Blog powered by Typepad

« Bored now | Main | Science and the afterlife (further thoughts) »


I've received names (only first names though) but I can never get details; the closest thing I got was one entity calling herself "Mary" said that she'd died over "200 years ago" and she was married to a "George Myers Wright".

The scarcity of information and the general formulaic responses are leading me to believe that, at the present moment, perhaps I'm just subconsciously making this up. I haven't been doing the writing for very long at this point; perhaps more practice is needed?

pat it appears that everyone that does automatic writing goes through this stage of thinking it is their subconsciousness mind doing the talking. oh the mysteries continue.

Pat: "Bill I.- Thanks for sharing your account; it was really interesting. :) But what do you mean by "accessing their own entities"? I'm not sure what you mean y that, or by accessing a "dead" version of yourself. Could you please elaborate?"

"Entity" is akin to "soul," "essence," or "oversoul;" it is that region of self that includes all life experiences; it is hardly "unconscious," however; that is a modern misconception. A good medium -- like Ms. Piper -- can communicate with someone's entity ("essence" btw is the word George Gurdjieff uses; he speaks of it as that which exists at birth, slowly hidden by the process of socialization and related growth of "personality). Such a communication is helpful for anyone who has never had a conscious encounter with their own entity but is still perceived as being "outside" or "external," as though the entity is separate from our conscious self.

A dead version of self is just that -- a life experience from a "past" time accessed in the present; clearly someone who died in, say, 1619 or 1932 must be "dead" from a living counterpart's perspective in 2007.

Back to "entity" -- this is difficult to express, as the experience of conscious self suggests a definite distinction between the two regions; we aren't ordinarily conscious of "past" lives, for example, while our entity is.

One way to put it might be to suggest that the region of conscious self is a part or component of the entity region but this all depends on how "I" is experienced at any particular moment.

"I've experimented a bit with automatic writing (which sounds similar to the exercise you linked) but I haven't had any particular success. I've had a couple of 'people' come through, with different names, but I don't know if this is just a figment of my own imagination or if I'm actually accessing anyone."

Over the years I've experimented with this myself quite a bit but also with a good number of others, both in-person and on-line, these others including those with powerful natural gifts and those who learned some version of this from others, improving over time.

This has included the use of ouija boards, computer keyboards, and, on a few rare occasions, interaction with those doing some form of voice channelling.

(Unique styles prevail; everyone has their own way of doing these things, and everyone varies in terms of degree of trance, nature of output, and so on. Several people I know use a ouija board as a kind of trance inducing physical reality focus -- a tether to egoic consciousness you might say -- they might whisper what they "hear" as the planchette or silver dollar does its thing, really a kind of voice channelling. In this way, the board is really a sort of "prop.")

Others use a board in a way most are more familiar with, as a conscious pathway to the "subliminal self," similar to using a pendulum.

I use a keyboard, primarily, and only after many years have I learned to enter a mild trance while doing so.

(I was dismayed at my seeming inability to get anywhere with this, watching as a good number of on-line friends on mailing lists got the hang of this; then I had a breakthrough experience while working on a small section of my web page. What had seemed to have taken only a few minutes to write had in fact taken hours, while the tone of it was not the same as the tone of my usual writing. Clearly I'd entered a trance state. Possibly, the reason this took so many years (whereas others took to it nearly instantly) was owing to the nature of my own conscious mind -- overly intellectual in nature -- but my own belief was key, too; I didn't belief I could do this. Obviously experiencing even mild success changes such a belief and paves the way for greater success.)

As to whether your experience is "genuine" or merely imagination -- I suggest the line isn't necessarily perfectly distinct, while doing this with others can often accelerate or intensify this whole process, such that a subjective "knowing" predominates, well past the doubt of a more "narrowed" place.

You could attempt to verify details -- to "prove" what your subjective experience suggests, as so many have done, yet this could be quite resource intensive and you might not prove anything after great effort.

The sense of knowing is key here, I believe, whether you are successful in "proving" this by external details or not.

A personal knowing, of course, cannot be readily transferred to another; this is why I advocate at least occasional group explorations. Often, "knowing" can be shared, although some might suggest a group delusion has been created.

I believe we are really very primitive as a society, barbarians, really, in these matters; only by actively exploring and sharing our explorations, our experiences, shall this change, as such experience changes beliefs and thus opens us to additional experience, in a feedback loop.

The narrow, skeptical perspective is part & parcel of a narrowed egoic consciousness which inhibits or restricts expansive experience, a chicken-and-egg situation.

Back to me -- my own consciousness, like that of nearly everyone, fluctuates.

I can be skeptical of my own experience as much as anyone; even so (and I'm not particularly gifted at trance) over the course of years I've had sufficient experiences of "knowing" to believe that a certain percentage of my insights regarding my own entity -- and "dead versions" of myself transcend imagination alone.

In a skeptical frame of mind I might list all unusual experiences. At first, only the most unusual come to mind, but the effort of focusing on this area brings more and more to mind, such that any list has to be enlarged, and enlarged again. The focusing itself seems to lead to an expansive region of self in which more and more experiences -- put aside by conscious mind -- come to awareness.

Again, I believe sharing this kind of experience is essential to greater collective explorations, regardless of how far into this a solitary adventurer might get.


Bill I.

The comments to this entry are closed.