Thoughts on Panpsychism / Panprotoexperientialism?

Gods
Angels
Demons
Ghosts
Aliens

These are all different things, albeit with some overlap.

"Gods", "Demons" and "Ghosts" are concepts you'll find in old pagan writings. The "gods" are our creators, benevolent and similar in appearance to us, physical but with strong psychic powers. The "demons" are a class of malevolent spirits, probably corresponding to a combination of Montalk's "agenda aliens" and the more harmful variety of tulpa. Ghosts are specifically the souls of living things that have died, and will hopefully get a new body soon.

In monotheistic writings, there is just one "god", and all the other gods have been converted to "angels". Things are otherwise basically the same as above, except for some weird cases where gods have been copied multiple times to have an "angel" version and a "demon" version (but that's an error, not a matter of terminology).

The modern talk of aliens comes from looking back at the old descriptions of gods and saying "hey, I think those are what we'd call aliens!" The aliens would include gods, angels (if you even consider these distinct from gods) and demons (barring tulpas), but not ghosts or tulpas. The claim that gods and demons are aliens is, well, a claim - if you think those are all tulpas or some other variety of permanently-disembodied spirit, then that's a disagreement.

People attribute abduction experiences to aliens because that's what they think it is. If they thought it was demons, that claim would pass much more easily in general society (the Big Skeptics are a tiny minority). Of course, when it comes to Montalk's version of aliens, there's no diffe

Can you attribute motives to a ghost? You're been a ghost before. You probably don't remember it, and the experience is very strange, so maybe you don't understand the motives of a ghost. But it's certainly something you could understand, considering that it's something you've been before.

Gods and demons are another matter, of course. It's no use talking about what they can be in theory - but there is some sense in talking about what they actually are, considering that they involve themselves with us. And there's no such thing as "totally incomprehensible" - only more or less difficult to comprehend.

All things are possible. But what's usual is for each being to have its own experiences, which may or may not overlap with ours. A fish only knows the sea; a tree only knows the shape of nature where it grows; a dog knows the same world a human knows, more or less. A god most probably knows the same world we know, and then some. A tulpa, perhaps, has experiences only through us; that I'm not sure about.

The ones that don't are called "tulpas".

Fortunately, we agree on this point, so we don't need to discuss the evidence. (And if we do encounter a disagreement, I'd rather exchange intuitions than evidence.)

Memories don't quite die with the body - they just don't come back to the physical world for your next incarnation. Seeing your past lives is possible with the right spiritual work.

My experience is similar. What I was saying, though, wasn't that humans astral project to go visit the gods - it was that the gods astral project to visit the humans (and if you have the right chakras open to be able to see spirits, then you can see these astral visitors as well).

 

I'm open to the idea that past-life memories don't quite die with the body. The fact that I don't understand the underlying mechanism for how they survive actually bothers me a lot, though. Brain injuries can eliminate memories. Wouldn't destroying a brain destroy all of a person's memories? Plus, memory feels intuitively like a reconstructive process; we piece parts of past experiences together into a(n experience of) a representation of a past experience. How do the impressions of the past survive without a system to store them?

When I was a child, I saw some strange things. The associated synchronicities still give me pause because the apparitions seemed to give me knowledge of events, past and future. I saw them at night, but I wasn't completely asleep. (This sounds crazy to those heavily steeped in modernity, but it's a common human experience throughout history. Even spontaneous hallucinations don't equal insanity or mental illness, but normies don't care about sperging out over the ins and outs of psychiatry and psychology.)

 

Memories are not a physical thing. Brain injuries can block a memory, but memories can also be carried by the soul, or even drift about on their own like a tulpa. It is possible for them to be destroyed, but the genuine destruction of memories is a magical event; physical death won't accomplish it (unless you die in a suitably destructive ritual, i.e. burning at the stake).

Like with everything else, there are many possibilities here. They boil down to: Someone, or some group, with either the power to decide a future event or the wisdom to predict it, decided to show that event to you. That "someone" could have been your own soul (if the prediction was minor enough), a group of humans (if the prediction only involved people with close ties to you), or a god. Maybe also a demon, but... can't see why they'd bother.

