From: William Treurniet <wtreurniet.nul> Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2011 23:26:11 -0400 Archived: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 05:32:46 -0400 Subject: Re: Third Kingdom Experiences >From: Jerome Clark<jkclark.nul> >To:<post.nul> >Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:54:11 -0500 >Subject: Re: Third Kingdom Experiences >>From: Dave Haith<visions1.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates<post.nul> >>Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 16:46:40 +0100 >>Subject: Third Kingdom Experiences [was: Alien Museum On Alien Abduction >>Case] >>It reminds me of physicist Sir William Crookes, president of the >>Royal Society and paranormal investigator who in 1874, when >>challenged by sceptics, said: "I didn't say it was possible, I >>just said it happened" >Stanislaw Lem, the great Polish writer of philosophical science >fiction, once remarked that it doesn't matter if something is >impossible; if it happened, it happened. >The problem is that when we hear of extraordinary experiences, >our first instinct is to try to explain them when it should be >to try to understand them. Jerry says that certain experiences occur in a space that is partly objective and partly subjective, "a kind of Third Kingdom that mocks our lazy notion that either things are or they aren't. By their nature we can neither prove nor disprove them. They exist - often vividly - in experience, and experience alone." He adds further that our job is first to understand the experiences, not explain them. All this sounds like something one might also say about mystical experiences. For example, kundalini awakening is a direct experience resulting from practices such as meditation. This is felt as an energy that rises through the various chakras to give different mystical experiences. By all accounts, these are very real and they are also hard to describe in words. The intellectual understanding of the experience will never be equivalent to the experience itself. We can never prove or disprove that such experiences are objective events, and the same can be said for the more mundane experiences of perception. A psychophysicist can measure various things about the color red in an experiment, but measuring the actual experience of seeing red is forever out of reach. Yet every seeing person accepts the experience as a given. We assume that we all experience the same sensation because we often respond similarly to it (e.g., at a traffic light). Probably the majority of us have never experienced kundalini awakening. We are blind to it, much like a person blind from birth who has never experienced seeing red. But most of us appear to have the capacity to experience kundalini. With proper guidance it is said to be a positive experience, but it occasionally has been known to be a devastating, even debilitating, experience. Is this beginning to sound like the reports of alien abduction experiences? Some have found the experience uplifting and some have found it terrifying. In the yoga tradition, so I'm told, a positive or a negative experience like alien abduction is considered to be one of a number of impediments to enlightenment. Could the abduction experience be a negative element of the kundalini experience? I would also suggest that the abduction experience is equivalent in kind to the experience of seeing the color red. But, as Jerry implied earlier, equating alien abduction to seeing red does not help to understand alien abduction, since we don't yet understand the experience of seeing red. I would argue that the problem lies in the method we have chosen to know things. We insist on a consensus reality, so we measure things about the color red because we don't know how to measure the experience itself. Our reductionist scientific method starts with matter and energy and builds a brain, thought to be the seat of all the knowledge each of us has. Consciousness is considered an epiphenomenon, a mere byproduct of that complex system. Yet the experience of seeing red or anything else is intrinsic to consciousness. Surely, something that holds all of our experiences is worth more than a passing mention. To understand experience in general, including anomalies like the abduction experience, we should consider that consciousness may have an effective role in shaping reality. This may mean that reality is more idiosyncratic than we now believe. It may be that our so-called consensus reality can actually be altered somewhat by the minds experiencing it. The reality of a private experience is a consensus of one and should be even more labile, even though the associated ego archetype may not always feel in control. Understanding better the organization of consciousness and its possible role in creating experiences may be a useful direction for research. This approach is not solipsism. Multiple individual minds are acknowledged to exist which might be integrated into a larger cooperative structure at some level. William Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp