Alas, after a good six hours of pouring out my heart and soul - all it takes is but a second to wipe it at all away; thus, a quick introduction will have to suffice for the time being.

First and foremost, I might posit that I am not an official Theosophist, nor an official anything of any what order - I am what I am; no more, no less. Of course, that is "officially" speaking; elsewise I might very well be a theosophist. Honestly, I don't really like labels much: they never seem be accurate enough, even though this is what they intend - to categorize.

Thus, simply put: I am here to listen often, and speak when called (as time permits). I love to learn and learning is a large part of my life - ever the student of life; ever the neophyte of the kosmos, as I always say. Thus, the reciprical of my love of learning is in the sharing of the things learned; in teaching, one might say. Of course, I realize: To teach, one must first "know" something...hence my learning.

Anyways, I'll end this introduction here and open the floor to you to know what's what: I cannot see my self save in the mirror of the other - this will be you.

P.S. - I am also wondering, as a passing thought - have any of you here developed, at the least, a rudimentary etheric sight..for if so, I'd quite like to compare notes from physical observation.

QaZsE

1

Hello QaZeE, sorry to see you've lost your post. Unfortunately, it happens to us all and we us MS Word or such to prepare our posts first, now, when posting for a Community Board. I would surmise by your now minimal prose that everyone has lost the benefit of your intellect.

Inadvertantly pulled up a browser I seldom use and it auto-brings up this page. I must have synchronistically been meant to say Hi. Nice to see new people discovering the Ancient Wisdom.

As per your query, I have well developed etheric vision, or AEtheric vision as I prefer to call it. Astral vision and Mental Plane sight too. Were you indicating you wanted to compare notes on the process, or on what can be viewed? As your interest is in etheric sight, you may have an interest in the Etheric Double, or the Etheric Plane (upper physical sub-planes occupied by Elementals; although, I think this is incorrect to and pertains to Elementals, Elementaries and Nature Spirit in separate ways.)

Christian

Qazse,

You said,

"Alas, after a good six hours of pouring out my heart and soul - all it takes is but a second to wipe it at all away...."

--> Did you write out a post, only to lose it due to a software malfunction? I always write out a post, save it to a word-processing sotware, then post the post. I, too, have written out long posts, only to lose them to software glitches.

"...I am not an official Theosophist, nor an official anything of any what order...."

--> That is perfectly fine. Everyone, from official members to people with only a passing interest, are welcome to discuss the Ancient Wisdom.

Theosophy is a collection of ideas. Feel free to ask any question about any Theosophical idea. What we mainly do here is take a look at any one of the thousands of Theosophical concepts, and see how well they fit into our own personal belief systems. I am excited to see which Theosophical ideas fit and do not fit into your belief system.

"I don't really like labels much...."

--> You will find that Theosophy does a very good job of not needing labels. If you believe in reincarnation, you believe in it. If you don't, you don't. Giving yourself a particular title does not change whether you believe in reincarnation or not. You are welcome to discuss reincarnation (or any other topic) no matter what title you give yourself, and your remarks will not be treated in a particular manner just because you give yourself a particular title.

"I am here to listen often, and speak when called (as time permits)."

--> As I said, what we do mainly is discuss concepts. Feel free to listen to (and participate in) any discussions on any topic. What Theosophical concepts have you come across that do or do not fit into your personal belief system?

"To teach, one must first "know" something...hence my learning."

--> There is no religion higher than truth.

"...have any of you here developed, at the least, a rudimentary etheric sight..."

--> Most of us here have not. Christian is a professional psychic (I think he prefers to be called a medium, or something like that), so he should be able to help you understand what you have been seeing.

Ah, well...I'm sure you didn't miss that much "wisdom" from the loss of my introduction; perhaps you were even lucky, in the long run - spared my tendency to long writings.

In pertaining to the question of etheric vision (as I will call it), I'm mostly interested in this because of the fact that it is objectifiable being a continuation of the physical - the ether and it's constituents and the like can be ascertained in that it is no longer a subjective mode of conscious activity, such as say the emotions/desire or the mental is subjective.

In this, I'll say I'm not overly interested in the miasmas of the astral/mental and they are of no concern...at least not for the time being. What is true/false in a dream, I cannot tell as of yet...so why bother trying to objectify them?

Anyways, back to the etheric sight - I'm not particularily "adept" at it- I make no claim to being able to see etheric beings or the like...as I said: rudimentary. As per knowing I see "something" as opposed to delusion, let me point out my glasses as a case in point...and how in taking them off, it becomes harder (as it is to see) to percieve the etheric as well. It is, indeed, a function of the senses. I am meaning to compare notes concerning physical and objective observation of the etheric. For example, what do you, physically see in this etheric sight, say, when you look at an apple? What has been your observations?

For me, around all objects/persons/animals (the like) I can perceive, at first, a glow and a refracting of light, ever so slightly, as though light through water (and how it distorts an image). This sort of "hazy glow", in time begins to striate with a bit of focus into a number of bands...the closest to the object/person/animal being a rather opaque bluish color, often a warm blue. The outer layers are not nearly so opaque and rather translucent to a considerable degree. The largest layer seems almost more of a radiance really, and this radiance is not always seen (indeed it takes a little more attention to notice it).

As well, in holding an object, the etheric bodies seem blend together, somewhat - at least concerning the higher striations...I'm not so sure about the closest layer (the opaque one).

That'll have to do for now.

QaZsE

1

Sorry about that, Nick - I had yet to see your reply...we must have been writing at the same time (or more likely this is due to my writing for x many hours...and even then, I missed a word). With that said, I'll get right into your questions - no time to waste.

Did you write out a post, only to lose it due to a software malfunction?

You might say that, yes.

I am excited to see which Theosophical ideas fit and do not fit into your belief system.

I suppose time will tell, no?

What Theosophical concepts have you come across that do or do not fit into your personal belief system?

At this time, I am merely "interpreting" them across mutliple systems and sources - until such time as this is complete, I cannot say for certain. Once more then, time will tell.

There is no religion higher than truth.

Indeed.

With that said and done, thank you for the greeting.

QaZsE

1

QaZsE

QaZsE,
The Theosophical opinion is that all physical world atoms are sheathed in successive layers of energies as they relate to the Planes of Consciousness. As the seven customary planes are themselves a grouping of seven finer sub-planes, and those too enjoy a similar ever-finer succession, there is therefore a gradient of energies around each atom.

