Now for something completely different. Following disclosures by the U.S. government of some of what it knows in regards to the U.F.O.’s (rebranded now as Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon or UAP’s), it may help to learn of a project that was undertaken by a linguist that may have shed some light on our ancient past as it relates to the ET presence on the earth.
Mauro Biglino was tapped by the publishing arm of the Vatican to perform its most up to date translation of the oldest versions of the Old Testament in existence. This work, which took some years to complete, included 23 books total. Some books the Vatican decided not to publish since they went against long-standing beliefs concerning what people have long-believed to be the “real story”.
Biglino was familiar with the process that other linguists have performed when translating these documents in the past. A system is used that assumes that certain words in Hebrew result in specific types of translations. In Hebrew there are no consonants, which means that the reader must bear in mind the context of what is being said in order to arrive at the correct words intended. While this isn’t a problem for the bulk of Old Testament reading in Hebrew, there are instances where words can be changed. Biglino thus went to work making a literal translation rather than using the standard program for translation that had been in place for a very long time. While the Vatican approved and printed 17 of his translated books, there were others that they did not publish. In those unpublished works, our understanding of what was written is brought into question, with the result that the Elohim of the Old Testament reads more as beings that came from the sky, who mingled with people of the Earth, and who were involved in the affairs of humans for many generations.
Using his knowledge of other languages like Sumerian, he goes into the Sumerian creation myths and finds that the stories told are startlingly similar in them as those in the Jewish tradition, often bringing up similar people (sometimes with different names) serving the same roles from one culture to the others. In The Jewish tradition there are angelic beings called the Watchers that show up in the Sumerian tradition, for example. In some cases, stories in the Sumerian tradition do not show up in the Jewish one, but bear so many similarities as to the nature of the characters described that Biglino suggests that these may well be the same people, the same story, describing how humans were created by a race that came from the stars. Sound impossible? Judea and Babylon are not far removed from each other, and Jews were taken into slavery by the Babylonians during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar. But, we are told that the Jews had Genesis well before this time. Was it possible that the two cultures had previous contact? It does not seem out of the question.
When Biglino has debated Hebrew and Christian priests on this matter, many have agreed that his translation work is accurate, what they don’t agree with are his conclusions.
From a video presentation Biglino has given explaining some of these issues he says: “Actually the Bible says that we were made using a certain amount of material which contains Elohim’s image and that has been cut out. Now everyone today knows what we are referring to when we say that we take something that contains the image of an individual that has been cut out, it’s the DNA. With all probability this biblical tale is the summary of the Sumerian tablets tale, in particular the “Enuma Elish” that is when the Sumerians tell about the beginning, but where the Sumerians are much more precise than the Bible, because the Sumerians who never thought of creating a religion. They never built a temple, never talked of Gods,the way we mean it, but they spoke of those people….with respect because they were much more developed technologically.” (see video below) Is this merely a coincidence, an appearance, a conflation? If so, then in Biglino’s work, these types of things happen a lot. After a while, it can begin to strain credulity and it gets harder to not see that the Jewish stories and the Babylonian ones weren’t taken from the same root story, which describes how beings called the Annunaki came to earth, described the solar system and the planets within it, and where earth was located in that order (really!) and performed a process that sounds remarkably like cloning or a hybridization of earthly beings (primates) into the species known as humans.
It all sounds incredible, impossible, and this is why you should listen to Biglino explain what it was he found when he translated the Bible in a way it had not been translated before. Biglino suggests that the reason why we have the stories that we do is in large part due to how the translational method has hidden what may be the real truth which has been right under our noses the whole time.
In one tradition, they were beings that came and developed a breeding program, describing what sounds to modern scientific understanding to be a cloning process, or taking a primate and blending their own DNA to produce a being (human) who would be bred as a worker inside gold mines that the Annunaki needed for their home world. What is so interesting about the Sumerian stories of the creation of human kind that it is hard not to see it as beings from another world coming here for a mining expedition. What is curious is how in the Sumerian stories, they describe the use of the gold that they mined, which was suspended in their atmosphere to enact a change in their climate or planetary condition. At first the Annunaki were able to find gold easily, but later had to dig for it and this was where the breeding program came into play. In the Hebrew tradition, much of this material is left out. Biglino describes how the two traditions are describing the same story, with one being an abridged version. Biglino explains that once the literal translation was made, the story was quite different. Instead of one God who created humankind, it was instead a group of beings, and not all of them were on equal standing with one another. Yahweh, for example, was put in charge of a relatively fringe group in a desert region. He wasn’t given the best people or the best location. To hear Biglino explain it, the story takes on a very different implication.
When you read the Enuma Elish and see how similar it is to the Genesis account, what I came to realizing was that these two stories may well have come from the same earlier story which people in the region had been telling for many generations. What makes the Enuma Alish different from the Genesis story is that it includes much more detail. Same story, one shorter, the other longer. The longer story describes how these beings, the Anunaki, came to Earth and began to create a new species of creature on the earth. The story reads almost like a record of all of the failed attempts, pointing out that when the efforts at creating a being (a human) weren’t working, the head Anunaki offered his own (genetic) material from his body, thinking that it would somehow be the answer. But, this turned out to be disastrous. If the Anunaki were divine beings it seems that all of this fiddling would not be necessary. The account reads of numerous failed biological experiments: one being upon being made urinates constantly until it becomes dehydrated and dies. Another has its organs on the outside of its body. Still another does not have eyes. In each case the humans are created in what looks like a vessel like a bath which is situated in the ground. In all cases, humans are made using the blood of the gods. When you look beyond the talk of gods and goddesses, the story reads as a group of people who came who wanted a work force who would serve them. The deeper you go into the story, the more details that surface that look….well…consistent with physical beings instead of gods. Biglino points out how the Anunaki asked for humans to make burnt offerings because their chief god liked the smell, that it was favorable to him. He goes on to explain that during the Apollo missions, the material from the suits was used to create a scent that astronauts were provided with in order to get them used to the smell of space. It turns out that when astronauts were coming back into the capsule from being on the moon that there was a smell that was often described as smelling like burnt meat. Biglino asks the question, did these beings like this smell of burned meat because they were space-faring beings who had grown accustomed to it? In the Jewish tradition, the Elohim (which is plural not singular—itself a paradox since YHWY says that there are no others “beside me”) are told that they are the “Chosen” People. In modern day abduction literature the ET’s tell many abductees that they too have been chosen. When Biglino translates the encounter that Moses has with the Elohim on the Mount it begins to read like an ET encounter in which a heavy object which flies, comes up to the Mount and shows itself to Moses. Moses is told that he has to hide in a cleft in the rock or else he might die from exposure to something coming from the object. In the traditional translation this is because the glory of God is so great that it can kill a person. But how can a spiritual quality physically kill a person, Biglino asks? This reads as a physical effect that causes a physical outcome. What is interesting is that when Moses comes down from the Mount, part os his face is burned from his sighting and his close proximity to the craft. He has a cloth covering his head as it was in the full sun and he later felt poorly enough that we then went into his tent for the rest of the day. Moses sees the Elohim because he tells the voice in his head which has been speaking to him that he needs some proof as to the reality of the being and what it had been telling him telepathically. He explains that he needs to be able to tell the people below that this phenomenon is real and he isn’t just hearing voices in his head. You can perhaps understand his position: he is their leader and now he is going on about how he is hearing this clear voice in his head telling him what to do. Up until now the voice has led them out of Egypt, but humans are humans and require continuous proof if they themselves are not witness to it.
