objects, lose some memories, lose the power of speech, lose the concept of words, lose subjectivity or even lose consciousness indefinitely while you are still alive.

But this certainly doesn't prove that consciousness cannot be separate (personally, I like the term awareness as it's much more free of baggage, and I often switch back and forth, just know I use them equally). One could easily argue that a damaged brain can now not serve the purpose of the awareness operating through it, that a damaged brain is a sort of limited vehicle for that awareness.

Summerlander wrote:Have you heard of a double-blind experiment in science? Nothing like that has occurred in your case and you certainly show no understanding of how fair trials are conducted. Again, what you described proves nothing.

Just so you have a little more about me, I have a degree in Physiology and Cell Biology. I considered myself widely read and understanding in the sciences in general. While physics is my weak point, I have nevertheless read more about it that I care to admit. I do know what a double-blind is, and I certainly wasn't describing one or inferring that I was! Nor was I saying it proved anything at all! It proves nothing, which is why I didn't say, "I find it more than conclusive". I said, "I find it more than interesting".

My point was that early on I was dreaming in isolation. There was no internet, and very few books to get my hands on to read about or understand the experiences of others at the time. I independently observed and investigated this buffer zone long before his book. When his book came out he, evidently, had observed a very similar phenomenon with very similar properties. I find that interesting! That's all. Now it may not be enough for a rigorous experiment, but what do I care? I'm not out to prove anything. I'm out to understand the nature of my direct experience, and I will gladly go down many pathways and see what they have to offer to that end.

Summerlander wrote:Which leaves you looking somewhat unoriginal and lacking imagination. Why not figure out your own definitions of what you experienced instead of just taking what somebody else said at face value when it doesn't even hold any water?

You seem to have the idea that I'm some kind weak-minded sap. I guarantee you you've got the wrong idea! As I've said before, direct experience is my first trusted guide. The scientists love their concepts, and the religionists their dogma. I guess you could say I like my understanding free of both, if it's possible.

Summerlander wrote:In light of the evidence and my own experience, I can confidently say that there is no real out-of-body state in its literal sense, no further than an illusory sensation

Awesome! Really, I mean that! But as you said, this proves nothing. These are merely YOUR concepts and ideas, they can hardly be said to be even close to conclusive.

Summerlander wrote:and those who claim that such really happens, well... the ball is in their court to prove it to the rest of the world

If that is what they are trying to do, then absolutely. Again, I'm not out to prove anything, I'm out to see if I can come upon my own concept-free, direct understanding. Of course, to communicate concepts are necessary, and they can get us into trouble.

Summerlander wrote:so I am previleged to have a great perspective on things and know what I'm talking about.

Again, awesome! And, again, I mean it! Personally, I've been through all the science. I've been through all the spiritual literature. I've been through all the kooky, entertaining nonsense you can find. And you know what? I still don't know a damn thing! It's all one big, beautiful mystery. Not only that, I've discovered that the only thing I know with absolute certainty is that "I Am", all the rest is mere concepts that in turn need other concepts for their support, but I've found that the awareness that everything appears in needs no support of any kind, and lies behind everything.

And know that I take nothing personally, even being called unoriginal, and lacking in imagination. That's actually not so bad considering what I've been called! In fact, if we were near each other, I bet we would be fast friends with many late nights of lively conversation. Last, I hope you'll pardon my propensity to push the buttons of science-minded individuals. It's just beyond my ability to resist!

P.S re: Tom Campbell. I'd never heard of him until someone posted that link on the other forum. I went over to his forum to see what they had to say. I noticed you were outlawed!

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 3642
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: OBE or Lucid Dream?

Postby Summerlander » 20 Dec 2012 10:35

[ Post made via Android ] Image
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 3642
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: OBE or Lucid Dream?

Postby Summerlander » 20 Dec 2012 11:25

Thank you for your reply and I guess I did address the wrong person in my last post. I'm using a phone at the moment so apologies if I have made some errors.

I see you have your experience and you are certainly entitled to have your opinion if you feel that science is not conclusive on certain matters. But here's the thing. You don't always have to be a scientific expert to derive logic. If the life force is not a something, if it is "non-physical" as they say, how on earth does it interact with the physical? How can a soul move a body? And if such thing existed to move it, it could be measured and said to exist. You see the predicament? Why should science pursue that which seems less evident and forsake that which is more apparent and which supports the idea that we are biological machines?