Of course, also take into account that someone who couldn't see/decide the future may have been showing you rubbish. You probably know by now whether that was the case or not.

 

I can see how memories are non-physical in a sense. We express them physically, though, and they're encoded physically. It takes time and energy to remember things and to communicate memories. They don't depend upon specific matter (if "specific matter" even means anything), but they depend upon specific interaction patterns.

 

You know...

If "don't come back to the physical world" means, "don't express themselves as interaction patterns at that specific time and place," then I can begin to understand what you're saying. That those patterns can emerge again in a way that connects them to their previous manifestation tends to confuse me a bit, though.

Maybe recovering and confirming my own past-life memories would help a bit, but I really want to understand how the system works. (I feel that I lived in mediaeval Europe and that I was just a regular guy. That sense of familiarity there may have more to do with racial memory than with past-lives, though.)

 

How do you think souls transport what they represent (the character of the person, mostly)? Seeing as how you believe in reincarnation, you presumably believe that some form of information can exist without a physical representation.

 

Well...

My thoughts on this aren't set in stone. I'm not sure that a person's character does survive. From a subjective perspective, a being's experiential patterns change after death. Similar patterns emerge again, and past experiences limit the range of possible futures.

I don't think that death feels like falling asleep. First of all, our experiences remain integrated in the moment during the various stages of sleep; however, they do not necessarily remain integrated across time. (I can remember my sleep states better than most, and even my ability to make memories is heavily diminished during sleep.) Death completely disintegrates experience and birth integrates it. I really struggle to intuit what death feels like. Maybe it feels like dissolving into an ocean of possibilities or like expanding to include all future possibilities which flow from the current past.

 

He got the densities from the Cassiopaea and Ra transcripts. Excerpts from the transcripts are included in the explanation at:
Densities | http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_dimensionshyperdimensions07.htm

I think the divisions are reasonable:

1: Inanimate
2: Alive
3: Self Awareness and Planning
4: Travel across Realms
5: Pure Thought
6: Group Soul
7: All Souls

I think a body is more of a training device, like a weight jacket. It does speed our spiritual evolution, but it does that by limiting us, and forcing us to try harder with the penalty of pain or death if we fail.

When we are between lives we apparently travel to some realms in the fourth and fifth densities, but we're still the same spirit, so it's not necessary to have a superior spirit to exist in some realms in the fourth and fifth densities. Also some spirits native to the fourth, fifth or sixth densities incarnate in the material world:
The Universe According to Ra | http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ra_material/universeaccordingra.htm#Wanderers

Maybe disembodied creatures are considered "higher" because most of those we meet are those who are able to cross realms on purpose. There are many fourth density realms, but we only meet the inhabitants who are not powerful and/or knowledgeable enough to purposely cross to earth by rare accident. The disembodied beings we encounter are usually powerful, because of selection bias.

 

It sounds to me like you're trying to fit spiritual intuitions within the framework of materialism. Materialists do so love to cite "there is no evidence" as reason enough to dismiss a possibility... but I suggest you give your intuitions more freedom than that. You know quite a bit more than you can prove.

I don't know what death feels like, and probably couldn't communicate it to you if I did, so I won't bother to figure it out myself. I will note, though, that there is a difference between:

• Your existence as a person ending, reduced to unliving matter
• Your ego and memories dissolving back into your soul, which is also you

Do you know what falling asleep feels like? To the extent that all of these experiences (sleep, nonexistence, reincarnative death) shut off the conscious mind, they might be indistinguishable from your current perspective.

I see. This is rubbish; gods do not speak through mediumship, though demons do, and occasionally ghosts. This "Ra" in particular appears to have monotheistic tendencies.

Astral projection?

You think the dead have greater capability than the living?

We're limited because we're damaged. Our natural state is acting fully in both physical and spiritual. Spirits and souls without a body are vulnerable, and certainly not a "higher" form.

I do know of one higher form beyond the natural state of humans, and that involves physical immortality (among other things).

