Insidious Creatures Of The Imaginal Realm
On one of the comments to the “Where Do Aliens Come From?” post “Gavilan” put up a link to an online book by psychedelic researcher Jim DeKorne which reconfirmed a lot of my suspicions about this alien/ “other” dichotomy/ connection.
What DeKorne finds in the available psychedelic literature is that not only do non-human entities appear to depend on us to bring them “into existence,” but that their personalities and motives change with the dominant culture of the precipient. Perhaps the fact of our accelerating and often paranoia-inducing development is mirrored in our experiences with the “other.” This is not a new idea by any means, but it confirms what many in who are interested in the imaginal realm have suspected for years.
It is also interesting to note that some of these entities will adopt a messianic attitude after informing the human percipient of some future event that appears to come true. This is quite similar to one of the methods used by government agents and disinformationalists to gain the trust of a “target” before loading him/ her up with useless garbage designed to lead them off the path that bothers the powers that be.
For some strange reason, I have a hard time believing that these “aliens” (or whatever they are) are all liars, bent on misleading us. It may be my attitude of hope and general optimism, which admittedly may blind me to the darker forms of human/ non-human interaction, although I admit it’s there. Perhaps the other realm is filled with things not unlike ourselves: some good, others not so. This brings to mind the old “war in heaven” idea, which seems to make sense if you allow yourself some uninhibited theorizing.
Of course, this sort of stuff is not “provebale” to the vast majority of the population, but it may hold one of the keys to unraveling the nearly undeniable existence of unseen realms populated with knots of existence possessed of some kind of self-awareness.
One quote that DeKorne pulls from the late psychedelic luminary Terence McKenna distills this all in one sentence: “It is no great accomplishment to hear a voice in the head. The accomplishment is to make sure that it is telling you the truth.”
But how do you know what the “truth” is?
This entry was posted
on Sunday, November 4th, 2007 at 10:26 pm and is filed under Alien Encounters, Books, Occult/Esoteric, Psychic Phenomena, UFOlogy, Wake Up Down There. You can follow responses via RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is not allowed.
del.icio.us Digg Reddit BlinkList Google Ma.gnolia StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Help
- Related News Stories:
- Whitley Strieber And His Aliens Deconstructed »
- Aliens And Drugs »
- Online Interview With Richard Strassman »
- Aliens On The Wall »
- See? There Isn’t Any Evidence! »
- Faceless ET »
- Alien Pyramids? Nah… »
- Mac Rethinks ET »
- Nick’s Pic Of The Day »
- Screening the Aliens »
|
Nov 04 2007 
November 5th, 2007 at 2:19 am
Greg:
It is regrettable that the subject of psychedelic (“mind-manifesting”) drugs is even more taboo than the UFO koan you deal with on this website.
As you know, there is a connection between the two: it is strongly arguable that UFOs are dimensionally linked to human awareness [cf. Vallee and Keel] because they (and the “aliens” associated with them) can be evoked via mind-manifesting substances such as DMT (a normal human metabolite). Many readers are probably familiar with Strassman’s DMT studies and their astounding resonance with John Mack’s descriptions of the alien abduction syndrome. For two university-affiliated medical doctors to derive nearly identical data from totally unconnected research suggests that the UFO koan might relate to dimensional/ quantum physics phenomena as hypothesized by Vallee:
“[M]odern physical theory opens up a much wider, richer spectrum of hypotheses for objects that might blink in and out of perception, impact the consciousness of witnesses, accelerate without creating sonic booms, change shape and merge with one another dynamically. Concepts of higher dimensionality, once on the fringes of physics, have entered the mainstream of science. Given what we know about the universe today, it is irrational to assume it can be described with only three dimensions of space and one dimension of time.”
