Gordon White, Pieces of Eight: Part 2, Aleister Crowley, Opposite Day |333|

S

Sciborg_S_Patel

#21
Right. But in Castaneda the Eagle is a-moral. It is likely a part of "nature." And there is also the "hero's path" that one can take to avoid oblivion at death. One can't deny that there are dangers in the non-physical. Castaneda certainly didn't and I don't either. But my feeling is much of the danger comes from encountering things out of ignorance that are more akin to visiting a beach on the day of a tsunami. I also accept that there may be malevolent entities in the non-physical who aim to hurt others, but I have a hard time accepting that everything in the non-physical is "out to get you." To my mind that is the kind of speech that the church used to make people shy away from occult activities and I reject that notion.
I'd agree with that.

I don't think it'd be fair to say the non-physical is excessively benevolent nor hostile...though sadly I can't claim any first hand knowledge of the non-physical so...
 
#22
Perhaps this may need to go into a new thread but I will chime in anyway. I never could really wrap my mind around getting hurt out of body by a non-physical entity. What does that even mean? I’ve read certain NDEs that show malevolent non-physical beings doing “physical” harm by “tearing” souls apart.

Howard Storm’s NDE story is a good example of where he was torn apart and then miraculously put back together again.
http://www.near-death.com/experiences/notable/howard-storm.html

Isn’t being “torn apart” or “physically hurt” in the non-physical environment an illusion and all in your subjective mind? Can one be mentally and spiritually strong enough, even during a temporary non-physical experience (OBE, Lucid dreams), to defeat these “demons”? Does this power come from overcoming the fear of the unknown? It seems with Howard’s case, he prayed to God which changed his mindset, converted his fear to love (or at least hope), and found freedom from his non-physical tormentors in his apparent hell.

It is curious that Mediochre apparently experienced non-visible, physical injuries from a negative encounter with one of these malevolent spiritual beings in a seemingly non-physical environment. At least this is according to his testimony. It’s curious indeed.
 
Last edited:
#23
This is precisely why I've never bothered to talk about my own experiences before. It's also why my girlfriend is so hesitant about wanting to join skeptiko. Both myself and her know just how unbelievably crazy it sounds even among other's in this circle.
Just be careful not to release any personal information that helps to pin you down, and you will both be OK.

David
 
#24
That was a great interview! Someone who asks if morality is fundamental like particle spin, is worth listening to!

I think even here on Earth, people find it really hard to define what is morality. There are endless puzzles - for example there is a British soldier who admitted killing some fatally wounded Iraqis to put them out of their misery. He may be prosecuted, but most people think that would not be just. The world is full of such moral ambiguity.

Morality seems very hard to define, and it only gets harder when you factor in the idea that this life isn't the end. Even causing pain isn't so simple, for example, masochists like to feel pain, and others inflict pain on themselves to prove themselves!

At the very least, morality seems to be something that everyone has to define for themselves.

David
 
#28
Yes. I think the Christian mystics, like Böhme for example, likely were able to connect to the ineffable in a substantial and transformative way.
Yes, but I don't think he contributed to Christianity as it was practised by the Church (I may be wrong). Surely the day to day practice of Christianity is what defined it.

David
 
#29
Are you keeping records of your testing? It would be interesting to see some of that.
I don't bother for a number of reasons,

1: Nothing about said records could function as objective evidence for anyone. I could show you a picture of some scratches, claim they were caused by Type A Kruger Effect and you could easily dismiss it as a hoax because nothing about the image on it's own independently proves what I’m saying. the same goes for dream journals. Let's say my girlfriend and I write up our independent accounts of a dream which we then confirm to be shared. Now we take those write ups and give them to you. You can throw them away as just words on a page that we could've easily colluded together to make look convincing. The only thing people could possibly consider objective evidence would be a showmanship style display of magic on demand right in front of their eyes. Even then I bet people would incessantly claim that it was somehow holographicly photoshopped or something.

2: I'm training this like one would train any physical skill such as a martial art. Using that analogy, if I had to stop after every single kick and bring out micrometers and video to determine if it was a "real" kick to verify the existence of kicking I would never get anywhere. I just have to suck at the beginning and get better as I go.

