Seeing beings in Meditation

[dwai]

My apology, dwai, for the derail here but I think perhaps it isn't -- the entities we encounter in meditation or dreamtime and the ancient ones who slip between the curtains seem at least markedly similar.

 

Oh No! This is fascinating stuff...thanks for sharing

[blue eyed snake]

twice in my life I've seen the little people

 

they were about knee high, 'dressed' in what nature at that place gave them. ( these two sightings were years apart and totally different places) leaves and grasses etc. Their skin looked sort of brownish and gnarled.

 

I've no idea who they are but felt honored in both occasions. 

[Nungali]

Now we know why he spent so much time out in the woods carving ; 

 

 

 

[Nungali]

[Nungali]

I couldnt resist these  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yoruba 'spirit house' ; 

 

  

 

 

Edited November 3, 2016 by Nungali

[gendao]

My  first experience  was when I was young , it was more 'trance' induced, or 'daydream' .   A 'lady' in the water .... under the surface,  I was confused as I thought 'she cant breathe down there '.  Then, my childish logic kicked in .... 'Ahhh, must be a reflection, silly me . '   I looked up and saw a sphere of light in the sky with the Lady inside it, then it all went white light for ...... ?   Until someone calling my name,  called me back.     I later tracked the icon down ;

or, if one prefers ;

or even

Of course, 'she ' is an archetype , the Catholics , the New Agers, the 'Thothers'  dont have any monopoly on her , they just have variant cultural expressions of the form.

Interesting, per Emotion and Healing in the Energy Body, that is the Lady of the Lake, and she comes to you in dreams/meditations to help heal your first chakra, through being reborn/rebirthed...

[Nungali]

Ummmmm ..... my whole point in posting those pics was to show ..... and I actually said ....   that no one has a monopoly on a  form. 

 

There is no definitive  'that is'  .  What's the point of that ?  Do I now say " NO it isnt the Lady of the Lake  ... that is the Virgin Mary ."

 

" heals you first chakra "    ?   

[redcairo]

Most theories about what cannot be, or isn't logical, are forced to preclude a "multiverse" concept. Because if this is truly the nature of the universe, then pretty much all bets are off for what "might be" concerning other-identities. (Or even our own identities in other parallels, as I call them. Or us as other identities in other parallels.)

I think a couple decades of active imagination meditation work are part of this, but I really dislike that term, because it is so misleading about the experience. It is only consciously imaginative when you are new and really bad at it. :-)  With skill, even in a fully alpha/beta state, you learn to "allow the autonomy" of all that is perceived as not-you.... just like it works in real life.

If the brainwave is closer to theta the experience is more "vivid and visceral." I was a hypnosis nut for about 15 years, and studied biofeedback and so on, so intentional brainwave states were already my thing even before I ran into this kind of meditation. The public seems to think brainwave states are like some kind of switch. The terms only refer to the 'dominant' quantity of waves in a certain frequency bandwidth. You can be walking around calmly and have everything from gamma to delta in your head -- it's merely that you will have 'mostly' beta (eyes open, conscious motion) with a degree of alpha (the calmness). But there's still plenty of other stuff going on. And you can entrain yourself to change this.

At one point in my life I thought the archetypal world had "accidentally animated itself" for me somehow -- I mean, I was a logical, practical person, and if you switch timelines when you're home at lunch (mind-bending), talk to entities in the night (mind-bending), and then you gotta get up early to give a presentation to the board of directors the next morning, it can be a little disconcerting. You come up with all kinds of theories to try and explain it to yourself in a way that doesn't require a straightjacket (or a chemical lobotomy of drugs). Because of the meditation I'd been doing, and my long experience with my own states of mind, I was pretty sure I'd become able to hold a fairly high degree of delta while keeping enough beta for alertness. (I was almost never not lucid in dreams, and even had periods where despite my body sleeping I was utterly lucid 24/7 for days at a time.) (Probably an over-stim chakra side effect, is my theory now. Although I had been lucid in most dreams -- and even intentionally if I chose -- my whole life anyway. Wish I still had that ability. It's rare now.)