Although this hierarchy works well for definition and differentiation purposes, the reality is there is a blending of them, an affect you have already discovered. Regardless, there is still in general a layering of energies when viewed ocularly/open eyed. Thus, most if not all of your observations are consistent with those having etheric sight, repeatable, provable and demonstrable. I demonstrate this fact every week in group sessions around the country.

Those who explore etheric sight are sometimes considered to see astrally too, as one will tend to follow the other. This too can lead to some confusion when trying to ascertain which energies you are seeing. This latter, the astral, is affected by emotion and a subject's constitution, so it will tend to change; something you as well seem to have considered.

The easiest energy for most to see is a dull blur, or hazy glow as you phrase it, around animate, AND inanimate objects. This will be etheric (or ætheric in my vernacular). It can be gray to gray-blue, gray-green, or gray-white. Some will see it as a dull white. White is a default color the mind uses when it does not yet fully discern the color scale. Ultimately, it will appear dull green or blue to a much brighter/intense shade of blue or green as your perceptions develop further.

Thus far you are addressing the ætheric energy around matter, and as it would pertain to the human, the “Etheric Body” (or Ætheric body). This sub-plane of etheric matter is of the Physical Plane, so can be generally viewed ocularly. There are other etheric sub-planes as well (with their attentive energies,) and the glass-under-water effect will pertain much to that realm of Nature People (or Nature Spirit, if you prefer. This is where I will begin differing in theosophical concept as the oft use term Elemental includes devolved human consciousness that actually belongs to the Astral plane.) Similarly, continued practice will result in color. So, thus far, that “hazy” range is the general etheric around all objects and appears as a [dull] glow, at first. The glass-under-water effect pertains to the Nature Realms.

When people see halos or glowing bright white or yellow around an animate object, however, they are discerning Astral energy. Again, the white can and usually will be due to the minds normal inability to ascertain the correct color, eventually color will result. Then, white will be reserved for a high spiritual emotional affect on the astral energy. Since astral energy is affected by emotion, the astral body of man will appear dynamic, it will change depending upon the current condition of the subject. Stimulating an emotional response through conversation will too result in a change in the astral energy. Astral energy tends to be “drawn” to us (eventually resulting in our aura) based on our emotional state/desire state, whereas the etheric energies will remain rather constant.

Much of your comment pertains to etheric energy and one’s etheric body. Although there will be similarities when you achieve Astral viewing, recall that it will be dynamic in color and appearance. The striations, for example, will also change. An astral body contains the “mixture” of astral energy we draw according to our current constitution, but this is not layered, it churns in reaction to what occurs within our minds. It is the “surface” that we tend to see and interpret, but the boiling effect can change this in an instant.

Objectively, the etheric energies can be seen consistently as a continuation of the Physical, as you say, and this would be correct. Once the Astral is perceived though, it is one’s psychic senses that are making the perception, and therefore, there will be extensive meaning beyond color. A psychic or medium, for example, can “sense” through {feeling, sound, sight or knowing} of {sound, taste, emotion, past/present/future pertanence, objects, thoughts, perclivities and consciousness} from those SAME energies. This is usually the same energy too that will be borrowed for influence by spirit, and “communication” as well as viewing can occur with a clairvoyant medium.

There are energies above this also, as I mentioned early on, which will generally have an intuitive nature, and can thusly be used for interchanges of consciousness of Higher planes. Channelers will draw from this, and mediums such as I who will strive for the highest connections that time permits for any individual sitters" (one haveing a Reading.) However, in this real-world Physical Plane, writers, scientists mathameticians, philosphers, religious leaders and innovators of great works are also "inspired" through this energy by Higher consciousness that is in repoire with them. Great Writers, for example, go on writing after they die, but they publish, so-to-speak, through those physically living.

As your pursuit is objectification, you will not likely experience physically beyond the etheric; as only the etheric plane (a misnomer) is PART OF the physical plane. The blending of energy, as described, however, might allow some physical perception due to "inference." The haziness, and temperature (“warm,” as you say) will be relative to your development. You will be able to perceive even more translucent energy to the point of “clear” and you will achieve brilliance of green mostly, and blue. However, there may be moments when you can see the energy “templates” of things. Not all accomplish this. If you do, it will seem like you are seeing a golden “mesh” behind things animate and inanimate. It will look like a wire-frame construction of us. You can achieve seeing this in the very air about you, and the world you normally see in a physical frame of reference will seem as a an energy construct in great void of space.

I believe this covers the extent of your question.

Regards,
ChristianMyst

Christian,

I appreciate your taking the time and effort to write out such a long and thorough post. The rest of us here cannot see auras, so it is great that you can tell us what they are like.

QaZsE,

You said,

"At this time, I am merely "interpreting" them across mutliple systems and sources - until such time as this is complete, I cannot say for certain. Once more then, time will tell."

--> I am remided of my own search for a belif system. I tried a lot of differnet things — I was even a Baha'i for a while. Then, one day, BOOM, I found exactly what I was looking for. I am glad I did not compromise and "settle for" a belief system that was so-so. There are some things we should never compromise on, and I believe religion is one of them.

It sounds you are doing well on finding what works for you. Feel free to include us in your search as much as you want.

I have found your reply to be of some merit - a certain "something" or other pervades it; you speak true. Hence, I will not reserve further questions concerning these matters. You have no idea how difficult it is to find others whom share this sight (in that they are using it) - even more so to find one who knows more about it, themselves. In truth, it is something which ever reminds me of the way I walk - something "solid", indeed.

As I mentioned, my goal is not astral vision, for in revealing emotions/desires (and the like) it can easily confuse more than help; I avoid it, for the time being, for this reason: knowledge first. Of course, I am quite sure that if I was set upon it (astral vision), it would quite achievable.

Thus, I have limited myself, once more for the time being, to etheric sight for it is not so vagriated and thus can easily be studied and considered, both by oneself, and in unison with others (such as here and now); the "content" of etheric sight will not differ (and is thus possible to examine more scrupulously) than the vageries of the astral "waters". Hopefully, this makes sense?

