Money where your mouths are? The Experiment

A lab rat that sets up the experiment…
Sounds highly experimental.

Mr.

Context as follows:

Astral Travel Made Easy: I will be using the steps I numbered in the “Definitional Logic Assistance” thread explaining the procedure for successful OBEs, which has been disputed by all the naysayers as impossible due to my basic stupidity and mental health issues.

First 30 days: I will continually attempt to astral project for up to 30 days from my home to a stationary location of your choice where in you have placed an undisclosed object of your choice. The object must be solid and in the stationary location without being removed or altered for the 30 days.

Equal rights. :sunglasses:

How does he specify location? Address? Longitude and latitude? Description?

First of all, I have very sincere doubts that anyone can do astral projections willingly. That is an extremely difficult thing to accomplish, though not impossible technically. Astral projections use to happen automatically, not willingly.

Secondly, if anyone masters that anyhow, he must know that person or place in normal (non-astral) position in the first place, otherwise he would never able to reach them/there in the astral projection.

Means, if you know a person in reality, you would be able to reach to him in astral projection, whether you know his actual current location or not. In the same way, if you want to reach any particular place in astral projection, you must have seen that location normally in the first place.

With love,
Sanjay

He emits some kind of radio signal and you follow it to his location?

Physically been there or just seen a picture?

Do you have to consciously navigate to get there or is it automatic?

OK, I am up for it. I have chosen the object. It is in a location that will not change for 30 days.

I am rooting for you.

Anything else you need to begin?

What people do not understand that each and every dream is also an astral projection, but you cannot control it.

In normal awaken condition, conscious becomes dominant while subconscious remains merely a spectator. This reverse in the dreams as subconscious becomes dominant and conscious takes up the role of a spectator.

But, in astral projections, neither party can be dominant. Both participate and also obseve the phenomenon. Having said that, if astral projection is happening automatically, subconscious will have a upper hand. In the same way, if astral projection is done willingly of forcefully, the conscious will control the events more than its counterpart.

With love,
Sanjay

Not for me in any case. Most dreams are not for me OBEs. And that is fine for me. I prefer bodily existence. Many dreams are intrapsychic dramas where memories of certain places - and obviously people and things - are used to integrate and have new interactions between parts of myself. There are also dreams of things done during the day. I do not think that if I dream of the beach during the night after spending the day there this means my astral body went back to the beach. It is me integrating knowledge/experience of the day.

I am not denying astral travel or remote viewing - which I think need not be an OBE - just disagreeing with your generalization. Actual OBEs, I think are rarer than that by a good deal.

There is no radio signal kind of thing involved here. One’s familiarity with the tergated person is enough to make the projector to reach to him during astral projection. Being more competent and powerful than its counterpart, Subconscious has its own ways to get the things done. It does not need navigation details either. All that is already known to the subconscious. Means, whatever is known to the mankind till date, is either known or if not, at least available to the everyone’s subconscious. It can use it when required.

It is something like Wikipedia. We all have access to the Internet and Wikipedia, but that does not mean that we all know all that what is stored at its main sever. But, everyone of us still can access its server, find, know and use what we want. The case of subconscious is also somewhat similar.

As far as your question about visiting any place in person or merely seeing its picture is concerned, I am not sure about it. But, my guess is that merely seeing a picture would be enough, if one has seen it manytimes and closely.

Like, if I am able to do astral projections willingly, and want to reach any particular place astrally which I have seen once only,
I might not able to do that. But, if I try that with white house or Eiffel tower, I might able to reach there astrally even though I have not visited either in person.

The bottom line is that you have to provide clear destination to the subconscious, and it will do the rest.

With love,
Sanjay

First of all, remote viewing is even more difficult than astral projection, almost next to impossible, though still possible technically.

I am not generalizing at all but saying that for some valid reasons.
Though it is very difficult for me to explain all in one post but i will try it succinctly.

We do not realize but we use to dream throughout the sleeping time. not only in REM sleep as most believe, even science. Sleep is not even possible without dreaming, rather i should say the sole purpose of the sleep is nothing but dreaming. The fact of the matter is that we sometime dream even in the awaken state. But, we are unable to realize/remember either non REM dreams nor seen in awaken state.

Now, the basic question is what actually the dreams are and what exactly happens at that time!