Another misconception that you posted regarding physics and I'll take into consideration that you admitted physics is not your area of expertise. Quantum physics does not show in any way that consciousness is the basis for everything. This is something that pseudo-science has tried to promote as an idea and I fear such branch is akin to New Age and almost ridiculously creationist in the face of overwhelming solid evidence for evolution, the non-existence of life/consciousness in the early stages of the universe (as heavier elements didn't exist) and the undeniable fact that we are nothing but nuclear waste.

Subatomic particles are still things that can be measured and are part of the physical world however weird they behave. Evidence supports that consciousness is a phenomenon of the classical level of reality and the result of the integration of a complex neuronal network. Sure, everything occupies the quantum but the quantum roots are not sufficient in the propagation of consciousness, or "awareness" as you put it. Here's a question for you: Does a rock have awareness?

On the decoherence matter in quantum physics: it is important to make the distinction between "observation" and "measurement". Scientific observation is really a measurement and the act of measuring is an interaction in itself. Consciousness does NOT collapse an outcome in reality as pseudo-scientific Campbell et al proclaim. I recommend that you take heed of the real experts at CERN, many of which are due Nobel prizes. I also recommend that you read Brian Cox's The Quantum Universe for a good understanding on why quantum theory works, what exactly the Uncertainty Principle entails and why there is a lot of tripe out there regarding quantum mechanics.

Finally, yes, I was banned from Campbell's site because I had pulled up Campbell in a different group (Facebook) about the things he was preaching to the laymen which were dishonest including the usage of quotes which were deliberately twisted regarding the context in which they were used. For someone who is portrayed as a modern age "Buddha", he was extremely rude, aggressive and defensive (predictable reactions of a liar). I even joined the site to see if there was something I was missing but what I found was something more sinister to the likes of cultish peer pressure coming from Ted Vollers and the usual suspects. Did you know that Ted offered to take me back provided that I changed my stance on the matter? :D

That is why I was warning you about Bruce, too. You can be open-minded but don't let your brains fall out when targeted by a combination of ego-centric fantasies, psychological manipulation and advanced forms of hocus pocus that will never be taken at face value before real science. To me, staying away from the bull is progressive and will not hinder scientific progress in any way. There are many practical applications in quantum theory. It gave us the wonderful transistor-based technologies and soon we will have more sophistication in computers and television with the advent of quantum systems that take advantage of superpositions. The wonders of the quantum world... which are not magical, by the way, they're natural. :roll:

Thank you for this discussion. I still maintain that OOBEs and lucid dreams are part of the same state of mind. It's a phase state characterised by Gamma activity and combines two mechanisms: REM sleep and consciousness. That's why lucid dreaming is also known as "conscious dreaming". The evidence is, well, evident! LoL! :twisted:

[ Post made via Android ] Image
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

User avatar
Peter
Posts: 1951
Joined: 26 May 2011 08:02
Location: New Zealand

Re: OBE or Lucid Dream?

Postby Peter » 20 Dec 2012 20:43

My point was that early on I was dreaming in isolation


Some very basic thoughts on this thread " I have not read it all so no head chopping please"

I have been dreaming (lucid) for a lifetime and like you it was in isolation for around 20 years before I knew what it was. During this time I wondered about a lot of things that were occurring and had to puzzle all this on my own and this is tempered with no beliefs in religion or no science background, just an inquisitive mind and a refusal to become a victim of my own fear of what was happening at the time.

My simple view after many years and most likely thousands of lucid dreams and OBE and any other term used it that it all occurs in our minds as this is the environment and place of dreaming. The scenes, states are made of experiences and void states of as I call them where there is simple existence without form are free of the baggage of life and so I called them voids many years ago and found this is the common term used.

I feel that some of the input for dreams could be external and played out in the dreamscape just like a radio receives we can receive energy and this could be quite common.
My main point I guess is that all of this happens in a living body and past this is either belief or seeking of proof depending on open mindedness or faith.
I have no issue with either and state my position as having no need to have a belief so I am neither for or against religions and my goal in lucid dreaming is to get past the playground and see what I can of interest.
We are very limited by science and for all we know our science went in one direction at a point in time and we looking in the wrong places for answers, I dont know

May be a little of topic here but interesting thread
Who are you I asked, the reply "dont be silly, we are your daughers" many years before they were born

danmc
Posts: 37
Joined: 02 Dec 2012 03:27

Re: OBE or Lucid Dream?