So I was talking to this friend a couple years later, who had been a manager in a sleep research center for awhile. I told her I thought I was holding more delta especially in that earlier era, and I was wondering, could "Information streams" that normally are only perceived by the deeply asleep brain, be perceived by the conscious brain in that case? And seem real to me? I mean -- the information (energy) being 'real and valid' -- just that normally you would not 'perceive and translate' it unless you were sleeping.

I told her, in addition to some of the anomalies from the earlier time, of some recent experiences I'd had back then (I think this is circa mid to late 90s) where I had been deeply asleep, and was abruptly woken. It was more like just stepping sideways into this world rather than going through a linear waking process. But the thing was, at the moment I awoke, I had been doing something with other people in another world that was ABOUT this world, and when I awoke it was utterly real to me -- even though I knew I had been asleep, even though I understood it had to be a dream, it didn't matter, my brain interpreted it as completely real, as much as anything tangible in my outer life. It was like I gave instant-validation to it.

She said actually, it's interesting you brought that up. She told me that she had, on a few occasions, had someone be in deep delta and wake up abruptly -- and insist that another person had been there that they were having a conversation with and, even though they understood they had to have been dreaming, they still insisted that as far as they were concerned, it was still utterly real. She said it happened more than once, and the anomaly for her was that they were in deep delta and you're not supposed to be dreaming in deep delta, yet they were describing things that clearly seemed like a dream. And the second anomaly was that even though they had to know it was a dream, to them it was still real-valid.

So I had this idea for awhile that perhaps my brain was simply carrying a larger quantity of theta-delta streams around while I was awake, as a side-effect of my practices, and it was sort of "expanding the frequency bandwidth" that my brain was likely to perceive energy within, and translating it in accordance with my biological filters, belief systems and expectations.

I think it is possible that culture, genetics or both could lead people to perceive a "larger bandwidth" of energy than our focus-reality normally makes manifest. I have a friend in the Ozarks who has seen a ton of anomalous beings in the forest where he grew up -- and a couple of them were wild predators or seemed like it and terrified him -- most of this stuff gets no press because it doesn't fall into the "aliens probed me" meme. Later in life he was to find that at least some of these things, which were utterly novel to him a kid and young man, are found in old native legends, or in grimoires of allegedly mythical things.

In my current multiverse model, there is (to shrink this down to human brain sized linear logic, which of course it's not) a collection of energy (or something that, eventually down the line so to speak, has an emergent property that to us, is). Every individual 'perception' that is created (and infinitely, these are created) basically has their own interpretation of all that -- a reality distinct to them. However that perception is probably categorically grouped -- in our cases, it's in a certain range of frequency, and within that it's a certain biological (massively filtering) creature, and within that there's a certain cultural set.

And so when a given area or group of energy is experienced, it is likely to be experienced "very similarly to" other perceptions which have the same "settings." That doesn't mean whatever is being perceived is some objectively-same-thing. There are no objects-things, there is no objectively, there is only energy perceived subjectively. But we see it "basically" as similar-same for the same reason most people see trees and rivers the same way. I suspect the underlying energy is similar; but the individuals experiencing it will be filtering/morphing it into what works for them.

So maybe in a world where people walked around in cloaks and had cultural stories of the fey with pointed ears, that is what they would experience. But maybe in a world where anything foreign is alien, it seems like that instead. I think Jacques Vallee and Richard Thompson have both done an excellent job of providing historical review of stuff that parallels modern cultural reports, making it patently clear to anybody with half a brain that is exposed to this that nothing new is going on and we just have different labels and contexts now. (Despite that I dislike the title, and that Streiber wrote the foreword -- I'm sure the publisher thought that was cool at the time -- the book "Alien Identities" by Richard Thompson is totally worth reading. It is one of the few books I have kept on my shelf since I first read it, circa 96 or so. He is a Vedic scholar.)

