forestofclarity

I seem to recall from my Western esoteric days that this is pretty much how they put it. I've been too engrained in Buddhism that the Christian-type Western concepts seem weird to me. For instance, I think the Tantric polarity makes more sense since you can map it directly onto experience. What I find interesting about these conceptual maps is that they form a type of bridge from the conceptual mind to the nonconceptual reality. One can either cross the bridge to the nonconceptual (rare), or attempt to bring the nonconceptual down into the conceptual realm (common) thereby solidifying (crucifying?) and killing it. I suppose from a more Theosophic POV, the first is evolution and the second involution.

I would say so.

You can get a similar effect by closing the eyes tightly, and sometimes pressing gently on them them.

Taiji Bum?

You're generous. I just presume that 99.99% of what's posted online is made up, delusional, a product of mental illness, or some combination.

This insight may arise after a brief or long cessation. The length of the cessation accordingly irrelevant. I would also suggest that cessations of various lengths may be invoked without any jhana or samadhi at all, although perhaps not as consistently. There is also a correlate using the dream and sleep state for similar insight. I guess the point I was trying to make earlier is that Theravada and Samkhya tend to follow a nirvikalpa samadhi model, although how they use the model is different. In fact, I really see no difference between the complete cessation of "nirvana" and nirvikalpa samadhi. Even the prefix is similar. However, the nirvikalpa model seems to be limited to full time monastics and renunciates given the limitations of the model (i.e. it has to be cultivated on long term retreats, with lots of hours spend in sitting). Mahayana and Advaita on the other hand may use these methods, but appear to me to be more modeled on savikalpa samadhi models.

Just riffing on some thoughts. I've heard two uses to the jhana state: 1) you attain jhana and then apply vipassana to it (sutta jhana approach); and 2) you cannot analyze in jhana, so the vipassana takes place upon exit (hard jhana approach). The second one I've come across in both some Theravada and also Zen schools. Interestingly, in Hindu schools, one might use samadhi states to strip away the kosas in real time, leaving only the atman. So remaining in samadhi for periods of time make sense. According to some commentators, the Samkhya goal is to remain in nirvikalpa samadhi at the point of death. However, for the Buddhist approach, it doesn't. What's the point of staying in a jhana state for a several days if the insight is to be had on entry or exit? It sounds like the Buddhists essentially repurposed Samkhya teachings. It is also interesting that Mahayana schools went on the develop methods to invoke shifts in consciousness without intense jhana, allowing one to take advantage of the insight provided by state shifts without having to achieve high levels of samadhi.

I thought this might be an exaggeration, but I looked at Delson's book and it does seem that the descriptions of jhana are fairly watered down, even for Sutta jhanas.

I tried them some years ago and found them compelling, but I didn't continue. I picked them up again to try them for a couple for months to see. They are simple and effective.

Ugh. https://medium.com/know-thyself-heal-thyself/what-i-learned-from-being-kicked-out-of-a-twim-meditation-retreat-9c9133542e5f

TWR's 5 Tsa Lungs?

Interesting interview. I would say that his understanding of rigpa is quite off, but the Theravada theory based stuff was interesting. It is interesting because he is practicing Sutta jhanas, or so-called "jhana lite." If true (which it may be--- his willingness to be tested scientifically is something), I would wonder if it is based on his own capacity.

I would say more like pixels of different shapes. Sometimes round, sometimes sharp.

Is this different from say, the Ganzfeld effect or phosphenes? I've never done psychedelics, but I often see geometric patterns at night and all sorts of strangeness looking at something for a time (often done in meditation). https://scienceline.org/2014/12/why-do-we-see-colors-with-our-eyes-closed/

Doesn't the Gita eventually say that the most advanced path, though, is bhakti?

I get that. Samsaric dreams vs dreams of clarity. Dreams of clarity tend to be hyperreal, meaningful, etc. I've had predictive dreams as well, but the predictions are always fairly minor (although dead on). Personally, my narrative is that there is no astral body. There is consciousness, and consciousness is unlimited. It is a DITY project. No way would anyone with discernment accept any of the evidence out there. It is too easy to fake, and even properly controlled, there may be unknown physical elements at play. The culture is definitely ridiculous. I found one person who sounded earnest, so I decided to try it for fun. I was surprised. I would certainly love to hear a good physical explanation. It is definitely problematic, but the claimed effect is so weak that it is claimed that one needs a low friction source to demonstrate it. Most videos use exposed objects, which move due to ambient air or hand convection. Even if it is under glass with no contact, there may be off camera subtle physical vibrations or heat sources (such as direct sunlight) that can move it. At least one enterprising person drilled a hole through a table and had some one breathing in it off camera. You can also buy magic-shop machines that perform the effect. However, under the right conditions controlling for much of this, the damn thing doesn't move.

I am almost don't want to admit this, but in researching OBEs, I did come across experiments in weak forms of so-called telekinesis. The culture around it is wacky to the point of absurdity, and the people who do it are incredibly ignorant of both basic physics (especially convection and air), the mechanics of magic tricks, and the magic of video editing. However, I have found that one can produce the appearance of the effect that defies most common explanations. Of course, it is one of those things that you'd never believe if you didn't do it yourself. Swami Rama evidently demonstrated such an effect in the same lab he demonstrated control over his heart.

A natural, that's what I figured. It is interesting to see how people seem to have certain "talents" --- lots of stories can be told about that. I've never had a talent for things like this. I agree that the presentation of dreaming is the closest as to how I experience the dream and waking state. What do you think distinguishes an OBE from a hyper lucid dream?

That's pretty cool. Nothing like my teenage Robitussin experience.

I would estimate that at least half (if not more) of the stories people post are made up, and another large chunk are probably sincere but deluded. I also don't think most people who AP are familiar enough with lucid dreams to distinguish the two (if they can be distinguished), or to distinguish the "false awakening." I have not heard of any danger, except from people who watched TV shows or movies. Lucid dreaming can be very educational. Andrew Holocek combines the best of Tibetan and Western. He is actually going over his book Dream Yoga on his site now.

Did you do it at the Institute? Did it work? Looks like the early version is on Youtube after a FOIA to the CIA (which used it for their program):

Did you use any methods or techniques that you found effective? Any specific methods or techniques, or is it more spontaneous?

I think books have a certain function, and for some people at certain times, they can be quite helpful. Obviously many advanced people have written books. The fundamental issue with a book is that it is always generic. The same words for every person, every time. A book doesn't personalize the teaching to fit you. A book doesn't answer questions. A book cannot clarify points. A book cannot tell you whether you misinterpreted it. You cannot check your understanding against a book. And finally, there is no non-verbal communication with a book, personal connection, or "warm hand" to take a hold of. I have found over the past years that for many people (and I include myself here) are just looking to exchange one set of stories for another. As I said, it appears to me that all concepts have a distorting effect.

How not to respond to posts, even if I think they are wrong.

They may have a function, but I wonder if at a certain point they block you. It strikes me that many of us read books and simply replace one story with another. Sometimes this is a good thing, as one story may have a closer proximation than another, but it seems to me that any story has a distorting influence on story-less reality. Also, In my experience, "reality" tends to warp around whatever story one has. One of my teachers has deeply challenged me to go beyond my stories, especially my precious Buddhist ones. In so doing, I am finding a great deal of pressure from other Buddhists to NOT DO THAT. Of course, I trust my teacher, but I am a bit surprised. Of course, what 'there' means is widely variant. For some, 'there' means feeling relatively stress and anxiety free, but for others it means your body becomes incorruptible at death or dissolves into light.