Here you can see his presentation from which the above quote is extracted:
The complete presentation can be viewed in the next video (below). It provides a lot of the background concerning the work that Biglino was tapped to do for the Church and how it proceeded. He also explains how he searched the roots of the words that he translated literally, which will help to explain how his translation take on a very different meaning especially the earliest books. If you would like to skip to the most relevant material, go to the 10:00 mark in the following video, which is where he goes into the translation and meaning of RUACH, the beginning of unwinding this translational tale.
It is worth mentioning that in India they have detailed descriptions of flying craft called Vimana. These devices are described not in a mythical fashion as one might expect with a chariot of the gods, but instead reads like a users manual. No allusions, no parables, no mythic language. One such vimana is called the chakra vimana. Chakra means disc. Flying disc. This is the same description made of ET craft. What gives? According to Biglino, similar craft are described in the ancient texts like the Bible but their meaning has been hidden behind the way in which the translations were made to turn ET’s into gods. If you watch the video you will see how Biglino dives into the device that David uses when he fights the giants. Biglino explains that this device is described as a communication device that brings the Elohim to David whereupon he is taken up into a flying object and taken to the Temple where others get out. Biglino goes to Ezekiel and the object he describes there is drawn by a technician at M.I.T. and the result? It certainly sounds and looks like a flying ship, and not altogether different looking than the description of the Indian vimana.
There is also very compelling evidence of early Christians being aware of an ET presence, which they called the Archons. This is largely contained within the mystic writings of early Christianity and were pushed out by the more exoteric wing of Christianity which would today be known as the Orthodox church. In 100 A.D to the mid second century, however, the mystics existed alongside the exoteric-minded followers of Christ. In their books, specifically The Hypostasis of the Archons (p.161, The Nag Hammadi Library, John Robinson, ed.) and the First Apocalypse of James (p. 265, The Nag Hammadi Library, John Robinson, ed.), the Archons are mentioned in some detail. In the Apocalypse of James, Jesus is explaining how beings called the Archons, Described in the Hypstasis as looking like an aborted fetus, come in threes and attempt to take souls by theft. Only by performing a series of declaratory statements can one escape their efforts to take the person. In the Hypostasis of the Archons it is explained that these beings exert a form of synthetic reality called HAL which makes it seem as though they are like gods (but they are not), and also that these beings are often involved in wanting to interbreed with human women. The Gnostic Christians, as may be clear, were not fans of these beings, but how they describe them suit the modern abduction literature in some pretty amazing ways. In the modern ET literature (Budd Hopkins, Whitley Strieber to name a few) it is widely known that the ET grays perform their activities in threes and are able to take a person “by theft” or, that is, against their will through a form of mind control. In the modern abduction stories abductions always take place with three of the alien grays (there are some instances where this does not happen, but the “three” grays are a regular occurrence in the literature).
It is worth noting that books like the Hypostasis of the Archons were scrubbed from any mention in ancient or modern Orthodox Christianity. It was only in 1945 that these and over 50 books from this line of early Christian thought reemerged in an amazing discovery in the desert of Egypt near the town of Nag Hammadi. This was the same year that a giant trove of Jewish scrolls were discovered in Qumran near the Dead Sea. What is so interesting about this mystic strand of so-called Gnostic writings, is that they describe the process of awakening and its many effects. What these early Christians caught onto was nothing less than what the Hindu describe in their own texts as kundalini. It is interesting how when given some of the most sophisticated documents pertaining to the process of enlightenment, the church has chosen to remand them to obscurity. I will also point out that there is a high correlation between awakening and encounters or awareness of ET or other intelligence which could be called “galactic” in character (not human) which those awakened report communing with or having a sense of connection with (some suspect that they have had past lives AS ET’s, and this turns out to be somewhat common in the abduction community, too).
Further, when the Gnostic Christians began to explore the spiritual dimensions which were opened to them with their practice of seeking, they found what many find: a presence which underlies all things, is wedded to every molecule and resides within it, and is a silent presence that observes creation. Encounters with this presence were described as a pure white light in which existed a consciousness of a being that was pure love and compassion. Just entering into this light in meditation would change a person. They then saw how the God of the Old Testament was at odds with what they had themselves uncovered. They then created a myth to explain why the God of the Old Testament was so different from the God which they had discovered and it played out this way: The world was created from a failed attempt at creation, what is called a demiurge. Sophia, the feminine aspect of the divine went off and tried to create a world on her own without the father. This explains why the world is the way it is, because it was “begotten” imperfectly. Sorry, ladies, it seems men from the past can’t help but heap blame on women. While the story of the demiurge seeks to explain why things are they way they are, I observe that this was done in order to make sense, to do what many people do when faced with contradictory accounts in Biblical stories both Old Testament and New, which is they seek to harmonize them in some way that then makes sense. In the early Christian harmonization the God of the Old Testament is jealous and wrathful because he wasn’t really God at all, but a being that arose from an improper creation. Well that explains it! The real God was there all along. Me, I see people who were looking at an imperfect being, which could have been a physical being, an Annunaki from elsewhere, who acted like a god or who was raised to that status over generations in the old stories. When I awoke and began feeling the presence in the Light, I had a similar reaction: the God from the Old Testament does not cohere to my own direct experience. Was that “god” in the Old Testament even a god at all? When Jesus brought the “new covenant” was this equal to his pointing to the old God as being at odds with the God which we find when we seek within and which other cultures might call the Tao or Brahma, The Great Mystery, etc.?
Could it be that in our past we had contact with races from other planets, races that took an interest in us, perhaps even creating us using local planetary stock along with their own D.N.A.? In the abduction literature, those individuals who claim to have been taken onboard ET craft to be examined and who had sperm and ovum extracted, among other things, have reported that the ET’s told them when their captors were told that they had no right to be doing what they were doing said, “We DO have a right. We MADE you.” Now a human living today, unaware of our ancient past as far as the Annunaki and the creation myths are concerned, this might be impossible to hear, but given what Mauro Biglino and others have to say on the subject, it might be a relevant retort.
It might seem impossible to splice D.N.A. from a completely different species from another planet to that on another planet. However, consider that the universe is a very old place and it is not out of the realm of possibility that life here could have been seeded not just by comets, but by space-faring civilizations with an interest in spreading the genome far and wide. In billions of years it is not out of the question that what we think of as our D.N.A. could be part of a much larger subset of a D.N.A. spectrum that has a lot more in common with life on other planets than we might want to admit. Just the fact that nearly all ET’s are described as a “five star” (one head, two arms, two legs) arrangement could reveal that evolution of life beyond our planet may well have proceed along more similar lines than we might believe is possible (either seeded far and wide or a factor present in cosmic evolution). All ET’s are upright humanoid looking beings which, in some cases, have very different features, yet they tend to have all of the same features that we do (but in different proportions—smaller ears or noses, larger heads or eyes, etc.), but it is this kind of similarity that poses a unique question. Are they a version of us, or we a version of them? Or, is it just possible that cosmos-wide, all of nature, terran or not, there might be a preference for advanced life to share certain traits that wind up being common?
Most believers recoil in the face of the possibility that their cherished notions might be part of a different story. I have always been interested in the “marginalia” of our world because as is often the case today’s myth often had a way of becoming tomorrows certainty. The universe is a much stranger place than we could ever imagine.
Lao Tzu once said that men, in order to know the Tao, needed to cultivate a receptive feminine quality in their minds, in their consciousness. It was this quality that open men up and allows them to relate better to the feminine principle so that they might better understand and appreciate the power that exists in yielding and receiving. It is all too easy for men to exaggerate or emphasize their masculine traits as a kind of emotional armor against which they protect themselves from what the world might seem to throw at them. Really all this ever has done is to insulate men even further from their natural selves. While seeming to protect them from the world what men might fear, what is really at work is how men have chosen to feel about the world and how that world might be at odds with their truer nature. So then the armoring really only serves to shield you against yourself, or your truer nature. A lot of this is learned behavior, so it follows that it can be unlearned as well.
A lot is thrust upon us here on earth, man and woman alike. We are taught from early ages how to be, what to like, and what we ought to believe. All of this is the product of culture, and culture is not the self, but a kind of collection of many selves that have gone before us that chose or valued things they thought were important. That is all. As a result, we take what others have fashioned and we try to make it into ourselves. The result is that some things work, and others do not. One thing that is becoming clear is that a lot of these cultural beliefs don’t suit us, not always.
I will point out that these learned behaviors are being instilled in us, supported, by men and women alike. I was once in a marriage where my wife, when hearing me express myself emotionally, would chide me saying, “This isn’t about you…” It was a quick way to express her discomfort at a quality that she believed was not a masculine trait. It is interesting because it was always okay for her to express how she felt without any pressure from me to do otherwise. But more importantly was how my son was raised up. She called him her “protector.” This is similar to calling a small boy a “little man.” We say these things often with swelling pride because we value certain qualities and want our children to take those on. We don’t understand sometimes how destructive these expectations are to children. A child does not know how to be a man, he is only three or four years of age and does not have the emotional means to handle what an adult does, nor should he. In the case of my son, when he was drafted into his protector status, when all you have everything is a nail. It turned out to be a quality that served to blind him in his life about the true nature of the relationships around him and how his Mother would later abuse his trust in her for less than noble reasons. The relationship fell apart with my then-wife when I stopped behaving in the old ways and simply was myself. Yes, it was a loss at the time, but it also meant that I gained my soul. I can’t tell you how difficult it is to pretend to be something that you aren’t. A large part of this had to do with a fundamental shift that was happening where I began to see the value in this receptive quality within myself. Not everyone is going to value it, and if they do not, they might just be the wrong kind of people to surround yourself with. It’s a hard lesson sometimes, but once learned you can do better and be with the kind of people who do value what you value as well. In fact the Law of Attraction will see to it that this happens, but only after you have changed your beliefs surrounding these programmed behaviors. You have to be aware of what is driving you if you are ever going to attract something different. We are all involved in our culture so by being aware of what we are doing to instill what anthropologists call “cultural knowledge” (or values) we can choose to do better in our raising of children (and ourselves).
For men, there is this particular idea that they have to be strong, and that means denying certain emotions or feelings. If you don’t believe this, just notice how often you ever see a man weeping over the sight of a puppy or a baby. There isn’t a lot of that kind of thing going on. You see, we have been taught as men that this is a sign of weakness. In fact, we have been taught that whatever a woman might experience or express is what a man ought never to engage in lest we become weak like women are weak. That of course is an assumption, a bias, a belief, that women are somehow weak. The problem with this way of thinking is that we know that women aren’t weak at all. The story is much bigger than that. Emotionally, women are much healthier in many ways than men are because they have permission to express and emote. Men do not, except for those emotions that are considered to be more masculine (aggressive ones usually). Now of course I am making a generalization, because not all men are like that, and the tide is indeed changing in a favorable direction currently, but there is more work to be done, and more to be aware of. I can explain this by asking the simple question: how many women in the last ten years have been involved in mass shootings? What do you think is at the root of the fact that men take guns and go out and shoot as many people as they can? Of course it is wrong to go out and kill people, it is a terrible thing to do to another human being. What I suspect is at the core of this kind of behavior is an inner rage, an inability to be seen or heard or to emote while at the same time the belief that the only way a real man can express himself is through aggressive behavior. These shootings are a manifestation of the most exaggerated qualities in male nature, but they do help to prove a point. Instead, expression is limited to violence because being tough is the only thing left for men. It doesn’t need to be this way.
Cultivating an ability to receive, to have a certain feminine quality in your awareness does not make you less of a man, it makes you more of a man. It allows you to relate to women better and it also allows you to feel your emotions instead of denying them. It is unnatural for men to deny their feelings. It is as unnatural for a man to deny his feelings as it is for a parent to call their two year old boy child their “little man” which is, of course, how these values are passed down to male boys who then grow up thinking that they have to be like men. The problem is that boy doesn’t really know how to be a man. It is unnatural. And yet, each year, there are parents all around the world who are calling their boys their “little men” and they do so with swelling pride because we have been taught, programmed, to value these qualities. So what the culture does not provide for you, you must learn to provide for yourself.
In all change, there is always the “threat” of not being accepted. We are all so programmed to value and to be triggered by certain behaviors that we see. Our bodies will respond to our inner beliefs about what manhood is when we see the programmed behaviors in others and ourselves running on automatic. We all have this programming, what it is the culture has told us masculinity and femininity is, and it all works automatically. You can change all of that, of course. You start by changing it in yourself. If you are a man, you begin by being courageous and cultivate this inner sensitivity. You learn to become a channel in your thinking. To know the greater mysteries of the universe you must receive. If you do receive, you can learn a lot and you can also appreciate the tenderness of women, the thoughtfulness of women, and the vulnerability that women can feel. Woman may be weaker than men, but it is not emotionally, but only outwardly. Weakness in this way is not a fault, not an article of shame, it is just how we are made and how we are made has a great purpose in a life so it should be respected, revered, even.