To understand this, we have to understand humans in the first place. Human is not a one singular entity, but a manifolded one. Without going in the details, we can divide it into two basic parts. The first outer part is its human wrap, which we can see and also consider the complete human generally. But, there is one more part caged in this wrap, to match it with our familiar terminology, we can call it the soul.

Now, both of these parts of human existence have their own bodies and minds as well. What we call our conscious mind, is the mind which is a part of outer human layer. And, in the same way, subconscious mind is nothing but the mind of the soul. Both minds are connected but it is almost one way traffic, from subconscious to the conscious one. Most of the traffic moves in this very way and very little in the opposite direction. But, this ratio can be changed by the efforts of conscious mind. And, that is precisely what is the purpose of the meditation or any other mental spiritual practice.

As our outer [human] layer operates in this world, in the same way, our inner layer (soul) also operates in its own corresponding world/realm, which use to be different and also distant mostly, though that different dimension is also present here in this world too but unlike human realm, that exists in enumerable distant locations in the universe also. And, the soul has to travel there in many dreams, if not all.

Dreams are nothing but the routine life of the soul. The most part of this remains hidden from the conscious (human) mind. Only some of it, which is considered necessary, presented/shown to conscious mind as a dream. But, that is never shown what exactly happened with the soul. It is tweaked for two purposes, firstly because it is forbidden (most part), and secondly, to make it understandable for the conscious mind. We never see reality in the dream but only its metamorphic representation in the events/terms which are familiar to the conscious mind, otherwise it would never be able to understand.

Like, you give and example of about seeing yourself on the same bench where you use to sit in awaken life. if that actually happens in the dream, It does not mean that dream would have anything with your habit of sitting of that bench. That very bench would used to tell you that just like your waking life, your soul also like or is there where it actually belongs (its actual home, its native place, its corresponding realm).

That is how dreams are supposed to interpret. As a thumb rule, dreams have nothing much to do with human life. There is no such thing like mind analyzing its human life, its events and contradictions in the dreams. Freud got it totally upside down, and that will be corrected for sure in due course.

There are some subtle points/experiences here, which give support to my theory. Firstly, most of the REM sleep and dreams use to occur in the late part of the sleep, mostly 3 to 5/6 am. Now, the question is why we see dreams during that time only, not all the night? The answer is that happens because in the most of the cases, conscious mind is informed the summary/abstract of the all that what has been happened with the soul during the last day.

If you ever noticed yourself or have read about other’s experiences, during the dreams, many times we feel that we already know what is going to happen next, that that happens actually too. How that can be ever possible? Again, the answer is that we are able to know future in the dreams because that event has already been taken place in the past in the life of the soul, and as human mind comes closer to soul’s mind in the dream, thus able to feel the thoughts of its counterpart.

In the same way, when we just get back from the dream, i mean in those very seconds when we awake, many times we feel that we have returned back here from some other and distant place. Again, the reason is the same that soul leaves the body during the dream.

Now, coming back to your objection, we have to compare dreams and OBE.

In the light of all what i said above, dreams entail OBE, but OBE do not entail dreaming. The difference in dreaming and OBE, is not the actual event, but how and by whom the event is being observed.

In awaken state, human (conscious) mind dominates and soul’s (subconscious) mind sees its counterpart’s activity as dream. This reverses in the dreams, where subconscious mind dominates the proceedings and conscious mind sees all that as a dream. But, the beauty of the OBE or astral projection is that here both minds have a say in the activities, and neither can be completely dominant. That is precisely why we feel more control in OBE and Astral projections. Having said that, subconscious mind still remains dominant generally, especially if OBE or astral projections are not enforced but happening automatically. Yes, conscious mind can still control or participate in the events to some extent, besides being able to observe more clearly than dreams.

Both of OBE and astral projections, implies by definition that some part of the human existence leaves it during there phenomena, but as i explained above, the same happens during the dreams also. The only difference is that we are not able to realize that partition/separation during the dreams.

If all that makes any sense to you!

with love,
sanjay

I don’t know about anyone else but it’s certainly true in my case.

I think that you should read the last post of mine also, which is in the continuation, and explains the issue and details more.

With love,
Sanjay

Zinnat,
your theory just does not fit my experience. Yes, there can be projection during dreams but it is not necessary. I have done a lot of professional and personal dream research, sleep research and meditation - this has included lucid dreaming and even lucid non REM states. All I can say is I know that many of my wri are going internal experiences of myself. I do not leave the room, nor does a portion of me leave.