With that, I'll begin a few more questions to you:

1. My "sight" developed quite naturally and accidentally about two-three summers ago as I had spent a large amount of time meditating in the parks. One of the things I pay alot of attention to (which I find quite grounding) is the senses - both the sense of "sight" and that of "hearing". One of the things I had noted was "light in the sky" so to speak. I'm not all sure how to explain it, but it is akin to little flashing and flittering lights...like diamonds in the sky, really. It was through observing these "lights" that I came to begin seeing fields of energy surrounding objects/peoples/animals. Perchance, what have you to say of these "lights"? I know of many theories (and atest to none), so...why not one more - yours?

2. At times, I am able to see (akin to the "lights in the sky") a sort of roiling body of light and dark, which in paying attention to it, it seems to begin pulsating and spiralling inward to a point. If I hold my focus upon it, the roiling masses become clearer, and the spiralling increase in speed, after which I lose sight of it...I'm not sure what to make of it and I have asked around years ago about it, but to no avail. I often see it when I look into the sky, or some other such monochromatic space...although, through experiment, I have ascertained that it is, indeed, an "inward" phenomena not "of" the eyes as I can (at times) manifest it with the eyes closed. What, pray tell, do you make of that?

3. As I mentioned above, I focus alot upon my senses in meditation, for I find it puts me in the moment - the here and now (a quiescent state). One such method is by listening to silence. I have found, in due time, that I am able to hear some interesting sounds - one is a neigh constant "ring", and the other (requiring much more focus and delieration) is a deep rumbling sound, akin to listening to a sea shell. It also feels quite "inward" - like turning your ears insideout. Another effect of this "inward" hearing is an incredible senstivity to all forms of sound, which become registered as vibrations on the skin. What do you make of these?

Enough, I suppose for now.

Now, to Nick...

The rest of us here cannot see auras, so it is great that you can tell us what they are like.

...And then there were two. Oh, if you do ever want to learn how to see the etheric, I can assure you it is quite possible: just ask if you'd like to learn to see them - I've got alot of good little exercises you can play with, which (of course) have been ascertained "objectively" to work; experience is the best teacher.

I am remided of my own search for a belif system. I tried a lot of differnet things — I was even a Baha'i for a while. Then, one day, BOOM, I found exactly what I was looking for. I am glad I did not compromise and "settle for" a belief system that was so-so. There are some things we should never compromise on, and I believe religion is one of them.

It sounds you are doing well on finding what works for you. Feel free to include us in your search as much as you want.

Truth be told, I am not seeking a system of belief, but rather I am working up the most viable "hypothesis" - this requires systematic study of many systems of thought. In truth, I know what I find to be the "best" thus far - not that I "believe" it, but rather that it is the most likely. Does this make sense? I am not looking for faith, but for reason. This is one of the reasons I hold (at the very least) the older Theosophical workings in high regard. Half the work is done in reading Blavatsky, you see because this is precisely what she was doing - following the gold thread, so to speak...I get to pick up where she left off. So much to study and consider...but, as I say, I wouldn't have it any other way. Elsewise, I'd be a poor teacher, indeed!

As per including the members here, and what they hold - I most certainly will, as you might already be able to tell. Hopefully, I can be of some service, in due time, to all of you as well.

With that said...

QaZsE

1

QaZsE,

As I find I have some time in my schedule tonight, not sure where the break came from, LOL, so I will attempt a response. You touch many points, so I may respond in successive posts.

Firstly,

LOL.  I will presume by “some,”  you mean “much.”  I indeed speak truly and with supplemental fact as well, even to scientific standards.  I set an extremely high standard for myself.  I share what I know from “experience,” not concept or theory, although I may indeed set out to prove or disprove them. What I offer you and the readership represents a set of facts I have proven literally thousands of times, with confirmation from human participants in equally large numbers. 

I attempt to present it in a way that any individual can take up the task and prove the intrinsic principles for themselves.  Few in Theosophy have set out to prove so vigorously the reality that [we are indeed energy,] and that it can be seen, felt and experienced at many levels, which therefore provides the inroads to proving other “life” and consciousness. 

Today we focus on the aetheric, your current interest.  It is a good goal of yours, and approach, as you will have demonstrable “experience” of another side of life, and support for concepts of eternity and Planes of Consciousness. 

As Nick has addended, few here, (and few elsewhere to be true) have enjoyed real-world proofs.  Some, of the more Hindu mindset, some Buddhism, and certain orthodox schools of Theosophy would say such endeavors interfere with one’s spiritual development; you should be aware of this.  Reasonableness will be your guide.  Regardless, you pursue, as I already have, the extent of knowledge reasonably available to us, and explore as driven by our intelligent proclivities under “controlled” circumstances until we can establish a safe, factual, reproducible, demonstrable frame of reference that are justifiable in most philosophies too, if one cares to discern all they espouse.

I find this mode of ours sane and safe, reasonable and expansive; ergo, I encourage you on your own safe approach and journey into the exploration of existence itself.  I caution you to be aware of all the possibilities (within reason) as you can before any new endeavor.

Of course I do, LOL. I throw myself before fully-loaded raging busses every week. I am fully confident and prepared to show others the facts in ways they can prove these matters for themselves. Not all will succeed in the process because, as with any psychic undertaking, the mind as (well as the eye) will protect you from the truth, ironic as that sounds. The more intelligent as well as the more material will have difficulty because of the “mental” hurdle. The brain is actually brainwashed to not present what it sees. The eyes are another matter. They have been trained over the great ages to “focus,” something that has only great value in the current stage of man. In truth we have two forms of vision, and the explorer such as yourself has learned, or is learning, to see in other ways than 3 dimensionally. This separation of the rods and cones of the eyes, and an independent use of them as well as the currently combined use is the [training] we undertake. What’s marvelous, as you’ve discovered, as that even in this physical Plane, due to the blending of energies, we can SEE and experiment objectively other energies and consciousness. Although limited when confined to the aetheric, it still represents a giant 100’ wall that comes tumbling down in our understanding of the construct of man and his Universe.

Great! And avoid it you should because one needs to be prepared. Nonetheless, my inclusion was that some experience will be unavoidable due to blending of energy. My commentary was to help you ascertain when you have exceeded the scope of your experiments. It is a wonderful asset to know the confines (really) of your research area, so that you have a safe and manageable scope to work with. Few have this benefit, so I offer it as a guidepost.

I set out on my exploration with the deliberate intent to avoid the Astral altogether, as well. In so doing I have achieved much Higher levels, but have as a result safely and knowledgeably acquired the learned passage into the Astral. I firmly believe, and thusly concur with your intent, that one should not make the Astral a pursuit. So very much of early spiritual, spiritist, metaphysical, psychic, mediumship and even early Theosophy drew inordinately from this realm, when in truth, it is the one they want to bypass.