 

Note: In the latter part of my post:
Thoughts on Panpsychism / Panprotoexperientialism? | https://www.xen.altrugenics.com/xf/index.php?threads/thoughts-on-panpsychism-panprotoexperientialism.804/page-2#post-9946

I wrote something like:

I edited because it didn't seem quite right, after editing it a few times I settled on the current text:

I apologize for my mistake and the confusion.

Why wouldn't gods speak through mediumship?

It is true, that mediums who are contacted by beings who say they are gods, are usually actually contacted by demons, because the earth is currently mostly in the power of malevolent entities, both physical and spiritual. Anyone who just contacts spirits, without much discernment, will just get the closest entity, which will usually be a demon or ghost. However, if a medium is a good person, is careful to contact a good entity, is careful to discern who they're contacting, crosschecks whatever information they can check, and in general always tries to contact only good entities for good reasons, then with effort they could contact a god.

Only a small percentage of humans can astral project at will, and they can only go on brief jaunts, because they have to return to their bodies within I think about a half hour or else they die. Most beings in the fourth and higher densities can travel at will, and without a body to worry about, they can go for extended journeys.

They can travel at will, remember all their past lives; they certainly have capabilities we don't have. In general, they can't affect the physical world, so maybe their overall power level is similar.

I agree. We should be able act fully in the spiritual realm at will. All humans should be able to astral project, and we should be able to hibernate so we can astral project for hours without our bodies dying. We should also be able to heal and rejuvenate at will.

 

I'm trying to fit my spiritual intuitions into a monist framework; though, monism itself is consistent with my intuitions. My materialist bias comes from my interest in science and from my tendency to systematize. I may have a slight anti-subjectivist bias as well.

To the extent that only the conscious mind makes distinctions, shutting it off would make different perspectives indistinguishable.

 

Right now, a physical body mostly functions as a place to hide from malevolent spirits. If it weren't for the malevolent forces in control of the Earth, it wouldn't be so limiting.

Mediumship - by which I mean calling an entity into your body to speak through you - is harmful to the medium, even moreso when they're channeling something far more powerful than themselves (i.e. a god). The gods do not want to do that harm, hence they will only enter a medium in the gravest of emergencies.

And have a conversation through a safe method such as clairaudience or a meeting in the astral plane.

However: you said "good" too many times. This makes me think you don't actually know what it means in this context. I will try to fill in the holes with something more meaningful.

In these dark times, it all depends on what entity you are trying to contact. Unfortunately, this is necessary: contact no one in particular ⇒ get something nearby. Look in ancient writings for entities worth contacting, i.e. Enki, Ra, Odin. Given that you have selected a good entity, you must also satisfy that entity's own requirements (be a person they are interested in talking to, and contact them for reasons they are willing to respond to). If that entity decides to ignore you, you eventually get an impostor. Finally, you have to take some measures against the possibility of your contact being intercepted from the start; that generally means making a big production of it (symbols of that god all over the place, candles of appropriate colors, a letter signed in blood, etc.). If you're trying to contact a powerful god who is already watching you (due to some previous contact), this last requirement is greatly lessened - that god can handle protecting the communication.

Half an hour sounds oddly short. Perhaps this isn't a matter of bodily needs, but of some threat in the astral that might kill anyone who ventures out too long?

Whereas we can affect the spiritual - more powerfully than the dead can, because we can project energy from the physical to the spiritual (in addition to acting with our soul directly, which both the living and the dead can do). We're only more limited than the dead in that we have to tend to the physical too, and can't spend all our time focused on the spiritual. (Also in the not remembering past lives... but our souls remember our past lives when we're incarnate too; they just can't get those memories through to the physical.)

I don't usually think in a monist way, but I'm pretty sure a monist interpretation of the spiritual/physical can work. In this interpretation, the physical would simply be the "lowest" edge of the spiritual, and the physical "laws" an extreme consequence of the spiritual "laws". It could be presumed from this that the spirit realm changes in functioning as you get higher, which I don't see any problem with.

...hey, that's kinda similar to Auriga's "Densities". (Except that a highly-evolved being would spread through all the layers, not give up lower layers for higher.)