I am afraid I find often that when you write it seems to me you write generalizaing from doctrine. This is the way it is and htat this comes out of your tradition. Neither of us can prove to the other what is happening in my sleep, for example. Perhaps you will listen and question your own theory as being partially true and consider that I may know things ABOUT MYSELF that your theory does not fit and perhaps even that it does not completely fit others as well. Or perhaps you cannot consider that the received information you have has tailored your experience and should not be generalized the way you do. I can only say you are incorrect and your experts who you repeat had incomplete knowledge. IOW I dor believe what you are saying happens, I just do not see it as the rule. In fact I see it is as the exception.

Up to you what you do with that. Think you have superior knowledge of me or reconsider, Good luck with that.

I was making a point precisely in this regard. What i was trying to say that that the difference can be only between how we use to interpret our experiences, not in the experiences per se.

I believe you but my approach/aim was never that. I never tried to study/research anything. Whatever more or less, right or wrong, i have learnt so far about all these things, is done following just the opposite/different methodology. Let me share some of my background with you. Perhaps, that might help.

Moreno, because of some circumstances, i involved in the meditation in my late twenties. Before that, i never believed in any religious doctrine whatsoever, including Hinduism. My perception was that the sole purpose of all the religions to impose morality on the society by making people afraid saying that they will be judged for their actions even after the death.

But, when i involved in it empirically and seriously for the first time, within some time ( a couple of months), i realized that something such was certainly there which i do not know. Being a curious and patient person, i decided to give it an honest try to see what happens. And, i did it very seriously for the next two years or so, almost to the extent to which real monks are supposed to do. Because of my circumstances, i had nothing much to do at that time, so my routine was nothing else but to sleep and meditate, besides some essential works like eating and going to bathroom. I used to meditate more than 12 hours a day at that time. This is hard to believe for others but it is true. My family members are living example of that. This continued for more than two years, until i realized that it is not the proper way to do it ( for me ), and i came back to routine life. Though, i never stopped meditating since then, but limited it to an hour or so, unless i have nothing else to do. I am following this practice for more than last 20 years, as i am 51 now.

But, during those two exclusive years, i made some breakthroughs in this regard, and experienced many new and unexplainable phenomena. I consulted with my Guru and others ( who were available to me at that time), but neither got any satisfying answers nor any advice how to handle myself properly. And, every unexplainable phenomenon increased both of my curiosity and eagerness to get over with it, and thus kept increasing my effort. That madness ended only when i realized ( on my own ) that everything has its own limitations, both result wise and time wise too, and i can never force things beyond a certain limit.

In other words, absolutes are neither possible to achieve nor it is wise to attempt those.

But, i kept looking for explanations/answers besides continuing by efforts ( though now in a limited way). This routine again continued for the next 5 years or so. During this time, i tried to study some pertinent books regarding all this stuff (mostly hardcore religious), and consulted with some more (so called )experts locally also, but all that was still not serving much purpose to me.

Then, i got a job offer of such kind for which i had not only to leave my station, but travel and stay (for some months) at new and different places all the time. That was also the time when i got access to the internet for the first time. Both of having access to the internet and becoming able to meet more experts of the issue, started giving me some vague indication what i experienced and where i roughly stands in this regard.

Seeing some opening at last, that was the first time when i started doing something which you can call research. Then, my focus shifted from mainstream religions to some small subsets of Hinduism and Islam. There is a branch of Hinduism, which is called Santmat, which literally means the opinions of the saints. This branch does not negate the doctrines of mainstream Hinduism, but says that it is not the end of the road. The final destination is more distant. There are many small such subsets all over north India. These are called Dera(s) in the local language. Some prominent of of these are Brahmkumari, Dera Succha Sauda, Dera Radha Swami Beas, Dera Radha Swami Dinod, Sahib Bandagi etc. Fortunately, as i was also travelling and staying all over the north India, I have visited almost all of these Deras, and studied their literature too.

As internet provided me the opportunity to study other religions beyond Hinduism also, i found that Sufism is exactly the same for Islam what these Deras are to Hinduism. Sufism goes beyond the limits of conventional Islam, both in the postulation of the final destination and details of the journey to that destination as well. Both of mainstream Hinduism and Islam lack these detailing, especially regarding issues related to meditation and other likewise phenomena.