Regardless this warning, if you pursue a higher goal, then the hierarchy of things come into play and you will experience Astral vision. Therefore, your knowledge should be sufficient enough to allow you to (filter) or otherwise shield/control your exposure to your liking and preferences. You will find the New Age concept of the “power of intent” is something your mind responds to well, and such is in truth your controlling mechanism into the “experience” (whatever form it may take) into other realms.

Of course it makes sense, I have stated as much earlier.  When you work with the aetheric, you are in truth still working in the Physical Plane.  Science and other relevant real-world/physical laws will be applicable to full, or reasonable extent.  To remind, it is only the mind, through its programming (peer and  parental hypnosis, and evolutionary states), and the eyes, due to our current real-world requirement for “focusing” that are the barriers.  THAT IS ALL.  Take it to the bank.  Both are very easily overcome.

You will find in time something I can as well share with you now.  Considering your objective work of the aetheric as it pertains to man, there are TWO (2) key areas you can achieve the fastest and most dramatic results from; the feet (mostly) and then the hands (secondly) although the arms are a logical extension.  The third, should you find such of interest will be about the head/or the crook of the neck on either side.  Given this, to support the odds I propose a test for you: 

Take a comfortable salt bath.  Lean back and stretch out your legs.  Separate them so the left and right foot are not touching.  Now, focus on a spot at the level of the top of your toes, but between the two feet.  This (method) is simply a trick to help one overcome the need to directly focus. 

If you can gaze for 1 or 2 minutes with out moving your line of sight, the true and actual breadth of your vision (the necessary 2D vision) will begin to show you a ætheric green glow around BOTH of your feet.  Of course, you will tend to move your gaze to the feet themselves and return to 3D vision, but you can retry the experiment. (Eventually, when your mind accepts your 2D ability, it will not matter where you look.)  If you maintain the wider 2D gaze, then you will see the energy around the legs, and indeed, in any other object that happens to be nearby (shampoo bottle, for instance.)  Subsequently there are a number of tests you can perform to prove the energy is ætheric, as I say, through its manipulation.

There are similar techniques to overcome the default focusing of the eye to view the hands, arms, head, neck et’al, which force the mind to allow you to see what (IT ALREADY SEES), meaning, TO LET YOU KNOW what you actually see.

I think I have addressed your points thus far in the header of your last message:
Christian

QaZsE, (PS: Is this pernounced, Qwazy?)

1) Meditation is not necessary. You are viewing the Physical Plane, of which the ætheric are but some of its sub-planes.
2) It “opened” because you essentially gave your (MIND) permission, so-to-speak.
3) Your (PAYING ATTENTION) was and is the “KEY.”
PERCHANCE? LOL. Do not think yourself abnormal, or your experiences. Expect that your experiences are verifiable, as indeed they all shall be. This this end, my answer to your point 4):
4) POSSIBILITY ONE: The flashing lights are your minds current perception of Nature Spirits (of the ætheric sub-planes.) Theosophy itself will speak to his, although in rather limited arenas. The New Age movement speaks of it often as Fairies, although “Faeries,” would be the more correct term as it has broader meaning to include all types. They will often include “spirit” and “angels” as the cause, but neither are likely but for different, yet related reasons. Neither manifest in the physical. Yet, both can be (perceived) if psychic senses are used, since such would provide access to other realms of experience.
LOL, yes I have seen them, but now see their actual or more true forms.

HOWEVER, my friend, there is another possibility that is very likely in your instance. And, this is something I teach people to accomplish as it has many potential benefits. It would necessitate, though, that that “light in the sky” (and there could be many) be definitely tiny, with a less light center that is infinitesimal. Thus, it would be like an extremely small circle of light. In this regard, it would be the “Hamsa, a silvery spark in the brain as it has been expressed in Theosophy. This pertains to “the Soul,” but not literally. Soul is un-confidently defined term in Theosophy so think of it as the Greek psuché. It is the halo around the soul. Although this has an obvious “spirit” inference, it tends most often to be YOUR Higher Self. This is how it is perceived outside of meditation. Given your meditation exercises of late, and what resulted, I think you had achieved connection with your Higher Self, … also a concept permitted in orthodox Theosophy as well as (New) Theosophy.

I think I have responded herein fully to your question 1. Such validation should serve to reinforce your accomplishment of something "real," and not imagined or surmised. Continue your self-study, you are achieving genuine results (although, remain aware that this is not a course that some orthodox Theosphists will take favor with, ...ironic, since it was the course orininally pursued by its founders.)

PS: If this occured as much as 3 years ago, then your progress is slow. You are capable of learning the meaning of your experiences faster, I should think, and such will bring you more directly in line with the belief system you should pursue. Granted, very very few will know the answer I have provided. Yet, hold the intent, and put you questions out there wherever you may be, and you will find those that can give you the responses you requre. "Action" is a necessity of learning, as well as of "life" and "magic."


Christian

This is simply your mind’s very-controlled means of relating to you senses of the Astral. As this is an area you do not want to broach, such you have stated, …hence your mind’s SAFE presentation. As a result, you have no clear understanding (your mind is “testing” you to see if you want to go further.) Noteworthy though, is an established concept that (something) from that realm might be seeking your involvement – some might convey this as Guides, or Teachers, others concerned spirit such as passed relatives and friends, others still, and instinctive “calling.” As well, it could be “influences” from this emotional desire realm, a very real possibility which can take the form of actual spirit, or more likely giving the cloud description you described, “thought forms.” Thought forms are created by the mind and have only temporary existence and consciousness which is imbued through the conscious or unconscious intent of some (living) human. The experience of this occurs in very early childhood, then much more intensely at puberty. Later in adult hood it becomes prevalent in relation to the affects you have on other humans who have cause to have “thoughts” towards you. You will need to look into this concept which is well expressed in many theosophical publications. Stick to the proclaimed theosophists, though, and not so much to the authors who have left theosophy, as this latter exaggerates the fear factors.

If the occurrences have attendant symptoms of discomfort around the eyes, ears, mouth or throat, … usually in the form of sinus conditions, head ache around the eyes, swelling in these area, ear aches, ringing in the ears, or throat conditions, … there is support that your mind is (BLOCKING) what has been called good influences from your spirit guides and teachers. The blocking relates to a pressure resulting from their insistence and your resistance.

