NeutralWire

Hi all, This book, 'Flood Your Body with Oxygen' by Ed McCabe: http://www.amazon.com/Flood-Your-Body-Oxyg...6094&sr=1-1 ... was recommended to me recently. Has anyone read it, and what did you think? Has it perhaps been discussed here before? (I only found one old mention of it with no additional comments when I searched.) Thanks and good wishes, ~NeutralWire~

All the genital dynamis stuff makes sense, esp considering what I recall from my Glenn days. Agree also on the 'living matrix' of the body, in fact they say in Kabbalah that's what earth/Malkuth is -- the physical part is a little extra on top. But of course it can be spiritualized. The livingness must be invested in it, that's where the alchemy comes in.... but I can't speak of it with any experience myself. There's any number of ways to divide this stuff up. What interests me is in astral projecting there is a similar 'ground base' of the physical reality outside ourselves (which Robert Bruce calls the 'real time zone') and it's of particular importance to make sure it corresponds with actual reality. I like this conversation because it keeps throwing up the most lovely coincidences! When you said this: ... I was instantly reminded of something I'd read not an hour previously: That the Poetic Genius is the true Man, and that the body or outward form of Man is derived from the Poetic Genius. Likewise that the forms of all things are derived from their Genius,which by the Ancients was call'd an Angel & Spirit & Demon. ... William Blake. Which wraps up everything we're saying rather nicely! In Bardon's practice there is a way to empower ideas so that they can do work, he calls them elementals, an overworked word. All best wishes, ~NeutralWire~

froggie -- Oh it's ultra-simple, it's from Mickaharic's 'Spiritual Cleansing' -- clean your ears with peroxide on a cotton bud daily, removes astral gunk that one picks up in an urban environment. Only the 3% solution I hasten to say, that's what a pharmacy will carry anyhow. I do my nose as well. I can feel etheric stuff working itself off... but since very young I have had issues with ears so there's a real need for it in my case. NW

tumoessence -- I didn't actually learn from a book as such on the sex thing. There's whole heaps of resources out there, but personally (without wanting to get into any arguments) I would stay clear of the whole Healing Tao technique. I like reading the old karezza writers but they aren't always too clear... Stockham Noyes and Lloyd are some names. A recent book I looked at which isn't bad: http://www.amazon.com/Energy-Karezza-sexua...4808&sr=1-1 ... especially on how to gradually begin retaining. I've been recommended a couple of other books recently but haven't had time to check them out. The Jack Johnston Key Sound stuff is interesting and a good foil to other things. But in general I have always done this more instinctually than by the book. I am happy to give more detailed advice, perhaps in pm, if you have any specific questions, but I don't consider myself an expert! artform is also knowledgeable. As to the rest of what you said, it's interesting... I think playing with these perspectives can be fun, but at my stage of development I don't give a 'final answer'. karen -- Personally I don't necessarily, but I've heard there are many who do. If you're talking about '1. tension, 2. charge, 3. discharge, 4. relaxation.', it's hard to avoid the fact that Karezza involves lessening the (physical) discharge or stopping it altogether for long periods, something which I simply don't know if Reich thought about. So in my mind I haven't really put them together. sahaj -- thankyou! All best wishes, ~NeutralWire~

Vajrasattva it takes us a bit off topic but I'm a bit hazy on how Glenn's stuff became KAP. How did you get into all that and what's the story? (Or what's a link to the story if you don't want to go too far OT?) NW

Ian -- So you understand the question karmically, thinking it will be 'better' to lose? So something is gained, something of value -- namely a reduction in karma? I've always found this a paradoxical viewpoint! 'The point' of spirituality would then be to cease involuntary incarnation... so then the reason to incarnate is to cease incarnating. Therefore nothing is in fact gained by incarnating. That was the reason I personally ceased to look at the question in terms of karma. Both the Western and Taoist viewpoints, it seems to me, look at things a little differently, or anyway, they are closer to what I see. But you obviously feel that to lose is good and to gain is bad, where I feel that they are essentially the same, as I mentioned before. This is perhaps compatible with the Hindu/Buddhist point of view, since ceasing 'attachment to gain and loss' would mean that the idea of gain or loss alike ought to be seen as false. It's just that I don't quite connect with that whole concept. NW

