Thoughts on Wisdom

At the risk of getting a little self-indulgent, I wanted to recount a few thoughts on wisdom that I had. Wisdom is such an important faculty; as one progresses in this work it ends up coming in spades. Perhaps it's the ultimate purpose of the whole thing.

Humility, Simplicity, and Aporia

The first thought I had was on the necessity of humility in developing wisdom. Assuming that one is lacking or inferior - not being vainglorious or arrogant - is the ground for becoming wise.

The best example of this in history is Socrates, who the oracle said was the wisest man in Greece. She proclaimed this for a simple reason: because Socrates knew his own ignorance. This sounds so simple but it exposes the average person: that everyone thinks he knows everything. By admitting one's limitations, by admitting what one does not know, one finds the basis for becoming wise.

Building off of this is the virtue of simplicity; not only living simply but embracing it as a virtue intellectually. For example, one thing Socrates always starts off by doing is defining his terms. Someone will come to him and want to debate, but before Socrates will do this he first makes sure both he and his interlocutor understand their terms.

I can never concede the utility of this. There are so many discussions that would fare so much better if people stopped and defined their terms. I also think of times when I see people arguing; I wonder if each has a different definition for the term they are yelling about.

When you read the dialogues Socrates will spend line after line trying to come to basic definitions - often unsuccessfully.  It is here where we see the purpose of the dialogues. As it is not for us to come to a particular conclusion - but to that elusive state of "not knowing" or "aporia."

Sometimes this is called the state of "divine ignorance" and I feel that this is a major part of wisdom. It is elusive and hard to define; you know when you are here because it is at the same time paradoxical, foolish, humorous, and profound. It is the "divine spark" that is the closest we can get to truth when using the mind.

Self-Knowledge

Another aspect of wisdom of self-knowledge. A great exercise for this is just to go mentally through one's day and make a list of all the different "roles" that one plays. For example, in the morning with this person I act this way; at midday I am with this superior and I act this way; then in the evening I am with this person and I behave like this.

If you go through this process you see how many contradictions we have - and how capricious we are. You see how much falsehood is a part of our personality. By doing this it becomes possible to see through all these faces and come to the true "self" that is behind them. 

Exile 

Another aspect of wisdom is exile. By this I mean detachment, disidentification, and dispassion; becoming disinterested in the fruits of one's labor, inclining to solitude, and abandoning the quest for sense experience. This trait is closely connected to asceticism, and elevates one above slavery to the physical.

Contradiction

"Do I contradict myself?" asks Whitman. "Very well then. I am large, I contain multitudes." This is another aspect of wisdom. There is often a desire that one should always be consistent; that one should never change one's opinion or be contradictory.

While on the one hand it is true that consistency can be a sign of integrity, at the same time contradiction can also be a sign of wisdom. Truth may change depending on the circumstances; and in our complex world truth may be one thing in one scenario, and then just the opposite in another instance.

Foolishness

Foolishness is another element of wisdom. If we return to Socrates, we think of the life of poverty that he lived. This lifestyle is an absurdity to the average person; it is here where we see the difference between real wisdom and the "wisdom of the world." 

It is humorous here because when investigated, the "world's wisdom" is a pursuit of nonsense. Eventually we all grow old, sick, and die; any experience in the present is temporary; and time is being wasted in which one could be making progress on the real "work." Yet heedlessly everyone barrels forward with the anxieties of materialism. "Vanity of vanities," says Ecclesiastes, "all is vanity."

Ordinariness

A final aspect is the invisibility of wisdom. A figure like Socrates may appear completely ordinary or unremarkable. When these people speak they could be poor orators - their mouths may not drip with drops of gold liquid ("chrysostomos" in Greek). You may not see the real wealth that they have within.

Thoughts on Gurdjieff

I have long since moved on from being a student of Gurdjieff, but I wanted to recount my thoughts here on the teaching that he developed. I feel I am in a unique place to comment on this, both having studied his "work" for many years while also having a commensurate background in mysticism, philosophy, and religious studies.

I have to start by praising Gurdjieff for his ideas, their relative completeness, and their uniqueness. Gurdjieff clearly spent many years studying different religions and philosophies, and then formulated what he learned into a teaching that has few equivalents.

Origins of the Gurdjieff Teaching

Let's try to reverse engineer the Gurdjieff philosophy and figure out its origins.

Self-knowledge

This part is the easiest, as there are many strands of this throughout philosophy and Western esotericism. The best example of course lies with Socrates and the prescription of the Oracle of Delphi.

Three Centers

There are a couple of origins for this idea. One might be a unique reading of the three part psyche in Plato's Republic, an alternate take on a similar idea taken from the Greek monastics, or an appropriation of the concept in some strands of Western esotericism (for example, the alchemical idea of mercury, sulphur, and salt).

Magnetic Center

This is a unique idea and one I give Gurdjieff a great deal of credit for. If the concept exists in other works they have since been lost to us. I have found no equivalent. I feel it is a great model for understanding the transition from ordinary life to the spiritual life. The concept of course melds excellently into the idea of metanoia taken from an esoteric reading of Christianity. After the magnetic center is sufficiently strong, it leads to self-transformation.

Contradiction

This idea likely originates from alchemy or the Western esoteric tradition. The thesis here is man is trapped in falsehoods and deceptions, and self-transformation comes from confronting these. The process of doing this creates "heat" like in the alchemist's crucible.

Law of Octaves

I always took this idea as a prescription that "any process once begun eventually loses its initiative" and "over time movements may represent one thing but then will vacillate and come to embody the opposite." Gurdjieff gave the example of pacifist Christianity turning later to the Inquisition and crusades. Gurdjieff used musical scales as his example for this; based on this I feel this idea must originate in some works of Pythagoreanism, or in strands of Platonism.

Self-remembering

Here we find corollaries with "sati" (mindfulness) in Buddhism, or with "nepsis" (watchfulness) in Eastern Christianity.

Three Spiritual Bodies

Gurdjieff had the idea of three spiritual bodies - the astral, mental, and divine - which we can find a corollary with in the idea of the three kayas in Vajrayana (Tibetan) Buddhism. I have tried to make sense of these over the years (both the Gurdjieff and Buddhist versions) and I have concluded that the latter suffers from severe issues of mistranslation. Gurdjieff, for his part, mentions these and never elaborates. So, this is my best explanation of these.

1. The physical body - where we are now

2. The astral body - represents an OOB projection in the real time zone (the "RTZ," as Frank Kepple would call it)

3. The mental body - represents an OOB projection in a nonphysical domain

4. The divine body - represents an OOB projection to the Source (formless supreme reality)

This, I think, is the correct understanding of these, and helps to elucidate what they are referring to. In all other cases we would have to assume the explanations are just misunderstandings or mistranslations.

Esotericism

The concept in general likely has several inspirations - the Western esoteric tradition, the monks of Mt. Athos, the Sufi orders, and the Tibetan monasteries.  I am aware of no independent tradition that comes as close to Gurdjieff in completeness, however.

Errors of Gurdjieff

Just as I critiqued Christianity before, in a Gurdjieff school these would be very "bold" pronouncements to make. But, speaking as a scholar of mysticism, these would be the criticisms I would identify.

1. The idea man is born without a soul

I must admit even now I find this idea fascinating. Gurdjieff taught that man was born without a soul, and one had to be forged through "work." Here I think that he developed this concept as a way to make religion palatable in the West. In the West many people have a profound hostility to religion and yet there is still a great inner desire to seek something "more." This teaching allows those people to come to religion by understanding it differently.

Having explored the question with many people over the years, it seems likely that we are all born with spirit fully formed as a part of us. Perhaps a better model is it is there but we have "forgotten" it, and need to remember and reconnect with that part of ourselves.

2. Miracles

Gurdjieff presented the idea of small energy "accumulators," and that the miraculous was possible through super-effort and direct connection to the large "accumulator." I was open to the miraculous for a long time, and studied strands of it where I could (for example, the reference to the "dynamikos" of Christ in the Gospels, or the "siddhis" of the Hindu yogis). However, after many years I have to conclude that miracles are impossible. There are indeed many strange phenomena, including OOBEs, self-healing, precognition, intuition, and so on that are true - however they are rare and simply come as a part of one's progress in the spiritual life.

3. Food for the moon

This is a part of the nefarious side of Gurdjieff's teaching; the idea that humanity is in a state of mechanical slavery and that with each death we are being "fed" to sustain higher entities. This was an idea I found no corollary to with anything in all of literature until I found a similar concept in Robert Monroe's writing. Monroe himself may have been influenced in this idea by Gurdjieff.

While I think the concept may have some utility as a parable or teaching tool, I would lean on the side of caution here as the potential for it to be taken literally is too feasible. Yes, these are useful models: to think "earth is a prison," the "human condition is a prison," "man is asleep," and "man is a slave." These all can motivate people to make progress on the spiritual quest. But at the same time they are just that, models.

4. Kundalini

Here is one where I think Gurdjieff's critique was based off interactions with "occultists" and "theosophists" who took this term and appropriated it without really knowing what they were talking about. Gurdjieff decided to turn the concept on its head and use it for his own teaching about self-deception. However, I feel there is some irony here. As there is indeed a force of kundalini which can be experienced as a result of meditation or sleep paralysis. It is an interesting point as it means Gurdjieff may not have been aware of the phenomenon.

5. Burying the bone too deep

Here I have to critique Gurdjieff's writings which I admit I do not have a great appreciation of. This is ultimately why I would consider myself a student more of the strand of his teaching embodied by P. D. Ouspensky instead. Ouspensky was a much better, clearer, and more focused writer than Gurdjieff.

One of the things I have touched on when it comes to these topics is the idea of urgency. We are confronted with the issues of the human condition; sickness, aging, and death. At any moment it could all be over with a simple accident. Gurdjieff himself spoke about people who "fell under trams." That is why I don't think it is useful to obscure one's ideas with overly complex writing. We find this same issue when we try to read old esoteric texts; if they used a needlessly convoluted system of symbols to formulate their ideas, the writing becomes useless to us.

I realize Gurdjieff wished to maintain his "mystique" but ultimately I feel it made his writings impractical. I recall once reading about ten pages of his first book and realized he had spent all that time talking about toilets in Persia and America. Get to what is important!

6. Gurdjieff's bastards

This is one of the major concerns I have with Gurdjieff after many years. His sexual conduct seems bizarre in juxtaposition with his spiritual accomplishment. While I can understand his attitude toward money - he was a pragmatist about it and not about living a life of poverty - here I am not so sure.

Gurdjieff was known for his many affairs, though he attempted to keep them discreet, and the many bastards he fathered. While nature is of course one thing, the shame this would create for the women of the time is concerning. It does not seem ethically justifiable. I also do not see why Gurdjieff would have such an interest in sexual conquest; the force of it as a drive declines as the real priorities of one's life come into better focus.