Jacques Vallee, from foreword to: UFOs and the National Security State
Other offerings on the website referenced in my earlier post explore these dimensional connections. Here are two more:
http://www.clcpress.com/dekorne/Chapter%20IV.htm
http://www.clcpress.com/dekorne%20tower/chaptertwo.htm
Gavilan
November 5th, 2007 at 5:43 am
I am unquestionably reminded of the DMT entities Daniel Pinchbeck speaks of in “Breaking Open the Head”. The description he utilizes in that said entities appeared to use his consciousness, his awareness of them as a means to look upon themselves holds some relevance here I think, albeit the “insight” if you will was gained through different means. Talk about a cosmic/psychical symbiosis huh? Perhaps all their aim simply is, is to keep us guessing and perpetually aware so that they can exist in some form. Of course this train of thought then invites inquiries into tulpas, and if you want to go the Jungian route, archetypes.
That wouldn’t even be the darkest side of things in my opinion. To quote Crowley on the matter of extrasensory, or extraterrestrial entities, “We are not ready to understand.” It’s been something of a small phobia of mine sitting on the back burner for some time now, but the possibility that we are simply not ever meant to understand is a bit frightening. It could be the nature and purpose of the phenomena, but I don’t like to spend too much time thinking about that.
I’d rather speculate and learn definitively what I can about the subject like more of the world should be doing!
November 5th, 2007 at 10:31 am
Unrelated topic Greg,
What do you think about Peter Dale Scott?
November 5th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
It’s either a symbiosis or a form of parasitism what we have with these entities.
Which one is, I’m not sure. I don’t think anyone is.
Maybe that’s the choice that WE have to make in the end. Kind of like what Meister Eckhart wrote.
Remember that movie, “Jacob’s Ladder”, with Tim Robbin?, these comments I have read make me think about it.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:56 pm
When I was a kid, I was terribly afraid of being alone and in the dark in my bedroom because I knew (and had seen) the boogie man who lived under my bed. It was not until I was much older that I realized that there was no room for anything bigger then a small rat to live under my bed and the reason the boggie man could never catch me was not because I was faster then the boogie man, but because the boogie man did not exist anywhere except in my imagination.
The moral of the story is: monsters can only live where ignorance thrives.
November 6th, 2007 at 7:38 am
Junkie, you said: “It’s either a symbiosis or a form of parasitism what we have with these entities.”
I respectfully disagree. To me, the classic stories of both abductions and close encounters display all the earmarks of zookeeper and contained creature. They are in full control, IMHO, and only make use of our conscious desires when it suits Their agenda. For example, how many millions desire to see a real UFO (myself included), but are for whatever reason not contacted? Conversely, how many hundreds of abductions involved wholly unwilling participants, who to this day which they’d never had their experiences?
Yes, that could be indicative of parasitism, but in order for that answer to carry through across the full spectrum of UFO events, that would have to include a completely new interpretation of the term. Were the saucers that Kenneth Arnold saw interacting in a parasitic way? How about the CE2 event at Shag Harbour? Or the multiple events where the creatures (whatever they were) were either scared off or decided not to pursue their intended targets?
That also begs the question, often asked: if we were to visit another civilization, would we not act similarly, that is, in a controlling, manipulative manner? And if we had multiple countries with similar FTL technology (Japan, China, Russia, India, in addition to the EU and the US), would our competing agendas (and perhaps cover stories as well) not seem as disparate and contradictory as the aliens seem to us?
I’m familiar with one theory that suggests that many contactees share a common background of abuse in their childhood, and that somehow their emotional scarring has either opened up a world otherwise denied to the rest of us, or that their retreat from the rational world allows them to hallucinate their contact experiences. I know some people who would accept that theory in a heartbeat (including some who post on this blog), but not me. I’ve spoken with more than one close encounter experiencer (participant? victim?), and none of them have anything close to a disturbed childhood.
To me, if the UFO and alien/contact events can be assumed to be linked (and I think for the most part they can), then my only answer is that They are our overseers, possibly our unwilling tutors or even the puppet masters (gotta love that Heinlein). Much of the determining factor of exactly which one, rests as much in our own hearts as in the evidence.