*strikes forehead with palm* -- missed that one! Many ways to actually put a spirit in a bottle of course, doesn't have to be a body spirit. Not only the statues in the British Museum that talk -- Glenn Morris found a couple of Japanese swords that retained their personalities and not ones to be trifled with either. Also owned a sword that had a bitchy spirit in it, used to cut him until he kept it closer to his bed than another sword. He called it 'Lydia', heh that man was a character. All the stories of talking magic mirrors are memories of Bardon/Mickaharic-style fluid condensered magic mirrors, with added spirits and therefore personality. I have a feeling bottle-genies relates to all this as well... You can find the spirit or you can create one. The creation is an artistic act and as an arty type that really resonates with the heart-creation idea. But the mind boggles at the idea of a culture that regularly bottles its organ spirits at death, really does... my mind anyhow. More on that? Want to reread the Arabian nights at some stage, such a great set of tales. Want to read the Argonautica and the Ancient Books of Wales first, so perhaps it will be number 3 on the list. Definitely agree re the multiple minds, and what's more (although I don't know of any that have thought of it in terms of organs yet) every single modern hypnotherapist will agree with you, esp. if influenced by Erickson. 'The unconscious' is known to be multiple in their view. Yes that initial division is beautiful and this to me: ... even more so and very suggestive, stunning. Keeping in mind karen's notion of the heart as feeling, it could be said to shape the flow of blood as Khepera shaped the matter of the universe. Rather makes a nonsense of the old Healing Tao correspondences which had Mars for the heart! dear o dear. Keep coming out with those quotes if you can, it's such a beautiful literature and I know it so little. All best wishes, ~NeutralWire~

Personally I do absolutely everything with this concept of flow in mind. The short answer for me is that everything successfully realized spiritually teaches you about this flow, which means being harmonious with what is arising. You start from a position of being unable to harmonize with this, and you move towards that harmony. We know, or at least I know, what is true and what is not by a deep instinct for harmony that we all have -- in the west this used to be called the conscience, and the ability to return, prodigal son-like, to the source of the flowing harmony, rather than act against it, used to be called repentance. These kinds of concepts are out of fashion now though, and maybe rightly so, because they are too easily misused by religious authorities. This concept appears in Stoicism (which so often echoes Taoism) as well -- for example with Zeno of Citium's statement that wisdom is equivalent to 'a harmonious flow of life, in accord with Nature.' xuesheng -- Your question is very interesting: ... and it dovetails with hagar's about the nature of raw or refined. In general it is not possible to go against the natural way, what is possible is to try, to do many things that obstruct the harmony, to be unwise. This is a sort of gift that human beings have, the gift of being their own independent wills and universes -- but never of course in fact independent. The harmony will be maintained, but the human wisdom to act in accord with it and thereby beautify material existence and attain deep illumination will be absent until wisdom is learned. Nothing couldn't be a part of Nature, but human beings, by the exercise of free will, are able to act wisely and harmoniously, or otherwise. To learn the difference is the beginning, to be absolutely in tune so that wisdom arises without thinking, is more advanced to my mind. It goes very gradually, a story at a time. This is not the same as 'not disturbing' the harmony. All actions are still taken, it is just that they are completely in accord with absolutely everything, they don't perturb and jar the harmony but on the contrary aid it to manifest human wisdom, which is the reason for human free will and creativity. All best wishes, ~NeutralWire~

Glenn Morris was always a really good read on this subject. He said that he couldn't work with people he disliked and as a result he would never be rich, I think this is key. He was good also at delineating the difference between boss and leader. Yoda -- the new avatar is awe-inspiring! NW