I met what I called 'the blondes' and the 'fragiles' well before I actually realized other people called these 'nordics' and 'greys.' I thought aliens looked like the thing on the Streiber book, which I avoided even looking at if I could help it, in bookstores. I didn't think of them as aliens. I just thought of them as other-beings. I figured if there were ANY other beings than us, then probably there was no limit. But it was mixed in with all kinds of other symbolism. I had what amounted to celtic lore, modern alien lore, south american shamanic lore, all in the same experiences sometimes. Those were usually visions or dreams back then.

Some readers may be happy to know that I do not talk to aliens anymore. On the other hand, just a couple of months ago I was utterly wide awake and getting up when a man walked in my bedroom door who was not in my manifest-focus-reality. And, another ref to mixed up cultures or timelines: he had very pronounced cheekbones, and medium dusky skin, but the top half of his face, to his cheekbones and nose, were a dusky red color. It struck me as vaguely familiar but not until later did I conclude I think I might have seen ref to it as a mask for south american shamanic stuff, at some point. But this was his actual skin. So later, thinking about it, I wondered if they were 'trying to look like' his people. Anyway he just walked right in and talked to me. I have had some very conscious awareness of stuff before, especially a few aspects of self, but he was just a guide and it was utterly clear. I was blown away by the experience.

What if some peoples, via genetics or culture or some other factor, were simply able to perceive such things all the time, or some of the time, or in certain areas (who knows why, environmental effect)?

Psychically, when you hear (it's more like feel, but it feels like "the tiniest whisper-voice ever") an insect like a spider, it "feels" tiny. But there's no reason for it to feel tiny as far as I can tell, except that this is my "translation" of part of the nature of the being. Trees "feel" deep. Planets (by their definition, not ours. Ganymede believes he is a planet) are gods-little-g's. Sometimes when I first perceive something, it will have clear symbolism I have learned to understand means, "this being is way more powerful than me." Like they will seem huge to me, or they will be sitting up on something high above me. It's just my symbolism.

If I am unable to perceive something clearly due to some distortions in my relationship with an energy, I will perceive it in ways that show me this -- it may seem 'multi-faceted' or it might be a guy with a bear head or wings or, in one memorable case that made me laugh (it's one of my Aeons who is in two parts), it's a horse. I was told (from the inside) that it's simply how my brain is forced to 'translate' for me. By the same token, sometimes there is an energy very powerful but I really just don't have capacity for most of it, and if I perceive that thing at all, I am likely to perceive some incredibly "shallow version of it." Literally like it's a paper doll or a cartoon or something, it will be completely different than how I am perceiving everything around it.

It's all just symbolism. But that's all reality is -- even this focus-reality, let alone any of the infinite others. That doesn't mean the entity/experience doesn't have validity, it just means that in my instance of the universe, everything is translating through my frequency bandwidth, through my biological filter, and the last part of that is my brain, with its culture and experience and beliefs -- and finally, the imagination which 'creates' something called "reality experience" for us out of that energy, rather than our just existing in the middle of a bunch of pink noise.

I suspect that there a lot of parallels that are, to put it one way, "closer to" us and that we are likely to run into at some point in life. It is possible (even probable I think) that the evolution of the energy gateways within us (our chakras) have something to do with this. So chances are we run into "generally" the same kind of energy. Sometimes a really powerful entity that might span millennia of our time. Sometimes a 'people' who, while individuals vary, generally look about the same with our filters in place, though their clothing and detail might vary with the culture of the person perceiving it.

In magickal workings one may be taught to actually expect certain identities, or recognize certain correspondences, and by this realize some of what you're working with. I avoid any such exploration as any 'expectation' on my part makes me invalidate myself usually so I avoid it, but later (usually after I have recorded an experience somewhere, and someone better educated on such things contacts me) I find it interesting.

