[ / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / bbbb / firechan / gdpe / imouto / madchan / maka / o / strek ]

/fringe/ - Fringe

Esoteric Wizardry
Learn more about the EARN IT Act, the latest attempt to gut Section 230
/1cc/ has been migrated.
Email
Comment *
File
Flag *
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 12 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


RulesMetaModerator LogLibraryArchivesFAQFringe GuideRanksCSS/fringe//asatru//4chon//ask/#looshFringechan

The rules are simple and mostly apply to the creation of threads on /fringe/:
1. No duplicate threads of topics that already exist unless the previous thread has hit the bump limit
2. No making threads just to ask questions, actually present substantial information if you're going to make a thread
3. No creating new threads purely to no-effort shitpost (you will be forgiven if it's a major GET)
4. Post threads that fall under the subject matter of /fringe/ (creepypasta is not allowed here, take that to /x/)
5. Respect anonymity. No identifying posts.
6. Do not sit on the default flag or post with no flag all the time
7. Do not raid/attack the board
8. Meta board discussion goes in >>>/fringemeta/
If the board goes up for claim and the board owner can't be found anywhere, please contact live:chanseywrites on Skype to give the board to her.

File: 1c307f45a8b593c⋯.jpg (18.35 KB, 300x407, 300:407, portsmall.jpg)

 No.86678

I would like to share with you all some of the more interesting back and forth email exchanges I have had with Tom Montalk. Heads up, lots of text coming up, but worth reading.

1st Question:

Me: It would seem most online resources don't differentiate between OOBE/AP and lucid dreaming. I am wary of the former (I'm new to fringe stuff), but am very interested in learning how to lucid dream. I understand there are unrelated key esoteric principles involved which I am picking up from various sources, but I was wondering if you might be able to recommend some good resources for lucid dreaming strictly. Lucidology 101 looks promising though the guy does talk about stuff I'm unsure of.

Montalk: Here is an excerpt from “How to Master Lucid Dreaming” by Sean Kelly. It’s not the whole book, but the important section from it.

And here is the Saltcube course videos: https://app.box.com/s/7c7q31l70h23pa4bdr9x3991n09hksjv (220MB)

I’ve done a lot of reading on lucid dreaming and so far have only achieved WILD (wake induced lucid dreaming) a half dozen times.

My conclusion is this: lucid dreaming isn’t about technique, so much as discipline, persistence, and energy.

Having spontaneous lucid dreams is easier than trying to fall asleep into a lucid dream. To have them spontaneously, make sure to go to bed sooner than when you’re tired, so that it’s a slight struggle to fall asleep. Reason is that you need the extra energy to counter the pull of the dream/sleep state. The more energy you have while being asleep, the more awesome your dreams. So you need to have a sleep / energy surplus to do it best. The other thing that helps is simply reading, thinking, and intending for lucid dreams on a daily basis. You can use affirmations too.

The other technique of finding something you see both in dreams and in daily life a couple times per day, and doing a reality check whenever you see it, that works too but again it takes discipline to keep that up for 1-2 weeks, which is how long it takes to become habituated with that. A good reality check is to plug or pinch your nose and try to breathe. In dreams, you’ll be able to breathe anyway. The looking at a clock, looking away, and looking back method doesn’t work all the time. The light switch check sometimes works.

If you want to check how non-lucid you are during the day, tape a string or fishing line across your doorway at forehead height and duck whenever you enter or leave. You’ll find that you will run into it many times during the day and rip it down because you keep forgetting. For this same reason, in dreams you forget to even check if you’re dreaming. It shows how habitual we are in our daily routines.

So, just remember you need a surplus of energy, and a 2 week period of persistence/discipline to begin seeing results. Keep it up, and the dream world will be yours….

 No.86679

File: 4899e44acc29485⋯.pdf (1.35 MB, Kelly - How to Master Luci….pdf)

Here is the attachment he sent me in relation to the above question. Great lucid dreaming info.


