On the advice of a friend I recently read, "Otherwhere, A Field Guide to Nonphysical Reality for the Out-of-body Traveler," by Kurt Leland.  It was a great piece of advice.

Leland describes how he developed his OBE ability and then goes on to describe, in great detail, many of the areas of nonphysical reality he has explored using this technique.  The level of detail in his descriptions is extraordinary.  But the thing I found most interesting and useful for those interested in exploring nonphysical realites was insight gained into the nature of our perception.

In my own attempts to teach others about exploring such places I've stressed the role of what I call "the Interpreter" as a component of our consciousness.  In my own jargon the Interpreter is the component of our consciousness that "translates" input from our nonphysical senses into the images, thoughts, ideas, sounds, etc. that we consciously perceive.  This translation is always done by translating what our nonphysical senses perceive into  the "nearest similar things" stored within our individual pre-existing memory.  The translation always introduces "Interpreter Overlay" errors.  We never directly perceive what is actually there, we only perceive the nearest similar things previously stored in our memory.  So, two people observing the same nonphysical "thing" will almost never "see it" in identical forms.  I've also stressed that the Interpreter's  translation is always done within the context of our beliefs and language.

Leland's desriptions of his OBE experiences and observations do a marvelous job of more deeply explaining what I mean by Interpreter Overlay from a perspective that is different than mine.  After all, I don't do OBE.

For those of you interested in learning about and understanding more about how your perception actuallly works Leland's book is a gold mine.  And, his descriptions of exploring many of the same places I written about give far more fine detail in an entertaining and eye-opening book.

Try it, you'll like it.

Bruce

augoeideian wrote on Mar 26^th, 2007 at 5:38am:


One of the more interesting concepts Leland's experience points to, and my own experience seems to verify, is that there really isn't any "material substance" that exists.  There is only something we could describe using the wornout term, "energy."  And that each individual, "physical human", nonphysical humaun, alien, etc. perceives this energy within the context of their individual perspective, including previously stored memories, beliefs, expectation. etc.  What we call physical reality is then only a perspective within which we perceive "energies" that to us human "physicals" appear to be "solid" and therefore real.  But to an "nonphysical" human (an OBEer for example) or "alien" these objects no longer appear "solid" and in fact they can be passed through as easily as physicals walk through air or water.

A really interesting example from Leland's book takes place while he joins a group of "aliens" touring one of the human "hells."  To call this place a "hell" is actually incorrect, but from Leland's perspective it's descriptive of the activities he perceives there.  

Leland witnesses a newly deceased person going through a process that is "purging" certain experiential energies taken on during that person's lifetime.  Leland perceives this as a fire-breathing dragon carrying out this (what appears to him to be a) horrendous process.  The aliens on the tour perceive the same process but in a completely different way.  Viewed side-by-side, so to speak, Leland's and the Alien's descriptions of their perceptions says volumes about how instantaneously, all-pervasively, and undetectably our own Interpreters operate to color and distort our perception.

augoeideian wrote on Mar 26^th, 2007 at 5:38am:


Yup, I agree completely.  The thing that fascinates me in Leland's accounts of examples of this is how well he gets across the point that this process goes on so seamlessly in our experience that most of us never realize it is happening at all.  Instead, we will spend endless hours arguing over what, if anything, actually exists beyond physical reality based on the fact that different physical humans perceive those things in entirely different forms.  So, we have endlesss, meaningless and pointless arguments over whether Monroe has it right or Swedenborg has it right or someone else has it right.  All these arguments seem to come out of the assumption that if (metaphorically) one of these guys perceives an angel where the other guy perceives a demon, one of the guys must be right and the other must  wrong.  I find such meaningless arguments tiresome.  If we attempt to find the Truth by comparing the experiences of others, we will get nowhere (in my opinion) until we realize that each individual's person's perception is colored and distorted (including our own) in unique ways to give unique results.  This is why I keep saying, don't believe a word I say, have our own direct experience and come to our own conclusions.  In my view this gives the best chance that an individual we begin to see the inconsistencies and internal conflicts within their own perception.  And in the struggle to make sense of those inconsistencies perhaps understanding more about how our perception works will rise within awareness.

augoeideian wrote on Mar 26^th, 2007 at 5:38am:


I would go just a little further and say the same principle applies within every reality that exists, but then, that is just my own distorted perception  

I encourge anyone with the means to get hold of a copy of Leland's book, wade through the first few chapters of background material, and then devour the real meat of his story.

Bruce

hi there everybody..I strong endorse Kurt Leland's book "Otherwhere" also. I just finished reading it last month or so and it clarified a great deal the "interpretor" Bruce talks about, how it's different perception for each of us, according to our unique belief systems.

I also agree emotions are tied to belief systems and following an emotion can open up inner vistas to see what it is we do believe, or hold valuable to believe. I found Leland's book an enjoyable read overall and I too deal a lot with symbolism within obe or dream and I was impressed his symbols are much more dramatic than mine. He does inspire one to explore on their own also.
I also agree perceptions are just perceptions and not the whole truth to be accepting in absolute terms. I think an open mind when reading or learning new things is a great aid to afterlife exploration.

thank you Bruce for mentioning Leland, it's good to see you here now and then!!
love, alysia

Hey Vicky,

I am finally getting to answering your post!

Vicky wrote on Mar 27^th, 2007 at 9:03pm:

The Overlay seems to serve to "channel" or focus the experience into the context of previous experience, beliefs, expectations, etc.  So, I guess I'd say the Overlay doesn't alter the context in which learning takes place, it sort of forces the learning to be "only" within that context.  Benefit is then only within the context of the pre-existing experience memories, beliefs, expectations, etc. of the experiencer.  But that does leave a "downside."  In order to gain benefit from the experience beyond the Overlay we have to, most often, resort to trying to interpret what we call the "symbology" of the experience.  Gaining understanding beyond our Interpreter's Overlay then becomes close kin to dream interpretation.  

We are limited to trying to decifer our Overlay's "symbols" to gain understanding beyond our present limited understanding.  A sort of Catch-22.  The hard part is that most of us don't even realize that what we are perceiving in any given moment are only symbols that represent what we are perceiving.  So for example someone perceives a hideous dragon, breathing fire on a soul, and reducing that soul to mere ashes, and believes that is what they have actually encountered.  Then the perceiver gets all twitterpated about dealing with the implications of encountering such a fire-breathing dragon that is "destroying souls" in the afterlife.  (BTW: this dragon example is in Leland's book)

Whole religons could be then built up around the fear of souls being destroyed by fire-breathing dragon's after death.  Millions of people throughout centuries of time could alter the course of their lives because some fool believed his or her encounter was with such a soul destroying, fire-breathing dragon.  But, the dragon was only and Interpreter Overlay, a dream symbol if you will, for an afterdeath process Danion Brinkley calls the "panoramic life review."  Just a process in which the deceased relives life experiences from the perspective of the people interacted with during their physical lifetime to gain understanding and release (or burn away) false understandings of those experiences.

Vicky wrote on Mar 27^th, 2007 at 9:03pm:


Yeah!  Couldn't have put it better myself!  Or said another way, once we realize, during the experience, that any "framework" is an overlay, that overlay can sort of dissolve and we might then get closer to more clearly perceiving beyond the Overlay.

Vicky wrote on Mar 27^th, 2007 at 9:03pm:

From my experience I'd say that there doesn't seem to  be an end to overlays, but that as we perceive from a munch larger "perspective"  the disuise that overlays impose upon perception become easier to "see beyond" and the meaning of our experiences becomes clearer and closer to the "Truth."

And, while there is a tendency to see overlays as "bad" if my (read that me as my Higher Self) mission/goal is to understand more about what it means to experience existence as a human being, knowledge of overlays and their effects are part of the "mission/goal."   Like someone said, to make an omlet you have to break some eggs.  If your mission is to make an omlet there is no sense complaining about all the empty egg shells cluttering up the landscape.

Love,

Bruce