Paralyzed in Dream

MKRNHR said:
Color said:
I believe it was clear through Cass that resistance equals knowledge, not mental visualizations of throwing anything... At least it's what I've read in the transcripts and on this forum, over and over again.
As I have understood from the transcripts and from reading the Wave and High Strangeness, knowledge will lessen the damage of such attaks but will unlikely avoid them.
What was said is that the more one expands it's knowledge the less likely one will be used for 'food' and if one constantly looks for knowledge - harder it will be to manipulate him/her.

MKRNHR said:
Color said:
Well, what you said here would make sense to me if you said earlier something like:
'One of the possibilities is that you could have been abducted.'
My english isn't very good but that's exactly what I had understood from Ruth's answer when she said "probably" and the chocolate affaire is a joke :)
We're still in the babel tower's syndrome world, so it could be helpful if we try not to jump to conclusions about everyone's sayings and try to understand that we're all here from different backgrounds and ways of talking. I'm still trying to understand the meaning of "causual" :d (poor of me yeah?).
My favorite christian teaching "dont pass judgement on others or you might be judged yourself" from The Life of Brian :)
OK, I understood it differently, which is one more reason for all of us here to say and express our thoughts in a clear way.
I also started some reactions here on this forum with the posts I wrote, which were understood differently
than from what I thought - I expressed, through my words. And other member's reactions were reasonable,
trying to get to the point of what I said. The same here. If it was clear, we wouldn't have this discussion
and I don't see why this looks to you as passing judgment?
 
Color said:
The same here. If it was clear, we wouldn't have this discussion
and I don't see why this looks to you as passing judgment?
It was a general statement that followed mistakingly. It is not directed to anyone and surely not towards you. Sorry Color! :|
 
MKRNHR said:
It is like making some knowledge at the disposal of whom asking it and then the person will absorb it according to him/her preparness. is it?
Yes, pretty much!! One of the hardest things to do is to determine whether a person is actually "asking".

What people "ask" for, may vary quite dramatically from what others, who might sound similar with their requests; are asking for. So, putting some information 'out there' with no expectations (of reward, attention, or to be taken seriously (my favourite) - or agreement) allows anybody who is interacting or listening to employ their free will, which is very important.

Of course, it is necessary to employ judgement (and sometimes make mistakes or 'tests' of others) to know how far or what you can talk about. This is a very delicate process. The first place people usually come across this is where they try to talk to either their friends or family about some of the subjects on this forum or Signs of The Times...

I know just how far I can discuss these topics with my family :D ! But we won't go there!

You might like to have a look at the Glossary on External and Internal Consideration. It very elloquently describes a complicated process.
http://glossary.cassiopaea.com/glossary.php?id=40&lsel=E
 
Color said:
I believe it was clear through Cass that resistance equals knowledge, not mental visualizations of throwing anything...
At least it's what I've read in the transcripts and on this forum, over and over again.
I'm sure that if a person has the ability to use knowledge in order to use mental visualisations for their own protection, then that should be considered knowledge. It is true that these things can't be measured or quantified - perhaps they can be judged only by results? What is knowledge and what is not knowledge? Here you have a complicated question.

Apparently you do not consider the act of using mental visualisations as "knowledge". Well, there's an awful lot of 'stuff' out there that is actually knowledge but we don't know about, but I suppose we have to start somewhere. Perhaps you confuse the act of mental visualisation with wishfull thinking? I would like to suggest that the two are different.


Color said:
Sorry but the way you respond here to Anart's remarks, which were completely logical questions to bring, not some personal attack on you, yet the way you react/reply reminds me of responses I got from kids I was taking care of yesterday, the way which is avoiding to understand the point made and continuing to explain something away from the context and adding the confusion in the whole matter, and increasing the conflict level...
Yes, I obviously completely misunderstood! I thought anart was infering that my remarks/comments were thoughtless or uncaring. :D And that as a nurse, I should know better! How I could have ever construed that as a completely personal critisim is totally beyond me. I have been known to be blunt and argumentative, but I don't think this forum is a good place to swing too far in the opposite direction. It is also useful to note that it tends to be emotional reactions that produce verbal responses And that relates to all individuals involved.