 No.86680

Second Question:

Me: In the Cassiopaea material, I came across a session where they say (I'm paraphrasing) that 6th Density STO beings have a much wider view of reality due to their ability or desire to see things "as is" (truth) whereas STS beings selectively choose what they want their reality to look like and thus cannot perceive beyond a narrow spectrum. Since human beings are inherently STS (according to cassiopaeans), is it even possible for us to see things "as is" or at least come closer to it? If so, what steps can we take without ruining our day-to-day lives? I have some ideas but would like to read your take on the issue.

Montalk's Answer: Clearly our 5 senses are currently locked into this reality and, by default, are blind to probable futures. So most people grope in the dark, so to speak, using their past experience, intellect, and instincts to make their way. You will also notice that by default, people are ego-driven and prefer fantasy and wishful thinking to truth. However, just because that is the general trend or starting position for a human, doesn’t mean we are limited to only that. We can definitely stretch beyond our biologically natural boundaries, and some people have done so more than others.

Also, as I mentioned on my site, there’s the issue of being STS but moving toward STO. Other people are being STS and moving toward even deeper levels of STS. This shows that what we are, isn’t all there’s to it. It’s also where we are aiming or striving toward.

So putting those two things together, yes we can move toward increasing levels of perspective and objectivity. There is one major caveat though. From 2003 onwards the Cassiopaea Research Group devolved quite a bit, and one of the traps they fell into was thinking that objectivity was objectivity, or equating facts with truth. They reasoned that since the New Agers were in la la land, in denial of what was ‘really going on in the world’, that by exposing themselves to each and every horror in the news about the latest Iraq War victim they were ‘shocking’ themselves into lucidity, into greater objectivity. The fallacy was in not realizing that there is a difference between truth, facts, information, wisdom, understanding, and knowledge or however you want to define those. Alternatively, something objective on one ‘plane’ may still be illusory compared to a higher plane of higher objectivity.

Therefore, seeing things “as is” — you have to ask, first of all, what constitutes “is” … are we talking about objective reality in the human earthly academically acceptable sense, or a higher metaphysical expanded perspective. Obviously, the more higher understanding you have, the clearer your perception of what’s actually going on. Sort of like a young child watching a magician versus an adult who has researched magic; both will view the act in different ways, and the child will say “I saw him make that dove disappear with my own eyes” and the child would be correct but there’s more to it. So a higher, correct, understanding is what’s needed and for that, I think it’s a combination of spiritual research and spiritual practice, including occult research and everything wide and far ranging to widen one’s perspective and not get trapped in a narrow lower viewpoint.

But to actually perceive things multidimensionally, that’s not just understanding, but it comes from an expanded state of being and that can’t be done in the human body without advanced technology, advanced biology, advanced etheric/astral development, or access to one’s higher consciousness. The 6D STO beings are not only advanced in essence of their being, but they are ‘located’ in a state analogous to a satellite while we might as well be mice at the bottom of a ravine. Mice can’t see the geography without going higher in elevation somehow, and I think the same can be said for us spiritually.

The most practical thing to do, which might only be a millimeter movement toward “as is”, is to be mindful of when we’re looking through the lens of ego/programming and seeking to rise above that and call upon all of our experience, research, intuition, and clear thinking to have some clarity and perspective on things.


 No.86681

Third Question:

Me:

Why does everyone only follow Blavatsky's 7-chakra system? There are many different chakra systems in the original ancient yogic traditions, with concepts, techniques, etc.., that are different from what people are doing today. The system currently used worldwide and the techniques used for activation seem to be completely inaccurate, even amongst the "experts." I understand the psychosomatic benefits that may be derived, but it seems people could be getting a whole lot more if they had a better understanding of the nature of the original traditions.

Check out this article for more info: http://www.tantrikstudies.org/blog/2016/2/5/the-real-story-on-the-chakras

After reading this article, I am left wondering why everyone talks about the current system like that is the objective reality regarding the chakras, when it looks like it could be far from it.

