When a friend of mine, Anja, was just fourteen, she flew in the form of an eagle to a high mountain with a Tibetan temple perched on top of it. There, she met some monks who were to become her teachers in a series of lucid dreams over the period of a year. The monks showed her books, symbols, and colours and explained to her that the physical body is made up of seven energy bodies. In her waking life, young Anja had never heard of energy bodies before.
--Clare R. Johnson, Llewellyn’s Complete Book of Lucid Dreaming
How dare I suggest a whole new set of terminology for the age old practice which was once called 'ecstasy', which originally meant being made to stand outside. In fact, the original meaning of 'shaman' was not just any old medicine man or witch, but specifically a practitioner whose mode of operating was to leave this place behind and seek information and healing in other places, with the physical body in a trance.
I'm glad a lot of people are interested in dreaming, lucidity and out-of-body experiences. My first act is to declare that these experiences--along with "real" or physical experiences--are all the same thing. The different terms such as "lucid dream vs. OBE" are occasionally useful because they can help when trying to communicate with someone who assumes the popular current definitions are true and complete, and then builds a house of cards on top of that foundation of sand. Since the techniques for OBE and lucid dreaming are the same, we need a general term for what these techniques accomplish instead of the hopelessly klunky "lucid dream or OBE" which reduces many a discussion to an argument over nomenclature. The fact that results are varied is not an excuse to confuse beginners with the false dichotomy of lucid dream vs. OBE, because no two unworldings are ever the same. We don't need a different term for every altered state; we need to understand how to attain altered states in general and then enjoy whatever results we can get.
People who lack ideas of their own are the first to throw the word "science" around. I don't want to sound too negative, but my role in life has always been to cast things in a different light. People who cloak themselves in assumptions feel threatened by a different light, so they label it a negative light and turn away. Using rigor and consensus as evidence of what it true is a way out for people who are afraid to think for themselves and afraid of believing something that can't be proven. Later I'll show that one should pick and choose beliefs that help him get unworlded, with less emphasis on worrying about some absolute truth that will always be beyond our reach.
When the topic is consciousness and altered states, the constant companion of the word "science" is the word "brain". I can't believe so many people have not caught on to the fact that science doesn't know what a brain might have to do with consciousness. We know a lot about brains and how they trigger body movements and relay information through electrochemical processes, but no one knows how a brain could possibly generate consciousness. There's no evidence that mind or consciousness is dependent on brain functions, so many philosophers of mind and consciousness agree that reality itself is a function of a pre-existing awareness. Just as you cannot teach a blind man to see the color red, no matter how much science you stuff into him, awareness must be more basic than the details of our experience which we interpret and build into events. So I go along with the notion that there's an underlying reality--existence itself--which is equivalent to both infinity and awareness. Awareness, reality, infinity, and existence are not exact synonyms, however they do have something in common. They're all imperfect descriptions of a source or energy or infinity or pure, unlimited, undifferentiated awareness that underlies every possible experience.
It will be obvious to anyone who's stuck on the scientific method that I have leapt miraculously from thought to thought and made up my own mind depending on what I prefer to believe. That's because I owe no obeisance to science. Much of the science of today will be the unquestioned tradition and/or the laughing stock of tomorrow, and this will always be true. But the deeper understandings which simplify instead of complicating our understanding of our worlds have a chance of surviving and a much greater chance of helping someone who's not a scientist and doesn't appreciate the enforced rigor of the scientific method.
Based on my own theory of everything, which I call Synfonemia, the source energy mentioned above, or oneness, is only the first harmonic of reality. The next seven harmonics--twoness through eightness--are the human chakras. They create the world as we know it, the human form. There's nothing sacred about the number seven, it's traditional. I don't study chakras much in the literature because I don't place undue stock in tradition. The point is that as a vibrational system of some kind, an assumption which most scientists, pseudo-scientists, and metaphysicians should agree on, reality needs harmonics. Every other vibrational system has harmonics, now so do we. The harmonics of awareness are the building blocks of our worlds.
We have to be careful about using the word "reality" as a synonym for the physical world. Reality implies absoluteness, so it's the same thing as infinity or oneness. The other harmonics are increasingly complex thoughts which build upon the notion of oneness and upon each other as a blossoming hierarchy of increasingly complex awarenesses. This hierarchy of elemental notions, or Synfonemia, describes the ideas that build our worlds. Our worlds, not our reality. Reality is what pre-exists our worlds. Reality is just undifferentiated energy, because it cannot be apprehended, comprehended, or described, or else it becomes something else. Something more complex than reality yet less substantial, more apt to be considered an illusion built on a paradox. That something else starts with the second harmonic of existence or twoness. Twoness has many imperfect descriptions also, including separation, duality, identity, definition, limitation, dichotomy, and many others. Twoness is still infinite in scope, so it's just as impossible to define perfectly as the source energy oneness.