Regardless whichever of the above applies, this experience is not of the ætheric, nor of Higher realms. It is the Astral, or to some lesser extent, the extreme lower Mental Plane activity.

“Pray tell” accomplished to the extent requested I believe.
Christian

I am concerned with the “focusing” aspect. If you accomplish the intended “listening” by doing NOTHING, you will have a more meaningful experience. In other words, stop any intended mental activity (focusing).

You are connecting to the Astral subtly, once again. As this is not your desire, you must have a prelude whereby your intent is clearly established on a Higher realm. Theosophy, Hinduism, Buddhism and all Eastern schools I should imagine will dictate this preparatory stage to meditation.

You should be aware that it is very natural for a human to drift easily towards the Astral. We ARE entities of desire basically, and in our current state. Any sensitivity to water; for example, are you a water sign, do you tend to live by water or drawn to it, or and extremely compassionate or loving constitution, or over development of the Heart Chakra will support an natural draw to the Astral realm. If you are a psychic, which you are not, such might be desirable. Women are more comfortable with this state too. Men will find they have some aversion as they are more Mental Plane oriented (these planes flip-flop in orientation male to female to male, etc.) and should dwell on something “lofty.” Perhaps bliss, the Higher Self, the Absolute/God, and Archangel or some Master. The astral energy that you draw will switch to the finest grades and begin drawing more from the Mental Plane energies instead.
I usually ask people in the situation you describe to define how the “feel” at that moment (in essence, to recall their psychic response, which will be most meaningful.) It is advantageous to your control process to know if this is a “good” connection or a detrimental one you are undergoing. Of course, you will want to mentally establish dissuasion towards the unpleasant ones, … your mind is a protective and obedient tool, .. it will through its “unconscious” mechanism block out that which you do not want, and allow that which you do. It will not PRESUME you want anything, though (in most cases.)

I suspect I have responded fully to your query 3.

Be well,
Christian

Nick,

Christian,

Your welcome. I trust the treatis will serve the limited audience whose interests pertain to the "energies" of consciousness. :lol: I understand the responses are long, but I was trying to fill in blanks I perceived from the poster. I should have much less to say on other, more germaine theosphical/Buddhist, topics.

Understood too, such matters are not favored such by all members. B) Nods to them, ...I'll contain my exploration of non-mainstream matters. This response was a happenstance as I found myself in an idle state last night. Not a normal occurance. I will likely not pursue the topic beyond Q's question(s) nor interupt the normal harmonious focus on orthodox theosophical issues.

Christian

From the bookworm gallery: "Elementary" is the word used in original theosophy for "devolved human consciousness", not "elemental." The latter refers to not fully human lives.

I think the bookworms eat through the controversial parts, :lol: As I indicated, Theosophy does have confusion and controdictory reports on the subject. At the risk of boring you ad nausium, I'll expain further:

Although well received news, Nicholas, apparently such sensible restriction or narrowing of the definition of Elemental, which is not comprised of { 1) Elemental, 2) Elementaries and 3)Nature Spirits} collectively, did not seem to reach the whole of Theosophy, even though wisely corrected. As pertains to "early Theosphy" I have always considered H.S.Olcott as the source of the term(s). Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he established this as a fact, as well as the error made:
TO WIT,

Olcott indicates the "concept" to have come through his 4-year discussions of such matters between Mediums Stainton Moseyn (Moses), H.P.B, early theosphist Charles Massey whom he was very fond of, and himself. You can take note in the following extraction in his own "Terms" section how he indicates a combination of Elemental, Elementaries as well as Nature Spirits: (Italics and Bolding, mine.)
H.S.Olcott, in his "TERMS" section of his Diary.

IN SPIRITUALISM, page 71
Her instructions to me about the existence of the elemental spirit world went on—as before noted—apace with our private intercourse with (alleged) rapping spirits, and so, long before I had adopted the Eastern theory of Pisachas and Bhûtas, called by us elementaries ... I had come to distinguish the two unlike classes of phenomena-working agents, the sub-human nature-spirits and the earth-bound, ex-human elementaries.

Actually, Olcott tried to implement a correction to ISIS before the confusion was made a Theosphical standard.

Above Elemental spirit and elementaries are mixed. The following definitions are also taken from a theosophical dictionary. In this one, the fading shade of humans is what is referred to as Elementaries.

Olcott says he has adopted the Eastern theory of Pisachas, yet, the archaic Hindu had a different view:

To me, the Bhûtas, which Olcott calls Elementaries is also the diminished consciousness of Blavatsky's explanation, which is also the Elementals or prior definition:

However, and this may have lead to some of the Theosophical connections of Elementals and Elementaries to the Elements, viz Nature Spirits. This from another Theosphical terms source:

And as well, the following:

I don't take difference to this essence of elements inference, but this would not translate to Nature Spirits or People, who would be rather, some several evolutionary cycles higher. In this later regard, I think C.W.Leadbeater illustrates it precisely in his diagram of the parallel streams of life.
That Theosophy groups Nature Spirits in with Elementals and Elementaries is far to numerous, and thus needs no great substantiation here. But, as some minor affirmation...

In the introduction to "Isis Unveiled", we find the following definition of Elemental Spirits: —

... and an "Elementaries" classification of Nature Spirits, also in Isis Unveiled:

In 1877 Blavatsky offers admission for causing some of the confusion (see Religio-Philosophical Journal, Chicago, Vol. XXIII, Nov. 17, 1877):

And on, and on.
I think my issue is substantiated, the terms are confused and confusing as they exist in Theosophy. Thus, as one who works with Nature Spirits, I find myself frequently in need to take difference with written Theosophical definitions as they have as well cropped up in the New Age definitions, incorrectly.

Regards,
Christian

Christian,

Glad to see you back!

It was because of this confusion, predating the TS as you mention, that WQ Judge (not Olcott, if I recall rightly) suggested to HPB that she pick one - elementaries = depraved human stuff & let the other - elementals = non-human lives.

Here is the online big Theosophical Glossary on Elementaries; another entry is on Elementals.

Elementaries

Thank you, polite of you to mention it.

Great, re the response. I'll study them both. Was surprised about Judge, as Olcott writes that he thinks he was the first one to coin the phrase. I will enjoy getting to the bottom of the ID. It is something that comes up in lectures.

