Discerning what isn't just part of your own psyche

[Kali's Child]

I always seem to interpret everything as coming from within my own psyche, but I've noticed that a lot of you here seem to see a lot of your dream characters as coming from 'outside'. I'm curious what criteria you are using to decide if a dream entity is independent of your psyche.

[Korpo]

Feeling that they are no dream characters.

Kurt Leland has described an inner sense to do with this in his latest book, and it's the inner senses that help you pick up on this information. There's a feeling or hunch associated with the entity in question. Once you start to trust that sensation it can develop further.

[CFTraveler]

I have to say that I consider all of my characters self-aspects; the only time I've thought of them as something or someone 'other' is when I dreamed about my mother telling me that she was going to pass "soon", and her doing so on the same week as the landmark she gave me about it.
In the same process I consider my grandmother's visitations (and my dad's visitations years ago) as external to me (at least sometimes) when they gave me information that turned out to be precognitive or sideways-cognitive (that is, let me know about what was going on with other relatives that later on turned out to be confirmed). Only in those cases I have tended to think they were 'them' and not some self aspect they symbolized.
Besides those isolated cases, I think it's either all me or mostly me.

[ButterflyWoman]

I have to say that I consider all of my characters self-aspects; the only time I've thought of them as something or someone 'other' is when I dreamed about my mother telling me that she was going to pass "soon", and her doing so on the same week as the landmark she gave me about it.
I'm the same. The only time I've had dream characters where I felt there was more to it than just my own subconscious generating a self-aspect for consideration is a few times when my departed grandmother came to visit me (and would laugh at me when I'd say, "Hey, what are you doing here? Aren't you dead?"), and a period where my father kept turning up in my dreams, almost as an actual intruder, trying to communicate with me. Those cases had a special or "different" quality to them, it's hard to describe.

The dreams with my grandmother stopped on their own.

The ones where my father was pestering me began when I finally worked out the hows and whys of full-on psychic tie cutting (and I got one hell of a psychic attack when he sensed what I'd done, too; I know NOW to shield BEFORE cutting the ties!). The dreams then commenced, and they only stopped when I set up specific psychic shielding against him. The pattern is part of why I conclude that the dream intrusions were a kind of psychic contact, rather than just dream images.

I also have had a few dreams with my mother where it was made clear to me that her mental state is deteriorating (later confirmed by my adult daughter who is still in touch with my mother), and there were a few where my mother showed up and wandered around in my dream annoyingly, like she was looking for me, but once I set up psychic shielding against her, that stopped. Now when she (or my father) show up in a dream, it's always a dream character (they have a different quality that is impossible to explain).

My dreams have, for some years, been populated by only my own dream characters, probably due to the fact that my house is very well warded and I'm in the absolute habit of psychic shielding (apparently, I even do it in my sleep).

[Beekeeper]

Ditto on the dreams of deceased people but some of my visitors popped through on their way out as well as afterwards.

I've also had some incoming visits from nieces and even a couple of friends' kids, which is sweet and helps with advance choosing of baby clothes :D.

In addition, I've met various other people in dreams briefly before meeting them IRL.

Now, the others. That's harder to know for sure unless you're at Kurt's level of accomplishment. I called a guide once and it came as a dove, which I rejected because I was ignorant and thought it too cliched. I spoke to a couple once that could have been something else but they didn't seem very interested in me and, in retrospect, I'm not sure they qualified as guides, even though they agreed they were. If they were, they had better things to do than chat with me.

I have noticed certain dream characters taking on particular roles and turning up over and over, sometimes in differing dream bodies (older, younger, tidy, sloppy). I feel they are more than dream characters because of the intelligence in them. I remember a bus driver in one dream who kept watching me with a smile on his face as if he was expecting something. I did get lucid a bit after and I'm pretty certain it was because of the look of expectation on his face. He appeared in several dreams before that one. There was also the extremely brief encounter with a woman in a crowded transport hub. The scene repeated thrice and then she stopped it still, looked across at me and said, "Can you talk?" When I said, "Yes," the dream ended.