Postby danmc » 21 Dec 2012 17:54

Peter wrote:I have been dreaming (lucid) for a lifetime and like you it was in isolation for around 20 years before I knew what it was. During this time I wondered about a lot of things that were occurring and had to puzzle all this on my own and this is tempered with no beliefs in religion or no science background, just an inquisitive mind and a refusal to become a victim of my own fear of what was happening at the time.

I never looked at finding my own way as a problem. In the end, it turned out to be a boon since I came across techniques on my own that are truly tailored for my leanings. I suppose one could say that it makes for slow going, but not having anything to gauge against, it didn't seem slow or fast, just what was happening.

I'm glad to see you apparently overcame your fear. Fear was never part of the picture for me. I don't say that in the way of a braggart, but because I found the adventure and exhilaration out shined any fear I might have had. I've had my share of terrifying adventures, but I have a "throw it to the wind" type of personality, so fear was never a problem for me.

Peter wrote:My simple view after many years and most likely thousands of lucid dreams and OBE and any other term used it that it all occurs in our minds as this is the environment and place of dreaming.

Yes, many dreamers have reached the same conclusion. The door is still open in my case. It would be easy to chalk everything up to the mind by taking on the necessary correlation that we are, in waking life, apparently unable to use it at all! I am no artist by any stretch of the imagination in waking life, but the architecture in my dreams makes Michelangelo look like a rookie! Mother nature has never made skies or forests that even come close to the sublime beauty of those that I experience in lucid dreams. And, as I am sure you can confirm, in dreams there are colors that simply have no physical correlate. This is definitive of nothing, but it still sits in the background as a big question mark for me.

Let's look at your statement above about mind a little closer. You don't seem to be the type who will throw a reference at me and force me to go read a treatise on quantum mechanics or biophotons so that I may educate myself (Summerland, I jest! I told you, I can't resist!)

I think it's very important that we understand what is meant by the term, "mind". We throw this word around as if it's understood by all, and more importantly, as if we ourselves have a very clear understanding of it. This is important because we say that mind seems to be with us in the dream state, so it is rather on topic.

Most people think of the mind as a container, of sorts, that holds all our thoughts, concepts, images, memories, and the like. Isn't this so? Isn't this your understanding of it? Your statement above seems to indicate that. You say, "in our minds", and describe it as a place and environment. Others say we can be "out" of our minds. So we do understand and treat the mind as if it's a place, a container.

An easy way to cut to the chase regarding this "container" idea is to do an experiment in our direct experience. We can easily put aside all the concepts, theories, and teachings of others and see for ourselves in our direct experience what's what.

Right now, see if you can hold two thoughts simultaneously in your mind. First, hold one thought. Really see that thought. Next, try to hold that same thought while bringing in a second thought, not only while holding the first thought clearly, but while holding the second thought with the same degree of clarity.

How did it go? If you performed the experiment honestly and genuinely, I bet your finding is that you really can't. Before another thought can be held "in" mind, the first must disappear. Maybe Summerland is right and I am weak-minded, but I don't think this is the case, and I think this is true for everyone. I'd be interested to know what your results are. My direct experience shows I cannot hold two thoughts simultaneously. You can repeat the experiment with images, concepts, or memories and I'd wager that the same is basically true.

(Images can be tricky. If I hold an image of a table, then attempt to bring in some other image, it at first appears it can be done. You need to really see if that's the case or if you are now simply holding a single image containing both elements. In any case, you will probably find the experiment convincing enough, even though you might have some degree of success.)

So what does this mean? It means that not only is the mind NOT a container, it is simply nothing more than whatever thought is currently arising! Period. It is not something other than that current thought, it IS that current thought. Seeing this clearly, it is obvious that neither the world, nor the dream world happen IN the mind, since the mind is not a container. If that's the case, where does our experience happen?