And, when i got access to the details of Deras and Sufism, some of my long awaiting answers/explanations started to flow for the first time in my life, which were also not much different but on those very lines which I had been assuming all along. Encouraged by that confirmation, i probed further and further, and in other religions also (like Buddhism, Jainism, Christianity and Judaism), and still doing.

Those details told me that whatever i experienced, was neither new nor something special. Millions have been done and experienced exactly the same already in the past. To be honest, i was surprised to see exactly the same there in those details which i experienced, thus concluded that the difference can be only in the interpretations of those experiences, not in the experiences, otherwise there is absolutely no way in which scholars would have keeping mentioning all the same since thousands years. The even more surprising fact is that there is no difference in those different Deras of Hinduism and different sects of Sufism, as far as issues like meditation, OBE etc are concerned. The only thing that is different is the terminology, nothing much else.

Intellectuals, both of religious and philosophical types, never believe this but it is true, though anyone can confirm it in person and empirically too, if he has the required time, commitment and patience.

Secondly, do not get me wrong, and i am not saying this for winning any argument, but the fact of the matter is, what i am telling you from my experience of last 30 years, that investigation in these issues cannot be done by starting from anywhere between the ontology. You have to start from exactly where the ontology starts, otherwise you will never able to understand what is happening and why.

Unfortunately, this is how it is done mostly now. That is precisely why researchers like Freud ( and most of the others of the present lot too) wrongly conclude that dreams are nothing but analyzing/sorting done by the subconscious mind during the sleep. They get it totally wrong because they do not reach at the bottom but try to deduce things from the middle of the ontology. That methodology will never give right results.

You cannot understand/interpret what happens in the OBE and dreams, unless you do not understand why these things use to occur. And, in the same way, you cannot understand why these things take place, unless you do not know what humans are exactly in the first place. It is almost the same like algebra cannot be learned/understood without arithmetic, and arithmetic cannot be learned/understood without basic numbers.

You have to find the bottom, start from there, and only then can move to the top gradually. And, if you are starting or have to take a start somewhere from the middle for any reasons, never use induction, but deduction only.

To some extent, yes, i am generalizing for sure. But, i why i should not! Are we not talking about humans only, so why object to generalization?

Moreno, i am as human as you are and others. No one is special or different as far as some basic things about humans are concerned. The structure of our bodies may be different but they still are basically the same and works on the same methodology as well. The same applies to the mind, it’s working and tasks as well.

Means, whatever happens to you in the dreams, must happen to me also, and vice verse. It cannot be the case that my methodology of dreams is somewhat different from you or others. Yes, there certainly can be a lot of difference how we deduce/understand the phenomenon of dreaming. But, that does not mean that what happens to Moreno in the dreams, does not happen to Sanjay. Is that ever possible? Yes, who is right or wrong in his perception about dreams is an entirely different issue. But, i do not think that you can blame for generalization here, unless you are talking about anything else.

Secondly, as tried to explain above in this post, i have a vague ontology/doctrine or humans/existence in my mind based on my personal experiences and history as well. So, I whenever any such issue comes, i derive answer from that very ontology. That is precisely why you see me often generalizing, but i have to because we are talking about a humans only, thus some generalization has to be there everytime, especially regarding basics.

All same things use to work and follow invariably some basic principles, including humans. I do not think i would be proper to call it a generalization.

As i explained above, nothing much is coming from my tradition.

True, but that inability does not has any bearing on the validity of the theory, if the issue in hand is beyond normal demonstrable limits.

Moreno, believe me, contrary to your thinking, i more than 100% believe that my theory is merely partly true. And, the reason is very simple. As far as it is incomplete, which still it is, it has to be partly true only. I never claim that i know all either, but there certainly are some things about which i am absolutely sure now.

Secondly, i have been myself questioned my theory thousands times in the past. I kept derieving and questioning its basics for years, almost 10 roughly. I started believing its basic and broad framework true only when i got confirmation from the ancient texts.

And, the reasoning for my belief is quite simple. As i told you above, i was basically an atheistic type of person. Not only that, i never believed in things like OBE or Astral projections either. But, when all that happened to me, and without any guidance, knowledge and intent for all that too, I had to ask myself why all this is happening to me? And, then i realized that all this has to be somehow embedded in the default systems of human. Did i concluded right or wrong?