3: The belief or disbelief of another person isn't going to affect my results so why should I waste valuable training time pandering to them? The closest someone will get to evidence from me at the moment are the methods that I've been using to get the results that I've gotten and my theories on why certain things work and other things don't. These are things that they are free to test out themselves but if they just want me to spoon feed them their definition of evidence they're out of luck because I don't owe that to them. No matter how much they then whine that they were right all along about how I was full of shit.

4: I want to try making a sort of manual on how to do what I can do. The only people I ultimately care about are those who are interested in learning for themselves and/or helping critique my methods to improve them. Yet I came to Skeptiko to talk about it despite not having any direct evidence for this skill and why is that? Because One of the if not the most important factor I've discovered through my training and research that affects a persons ability to do any of this is desire. If a person's desire for evidence about the existence of something outweighs their desire for the thing itself then there's simply no way they will ever attain it because they will never push themselves to learn in the first place. People do not try to do things they think are impossible. I will get into the mechanical reasons I've discovered for this in another thread.

I know from hearing numerous ayahuasca reports that people do sometimes have an negative entity energy attached and that it can be released through the ceremony. Do you reject that notion? Do you reject that true shamans have any "power?"
I do not reject the notion but I would need far more information before considering it true. For example I'd want to know why it needs to be Ayuascha and not some other drug. What is it that the drug does to the entity? What does the shaman do. What makes a shaman a "true" shaman. What makes an entity "negative?" If an entity is doing something you don't like, does that alone define it as negative? But most important of all, how do all these things mechanically fit together? What are the properties of the entity that make this method work? Why is the entity attaching in the first place? Basically I've heard lots of claims like this and no one has ever managed to give me a proper mathematical, physics based model explaining why it works, usually all anyone tells me just a bunch of hollow terms like "negative energy" or "raising your vibrations" which they never define even when asked. Furthermore even if I did have something like that happening to me psychedelic drugs can have some pretty nasty side effects, are typically illegal and expensive, and I wouldn't want to replace said entity with a medical condition that's even worse than whatever it was doing to me. Plus I just plain don't want to take drugs.

If that were the case with your claim I wouldn't bother with it either. I don't care that it works I care how it works. Because otherwise I could just as easily go to a priest and get them to exorcise the "demon" out of me too. I could just as easily go on a native american vision quest and "purify" myself. I could just as easily use my own methods that seem to work for me. So if you're going to tell me that it specifically is an entity attached to me and I need to specifically take that drug and I need to specifically find a Peruvian shaman then I expect you to be able to explain to me the medical, physical, chemical relationships that lead to that specific diagnosis and treatment. If the best someone can do is say "well I've heard that it works." then it's worthless. I could just as easily say that I've heard that if you chant the lords prayer to a glass of water five times and then drink it that works too. If someone who believed they had an entity attached to them tried that and it "worked" I would be seriously questioning whether they really had anything attached to them in the first place or if it was all in their head. I've been told in the past that if I were in a situation like the one I described that all I neded to do is imagine some yellow light and that would somehow get rid of the creature. Because yellow light was teh light of "love" and somehow that creture would be made out of "darkness" and somehow love kills darkness or something. That's the quality I've come to expect from "occult knowledge" including pople like Robert Bruce. So I'm just done with it., just comepletely done. Unless someone else can actually show me something as good or better than what I've developed myself and explain how it works I have absolutely no reason to open another book or look to any other source because I'm so tired of the complete lack of scientific rigour. I'm tired of the meaningless rituals, burning candles, appealing to other sprits to do things for you. I'm tired of hearing about drugs, I'm tired of the contradictions, I'm tired of every last little bit of it. My stuff actually works, that's all I really need to know right now.

Meanwhile, I wrote up the overview of my own reseach on your Magic Discussion thread along with a mathematical basis for what I was claiming. Using that overview alone as well as the follow up exercise I wrote you can rebuild the compressed energy blade technique I claimed to use. If negative emotions are closely correlated with poltergeists, and poltergeists are capable of kinetic effects, then if you learn how to control the emotions and mental states that seem to cause the most poltergeist effects and then refine it further to get the specific effects that you want then you could easily shape that energy into any form that you want. Such as a blade.