When I was temporarily involved in that world (magick), I used to regularly have experiences with things about a couple days or week before first hearing or reading about them, as if my exploring mind were ahead of me. (I did that with books, too, nearly channeling whole sections of them intuitively just prior to reading them. Seth [Jane Roberts] and Crowley were very strong with me that way.) I was never into summoning anything -- frankly the other worlds seemed more than capable of getting their ass here all on their own if you asked me -- but I ran into stuff that to this day I think is freaky.

Like once, I saw a magickian friend in a world I was in while dreaming -- (an interesting thing we call 'when the body, hardwired to this frequency and beat-pattern, reflects some small portion of brain activity, from the larger self, during far more complex activity in what we would call "there" if we knew it. This causes our people to assume nothing whatever is happening except a moment of brain activity, and we ignore a huge percentage of our human experience as assumedly "doesn't count" as a result.') -- and when I was trying to find to where he had vanished, I met this group of girls, like six or seven siblings, and the youngest, I was talking to her and she wouldn't answer me. I got mad and yelled at her and she just walked away as if I could not hold her. I told my friend who got a kick out of that, as he was really "involved with" this so-called entity named Madimi who was the youngest in a "seven sisters" mythology. Did I perceive that because HE believed it and it was part of his construct? Or because it was a third-thing from either of us? Maybe there is no such thing as a difference. At the time I'd never met him except online and phone and never heard of the entity.

I have learned to not invalidate what seems like 'symbolism' because everything is symbolism. How we perceive a butterfly, a tree, a skyscraper, is just as symbolic as anything else -- it is all translations at the final point of our nervous system that give us the "immersion effect" of reality. I've been fully lucid in innumerable realities, many of which I totally understood were considered 'a dream world' from THIS reality -- but at the time, I understood this reality to be just as much a dream as anything else.

If the multiverse is truly infinite, then it just doesn't matter. I sometimes say:

Every time I wake up here, it seems so real!

:-)

RC

[dwai]

Some cultivators are more adept at seeing chi. Chi can transform from a pre-heavenly quality into post-heavenly form (edit: such as a vision), depending on your energetic makeup and your interests.

 

What does your teacher advise?

 

Something I found on the www that reminded me of Buddha's experience and what he advised:

 

 

 

Best --

 

Thanks rv

 

I'm not particularly concerned or fixated about these things. I just posted to see what the bums think about these phenomena and also that they share them...

 

This is just different from my having teachers visit me in dream state (which is what I experienced for the great part of my practice, especially initially) or seeing beings in waking state observing me while i practice (very rare). 

 

My teachers have consistently told me, don't fixate on phenomena. They come and go. The aim is to become empty...let go.

 

Thanks to all for sharing their thoughts. 

[gendao]

Ummmmm ..... my whole point in posting those pics was to show ..... and I actually said ....   that no one has a monopoly on a  form. 

 

There is no definitive  'that is'  .  What's the point of that ?  Do I now say " NO it isnt the Lady of the Lake  ... that is the Virgin Mary ."

 

" heals you first chakra "    ?   

I was just giving you another variation of the same archetype to offer some more information...orrrr apparently trigger you into some more over-defensive overreaction, lol...

[GreytoWhite]

My first meditation teacher was Yucatec Maya (even though he largely taught me Daoist techniques I was learning the poetry of the Yucatec simultaneously) and most of my visions of other beings have not been particularly humanoid during meditative states. Most of what I encountered are serpents, feathered and not. Very yang creatures that are quite concerned about expansion, they are very concerned about the long term, building, astronomy, mathematical beauty, and engineering. No compassion in them and they will give you the knowledge you ask for without regard to or explanation of the consequences because they can see them and assume you can too.

[Gerard]

Very good rainbowvein friend! That's what wisdom dictates.

 

Lust and delusion the biggest adversaries seekers will face before returning to the Source.

 

Delusion is a monster I haven't faced yet but I can imagine how demanding it is.

 

It's basically ignoring all attempts of the mind to draw you back in to Samsara, its pulling force is massive!

 

Hey Nungali, you live in Australia, do you? Mt. Warning is the location which allowed me to access the higher heaven realms.

 

It's a great energy spot and highly conducive to deeper states of meditation. I think you should check it out.