7. No contemplative life or mysticism

Ultimately, the lack of references to the contemplative life and to the more mature and solitary side of the mystic quest are the biggest omissions I find in the Gurdjieff work. This is where I feel the teaching is ultimately "incomplete."

I have seen Gurdjieff schools where the people go in endless circles administering "shocks" to one another. After a point there is no need for this and it becomes unconstructive to one's progress. Eventually, one has to graduate from this and move on.

Here I wonder about Gurdjieff's experience with meditation and the OOBE. There was of course no concept of going OOB during his time. There was also no study of dreams or lucid dreaming available. Perhaps Beelzebub is a truer tale than it seems and partly recounts Gurdjieff's adventures while OOB. Or, perhaps it is simply an imaginary tale meant to get one to think.

Final Thoughts

There are two more ideas I wanted to touch on here that I am still thinking about.

The Last Supper

The first of these is Gurdjieff's explanation of the Last Supper. I still find this one fascinating. I have found no other account like this in literature. Gurdjieff understood the Last Supper as a magical ritual that fit into the Jewish occult tradition. According to Gurdjieff, the disciples ate real flesh and drank real blood. Doing so, according to Gurdjieff, created a "connection" between Christ and the apostles so they could continue to communicate after his death.

Here I do not know what to think of this. It could coalesce with some of my other thoughts on the resurrection; that is, while there was no physical return of Christ, he continued to communicate directly to the apostles as a result of this.

Materiality of the Cosmos

Gurdjieff's idea here was that everything is material. It is just that on higher planes the materiality of objects (he used the idea of increasingly less dense "atoms") becomes finer, superior, and more rarified.

Here I am not so sure about this particularly when we start talking about formless reality. But, I certainly appreciate this idea as a very constructive "model" by which we can apprehend the world. It also goes hand in hand with a discussion of "dimensions." Here if you have never seen Carl Sagan's explanation of the fourth dimension (he does this on an episode of Cosmos), I recommend giving it a view.

Pseudo-Esotericism

Here I wanted to touch on an idea related to esotericism again. It's a brief point but I think it will help to clarify what I mean when I use the word.

There's a great point Gurdjieff makes in Fragments.

[A]lmost everything we know about various kinds of occult, masonic, and alchemical schools [is a result of] imitation. We know practically nothing about real schools.

This is entirely true and what we have to keep in mind whenever we talk about this topic. Because this is the real starting point: that effectively every manifestation we see of "esotericism" is a misrepresentation, a fragment, an outward imitation, or nonsense.

The writings that are preserved to us in some cases may be legitimate texts or they could be complete nonsense. In many cases (I brought this up when we examined alchemy last time) even if we have a text that is legitimate, if it was written using a confusing system of symbols, we have no way to translate that into comprehensible language so it becomes effectively useless to us.

Gurdjieff explains how there probably have been many real esoteric schools throughout history, but we don't know about them. Instead, what we have knowledge of today are imitation schools or devolutions of real schools.

We can go through the list of these: Freemasonry, Pythagoreanism, Orphism, the cults of Dionysus and Apollo, the Eleusinian mysteries, the cults of Mithra and Isis, the Western Hermetic tradition, and so on.

Probably the best example of these is Freemasonry. I have some limited experience with Freemasonry (I never thought it was a good use of time) and for the most part my conclusion was it was mostly devolved into a drinking or social club. It has a feel good "become a better person" philosophy but has lost most of the hermetic foundation that is supposed to underlie it.

Gurdjieff explains how schools degenerate over time: the people who formed the school move on, and those who remain maintain the outward show but the purpose of the school goes away.

The example he gives of this is rites and sacraments: like those we might find in Freemasonry or Catholicism. These rites were created as powerful, sacral symbols used to elevate the meaning of the inner quest. But, here you can see the error of later interpreters who claim these rites communicate anything in themselves when that is quite wrong. The actual work needs to be done on one's own.

Socrates himself speculates on some of the mysteries of his time in the dialogues. It is clear both he and Plato understood the meaning of their contemporary mystery schools, and tried to create their own version of the discipline through their development of philosophy.

A final thought I wanted to add here is that esotericism is by nature fragmentary. Even if we pick up a few legitimate elements here and there, part of the challenge is still to make it all into a functional whole in oneself. 

This is where I think the original title of Ouspensky's book was great. As the ideas in it are fascinating - though ultimately incomplete. I touched on the purpose of esoteric schools once here; that these schools are focused on the beginning stages of spirituality (in the Gurdjieff language, "man 4" and "man 5"). But, in order to complete the "great work," one must eventually move on, and examine the disciplines of mysticism and philosophy.

Thoughts on Asceticism

Asceticism is a term we are very unfamiliar with in the modern world. We encounter it so little that I think most of the people you meet would be unable to define the word. I feel this is a shame because simply understanding it as a concept may be of great benefit to mental health.

Asceticism has existed throughout history, and has the following basic premise: that by renouncing desire or experience now, one grows in freedom and spiritual attainment.

If we look at history, those who valued ascetical principles played a major role as some of the most important figures of humanity.

The impoverished Socrates certainly articulated these values as key for a philosopher. For him, the philosopher seeks to transcend the physical and return to his true home in the nonphysical. By forsaking attachments to the present reality, one is less bound to it and all the better bound for exiting to the next life.

We see these principles in Jesus; he practices them himself, for instance, during his time in the wilderness. Jesus also articulates very clear ascetic ideals when the rich young man comes to Christ and he tells him to "give up all he has and follow him."

The Buddha also embodies these ideas. In the mythology of the Buddha's life, Siddhartha spent his early years as an ascetic in the wilderness before realizing intense asceticism was fruitless. This led him to develop the "Middle Way," a moderate path between materialism and asceticism, as the most efficient way to enlightenment.

Stresses of Materialism

Here I look at humanity at the present day and see the endless foolishness of materialism. We are constantly bombarded by falsehoods: by images of celebrities and billionaires who seem to be enjoying pleasures far in excess of everyone else. There is such a useless amount of anxiety felt over the pursuit of objects that are all really empty in the end.

Here I think of my cousin who works at a hedge fund. He is someone with a "rajasic" temperament - using the term here from the Bhagavad Gita - someone who is endlessly ambitious, competitive, and materialistic. This is often the mindset of the entrepreneur; someone who when you are in the presence of makes you feel driven to become more ambitious yourself.

Here I must admit when I am in the presence of these worldly people I have felt myself getting caught up in their temperament - as it is intoxicating. However, whenever I stay with them for longer periods I begin to understand its contradictions and hollowness, and how it is an inferior worldview to my own. I begin to see the inner realities of these people. I see how their inner lives are filled with endless anxiety over competition, and of fear over confronting their true natures when they are forced to see themselves as independent of things.

The delusion I realized this mindset operates under is that matter is the highest dimension of our experience. If there is nothing higher than matter, then the attitude would make sense; the acquisition of things in the physical - wealth, sexual experience, fame, and so forth - would be the highest end. So, this is the issue with this worldview; it does not understand that matter is just an expression of higher principles.

Materialism and Happiness

So, let us look at the happiness of materialism, and try to gain more insight into it. Let's acknowledge here that materialism can bring happiness, although it more frequently results in disappointment, delusion, and anxiety. Let's also acknowledge that materialism does have its own wisdom to it - however, it is a wisdom that is inferior to what human beings are capable of.

We spend our lives...

1. Amassing wealth

2. Accumulating sexual experiences

3. Achieving reputation and fame, or becoming "important"

4. Amassing friendships and relationships

Here I am also including the last category, as amassing attachments and identifications with people is also an expression of materialism, and will only bind us here. 

What Asceticism Means

I am not saying one should live in a cave in the wilderness, or forsake all material comfort. Certainly while we are here in the physical it is necessary for us to amass wealth, to have sexual experiences, to progress in our work, to build relationships, and so on. But what I am advising is, first, we should go through the intellectual exercise of seeing the uselessness of things; and, second, not to make the primary purpose of life the accumulation of these worthless objects. "Do not store up your treasures on earth," says Christ.

Recall the reality of the grave in which no dollar of your portfolio will follow you; think of how all the young women you were with age and turn into old matrons; think of how all celebrities are forgotten within a few decades; and think of how much we escape ourselves when we continually seek out others for validation. 

A Final Thought

I had a last thought on this and it is something I do not see examined in religious literature which is a shame. This is an alternate perspective and one that might be very useful for one with the ambitious temperament.

If the physical world is a projection of a higher reality, then that means that all the sense experiences of this world are inferior to those in the other world.

Think about that for a moment. If you are really ambitious, let it sink in.

Here I can't help but think of the "Nanda Sutra" of Buddhism. In this tale, the Buddha meets with one of his relatives who by modern standards we would call a "sex addict." His relative has a beautiful girlfriend. Nanda likes the Buddha but does not want to take up asceticism. So, the Buddha briefly shows him the nonphysical reality. There, the man sees that his girlfriend is profoundly inferior to the beautiful women that can exist in the next reality.

Think of each flaw to the body; think of your own flaws and limitations. The reality is a materialist is accepting an inferior good by confining himself to this world when there are higher goods he could be enjoying in the next world. Just an interesting thought for you. ;)

Understanding Alchemy

In one of my earlier posts I compared several different models of the spiritual life. Here I wanted to look at a model that I neglected: alchemy.

In the chemistry courses many of us take in school, alchemy is usually mentioned briefly as an early version of the discipline. The textbooks will usually make some sort of mention about those quaint alchemists "trying to turn lead into gold" and then go on to explain all the ways modern chemists have surpassed them.

While it is true that some medieval alchemists did work with chemicals, on close inspection the discipline is much more than this. When we unpack it, we find its symbols are a cover for their real enterprise, a great inner "work" that takes place within man.

Now you may ask, "Why all the confusing symbols?" I think the best answer to this is to look at the times and places where alchemy was practiced. If we do so we find that it developed in settings that were often not known for their tolerance - where those practicing "alternative" spiritualities were likely to be branded as heretics. So, the schema of alchemy was developed as a cover for them to work without persecution.

Goals of the Alchemists

Let's look at a few major models of alchemy, then compare them to the other descriptions of the religious life we've examined.

To start, what is the goal of the alchemist? Usually there are several different ideals.

1. To turn the base metals into gold

2. To create the elixir of life

3. To create the philosopher's stone

4. To complete the "magnum opus" (great work)

We find that these are all describing a similar end, although the emphasis is placed on different areas. Let's try to unpack what each of these means.

1. This first goal makes use of the symbolism of metals. In alchemy, there are usually the "base metals" (lead being the lowest) and the "noble metals" (gold being the highest). The alchemists that did work with physical chemicals would attempt to transmute (via various processes) the base metals into valuable gold - as we know, to no avail.