This uses things that I know have been discussed on Skeptiko before as well. Goal oriented men scoring higher on picture prediction tests demonstrating that having goals makes you better at things like that. Combined with negative emotions being closely associated with poltergeist phenomena equals the ability to train such a skill for yourself. But even that incredibly vague overview look at documented research and phenomena is more than I've personally ever found from any sort of occult documents.

I think we have a general idea of what a shared dream is. Do you have a different concept of shared dreaming? Let's get into the meat and potatoes of the how and why in the new thread or conversation, whichever we decide on.
I'm going to do a new thread. I was originally going to go into an indepth technical explanation of how to rebuild the compressed energy bade technique to show that I don't need any esoteric, objective morality implying terms to explain how it's done and how anyone could train it themselves and other things the fundamental process can be applied to. But then as I started writing it I realised that if I have to start right from square one and explain every single fundamental concept I would be here all day. It would only result in me hijacking this thread and I'm not going to do that. I've tried about five different times to start my own thread on this topic but I never know how to start or what to say because there's so much to get through. I'm also taking a break from Skeptiko forums because I am spending way too much time on here and I have real world things I need to be getting done.
 
#30
1: Nothing about said records could function as objective evidence for anyone. I could show you a picture of some scratches, claim they were caused by Type A Kruger Effect and you could easily dismiss it as a hoax because nothing about the image on it's own independently proves what I’m saying. the same goes for dream journals. Let's say my girlfriend and I write up our independent accounts of a dream which we then confirm to be shared. Now we take those write ups and give them to you. You can throw them away as just words on a page that we could've easily colluded together to make look convincing. The only thing people could possibly consider objective evidence would be a showmanship style display of magic on demand right in front of their eyes. Even then I bet people would incessantly claim that it was somehow holographicly photoshopped or something.
Andy Paquette who participates here has several peer reviewed journal articles detailing his precognitive dreams and veridical OBE experiences. Granted, it takes a tremendous amount of time for him to present that material in a manner so that it can be critiqued by "science." Not everyone's cup of tea. I agree that just telling a bunch of stories is basically meaningless. Anyone can do that.
do not reject the notion but I would need far more information before considering it true. For example I'd want to know why it needs to be Ayuascha and not some other drug. What is it that the drug does to the entity? What does the shaman do. What makes a shaman a "true" shaman. What makes an entity "negative?" If an entity is doing something you don't like, does that alone define it as negative?
I'm guessing like anything else to really answer these questions you would need to live and train with the shamans for a number of years. I certainly don't consider the work they do "worthless." I'm the kind of person that can read other people's accounts and accept them at face value for what they are. Understand that I personally don't need to know how or why things work, but I am willing to accept that well documented processes like taking ayahuasca with an actual shaman can allow for powerful change in that setting with those tools. I can see and accept the results without needing to explain why they happen.

We really can't explain why anything happens. All we have is our experience of something happening.

I'm also taking a break from Skeptiko forums because I am spending way too much time on here and I have real world things I need to be getting done.
Certainly understand that. You were the one who said you wanted to elaborate on your stuff. But obviously working with others takes time and we only have so much time allotted.
 
#31
I may wake up and ruminate on "what that means." But I don't get the same sense of "morality."
I don't think we could really conflate the dream world with objective reality.

I understand what you're getting at here. It's true there doesn't, on the surface, appear to be any kind of objective morality within dreams. But when you say you ruminate on "what that means", you seem to be saying this as though while you are capable of rumination in this reality, in the dream world you are not. For the most part things just kind of happen, right? Unless you are a prolific lucid dreamer, there is a sense that we are not in control of our own consciousness in the same way we are in control in this reality. Hell, I spontaneously lucid dream on occasion, and even then I don't have full control. However, I know for a fact that I have, within dreams questioned my actions or felt bad about something I did that was wrong. So I'm not entirely sold on this idea that dreams are amoral.