Good question, nicely phrased. To me it is both the same. Bardon method 'works towards', aiming. You pick something and you work on it until it is done. Vital to be prudent and to be consciously as wise as you can, refining on purpose... It has to be transformed from one state into another, and you do it with the will -- so it appears in method on the surface. Even so, in practice, how it feels is that I am returning to a state of greater simplicity as a result, that what I am 'doing' is actually equally undoing, depending on how you see it. Negativity means 'inability to attain neutrality' rather than 'absence of positivity', that's my outlook -- hence my screen name... positivity builds towards the middle, but when you get to the middle, it appears that it was always there anyway, and one could equally say you removed what obscured it. So building and taking away seem the same to quite a big extent, and raw and refined end up being the same -- I relate more to refined because I relate spirituality to 'living well' but if I were a Buddhist I would philosophically consider them identical. (Mind you, I don't relate to 'setting boundaries' as Uncarved, to me that is intention also and also very important. The Uncarved is the result -- but the uncarved was always present, the carving didn't actually alter it, so as well as being the result, it's also the cause of the result, or its own cause, the causeless cause, etc. This is related to what Bruce would call the 'face you had before you were born'.) I want to know your answer Hagar! All best wishes, ~NeutralWire~ EDIT: Here's a related question which has been asked before but I don't know if an answer was reached: is anything gained by incarnating and if so what? goldisheavy's answer seems to be 'a little', if wisdom is developed... an interesting issue.

Centre for Corporate Accountability? NW

forestofsouls -- ... you'll have to forgive me then, I did think that you were meaning voidness of mind. My mistake! goldisheavy -- Agree on Chaos Magick lacking wisdom, etc. I do get your attitude, and I totally understand the love you have of contemplation and why you wouldn't want to mix it up with a 'forced achievement' attitude. Where perhaps we differ is that I think you can practice Bardon without that attitude -- in other words, the attitude isn't endemic to his course but is something inside oneself. Personally I do try never to practice anything without that sense of play, discovery and (in the case of contemplation) love. In the case of changing one's personality and earthly destiny, following Erickson, I've discovered like you that creativity is the most important thing. The only way to manifest differently is to see beyond the patterns... I think of it in terms of storytelling because I think of it all as stories that are arising, and of rewriting them. Bardon is written in a certain cajoling manner suitable for its time and place, but if one doesn't actually do it out of love, one won't continue long. All best wishes, ~NeutralWire~

And BTW if you want to tell me more of your own point of view I'd still be curious. This is the one subject that sometimes get out of hand, glad it seems like everyone kept their head.... so far NW

It certainly sounds like it... Bardon refers to mastery of this letter (which is the final one in his system, the 'omega') as conferring a perfect understanding of alchemy which I would guess includes a perfect spiritualization of matter. I have to stress I have only got other people's descriptions of this to go on though! Mistele's description is very good however! NW EDIT: Other terms for minds include logos of course, which in the Hermetica is often used for reasoning mind in humans, and psyche and pneuma for the levels of soul and energy. These are all related to the fairly standard nested system of bodies/minds that you find pretty much everywhere, but of course they all have different terminologies, in the West just as in the East. Every new book one finds, especially if it's by an interesting author, one has to learn a new set of terms! Dynamis is a Greek word meaning activity or energy... don't think it's related to daimon but the latter is certainly an interesting word. It's where we get 'demon', which like 'djinn' has a negative connotation but does not refer to something necessarily negative -- there are positive ones and negative ones, and all are necessary. They are the consciousnesses that manifest divine will. In his book on Evocation Bardon chose to use the word 'genius', which has a far nicer sound to our modern ear, but which I'm pretty certain is cognate with djinn -- hence the 'genie in the bottle'. But the word demon could just as well be used. As Bardon says, these entities are responsible for all the characteristic energetic movements in the human soul, so the old image of good and evil spiritual entities 'warring for the human soul' is not without a certain amount of truth; self-knowledge being the answer as ever. The point of view that some hold would have a genius or a demon in each major organ or organ system of the human body -- Michael Winn insists there are several -- and that is what apepch7 is saying. I'm not wise about these things. I keep meaning to check what the Stoic system about the organs was but never get around to it. On a slightly different note, the knowledge that the organs have consciousness(es) is common in China but can have some interesting results. During the worst period of the cultural revolution, people would sometimes not only kill the 'bourgeois counter-revolutionary' authority figures they were instructed to 'struggle against' -- schoolteachers or whoever -- but would also eat their organs. This still happens occasionally! All best wishes, ~NeutralWire~