Color said:
Well, what you said here would make sense to me if you said earlier something like:

'One of the possibilities is that you could have been abducted.'
It's a 'possibility' that I have been abducted, too. Indeed I probably have, and in my dreams as well. So, if I was ever to defend myself, I think I'd want somebody being a little more 'blunt' to shock me into realising that there's an awful lot of 'stuff' going on and that I have a choice about how I interact.

Color said:
Can you please give me some links or quotes from Cass or Laura suggesting such things, I would appreciate it, cause I didn't find them yet.
I got access to the transcripts from the yahoo group forum. I'm not sure where the transcripts are now, but yes, they're definately worth the effort to read. Some very interesting stuff in there and the whole process provokes much thought.

Color said:
This is why I write this, to take the spot out of Anart and this whole thing as being her 'thing' .
I agree with her remarks, I had similar questions raised while reading your reply to MKRNH's post, BEFORE I've read hers.
Wonder what others think about it...
I wouldn't want to take the spot out of Anart either. :D I think she does a really good job and I think others would agree. Its a difficult and demanding job.

Color said:
ruth said:
I certainly don't communicate with my patients the same way I communicate with others. Neither do I communicate with people in the community the same way I communicate here.
I don't think that's the point. It was not about how you communicate with different groups of people,
it was about how you express yourself within your personal thoughts and views,
like making wild guesses of what could of happened to somebody else, but presenting it in a way
which suggests you have a huge knowledge on the matter and feel free to say what to do about it.
Ah, so this is the problem and what a problem it is! It may have been how it was read and interpreted. Unfortunately - or is it fortunately, I am not smart enough to hide a need to stand on a soap box behind pretty words or by any perceived increased objectivity (as has been done previously by others). So, when people read my blunt words and see them as arrogant and opinionated, they react. The irony is, what I've said may not be incorrect, and they also might not be opinionated or arrogant either. 8|

Color said:
Again, I am not saying you don't have the right to your views and solutions on the matter,
but the WAY you presenting it bothers me too. And it's really strange that you said to Anart she shouldn't 'assume',
cause I find a lot of 'assuming' within your own thoughts/words.
Ah yes, and you have very thoughtfully cleared up the real 'problem', I think. I have 'boldly' gone and bolded it, I hope you don't mind? :D But it does bring out the problem of communication and perception between people. We can't all be the acting or reacting in the same manner either, so it must occur quite fequently. Especially if there were expectations on the part of people. I wonder what part NLP (neurolinguistic programing) has to play?
 
hi,

Last night, November 28, what started with a ´regular´ paralysis during my sleep, which I fought back as usual, something new followed afterwards. I was trying to get back to sleep, as my forehead started to get warmer, esp in the area where the third eye is supposed to be located. It was a rather pleasant feeling... when suddenly a fast ´swoosh´ sound ( as would do a fast speeding car) passed through my brain from the right side to the left side. It was painful and made me scared, up till the point that I left the room to go and sleep somewhere else in the house. No futher events that night. Up till now, almost 24 hours later, I still suffer from a headache, located in between the eyes, where the warm feeling occured.

Does anybody has had something similar or an idea what this can be?

As stated, I have frequent episodes of sleep paralysis. The first time I remember having them is about 15 years ago. I was reading the third book in the series of Castadena and that night I was paralyzed, while looking at a small clear blue circle in my room. It scared me tremendously. And after a few times more of the same , still reading Castaneda, I stopped reading those books. The paralysis disappeared and didn't come back until about two years ago, when I started to read the WAVE series. Could this indicate that this phenomena is ´knowledge´ related? Am I attracting too much attention from something? Or is it that I read for many many hours in one stretch and overexcite my brain?