Another thing to be said about comparing the dream world to the waking world is that dreams are HIGHLY symbolic. And while we may use symbolism in this reality as well, our actions are our actions. While there may be nuance to our beliefs, thoughts and feelings, we cannot really say the same for our actions. Actions are binary. We either take action or we do not. Actions are not symbolic, unless you're speaking of ritual, but even then it is often the objects used that are symbolic, not necessarily the action itself. So what takes place in the dream world is often not at all what it seems.

For example, someone close to me told me about a dream they had where they were helping their manager from work shovel snow from his driveway. As they're working, his manager hands him a small box and tells him to be very careful with it because it's a very small but very expensive bottle of liquor, that cost him $2 million. But, the dreamer is wearing large winter gloves and fumbles and drops the box, destroying the bottle inside. His manager gets angry with him, and he wakes up.
I thought this was actually pretty simple to translate. There is something in his life, that seems small and perhaps unimportant or insignificant, but is very valuable or precious, and he's not caring for it as he should be. It was up to him, the dreamer, to figure out what this thing was. At face value it's kind of a stupid dream where he, the dreamer, makes a big blunder. But oh well, just a dream, right? Not really. I see it as incredibly valuable information that his subconscious, or perhaps even his "higher self" or another entity is trying to communicate. Highly symbolic, important and full of meaning, even if on the surface it appears to be none of those things.

It's an interesting thought, comparing morality in the dream world to that of the waking world, but as I hope I outlined above, morality seems to require a consciousness that is in control of itself. A consciousness that is aware and in direct control of its own actions seems to be the key. Once again, there we go with consciousness itself being the key component. Action without consciousness can be and often is amoral. It is the insertion of consciousness that turns the action into either moral or immoral.

Saying reality (or consciousness) at base, whatever that may be, seems to be or is amoral is just backdoor materialism, IMO. It's like, wanting your cake and eating it too. It's saying, yes there is consciousness, yes there is free will, yes there is a spiritual reality but morally, it's a free for all. It's just more "I make my own morals" type stuff that's stinks of convenience. It's basically moral relativism.
 
#32
Isn’t being “torn apart” or “physically hurt” in the non-physical environment an illusion and all in your subjective mind?
I think yes. I've said it here before but I'll repeat it here. I remember listening to a podcast where a guy, who was an atheist, "died" and had an NDE. He had the experience of dying and thinking "well, this is it, lights out." But was surprised to find that his consciousness didn't end. It just....was. Then he started getting scared, he thought, "oh shit, if there is an afterlife, I'm going to hell. I'm a peice of shit. I haven't done anything good in my life." At which point he found himself to be an actual pile of shit. He started to panic, believing he was going to be trapped as an actual pile of shit for eternity. After a while he started to calm down and the "pile" started to crumble and fall away. It was then that he realized he was not a "peice of shit" and he went on to have the "traditional" NDE with life review, etc. I cannot remember the podcast or the man's name unfortunately.

I watched a documentary some time ago, I believe about the Tibetan Book of the Dead. It featured a village going through a ritual after the death of one of the elders. I remember part of this was ritual involved the living helping the dead through a certain phase where the dead are presented with monsters (or demons in western vernacular) of their own consciousness that they must recognize as shadows of the self and that they are illusions in order to continue on to the afterlife. If they cannot see through these illusions, they will sit in torment in a kind of purgatory. It's been a while since I watched it, so I'm definitely paraphrasing a great deal here. But the point is, it's not unheard of in ancient spiritual traditions the idea that hell is literally within ones own mind.

I'll see if I can dig up the name of that documentary.

Edit: I believe it was this one
 
Last edited:
#33
I think yes. I've said it here before but I'll repeat it here. I remember listening to a podcast where a guy, who was an atheist, "died" and had an NDE. He had the experience of dying and thinking "well, this is it, lights out." But was surprised to find that his consciousness didn't end. It just....was. Then he started getting scared, he thought, "oh shit, if there is an afterlife, I'm going to hell. I'm a peice of shit. I haven't done anything good in my life." At which point he found himself to be an actual pile of shit. He started to panic, believing he was going to be trapped as an actual pile of shit for eternity. After a while he started to calm down and the "pile" started to crumble and fall away. It was then that he realized he was not a "peice of shit" and he went on to have the "traditional" NDE with life review, etc. I cannot remember the podcast or the man's name unfortunately.