Montalk's Answer:

It’s a big mess like that article you linked says. In fact, it’s a mess going back to those very sources cited in the article. How many of those sources were already based on hearsay and error existing at the time? And, could it be possible for someone later on, in the 20th century, who has clairvoyant vision or higher knowledge, to correctly select which of those sources was closest to the truth? I’m not saying the latter is what happened, but I do want to make sure there’s no logical fallacy going on here where the oldest source wins by being the oldest.

I was reading Rudolf Steiner on this subject. He was a clairvoyant who based his world view on a combination of sources including his own direct perceptions and experiments. One source of his, or talking about his system, mentioned there being roughly 7 main chakras and 21 sub-chakras and an even greater number of sub-sub systems along with the meridian lines connecting them and their various nodes. What I think is going on, is that you have probably three main areas of the subtle body. That link you gave me said as much, that all those sources he mentioned had in common the idea of a crown center, heart center, and lower belly center. So if there’s any truth to any of this, we can say there are at least those three. They correspond functionally to thinking/intuition, heart/feeling, and willpower/sexual-energy.

Further, the various processes, feelings, activities of the mind/body/soul appear to be localized or have major resonance points in certain parts of our body. Like heart/empathy can be felt in the chest and not, say, the right ear. Higher intuition and reason does have an ‘upward’ sense from the crown and middle of the head and not, say, the knees. So this means that the subtle energy body is indeed non-homogenous, and that the various functions of our being have resonances on various parts in our body. Therefore some kind of chakra/meridian system must exist, and each component of that system may have a general ‘theme’ of sorts, while its own sub-combponents may have related sub-functions.

The 7 chakra system may be somewhat arbitrary. There could be 12, there could be 20, there could be 128 but even if 128 I think they can be grouped into a smaller number of major themes. I’d say 3 is the absolute minimum needed, 7 is not bad because it does loosely correspond to the endocrine system and where people feel certain feelings/impulses are located, and anything more than 7 might include lesser/auxiliary energy centers among the main ones sort of like how Pluto is not a planet anymore but once was depending on how you define planet.

In the end, unless we are highly clairvoyant, beyond vague sensations and intuitions we have to take sources’ word for it regarding the chakras. If that’s the case, then I would use Occam’s Razor and stick to the simplest model that is workable for now. I don’t advocate individual chakra stimulation in the sense of applying energy to a specific part of the body. I prefer keeping it more general and, for example, focusing on feelings of empathy and love to stimulate the ‘heart center’ because then, no matter where that heart center is actually located or how it’s distributed throughout the body, it will be exercised nonetheless.


 No.86682

That's all I got. Hope you guys get something beneficial out of it. Would enjoy reading some of you guys' exchanges with him if any; if you don't mind sharing the of course. Have a good one.


 No.86695

I should post my Montalk emails in here too.


 No.86696

Sent him an email about prana water coolers and off-grid cabins.


 No.86700

>>86695

Please do so if you don't mind. Always glad to read new material from him.


 No.86746

bump for potential


 No.86802

bump 2/3


 No.86811

>email him using PGP

>no response

>month later he removes his PGP key from the site

I only wanted to help him with the security of his site…


 No.94125

>>86678

>My conclusion is this: lucid dreaming isn’t about technique, so much as discipline, persistence, and energy.

I agree.


 No.94135

>>86746

>>86802

>implying this whole thread isn't just you

>>94125

gez I wonder who made this post? ;^)

oh shit dog I'm anon now!! XDXDXD!!!! WOW shit man board quality shot up through the roof now!


 No.94137

I want Tom to rim my asshole.


 No.94848

Any more? These are great.


 No.97342

Why is Montalk so boring? He took old ideas and instead of streamlining them, he made them into a big heap of shite.


 No.97681

>>86811

Don't use PGP. It completely destroys your anonymity and plausible deniability by identifying you unequivocally. Use SSL/TSL for secure communication and if you want to, encrypt the message using symmetric encryption.


 No.101787

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>86678

so,

He takes a fairly decent single lighted profile picture.

Pretty much doesn't know shit about anything substantive.

Meaning that in the real world he is a…

[reset]

…nice guy.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / bbbb / firechan / gdpe / imouto / madchan / maka / o / strek ]