Now the episodes come and go in periods. There are several consecutive months I have none, and then for a few weeks sometimes two a week. They seem not longer linked to reading of books, although it does still occur that they are linked. As said above I grew used to those episodes and have become adequate in fighting them back. Now I can sense the onset of a paralysis before it starts. I will wake up, feel something in the room and know it will start. As soon as I resist, it goes quiet quickly away. What happened last night though, is completely new. Have ´they´ changed tactics? Or is there something else going on?

BTW: last night I was rereading the second book of the wave. And this afternoon, a few pages after the point I stopped reading last night, I read this.

Quote
07-23-95
Q: (L) The first thing on my mind is an experience I had several nights ago. It seemed as though there was some sort of interaction between myself and something "other." Could you tell me what this experience was?
A: Was eclipsing of the realities.
Q: (L) What is an eclipsing of the realities?
A: It is when energy centers conflict.
Q: (L) What energy centers are conflicting?
A: Thought energy centers.
Q: (L) Whose thoughts?
A: Thoughts are the basis of all creation. After all, without thought nothing would exist. Now would it?
Q: (L) True.
A: Therefore, energy centers conflicting involve thought patterns. You could refer to it as an intersecting of thought pattern energies. ...
Q: (L) I also seemed to be aware of several dark, spider-like figures lined up by the side of the bed, was this an accurate impression.
A: Those could be described as specific thought center projections.
Q: (L) I seemed to be fighting and resisting this activity.
A: That was your choice. ...
Q: (L) At what level of density do these thought centers have their primary focus?
A: Thought centers do not have primary focus in any level of density. This is precisely the point. You are not completely familiar with the reality of what thoughts are. We have spoken to you on many levels and have detailed many areas involving density level, but thoughts are quite a different thing because they pass through all density levels at once. Now, let us ask you this. Do you not now see how that would be possible?
Q: (L) Yes. But what I am trying to do is identify these conflicting thought centers. If two thought centers, or more, conflict, then my idea would be that they are in opposition.
A: Correct. ...
Q: (L) Okay, in the experience I felt a paralysis of my body, what caused this paralysis.
A: Yes. Separation of awareness. Which is defined as any point along the pathway where one's awareness becomes so totally focused on one thought sector that all other levels of awareness are temporarily receded, thereby making it impossible to become aware of one's physical reality along with one's mental reality. This gives the impression of what is referred to as paralysis. Do you understand?
Q: (L) Yes. And what stimulates this total focus of awareness?
A: An event which sidetracks, temporarily, the mental processes.
Q: (L) And what event can sidetrack the mental processes to this extent?
A: Any number.
Q: (L) In this particular case, what was it?
A: It was an eclipsing of energies caused by conflicting thought centers. Whenever two opposing units of reality intersect, this causes what can be referred to as friction, which, for an immeasurable amount of what you would refer to as time, which is, of course, non-existent, creates a non-existence, or a stopping of the movements of all functions. This is what we would know as conflict. In between, or through any intersecting, opposite entities, we always find zero time, zero movement, zero transference, zero exchange. Now think about this. Think about this carefully.
Q: (L) Does this mean that I was, essentially, in a condition of non-existence?
A: Well, non-existence is not really the proper term, but non-fluid existence would be more to the point. Do you understand?
Q: (L) Yes. Frozen, as it were?
A: Frozen, as it were.
Q: (L) Was there any benefit to me from this experience?
A: All experiences have potential for benefit.
Q: (L) Was there any detriment from this experience?
A: All experiences have potential for detriment. Now, do you see the parallels? We are talking about any opposing forces in nature, when they come together, the result can go all the way to the extreme of one side or all the way to the extreme of the other. Or, it can remain perfectly, symmetrically in balance in the middle, or partially in balance on one side or another. Therefore all potentials are realized at intersecting points in reality. ...
Q: (L) Was one of these conflicting thought centers or energies some part of me?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) And was it eclipsed by interacting with a thought center energy that was part of or all of something or someone else?
A: Or, was what happened a conflicting of one energy thought center that was a part of your thought process and another energy thought center that was another part of your thought process? We will ask you that question and allow you to contemplate.
Q: (L) Does it ever happen that individuals who perceive or think they perceive themselves to have experienced an "abduction," to actually be interacting with some part of themselves?
A: That would be a very good possibility. Now, before you ask another question, stop and contemplate for a moment: what possibilties does this open up? Is there any limit? And if there is, what is that? Is it not an area worth exploring? For example - just one example for you to digest - what if the abduction scenario could take place where your soul projection, in what you perceive as the future, can come back and abduct your soul projection in what you perceive as the present?
Q: (L) Oh, dear! Does this happen?
A: This is a question for you to ask yourself and contemplate.
Q: (L) Why would I do that to myself? (J) To gain knowledge of the future.
A: Are there not a great many possible answers?
Q: (L) Well, this seemed to be a very frightening and negative experience. If that is the case: a) maybe that is just my perception, or b) then, in the future I am not a very nice person! (J) Or maybe the future isn't very pleasant. And the knowledge that you gained of it is unpleasant.
A: Or is it one possible future, but not all possible futures? And is the pathway of free will not connected to all of this?
Q: (L) God! I hope so.
A: Now do you see the benefit in slowing down and not having prejudices when asking questions of great import? You see when you speed too quickly in the process of learning and gathering knowledge, it is like skipping down the road without pausing to reflect on the ground beneath you. One misses the gold coins and the gemstones contained within the cracks in the road. ...
Q: (L) Okay, when this experience occurred, am I to assume that some part of myself, a future self perhaps, of course they are all simultaneous but just for the sake of reference, came back and interacted with my present self for some purpose of exchange?
A: Well this is a question best left for your own exploration as you will gain more knowledge by contemplating it by yourself rather than seeking the answers here. But a suggestion is to be made that you do that as you will gain much, very much knowledge by contemplating these very questions on your own and networking with others as you do so. Be not frustrated for the answers to be gained through your own contemplation will be truly illuminating to you and the experience to follow will be worth a thousand lifetimes of pleasure and joy.