So, if they are DCs, these guys are of a higher order intelligence than your run-of-the-mill.

And, since I can throw this in because of your title, I feel the apparitions I've encountered were also objective realities, rather than something my brain conjured.

[Korpo]

Actually, expecting that everything is an aspect of your own psyche might block developing this hunch a bit.

On the other hand, Robert Waggoner told people in his dreams they were dream characters, and some were very insistent they were not. I really like his book "Lucid Dreaming".

[ButterflyWoman]

Robert Waggoner told people in his dreams they were dream characters, and some were very insistent they were not.
Yeah, they do that in waking reality, too. Try telling people they're figments of your imagination or some aspect of yourself and they get all kinds of weird on you. :wacky1::lol2:

[Beekeeper]

Shheeze, it was just that one time, CW!:lol:

[ButterflyWoman]

Oh, it's okay. I don't mind being a figment of someone's imagination. Hell, I'm a figment of my OWN imagination, why would I object to being a figment of someone else's? :P

[Kali's Child]

Thanks for the responses everyone.

I think there may be something to what you say Korpo. My experiences seem to mirror my expectations very closely. Perhaps I need to open myself up to the idea of more contact with the other.

[Kali's Child]

Now I'm kind of thinking that maybe swimming around in your own SC is kind of like staying in the shallow end of the swimming pool...

[Beekeeper]

So, what has happened recently to lead you to that thought?

[Kali's Child]

Just a theory really. But I do wonder why others get taken under the wings of guides and get to really make spiritual progress and get an education of the big picture. Am I just dog paddling around the kiddie pool because I haven’t earned the attention of a guide? Is it just my belief system/expectations holding me back from that kind of experience? These are the questions I ask myself.

[Beekeeper]

Ah, yes, recently the guide question has been playing on my mind. I'm just coming around to thinking it might be good to have that direct guidance rather than floundering around. I did a meditation to meet my guide once and someone showed up but I dismissed it as imagination- maybe I shouldn't have.

[Kali's Child]

Exactly. It's hard to tell. :?

[Beekeeper]

I've been clairaudient before, but spontaneously rather than at my bidding. The information was unsought and correct, against expectation. That, I believe, was a guide and such experiences are pretty black and white. Other times I've had visions, fully awake and active where I wonder if that's an innate faculty or the influence of a guide because, again, it was spontaneous.

[sleeper]

people who use drugs for spiritual experiences report that most of their thoughts are from somewhere else, not from themself.

i don't use drugs but i agree; that most thoughts are not our own.

in dreams, there is a blending of our daily experiences, our emotional-energetic blockages, our spiritual insights, our projections, our wandering thoughts of our physical mind, etc. so sorting it out can be a pickle, no doubt a bout it.

[Korpo]

Sometimes one can see the mind thinking, realising that it is not oneself who is doing the thinking.

[CFTraveler]

I don't understand the 'someone else is thinking for you' idea. If you see the world as a macrocosm of the microcosm (And I'm aware that not everyone does), isn't everything a result of what you think? Or is there a degree of subtlety in this conversation that I'm missing?
According to most scientific theory we have bicameral minds- in some subjects the left/right brains have been experimentally divided, and it's been found that the (right?) mostly? side of the brain is largely unknown- but it is our brain after all even if not consciously recalled, and it's 'us' that is using it to think, even if not consciously.
In fact, there are various studies that show that when the corpus callosum is severed and the hemispheres independent from each other, things like one side of your body can actually react suddenly to something that doesn't seem upsetting to the conscious/right brain.
So if this 'other' thought process is constantly happening (and you can witness it when meditating) who do you think is doing the thinking for you?
(unless you're getting into the 'There is no I' outlook?)
I'm curious about this theme, it kind of bewilders me a little.