And to Gavilan, you twice mention “the UFO koan,” as you put it. My understandong of koans is they are contradictions or unanswerable puzzles. As Dictionary.com puts it, a koan is “a nonsensical or paradoxical question to a student for which an answer is demanded, the stress of meditation on the question often being illuminating.”
Are you saying that by design, we can never answer the UFO mystery? Or that only through inner knowledge can we approach a satisfactory answer?
– TemplarScribe
http://www.MichaelDelving.com
http://www.EternalHorizons.com
November 6th, 2007 at 8:04 am
I’m reading Graham Hancock’s book Supernatural now, and he addresses this very idea. He makes a convincing argument using a myriad of examples that our contemporary abduction/grays scenario is consistent with establishedancient/shamanistic/trance/plant psychedlia narratives and artistic representations (cave art, etc.) He goes further, speculating that there is a ‘planted’ DNA connection, using the idea that our DNA matrix material may be responsible. There’s a strong idea of the physicality nature of the phenomenon, including the idea (which I love) that psychedelics enable our brains to tune in to another reality dimension/channel. I’m aware these ideas are not new, but he really does an excellent job weaving it all together, and I highly recommend the book.
November 6th, 2007 at 10:16 am
As always, my dear TS, you provide wonderful food for thought.
Yeah, the zoo-keeper angle has occurred me. It has even occurred to some cosmologists as a matter of fact.
I don’t presume to know why Gavilan uses the term “koan”, but I think it was a great choice of words. Because wahtever the nature of the phenomenon, it seems intended to provide a very subtle but yet powerful pressure on our collective psyches and our civilizations. It may very well be that as a species we’ll never find an answer to this unknown, but that’s not a reson not to keep searching. Who knows what riches we might stumble upon in the road. As the Zen philosophers say: the reward lies not at the end of the road, but in the very journey itself.
Well, ok, I don’t know it that’s actually a Zen saying… but it was used by Data in one of my favorite Star Trek: Next Gen episodes!
You know? the one when Data has a “daughter”?
November 6th, 2007 at 10:46 am
“(I)t was used by Data in one of my favorite Star Trek: Next Gen episodes!”
Ah yes, “Offspring,” third season. Data creates a daughter, who is going to be taken by Star Fleet command, which Data and Picard oppose. She winds up dying, if memory serves, because of an inability to absorbit does human emotions.
I don’t recall the saying he used, but yes, it does fit with the concept of a koan. Although, always the eternal optimist, I cannot see how we can fail to find an answer, given our current technological progress and assuming we fix our current problems (nukes, global warming, the decide lack of good comedies comeing from Hollywood).
November 6th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
TemplarScribe asks:
“Are you saying that by design, we can never answer the UFO mystery? Or that only through inner knowledge can we approach a satisfactory answer?”
Vallee has described the UFO mystery as a test:
“To me this [UFO] phenomenon is not simply something that should be investigated, it is a psychological test: the first great collective intelligence test to which mankind has been subjected. The sightings put into question both the structure of our society and the laws of our physics. Naturally we are free to run away from this test, as our scientists are currently doing.”
Jacques Vallee, Forbidden Science, pg 49
A Koan is a teaching question which, when solved, creates an inner revelation. The koan’s resolution isn’t logical, it’s psychological. It’s not in the same category as a final exam in high school algebra. This suggests (following Vallee) that the UFO “answer” will likely be found in a sudden new comprehension of our multi-dimensional place in the cosmos.
The wave/particle koan of quantum physics tells us that observation is essential for the manifestation of reality – that suggests that our own observational psyche is a good place to look for answers. Especially problematic are our belief systems – if you believe that the saucers are from Zeta Reticuli, and they really come from another dimension, you’ll never solve the koan until you open your mind to the possibility of other answers. That’s precisely what koans are for, to bust up our limiting beliefs obscuring what’s real.
In a multi-dimensional cosmos, we are equivalent to Flatlanders. We’re provincials, we’re hicks, we haven’t gotten it yet. Until we do, we’re vulnerable to all kinds of exploitation, of which there is plenty of evidence in the alien abduction literature.