One thing that all of this does is it begins to erase in a man fears of incipient homosexuality. When this evaporates, the self is more open to acknowledge the larger truth of the self. This in turn can open you up to a still larger truth about all humans on the earth who are coming and going in this grand experiment in learning and growing here on earth. It can lead to a respect for all people and it begins to erase the divisions many people create that separate human from human.
It isn’t that masculinity is to be distrusted or torn down, but that in our past certain qualities have been exaggerated. You don’t need to exaggerate, you need only to explore and feel as fully as you can and allow yourself to go in feeling in places where perhaps you felt you weren’t allowed. You can begin this on your own as a kind of experiment. Consider that feeling is itself not weakness, and when you do that, you might actually see how you begin to dismantle a belief that might be within you without your having realized it. What I found when I did this was that there was this truly amazing amount of energy in consciousness that was now available to me that had not been available before. It was so good that I just never went back. I told myself that if someone tried to pull the old cultural strings on me, I just would not respond, I would resist being activated by that kind of cultural value which was outmoded and which tries to keep men in the old mode. The only way they have you is if you let them shame you or trigger you. The trigger only ever has power if you give it value. Leave it alone, let it be, let it fall away as you experiment with feeling and receiving. I can tell you that it will help you in meditative work and it will help in your life in surprising ways. There is nothing to be lost in doing this kind of thing inwardly.
When we are young we are soft and supple and as we age we often grow hard and stiffened. We aren’t made to be that way, and often beliefs about ourselves will stiffen us into unnatural postures and ways of feeling. Take what Lao Tzu said to heart. In Eastern practice the power in their martial arts is the degree to which they use feminine-like principles to overcome an opponent. You literally can use the force of another against him (or her) so that their force works against them. If you know the power in such things, you can begin to learn to cultivate an appreciation for the “other” which is also who you are because we are all just one family here when you get right down to it. There is nothing to oppose, and everything to nurture and build up. Men would do well to do more of that in themselves than the other things which have kept us locked in personal and mass conflict. There is no power in control, only brutality. There is no strength in war, only destruction and theft. These are not noble qualities, they are those of lower life. The masculine can be tempered with understanding and I suspect that this is what the world needs right now. And if a woman rejects you for being sensitive, take that as a sign that she herself has been programmed into a belief system that wont serve you. Just walk away. Do you really need someone to approve of you? Do you need love so bad that you will become someone else’s puppet on a string just so you will get showered with love? What kind of love does such a thing? It is surely a very pinched and distorted form of love.
When you cultivate this inner receptivity you can begin to see just how little as a man, as a person, that you really know. It makes a person humble in such a place as this. Don’t worry about others, just tend to yourself. You aren’t here to make the world into your image, you can just let the world do what it is doing. Live by example. If more people did this, the world would change in the right way, without coercion, without force, using only inspiration as the way that change takes place. This is the softer hand at work and it gives freewill its proper voice in the world. If something is worth doing then it will become apparent, you don’t have to force it. You inspire the change, and not everyone will be so inspired by you. This is natural. If your ego needs validation so badly that you must force your ideas on another, it might be that those ideas aren’t worth adopting if they must be adopted by force.
There is no loss in masculinity in doing this kind of work, nothing at all. What we might lose is the bias that exists against others different from us. It could soften chauvinism, and a sexist outlook. This alone would make the world, at least your corner of it, a better place. It might even make you into a better version of yourself, someone the world might just be in need of.
So every now and again, this inner Presence does its thing when I am in the right kind of mind space. It always feels like someone is asking me to become part of a partner in crime….to go on this thought adventure….
So consider what it showed me. I have been writing about, as have others written about, how kundalini is at least in part the union of the opposites, two opposites that move into union. These opposites may very well be reflected in the two hemispheres of the brain as channels for cognition and then explode into something more when the two become-one, an idea that is pretty big amongst those who experience awakening and the resulting near-obsession that we can tend to have with inner union…divine union. But this little rascal in me opened a door recently and flashed that mischievous smile at me that told me I just had to follow it.
It showed me another dimension of all of this, which has had to do with research I have done over the years of the connection that exists with stored emotion being let go especially after kundalini is aroused. It’s as if the emotion is being released from the body. A close friend and massage therapist who knows energy work has many times worked on me and by pressing a spot on my body, caused an emotion to lift and release, gone forever, leaving me with a little blank spot and a little less reactivity or one less trigger. Okay, so this energetic presence is saying to look deeper at this quality. I’m not getting what it is pointing to, so it says, that as we wake up and as the two hemispheres activate in this new arrangement we call cosmic consciousness or what I used to call meta-mind (before I even knew this thing I had had a name), but that it then activates the body consciousness or intelligence that exists in each person. We don’t think of the body as having intelligence within materialistic science, but it turns out there is a LOT of information about it written in the East. In Zen Buddhism they say “the body thinks.” We say “What does your heart tell you?” and “What does your gut say?” All of these are a nod to body intelligence. Now we might at this point kind of roll our eyes a bit with that suggestion, but hang on a moment.
In recent research we have found that the human gut has as many neurons as the brain of the average house cat. Now I ask you, what is the gut doing with so many neurons? What’s more, the heart has them in a high concentration as do all of the major organs. The body or viscera has its own neurological system separate from the one that goes from the brain to the rest of the body that is called the vagus nerve. Researchers have found recently that there is more signal activity going from the brain from the heart than from the brain to the heart. Signal means information, and information implies intelligence. What gives?
So this presence is suggesting that this other “brain” is linked to the brain in our cranium during the process of awakening and that one reason why many report feeling these energetic blasts up the core of their bodies (raises his hand) is because this is the moment when this brain is brought along with the other two hemispheres into a greater unity. Then conversations I have had with people who have described their awakenings begin to make a kind of sense when they almost universally use terms to describe the experience of feeling things all the way down to the cellular level (some say atomic, but close enough). Is it possible that what we are experiencing is the linkage of this third brain into a larger consciousness and that this ties us more closely to our emotions which may well have some of their origin in the body itself? For as crazy as this may sound, we do have both anecdotal as well as established evidence that this may well be true.
In my hunt years ago for this intelligence I came across the work of researchers who gathered data from hundreds of organ recipients and found a high correlation of the recipients having what could only be described as the memories of the donor. In fact, in one case a child was able to identify the person who had killed the donor, which triggered the organ donation. The child was able to name and describe the person who had committed the murder. There are all kinds of stories similar to this one (okay, this was one of the most dramatic illustrations of memory retention in the organ) that researchers had collected. Now it is worth noting that some scientists view this area of study as being pseudoscience, but I find it to be something worthy of more study. I know for myself that my body has certainly exhibited and still exhibits some form of intelligence and awareness that is structurally different from what the brain offers, but still may make up part of our overall intelligence. If it does indeed do this, then it would be worth tapping into it for a host of reasons, many of which we might not even be able to anticipate at this point what they might even be.