The first thing to remember is that reality as an absolute underlies any attempted description of it, so for anyone to claim that the scientific method and the consensus of multiple witnesses defines the ultimate truth about reality is just a religious statement made in blind faith. We need to be reminded that voting on what's factual has no effect on the facts. The keystone of science--being able to repeat experimental results--is the building block of consensus, not the building block of reality. There is no building block of reality itself; it just exists. Consensus is just dimensionality, physicality, gravity, the joining of separate things together again: threeness. Consensus creates worlds, not reality. Worlds spring from reality, and not the other way around.
When it comes to questions of mortality, life and death, eternity and survival thereunto, we rely on the notion of time in order for the conversation to make sense. Oddly enough, nonsense is then forthcoming. Unworlders are fond of saying that there's no time in the Unworld, but then they turn around and describe an experience they had there as a "past life". I agree that there are other lives that we can live, but this would be a matter of merging with other identities and experiencing their perspectives. Reincarnation is not an invalid assumption, just an unnecessary one. The Occam's Razor of logic should have us questioning the assumption that individuals are born in the past and proceed to the future, yet on some vague spiritual level they never actually die. And this vague spiritual level depends on souls entering and leaving bodies, the klunkiest of vague notions. Time is not a basic on which reality is built, but the other way around. Time is one imperfect description of fourness. Some scientists call it the fourth dimension, but it's not a dimension, because it doesn't measure objects. Dimensionality is threeness.
Fourness is order, hierarchy, value, system, arrangement, time, etc. Time is an ordering of experience but time doesn't give birth to us. Reality gives birth to us, and that "us" or identity or 2ness underlies time which is 4ness. Identity or separateness or distinction of one thing from another is built into any notion of time, but time is not built into identity. As a belief system, reincarnation exists for sociological, religious, and psychological reasons. Same goes for the corollaries of reincarnation, the notion of lives between lives with guided counseling sessions and goal formation and flow charts and possible futures and the idea that individuals and species are evolving into something greater. With infinity underlying all these details, nothing greater awaits us in some future. Time is just one way of experiencing reality. Fourness, like any of the harmonics, can be turned up or down or turned off. The simpler explanation of the incarnations that people experience in unworldings and near death experiences is that we resonate with another identity and merge with them.
This leads into a key part of my belief system, which is that there's only one soul and it is imperfectly described as pure awareness (also imperfectly described as infinity, reality, existence, energy, God, etc.) Souls do not follow some stilted mechanical framework by inhabiting bodies. One soul--oneness itself--experiences itself through many perspectives or identities. Thus we are all reincarnations of everybody. An individual could conceivably resonate with any other individual--especially one that he can vibrate with sympathetically due to their having some commonalities in their configurations--and then come back from the Unworld believing in reincarnation. With our consciousness equivalent to infinity and underlying any notion of time, there's nothing to worry about in regards to whether or not we survive death. Life becomes something like a file that can be opened and closed. Awareness can take a run through any life it wants, rerun a life for kicks, or try variations of a theme. Within infinity there have to be infinite choices or infinity would not exist. If infinity didn't exist, nothing would exist. How do I know? I thought it through and made up my mind over 50 years ago.
The purpose of unworlding, in my view, is to get unstuck from physical life and its obligatory suffering. I don't propose enlightenment or living on top of the mountain or perfecting oneself. I propose learning a skill called unworlding so that the individual's life stream of experience becomes an exploration of the unknown instead of a cowering in an earthville which comes more and more to resemble a mental institution as it's overtaken by overpopulation and the greed of those who have clawed their way to the top. My proposition is not to fix this place but to learn how to get away from it. To emulate a most indefinable thing: freedom. I believe that humans are here to keep them from bothering people in the Unworld at large. I'll come right out and say it: humans are entities which thrive on rehashed fear, so they are annoying to entities which don't function in that way, and earthville is their home because they belong here.
The status quo version of lucid dreaming and out-of-body experience doesn't serve me in my quest, so I'm changing it to unworlding and unworlding is my life. I'm not very good at it yet but I am quite sure that my life hasn't been wasted. I think the philosophy taught in these pages is worth a lot to anyone who shares my interest in the Unworld. Because of the high value of this information, it's totally free so anybody can get access to it.