Christian

Some F/U: Olcott's references are all going to be 1878 and prior (prior to the first journey to India, in other words.) From what I've seen so far, Judge played a judiciary role at that time, but have not noted much yet about his involvement in such weighty matters during this period.

Have not had time to get the original source, but here is Katinka, from her site:

Ah,finally...the computer is working again - and (it would seem) just in time for me to reply.

First and foremost then let me thank you for all your time and effort (thus far even), as I had set you to quite a task, answering my "barrage" of questions. Grateful, indeed.

Now, with the nicities dispensed, it's time to get back to work here.

...Or perhaps I mean exactly what I say. However, do not be so disheartened - I most certainly do not think little of you, if this is your worry; I have a certain "intuition" about "some" things...and the statement which concerns you here is more the compliment to you. Understand...I, as of yet, hardly know you and you, I - would it be prudent to use the term "much" as opposed to "some" given the little we've shared? I would wonder then if the term "some" then is not more realistic, or would you disagree?

Be glad.

Hmm...this is not surprising in the least. Honestly, to some degree, I must say I concur: these endeavors "can" interfere with one's spiritual development...no arguement there; the Great Work is always to be first and foremost. However, on the other hand, are we to "ignore" the fruits of our labors; to so unceremoniously discard the new-found tools open to our rightful use in the service of others? Should we truly think such things a hinderance...how our eyes might see just a little bit farther? Nonsense. It is perhaps one thing if your sole intent is bent upon developing such capacities - it is quite another when they come concurrently with your own spiritual progress. Nevertheless, I understand well what they mean - many have fallen to the way-side because of being overly concerned with cultivating/acquiring such capacities; history shows us this.

Thus, your manner is quite different from mine - I am quite selective about just whom I speak with concerning such matters. I have had to learn how to read people quite well (out of necessity)...to find out just how "deep their river runs", so to speak...whether they have any inkling at all concerning the hidden and the esoteric, and (second of all) whether or not they would make a suitable audience for such a discourse. I will tend to prod them with questions, testing their sensitivities - their philosophies, daily concerns...whatnot. In short, I have learned the law of silence in esoteric matters...and a hard-won lesson it was, I might add. In general, I am the anti-thesis of you: I speak not, unless I am quite certain it will not fall upon "deaf ears", so to speak.

Of course, when I do speak...I can go on for hours (I'm sure you can tell that, already).

Indeed.

Once more, I reply: indeed; this is as I have learned. The astral is (largely) a place of illusions and glamours; false knowledge. One needs to first learn how to seperate the "wheat from the chaff", so to speak - no easy task. As I had mentioned prior, using dreams as an example...what precisely is "ment"/not in a dream? Until we can tell these things, for certain, via a certain causal intuition perhaps, we have quite little hope of finding truth in the mire of illusion, or would you disagree?

As well, I am aware that it (astral vision) cannot be avoided forever, true enough, and that these energies are not exactly seperate (and thus blending) - rather I'd wish to be more prepared for it, in it's time; to have better grasp of it, as opposed to the other way around - if you get my drift? I'm sure you do.

1. Feet (done)
2. Hands (done)
3. Arms (done)
4. Head/Neck (done)

...Understand, I can already see the etheric - it's not difficult. I am quite capable of it (be sure), for it is something I can do at will, so to speak; I can "pay attention" or not as I want - albeit, I find it most likely to be only rudimentary etheric sight (49:3-4 perhaps). Once more, I make no incredulous claims - there is little I can discern from it, as of yet...even though I can certainly discern "something", for certain - fact of the etheric (49:3-4).

Beyond that (just as a note), I'm still seeing it as an indigo blue as opposed to green...however, I suppose the color (at least for the moment) is of minor import, or would you disagree?

In truth, I am not sure how one "should" sound it, for the term "qazse" is, itself, is more a play on the word "cause" then a name.

I do not - perhaps my choice of words confuses you; I will need to take that into consideration then.

Beyond that, concerning the "lights in the sky" - honestly, I'm not all too sure what to think...understand, there are a great multiplicity of theories and speculations regarding these "lights", but I seek not those things (theories/speculations); they tell me nothing substantial - especially so when most people devising the said theories/speculations do not actually have such experiences. You, however, prove to be a different matter in your merit - it is obvious we share "something", and as such, I shall (at the very least) entertain your theories - for they are theories in that we are not completely sure, are we?

Now...back to the "lights": I would describe "them" as being tiny (indeed), but akin to sparks from a flame which flit about, appearing and disappearing quite rapidly. Indeed, it is quite a sight to behold, for "my sky" (quite literally) sparkles and shines. A few points more, perhaps, might help:

1. They are everywhere, and not just in the sky - rather, it is easier to see them against monochromatic backdrops.
2. There are so many that the sky itself seems to sparkle, as does a diamond.
3. They seem to interact with the etheric envelopes of objects/peoples/animals, flitting in and out of their influence.
4. They are not much bigger than the head of a pin (if that) - it is rather their radiance I notice...their flashing and flittering about.
5. I need to be looking in the etheric to see them...it requires the same manner of looking, if you get my understanding - if I can see these "lights", I can also see the etheric (49:3-4).

Honestly, I'm not all too sure that the orthodox varieties would have much a problem with what I do for, in truth, I do not work to develop these capabilities - or at least, not nearly as much as some would, I imagine. I am, indeed, glad for what I have, but I will not put all of my effort into increasing it's effectiveness just yet for the Great Work beckons, as you know.

Let us, here and now, remember that I did not "try" to achieve etheric sight, but rather it happened; there was no (conscious) intent, understand. Of course, in being "given" a tool (understand that in "given", I am not saying it was a gift, per se), I will not shy away from considering it and what it has to offer, especially so if it can help me be of service to others; there are no coincidences - I'm sure you would concur with that thought.

I'm not all too sure what you mean by my "progress"? Progress in what, exactly? Knowing what those "lights" are, do you mean? Or, in developing etheric sight?

1. I do not "know" what those "lights" are...nor will I pretend to - that would be foolish.
2. As per etheric sight...I "know" little of "it", and have only just begun researching "it". I "know" not how it came to pass for myself, nor how it can be grown and, thus, my progress is (indeed) quite slow; up till late, I have only had myself as a reference, understand...no one else. I am "guilty as charged", if this is your meaning.