Well first off, I don't 'teach outside practices' or anything else -- I'm using this forum to pass on experiences, that's all. Secondly, no-one's praised me for my wisdom. Thirdly, no-one called Bruce a fundamentalist save himself. And fourthly, nothing in what I'm saying is against 'the proper teachings', by which I presume you mean proper Buddhist teachings, for someone who is not a Buddhist -- which I'm not. I adhere to very strong principles in what I do, and my practices are not 'outside practices' for people who follow a Hermetic path. All the best, ~NeutralWire~

Bruce -- Well I didn't want to say so, but I thought that might be it. Decent of you to say that. I absolutely know that the highest levels are working with forces where you have to be completely over mundane emotional involvement, I'm just saying -- you can work towards that stuff using sex as a vehicle to become more disciplined about pleasure, and the pleasure is far deeper as a result -- but can't be grabbed onto, necessitating more letting go. And btw I don't have anything against not having sex. I've spent a long period celibate to see the effect myself. And I'm quite aware that some people are better suited to different approaches. I think some teachers are hooking people in on a kind of selling of pleasure that's very dubious, but it doesn't have to be that way, it really can be legit. NW

I agree so much! This is something that's so important to me because alot of my work is about sinking into the energy of the body in various ways, melting it so that it disappears. What you said though also reminds me of what Bill Mistele said about Bardon's letter OE (equivalent to omega in Greek, of which Zosimus wrote so much around 400AD...): ... kind of addresses karen's ideas also. I find his whole essay on that very interesting: http://shell.lava.net/~pagios/oe.htm ... this is far above my level but does inspire me to continue with the ol' Hermetics. There are many, and also, it depends which Greeks; not sure what Steiner was speaking of specifically. The Stoics (who were closest to a Taoist-style view) actually did have the organs as individual centres of consciousness. With the philosophical terms for mind probably the most important is nous, and you have also daimon meaning the genius or higher self in our time. Not sure what other ones in particular. Also not sure whether they realized that all the minds are also bodies, which the Egyptians definitely did know. Best NW

IIH has got nothing sexual in it at all, although it's the foundation of most things I do in meditation, energy, self-knowledge, and other spiritual skills. Did Reich recommend Karezza BTW? I always understood that he was not in that direction, although I have a great deal of respect for him. NW

Don't think so, from what I understand it involves use of various substances eg. ozone and peroxide to increase physical oxygenation of the body. But then I haven't read it yet. NW

Hey Bruce -- ... no problem agreeing to disagree, but let's be sure we understand each other. What's being talked about here is not 'sex for sex' -- if that's what you were 'chasing after', I think that's where you're off track. When people fast a great deal and watch their food intake to increase the amount of energy available for higher centres and cleanse their body of toxins, this is a rather different thing from, say, eating good food in a nice restaurant. Similarly, when people alter their habits of sexual relating and experience in the way artform and karen have been referring to, this is very different from mundane pleasurable sex. It requires discipline and it does begin to result in certain kinds of spiritual attainment. No, I'm equating it with freedom from emotional blockage and the experience of genuine intimacy leading to cosmic consciousness experiences. Healing on the pure personal level is important -- it's something that many folks who consider themselves enlightened could do with a bit more of. I'm very well acquainted with what's required to release emotional difficulties and in my opinion sexual energies are extremely useful. The amount of research connecting emotion, family, sexual history and so on to severe difficulties with being happy is fairly large. 'Talked about'...? You're right that at the highest levels there is no thought of 'getting off' -- it's the same with the Hermetic practices I understand, but lacking personal experience, I won't comment further there. Practices of the kind I'm speaking of move the person towards that level of having less interest in purely physical 'getting off', as a natural flow of the human system towards liberation. This is a very valuable thing spiritually in terms of amount, refinement and usage of energy. It's why artform talked about 'rewiring'. Unless you have personal experience of that 'rewiring', perhaps it's safe to say you missed what he meant? If all sex taught you was how not to live, you were going in a different direction IMO. Exactly the same thing can happen through modification of breathing patterns, and yes, even modification of eating patterns if it's done skillfully. It can take one a long way to cleanse out the system, and cleansing out the system is very connected to spiritual achievement, in every lineage the world over. These things are also important if one wishes to increase the stock of happiness in the world, rather than continuing to pass on patterns of emotional damage. Those are questions which a monastic life obviates, thus subtly skewing the world away from happiness at ordinary ground level... one's way of life and way of using the body are fundamental in one's approach to life, and I think spiritual practice should embrace all levels, from highest to lowest. NW