I watched a documentary some time ago, I believe about the Tibetan Book of the Dead. It featured a village going through a ritual after the death of one of the elders. I remember part of this was ritual involved the living helping the dead through a certain phase where the dead are presented with monsters (or demons in western vernacular) of their own consciousness that they must recognize as shadows of the self and that they are illusions in order to continue on to the afterlife. If they cannot see through these illusions, they will sit in torment in a kind of purgatory. It's been a while since I watched it, so I'm definitely paraphrasing a great deal here. But the point is, it's not unheard of in ancient spiritual traditions the idea that hell is literally within ones own mind.

I'll see if I can dig up the name of that documentary.

Edit: I believe it was this one
In many ways, what you describe regarding the 'afterlife' takes place during this existence too, we can be fighting illusions and creations of our own mind here as well. That's not to say that all problems are self-inflicted, but there are almost certainly situations where the solution starts with recognising the illusory nature of one's 'demons'.
 
#34
This is precisely why I've never bothered to talk about my own experiences before. It's also why my girlfriend is so hesitant about wanting to join skeptiko. Both myself and her know just how unbelievably crazy it sounds even among other's in this circle. We're very self aware of that fact. It's humiliating but that's also what continues to drive me to develop things into something real and tangible that can be shown to and taught to others. Because I want to demystify all this religious drug induced hippy nonsense and actually get tangible results. Not like the shaman in the movie that Alex mentioned who lost to a piece of metal because his spirits clearly weren't good enough to do the job.

Reading things off of the internet and then taking them at face value because "oh a shaman said it" or whatever isn't real research. My day in and day out grind trying to figure shit out, making hypothesis and testing them, refining what I learn, that's real research.

I’m sorry but it honestly sounds like your comment is based on not liking what I'm saying and you don't want to debate it. You wanna sit there in your little echo chamber having everyone agree with you and then call yourself a scientist or skeptic. So you're just putting me down because you don't like that it's different from what you've heard. It's like the standard lightworker cults going “Oh I don't resonate with that you're just all darkhats” all over again. I came to Skeptiko because I had higher expectations for this community and Alex has certainly been one of the few I've talked to thus far to actually live up to those expectations which I commend him for.

For example, what's your basis for thinking I have an entity attached to me? is it merely beause "bad things happened therefore entity" as you appear to be saying? I mean really, you feel that I might be a troll and if I'm not you feel that it must therefore be an entity. Then stated that I should go do "real research." And yet you're saying "oh on these forums we have to be skeptical." Then maybe actually try being skeptical and get further data instead of going with your feelings. Maybe try asking some clarifying questions about the details of my story, ask what the Kruger effect is, ask what I mean by shared dreams and how I induce one, ask about the process of a projection maybe. Y'know, basic clarifying questions like a researcher would ask. So you can attempt to accurately determine whether or not I actually am a troll making stuff up or if maybe there's something to it.
Please remember that this forum has been plagued by trolls of various types. I guess people are constantly on the lookout for such trouble makers! If someone is unhappy about a post, the first step is to make a report, which comes to me. I can reassure you that nobody has reported any of your posts. I suggest you start a thread to talk about your experiences in full. Don't assume that everyone knows what you mean by phrases like "energy signature", please explain! Remember that people here come from a wide range of backgrounds. Also, please bear in mind that the terminology relating to anomalous experiences is less well defined than, say the terminology relating to science.

I would suggest you start with your earliest experiences - start slowly so that everyone gets what you are saying - and tell us how exactly you and your girlfriend got to where you are now. Could some of it be tested objectively? This is worth thinking about, even if you have no wish to actually go and be tested (something I totally understand!).

Many of us here - myself included - reveal ideas and aspects of ourselves that we do not share with many, if any, other people. I can tell you that I tried to share the concept of NDE's and what they mean, with a man whose wife was dying of cancer. That did not go down well, and I had to back off sharply.