 

Good luck!

[Nungali]

I was just giving you another variation of the same archetype to offer some more information..

 

 

That is a better way of putting it than your  former definitive  declaration    

 

 

.orrrr apparently trigger you into some more over-defensive overreaction, lol...

 

Ha      

 

More like a  reiterated clarification    ......        and it seemed to have worked ,   thanks for your re-definition  

[Nungali]

 

Hey Nungali, you live in Australia, do you?

 

yes 

 

 

Mt. Warning is the location which allowed me to access the higher heaven realms.

 

It's a great energy spot and highly conducive to deeper states of meditation. I think you should check it out.

 

I know it well , however , it is not 'my country'  .    'Deeper'  states of 'meditation' ?  I get that ( mountainwise )  from the mountain whose gaze I sleep under  ( or day dream under or meditate under ) ;  'Old Man Draming' - Nungli  (  'face' just below and to left of highest peak )  ;

 

 

 

 

[Orion]

Make sure the back of your neck, the top of your head, and any weak points are protected... like anywhere that you have an illness. Those are the most common attachment points. When we meditate our field changes... for lack of a better word... and in successful inner plane work we sort of light up and become more interesting to them.

 

I personally would not believe anything an entity tells you, especially if they seem divine, blissful, intelligent, or whatever. If they aren't invited then there is a boundary/consent violation happening and that is the first sign that they are not actually there for the highest good. Entities like human energy and that's all there is to it.

 

But... to be honest... we don't need to know the origin of the entity, the mechanism, the science, whatever. It's all irrelevant because the perception is arising from mind. If you aren't distracted and return to centre, it's less likely they will stick around. They successful lure people in with fear, lust, and even intellectual discourse that engages the mind. Like anything that arises in meditation, let it dissolve... just like you would ignore an incessant person trying to talk to you while you're clearly meditating.

 

They're just nuisances.

[ChiForce]

You are not alone....hehehehehe...  With me....yeah, I see many celestial beings.  At one time, I saw this Taoist (wearing some peasant Han clothing) who looked like me...with light shining from his eyes.  The next night, I saw this figure again.  Instead, I saw him performing some rituals before an altar and I saw his heart radiating in white light.  According to various Taoist texts as I later found out, the light you see in your meditation is the reflection of the luminosity  of the heart.  Most of the times, I see flashes of faces..mostly pleasant.  I have not been frightened by these expressions...fortunately.       

[Jeff]

For those who may be interested, the great master Ahbinagupta (Kashmir Shaivism) describes his tradition's view on the topic...

 

"The initiated one knows this supreme knowledge characterized by the Heart and which is given by the divinities of Bhairava who are within the Heart and who bring escape from the vibration of manifestation which leads to an obscuring of the Self, and are rather directed towards the supreme vibration which consists of the opening of the Self. These same divinities destroy the chief bond which is the state of contraction."

 

Continuing, Ahbinagupta says...

 

"In order that this sacrifice be successful, one must properly honor (the goddess) with fragment flowers which effortlessly allow for an entrance into the heart;

 

...

 

But one may ask, how should he sacrifice properly? With the highest devotion, with reference and great faith, all of which grant absorption. This great devotion consists in effecting the subordination of the finite levels of the body, the vital breath, and the subtle body. This subordination consists in accomplishing a state of humble devotion, whose nature is an immersion into the essence of that which results in the removal of those finite levels and the establishment of the superiority of the supreme consciousness, whose nature is the Divinity which has been described and which is to be sacrificed to."

 

Then also specifically describing practice such as mantra-s and mudra-s, he says...

 

"When such a practice, consisting of absorption into the mantas-s and mudra-s in their universal form, has become strong, if he extends it constantly in the midst of that practice to three hours without interruptions, shining simultaneously, of one taste, whatever divinity connected with a mantra or mudra is placed in the Heart, then that divinity is brought near by the powers of Rudra, is drawn to him by the powers of Rudra, formed by the power which develops from his constant absorption; he sees it before his very eyes, in identity with his own body, because it's form has been known."