My question then is this why those who awaken are able to “shake” off the trauma from the past because we are now more intimately connected with that part of the body, that the whole neural network is now aligned and “connected” by way of this inner alignment that pushes consciousness into a whole new arena of awareness? I ask the question. I’d be interested in your thoughts and experience pro or con. I don’t know what to think of this impish presence that takes me down these rabbit holes. Just had to put this down so I could get to sleep tonight.
This. From Alan Watts. From me to you. I don’t always agree with these teachers, but Alan gets to a state of mind necessary for beginning meditation and how to get the mind to go calm so you can go deeper. It’s also an easy thing to listen to because of the imagery and music. Nonduality is for all of us. Let it happen…
Alan speaks about a type of consciousness that I have written about as a result of having experienced it directly without a teacher or a book to tell me about it, and it’s an important part of what awakening is. I say pay attention. I call it “particalized consciousness” and “waveform consciousness.” Alan calls it “spotlight” and “floodlight” consciousness. Bring that forward, focus more through the broader and you will begin to experience it if you learn how to emphasize that part of you. Now go watch that one, too!
Many of you know how sex can be a vessel for the transcendental. Heiros Gamos, the divine masculine and feminine, kundalini as a union of the divine within the self. Finding artists who have an awareness of the sacredness of the feminine and the masculine without falling for the mundane is pretty rare. You’d think it would be easier done given how much energy we put into the act of begetting.
For some time now I have been availing myself and those I know who appreciate a deeper awareness of our sexuality than just a moment of pure pleasure, and that is the artist whose name is elusive but whose presence on the internet is not. Found, for now, on Instagram under @alphachanneling. I say this because if you haven’t noticed, social media has been enjoying its heavy hand in the censorship arena these days on just about anything that anyone might frown upon, be it an errant crumb on the tablecloth, an unapproved of political opinion, or scientific information inconvenient to whatever the current narrative is. Or sex. Even when your channel is defined as for adults only. Even then.
When I first saw the work I saw a range of works using different styles but clearly rooted in the sacred. There is, to my eye often a whisper of Art Deco stylization in some of the work. Many are fast, gestural, and I think it is what keeps the work from being less than what it is. That’s not to say that if it were more that it would be less either….(I have a right to be inconsistent if I wish).
I suppose that I should do a little digging to find out a little more about the artist sans actually interviewing him. So I found another who did, but not before contacting him to get permission to publish a few images of his work for you to see.
“Alphachanneling is a Swiss-born American artist based out of Oakland, California….Central to my process is … channeling, an ongoing cultivation through a deep relationship I have with several master-teachers….Spiritual in practice, the images I produce are simple thought-waves … I look towards Taoism and tantra, pornography and folk art, BDSM and the divine, the mystical and the occult, indigenous and outsider art alike … Alphachanneling lives in a boundless world called the Utopian Erotic, a world of magical pussy, radiant women, bedroom jungles and temples of light.”
Since I find reviews of artwork usually tedious and more about the writer than the artist, let me get down to the work so you can see for yourself. Hang on for the ending because I will include a link you might want to save…
This one was either the same one or one very much like it that I saw first when I came across his work a number of years ago. When I saw this image I stopped my scrolling and thought, “Hang on…someone has gotten onto the whole concept of energetic transfer.” Then sure enough, with a title like “energetic transfer” a little bell went off. Its nice to be on the same wavelength, it makes everything so easy.
Sadly, though, there is an image that this artist has been seeing too much of right along with his viewers, too, and one wonders whether the prudes at Facebook/Instagram will play the bully and selectively edit this chap’s feed:
With the announcement that the post runs afoul of their community standards….
I don’t know what the problem is quite honestly: there are images that some might want to call “scandalous” that stay up while, selectively, some are banned with this rather jolting image that belongs on the roadways and not on the Instagram feeds. It looks more like Sally Prude works on Tuesday the censor shift and she finds something she just can’t stand so she slaps on the above sticker, only to be followed by Ted, who we all know is a malcontented prude, who works on Thursdays the censor desk and goes to work hacking away at the artist’s lovely feed of spiritual erotica. It’s almost like there aren’t enough of them, taking down what they don’t like, but kind of hacking their way through the lovely jungle. Meanwhile, images of graphic violence and gratuitous sex remain on other channels. It’s enough to make a person want to start carrying around a pitchfork or something. We are lucky that this platform hasn’t gone demented and taken to censorship, at least not as I can yet tell.
So I will leave you with this one last image and a link to the artist’s site should you find yourself wanting to buy a piece or two. Maybe for your altar…It’s lovely to know that the feminine is treated as a sacred altar as evidenced in this artist’s work. Let me know what you think. Please, don’t be shy!
When it came to religion this voice inside said not to join. Over and over it reminded me this…and as time went on, I found I came to rely on myself. Upon awakening I found that relying on teachers detracted from learning what we all natively know…what we already know. So when I found Seth at the ripe old age of thirteen that voice did not admonish, reminding me what it had done many times before. So I paid attention. Much of what Seth conveyed was the need for the reader to look within, learn a few things “he” had to say but apply it to really see. To date the work still stands up, and now many years later there are eventualities in my own present experience that were hinted at by Seth all those years ago. If you haven’t heard of Seth before, I suggest the first book as a primer and then many others waiting should you want to dive deeper. Below is a quote from a class session which was later published.
“Now the universe speaks in many voices, and it can indeed speak through a leaf if you have the wits to listen. Then you can learn much. It can speak in the silence of a room if you have the wits to realize that beneath sound there is what our friend, the physicist over here, might call antisound. That beneath the sounds that you hear there are other sounds, and I do not simply mean beneath the range of your hearing. At times you fill the atmosphere, as you think of it, with questions and with noise and you demand answers. Yet all the time far more important messages are there for you if you would once forget your questions and simply listen. Concepts that you have not thought of are there for you.Now I have let you all play and it is good for you. It is like using your physical muscles, but beyond the playing that you are doing there are also more important issues, and you should learn of them. There should be questions in your mind besides, what was I in the previous life? How do I relate to others? How am I doing? Am I good or am I bad? Such as, what is the nature of reality?What is the meaning of existence? I can verbalize some answers for you, and I try to do so, but through direct experience and through opening yourselves up you will receive direct knowledge even though you may not be able to verbalize it later. And you will not get such knowledge by asking goodies of the universe like, what was I before? There is nothing wrong and much good to understand and receiving such information, but this is not all you should be concerned with. In the silence of your own thoughts, listen. As I have told you before, look where there seems to be nothing. Between sounds, between objects, not in your thoughts but between your thoughts, and there you will find answers but not to questions that you postulate in a demanding manner. And this is what I want you to do for the following week.What does the plant say? Forget that the plant speaks to you, but what does the plant on its own say? What does the tree say? Not as you are related to the tree, but what does it say, for it speaks.What does the air mean when it swirls about the windows? How is this related to the nature of reality, for it is? You are focusing your questions too deeply upon yourselves and in so doing you are cutting down the kind of information that you can receive.”