From the allegorical perspective, these metals are describing an inner work. The base metals represent ordinary man - man in an "uninitiated," "ignorant," or "unrepentant" state - while gold represents the state of self-perfection, enlightenment, or wisdom - the state of the "divinized" or "deified" man.

2. The second goal places its focus on the creation of the "elixir of life" - the idea being that by consuming this secret drink one will attain immortality. This perspective usually has all sorts of colorful descriptions of how this elixir is made.

I have some sympathy with this description, as I feel it is alluding to the greatest problem of human beings - death. To me, any seriously minded person should be working diligently to overcome death, and I feel this description is an expression for someone on this path.

An interesting anecdote here is the tale of Shi Huangdi. Towards the end of his life the Chinese emperor became absolutely terrified of dying. So, he gathered all the alchemists from throughout China and set them to work to make him the elixir of life. They produced many liqueurs for him to consume, but one of these was a potion of mercury, which (ironically) was what caused his death. Here we can learn from the emperor, and remember these are figurative formulas - not literal ones.

3. The third goal is to create the "philosopher's stone," and I always found this an interesting one because it in itself makes reference to the overlap that happens between disciplines.

So, are we working with alchemy here - or philosophy? It is an interesting question. Who we should immediately think of here when we use the term "philosopher" are of course the ancient Greeks, Plato and Socrates, who coined the term, and who described the praxis one on this path should follow in works like The Republic, the Phaedo, the Timaeus, and so on.

I have already covered the three parts of the psyche described in The Republic earlier, and touched on how this work is itself an allegory. The Republic explains the establishment of justice within the psyche, and compares the psyche of the normal man (the tyrannical city-states) to the psyche of the higher man (the philosopher, the Kallipolis or beautiful city).

We also find throughout the dialogues Socrates describing much of the lifestyle that one on this path would follow. He explains the heroic and ascetical temperament, and the pursuit of wisdom as major practices. He also speculates on the nature of reality, justice, the afterlife, and other topics that one on this path would consider of interest.

4. The final goal of the "magnum opus" is compatible with each of the others, and is of value because I think it reflects the overall perspective of alchemy. Alchemy is different from other spiritualities because it sees itself as a life process of work that permanently transforms the human being. For the alchemist, he is the material with which he works; he is the "prime matter" that is turned into the "gold" of wisdom, perfection, and immortality.

The Philosopher's Stone

Having looked at the goals, let's look at two major formulations of the alchemical path. The first is usually presented as the following.

1. Blackening (nigredo)

2. Whitening (albedo)

3. Reddening (rubedo)

This model is usually presented as a means of creating the philosopher's stone. First, the alchemist begins with the first matter (the "prima materia") - that is, man in his ordinary state. Man as he is is unwise and uninitiated; selfish and base; corruptible, passible, and perishable.

From here, the alchemist grows in wisdom (self-knowledge) and comes to know himself fully. As he comes to know himself,  he sees the parts of himself that horrify him or that contradict his self-assured opinions. There is a great unmaking of all his earlier beliefs and ideations. This is the state of "putrefaction" or blackening, the creation of a chaotic black stew of unorganized ideas. If you notice, this state correlates with one we examined earlier - the state of purgation in mysticism.

(For those interested more in this state, I would recommend Carl Jung's writings on the "shadow self," or the work The Dark Night of the Soul by John of the Cross.)

The chief tool the alchemist works with here is the "fire" or furnace. The stone goes through many chemical transformations and is also put into a crucible which cleanses it of its imperfections. This I think may reflect the feeling of contradiction when one grows in self-knowledge; of suffering; or of personal adversity that helps to elevate or ennoble one.

The second state is that of whitening. In time the chaotic mess of blackness is purified; perhaps the negative elements are expurged or evaporate. The confused notions form into a coherent vision of oneself and the world. Man comes to a new understanding of his place in the cosmos. This is the state of "whitening" and we find the equivalent here with illumination in mysticism.

In the final stages the stone is portrayed as turning yellow, and then reaching a final state in which it becomes either red or multicolored. At this point it is now the "lapis philosophorum" or philosopher's stone; the "great work" is completed and man reaches a state of personal perfection, enlightenment, and immortality. Here we find the equivalent with divinization in mysticism.

The Three Elements

The other model of the alchemical path often involves working with the following elements.

1. Mercury

2. Sulphur

3. Salt

The precise meaning of these elements depends on the context; but in most cases they represent on some level the "three parts" of the psyche.

If we use the division of the psyche described by Plato, we would correlate these elements with reason, anger, and passion. In the same scheme as The Republic, the alchemist's goal would be to bring these elements into a proper alignment; mercury should be the chief element, followed by sulphur and salt.

Another model would label these elements spirit, mind, and body. The goal with this approach would be to use the combination of the latter two (sulphur and salt) to produce the dynamic element mercury, which represents the imperishable spirit.

Other Allegories

Alchemy is a vast discipline, and there are other models beyond these two. Alchemy also likes to use many symbols, sometimes involving astronomy (sol = gold or divinization; luna = silver or illumination) or zoology (lions - the most famous being the "green lion," the bold but fledgling seeker of the transcendent - or ravens, usually a symbol of the stage of putrefaction).

The Lethe, Karma, and Destiny

In one of my earlier posts I examined the idea of eternal return, the idea we keep coming back life after life. As part of this post I mentioned the Lethe, a river from Greek mythology that Socrates describes one drinks from in the afterlife. This river represents the experience of forgetting that happens with each rebirth.

There are a couple considerations we might touch on here. If you are familiar with the work of Ian Stevenson, you may know there are rare cases where young children claim to retain memories of their former lives. Spiritual masters have a siddhi by which they can remember past lives, and one is able to see all one's incarnations simultaneously from the perspective of the Source.

Those experiencing NDEs or OOBEs are able to see the nonphysical world, then return and have memory of their experiences. Each of us experiences a version of the nonphysical world each night when we dream, but we tend to forget what we dreamed about unless we are in the process of journaling. Journaling is a very important practice here, as it helps connect the nonphysical consciousness with the physical waking consciousness. So, these phenomena seem a manifestation of the same principle, that there is a "remembering/forgetting" barrier between the physical and nonphysical states.

A final thought I had on this was that of elderly people who lose their memories or identity as they age. Perhaps this is not a connected phenomenon, but it seems a strange coincidence how dementia occurs towards the end of life. Perhaps this is a manifestation of the same principle.

The Lethe
Last time, I mentioned how the Lethe is in a sense self-defeating. Yes, we get to experience innocence and novelty over and over again, but if we are here to learn and evolve, then the Lethe represents a major obstacle. One has to relearn over and over again, and because one forgets the choices one made in prior lives, one is unable to comprehend the consequences of one's actions in the next.

Here we come to the pretty well agreed upon realities of the human experience. These are, first, the usual Jobean concerns - that bad things happen to good people and that good things happen to bad people. For example, a child dies in the womb; a young person gets a terminal illness or dies in a car crash; a murderer lives into peaceful old age; and so on. It seems in many cases there is no reward for virtue or no punishment for vice. 

The Lethe would offer some explanation of this phenomenon.

Action in one life (positive) -> Returns (forgets) -> Enjoys merit even if undeserving in new life

Action in one life (negative) -> Returns (forgets) -> Experiences suffering even if undeserving in new life 

We see other expressions of the idea of the Lethe. For instance, a first generation starts from humble origins and works their way up to wealth; then the second generation is spoiled and selfish, and dissolutely wastes the family's fortune. Here I can't help but think of some of the unremarkable kings of history who began their lives as spoiled princes; or, perhaps a better example, of the Roman emperors. The adopted emperors from simple backgrounds ended up being the greatest rulers; while those born into privilege are remembered as being some of the worst.

So, it is like a vicious circle.

Simple birth (experiences misfortune) -> Develops empathy and wisdom -> Results in fortune

(Next birth)

Privileged birth (experiences no misfortune) -> Does not develop empathy or wisdom -> Results in ruin

Karma
On the one hand, it seems like it is all accident (the murderer who lives a long life, the young person who dies, the spoiled prince). However, experience also seems to teach that there is a principle of karma in the world. While it often takes a long time to see results, consequences tend to follow from actions.

For instance, if one joins the mafia, this life nearly always results with one either going to jail or being killed oneself. If we think of a serial murderer, they generally are apprehended even if this process takes a long time. Often they will escape punishment for decades, then suddenly a witness comes forward or some new evidence comes to the detective and that is the end of it.

Having spent time in the inner city (which is not a fun place to be), it seems there is a bringing together of those with a similar mental state. While there are of course exceptions, those who are inclined toward violence, who try to take advantage of others through cons, and who disparage learning seem to gravitate together. I often find it strange how one part of a city has an extremely high rate of crime, but one can cross a street not far away and experience relatively little crime.

Another phenomenon I have felt is strange over the years is people's acceptance of the extreme inequality of human life. If one looks at all of human history there is almost no progress on this metric even though we are supposed to be "advancing." In Jesus' day there was a large proportion of people with little wealth and a small number of people with much wealth. Especially in today's world, I am always incredulous that people accept such a situation, but I can think of no other rationale than that on some bizarre level they are all accepting the current conditions as "just."

Guilt and Shame
The other day I was thinking over the concepts of guilt and shame. I have had very different opinions of these forces over the years. In the past I have thought of them, for example, as social impositions or as mechanisms for control. Today, while I certainly think these emotions can be manipulated and turned into tools of control (over things that are completely non-moral), I am becoming more inclined towards the idea that these emotions are expressions of forces that are deeply a part of us.

One example of this is on the show The Sopranos. I realize that this show is fiction, and Anthony Soprano is portrayed to be a sociopath, but the show is commendable for the extreme psychological complexity with which it examines his character.

Tony is a psychopath, however he cannot escape feelings of guilt, shame, remorse, and self-hatred. The show does an excellent job showing how these emotions manifest: either in his dreams or physically (whether that be in panic attacks or in other consequences of his actions).

With this perspective on these emotions, guilt and shame are intuitions from our true nature. Even in our current state detached from the Source, on some level we still feel the unity and interconnectedness of everything; one cannot come to peace without a sense of moral rectitude. It also follows that if unity and interconnectedness are the realities of the cosmos, then destructive acts towards others are by nature self-destructive. This would be the basis of karma. 

Destiny
As a final thought I wanted to look at karma for a moment. I wanted to look at how accepting the idea of karma leads to a sense of destiny.

1. Let us say for the sake of argument that today I, who has never really done anything too bad in this lifetime, decide to go out and murder someone. Now obviously I am not going to do this, it is just for the sake of argument.

2. As a part of this process, I choose someone at random to be my victim. There is no motivation or design in this, it is just someone completely at random.

3. If this is a world in which there is karma, this random choice is actually not random at all. The person who is killed is in fact reaping the results of former actions.