 

At even higher levels he is able to perceive whole hosts of divine beings...

 

"Moreover, when he does not abandon the practice of absorption... Then he will behold the Mothers, Brahmi and the others;... All of these are endowed with the great power of Bhairava..."

[dwai]

For those who may be interested, the great master Ahbinagupta (Kashmir Shaivism) describes his tradition's view on the topic...

 

"The initiated one knows this supreme knowledge characterized by the Heart and which is given by the divinities of Bhairava who are within the Heart and who bring escape from the vibration of manifestation which leads to an obscuring of the Self, and are rather directed towards the supreme vibration which consists of the opening of the Self. These same divinities destroy the chief bond which is the state of contraction."

 

Continuing, Ahbinagupta says...

 

"In order that this sacrifice be successful, one must properly honor (the goddess) with fragment flowers which effortlessly allow for an entrance into the heart;

 

...

 

But one may ask, how should he sacrifice properly? With the highest devotion, with reference and great faith, all of which grant absorption. This great devotion consists in effecting the subordination of the finite levels of the body, the vital breath, and the subtle body. This subordination consists in accomplishing a state of humble devotion, whose nature is an immersion into the essence of that which results in the removal of those finite levels and the establishment of the superiority of the supreme consciousness, whose nature is the Divinity which has been described and which is to be sacrificed to."

 

Then also specifically describing practice such as mantra-s and mudra-s, he says...

 

"When such a practice, consisting of absorption into the mantas-s and mudra-s in their universal form, has become strong, if he extends it constantly in the midst of that practice to three hours without interruptions, shining simultaneously, of one taste, whatever divinity connected with a mantra or mudra is placed in the Heart, then that divinity is brought near by the powers of Rudra, is drawn to him by the powers of Rudra, formed by the power which develops from his constant absorption; he sees it before his very eyes, in identity with his own body, because it's form has been known."

 

At even higher levels he is able to perceive whole hosts of divine beings...

 

"Moreover, when he does not abandon the practice of absorption... Then he will behold the Mothers, Brahmi and the others;... All of these are endowed with the great power of Bhairava..."

This makes sense as I base my meditations by first energizing and cleansing the session with a shakti mantra meditation.

[Jeff]

This makes sense as I base my meditations by first energizing and cleansing the session with a shakti mantra meditation.

Glad it makes sense, you are blessed to have such divine inspiration and help. A little more describing what you are saying for the broader group.

 

Abhinavagupta explains...

 

"The tantric practitioner who has penetrated into the heart whose essence is pure existence and potency, who because of the particular efficacy of the practice of the ritual adoration is capable of remembering perfectly the "mantra" thus attains to a very high degree the potency of the "mantra" which is the reality known as the Heart. by the particular efficacy of the ritual of adoration he crosses over completely, either by himself or as the result of the clear and pristine lotus-word of the teacher, and obtains the power of the "mantra", whose essential characteristic is the Heart, and in this way he attains liberation in this very life."

 

The ritual of adoration also relates to your two visiting friends.

[Seth Ananda]

I dunno. "Archetypes" seem to be approximations that people make in their minds. The actual energies of different entities don't always work well together and the spirits of different religions don't always get along.

I totally object to the "archetype" description these days. It just does not fit my experience of these beings.

They are them and no one else, at least most of the time - no matter how similar they may seem to others in some list of corresponding Venusian spirits.

 

Look at the various Papa Legba/Ellegua/Eshu/Exu variations. If you make a pact with one you owe him what you offer him, and if you change to or adopt another 'variation of him', you can not carry over your promises to the new one without repercussions from the old one.

 

I wont say it does not get weird though.

[redcairo]

I agree that the term 'archetypes' is over, badly, and incorrectly used -- by me greatly too. We really need a few words in this area that our language just doesn't have.

 

There are identities which are the collective composite energies of our intent which are, as a result, half-us.