I haven’t really known how to address my experience in regards to the feminine in today’s world because quite frankly, it is a mine field. I had said when Trump got into office that this personality was going to drive so much to the surface in our culture, that it would not be fun or enjoyable, but there would be some important truth there. I am speaking specifically at it concerns our history as men and women together on the planet and how women have been treated for a very long time. For women, culturally and behaviorally, living on the planet is a real mine field in many ways. As a man I have perhaps only one important perspective which is one gained by not being a woman and not having been subject to all of the influences that women have dealt with…which you might think would be enough reason for me to sit on my hands and just be quiet. After all, what could I know about it being a man, right? Except it is for the very reason that I am looking across the river at the world of the feminine that I see some things that I might not be able to see were I there living in the midst of it. If you are a woman reading this you can judge for yourself whether what I am going to say is of any value or not.
When I look at history as it relates to women, one thing that rises to the surface is how women are raised to be as an identity. A lot goes into it, and some of it is reflective of real feminine values. What I also see is that there are expectations placed on women from the very beginning of their lives that aren’t reflective of feminine nature and actually may run counter to its truer nature. When I see miss matches like this, I can’t help but want to point them out.
Purity
Have you noticed the difference between how women and men are treated when it comes to what I will call “purity”? It’s a real double standard that we apply to women but we don’t apply them to men. Why is that? This purity standard goes something like this: a women should save herself and remain chaste until she meets the man she is going to have children with. In ancient culture virginity was considered a prize for this very reason. But for men? Forget about it. For men, we know, they sow their wild oats, but for women it is important to remain untouched. This is one value that I think society has foisted onto women and I think that it does indeed originate with men exclusively. As men I think we need to really rethink what it is that drives our instincts and why we seem to want this. While it may stem from a man always wanting to know that he is the father of his children, it has some bad repercussions for women that winds up them denying a part of their own inner expression.
I think that this concern has been taken up by women as a value and it has driven them in a certain direction behaviorally that isn’t natural. What it does is it denies the natural sexual drive of women, driving it underground, pretending that it does not exist, or that it does exist but that it can only exist within certain contexts only. Suddenly femininity becomes a prize that is treated unnaturally and it leads to unrealistic behavior both in men and in women. Whenever something is taboo we tend to have a lot of exaggerated behavior that springs up around a it, and this isn’t a good thing. It stirs an exaggerated level of interest in males, too, and this hasn’t been a good thing in our history. The media has used this as a great way to sell a whole world of products, essentially commodifying female sexuality as a result. We all tend to dislike this, right? What is interesting or ironic is that female sexuality has become exaggerated in certain key ways. Blush is sold to express the blush of sexual readiness, the flush of blood to the face an other parts of the body as a potent signal of readiness for coitus. We don’t even think twice about it because all of these symbols or signs are now existing almost as unrecognized symbols for that which we cannot just say openly. It is a strange outcome to me, but it makes a lot of sense when you drive feminine sexual energy underground. No one continues this tradition more than women themselves, and so it has planted itself firmly in our culture as self perpetuating program. No one is innocent here, we all take part in the program. We can also undo it.
This value that has been placed on women is looking like it is in some way beginning to fall away, and the way it is falling away is interesting to me because in the places where it is most effective is where old values are being discarded, disregarded just as the way that we then respond to women and how women respond to the world and the societal pressures placed on them also change. For a very long time as a society, whether we are male or female, we have used a range of terms to keep women in line with this purity value, and the one term I can think of that best illustrates this is the word “slut.”
Slut-shaming, as it is called, to my mind, is nothing more than a control to keep women in line within a certain value set. It is entirely transactional and it goes something like this: “be good and stay in line and we will value you as a person, but step out of line and we will brand you a slut.” Most often we as humans use the specter of shame as a way of controlling behavior. On the one hand, this is how we teach our children to value some behavior over others, so it has some use when young. We can also go overboard with it, too, as in the case of how we treat women. The fear of being a slut is created as a way to govern behavior. The message is we wont accept you as part of our tribe if you wander from this tight set of expectations that we have for you. Fall in line or lose your place in your tribe.
Where this is being dismantled is where women take the term “slut” and accept it not as a reason to feel shame but a reason to feel proud. This has had some play in some areas of our culture today, and what I suspect is that this is one area where if you want rapid change, it is in changing, fundamentally, the meaning of the words that we use to control behavior. Behavior can be viral, it spreads. It is pretty amazing to me how certain stories as a child swept through our cultural awareness. I remember talking to a friend about rumors that we told as children in school that were similar rumors that had crept up far from our region. I don’t think that these emerged spontaneously, I suspect they spread through the culture, on the ground, so to speak, and they went far and wide. I think that behavior also does this. You can actually change behavior very quickly if enough people talk about it and begin to exhibit that different behavior and you can have a way to over come the shame element so often tied into societal behaviors. Change gets us rethinking our values. Accepting “slut” as a badge of courage turns the meaning of the word and all of its intended power on its head. Suddenly, it is no longer a scare word, but something different. It loses its charge for us as people in the culture.
I think the way the orthodoxy goes, we say these things to order behavior in a positive way because it keeps women from being promiscuous. The fear is that if women can’t be controlled this way by a word like “slut” then what is to keep them in line? I tend to feel that when our natural impulses are no longer artificially hemmed in that what results is a much healthier approach to that behavior. We fear it not because it can wreak havoc in the streets, we fear it because it is so powerful. Female energy is powerful. Women have been marginalized materially, politically, and spiritually in most of our major religions for a very long time. I think that we control women in this way because of a deep fear of the power of womanhood. It may go back to how women nurture and bring forth life, and this was too powerful a thing to let women be in control of too much, so to the degree that men could, they put in place ways to manage that power when they could. I am not suggesting that this was some conspiracy that men brewed up in tents in the middle east or wherever, but that it happened probably without too much conscious thought. Regardless of how it evolved (and I could be wrong—maybe a bunch of dudes did sit around and figure out a way to control women), we can change it. The people who seem to be changing this are women themselves, and this is one important lesson in how power has worked on the planet for a very long time, which is that if you want something to change you will have to be that agent of the change, no one is going to just give it to you, you have to demand it. For a very long time we in the U.S. had a Constitution and it granted equal rights to all People, and as the wives of the framers of that Constitution recognized, that did not include women. After generations of men showing little sign of putting their words into action, women began to agitate for the rights provided to them in that document. This led to the women’s suffrage movement. This was no small task: women chained themselves to the gates outside Washington D.C., they were arrested, harassed, and were subject to a lot of criticism. Here, “the power” of accepted societal norms was asserting itself to try and keep things as they were, but women kept pushing back. They kept pushing back until there was change. Now, women voting is no big deal. No one bats an eye when a woman votes. The same can be said for this whole managing of feminine power, and it can be changed in similar ways. In the case of a vote you use the system of government. In regards to behavior, you use your own behavior in front of your children, your community, and friends, to model this new mode of behavior. What you don’t do is you don’t play the victim. To play the victim is to not recognize the nature of power. You might not want to make change, but if you are upset with how things are and you do little to effect that change, then acting like you are a victim wont improve the situation. It is power through weakness and unfortunately people have found that they can get power this way, but this method never achieves the kinds of results that changing the modus operandi of the power structure does.