4. Now - and this is a part of what makes the world so complex - let us say the person is innocent in this lifetime. In accord with all the person's self-knowledge and experience, they have done nothing to merit being killed. Everyone who knows this person thinks the same and this leads to the level of complexity to the world ("bad things happening to good people").

5. Now at the same time by committing this act, I am also creating a karmic cause for myself which I will reap later on - either as violence experienced myself or as general misery.

6. Now this also creates a paradox. As if there is karma, is it actually my own choice to commit the murder? Or is it destiny? If I choose not to commit this act (and there clearly is a choice here where I have personal accountability), will the consequences still be experienced by that person? How, then, is the torch passed on to another to carry out those consequences?

Here we begin to see the complex way these forces overlap with and interact with each other. I mentioned in the other post how I "saw the wisdom in different perspectives" and here I have to say it is the same. Many of us intuitively feel there is a force of karma in the world - even though it is delayed or imperfect - but how all this functions in unity is deeply hard to comprehend.

Moving on from Jeff

I have a great deal of respect for Jeff Brooks, and have learned much from him over the years, but there are a couple issues that have been developing for me that are coming to term. I already explored a couple of these here, but had a few more thoughts on it.

1. Focus on the student/teacher relationship
I have been dialoguing with Jeff for nearly 10 years, and while I have appreciated the student/teacher relationship, I feel it is becoming something very inappropriate to continue with. On the one hand one could not have had a student who better internalized the monastic values of  "duty" and "obedience," or who more humbly questioned his own beliefs and self-will; however, I feel it is no longer correct to maintain these practices, or remain in the "student" role. I am also having issues with Jeff in the teacher role; for instance, times when Jeff misunderstands me, or repeats something we've already been over many times; or, when he does not appreciate my experience, when he rigidly frames everything in the Buddhist model, or when he states something that I feel is his opinion which I disagree with.

2. Issues with guidance
Jeff certainly is a better teacher than most that are available out there, and he is one of the few that can dialogue maturely on mystical questions, but I fear I have foundered for years now as I did not pursue more flexible guidance. I likely would have had better progress had I gone outside the religious model sooner. Instead, I foundered with Jeff's intent focus on the "direct method" - the meditation induced OOBE. So, from one perspective I am reaching a point now where I feel it is time to leave all this "enlightenment," "arahant," and "jhana" business behind. Perhaps this is itself a part of the "shedding" or getting away from belief systems.

So, by the above I do not mean to negate Jeff; but, I am saying that I have become my own authority now. I feel we should have the ability to dialogue now and disagree, and hold alternate, equally viable opinions.

Comments from Jeff

Everyone, please excuse the long delay since I last replied here.  As many of you know, my health is quite poor, and I am getting old.  We here in Prescott, AZ are well into our 5th month of record allergens, and allergens are at the root of my problems.  If I stay in my camper van, and regularly change my HEPA filters, then I enjoy relative good health.  If so, then I have not been able to get on line, because I needed to use the library's computers.  Thank-fully a friend fixed the OS on a laptop that was given to me last winter.  Now I can park in handicapped parking across from the library of the local junior college, where I have acquired internet access via WIFI.

Quote from: Alexander on April 24, 2019, 12:06:34 AM

Jeff, you are in a persistent thoughtless state correct? As I have been able to still the mind for ages - not silence it however.

Yes, I learned to silence the mind decades ago; however, I use it as a useful tool when needed.  I call it learning to find and use the off-switch for the mind, but using it for useful purposes, just not being addicted to the mind, as most people are.

Quote from: Alexander on April 24, 2019, 12:06:34 AM

Is a still mind sufficient for charismatic phenomena?

A still mind is the doorway to the charisms, as well as 6 more 'chambers' to pass through for final liberation.

Quote from: Alexander on April 24, 2019, 12:06:34 AM

Is there something necessary about prolonged bodily motionlessness? Is that my issue?

Motionlessness, within the context of deep meditation here does not refer to rigidity.  To go deeper in the experience of deep meditation requires deep relaxation, so if one is being hyper-vigilant to keep the body from moving might be being rigid, and tense to keep the body from its automatic movements.  I find when my mind is still, then my body is so relaxed that, if I am sitting up to meditate, then my body may sway slightly as the major arteries and veins will cause a deeply relaxed body to sway slightly.

Quote from: Alexander on April 24, 2019, 12:06:34 AM

As I have been thinking for so long the "quest" is a purely cognitive activity. I notice when I sit for long periods the body begins to paralyze itself. Should I just be satisfied with the still mind and stay motionless for long periods rather than commit all this labor on the silent mind? Would that be my error? What do you recommend? What might I be missing?

Here I have to disagree.  The experience of deep meditation is relative in depth to how much cognition one has let go of, as the states are self-arising when the mind is still and relaxed.

Possibly what also is needed is to recognize the arising of the charisms, so that one can attend to them as if they were a meditation object.

Quote from: Alexander on April 24, 2019, 12:06:34 AM

I always thought if I got "stuck" on the path I'd just come out there and put myself under your yoke; though my Inner Director doesn't compel me to do this.

Well, people are welcome to visit me, and we can work out a mutually convenient time to do so; however, I am so ill with an over-loaded auto-immune system that I cannot breath the local air for more than an hour without it turning into a trip the the ER.  So, it is best for now that a serious contemplative find a conducive environment for deep meditation, and engage in it for at least 3-6 hours a day.

Quote from: Intuition on April 27, 2019, 11:31:55 AM

Alexander, if you seek a still mind (which I define as no thoughts) (2nd jhana), then I suggest you make this your practice: Always observe the contents of the mind, without either accepting or rejecting the contents, and without making any commentary on them. You merely witness the contents of the mind.

Try this practice as an experiment for 10 days, and see where that gets you. For more detailed info on this, go into my post history and look at my post on mindfulness. Suspend judgement on this enterprise until the end of the 10 days. Although you claim that it took Teresa of Avila 12 years to silence her mind, it shouldn't take you, nor anyone, anymore than 10 days.

This is good advice, thank-you, Intuition.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

1. For some reason it seems I had the idea the still mind evolves into a superior "silent mind" in which no thought provocations arise. Perhaps this is achievable in an OOB state but after years of striving for perfect "silence" using all kinds of mechanisms in the here and now it seems to not be a good use of effort. The "still mind" will suffice.

While the still mind is a valuable stage to develop, and longer periods of stillness are useful, which can be accomplished in solo wilderness retreat; nonetheless other skills are necessary for depth.  These skills are detecting charisms, which require a still mind, but once the charisms start to arise, then they become the object of meditation, leaving behind observation of the still mind.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

2. I have been consuming more literature on astral projection / the OOB state recently. I have been reading through Robert Monroe's original book on OOBEs and browsing some posts and guides by people who claim to be able to have OOBEs. I have been reading these with a good mix of openness and skepticism. Many of the ideas challenge well established notions. For example, one person claims to have interacted with aliens, been tackled by astral projecting secret service agents, etc. It may be in this higher reality there are deceptions there too.

Here is where I have been somewhat negligent.  Once one goes OOBE one will eventually find the immaterial domains are infinite, and highly stratified.  Thus, the first level one encounters in the immaterial domains is a domain that parallels the material world.  This is where we can encounter beings who are either asleep and dreaming, or those who are recently dead.  This domain is where we can encounter demons, and yes, it is a highly delusional domain.  We move beyond this delusional domain the deeper we learn to meditate.  Also, as we develop skill with sensing the charisms then the deeper/higher we go leaving behind the demons.  We just have to keep in mind that as scary as the lower astral realms appear the more delusional it is.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

3. It seems I got the idea (from one of the Buddhist sutras somewhere) that it was necessary to master jhanas 1-4 to achieve enlightenment and the OOB state was of secondary importance. It seems I also developed some unclear ideas from reading mystical literature; for instance, the concept of the "unitive state" or "spiritual marriage" as a state in the here and now as the highest goal.

Yes, and no.  Yes, the 4 jhanas, or material attainments, are critical to develop for various reasons, and I will simply put it now as developing essential skills.  However, the 4 immaterial stages are also essential for various reasons but including greater depth in overcoming our delusions.

Here I will state that as long as we are in a material body, then we are subject to the body's biological imperatives.  When we fully gain facility with the 4 immaterial attainments (ayatanas), then we have shed most of what it is to be in biology.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

4. Reading Monroe's account - and the accounts of others who have had OOBEs - it seems many of them have them with no prior preparation or meditation experience. I do not have a good narrative here and am honestly losing interest in creating one; it is what is. Monroe writes he had a nonexistent interest in religious questions prior to his experience; he experienced his first OOBEs just from relaxing deeply.

I had OOBEs throughout my childhood.  I did  not understand them, and no one helped me to understand them until I was 21.  It was then that I read a number of books including Monroe's  I left the OOBE community behind back in 1974 because they did not understand much of the immaterial domains or how to gain facility with them.  I found understanding and control of the immaterial domains via leading a rigorous, self-aware contemplative life, which most of the OOBE people do not seem to have come to.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

5. Monroe's account testifies to the reality of the nonphysical, and on the survival of the spiritual after death. At the same time, it emphasizes the importance of trying to achieve this experience while alive, so one can be prepared for the end.

I agree.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

6. From Evelyn Underhill, Gurdjieff, and similar writers I had the idea that those who experience OOBEs have been through the "mystical way." For example, they have gone through a process of metanoia (the transformation of the mind and emotions) - also called "purgation" in monastic literature - and the dark night of the soul, etc. Reading some of the accounts of people who have been OOB, it seems many have these experiences at an extremely young age with no prior preparation. So, this undermines all these neat narratives of how the mystical life works or develops. Though I do not lament my years of training and study and discipline, it is a paradigm shift.

The explanation for why people experience OOBEs prior to taking up a contemplative life is because they engaged in a fruitful contemplative life in previous lifetimes, and have come back to finish up.  I have recovered many previous lifetimes through the OOBE, and have found evidence in support of this hypothesis.  However, I have also observed while in an OOBE that when a master returns to a body for the betterment of material beings, then when he or she takes birth, his/her students also may return to the body, which explains why during the life of a master, the master accumulates students with impressive spiritual accomplishments.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

7. Stopped meditating sitting. Meditating now lying on the back in bed, and orienting most sessions now to begin about an hour or two prior to sleeping. Focusing mostly on bodily motionlessness.

This is where the OOBE community has made a mistake.  They clearly do not understand the value of the 4 material attainments. While your practice regimen seems close to be correct, I would caution you that, while you seem to have gotten the 2nd jhana, you do not seem to have gotten the 3rd and 4th, which you are going to need when you go OOBE. 