Even then, though i made some assumptions but i never believed in anything, and kept probing. It is only when i found the same experiences and almost the same conclusions in the ancient texts, thus i had no option but to believe. I concluded that if all previous scholars from the centuries had almost the same results and conclusions as well, there has be some truth in my theory as well. And, i do not think i was wrong in my decision.

Having said that, i still try to listen to everyone, and still change/amend by theory, whenever i find anything worthy.

Here, i completely disagree with that.

Given that we all are humans, some basic things must be applicable to all. You are wrong in concluding that you know about yourself more than others in every aspect. Do you know more about body than a doctor/specialist? Say, you feel pain in your chest, and assume that you are suffering from any heart problem and go to the specialist. He does all the tests, finds that you are suffering merely from gastric problem, gives you proper treatment and you get relief also. Now, can you claim that you know more about yourself than all others?

The only thing that you can know more about yourself than others, is the severeness of the pain that you felt in your chest. No one else can know that better than you, but you are not best judge of many more important things, like why that pain is happening and how to get relief from that.

Again, subjectivity applies only on the perceptions, not on the events. Events are always objective. Different/subjective opinions about the same event does not mean that the event must be happening differently to all persons. Do not commit the same mistake what quantum physics did. Observer cannot influence the event.

I do not think i incorrect in what i said to you so far. I have told you about my list of experts above.

Moreno, it cannot be, ever. Neither i can be an exception nor you. The only difference between you and me is that, for some reasons,i am able to observe those events from slightly less distance than you. That only why our observations differ, otherwise we are experiencing the same events.

If you are interested, read my posts in below mentioned two threads. Both are short threads but you might get clearer perception of what i have in my mind.

with love,
sanjay

viewtopic.php?f=15&t=187069
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=184542

I left room for you to have the correct interpretation of your own experiences. You cannot grant this to me. It is a minimal respect, that perhaps there are things beyond you that are new to you, that your philosophy so far has not covered, that you have things to learn. But what comes back from you is simply pompous.

It seems you have nothing to learn.

I must ignore a person like this, because fundamentally, that person is ignoring me in their smugness.

Take care. Bye.

truth is your contrivance.

That is not is not what i am saying. I mean to say either you also leave the room or i also do not. Given that we both are humans, the basic working of our bodies and mind must be the same.

It has nothing to do with respect. Discussion entails disagreement. Disrespect is an entirely different thing. I cannot agree with anyone just for showing my respect, if i am sure in my opinion that i am right.

Moreno, i do not believe in that version of subjectivity which postulates that you are right on your side and i am from mine. I believe in if we disagree on any issue, either i am wrong or you, or at least less right or less wrong than each other. So, let us discuss and sort it out.

I already accepted that i still have a lot to learn. But, accepting that i do not know all does not entail that i cannot know anything at all thus should agree with every version.

I am not sure how you concluded that. Presenting arguments in the support of one’s position is not ego, if it is being done in the right way. If you have noticed, i did not merely make the claim that i am right but gave enough reasoning to support that too. On the other hand, i do not think that you provided any proper reasoning to support your claim. You are merely insisting on that we must be experiencing different phenomena but not giving any reasons how that can be possible ever, if we both are humans.

I already accepted that i still have a lot to learn. But again, that does not mean that i have not learned anything so far. If you have noticed, i many times accepted my mistakes/unknowingness at ILP, and accepted other’s versions too. I can do, and will do that again if something worthy comes across.

Some like to call me an objectivist, which i might be, but i have not seen any subjectivist accepting his mistakes and changing his position, at least to my memory. But, unlike them, i cannot agree on that you are right on your side and i am mine. I would rather agree on that i am wrong and you are right.

As you wish, i am okay with that but there is no such intention from my end.

Again, arguing, disagreements and giving reasoning to support one’s arguments, are not supposed to be called as smugness. I am still not sure how you concluded that.

Thanks, best of luck from me too, in case you have been decided not to engage with me ever.
But, keep in mind that there is nothing such in my mind. You are very much welcome if you want, now or ever.

with love,
sanjay

This all sounds so familiar. :wink:

Ill be happy to assist in the experiment if it involves simply putting an object somewhere.
PM me details. I might forget the location of this thread.