One outcome of this management of female power is how it has led to women denying their own natural behavior. I recently saw a video that dealt with the mismatch between what women say they want in a man and what they really want (according to a male observer). I think that women don’t always know what they want and are controlled by the society in which they live in subtle and over ways. Many of the things that this video points out has to do with the how women’s own sexual energy is triggered. The podcaster pointed out that women were expressing superficial things that the guest believed weren’t as important as the more important elements, he was saying that women were saying that the things that he believed actually drove women’s sexual interest the women saw or believed were superficial when in fact they weren’t. The host surmised that women weren’t being honest with themselves about this. These “superficial” likes also related more directly to sexual expression itself than the qualities that might help a relationship staying together ongoing. While they might be seen as superficial, they are actually probably very important when it comes to being honest with yourself about likes and dislikes. A woman might value a sense of humor or a man who listens to her and values what she says, but when it comes to being attracted to a man, other traits like a square jaw, height, and confidence ruled the day according to the host of the podcast. To be fair, both sets are equally important and for different reasons, but it is the fear of seeming superficial that women seem to respond to. The fallacy in this is that we assume that being sexual is somehow superficial or a weakness. Why do we think that? Why is it that we treat this with such disdain? Is it that we don’t know how to properly deal with it deep down? Are women afraid to own that yes, there is a “look” that does trigger them regardless of how self aware they think they are being. Do we fear that it will be stronger than our own will? Or is the fear of it only making our interest in it being driven to unnatural heights? Does it at the same time misdirect our attention from the sacred power that sexuality has for us as a species that we have erected so many rules to govern it? No doubt about it, the power to create new life needs to be taken seriously and with care because lives are at stake. That means casual sex could be seen as a no-no, but when we say “casual sex” don’t we mean sex in a committed relationship but still while using, say contraception so that conception does not happen except for when we are ready? Not that long ago many people thought that sex was for procreation only. I had a roommate from South Bend Indiana who said, “Why do women need to have an orgasm? Orgasm in women isn’t needed for conception.” Good old John, he was a “good Catholic” and just couldn’t wrap his head around it. I answered to him that she needs orgasm so she didn’t wind up wanting to burn the house down. He still didn’t quite get it, but I did give it a try.
I know that as a man one of the things I have noticed is how a woman will unclothe herself of the societal norms placed on her when she is sufficiently safe and in private. As those layers are removed as a result of the seductive nature of our own native sexuality, a core persona seems to emerge, and it has always been like witnessing glory to me. But then once over, everything gets packed back into its acceptable layers and hidden away as if it never existed. One major faux pax is to discuss what went on outside of that moment of exquisite honesty and self surrender. In one instance when I mentioned what one woman had said to me when we were intimate, she denied ever having said what it was she said. I knew I wasn’t imagining things, and later I found a piece of writing that she sent to me, probably one of the most honest and courageous pieces of writing I have seen in a long while where she was using precisely the same kinds of words. How was it that she was behaving like she was ashamed of her expression of what I took to be unbridled honesty? She not just denied it, but accused me of not caring about her for even suggesting that she had said such things. Ouch. It also cemented into my mind why it might not be a good idea to even be with this person because of how fundamentally dishonest she was either with me or with herself, or both. Why wouldn’t someone just admit to their feelings? This is the kind of outcome that results from what our society puts on women and which women respond to. Maybe women accept it because of how well it works on them. This is also the manual on how to dismantle this behavior if it is of any interest to you. You might think that you are liberated from these kinds of behaviors, but the best way to test them is to see how you feel when you publicly buck their power and then you will have your answer. I think most women follow these conventional behaviors without thinking much about them, it’s just how it is, why question them? Me, I am interested in change on the planet, and it seems that this is one good place to start.
The other side to this is having men who can accept a woman who does this and can reward her for doing so. We all seem to need encouragement, and it is not easy feeling like you are on the front lines. Some seem to be made for it, but others might not feel so bold. This means that in the men that they learn to see feminine power as a compliment to their own, not a threat to it. You see, men are incredibly power-driven through their masculinity, its true, but I think where we get it wrong is in thinking that men alone must be the strongest most powerful ones, hunt the flesh, kill the flesh, apex predator an all that, etc. Somewhere there is a place for the feminine in this that does not make it less, a level of cooperation that I think we are just now beginning to figure out. The challenge I think is summed up very well by my high school art teacher who said “Men and women aren’t equal, they are equivalent…” Those were very enlightened words. When women try to be powerful, men might feel like they are just trying to be masculine. No, they are being assertive, and the problem I think is that we have so hemmed in women over the ages that we have equated assertiveness as being associated with masculinity. This need not be, and I think as men we just need to learn to live with feminine assertiveness long enough to understand that it is not a threat to us. We have confused sexuality with psychology. We even see one hemisphere of the brain as “masculine” while the other is more “feminine” despite the fact that these traits are in both men and women because we both have brains with two hemispheres! No, those are not sexual traits.
I think that when behaviors that have been controlled for so long are threatened with deletion, we humans tend to feel a little lost and don’t know what to replace them with. I tend to be of the mind that we don’t need to replace them with anything because, to my mind, all of this behavior is a kind of white-wash our ancestors have handed down to us that doesn’t reflect our understanding of our energetic potential in consciousness from the get-go. Part of the problem that we have is that we aren’t actually dealing with authentic human behavior through all of the constructs that we have created as a society to control that behavior. I tend to feel that the fastest way to self realization is to move away from the shame and the controls just to be able to get a glimpse of human nature in the wild. And what is it? I think that it is much freer, more in touch with its creative potential, and more at home with the planet as a cooperative whole. I think life evolved to be this way so that it can thrive on this little blue ball in space. I also feel that it is critical to our survival to awaken to our truer nature because that truer nature knows itself as part of a larger whole. You don’t get that when you are constantly being shamed for your natural impulses, feeling divided from the herd or feeling separate.