So, sure practice meditation while lying down once you put the body to bed for the night.  Do not be rigid about not moving, instead just relax deeply, and be observant of the charisms as they arrive; otherwise continue your sitting practice to acquire the 3rd and 4th jhanas, and their associated charisms.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

8. It seems the goal may be to reach what is called "sleep paralysis" and then "pull" oneself or "roll" oneself out of the body. I have never experienced this state of paralysis before, though I have felt the limbs and body parts "tingle" or change as you remain motionless for long periods.

Yes, sleep paralysis is a common experience prior to the OOBE, and one could practice various role-out methods.  They worked for me.  The tingling that you mentioned might just be one of the charisms, or it might be your limbs are falling asleep because you are not relaxing deeply enough, and being too rigid.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

9. It seems being still for 1 hour is not a long enough time. This is what I have been doing and it may not be enough. I have been trying to find people giving time frames to give a better perspective. Some people claim paralysis can happen within 20 minutes, others say 1 hour or more.

Typical of the OOBE it has incommon with the 4th jhana a loss of the time domain, so one cannot be sure how much time goes by when one is in the 4th jhana, and just before the OOBE (5th samadhi) begins.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

10. The paralysis / OOB state may have something to do with sleep phase (unclear). One writer is absolutely vehement it only happens during "phase 2" (?) of sleep. So what he writes is one should take a nap in the afternoon (uses your "phase 1" of sleep) then go back to bed with the bodily motionlessness practice to provoke the OOBE. I don't nap often but I may try to get an hour or two less of sleep one of these nights and give it a try.

Most of my early OOBEs occurred during a nap, or following one.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

11. It seems I should expect blindness and a lack of other senses, strong sexual desire, and a difficulty separating from the physical body if I can provoke an OOB state. It seems sight and the other senses "develop." I should also expect, apparently, not to remember the experience and that for this reason I should write it down.

For me, the OOBE followed a rigorous, self-aware contemplative life that gave rise to the 4 material attainments (jhanas), and the developing of lucid dreaming, which included journaling my dreams.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

12. It seems the experience of being OOB (I am writing as someone with no experience of it) gradually results in a development of senses in the "astral" body but then after sufficient time elapses it shifts into a wholly different experience as a formless being.

Those 'astral senses' are the charisms that we develop in the 3rd and 4th jhanas.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

13. It seems sex in the physical world is a shadow version of intimate contact in the nonphysical world.

I do not see this, and see no reason for this; however, I can see that some people gain deep relaxation following sexual release of tension.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

14. It seems OOB experiences take on two forms: one in which one has the experience of separating from the body and finding oneself in the present environment; and one in which there is no experience like this and in which one just finds oneself spiritually in a wholly other place. This distinction really clarifies a lot and helps make it a lot less confusing.

Yes, I have experienced both of these.  I do not think it matters much.  Once one goes OOBE one is likely over time to have both experiences.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

15. Dreams, it seems, are in fact the lowest plane of the spiritual world and each night pretty much everyone visits the spirit world though they do so in a "drunk" or "unconscious" state. This is honestly a huge understanding to have in our world of 2019. Dreams are usually dismissed as oddities or events of moderate psychoanalytical interest but not much else. It seems that our distant ancestors, before the rise of technology, may have been quite active while asleep - which would explain much of the folklore around shamans, medicine men, etc - and with the advent of technology and materialism we lost this understanding.

Yes, these have been my experiences.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

16. Lucid dreams seem to be a "created" reality (no experience with these either) but are still illusions. The out of body state is an interaction with a "real" world (?) though the concept of real changes quite dramatically here...

This is only true for those who are actively cultivating creative visualization.  Whereas, if an individual goes OOBE without the experience of leaving the body, then we can call that a lucid dream, or an OOBE.  It just depends upon the level of cognition that one is engaged in at the time.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

17. Reflecting back on all this it is quite an extraordinary journey to come to this. It is indeed true the "straight and narrow path" is found by few and that "human beings are not supposed to find the spiritual path." Being born in the world one has no idea; the idea of there not being a spirit, atheism, materialism, etc, could be just as plausible as there being one from normal understanding. All the established religions with their corrupt priesthoods also lead one astray. Enlightenment itself could have been many things for all one knew and one might imagine it could have nothing to do with the "fantastic."

I do not agree with "human beings are not supposed to find the spiritual path."  However, it is true that the genuine mystics have remarkably similar experiences from one culture to the next.  And, the priesthood of every religion in most cases has no experience like we are discussing here, and they tend to demonize mystics, because they are "bad" for the business of religion.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

18. I think of all those philosophers I read over the years who got side tracked thinking about other topics (economics, politics, etc...) missing the real goal of philosophy; or of Kant who thought there was no way one could have definitive knowledge of the spiritual one way or the other. I have to say I am glad there ended up being a spiritual realm and the like and it makes the whole cosmos a great deal more interesting. ;p

19. Been contemplating the reincarnation question and its relationship with karma, justice, free will, and destiny. Some of the OOB writers seem to say animal spirits are different from human spirits. This contradicts the usual Buddhist teaching that a human can descend and be incarnated as an animal with negative karma. I also question how one can obtain freedom if one lacks the cognitive powers of humans. Finding the "way" is hard enough in itself. Not sure...

I do not see the need for cognition, and see how the 8 levels of spiritual attainment clearly occur as we drop the cognitive elements.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

20. Been contemplating one strange idea I got from Gurdjieff which I've seen repeated by Monroe. These are honestly the only places I have encountered such a thing. Gurdjieff said "archangels" feed off the suffering and deaths of humans; that the whole earth is a kind of prison for their benefit. It seems Monroe had a similar idea which he mentioned once called the "loosh" farm... no idea what to think of it. If true it makes human life extremely bleak and intrinsically manipulated. But perhaps it is an allegorical / teaching tool.

I disagree here.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 11:53:55 AM

21. Been thinking about Plato and Socrates, the idea the physical world is an "emanation" of the higher spiritual world, and the World of the Forms. These great Greek philosophers had the right idea...

My experiences in the immaterial domains agrees with the above.

Quote from: Alexander on April 30, 2019, 04:02:34 PM

22. I think of my cousin who works at a hedge fund. Such a different path he has followed: following the wisdom of the world, a life filled with stress and anxiety and endless work hours, trying to accumulate wealth. And yet that wealth (as I intuited at a young age) only lasts so long. The same with my friend who is sex-obsessed. And here I have followed this (apparently ;p) foolish path, with this lifestyle that is simple and unambitious, and yet reach this otherworldly wisdom and have the potential for freedom. Life is a harsh place and very complex.

All too true.  And, these people who waist their entire life in materialism are the ones who will marginalize the fruitful contemplative.

Quote from: Journeys Out of the Body, "Post Mortem" chapter

And yet, at times, in visiting Locale II, a very unusual event
periodically occurs. It makes no difference where in Locale II, the
event is the same.
In the midst of normal activity, whatever it may be, there is a distant
Signal, almost like heraldic trumpets. Everyone takes the Signal calmly,
and with it, everyone stops speaking or whatever he may be doing. It is
the Signal that He (or They) is coming through His Kingdom.
There is no awestruck prostration or falling down on one's knees.
Rather, the attitude is most matter-of-fact It is an occurrence to which
all are accustomed and to comply takes absolute precedence over
everything. There are no exceptions.
At the Signal, each living thing lies down-my impression is on their
backs, bodies arched to expose the abdomen (not the genitals), with head
turned to one side so that one does not see Him as He passes by. The
purpose seems to be to form a living road over which He can travel. I
have gleaned the idea that occasionally He will select someone from this
living bridge, and that person is never seen or heard from again. The
purpose of the abdominal exposure is an expression of faith and complete
submissiveness, the abdomen being the most vulnerable part of the body
or the area that can suffer damage most easily. There is no movement,
not even thought, as He passes by. Everything has come to a momentary
standstill, full and complete, while He passes.

This is not an experience that I have had instead I have had many experiences of communicating with the major masters of the world as a peer, no doormat for me.

Quote from: Journeys Out of the Body, "Post Mortem" chapter

To me, it was a place or condition of pure peace, yet exquisite emotion.
It was as if you were floating in warm soft clouds where there is no up
or down, where nothing exists as a separate piece of matter. The warmth
is not merely around you, it is of you and through you. Your perception
is dazzled and overwhelmed by the Perfect Environment.
The cloud in which you float is swept by rays of light in shapes and
hues that are constantly changing, and each is good as you bathe in them
as they pass over you. Ruby-red rays of light, or something beyond what
we know as light, because no light ever felt this meaningful. All the
colors of the spectrum come and go constantly, never harshly, and each
brings a different soothing or restful happiness. It is as if you are
within and a part of the clouds surrounding an eternally glowing sunset,
and with every changing pattern of living color, you also change. You
respond and drink into you the eternity of the blues, yellows, greens,
and reds, and the complexities of the intermediates. All are familiar to
you. This is where you belong. This is Home.

As you move slowly and effortlessly through the cloud, there is music
around you. It is not something of which you become aware. It is there
all the time, and you vibrate in harmony with the Music. Again, this is
more than the music you knew back there. It is only those harmonies, the
delicate and dynamic melodic passages, the multivoiced counterpoint, the
poignant overtones-it is only those that have evoked in you the deep,
incoherent emotion back there. The mundane is missing. Choirs of humansounding
voices echo in wordless song. Infinite patterns of strings in
all shades of subtle harmony interweave in cyclical yet developing
themes, and you resonate with them. There is no source from which the
Music comes. It is there, all around you, in you, you are a part of it,
and it is you.

It is the purity of a truth of which you have had only a glimpse. This
is the feast, and the tiny tidbits you tasted before, back there, had
made you hope for the existence of the Whole. The nameless emotion,
longing, nostalgia, sense of destiny that you felt back there when you
stared at the cloud-layered sunset in Hawaii, when you stood quietly
among the tall, waving trees in the silent forest, when a musical
selection, passage, or song recalled memories of the past or brought
forth a longing for which there was no associated memory, when you
longed for the place where you belonged, whether city, town, country,
nation, or family-these are now fulfilled. You are Home. You are where
you belong. Where you always should have been.

Most important, you are not alone. With you, beside you, interlocked in
you are others. They do not have names, nor are you aware of them as
shapes, but you know them and you are bonded to them with a great single
knowledge. They are exactly like you, they are you, and like you, they
are Home. You feel with them, like gentle waves of electricity passing
between you, a completeness of love, of which all the facets you have
experienced are but segments and incomplete portions. Only here, the
emotion is without need of intense display or demonstration. You give
and receive as an automatic action, with no deliberate effort. It is not
something you need or that needs you. The "reaching out" is gone. The
interchange flows naturally. You are unaware of differences in sex, you
yourself as a part of the whole are both male and female, positive and
negative, electron and proton. Man-woman love moves to you and from you,
parent-child-sibling-idol and idyll and ideal-all interplay in soft
waves about you, in you, and through you. You are in perfect balance
because you are where you belong. You are Home.

Within all of this, yet not a part of it, you are aware of the source of
the entire span of your experience, of you, of the vastness beyond your
ability to perceive and/or imagine. Here, you know and easily accept the
existence of the Father. Your true Father. The Father, the Creator of
all that is or was. You are one of His countless creations. How or why,
you do not know. This is not important. You are happy simply because you
are in your Right Place, where you truly belong.

Each of the three times I went There, I did not return voluntarily. I
came back sadly, reluctantly. Someone helped me return. Each time after
I returned, I suffered intense nostalgia and loneliness for days. I felt
as an alien might among strangers in a land where things were not
"right," where everything and everyone was so different and so "wrong"
when compared with where you belonged. Acute loneliness, nostalgia, and
something akin to homesickness. So great was it that I have not tried to
go There again.

I have had this experience many times.  It is what I call heaven, but there are domains much higher and more blissful than this.

Quote from: Journeys Out of the Body, "Inconclusive" chapter

9/9/60 Night
I was lying in a north-south position, when I suddenly felt bathed in
and transfixed by a very powerful beam that seemed to come from the
north, about 30° above the horizon. I was completely powerless, with no
will of my own, and I felt as if I were in the presence of a very strong
force-in personal contact with it.
It had intelligence of a form beyond my comprehension, and it came
directly (down the beam?) into my head, and seemed to be searching every
memory in my mind. 1 was truly frightened because I was powerless to do
anything about this intrusion,
This intelligence force entered my head just above the forehead, and
offered no calming thoughts or words. It didn't seem to be aware of any
of my feelings or emotions. It was looking impersonally, hurriedly, and
definitely for something specific in my mind. After a while (perhaps
only moments) it left, and I "reintegrated," arose, shaken, and went
outside for some fresh air.

9/16/60 Night
The same impersonal probing, the same power, from the same angle.
However, this time I received the firm impression that I was
inextricably bound by loyalty to this intelligence force, always had
been, and that I had a job to perform here on earth. The job was not
necessarily to my liking, but 1 was assigned to it. The impression was
that I was manning a "pumping station," that it was a dirty, ordinary
job but it was mine and I was stuck with it, and nothing, absolutely
nothing could alter the situation.

I got the impression of huge pipes, so ancient they were covered with
undergrowth and rust. Something like oil was passing through them, but
it was much higher in energy than oil, and vitally needed and valuable
elsewhere (assumption: not on this material planet) . This has been
going on for aeons of time, and there were other force groups here,
taking out the same material on some highly competitive basis, and the
material was convertible at some distant point or civilization for
something very valuable to entities far above my ability to understand.
Again, the intelligence force moved out and away quickly, and the
visitation ended. I got up after a bit, feeling depressed, and went into
the bathroom in our house, and actually felt I should wash my hands
after working (although my hands were clean).

My documentation here is an effort to show that these natural phenomena are either misinterpreted OOBEs, or experimental air and space research vehicles, and/or misunderstood natural phenomena, such as mirages.

The immaterial domains, and the OOBE are commonly misinterpreted.  Misinterpreted phenomena on the immaterial domains is a product of people who are: dreaming, or dead, or in an OOBE, who collectively create a domain in the immaterial (spirit) world, where an apparent high tech culture exists, but it is simply a collective fabrication of the mind (delusion).

Quote from: Alexander

So, it seems that Monroe and Gurdjieff may have both been mistaken in this regard, misunderstanding delusions in the collective unconscious as bona fide aliens. It seems the OOB writer I read last week (who wrote about astral projecting secret service agents, "greys," etc) might share this delusion. But, I am just evaluating it as best I can.

Yes, I agree here, I too have had many OOBEs that involved technology, and space aliens.  I came to realize that this is just another delusional realm, and quite far below the deepest/highest levels of the immaterial domains.

Quote from: Alexander on May 03, 2019, 11:43:25 AM

1. As of now, no progress on a meditation induced OOBE. Some theories on why this may be:
(1) Duration. It simply requires a very long session in order to induce. The theory here would state session length must be increased to reach the OOBE. Even with this young body, it is hard to sit upright for more than 1 hour. Even lying down in bed motionless for over 90 minutes is difficult.

It is looking like you are trying to hard.  Do keep in mind that Islam means to 'submit,' with the implication that one is submitting to god, or what we would call here 'samadhi.'  This is where I find Islam, and Mohamed were right on. Thus, now making your primary goal deep relaxation.

Quote from: Alexander on May 03, 2019, 11:43:25 AM

(2) Vibrational state. Monroe writes that through relaxing deeply, he induces what he calls a "vibrational state" in which he can feel oscillating waves spreading throughout the body. I have not experienced this. Though I have experienced a "tingling" or other sensations I would be just as willing to attribute these to imagination. The theory here would state that persistent practice would eventually result in the "vibrational state" leading to further progress.

It is my hypothesis that many of the so-called 'charisms' might just be natural physiological phenomena that generally lies below our awareness level until we take up a fruitful contemplative life.  Thus, the so-called "vibrational state," which is reported by most mystics, is becoming so sensitive that we can actually 'feel' the oscillations of the nervous system.  And, it is the arising of such charisms that precede the OOBE. 

Since it appears that you have arrived firmly in the 2nd jhana, then your goal should not be jumping ahead 2 levels of spiritual experience, and put your attention upon developing the 3rd jhana.  The third jhana is where many of the charisms arise.  So, charismatic hearing should also arise here.  The third jhana is where we also develop a deeper level of tranquility, which is called 'equanimity.'  So, keep practicing.

Quote from: Alexander on May 03, 2019, 11:43:25 AM

(3) Need for a "first" OOBE. Many of the accounts I read of these OOB writers describe an initial first experience which was not anticipated; in many cases it came as a total accident or surprise. After this, OOBEs occurred at regular intervals whether desired or not. If this is the case the theory would follow that a first OOB experience must be provoked in some way through much effort and trial and error, and that the experience would naturally follow in further attempts from there.

Interesting hypothesis.  Yes, I too had early OOBEs, as early as my childhood.  However, my explanation for this is people who manifest chrisms at an early age without having engaged in a contemplative life might be reincarnated mystics at some level or another.

Quote from: Alexander on May 03, 2019, 11:43:25 AM

(4) The "phase 2" of sleep theory. I mentioned this one earlier. As of now this is the one I am leaning furthest towards. This is mostly a product of my many long hours of meditation with no extraordinary experiences. It just seems there is some nuance about consciousness or the like that I am missing. But, further investigation is required.

What made OOBEs a nightly occurrence for me was developing lucid dreaming.  Getting lucidity in the sleep state started with me taking up a contemplative life, and developing moment to moment here and now awareness; then working on lucid dreaming techniques, which for me was just programming myself before sleep that I would awake after each dream, then I recorded each dream.  In about a week or 2 I had my first controlled, and fully aware OOBE.

Quote from: Alexander on May 03, 2019, 11:43:25 AM

(5) Attention level. One of the OOB writers I read mentioned there is a "happy medium" required for the attention to induce the OOBE. He said it is neither a state of complete focus nor one of daydreaming sleepiness. There is a state in between these that, when maintained, results in the OOBE. If there is anything to this this theory would likely state I am too attentive, and the concentration should wander for it to work. Not sure about this one and it contradicts all the traditional experience I have had with meditation.

The problem that I have with most OOBE writers is they do not often get the connection between consistent OOBE experiences and leading a rigorous, self-aware, contemplative life.  Thus, I disagree with the OOBE writers here.

Quote from: Alexander
2. Only two entries worth recounting from the dream log.
4/29 Dreamed about standing up, walking out of bed, and writing an entry in the dream log. A "false awakening."

5/2 An interesting one here. Happened to drink quite a lot of fluid before sleeping. Usually go to the bathroom before trying to sleep to avoid having to wake up in the middle of the night. I did so, however my bladder awoke me around 2 or 3 AM to use the bathroom anyway. Went back to sleep; used it as an opportunity for what OOB writers call a "wake back to bed." However, I was unable to stay motionless on my back. I was extremely agitated and restless trying to maintain a straight position on my back. I recall rolling onto my side, the body slightly curved in this posture that way. This was easier to maintain.

From here I have a memory of me raising my hand up and away from my physical hand. I then have a brief memory of moving slightly forward into the room. The reason I recount this as perhaps not being a dream was the sense of doing this in my normal consciousness. Perception and understanding were present in what I remember (these two factors are absent in dreams). At this point (it was only a very brief few moments) I paused and attempted to comprehend what was happening. This invoked thinking. Upon this the experience ended.

The experience above may entirely have been a dream; I do not know. I made a note of it in the log either way.

These sound like possible brief OOBEs.  Good work, and keep going.

Quote from: Alexander on Today at 12:07:14 AM

Thank you, Jeff, for the very interesting thoughts. Yes, for some reason I have felt compelled to pursue the OOBE now, and also to recount my experiences here. I generally look to your thoughts and to my Inner Director for guidance. So, my Inner Director is the one encouraging this and compelling me to record these things here; I try not to write unless I feel the inner "push" to do so.

You are welcome, and following one's inner guidance is a good thing, as long as we are skilled at stilling the mind, so that our inner guidance does not end up being a mind-game.

Quote from: Alexander on Today at 12:07:14 AM

I find this a very interesting idea. If I recount some of the "charisms" I have experienced, such as the "inner sound" (tinnitus), the "vibrations" (feeling the nervous system), "inner heat" (warmth in the chest), and so on, they might be attributed to physical phenomena that we are simply becoming more sensitive to. One interesting point I read recently was a writer discounting the visions of orbs and light (I have not experienced these), and disembodied sounds, as hallucinatory phenomena, which would be in accord with this idea.

Yes, here I believe the orbs of light seen just prior to the OOBE might just be the body being so relaxed causes the irises of the eye to dilate, and the focus of the eyes becomes so relaxed and pulled back that the retina is resolving the empty space made by the retracted iris.  This could explain why some people see different colors of light orbs.  I tend to see blue orbs, and my irises are blue.  Thus those with brown eyes would see brown, or golden orbs.

Quote from: Alexander on Today at 12:07:14 AM

This is an interesting question, and one which I in humility have attempted to discern. The first jhana (self-arising joy) and second jhana (the still mind) are very clearly definable, while the third and fourth are less clear. If the third is defined by equanimity, the long martyrdom (we are venturing into Christian mysticism here...) I experienced over the preceding years is unambiguous training in the perfection of this attribute. The fourth jhana I am less clear on; the Pali definition is "no pleasure and no pain." The transition state to the OOBE involves viriya (the vibrations in the body?), which are affirmed by Monroe.