I don't think it's true that only the conscious mind makes distinctions. First, to disambiguate: the mind and the ego are not the same thing. "Conscious mind" is a blanket term containing both. The ego has the function of making all of the decisions that need to be made during life, while the mind is a tool that the ego relies on heavily to consider its decisions. The left brain - a particular part of the mind - has the distinction of making much sharper distinctions than any other part of a person does, but it hardly has a monopoly on making distinctions.

 

This is why those who don't know what they're doing shouldn't experiment with trying to contact entities. The warnings against this sort of thing within Christianity actually make a lot of sense in this context. (The fundamentalists may panic a bit too much over it, but I'd rather people err on the side of caution.)

 

I'm loath to give Christianity any credit for this, because Christianity is partly to blame for contact becoming this dangerous, and the impostors that show up often have giving those warnings more credibility as their goal (they'd hate for you to successfully contact a god). But you're right in principle.

 

I don't have a problem with Christianity, but I interpret it esoterically. I just also think that the old gods exist; I'm just not sure in what sense they exist exactly. When I say, "God," I mean the Author of the simulation. When I refer to "the gods," I mean beings which also exist within the logic of the simulation--like we do, just not in the same manner as we do.

I'm kind of a skeptic when it comes to religion, and I deal with my skepticism by going full Peterson. Pic related.

 

If the gods only exist "inside" us, then my whole paragraph about how to safely contact them makes no sense. It's an important distinction. Calling up purely internal things is quite simple and safe, but also fairly useless; it's the sort of thing you'd do to write a story or act a part in a play (or get some comfort after a bad day), not to learn the great truths of reality.

Also, when you say "Author of the simulation", are you imagining a thinking person who designed the basic laws of reality? This usually refers to the particular god who claims to have created "the heavens and the earth", but this is a falsehood; no person created life itself, and the essence of life itself is life itself; not a thinking being. Likewise, a "simulation" is a poor analogy for what life is; but it is a rather good analogy for the "illusion" - the peculiar environment we live in, in which spiritual awareness is almost extinct and the worth of things is measured in terms of money. The author of THAT is a malevolent Nordic, the ancient god who made the decision to give the Earth to the reptilians. (But the other gods don't exist within that illusion - it's only for humans.)

 

My experience is that when God the Creator enters into you as a medium, he created you, so he knows exactly the right frequencies to tune into you, so it is very gentle and NOT harmful. The other spirits don't have the knowledge and fine precision to tune in, so they make a "rough landing" so to speak. I can speak only to my experience with the Creator, which happened one time, possibly twice. Both times, so smooth it was the most gentle and unobtrusive thing. An augmentation and enhancement, not a loss of control or a takeover. As for the harmfulness of mediumship, I have read accounts, not only of Edgar Cayce, but others, and they all agree that mediumship is harmful. To be honest, spirit channeling, compared to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, sounds like the difference between anal rape, and vaginal sex with a woman that is fully lubed up and prepared.

 

This is a quite different thing from mediumship. Plenty of spirits are capable of putting some of their energy into you without doing any harm.

More like the difference between shoving a water bottle into a glass, and just pouring some water in.

 

I'm not so sure about that. All of us have some darkness inside of us, and it affects our behaviour. Plus, nightmares and bad trips seem to affect people quite profoundly. The gods associated with natural forces exist outside of us, and they can kill us easily. I just don't understand how those gods speak to us, so I approach the issue with some skepticism. (I'm not talking about the "muh sky daddy lol" variety of skepticism; that's closed-mindedness masquerading as mere skepticism.)

When I say, "Author of the simulation," I'm not referring to a being who literally thinks and feels only like we do. I use "simulation" to refer to all of creation, even to the higher levels of it. God, the Author of the simulation, is Being itself, the Truth, and the ultimate Reality; it all emanates from Him. He creates and experiences all possibilities in a single eternal "moment."

 

It sounds to me like you're talking about your personal connection to the divine. We all have such a connection. (I don't really know how it works, though.) The fact that you're comparing it to sex makes me LOL for some reason. Feeling that sex talk is uncouth must be a vestige of my fundamentalism.