What would happen if those horses were set free? Would they create chaos, or would they find a new equilibrium? I suspect the latter. I wont suggest that it will all be joy and light; it is a new state and we have to learn how to navigate it like you learn how to drive a car, for instance. I also don’t think it is the end of all control, but it could lead to a growing sense of not needing as much control of ourselves as we had previously thought. I suspect that it can also lead to a speeding up of our evolution on the planet. We very much need the apex species to be aware of how it is not the web of life but an integral strand in that web which has the power to also destroy that web if we don’t get more enlightened about our place in the order than we seem to have right now. Earth to human: everything is connected. Time to get with the program.
I sense that as shame falls away, power increases. Isn’t inducing shame similar to crimping a garden hose? More bliss, more joy, and a greater sense of unity could emerge I think. When we limit behavior we make it so we crave it more. What happens when that hose is allowed to just flow naturally?
I think the fear is that this will just drive men crazy somehow. Men have ben known for not being able to keep their own desire in check, so wouldn’t this just lead to chaos? I suspect, and I might be wrong, that as women come forward out of the control, that their own qualities that are native to them will themselves have a regulating influence on men Assertive women will themselves remind men that they aren’t the only ones with power in the room. Will men respond with resentment? I think that is possible. Men who feel like their power is being taken away can respond in violent ways, absolutely. That said, men are just as affected as women are in self regulating behaviors, too (they are just of a different kind but every bit as troubling and difficult). That is a potent regulatory force for men I think. As a man nothing is more self regulatory than being aware of the full range of what women possess. It’s true, at least for this man. There is less yearning when something isn’t hard to get or hidden beneath layers of behavioral modification. The thrill of the hunt is simply taken away because the mystique has been dissolved. How about that as a self regulatory model in society? It is well known what “playing hard to get” does to men. It makes them try harder. Well? The elephant is in the room. Maybe there is a better way. I am not suggesting that everything I am saying here is entirely on the mark. The problem with all of this is we wont know unless we try. Will it upend male attraction to women? Will it upend female attraction to men? What happens when men themselves are no longer constrained in the ways that society controls them as well? You see, men are told that they cannot have any real connection to their feelings, that crying over seeing a puppy is being weak and not masculine. Is it any mystery why men are such rage monsters in our societies? We have a few things really off and maybe it is time to just let those behaviors fall away, and then not care whether we are attractive to the opposite sex if we don’t present with those time-honored behaviors that now act as the triggers for our deeper sexual drives. It might just be that the triggers have been the problem all along. Well, that’s how it looks to me right now, and thanks for reading…
I have been having another bout of information overload lately, with material floating in on the ether.
This began while studying the link between awakening, the brain, electrical conductivity in the body, and how this affects consciousness and how the very low-level electrical potential that the body produces as behaving as a transceiver for information that is beyond the body.
It is a simple concept, which is that if the universe is intelligent (see both the ancients and the quantum physicists), then this intelligence is likely to be energetic in nature. If our own bodies are energetic at the signal processing level where the brain is concerned, it stands to reason that what we call psi ability is the shift that can take place when someone becomes more psychic. Most people are born with these gifts, but as we evolve, methods have been developed that are allowing people to tap into their latent potentials, all with some pretty profound results.
When awakening takes hold, there is evidence to suggest that the “latent” aspect of kundalini may in fact lie in what happens when the right and left hemispheres are able to come into a more direct alignment without the left brain serving as a “brake” against the right brain. I had suspected that what I had been feeling with a masculine and feminine quality in consciousness “rising” upward through my body was in some way tied to what I had been doing in meditation, effectively “freeing” the brain to be in greater balance with itself. Later, I would find research that revealed that this actually happens, which is to say that we appear to be left brain dominant at least as far as higher order processes go (like enlightenment). The work of Jill Bolte Taylor in her TED Talk and her book “A Stroke Of Insight” reveals the same support for where nirvana resides at the neurological level (which she identified at being in the right brain). If this is correct, then when many who have awakening experience to some extent or another an increase in psi ability, it may be that psi is linked to the right brain, or to what both hemispheres do when they are allowed to play together in a more natural fashion. But I ask one more question based on my review of some recent material I have been getting lately which is this: when this new state comes online does it also enable our brains to properly process information that we are receiving beyond the physical senses and which may point to the universe as a kind of store house of information?
In the documentary Superhuman: The Invisible Made Visible, the journalists look into cases of psi ability and how it can be cultivated or taught.
In the documentary they demonstrate how individuals were able to cause objects suspended in sealed tubes with their minds. Dr. George Weissman, a theoretical physicist has been conducting experiments like this for years and has been able to both show and learn under what conditions a person can induce an object to move in these sealed containers. They took the experiment one step further by placing objects in a sealed container under vacuum where no movement should be possible and people were able to induce movement during their test period even from thousands of miles away. A baseline was created where there was no involvement from the test subject and then an hour long period where the test subject attempted to cause a thing strip of paper balanced over a needle, to move. The result was that the researchers were able to get results that were highly significant, with movement that could not be attributed to anything except the fact that a remote subject was moving the object with their mind. (1:15 minute mark)
The documentary showed how a group of children who, using blindfolds (special blinders that close off all visible light to the eyes) and had learned how to read books using nothing more than their inner sensing capabilities. The demonstrations were quite interesting. From there, they also show similar experiments with individuals trained to “see” blind with detecting shapes, colors, and objects. This project was developed by Nicola Farmer the founder of ICU Foundation in the U.K. She explains the method simply as teaching the children how to tap into the universal energies which they then learn to use for detecting objects without using their eyes but instead their inner eye sensory capability. (1:33 mark) This process involves having the children reach a bright light, and once this is done, the children are able to see all around them despite having special blindfolds (made of a compressible foam that seals off all light). i will point out that I encountered a brilliant white light during meditation, after which a lot began to change in my perception and experience. In Ogden Utah one group is teaching people how to use a technique called “vibravision” to detect colors of objects as well as to read what is written on them. Mike Zeleznick is the founder of Vibravision, MP USA. Here is a video detailing some of their results (it is a promo video meant to get you to want to sign up, so there is that, but these are real examples of what they are doing)
By awakening are we essentially tapping into this field naturally, without training to do so? What would happen if those of us who already have this advantage were to learn these methods? I know that in my own work, I began to spontaneously remote view locations thousands of miles away from me, locations I knew nothing about yet had a very high rate of correct impressions (in the 80-95% range!). While the Hindu say not to pay much attention to these abilities, in an age of deceit and misinformation, skill sets like these could serve to keep our leaders honest. The one most important prerequisite: keeping the mind completely blank. There is no trying, no doing, it is instead by way of a different method, one where it feels as though one is receiving through a completely blank screen of the mind without any need or desire to color the results. If you have any bias or belief about what you are going to find, it will completely twist your results. See? Even the process itself pushes you to be completely honest. This process also requires “doing the inner work” necessary in order to be clear from any competing material that might sway results.
I think that this field is fascinating and points to our true potential, largely untapped, for understanding the nature of consciousness and who we really are beyond just the body.
Thanks for taking a moment to give this a read. If you liked it, let me know!
Waking The Infinite 