[sleeper]

I don't understand the 'someone else is thinking for you' idea. If you see the world as a macrocosm of the microcosm (And I'm aware that not everyone does), isn't everything a result of what you think? Or is there a degree of subtlety in this conversation that I'm missing?
According to most scientific theory we have bicameral minds- in some subjects the left/right brains have been experimentally divided, and it's been found that the (right?) mostly? side of the brain is largely unknown- but it is our brain after all even if not consciously recalled, and it's 'us' that is using it to think, even if not consciously.
In fact, there are various studies that show that when the corpus callosum is severed and the hemispheres independent from each other, things like one side of your body can actually react suddenly to something that doesn't seem upsetting to the conscious/right brain.
So if this 'other' thought process is constantly happening (and you can witness it when meditating) who do you think is doing the thinking for you?
(unless you're getting into the 'There is no I' outlook?)
I'm curious about this theme, it kind of bewilders me a little.

i would like it first if you would elaborate on your macro/micro view of the self.

[CFTraveler]

I'm of the provisional belief that everything I experience is self-created. Not in a solipsist way, but in an "Indra's Net" kind of way- the universe is a reflection of me, as the universe you experience is a reflection of you, and we create the collective experience. I do think that we can experience each others' creation (and thoughts, too) but only as separate expressions of oneness- so on a fundamental level (maybe very fundamental) all is one, and there is no 'other'.
So my whole life is a symbol of my psyche, including the 'outward' experience.

[sleeper]

I'm of the provisional belief that everything I experience is self-created. Not in a solipsist way, but in an "Indra's Net" kind of way- the universe is a reflection of me, as the universe you experience is a reflection of you, and we create the collective experience. I do think that we can experience each others' creation (and thoughts, too) but only as separate expressions of oneness- so on a fundamental level (maybe very fundamental) all is one, and there is no 'other'.
So my whole life is a symbol of my psyche, including the 'outward' experience.

many native american tribes (both in north and south america) have a greeting that basically says: "you are another me and i am another you" (there are different flavors and extrapolations of this).

what do you think about that greeting?

[sleeper]

ok just a primer i know my post here sucks but it's the best i can do in a short period of time.

here it goes:


I always seem to interpret everything as coming from within my own psyche, but I've noticed that a lot of you here seem to see a lot of your dream characters as coming from 'outside'. I'm curious what criteria you are using to decide if a dream entity is independent of your psyche.

i use roughly the same criteria that i use do determine whether i'm dreaming or imagining; i.e. whether i'm in a variety of dream landscape(s) or a fantasy realm. i don't know how to describe the difference in a convincing way so if you're not certain of the difference, my suggestion is to experiment with your own and learn the same way that i did.


I have to say that I consider all of my characters self-aspects ...
Besides those isolated cases, I think it's either all me or mostly me.

does this have to do with a hermetic macro/micro perspective, or the power of your subconscious, or something else?


Sometimes one can see the mind thinking, realising that it is not oneself who is doing the thinking.

this is the single (philosophical) foundation of the duality of samsara.

tell me: what would you say to someone who has never noticed this?

what would you tell them that it means?

when you are not aware of it, what do you tell yourself about it?

thanks in advance!

~dale.


I don't understand the 'someone else is thinking for you' idea.

people who use psychadelics report that aliens and whatnot talk to them telepathically AND once the trip is over, and they remember the experience, they realize that the same is going on all day (and night) between people of the physical world. only they mistake the wandering thoughts of nearby people for their own thoughts.

never having hallucinated or been on drugs, i subscribe to an approximately similar theory, but one of my own making. very similar though. i might talk about it later.