Thinking about ´conflicting thoughts center´: I am going through a rough time with my wife. The relationschip is pretty much dead, but, because of the child, she and I are still trying to mend things. We succeed in getting things better for a few weeks, have a conflict and come back to the point of breaking up. Then again I think: if we came together, it means something. And would it not start all over again with somebody else. I know have some serious STS problems to overcome and have just started working on them. If I can get things in order wiith myself, the problems with her might go away. Or at least I can be more certain that I did my part. Something of which I am sure I have not done for the moment.

I wonder now if this is the paralysed state I encounter. And is the new phase a sign things are getting worse of dire?
 
Jeremy F Kreuz said:
Thinking about ´conflicting thoughts center´: I am going through a rough time with my wife. The relationschip is pretty much dead, but, because of the child, she and I are still trying to mend things. We succeed in getting things better for a few weeks, have a conflict and come back to the point of breaking up. Then again I think: if we came together, it means something. And would it not start all over again with somebody else. I know have some serious STS problems to overcome and have just started working on them. If I can get things in order wiith myself, the problems with her might go away. Or at least I can be more certain that I did my part. Something of which I am sure I have not done for the moment.

Hi Jeremy,

In such a situation it's usually recommended not to take hasty decisions since we are not able to see the situation objectively and therefore to take the proper decisions. It's said that when someone meets the Work he is in the perfect situation to start learning and applying the first lessons he has to learn.

Something else to keep in mind is the outmost importance of your child happiness, this factor should definitely be taken into in account as far as your analysis and decisions are concerned.



Jeremy F Kreuz said:
I wonder now if this is the paralysed state I encounter. And is the new phase a sign things are getting worse of dire?

This event might not announce a better or worse future per se. It might just be a symptom of your current state where a struggle occurs between your old programmed thought center and a growing one that is stimulated by reading The Wave or Castaneda.
 
Can alien abduction appear during sleep paralysis?


I didn't have enough time to browse in the quest of this subject on the forum but i hope that some of you may have heard about 'sleep paralysis' (a sleep disturbance that appears during REM when the subject is partially conscious that he's asleep but can't move his body and has some sort of hallucinations). Do you think that there is a link between the two?
 
Back
Top Bottom