When you fully develop the charisms, then the 3rd jhana will become more apparent to you.  Also, the 4th jhana is also characterized by a sense of timelessness.  Say, an hour or 2 meditation will go by and we may only think it has been minutes, or minutes go by and we think it was hours.

Quote from: Alexander on Today at 12:07:14 AM

Yes, I was rereading your biography on this recently and trying to get a better sense of it. You have followed a very different path than me. You had these OOBEs starting from a very young age. Having these from the beginning would likely make the whole experience with meditation very different.

Yes, and no.  While I had a consistent series of OOBEs at an early age, nonetheless, there was no cultural context for the OOBE until William Monroe and others started publishing books on the subject.  Before then I thought I might be going crazy.  It was my early mentor, Francis Grow, who gave it a name, and eased my concerns.  So, I see it that this is my goal here:
1) inspire people to experience the charisms;
2) help people understand the strange world of the immaterial domains.

Quote from: Alexander on May 06, 2019, 12:57:49 PM

Based on the above, when one attains nonreturning one is reborn in the heavenly worlds. Though this raises several questions. In Buddhism, nonreturners don't return to lower worlds. But this seems to contradict the idea that higher world existence is impermanent; that the devas can descend to lower states of existence. Does this mean that one can be reborn in higher worlds just due to virtue or good karma, but without the quest for liberation?

While the altruistic states are valued in the Pali Canon; nonetheless, altruism is seen in the Pali Canon as the product of correctly following the Noble Eightfold Path, which culminates in negotiating the 8 stages of samadhi.

Quote from: Alexander on May 06, 2019, 12:57:49 PM

3. The OOB state is making me reconsider what the definition of "enlightenment" is. It seems many people have these OOB experiences with no interest in religious-philosophical questions. It makes me recall the Buddhist sutra I mentioned earlier - when the Buddha said one might go OOB but not be enlightened. Though the experience necessarily results in a dramatic change of views, the question arises: are all those who have OOBEs enlightened? Or can one have these experiences and not be?

By my definition above, then attaining the OOBE may represent stream entry requiring attainment of all 4 jhanas, plus attaining the 5th, which is the OOBE, but not consistently.

Quote from: Alexander on May 06, 2019, 12:57:49 PM

4. This raises the question: what is enlightenment? This is such a hard question to answer; scouring all of Christianity and many of the world's religions and philosophies there are few answers. The best we have likely lies in Buddhism, relying on the fetters to judge progress:

I. Overcome
- Identity view
- Attachment to rites and rituals
- Doubt about the teachings
II. Weakened
- Sensual desire
- Ill will
III. Overcome
- Sensual desire
- Ill will
IV. Overcome
- Attachment to form based existence
- Attachment to formless existence
- Conceit
- Restlessness
- Ignorance

I will agree that the fetters are removed for one who is fully enlightened, but it requires full attainment of all 8 stages of samadhi.

Quote from: Alexander on May 06, 2019, 12:57:49 PM

This then raises the further question: can one be enlightened and not have the OOBE? Though it is unlikely one could fully overcome ignorance or the desire for existence with or without form without it.

Well, no, see above.

Quote from: Alexander on May 06, 2019, 12:57:49 PM

Log
Experiments this week were mostly unsuccessful.
5/3 Attempted to repeat the "WBTB" experience using the "bladder method." This time I consciously tried to drink a lot of fluid to wake up in the middle of the night. Woke up at 11 PM (drank too much). No results.
5/4 A second attempt with the "bladder method." Woke up at 5 AM (drank too little). No results.
5/5 Last attempt with "bladder method." Woke up at 4 AM. Interrupted dreaming. I was in a "dreamlike" consciousness with many images spontaneously flowing. I only make note of this as it is mentioned as being significant by some OOB writers. Very hard to keep the body motionless and relaxed. No results.
5/6 It seems like I am wasting too many days with the bladder method. This time I set the alarm clock for 3 AM. I woke up then and a few other times in the night. The early awakenings were very stressful; high drowsiness and restlessness. Woke up at 4 AM and was able to be motionless and relaxed with the aid of music for about 20 minutes. No results. I am questioning if it would be prudent to physically get up or give the mind some time to reorient itself before making the meditation attempt.

Good tries.  Your use of music reminded me often we have background sounds that can interfere with going deeper in meditation.  I recall about 20 years ago I used to lead the meditation sits at a vipassana group in Tucson. I noticed that the meditation hall had a clock on the back wall, and it ticked loudly.  I found the ticking interfered with my normal depth of meditation, so I removed it from the hall, and found I had my normal depth restored.  So, I do  not recommend meditating with music, or guided meditation, nor clocks, or other cyclic mechanical devices, such as refrigerators, etc.

Quote from: Alexander on May 06, 2019, 12:57:49 PM

1. Remembering more and having more entries for the dream log. Though I am likely still forgetting much.

2. It seems that the mind goes through phases during sleep:
https://i.imgur.com/S7DFLAk.jpg
According to one sleep scientist the brain enters dream-sleep several times in the night. That means when one recalls things for the log it is likely only from that last dream-phase. At the same time it is comforting as it means I am not forgetting many hours worth of dreams - most of the night is not spent dreaming.

3. Much of the dream content is nonsensical; like low value flotsam, it consists of images and information from media, TV, etc. It is just disappointing this is what my unconscious spends its time engaged with.

4. After reading Monroe's account of the "vibration" state I am becoming more conscious of it as a possible phenomenon. Have felt a couple occasional tingles now and then over the past weeks, often emerging when in a relaxed state. Though, they do not deepen to anything. It could just as well be imagination.

Your dreams are quite normal, and common for most people who are not contemplatives.  A contemplative who wishes to have many of the superior fruit (charisms) often finds they will need to radically change their lifestyle.  For instance, at about the same time I began making progress with the OOBE is when I stopped watching TV.  Since then TV has not been a feature of my daily life.

Quote from: Alexander on May 13, 2019, 05:16:44 PM

1. Yes, I was reflecting yesterday myself on the value of this community. It started small but has become quite decent in size now. Actually I was realizing that it is probable nothing like this has existed before in human history. This community was made possible due to the Internet, in particular the modern (not dial-up) kind...

Yes, I too have often reflected upon how unique this forum is, as most of us live at quite some distance from each other, and we most probably would not have met, and learned so much from each other, in any other civilization until the advent of the internet brought us all together.

Quote from: Alexander on May 14, 2019, 12:13:16 PM

I was rereading a post Jhanon had made years ago, and it got me thinking about it.

Quote from: Jhanon

We are treading very close to "sexism", but I wish to express that I am not "sexist." I have some questions for you, Alexander, that I wish to know how you see.
1) Why are there so few woman seekers of enlightenment?
2) Is it because their ticket to enlightenment is companionship with a man headed to enlightenment?

On the topic of enlightened women in history: Teresa of Avila, my teacher Francis Grow, and Socrates teacher were all women.  This fact should suggest that women have an equal capacity for enlightenment; however, they are less known in history, possibly due to a number of factors, such as: 1) Humans tend to get their guidance from men, even when there are no enlightened men around.  Also, women tend to be passive, and acquire their wisdom in secret. 

I know that this forum has had quite a few women, who tended to send me inquiries off-list.  Some women on this forum even took a masculine name, and person.  However, I am also aware of a propensity for women to believe that by having sex with a master, she will acquire enlightenment, which is simply not true.  I personally would like to see more women on this forum, because I am certain our dialog would be much better for it.

Quote from: Alexander on May 15, 2019, 11:52:00 AM

1. Progress? The previously written about "tingles" or changes felt in the body have changed into something that can no longer be attributed to imagination. The sensation is consistent with the "vibrations" written about by Monroe. As of now they seem very hit-or-miss. They seem confined mostly to the hands and feet, though the sensations have also been felt elsewhere as well. When taking time to sit or be motionless, sometimes they are present, sometimes they are not. Sitting for longer periods does not seem to necessarily amplify the sensation, but the feeling correlates with 1. relaxation and 2. motionlessness.

Congratulations, because it appears that the charisms (jhana-nimitta) are appearing, which means the 3rd jhana has arrived.  Here your new meditation object will be the charisms themselves; however, you may have to give rise to the still mind of the 2nd jhana, before the charisms return, then switch to the charisms as they arise.

Quote from: Alexander on May 15, 2019, 11:52:00 AM

2. It is the middle of the work week now so I cannot experiment more with long sits. Although, I may investigate focusing on relaxation and being motionless while keeping the eyes open for brief intervals throughout the day. It is not clear whether closing the eyes or not is significant. If I close them at work it will stick my contact lenses to my eyes. But, it seems my goal now should be to try to figure out a way to amplify these vibrations.

Just by making the vibrations your object of meditation should amplify them significantly.

Quote from: Alexander on May 15, 2019, 11:52:00 AM

3. It is interesting that the sensations focus on the hands and feet. This does correlate with the meridians described in occult literature, or with the locations of the "holy wounds" of Christ.

Yes, I do not see this as a coincidence.

Quote from: Alexander on May 15, 2019, 11:52:00 AM

4. One of the things that left an impression on me when I read Patanjali's Yoga Sutras years ago was at one point he makes a reference to omens. At one point he says something along the lines of "by discerning omens, the yogi gains knowledge..."

The way you use the term 'omen' is in the same sense that the term 'insight' (vipasana) is used in Indic literature.  Insight to to see into something at great depth.

Quote from: Alexander on May 15, 2019, 11:52:00 AM

There was one "omen" I saw as a teenager when out on a solitary walk, in which two large, mating? dragonflies passed in front of me. This was very pertinent at the time, as I was still conflicted over the usual socially-induced sexual repression taught by society. It made clear that sexual desire was a natural part of the human experience and that what society taught about it was dysfunctional.

Yes, I too have had this insight.  I find sexual repression is at the root of human neuroses.

Quote from: Alexander on May 15, 2019, 11:52:00 AM

Over the past two years, I have developed a pain in my abdomen, on the right side between the end of the ribs and the start of the stomach. It seems to be localized to a certain "spot" or point. I was concerned about this when it did not go away, and went to the doctor's for it. The doctor conducted a number of tests, and an ultrasound, but could not find anything where the pain was. Since it has been two years I have since concluded "well it is just a pain I permanently have now" and that it is benign. Perhaps a muscle or a nerve that has been permanently damaged. It was only yesterday when I realized the location of the pain correlates with the injury of Longinus. "Well, great." Didn't ask for that one. Now, it could be complete accident, or it could be something of significance. But, it is one way to interpret the permanent pain there.

One of the gifts (charisms) that contemplative acquire is a high level of bodily awareness.  So, you may have acquired this charism.  Let your insight direct you to ways to improve your health so that the abdominal pain goes away.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

1. It is clear Jesus – who we might refer to by his historical name, Joshua ben Joseph – was a true spiritual teacher.

It is my understanding that the Aramaic for Jesus is 'Yeshua,' but I am not sure.  'ben Yoseph' would work, but I recently reflected upon his name at his time; since the claim was he was from the 'house of David,' then I guess it would have been 'ben David,' pronounced 'Doveed.'