If you see the world as a macrocosm of the microcosm (And I'm aware that not everyone does), isn't everything a result of what you think? Or is there a degree of subtlety in this conversation that I'm missing?

i broadly approve of that notion, however i admit that i disapprove of the hermetic flavor of it: i think that it has been misunderstood in ways that have far reaching implications. for instance: i am convinced that metaphysical things have been misconstrued to be the same as their physical counterparts; e.g. physical fire (such as burning wood) and spiritual fire, or the feminine principle and physical femininity. i think that this perspective has led to the growing opinion that 'wise people' (psychics) were trying to tell us something about the physical world, rather than the non-physical. this is manifest in the burning of witches in the past, and the misassociation of the 'feminine age' with the women's liberation movement, all of which i consider to be different things.

another way of describing this: women have qualities that are traditionally 'masculine' such as bravery, strength, anger, etc. they also contain a mind which is mostly genderless, although they do have some differences that distinguish them from men. men and women both grow boogers, earwax, etc.

where i agree is that each of the created realms are made in the likeness of each other, that the heavenly realms of God are divine and complete in their wholeness, and as you descend downward towards our realm, each becomes increasingly complex and less 'complete.' i also agree that humans are in the likeness of the universe or galaxy, and that we transcend our limited physical experience during enlightenment when we project into the celestial realm and are anointed by the light of the heavenly father. But i do not think that makes us each a 'star.'

i see that we are made in the likeness of eachother, especially in the deeper aspects (where we are identical more or less) but also that we are distinct.

i agree that the world is an illusion, created by the mind, until that mind becomes self realized and begins to function properly and ceases to create self-illusion. then the mind experiences the real world, which is like a hologram.

i agree that the world is like a hologram but not that it is a contrivance; it is real, and solid as we are permitted to interact with solid things.


According to most scientific theory we have bicameral minds- in some subjects the left/right brains have been experimentally divided, and it's been found that the (right?) mostly? side of the brain is largely unknown- but it is our brain after all even if not consciously recalled, and it's 'us' that is using it to think, even if not consciously.
In fact, there are various studies that show that when the corpus callosum is severed and the hemispheres independent from each other, things like one side of your body can actually react suddenly to something that doesn't seem upsetting to the conscious/right brain.
So if this 'other' thought process is constantly happening (and you can witness it when meditating) who do you think is doing the thinking for you?
(unless you're getting into the 'There is no I' outlook?)
I'm curious about this theme, it kind of bewilders me a little.

in the same way that the eyes are perceivers of sunlight, the mind is the perceptive organ for mind-stuff (chitta in hindu thinking). they eyes perceive star light. the tongue tastes. the skin senses tough. skin hair senses wind or insects. so the mind is the tool for perceiving both our own thoughts, and the thoughts of others. in empathy, the emotional body is the tool for picking up others emotions. the astral body is a perceptive organ for interacting with spirits. etc. so self perception and other-perception are both natural (and also why spiritual people have difficulty in crowds, at least at times).

so to go back and answer your question of who is thinking for me during unconscious thought processes, it is the natural nature of the mind to think for itself, separate and independent of my self. that is why i want a ban on most media, because it infiltrates and permeates the minds of whoever watches it.

the goal of 1st samadhi and 2nd enlightenment is to unite the body and mind and transform the body into a vehicle for the mind.

let me leave you with a comment: if we wait for science to validate our work, our work will pass us by.

in other words, if a scientist wants to test my beliefs, i have to first organize them into a rudimentary hypothesis, a coherent system with controllable variables, etc. i have to do all of the work then submit it to scrutiny of people who probably won't even understand it, then wait a few decades while they sort out the problems that they create in the lab. its not going to happen.

also, much of the modern research on brain function is done on and by people who trash their bodies and minds every day. fyi i'm sure that you know that you can't have a healthy mind with an unhealthy body. our brain and body share the same blood supply. so of course the research is not going to reflect the incredible potential that you and i and all humans share equally.


~dale

p.s.- this is the best i could do to ask and answer questions. sorry if i said anything poorly!

also, sorry if i didn't explain my worldview enough! ask me if you're not sure what i mean. or tell me to shut up. either one is fine.