This is Skeptiko, so you will be challenged by people - but that is the price you pay for being in a place where people really think about these issues.

David
 
Last edited:
#35
I don't think we could really conflate the dream world with objective reality.

I understand what you're getting at here. It's true there doesn't, on the surface, appear to be any kind of objective morality within dreams. But when you say you ruminate on "what that means", you seem to be saying this as though while you are capable of rumination in this reality, in the dream world you are not. For the most part things just kind of happen, right? Unless you are a prolific lucid dreamer, there is a sense that we are not in control of our own consciousness in the same way we are in control in this reality. Hell, I spontaneously lucid dream on occasion, and even then I don't have full control. However, I know for a fact that I have, within dreams questioned my actions or felt bad about something I did that was wrong. So I'm not entirely sold on this idea that dreams are amoral.

Another thing to be said about comparing the dream world to the waking world is that dreams are HIGHLY symbolic. And while we may use symbolism in this reality as well, our actions are our actions. While there may be nuance to our beliefs, thoughts and feelings, we cannot really say the same for our actions. Actions are binary. We either take action or we do not. Actions are not symbolic, unless you're speaking of ritual, but even then it is often the objects used that are symbolic, not necessarily the action itself. So what takes place in the dream world is often not at all what it seems.

For example, someone close to me told me about a dream they had where they were helping their manager from work shovel snow from his driveway. As they're working, his manager hands him a small box and tells him to be very careful with it because it's a very small but very expensive bottle of liquor, that cost him $2 million. But, the dreamer is wearing large winter gloves and fumbles and drops the box, destroying the bottle inside. His manager gets angry with him, and he wakes up.
I thought this was actually pretty simple to translate. There is something in his life, that seems small and perhaps unimportant or insignificant, but is very valuable or precious, and he's not caring for it as he should be. It was up to him, the dreamer, to figure out what this thing was. At face value it's kind of a stupid dream where he, the dreamer, makes a big blunder. But oh well, just a dream, right? Not really. I see it as incredibly valuable information that his subconscious, or perhaps even his "higher self" or another entity is trying to communicate. Highly symbolic, important and full of meaning, even if on the surface it appears to be none of those things.

It's an interesting thought, comparing morality in the dream world to that of the waking world, but as I hope I outlined above, morality seems to require a consciousness that is in control of itself. A consciousness that is aware and in direct control of its own actions seems to be the key. Once again, there we go with consciousness itself being the key component. Action without consciousness can be and often is amoral. It is the insertion of consciousness that turns the action into either moral or immoral.

Saying reality (or consciousness) at base, whatever that may be, seems to be or is amoral is just backdoor materialism, IMO. It's like, wanting your cake and eating it too. It's saying, yes there is consciousness, yes there is free will, yes there is a spiritual reality but morally, it's a free for all. It's just more "I make my own morals" type stuff that's stinks of convenience. It's basically moral relativism.
I remember a dream that I might have had more than once in which I suddenly "remembered" that I had murdered two sisters I happened to know and buried them in some forgotten place. The guilt I felt within the dream was absolutely crushing. How could I have forgotten that I murdered them? Had I condemned myself to an eternity of hell?

When I woke up, I still actually thought I'd murdered them. I was trying to remember why, where and when. Of course, I didn't actually murder them: they were still alive and well, I was relieved to discover. God only knows what the symbolism of the dream was, but the point is, that within the dream, I experienced morality. I knew what was right and what was wrong, and it was wrong to murder someone. No doubt about it: the guilt I felt was real, the regret, the feeling of having lost my soul, all of that. My skin still crawls with the memory of how I felt.
 