Finally I like your statement:

Peter wrote:my goal in lucid dreaming is to get past the playground and see what I can of interest

Yes! Exactly my goal as well. It is indeed a playground. But is that all it is? And do you see how the container concept of mind might lead many to think it is purely, and only a playground? In other words, it is fantasy "in" the mind, and mind is something I possess. Therefore, it is purely a playground "in" "my" mind and has no meaning or reality beyond that. But if mind is nothing more than the currently arising thought, we cannot draw that conclusion.

I alluded to what I think beyond this, in another forum, but, in any case, more investigation is warranted. And just to reiterate, I don't feel like discussions of this nature are off topic at all, but have direct bearing on lucid dreaming, even if they tend to be more philosophical and not everyone's cup of tea.

Another super long post. It wouldn't surprise me at all if you held it in your mind as, "blah blah blah" :)

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 3642
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: OBE or Lucid Dream?

Postby Summerlander » 22 Dec 2012 01:56

danmc wrote:Yes, many dreamers have reached the same conclusion. The door is still open in my case. It would be easy to chalk everything up to the mind by taking on the necessary correlation that we are, in waking life, apparently unable to use it at all! I am no artist by any stretch of the imagination in waking life, but the architecture in my dreams makes Michelangelo look like a rookie! Mother nature has never made skies or forests that even come close to the sublime beauty of those that I experience in lucid dreams. And, as I am sure you can confirm, in dreams there are colors that simply have no physical correlate. This is definitive of nothing, but it still sits in the background as a big question mark for me.


Much of the human creativity that we see in the waking world comes from dreams anyway. They are an attempt to recreate the dream ideas. It is very simple: the mind is exposed to the real world and then it can recreate versions of it and expand upon these versions. It starts with simple models and these models evolve as the mind develops more connections until the models end up outdoing the reality that is perceived when we are awake. To use your terms, the imagination "stretches" even if you are not conscious of it and creativity can arise from the mishmash of already existent concepts. There are no flying pigs with wings but we can convey such concept in language and illustrate it with a picture - and yet, flying pigs don't exist (nor do fairies or unicorns but you can get them simulated in lucid dreams if you wish to see them as existent).

You also say that colours have no physical correlate... well, how do you know when we do not yet have full knowledge of all brain interactions? Also, can you look at the hardware inside a computer and identify the colourful picture of a beach? No, you can't. And yet, the software may display it.

On the intensity of lucid dreams which can outdo reality, consider this:

It’s worth mentioning up front that all of the sensations of the phase experience (OOBE/LD) are not only like those in the physical world, but are to a certain degree even more realistic in terms of sensory perception. At any rate, this is what is to be expected if we consider the phenomenon from a scientific point of view, as it turns out that all of the phase sensations are generated directly in the brain cortex, without having to travel the relatively long path along the nerves from the sensory receptors, a process that somewhat distorts reality during our day-to-day lives. It can be said that sensations in the phase are even more vivid than their waking life counterparts. They are more distinct and more intense, and can thus deliver extraordinary satisfaction, and this makes it possible to experience some events quite vividly – especially when it comes to pleasure, or even real pain. This applies equally to all of the five senses.
- Michael Raduga (obe4u)

I hope I got rid of that question mark for you...

danmc wrote:Most people think of the mind as a container, of sorts, that holds all our thoughts, concepts, images, memories, and the like. Isn't this so? Isn't this your understanding of it? Your statement above seems to indicate that. You say, "in our minds", and describe it as a place and environment. Others say we can be "out" of our minds. So we do understand and treat the mind as if it's a place, a container.


It's not a container. We are our brains. Destroy the brain and there is no mind. It is the brain as an organism that minds things. The brain is computerised. That is the only evidence we have. No "self" as an entity has ever been identified inside it. And no, there is no soul inside the pineal gland.

danmc wrote:Right now, see if you can hold two thoughts simultaneously in your mind. First, hold one thought. Really see that thought. Next, try to hold that same thought while bringing in a second thought, not only while holding the first thought clearly, but while holding the second thought with the same degree of clarity.


I can put three thoughts in one sentence and think about them as only one thought and bring in more if I have to whilst holding them as independent images on screens (isn't my mind wonderful and capable of creating any reality with all its resources!!!): My mother is sleeping, my sister-in-laws cat is eating, and I can see Orion's constellation in the sky (whilst seeing images of other thoughts in my mind)... :mrgreen:

danmc wrote:Maybe Summerland is right and I am weak-minded, but I don't think this is the case, and I think this is true for everyone. I'd be interested to know what your results are. My direct experience shows I cannot hold two thoughts simultaneously. You can repeat the experiment with images, concepts, or memories and I'd wager that the same is basically true.