November 6th, 2007 at 10:58 pm
Gavilan,
Vallee always deals with concepts that I am still trying to figure out, but much better, and with far deeper implications. It’s too bad he doesn’t come out with them more often, but then, he probably doesn’t think that he needs to.
When fundamentalist skeptics, 19th century-style science worshippers, and nuts-and-bolts ufologists complain that there is nothing to this “psychological mumbo-jumbo,” I can’t help but feel that they are willfully shutting out possibilities that would require them to evolve their views on the phenomenon.
November 6th, 2007 at 11:10 pm
111uminate,
I think that we have always been ready to understand, and will someday acquire the knowledge and techniques to do so. Everything that was supposed to be “the end” of the human race has at most caused a bump in history, although I am aware that it seemed like a lot more than that to those who went through it.
November 6th, 2007 at 11:12 pm
misteranderson,
From what I rememeber of Scott, he seemed like a reasonable and very intelligent dissenter to the official version of the JFK assassination. Apparently he wiped the floor with Gerald Posner in a debate a few years back.
November 6th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
RPJ,
I think we have a symbiosis with everything in existence. That is to say, I subscribe to the hyposthesis that the observer is just as important as the observed, particularly when we are not sure what the “observed” is.
November 6th, 2007 at 11:20 pm
Sage,
What I am guessing at here is that existence is much bigger than we can even theorize as yet. This is backed up by an examination of the history of human thought. What we can “prove” with our current knowledge changes constantly. “Imagination” sometimes begets reality.
Francisco Goya produced a painting called “The Sleep of Reason Breeds Monsters,” which has always been a thought I keep as close as my respect for science, logic, and disciplined research.
November 6th, 2007 at 11:22 pm
Richelle,
I’ll try and pick up a copy of that book. Thank you.
I wonder if anyone has dealt with the subject in another way which would respectfully disagree with Hancock in a systematic manner?
November 7th, 2007 at 7:21 pm
Greg:
“This is backed up by an examination of the history of human thought”
There has been no such “examination” that would lead us to the same conclusions as you have come to.
“What we can ‘prove’ with our current knowledge changes constantly”
What we can prove with our current knowledge will remain fixed and unchanging unless we can continue to add to that knowledge with newer knowledge.
“‘Imagination’ sometimes begets reality”
For example?
“Francisco Goya produced a painting called ‘The Sleep of Reason Breeds Monsters’”
How do you interpret that painting?
Gavilan:
“The wave/particle koan of quantum physics tells us that observation is essential for the manifestation of reality”
Quantum physics tells us only subatomic particles are subject to quantum weirdness, not people or the things they observe outside of the subatomic realm. Unless you can get a people to pass through a dual-slit interferometer and appear on the other side in an interference pattern, quantum physics will never be able to be applied to everyday living.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:12 pm
Sage,
You worte:
“There has been no such ‘examination’ that would lead us to the same conclusions as you have come to.”
Our thinking on what is possible changes as we discover new facts and the concepts that explain them. This is practically indisputable.
You wrote:
“What we can prove with our current knowledge will remain fixed and unchanging unless we can continue to add to that knowledge with newer knowledge.”
We appear to be saying the same thing. The difference is semantics. I do not think that all knowledge is “fixed and unchanging.” Some things change, others are redefined with new information and/ or theories.
You wrote (responding):
“‘Imagination’ sometimes begets reality”
For example?
Imagining things differently begets action which changes our physical and mental reality–like the invention of the light bulb or the discovery of a new planet. People know that things can be better or different, and act on their imagination.
You wrote (responding):
“Francisco Goya produced a painting called ‘The Sleep of Reason Breeds Monsters’”
How do you interpret that painting?
Too much reason without inspiration and imagination cuts us off from what it means to me human and delays progress of the human spirit and the development of compassion.
November 8th, 2007 at 3:02 am
Some possibilities about the “others”:
- The phenomenon may be a honeypot to entrap the susceptible, for some reason.