 

Then there are identities which are autonomous and often far more powerful, present, and long in duration, than us. We might get 'our version' of them but they are who they are regardless of us.

 

The former are like 'personalized' archetypes. The latter are like Archetypes capital-A and tend to be way, way more powerful and impactive.

 

The former are good for meditative work on your problems. The latter may range from changing your life to having you for lunch. I think a lot of this stuff is greatly underestimated in terms of the repercussions on every level that interaction can bring.

 

RC

[Seth Ananda]

Sorry if this is too off topic Dwai - let me know if it is and ill drop this line of conversation, but its so interesting. 

I agree that the term 'archetypes' is over, badly, and incorrectly used -- by me greatly too. We really need a few words in this area that our language just doesn't have.

 

There are identities which are the collective composite energies of our intent which are, as a result, half-us.

 

Then there are identities which are autonomous and often far more powerful, present, and long in duration, than us. We might get 'our version' of them but they are who they are regardless of us.

 

The former are like 'personalized' archetypes. The latter are like Archetypes capital-A and tend to be way, way more powerful and impactive.

 

The former are good for meditative work on your problems. The latter may range from changing your life to having you for lunch. I think a lot of this stuff is greatly underestimated in terms of the repercussions on every level that interaction can bring.

 

RC

I used to think like this too, dividing beings up into these kind of categories, and maybe I have little hangovers of it left - but the only being I would consider being 'half me' would be something I have control over {or even half control over} - And none of the beings I work with are in any way susceptible to that kind of nonsense. 

 

I know however that some servitor experiments create a basic intelligence that you can manipulate - which I have no interest in whatsoever anymore. 

 

But anyway the Animist in me believes that everything is alive - everything - and that life is an ensouling process. As soon as something exists it takes on (or tries to the best of the capacities it is given) independence and life of its own, no matter where it begins -even if that was someones mind, or cultural ideas.

Its life span and ability to sustain itself may be in doubt, but it at least exists for a little moment of time before the death process takes it, and I treat it all as such.

 

I also find the concept of ownership problematic. Where does inspiration come from? Who owns it?
We are all so sure we are us, like an island somehow not touched by the sea or other land masses - and if we heard an idea in our heads or had a creative impulse pop up in our psyches we take immediate ownership or claim authorship of that inspiration - maybe some variation of Mary that's seems so culturally specific or culturally created was inspiration to humans from her herself?
 

Another interesting thing is the dual faith observance that some traditions have - where an older spirit of an older tradition lives within the surface image of say a catholic saint, and even seems to thrive there.. Its a weird world

 

So even if it 'seems' to have started in a cultures religious ideas, or a magicians mind or a psychotics splintered psyche, I don't think we really know what the possible causes behind it are, or that we can accurately say it is 'just' an egregor, a construct, an archetype and so on.. 
 

[redcairo]

Howdy!
 

 

the only being I would consider being 'half me' would be something I have control over {or even half control over}

Temporal archetypes (again this is probably the wrong word but is commonly used in some work) can be a composite such as the coming board meeting Monday, the pain in my left knee, and my current lack of money. They function as "autonomous identities" quite well and can even function as guides, but I do not consider them "entities" or "beings." That is what I was referring to. Apologies if I phrased it poorly.

(Even as guides if they are to stick around they have to be given thoughtform energy for it. Of course that goes even for thoughtforms themselves (e.g. of an statuette, I have several thoughtforms I've been "given" from the inside and have to pointedly focus with sometimes to maintain their "presence" around me).)

Aeons (of the universe, such as Tarot, the Elements [chemistry's ToE]) have a power and sentience degree which experientially are very different from that noted above. This could be the thoughtform energy poured into them by billions of people over time, of course, but regardless of why, they simply do.
 

 

I know however that some servitor experiments create a basic intelligence that you can manipulate - which I have no interest in whatsoever anymore.

I have no interest in that kind of thing personally.
 

 

But anyway the Animist in me believes that everything is alive - everything - and that life is an ensouling process.