My friend, I never said you are weak-minded, you're saying it. Whether a person can hold more than two thoughts in their heads or not, what does that prove? What is the point? I wouldn't even place a number on it as people are different. Some can multi-task, others can't. All of us can have thousands of thoughts in a few minutes and only be aware of some. Not everything is brought to consciousness, there is an older and "wiser" side of our minds, one that has been around longer than the one that sits on top of it. One that remains largely unconscious but thanks to phase states of the mind that give rise to lucid dreaming, we can tap into the hidden potential and all that has been learned but gone unnoticed.

danmc wrote:If that's the case, where does our experience happen?


The integration of electrochemical activity. Where else? Imagination if that takes your fancy. For example, regions of the brain associated with self-assessment, self-perception and the evaluation of thoughts and feelings have been found to become active when a person is lucid dreaming. Neurology has also shown us that different types of experience can be lost with brain damage. Also, a bee sees the world differently because it is a different species and its brain is very different from ours. And so do other animals for that matter. What are you getting at? Are you insinuating that dream reality happens objectively (before you do know that dreaming is not only beneficial but necessary for us) and that a schizo's hallucinations are real?

danmc wrote:Yes! Exactly my goal as well. It is indeed a playground. But is that all it is? And do you see how the container concept of mind might lead many to think it is purely, and only a playground? In other words, it is fantasy "in" the mind, and mind is something I possess. Therefore, it is purely a playground "in" "my" mind and has no meaning or reality beyond that. But if mind is nothing more than the currently arising thought, we cannot draw that conclusion.


You are all the thoughts that you've had so far.

danmc wrote:Another super long post. It wouldn't surprise me at all if you held it in your mind as, "blah blah blah" :)


Now this is something I agree with! :D
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

User avatar
Peter
Posts: 1951
Joined: 26 May 2011 08:02
Location: New Zealand

Re: OBE or Lucid Dream?

Postby Peter » 22 Dec 2012 04:45

I have a very guarded use of words and its hard sometimes to get meaning into a post without it going sideways a little, when I say mind I more corectly mean internal experience - this is where it happens.
This is where we see, hear, taste, smell etc not on the outside as that is where infomation comes from via out senses. In a dreamstate i feel there are at least 3 infomation flows, memory, blended memory and the other I have no name for yet. The parts of dreams that are beyond normal experience and becoming more common - the void and other light and energy experiences, I hesitate to call them dreams but we use the word dream or dream state (will I do) as a basic term for this other reality.

I art I see and colors that are alive more so that reflected light, I have no idea where they come from of how the art is created but would very much like to get it on canvas one day as it is unique and interesting. I have seen a lot of the great artists in gallerys and some of it is a tasteful blend and I like viewing it in the dreamspace.

I still puzzle over how we create thougth, like emotion being the end result not a pure state and to have a thought is a few levels deeper than the thougth itself and way ahead in real time as well. What part of me does this thinking and is that part a construct that has a more pure form, I sometimes think we are more that one awareness and dont understand our basic makeup and most of the time are existing in a very crude form of what we could be. Modern life destroys the quite reflective time we need to gain some understanding of what is around us and I also think that life itself is simply a gift and that is all. Beyond this we should find a passion and follow it.

I'm glad to see you apparently overcame your fear


This fear was after about a year of SP a few nights a week and it took a while to deal to this.

On thougths I feel it is 1, 2, 3 and so on, some people can hold and work and swap around very fast but it is still in a line, multitasking I used to joke is another name for confusion :lol:

If I read correctly noise is the only sense that can be truly multtasked with and I tried this by listening to 2 sets of music and one book using 3 devices and 3 sets of ear peices and it worked but again might just be the speed and buffer of my mind at work.
As a side note it did create a very long lucid as in listening to new music the body creates some of the chemicals used to get lucid during the proccess of learning new music. I think this is why some of the biaural beats works in the first instance but then loses effect. (it has never worked for me)


LOL - off I go on a tangent once again
Who are you I asked, the reply "dont be silly, we are your daughers" many years before they were born


Return to “Paranormal Activity”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests