Copyrighted Logo

css menu by Css3Menu.com


 

Bruce's 5th book, a Home Study Course, is now available.
Books & Tapes by Bruce Moen
    Bruce's Blog now at http://www.afterlife-knowledge.com/blog....

  HomeHelpSearchLoginRegister  
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
validity of obe's/vs. lucid dreaming (Read 7599 times)
Terethian
Ex Member


Re: validity of obe's/vs. lucid dreaming
Reply #15 - Feb 21st, 2008 at 6:15pm
 
No one will deny that the human brain is a powerful thing. No one can deny that many dreams are  definitely connected to actual events that took place or thoughts that a person has recently been occupied with.

I also have a hard time accepting any reported NDE/OBE as a true real experience when it is possible that it is all brain related.

However!!!!!

I have read some OBE's in which the person reported an object on the roof of a building which they could not have possibly known was there because they were unconscious and lying on a bed in a hospital. For a person to be able to actually report a shoe or some object that is somewhere they have not been because they saw it when they were "out of they're body" is truly baffling.

The major issue is whether we can believe the sources of this information. I think the only way I would believe it for certain is if I or someone I knew personally to be truthful reported an object somewhere they have never been....and I can verify it.

So...next time you are OBE make sure to fly above your roof top and other roof tops and areas  you have never actually seen. Try to find verifiable evidence and report it to us so that we have scientific proof that you were in fact no longer using your brain at the time.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Lights of Love
Super Member
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 881
Re: validity of obe's/vs. lucid dreaming
Reply #16 - Feb 21st, 2008 at 6:46pm
 
Albert, I consider all true guidance to come from within my own consciousness from the inner source within me that I call the Holy Spirit. If I receive information along with emotion I consider it to be tainted by the emotion I feel. On that level I’ve recognized guidance since I was a teenager.

I’ve heard voices inside my head giving directives for nearly as long but more often after the spontaneous kundalini experience about 22 years ago. It was also after that experience that I was able to see and interact with other beings and yes I can do so while wide awake, but then it’s more like they interact with me. They facilitate the interaction. Sometimes I’m drawn to the light beings, other times I want to go toward them, but can’t seem to do that for some reason.

Don I don’t have a clue about what you are talking about. Perhaps you could be more specific. If you have questions you’d like to ask me personally send me a pm. Actually I have a question for you. ES also saw beings as stars and interacted with them. How was he able to do this?

Kathy
Back to top
 

Tread softly through life with a tender heart and a gentle, understanding spirit.
 
IP Logged
 
Berserk2
Super Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 844
Gender: male
Re: validity of obe's/vs. lucid dreaming
Reply #17 - Feb 21st, 2008 at 9:42pm
 
Kathy,

I guess I need to make my points through specific examples.  As time permits, I hope to start two new threads--one on the Jungian "structure" of the unconscious and the other on scientific research on ESP and personal ESP acecdotes and the relevance of this to the reality of "astral" dimensions.  In my own paranormal experiences, I have often encountered complications arising from the elusive line between ESP and divine guidance.  I acknowledge that there are clearcut cases of divine guidance and genuine OBEs, but I'm concerned about widespread indifference to the line between giudance from discarnates and mere ESP mediated through lucid dreams.  For example, my intuition tells me that Robert Monroe experienced some genuine OBEs, but it also tells me that he confused some of his lucid dream states with genuine OBEs.  I can't accept claims I've heard of ordinary dreams within a genuine OBE state.  For example, one guy on Robert Bruce's site claims to have OBEs in which he interacts with the characters of a fictional novel.  To me, that just means he can have lucid dreams about themes in a novel. 

Don

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
maks
New Member
*
Offline



Posts: 38
Gender: male
Re: validity of obe's/vs. lucid dreaming
Reply #18 - Feb 21st, 2008 at 10:57pm
 
HI Don,

What is ESP you are talking about?

Maks
Berserk2 wrote on Feb 21st, 2008 at 9:42pm:
Kathy,

I guess I need to make my points through specific examples.  As time permits, I hope to start two new threads--one on the Jungian "structure" of the unconscious and the other on scientific research on ESP and personal ESP acecdotes and the relevance of this to the reality of "astral" dimensions.  In my own paranormal experiences, I have often encountered complications arising from the elusive line between ESP and divine guidance.  I acknowledge that there are clearcut cases of divine guidance and genuine OBEs, but I'm concerned about widespread indifference to the line between giudance from discarnates and mere ESP mediated through lucid dreams.  For example, my intuition tells me that Robert Monroe experienced some genuine OBEs, but it also tells me that he confused some of his lucid dream states with genuine OBEs.  I can't accept claims I've heard of ordinary dreams within a genuine OBE state.  For example, one guy on Robert Bruce's site claims to have OBEs in which he interacts with the characters of a fictional novel.  To me, that just means he can have lucid dreams about themes in a novel.  

Don

   

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
DocM
Super Member
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 2168
Re: validity of obe's/vs. lucid dreaming
Reply #19 - Feb 22nd, 2008 at 12:05am
 
I have to again object to the notion that the general category of ESP somehow grounds an unknown event (mind reading, precognition) into a known process in the physical world.  There has been much research into various aspects of extra-sensory perception, but with little scientific conclusiveness about reproducible processes that underlie ESP.

In point of fact, science can not at this date adequately explain the concept of mind or consciousness.  There are models of psychology that have been applied from Freud, Jung and others.  These in general have been functional models that try to "make sense" of our behaviour without explaining the basic physiology behind human thought.  Neurotransmitters, brain physiology and Western science have never explained how we have sentience, or how an idea is generated. Does the brain generate human consciousness, or is it like a radio receiver, with consciousness existing in an interpenetrating plane of reality (my own personal model)?

In any event, it seems clear cut that while ESP phenomenon do not prove the existence of an afterlife, they do not disprove it.  A warning in a dream, the synchronicity of knowing a loved one's thoughts without speaking, may be examples of what is lumped into the catch all phrase "ESP," but that does not give us any true basis of what is happening in the physical world.

Pure biophysiologists do not believe in heaven, or even their own consciousness!  Sentience and self-awareness are seen by many pure scinetists as a freak of our evolution, with a feedback loop created in our brains, giving us a sense of individuality and what we call "mind," where nothing really exists.   Thoughts, to them are accidents, and could be easily created with electrical stimulation of the brain. And yet.......little progress has been made in understanding the pure physiology behind our simplest of musings.  These pure biophysiologists who doubt the existence of their own minds are the saddest examples of the scientific method going insane.

There is much new physiological evidence that the human brain may operate on a quantum level, not just on the basis of neurotransmitters and electrochemicl interactions. 

Unless one can tell me on what basis in the physical world telepathy or precognition work, I must come to a different conclusion than Don; that these are phenomena of consciousness, probably separate from the physical world.  As such, I see ESP as part and parcel of our very essence, which may in fact be important in exploration in both the physical plane and in the astral and afterlife realms as well.

Matthew
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Berserk2
Super Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 844
Gender: male
Re: validity of obe's/vs. lucid dreaming
Reply #20 - Feb 22nd, 2008 at 1:06am
 
Matthew,

I don't blame you for repeatedly replying in this way, but I am always puzzled because I don't see how you disagree with what I've been saying.  I have never presumed that the mechanism of ESP is well understood.  All communication with discarnates who lack vocal cords is by definition a manifestation of ESP.  What is important are questions like these: (1) Is alleged channeled communication with discarnates the product of genuine contact or merely ESP gleaned from the memory banks of living acquaintances of discarnates?  (2) Is channeled communication merely retrocognition achieved to tapping the collective unconscious in a way that has nothing to do with whether the discarnate soul has survived death?  Or suppose, as I believe, that the discarnate soul HAS survived death.  In that case, might not channeled material be gleaned from their ongoing mind without their awareness of this?  The debate--ESP vs. genuine contact--is of course iffy, but I favor the non-contact perspective in most cases of channeling.  As I said, I will eventually start a new thread to explain the reasons why on the basis of studies and my personal ESP experiences.

Don
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
DocM
Super Member
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 2168
Re: validity of obe's/vs. lucid dreaming
Reply #21 - Feb 22nd, 2008 at 1:17am
 
We actually do agree, Don, but I usually read your meaning quite clearly, so I am somewhat in shock.  I always assumed that you spoke of ESP as a given phenomenon of the physical world, akin to the circulatory system or any other explainable science. 

If the question now turns into "can ESP tap into a universal mind or storehouse of information," I think it is an excellent question and we are on the same page.  Those Akashic records, Jung's collective unconscious.....could a medium read information that way (akin to remote viewing) and how do we know when true contact is made in an objective sense?

Very difficult questions to answer.  It was much easier when I assumed you believed that ESP was a well explained physical phenomenon, separate from our thoughts.

Matthew
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
vajra
Ex Member


Re: validity of obe's/vs. lucid dreaming
Reply #22 - Feb 22nd, 2008 at 7:21am
 
Must say I'd add two perspectives to this discussion:

(1) As Doc says science doesn't at all seem to have any sort of a meaningful handle on the nature of mind - it does quite precisely correlate certain functions with specific parts of the brain, but gets all fuzzy and confused when the question of how it works or what is actually going on (or even of where consciousness is located) arises.

(2) It's just a personal view informed by teaching and experience, but it seems likely too that while practical methods of working with mind that raise consciousness are highly desirable, that there's a very big trap that needs watching out for - specifically that getting intense about theories and 'beliefs, or getting hung up about understanding it all in conceptual linear logic theory of a few variables terms is inevitably going to block all progress.

He may not be to the taste of many here, but Robert Anton Wilson has lots to say in his book 'Cosmic Trigger' (New Falcon) that underlines why both of the above may be rather more intractable issues at the centre of a cosmic catch 22 problem than we given our hubris and fearful need for intellectual certainty might like to admit.

A few quotes:

'The need to believe seems to be a hangover of the medieval Catholic era.' (or a reflection of our grasping for security by attempting to impose predictability on a frightening and uncertain world)

'Even our language implies this', and programmes us to think that each part (of the reality that) we perceive is just some part of a single monolith. 'Reality' the noun is singular'.

'When dogma enters the brain, all intellectual activity ceases'

'Belief is the death of intelligence.'

'What we perceive is not reality but the creation of the observer.'

'Reality is always plural and mutable' - there is no solid monolithic single reality.

'The universe is a giant Rorshach ink blot.' (borrowed from Alan Watts)

'Our models are small and tidy, the universe of experience is huge and untidy, and no model can ever include all the huge untidiness perceived by uncensored consciousness'.

'Neurological model agnosticism - allows one to escape from the certain limits of mechanical emotion and robot mentation that are inescapable as long as one remains within one dogmatic model or one imprinted reality tunnel.'

Perhaps the most interesting perspective is all is the (far from original statement of the) idea that raising consciousness and expanding awareness requires 'metaprogramming of the human bio-computer'.

We can't find our way forward by adopting rigid views on the nature of things, because forward by definition entails the continuous dropping of 'views', and the evolving of new ones. (we can't inch forward leaving a trail of bits of 'certainty' behind us so we can retreat if the going gets tough, there's no such thing)

Whatever it is that drives this 'meta-programming (and the very idea that there is a 'thing' may be a delusion, it's possible just an aspect of mind) seems to communicate by all sorts of disjointed allegorical, symbolic and other non-intellectually linkable means which when put together can only be tentatively explained if we're prepared to strike our ideological camp and head out into some metaphysical wilderness.

RAW describes the 'whhooooooaaah' groundless space this finds us in when we move (are led?) beyond our belief systems as 'chapel perilous'.

This is not to say that we shouldn't attempt to make sense of our perceptions, the essential point is that we shouldn't become attached to any particular view, or to the process of developing theories.

Lest anybody conclude that this is just the ranting of yet another new age loon, its just another statement of the ancient Buddhist teaching of 'non-attachment' or the 'dropping of  attachment' or 'dropping the need for grounding' (in certainty) to 'live with groundlessness' as a prerequisite for spiritual progress.

RAW talks of receiving poison pen letters from the fundamentalist Christians, and the fundamentalist Materialists of purist Newtonian science, and points out that the 'letters (from both of these arch-proponents of dogma) are astoundingly similar'. I guess the anger begs a few questions too.

To borrow the old Zen saying. Perhaps it's about 'caring but not caring',  about lightly, openly and courageously approaching our experience......

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Vicky
YaBB Administrator
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 2170
Colorado
Gender: female
Re: validity of obe's/vs. lucid dreaming
Reply #23 - Feb 22nd, 2008 at 11:54am
 
While most people are aware of the "classic" OBE, there is more to OBE than just that.  You can think of it in terms of the classic OBE being a "full consciousness" OBE.  It seems to be the thing that a lot of folks are out to get, thinking that if they could have such an experience it would just be the ultimate in proof, especially if they were to bring back verified facts that they witnessed while out of body.  It only sounds impressive to you if you haven't had some of the other various forms of OBE as well.  There is more to be had than just the classic version.  

There's a kind of experience that may not be as commonly associated to OBE and that is deja vu.  Everyone pretty much knows what deja vu is and has had many experiences with it throughout their lifetime.  Deja vu is one form of OBE, let's call it a mild one.  In deja vu, some part of your consciousness "went out" and gathered up some little bit of info and has brought it back to you.  You have no conscious memory of it, but you get that feeling that what you are experiencing has happened before.  What you see and hear seems very familiar and you just barely feel like you know what will happen next.  Deja vu can last quite a while at times but usually only lasts a few moments.  You may wonder what's the point of deja vu?  Well, maybe there is no point other than the acknowledgement that our conscious minds aren't just always sitting around in the tight little package called our head.  

When you have an experience of feeling someone's energy suddenly right next to you, or you know a specific person is about to call and the phone rings and it is them, or you suddenly get the feeling that so-and-so is sick, etc. most people have had some kind of experience like that.  That's another form of OBE in the sense that you are experiencing that person's consciousness reaching out to you.  That other person usually doesn't have conscious memory of an OBE, but they can usually verify that they were thinking strongly of you at that same moment.  The thing everyone calls "coincidence" is actually the proof and verification that skeptics are always on the prawl for.  Yet these kinds of experiences get brushed aside as "nothing but a coincidence".  

Now, when it comes to ESP in all its various forms, sometimes it is yet another lesser known example of OBE.  For instance, those of you who have clairvoyance know what I'm talking about, and this may even touch on the subject of remote viewing as well.  Some people think of remote viewing as being able to tap into the information of the target through ESP.  And that's a fine enough way to explain it, however the part of the RVer's mental capacity to seek out that info is using conscious ability, in part, to "go" and grab that info and bring it back to full conscious awareness.  This may be hard for people to understand.  However, when you think of consciousness as not being "in" the body and certainly not being in the body at all times, then it makes it a little bit easier to see what I'm talking about.  When it comes to clairvoyance, I think of clairyoyance as just a little step up from RV.  It is the same concept but different application.  RVing has it's intended purpose whereas (at least for me) clairvoyance is a more spontaneous event, not something I was trying to do.  I think of clairvoyance as yet another minor form of OBE, where some part of my consciousness went and gathered information and is presenting it back to me, this time in the form of a clairvoyant vision.  When the info I saw turns out to be precisely to a T the same thing I saw in my mind, then that is more proof that consciousness can operate outside of the physical body and outside of time as well.  

Yet skeptics say that that is just a coincidence, or that since there's no way to "prove" that what I saw was precisely exactly what actually happened then it cannot possibly be considered proof, or they say that that it only proves ESP yet it doesn't prove OBE.  However, when you've had these kinds of experiences as much as I have, you begin to realize there is more to how the conscious mind works than just what is commonly thought.  

This thread was started asking people how they've come to believe what they believe about OBE through their own experiences, and these are just my own personal beliefs.  
Back to top
 

Author of Persephone's Journey (Amazon.com)

http://www.vickyshort.blogspot.com/
WWW 198267046870499  
IP Logged
 
recoverer
Super Member
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 5027
Gender: male
Re: validity of obe's/vs. lucid dreaming
Reply #24 - Feb 22nd, 2008 at 4:05pm
 
Thank you for the response Kathy.

Lights of Love wrote on Feb 21st, 2008 at 6:46pm:
Albert, I consider all true guidance to come from within my own consciousness from the inner source within me that I call the Holy Spirit. If I receive information along with emotion I consider it to be tainted by the emotion I feel. On that level I’ve recognized guidance since I was a teenager.

I’ve heard voices inside my head giving directives for nearly as long but more often after the spontaneous kundalini experience about 22 years ago. It was also after that experience that I was able to see and interact with other beings and yes I can do so while wide awake, but then it’s more like they interact with me. They facilitate the interaction. Sometimes I’m drawn to the light beings, other times I want to go toward them, but can’t seem to do that for some reason.

Don I don’t have a clue about what you are talking about. Perhaps you could be more specific. If you have questions you’d like to ask me personally send me a pm. Actually I have a question for you. ES also saw beings as stars and interacted with them. How was he able to do this?

Kathy

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print


This is a Peer Moderated Forum. You can report Posting Guideline violations.