[CFTraveler]

I think you and I see the world very similarly, at least how I understood what you said.
I think the modern Western mind has misconstrued most of what Hermetics teaches because of the cultural differences-as society has changed from the original writings and the language has changed we just understand the same words differently.
If you read some of my old posts (here and in the Pulse also) I'm constantly explaining that the term 'element' in Hermetics and Chemistry have different meanings, for example- so the misunderstanding is more of cultural context, it seems to me.

The research I was talking about was conducted on people who are epileptic, and had their corpus callosum cut to avoid the electrical activity of the brain to spread out (preventing seizures)- these were severe cases, but showed interesting things about the brain itself- the modern brain is equipped with redundancy and thus functions as two brains, sometimes with entirely different belief systems, which is the cause of all kinds of interesting effects. I'll see if I can retrieve the links to them. And I hate to tell you, most people are not aware of this 'doublethink' that happens all the time, except- guess who? Meditators. Meditators are more aware of how they 'really think' than most other people.

To answer your first question: I think the greeting is reflective of a view of the world that is more 'in tune' with my own views, I imagine that there is a cooperation and sense of community that is inherent to how they think. I wonder if modern Western Civilization can come to such a worldview.

[sleeper]

I think you and I see the world very similarly, at least how I understood what you said.
I think the modern Western mind has misconstrued most of what Hermetics teaches because of the cultural differences-as society has changed from the original writings and the language has changed we just understand the same words differently.
If you read some of my old posts (here and in the Pulse also) I'm constantly explaining that the term 'element' in Hermetics and Chemistry have different meanings, for example- so the misunderstanding is more of cultural context, it seems to me.

The research I was talking about was conducted on people who are epileptic, and had their corpus callosum cut to avoid the electrical activity of the brain to spread out (preventing seizures)- these were severe cases, but showed interesting things about the brain itself- the modern brain is equipped with redundancy and thus functions as two brains, sometimes with entirely different belief systems, which is the cause of all kinds of interesting effects. I'll see if I can retrieve the links to them. And I hate to tell you, most people are not aware of this 'doublethink' that happens all the time, except- guess who? Meditators. Meditators are more aware of how they 'really think' than most other people.

To answer your first question: I think the greeting is reflective of a view of the world that is more 'in tune' with my own views, I imagine that there is a cooperation and sense of community that is inherent to how they think. I wonder if modern Western Civilization can come to such a worldview.

when the native americans met the foreigners, the stuck out their hand to do the original handshake but rather than the brotherly greeting and handshake, the white dudes dropped a trinket in the native's hand. or at least that's how the Hopi tell the story, more or less.

[CFTraveler]

Sounds right. :D

[Korpo]

this is the single (philosophical) foundation of the duality of samsara.

tell me: what would you say to someone who has never noticed this?

what would you tell them that it means?

when you are not aware of it, what do you tell yourself about it?

thanks in advance!

~dale.

Hello, Dale.

I would tell a person that it is possible to see your own thoughts go by without seeming to be involved in thinking them. I would however only tell that to a person when I'm sure that the context is right - the person receptive to the idea at all, for example. That doesn't happen too often in physical life... :?

What does it mean?

I have an explanation that I could tell, but it just is a placeholder. It describes it, but a description is not the thing.

When trying to answer a question like this, I usually follow the energy, and process it out into words. It's not quite the same as regular thinking, it's more like expanding an answer that is already there, probing into it from various angles till I have - for now - a feeling of having successfully expanded it. The energy is the thing, and that ability to expand it into a descriptive answer is a process.

Having said that I found that I cannot truly answer the question at this time. I cannot say what it means as I don't know it in the way I would need to describe it and expand it satisfactorily.

Cheers,
Oliver

[sleeper]

korpo,

thank you for sharing.

[CFTraveler]

I liked the answer, because it describes well how I sometimes process certain things.