Well to me, anything that removes blockages in your system by healing is very valuable for enlightenment purposes -- that's a part of 'enlightenment', namely being able to deal with family history and karma, that sexual practice is very suitable for, but it's also a part that many monastic systems skip over. If you're constantly happy and fulfilled, it makes being nice to people alot easier, and that makes flowing with one's life harmoniously alot easier. If you don't live in a monastery, such things are like gold dust... look around and see how hard people are chasing it. Plus, again, if you actually read artform's stuff... never mind. NW

The fetal 'primary blood flow' is new to me and very intriguing. Of course the feeling function of the heart was being revived by Steiner. The Egyptians and Taoists both knew about it, and the Stoics knew it also. It's interesting to think of the heart sensing flow... thx for this NW

karen -- totally agree with all the Reich/Steiner polarity stuff. Was always under the impression that this was the theory worldwide too, but I might be mistaken... certainly the cover of IIH: ... with its male and female polarities uniting to the androgyne in the lower section, and its +/- eternal orgasm on the brink of the void at the top, does imply the multiple levels and different shades and meanings of polarity. Michael Winn has talked about this on occasion, intelligently it seemed to me. Bruce -- I quite agree that there is a difference between good sex and the highest possible tantric sexuality. But the problem with your point of view, if I may say so, is that there's a great deal of stuff in between those two extremes which is very interesting. In Hermetics as well as tantra there are very high sexual applications that I know I'm not ready for, but whether it's the kind of cosmic consciousness experiences that artform linked to in his blog, or the Reichian psychic unblocking that karen referred to, there's a great deal more to sexual applications for the discerning human being than total enlightenment on the one hand and passionate emotional bonding on the other. It starts with great trust, sensitivity, and for the man I think some retention. And it does lead to experiences that are worthwhile in a healing context. This is beyond regular sex, and it's definitely not a waste of time IMO. I don't judge the 'new age tantrics', mainly because I know nothing whatsoever about them. New Agery is not monolithic so one would have to investigate each of the practitioners individually. BTW, as far as 'old married guys with kids' are concerned, if you'd've read artform's link, you would have seen that he's been married forty years and has two kids grown up and left home. Doesn't seem to stop him having 4 hour orgasms. All best wishes, ~NeutralWire~

karen -- thanks as ever for your valuable perspective. This: ... is a touch of genius that had never occurred to me. Very very clever! I will take a look at that book and look more closely at what McCabe is recommending... just to see. NW EDIT: materia medica is interesting actually.

artform you're my kind of guy! Read your link. I never practiced Chia's approach, but like you I've been 'at it' since I was very young - 4 hour non-ejac masturbation sessions at the age of 12 seemed perfectly normal to me! (*sigh* "normality"... one of humanity's least useful concepts! ) I was really glad when I saw that Chia's practice had appeared, but then many people seemed to start having some serious problems with it, and frankly, that bothered me. I don't know where that's gone now -- maybe nowhere, although Winn still teaches it doesn't he? Glenn Morris was good at this kind of thing but didn't teach, just said, try stuff out. The clamping/inward thing isn't where it's at for me either -- I agree it's all about rewiring one's response to the feelings but (I guess you would agree that) it's a very natural state for human beings, it feels much more to me like wiring back to how it should be. On the question of mitochondria that's very fascinating, not something I'd looked at before although I remember a guy called Taylor Ellwood mentioning it a couple of times. Here's to the good things in life! All best wishes, ~NeutralWire~