- A thing that can’t be studied scientifically, is nonsense. By behaving nonsensically, one thing the phenomenon may be elaborately telling us, is to be/remain scientific, and get even more scientific, and pay no nevermind to nonsense, and to leave any vestiges of mumbo-jumbo thinking behind. If that’s the case, the characters behind all this play-acting may be quite “normal” characters, not too unlike us, or like the Wizard of Oz. By presenting intriguingly “psychic” and “other-worldly” scenarios that can never be fully pursued, they may be saying that many (all?) such weird thoughts are nonsense, and so they may be trying to encourage us to keep looking for the real fascinating things the universe contains, and not the theatrical versions, as well as telling us to remember to keep our feet on the ground–after all, what’s more valuable: being able to zip around the world as a ball of shifting energy, as fun as that sounds, or being humans organizing a country, raising our kids, or even going on a camping trip together?
- Then again, the partial opposite may be true: the sum total of their behavior may be a way of encouraging new ways of thinking that may be genuinely enlightened. Just as we can learn a whole new way of life from a single person (or a few, anyway), we may certainly be able to learn a lot from an entire other species. The phenomenon often invokes deep human feeling that sometimes isn’t felt in our “normal” lives. Then again, the anal probing, and stuffing things at the other end too, up people’s noses, leaves something to be desired.
- My personal experience tells me that all the above may be true. I also see some of these seemingly different possibilities in the writings of Vallee–I’m touched by his including personal stories in his book, “Forbidden Knowledge”, showing that he tried to live a good, human life, with his wife and kids, even as he was deeply involved in investigating the phenomenon with Hynek, etc. From a couple times I’ve been peripherally involved in some in-person discussions between him and a relative who communicates with him about the phenomenon, and knowing a little about the venture capital work he currently does, which brings him a lot of satisfaction, I also get that he still keeps the phenomenon in perspective.
November 10th, 2007 at 7:06 pm
“Our thinking on what is possible changes as we discover new facts and the concepts that explain them. This is practically indisputable”
It is only “indisputable” if it can be proven there was any such “examination” as you presented. You have interpreted history, rather then objectively described history, and you did so in such a way that it would appear the way you want it to be, and not as it actually happened. Imagination is limitless, but reality is limited, and it is limited in more ways then our imaginations would want it to be.
“We appear to be saying the same thing”
If you want to put it that way, then what we are saying is irrelevant to reality. When I was a kid, I thought the boogie-man was real. With new knowledge I learned that the boogie-man was imaginary. You cannot claim with any hint of reasonableness that maybe if we wait long enough, maybe some newer knowledge will prove the imaginary boogie-man is actually real. That is wishful thinking. If monsters are imaginary now, new knowledge will not make them real again.
“Imagining things differently begets action…”
Action is not imagination. No matter how hard you try, you cannot will the boogie-man into existence using imagination alone. What is imaginary always remains imaginary, even when you act on your imagination. A man can imagine building a bridge out of nothing but plastic straws that will withstand a four-lane highway, but the reality is that a plastic straw bridge will not withstand any such thing. Imagination and reality rarely intersect.
SAGE — “Francisco Goya produced a painting called ‘The Sleep of Reason Breeds Monsters’…How do you interpret that painting?”
GREG– “Too much reason without inspiration and imagination cuts us off from what it means to me human and delays progress of the human spirit and the development of compassion”
How interesting. I interpret that painting as if you put reason to rest, you will be susceptible to being overwhelmed by imaginary creatures.
November 13th, 2007 at 8:44 pm
So–I fianlly just finished the Hancock book, and I must say it completely pulls the rug out from under the whole UFO/alien ‘interdimensional’ theories, the psycho/social areas, daimonic realities/fairyland thing, etc., and even the nuts & bolts stuff. It’s as close to a grand unifying theory–as it includes almost all previous main theories– of the UFO phenomenon I have ever read, and it’s not even primarily a UFO book. It should definitely be on everyone’s reading list–I can’t recommend it enough. Supernatural, by Graham Hancock (get the newer disinfo.com edition, apparently the older one contains 7 chapters of superfluous information regarding cave art…)