See group mind, and also this book on Amazon.
Monday, 19 May 2014
Saturday, 17 May 2014
clairvoyance
Clairvoyance
literally means “clear seeing” (see here
for more on this). In the context I and others have used it, it can be a
generic term for all forms of ESP,
or, more specifically, those forms of ESP associated with a sensation of sight –
i.e., “seeing in one’s inner eye, or mind’s eye”, or having an impression of an
image, as opposed to intuitively knowing, or having a sensation of sound, scent
or some other sense. In some cases, the impression of a vision may come from a
person (hopefully a BPLF Guide!),
rather than one’s innate psychic ability: what has been used then is a
combination of telepathy and clairvoyance, as the faculty to register an image
is still clairvoyance, notwithstanding that it has been placed in one’s aura by
a person.
Now, the description
I have given of seeing by means of one’s inner perception, or mind’s eye, is a
definition of ‘subjective’ clairvoyance. Some people report seeing things as
clearly, or very nearly as clearly, as if they were looking at a scene, person
or some other part of physical reality seen by our physical eyes, which is termed 'objective' clairvoyance. At this stage
of the world’s evolution, this is extremely rare – I’ve only had two such
instances in over half a century of life
(see here
for a description of one of those times; the other was when I rolled after a
crystal was taken off me [we had been doing spirit rescue with crystals on top
of us] and I saw the feel of my Tibetan [BPLF] Guide sticking out beneath his
robe – which is an interesting way to meet one of one’s Guides … ). I
consider that most clairvoyance these days is subjective, whereas I suspect
that in the era when Charles W. Leadbetter wrote his book “Clairvoyance” (which I reviewed here) there
was more objective clairvoyance – which may be why modern descriptions of
chakras are different to those that Leadbetter gave … which I prefer, and
consider more accurate. Some of the problem may also be an unquestionable association between some objective clairaudience and mental health problems, which I wrote about here.
My 1960s school
dictionary defines this as “abnormal faculty of seeing what is out of sight;
deep insight or penetration.” Well, there is NOTHING abnormal about it – almost
everyone has the potential to be psychic in some way, if they are prepared to
work objectively (i.e. don’t be too
gullible or willing to believe or see results when they are not there!) and
persistently.
The attribute of
clairvoyance is often credited to the proper functioning of the ‘Third Eye”
chakra in the centre of the forehead (there
is a bit of debate about exactly where the centre is, incidentally, with some
descriptions placing it effectively in the lower centre, between and just above
the eye brows, or … stating it is connected* to the location of the pineal gland).
* I'm wary of the embedded video, but Lobsang Rampa described, in "The Third Eye", a DANGEROUS ceremony aimed at stimulating this gland for the purpose of improving clairvoyance ...
PS - for more on this, also see http://www.aspects.org.au/clairvoy.htm
* I'm wary of the embedded video, but Lobsang Rampa described, in "The Third Eye", a DANGEROUS ceremony aimed at stimulating this gland for the purpose of improving clairvoyance ...
PS - for more on this, also see http://www.aspects.org.au/clairvoy.htm
As of the time this
definition was written, I’ve touched on this topic in the following posts:
Monday, 12 May 2014
metaphysics
My explanation of
this world is that it is the application of detachment, objectivity, and a form
of “scientific method” and rationality to the non-physical parts of reality (counting merely unseen matters such as X-rays as physical, for the
purposes of this explanation).
This attitude has led
to some interesting developments in Asia over several millennia - probably best
known these days to many in the West through those few portions of the great
science of Yoga which have become popular, and possibly matters such as Reiki
and the discipline methodology of Buddhism.
In the West, my personal
exposure to this term came through the writings of the very controversial
author, Lobsang Rampa, where psychism was separated from religion and mysticism
– and that is a point worth adding, so let’s explain metaphysics as:
the application of detachment, objectivity, and a form of “scientific
method” and rationality to the non-physical parts of reality in a way that
separates psychism from the dogma of religion and the vagueness of mysticism.
Note that this is my definition: for others, try seeing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics,
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/metaphysics
(not a bad tie-in to philosophy, there)
and http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/metaphysics/
- and any of the links an Internet search will lead you to, although it would
be better to focus on the credible sources, if you can J
As of the time this
definition was written, I’ve touched on this idea in the following posts:
meditative state
In general, the word
‘meditation’ has some fairly rigorous or even formal associations about
techniques, etc; the phrase ‘meditative state’ does not have the same element
of formality, to me, and thus I occasionally use it as a general term to
indicate a state of being in which one is more aware of higher frequency
people, levels or matters – specifically, states of being in which one is more
open to psychic impressions.
Manu
I first came across
this term in Lobsang Rampa’s books, where it is basically explained - in my
words - as a hierarchical arrangement of entities who responsibility for
overseeing the spiritual development of a particular group or place. Hence,
each of the cities in Australia would have a Manu, and these all ‘report to’ (to use business vernacular - which
basically means ‘answerable to’ and ‘take orders from’) a Manu in charge of
Australia, who in turn reports to / is answerable to / takes order from a Manu
for the entire planet.
Not the same as a deity,
in my view, but could be seen to have some overlap ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)