#36
I understand what you're getting at here. It's true there doesn't, on the surface, appear to be any kind of objective morality within dreams. But when you say you ruminate on "what that means", you seem to be saying this as though while you are capable of rumination in this reality, in the dream world you are not. For the most part things just kind of happen, right? Unless you are a prolific lucid dreamer, there is a sense that we are not in control of our own consciousness in the same way we are in control in this reality. Hell, I spontaneously lucid dream on occasion, and even then I don't have full control. However, I know for a fact that I have, within dreams questioned my actions or felt bad about something I did that was wrong. So I'm not entirely sold on this idea that dreams are amoral.
I wasn't really clear in what I was saying. I do think and feel remorse within dreams. So there is an internal morality to dreams, but when you awake there is no consequence for any dream action. You may be disturbed by something, as Larkin recounts. But as far as we can tell the "morality" doesn't really carry from the dream world into "physical" world. Some advanced yogis have felt that the relationship of this physical life and "waking" into death presents the same scenario. That in fact this life was really but a dream.

Another thing to be said about comparing the dream world to the waking world is that dreams are HIGHLY symbolic. And while we may use symbolism in this reality as well, our actions are our actions. While there may be nuance to our beliefs, thoughts and feelings, we cannot really say the same for our actions. Actions are binary. We either take action or we do not. Actions are not symbolic, unless you're speaking of ritual, but even then it is often the objects used that are symbolic, not necessarily the action itself. So what takes place in the dream world is often not at all what it seems.
I personally feel this way when I am not devoting time and energy to dream journalling--the snippets that I remember are relatively short and appear symbolic in nature. But as I record my dreams I begin to realize that dreaming occurs almost all night and many dreams appear to be "me" (whatever that is) living in another place, doing some other things. There may be some occasional dream weirdness, and of course there is the fluidity of time and place that is ubiquitous in dream reality. But I don't find most dreams to be highly symbolic. I don't really subscribe to the idea that most dreams are our subconscious working through issues, or trying to communicate something to our conscious selves. I think that happens a certain percentage of the time. Other times I think we are participating in a shared non-physical reality with others, whether their source consciousness is this physical reality (now or previously) or perhaps some other layer of reality. Other times I think our local mind is just riffing, creating something. Sometimes this creation is joyful, sometimes fearful. This I think is when it is most likely that the subconscious mind will do it's "communicating."

I'm not really a moral relativist. I don't really like that position. Morality certainly exists here in this reality and like I said earlier, likely carries over in some form to the next layer (or layers) of reality. (Where we "go" when we "die.") But I'm still not certain that makes it objective in nature. I think this reality is constructed in some sense and in that regard morality is likely an element of construction like gravity or time. And just like we already see time and gravity in the next layer of reality are quite different, morality may also warp or become completely unneeded as we "mature." I'm certainly not any kind of materialist.
 
#37
My skin still crawls with the memory of how I felt.
I agree the dream and waking worlds are not clear cut. This morning I awoke convinced that a former girlfriend's present husband thought I was stalking them both. Nothing could be further from the truth, I have no idea where they live, no interest in their lives (if they're even together), and our relationship ended more than 30 years ago. She/they are to all intents "historical" characters in my "story". However in the dream my wife and I happened to pass a non-descript building at an equally random location in a car, from which the chap emerged accusing us of following them.

For the first twenty minutes, even while drinking my first cup of tea of the day, I tried to work out why this chap (who I wouldn't know if I saw him in the street, but recognised immediately in the dream) thought we were interested in their lives. It wasn't particularly upsetting in my dream, more ridiculous and annoying than anything, but absolutely convincing. I'm tempted to think that I came up in their real conversation or thoughts, and this somehow transmuted itself on a psychic level, but that's only a way of validating the reality of my dream. Interestingly, about two months previously I had a vividly lucid dream in which I explored their house! This was a new location to me in the dream, and I was aware I was there alone and uninvited, but I was just being "nosey". The details were most compelling, the kind of handles on the kitchen cupboards, the books on the shelves, the gravel on the drive, the light fittings and patterns on the soft furnishings were all there to see, and didn't resemble anyone's house and I knew I shouldn't really be there.

It reminded me of the story I posted recently, where the new house owner's mother was intimately acquainted with the place her son had bought, and the old owner believed she was the woman who used to haunt it. The obvious conclusion is that I have "unfinished business" with the relationship and on some subconscious level this may be so, but it's not something that's apparent to me, and wouldn't account for the clarity of either dream. Although I'm not in contact with anyone who might know her/their whereabouts, and certainly wouldn't enquire, if new information - waking or otherwise - does arise I shall post it!
 