Understand, I am in no race here - the "fastest" is not always the best (and I'm sure you know this). Let us remember then the "tortoise" and the "hare"; I'd prefer to be sure of foot and (consequently) slow, than to attempt a bolt to the finish, only to trip and fall (hard) because my shoes were untied. As well, in the fact that my greater service is teaching (sharing), I like to be, at the very least, quite certain about what I am speaking on...and when it comes to those "lights" or my rather rudimentary etheric sight (49:3-4)...let's be honest...it's not quite there yet, and I'll not pretend it is.

Does this make sense?

Once more, I do not seek a system of "beliefs"; let us remember: there is no religion higher than the truth, as it has been said. Honestly (I must remark), this thought is a rather whimsical pun...for "truth" is no "religion", is it - it is no system of "beliefs". This statement (there is no religion higher than the truth) is rather only "half-lit", so to speak. Think on it, if you have time.

Indeed.

Oh, I am quite aware of the nature of thought-forms (or rather "elementals" - another word used to describe them in some instances - programmable "robot" matter, which is in the process of involving). I came across thought-forms years ago...in fact, I (somewhat intuitively) know how to make/charge/and put to use these thought-forms...and the further I grow, the easier it becomes (I might add). Of course, I hardly use these deliberate methods for I find one has to be just so incredibly careful - there are very real results that can come of it, and not all of them are good - this from experience; ones "intent" becomes neigh paramount.

I would not be so quick to judge.

No symptoms.

I had assumed it was not the etheric...especially so that it is not a phenomena related directly to the eyes; it is in the head - this I have ascertained.

As per the listening:

Perhaps this is so - how would one tell, for certain? The "ringing" I have described (which I can always hear, no matter what) or, perhaps, the deep rumbling sound? I would like this elucidated, if at all possible - what tips you off, so to speak; what makes you sure it is the astral?

Indeed; some of these things do describe me - perhaps therein lies (at the very least) a partial answer.

1. I am a water sign (cancer, to be specific)
2. A river runs through this city I live in
3. Loving and Compassionate - I'd like to say this is so, but it would be incorrect for me to give audience to my own self, in these regards.
4. As per the Heart Chakra...honestly, I could not say for certain; of this, I "know" not.

...In the hearing? Honestly, I don't "feel" much in it at all - I just listen (ie: "pay attention").

The ringing is always active, behind all strictly physical sounds...but the deep rumbling is not - that has to be achieved with more attentive listening.

It seems, with these last thoughts, that this shall wrap up my reply.

The ball is in your court now.

QaZsE

1

Glad I could be of some help.

Adieu.
ChristianMyst

QaZsE wrote:

Now...back to the "lights": I would describe "them" as being tiny (indeed), but
akin to sparks from a flame which flit about, appearing and disappearing quite
rapidly. Indeed, it is quite a sight to behold, for "my sky" (quite literally)
sparkles and shines. A few points more, perhaps, might help:

1. They are everywhere, and not just in the sky - rather, it is easier to see
them against monochromatic backdrops.
2. There are so many that the sky itself seems to sparkle, as does a diamond.
3. They seem to interact with the etheric envelopes of objects/peoples/animals,
flitting in and out of their influence.
4. They are not much bigger than the head of a pin (if that) - it is rather their
radiance I notice...their flashing and flittering about.
5. I need to be looking in the etheric to see them...it requires the same manner
of looking, if you get my understanding - if I can see these "lights", I can also
see the etheric (49:3-4).

and:
At times, I am able to see (akin to the "lights in the sky") a sort of roiling
body of light and dark, which in paying attention to it, it seems to begin
pulsating and spiralling inward to a point. If I hold my focus upon it, the
roiling masses become clearer, and the spiralling increase in speed, after which
I lose sight of it...I'm not sure what to make of it and I have asked around
years ago about it, but to no avail. I often see it when I look into the sky, or
some other such monochromatic space...
====

Greetings. I'd just like to add that these two things that you've described I
also experience them just like you've described. I am glad that you were able to put it into words.

The lights in the sky I began seeing AFTER my spiritual emergence experience
(the classic kundalini type experience). That experience lasted 4 days starting
the first day of Winter (solstice) back in 1999, after which I could see the
lights in the sky. Before my awakening I was agnostic; almost immediatley afterward I came upon Theosophy with great resonance. I've often wondered about the lights but have never quite settled on what it is. I might add that I do NOT see the etheric fields around things as you and Christian describe, and I've never put much effort at it either.

The second thing you describe, the "roiling body of light and dark" (moving cloud vortex like thing), I only just started "seeing" in the last 6 months or so. I've never spoken about it to anyone (nor have I discussed the lights in the sky) but I've only casually wondered about it. I'll say I've experienced this about 5 or 6 times in the last 7 months, and it's usually late in my day after a 14 hour shift of driving (I am an over-the-road team truck driver), and I'll be in the passenger
seat staring at the sky while my father drives. I never meditate on it, and I
usually just retire to my bunk in the sleeper soon after begining to 'see' it.

I recently read something about how Blavatsky would "see" in what the passage
referenced suggests is the "Astral Light." It reminded me of what we see. One day during the time Blavatsky was writing the S.D. her assistant came upon Blavatsky and a mess of paper strewn about her and her desk. She explained to the assistant that the Masters kept rejecting the way she wrote a certain passage. The assistant asked how it could be that she could make such mistakes as this, and H.P.B. explained it like this:

She said, "Well, you see, what I do is this. I make what I can only describe as a sort of vacuum in the air before me, and fix my sight and my will upon it, and soon scene after scene passes before me like the successive pictures of a diorama, or, if I need a reference or information from some book, I fix my mind intently, and the astral counterpart of the book appears, and from it I take what I need. The more perfectly my mind is freed from distractions and mortifications, the more energy and intentness it possesses, the more easily I can do this; but today, after all the vexations I have undergone in consequence of the letter from X., I could not concentrate properly, and each time I tried I got the quotations all wrong. Master says it is right now, so let us go in and have some tea."*

"I make what I can only describe as a sort of vacuum in the air before me" -- this is the part that grabbed my attention.

Anyhow, I thought I'd share my experiences to give you some more reference or ideas about it. I might add that I began reading Laurency around the time that I began seeing the roiling body of light and dark (7 months ago). I noticed your reference to hylozoics.