My views on this are currently in flux. I call myself an accidental animist -- I came to the belief system via experience not intellect -- but I've had a number of experiences where I am forced to dramatically reconsider what I think about every particle of energy in our perceived reality -- from metal to gumwrappers to skyscrapers -- and in the rare moments that is not utterly frying my brain, it is making me think my whole definition of life and sentience has been wrong all along. It'll probably take awhile to work that through.
 

 

I also find the concept of ownership problematic. Where does inspiration come from? Who owns it?

This comes with the above views-in-flux for me, as it's part of the same inner information. It's always mutual, I get. If we write a story, a song, build a table, the consciousness inherent in that energy already existed and is as much a part of the creation as we are. Our belief that it's all-us (most people, most the time) is just a belief. Kind of like getting information and being sure we imagined it, even though we did not create it on purpose. Of course we did -- imagination feeds information INto us, not just out from us, it's our personal interface with the cosmos... most everything feels like that when in a light brainwave state, as a result.
 

 

We are all so sure we are us, like an island somehow not touched by the sea or other land masses - and if we heard an idea in our heads or had a creative impulse pop up in our psyches we take immediate ownership or claim authorship of that inspiration -

Part of the same stuff above for me, although this one I've been stumbling over much longer. I'm not sure what 'is' for me, is for everyone else, I mean I kind of assume it -- but maybe not. I've been working on coming to terms with an understanding that I am an 'emergent property' of a group of 12 and I'm pretty much the composite-energy-CEO to be 'driver' in this identity-instance for this focus-reality. I spent awhile freaked out, going, "I'm not real! OMG! I'm not even real!" after understanding that the first time LOL. The spirit is in them. Of course I am them. Sort of.

Identity is by far the most infinitely complex and confusing topic of everything I've ever dealt with. The more I understand from the inside, the more the "walls of separation" seem to fall. That doesn't mean there aren't different kinds of Beings for example -- a tree is not a cat is not a person -- but they are all beings and they "overlap and merge" to a far greater degree than we might imagine at times.
 

 

maybe some variation of Mary that's seems so culturally specific or culturally created was inspiration to humans from her herself?

Maybe it is ever thus.
 

 

Another interesting thing is the dual faith observance that some traditions have - where an older spirit of an older tradition lives within the surface image of say a catholic saint, and even seems to thrive there.. Its a weird world

I think of it more like there is an energy and the interface of our current instances perceive it according to our capacities, which vary, but as-perceived, that instance is still a legitimate being -- an aspect of something we couldn't name if we wanted to, but we can name the 'Aspects' Mary, or Diana, or whatever. None are accurate beyond the aspect-instance, but all have accuracy within the larger Identity, I suspect.

All theory of course. I only met so-called Mary a couple of times (and I had a knee-jerk rejection of the whole christianity thing) and she was ass-kickingly powerful both times and I'm not even Catholic. I no longer make assumptions about her. I think she and other semi-deities may be something we really just aren't equipped with current neural patterns to fully understand. At least not while in an alpha/beta state, as something we can bring to verbalization.
 

 

So even if it 'seems' to have started in a cultures religious ideas, or a magicians mind or a psychotics splintered psyche, I don't think we really know what the possible causes behind it are, or that we can accurately say it is 'just' an egregor, a construct, an archetype and so on...

The identities I've been working with the last couple of decades do have certain recognizable elements, and identify themselves when asked in different ways. That doesn't mean that things "are vs. aren't" identities or beings -- that's too simplified and polarized -- everything is an 'identity' if it's talking to you and I think we can communicate with most anything (a key feature of humans possibly, unless trees and squirrels and mailboxes do this too). It just means that even if, for example, all animals are animals, still some are clearly more like a duck than a giraffe. Same in the interworlds. I can't say I know the underlying source or meaning of anything -- even my kitchen table -- I'll leave that to the sages for now. But I do know that as long as it looks like a table when I experience it, I can probably interact with it as if it is, and so far that has always worked for me. :-)

Best,
RC

Edited November 9, 2016 by redcairo