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

2. Jesus seems to have been familiar with esotericism and mysticism (these are my terms not his), strands of which have existed in Judaism throughout its history.

Yes, I agree, and my evidence is what is often translated as 'fruits of the spirit.'

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

3. Jesus spent many years in contemplation and withdrawal; we see this alluded to briefly in the Gospels, where Jesus was in the “wilderness” and when he is a student of John the Baptist.

Yes, I agree.  His 40 day fast suggests this.  And, further, the reference to his 'way, truth and life' suggests to me his way was that of the contemplative as a journey to mysticism.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

4. Jesus and John the Baptist were likely connected to a group in ancient Judea called the Essenes. We would associate the Essenes with asceticism, the contemplative life, and the mystery religions today. The Essenes believed in a life of retreat into the wilderness and the practice of the inner life.

This is a well reasoned hypothesis; however, the earliest Christians were Jews who called themselves 'nazara.'  The Hebruic term 'nazara' has been translated as 'nazarite,' which refers to a Jewish person who took up monastic vows, so I take it that way; and since there is no 3rd person evidence of a town in Judea called 'Nazareth,' then all references in the new testament for such a town suggest a pervasive translation error, or an attempt to subvert the monastic origins of Christianity.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

5. When he began his ministry, Jesus’ teaching was fundamentally given “underground.” He preferred to teach directly a limited number of disciples (who in history we call the “twelve apostles”). Beyond this we don’t know his precise teaching or much about these disciples.

I really do not see much evidence of an 'underground' or secret teaching, as there is evidence in the Gospels that he did a number of public things.  The Gospels suggest Yeshua was a peasant street preacher, or what we call a 'mendicant.'

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

6. When Jesus does have contact with the public, he preferred to teach in parables, or symbolic stories.
*There are many examples of Christ’s esotericism in the Gospels, but let’s look at one occasion when he speaks to the apostles: “To you [my direct students, the apostles] it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them [the public] it has not been granted.”
*This is overall a very prudent approach for one teaching these topics; as their niceties are hard to understand, and it is easy to be misunderstood or misconstrued.

I agree regarding him possibly keeping the esoteric part of his teaching for his initiated disciples. 
It might be worth pointing out here that the parable is a characteristic of Persian literature of the time.  And, while Rome persecuted Christians until the 4th century, the early Christians took refuge in Persia from Roman persecution.  And, Christians in Persia have been known as 'Nazra' ever since.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

7. There is a great deal of mythologization about Jesus; some of this is based on symbols communicating important truths, while some is fiction.

Yes, I agree here.  It is a simple fact that many concepts central to Christianity are based upon gross translation errors, but what is new about that.  We have been discussing translation errors in religious literature of all religions from the origins of this forum, and long before.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

8. It is very difficult to know exactly what Jesus said or taught and we must make our best guesses at it. There was likely a list of aphorisms (sayings) of Jesus compiled early on that was the most authentic source of his teaching; this work likely influenced the Gospel writers.

Yes, I agree.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

9. The Christian Gospels are clearly revealed texts, written under religious inspiration. They are dense, rich texts which communicate important and essential truths about spirituality and human nature.

However, we also have to keep in mind that the New Testament also suggests that the 4 Gospels were not written in unity, but suggest competition of the Apostles for donations, which explains why one Gospel celebrates on Apostle, while dissing others; and why there are a fair number of contradictions between Gospels.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

10. At the same time, the Gospels have many eccentricities, and are imperfect texts, as all revealed texts are. We may distill the essential element out of them and appreciate them, but should also subject them to criticism.

I agree.  The message of the Gospels can not be understood without deep critical investigation, which none of the translators seems to have done.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

11. The Gospels were written a minimum of 50 years after the death of Jesus, and it is probable none of the authors had direct contact with Christ himself.

This I find is a reasonable conclusion considering that literacy was a profession at the time of Gospel redaction, and clearly none of the Apostles were literate, so even if one or more Apostles were involved in the redaction of the Gospels, they surely did not write it.  They would have hired a scribe to do so.  This includes the letters of Peter and Paul, and explains why scholars of the Gospels have suggested that there were at least 5 different authors responsible for them.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

12. Here are a few areas which I have been suspicious of over the years.
*Miracles
In the period of the Roman Empire during which the Gospels were written, a trope existed in which the ability of spiritual teachers was proved by their demonstration of spiritual powers. In the East, a “siddhi” is the term for a spiritual power a holy person or saint might manifest. In the Gospels, there is the interesting term “dynamikos” (power) which is alluded to at times when Christ performs the miracles.
There are other writings from around this same era of magicians and thaumaturgists (miracle-workers) who work similar wonders as Jesus. Most of these figures have been forgotten to time. It is interesting that the true teacher Jesus was the one whose account remained, and became a prevailing force.
I think these miracles are partly based on authentic manifestations that sometimes happen to spiritual seekers (the charisms), and are partly exaggerations, mythologizations, and fictions used to “prove” the attainment of Christ.

I have found that regardless of the religion, where the miracles are, there is little truth.  So, I have had to conclude that miracles were just the marketing hype or every religion of the day.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

*The Son of God
This is one I am relatively certain of. When participating in a modern Christian mass, Jesus is referred to as the (singular) “Son of God.” There is a whole teaching in Christian dogma today about this, linking Jesus as “the” Son to a “God the Father” and a “Holy Ghost.”
This seems to be a misunderstanding of the Essene teaching of the “ben Elohim” (sons of God). Jesus seems to have referred to himself as one of the sons of God (plural), with the idea being that anyone could become a son of God if they followed his teaching. This line of reasoning also elucidates the teaching of the early church fathers, the idea “God became man that man might become god.” This teaching is sometimes called the idea of deification or divinization (theosis).

I find this reasonable.  Further, 250 years before Jesus Alexander the Great was believed to be the "Son of God, and was the God Jupiter, who was born of a virgin.  Also, if we examine the archaeology of early Greco-Roman Christianity we find that most of the early temples that were dedicated to Jesus, were Jupiter temples that got a face lift, and a nae change, often without removing the mozaics that depicted Jupiter.
Also, making Jesus a god, and marketing a trinitarian belief system goes against the epistemology of monotheistic Judaism.
Further, if we stick to the epistemology of monotheistic Judaism ad examine Genesis, then we would have to acknowledge that Adam and Eve would constitute "God's first children."
Also, the Koran points out that the God of Abraham was a creator, therefore a woman would not have been needed to get Jesus.  Jesus would have just been created.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

Christian teaching often posits that Christ had two natures, divine and human. Based on the above, it follows that all men can realize this possibility, and become fully divine and fully human like Christ.

I agree with this.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

*Jesus of Nazareth
This is one I am not as certain of, but have been suspicious of over the years. The idea Jesus originates in the town of Nazareth has been questioned by scholars and archaeologists. So, one alternative is “the Nazorean” or “of Nazareth” is a mistranslation of the correct “Nazirite.” The Nazirites were a sect of the Essenes, which would clarify more of Jesus’ origins.

Yes, I agree, see above.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

*The Virgin Mary
Here I must admit I have never been a big fan of the cult of Mary, though over the past years I have in some ways been altering my perspective. Christian teaching says that Jesus’ mother “was born without original sin” and that she conceived Jesus without having had sexual relations: that Christ’s birth was of a virgin.
I feel that this is very clear mythologization, and we can find analogues of virgin birth in the religions and mythologies that were contemporary to the Gospels.
One problem with Mary is beyond her motherhood and holiness, we don’t know much about her. This has been an obstacle of mine in appreciating her as a spiritual figure. Perhaps it is that Mary was a holy woman, who also gave birth to a son who went on to become a holy man. Yet there is also evidence against this in the Gospels; for instance, the scene when Christ is teaching in the synagogue and Mary calls out, “He is out of his mind!” This brief scene in the past suggested to me that his mother was a worldly woman, unaware of the true nature of her son.

Yes, I agree.  But, I should also point out that the term 'virgin' in translation more often means a young, unmarried, person.  Not someone who had never had sex, but it is implied.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

*Physical Resurrection
The Resurrection of Christ is one of the most important parts of the Christian Gospels. The earliest Gospel (Mark) has an ending in which the disciples go to the tomb and find it empty; then the Gospel ends ambiguously. The two next Gospels have Jesus’ appearances to the disciples (which might be construed as intuitions or spiritual communications). However, by the time of the last Gospel (John), this return is now a full bodily resurrection, with Thomas famously touching Christ’s wounds.
This narrative has led to the modern teaching that Christ’s promise is of physical resurrection as opposed to spiritual resurrection. Unfortunately, I find this flawed and do not see any reason for a return to the physical body.

There are definite problems with the so-called resurrection:
1) I have been an herbalist for 55 years.  Aloes are commonly used in herbalism; however, aloes are not put on a dead body for imbalming.  They are put on an injured, but alive body for healing.
2) The whole point of the first Nacian counsel was to establish the divinity of Jesus.  The Persian Christian Church had existed for 4 centuries before the Greco-Roman church.  It was their premise that Jesus survived his crucifixion, and traveled with Thomas to Persia, where they started Jesus' mission together.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

*Redemption Theology
This doctrine is a major pillar of all modern branches of Western Christianity, and one I have a problem with. While this dogma does reconcile Christ’s martyrdom, suffering, and death with the larger narrative of the Bible, I do not feel it is an appropriate interpretation.
This teaching usually goes something along the lines of this. “Man has original sin due to Adam; so, God sends Christ to suffer and die, and by doing so he ‘redeems’ the sin of mankind.”
I find this a very simpleminded understanding of Christ’s death, and an unnecessary one. Here I do feel the Eastern churches have been better at maintaining their integrity, as they have left many of these events open-ended for the individual to discern as “mysteries,” as opposed to giving easy canned narratives to preach to the public from the pulpit.

I agree that Christian doctrine is naive, but all mainstream religions tend to be naive.

Quote from: Alexander on May 31, 2019, 12:13:08 PM

Teachings of Christ
Here are the four major tenets I get from careful study of the Gospels. I. Metanoia
The call for the complete transformation or conversion of man to conformity with truth or God.
II. The Beatitudes
The teaching of the themes of universal love and acceptance.
III. The redemptive power of suffering
The teaching that suffering ennobles or elevates man. IV. Christ’s conquest of death
The meaning of the Resurrection: that eternal life is possible for man.

Yes, I agree; however, I do not agree with the so-called redemptive power of suffer, but the redemptive power of leading a contemplative life.  Much of this discussion I hope will become central to the Great Western Vehicle.