Oh and one last thing. Sometimes I see what I describe as a firefly; a slow and careful firefly. It appears like a flame that you would see from a lit match but it's horizontal, and it comes in usually in the periphery of my vision, moves around for anywhere from 3 – 15 seconds, then goes away. I've had an eye doctor try to explain this to me, but It's always quite shocking when I see it. Sometimes I'll see it many times within a period of a week or so, then I go months without seeing it. On occasion I've seen 2 or 3 of them at the same time. The tend to 'streak' through my vision. I tend to think it's of the eye, cause it moves to wherever I look. That is that it follows my eyes wherever they go.

That is all. I hope this helps. If you ask me a question and I do not respond right away, it's because I get Internet access only sporadicly.

-Raul

* http://www.katinkahesselink.net/his/hpb_wach.htm

Good, good - yet another to talk with...I was getting lonely for a moment there; it seemed the ship had been "abandoned", so to speak. Glad to have you "on board" (in keeping with my metaphor).

...You might want to try (at least for curiousities sake) - I'd be willing to bet you could see the etheric (49:4) quite easily, especially since you already see the "lights in the sky" phenomena. It'll most likely look like a hazy glow/refraction of light at first (no color, rather transparent...more akin to a film), if you can see it.

That is, indeed, quite interesting; I am glad you brought it forward for consideration. I had been wondering about this vortex phenomena for years now, actually - no one seemed to have an answer for it. In doing some of my own tests I did ascertain it to be an "inward" phenomena (and thus, it [at the very least] pertaining to astral vision does not come as much of a surprise to me) - it can be "seen" with the eyes closed...it's just easier with the eyes open upon a monochromatic backdrop, such as the sky.

Laurency's work I hold in high esteem - no "dogma" mind you, but high esteem, yes. I also find Laurency's work a good "primer" for the reading of A.A.B/D.Ks work - both are incredibly meticulous in design. Hylozoics, indeed.

The periphery you say? I see soo much in the periphery - and yes, I've seen this too. Unfortunately, I cannot be of much help here, either...besides offering a sense of understanding; of sympathy for I share these things with you - including the "not knowing". Also (while we are on the topic of peripheries), have you seen the sort of "cloudy, vaporous" things go slipping past in the periphery - often on a "gust of wind"? More and more I see this sort of phenomena when I'm out on my walks.

QaZsE

1

QaZsE, I'm glad my post was relevant.

Concerning the "cloudy vapors", I believe I've seen something similar to what you describe, but not in a long time. I would try to describe it as a concentrated shadow, around the size of a golf ball, sometimes smaller if it gets close to me, and they will wisp by at speed comparable to the speed of a dragonfly. It would wisp as if blown by a moderate wind. Is this familiar? I used to see this quite often. I used to guess that it was a nature spirit, but I would not contemplate it for long. Sometimes, while sitting and studying at the computer I would see similar objects fleet about my periphery. These would sometimes come into my periphery and sort of pulsate for a bout half a second before fleeting away. But none of this has been the case in the last few years. I can remember seeing this type of thing mostly indoors. But I didn't spend much time outside in those days. I remember on one occasion one of these things flying straight through the windshield of a moving car that I was sitting in the back seat of. It promptly left through the rear window after passing between a friend and I. It was as if we drove through it or some thing. I remember asking my friends “did you see that?” and none of them saw anything. Another time I was sitting in my living room and this 'shadow ball' came through a small window that's on my back door. It flew right in and then passed between myself and my T.V. And then it disappeared into the other room. I remember this one definitely appeared as if coming on a “gust of wind” This phenomenon that I am describing I saw shortly after my spiritual awakening experience and up until a few years ago. I had not thought of it when posting last night.

I had determined that this phenomenon was definitely not “floaters”, the visual phenomenon associated with the vitreous layer of the eye. I could distinguish the two, but they are somewhat similar.

I hope that this post is relevant.

-Raul

-- Just a bit of an update, QaZse... after posting this afternoon I went about some errands. On my way home just now (and this time it's early in my day) while driving my pickup truck I experienced the vortex. I made note that it came upon me as I began thinking about my best friend and his possible stage of developement. The vortex only lasted about one minute and I haven't experienced it again today. Anyhow, best wishes.

No - the phenomena I have describe is:

1. Not a sphere.
2. Not tiny.
3. Not shadow-like.
4. Is never directly seen - at least not yet, anyways.

The "shape", generally speaking is difficult to determine really - it's rather amorphous, though it is, at times, somewhat spherical (perhaps) - how would you go about describing the shape of a "gust of wind" seen in the periphery, mind you? Of course...it's not tiny either, but rather is (at the very least) the size of a small child or larger. And (as listed above) it does not appear anything like a shadow, but more like a translucent figure - translucent in the "etheric" sense (as I had described above for you - a refracted light and hazy glow).

Of course.

I see - do you ever "intend" for it (the vortex), or is it always so uncontrolled?

QaZsE

1

No, I do not see things like this.

It is uncontrolled.

I more than likely will go back on the road tomorrow for about 2 months. I would like to begin attempting to control things, namely the vortex. The 'lights' are always there but I can focus on them to see if I can bring it out more (more brilliant). Also, if you would be so kind as to offer an exercise or two I would like to try to develope the etheric sight. I also have some exercises saved away that I just came upon last week. Then, if things go well I can report any effects.

-Raul

Hello and welcome to the forum. I have been taught in the astral light these past five years. I do not think too much about it one way or another, it just natural to me.

Hi group. Just an update for anyone who followed this thread. A couple of us wrote about these "lights in the sky" that dart about. I found the scientific answer, which is that what we are seeing is something called "blue field entoptic phenomenon".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entoptic_phenomenon

The funny thing is that while at this wiki site the article makes the following reference:

"During the 1920s, some theosophists, unaware of the physical explanation, maintained that the moving spots seen in the blue field entoptic phenomenon were "vitality globules" related to the concept of prana in yoga.[2]"

This was first written by Leadbeater or A. Powell (or Swami Panchadasi?). My own guessings were leading me to believe that the lights were part of our own etheric body, perhaps the etheric counterpart of the eye. Qazse, if you read this, the vortex I guessed was our perception of some activity of one or more chakra. The last time I experienced the vortex, I was sitting on the beach, just after a swim in the Atlantic, and reading VOS. The vortex was so strong I could hardly read the text. No other sensations.

Best wishes to everyone.
-Raul