Last edited:
#38
In many ways, what you describe regarding the 'afterlife' takes place during this existence too, we can be fighting illusions and creations of our own mind here as well. That's not to say that all problems are self-inflicted, but there are almost certainly situations where the solution starts with recognising the illusory nature of one's 'demons'.
I agree and this reminds me of a time when I was younger. I had a cousin whom I was close to in age and emotionally who was dating a guy that was...a little messed up. He was a very sweet guy, but he got himself involved with drugs, homelessness,etc. IIRC, his home life had been quite bad, which kind of led to the drugs, partying, homelessness lifestyle. We were conversing one day about challenges in life, how difficult they can be to overcome, etc. and he asked me how I had overcome some difficult situations in my life and I remember telling him that we must face our own demons, look at them head on instead of ignoring them or trying to run away from them. That, no matter how frightening or difficult this challenge is, it's what we must do if we want to move past them, to grow and become a better version of ourselves. Little did I know at the time that I was essentially relaying Jungian psychotherapy philosophy to him. It wasn't until many years later I realized this.

So, my point here is I agree with you that often we can be tormented by our own personal demons, that when ignored can actually manifest themselves in physical reality in various ways. For some I think there is a possibility that they manifest as seemingly real entities. Not to say that all instances of experience of "evil" entities are this (I truly don't know, but can only say I have never experienced such a thing) but that it goes back to the idea that we are actively creating our own reality, and it is through our choice whether that reality be fraught with demons or angels.
 
#39
I wasn't really clear in what I was saying. I do think and feel remorse within dreams. So there is an internal morality to dreams, but when you awake there is no consequence for any dream action. You may be disturbed by something, as Larkin recounts. But as far as we can tell the "morality" doesn't really carry from the dream world into "physical" world. Some advanced yogis have felt that the relationship of this physical life and "waking" into death presents the same scenario. That in fact this life was really but a dream.


I personally feel this way when I am not devoting time and energy to dream journalling--the snippets that I remember are relatively short and appear symbolic in nature. But as I record my dreams I begin to realize that dreaming occurs almost all night and many dreams appear to be "me" (whatever that is) living in another place, doing some other things. There may be some occasional dream weirdness, and of course there is the fluidity of time and place that is ubiquitous in dream reality. But I don't find most dreams to be highly symbolic. I don't really subscribe to the idea that most dreams are our subconscious working through issues, or trying to communicate something to our conscious selves. I think that happens a certain percentage of the time. Other times I think we are participating in a shared non-physical reality with others, whether their source consciousness is this physical reality (now or previously) or perhaps some other layer of reality. Other times I think our local mind is just riffing, creating something. Sometimes this creation is joyful, sometimes fearful. This I think is when it is most likely that the subconscious mind will do it's "communicating."

I'm not really a moral relativist. I don't really like that position. Morality certainly exists here in this reality and like I said earlier, likely carries over in some form to the next layer (or layers) of reality. (Where we "go" when we "die.") But I'm still not certain that makes it objective in nature. I think this reality is constructed in some sense and in that regard morality is likely an element of construction like gravity or time. And just like we already see time and gravity in the next layer of reality are quite different, morality may also warp or become completely unneeded as we "mature." I'm certainly not any kind of materialist.
I agree, there are different kinds of dreams. Some are highly symbolic, meant to relay information. From whom, I'm not sure. Perhaps our subconscious, perhaps our Higher Self, perhaps "God". These are the ones I think we are most likely to remember. Then there are the kind that I call "brain poo", lol! It's gobbledygook that is the brain's way of taking out the trash. Then there are those that I think could be astral travel to other realities.

So no, not all dreams are symbolic. Not all are conveying important messages. But I think it suffices to say the in the western world there is a distinct propensity to dismiss all dreams as being "brain poo".
 
#40
So, my point here is I agree with you that often we can be tormented by our own personal demons, that when ignored can actually manifest themselves in physical reality in various ways.
Here is an encounter with a demon. A long and fascinating interview, and my third link to the same writer. 8:30 to around 35:00 minutes for the relevant parts.

 
Top