Way Out ::: tuO yaW

 

(note: this work is presented, as is all of White Rabbit, in process - so as to show not the product so much as the marriage of the process and the product - what you see here will change in scalar ways away from this particular source toward new openings and understandings ...constantly ...and is, in fact, an unwritten text ...it is in-process)

L:317 V 222 Quad: Tertia

Paravisionary Phenomenon

 

Introducing the Paravisonary

The purpose of this document is to collect, record and examine certain personal experiences and speculations, which bear similarity to circumstances described by a wide variety of perceivers, which one might categorize loosely as unusual perceptual or cognitive phenomenon. Its secondary purpose, and one for whose success I deeply hope on a personal level, is to offer the reader some productive and positive support - to potentially empower others who may struggle with or have other kinds of experience with the topics we will touch upon.

This work is speculative, however it is also based upon long, sincere and curious observation, as well as direct personal experience. By speculative, I mean to divide from academic preoccupations, and resolve at least internally such divisions by classifying this work as one of a personal and thereby liberated nature. I presume then the freedom to discuss the topic and those related with liberty, rather than a stringent legalistic set of definitions or agendas, which I hope will become apparent.

My hope is to reveal a few aspects of unusual, uncommon, or little-noticed experiences - but also unexplored aspects of experiences which, though common, are conceptually corralled in such a way as to render them dangerous or useless to the experiencer.

By valuing negatively, or controlling the terms and meanings in discussion, those outside the experience may catalyze an environment in which the thing (event, perception, etc) itself, and the relationship of its events and perceptions to the experiencer cannot be reasonably explored or unpacked. Further, I wish to point quite dramatically at the tools we use to examine, discuss, deplore or explore such experiences - for the natures and shapes of the tools we use to examine our experience and that of others - as well as our ability to chose such tools for ourselves

The fact that some of these experiences might be label-able hallucinatory or even mere illusions will be taken into consideration - but with the openness to psycho-synchronous events that is their due. Thus we may in this way presume a basic valuable and exploreable quality in such experiences - both those that appear to arise with 'real' phenomenon, as well as those which arise in domains more generally cognitive or psychological in nature.

I am going to use the term paravisionary to loosely categorize certain phenomenon which I have found to bear similarities to one another, these being dreamlike, hypnotic, meditative, crisis - or other situations in which one's cognitive reality undergoes for some reason a perceivable and dramatic shift, generally resulting in observable phenomenon which may be somatocentric, visionary, synesthetic, ecstatic, satori-like, or merely shifts in psychocentric or perceptual attitudes or abilities. Sometimes such shifts are extremely brief, others may last so long as to be essentially permanent. The later tend to be at a severe end of the spectrum which would be difficult not to classify as illness. But even illness deserves a for more articulate exploration than our western academy is want to offer or engage in.

The basic plane that I wish to embark from is general for a reason which I trust will become clear, as well as add some needed flexibility of terms that I believe will aid us in exploring the topic holistically.

That these phenomenon are so disparately arranged amongst what we as humans categorize as different 'classes' of experience - for example the difference between a dream and an automobile accident - poses problems that I feel can be integrated by choosing to address such disparate examples as fundamentally related - at least in this thread, which has been both my experience and the basic nature of my speculations for many years. It has also been the nature of my experience to increasingly discover a particularly useful tool-fact: that how each person or being 'categorizes' their experience radically affects what they have to say about it - the judgments that one implicitly makes in choosing language and/or conceptual domains to 'discuss' such events with and within, largely determines the species of limitations that are imposed on the 'actors' in the events, as well as how they are defined and valued internally, to the experiencer, and externally, to others.

Such shifts arise and depart constantly, at various levels - a commonly recognizable example would be the perceptual shifts that happen while an accident is in progress and directly after such an event. As 'normal reality' morphs and shifts under the sudden stress of instantaneous reactions - one's perspectives, and perhaps even one's basis of perception may undergo dramatic changes. Of course, this process is actually continuous (and particulate) in the individual and in societies, but the realm of personal experience lends itself well to examinations of specific events, allowing us to explore 'how we explore them' internally, socially and even academically

While acknowledging that 'matters of degree' or intensity will always range from minute to dramatic in any individual experience - we can still explore the basic relatedness of perceptual or cognitive experiences which are by their nature either peripheral or epiphanies to varying degrees.

Language, experience, and valuing.

Most of us have experienced directly at least some small aspect of what I am terming paravisionary phenomenon, but we will define it very loosely to begin with as some perceptual or cognitive event that, at least upon initial exposure, appears to deviate dramatically from what might be expected, or previously experienced. On the one hand, humans have always sought such events in various forms - it could easily and perhaps profitably be argued that what we label 'television' and 'movies' are actually mediated forms of access to waking dreams - paravisionary phenomenon created by other human beings for mass 'experiencing'. The semi-equality of television and dream-experiences is neither an accident nor a conspiracy. It is more akin to (somewhat) natural creation of an external organ of 'broadcasting' and 'reception' - wherein a given level of (mediated) access to paravisionary experience - in this case a 'shared one' - can be had by all participants, pretty much at will, and without effort. A fascinating topic in its own right. More interestingly, if opened to scrutiny, we discover that paravisionary experiences are commonplace in all extant cultures, at least as defined. We further discover that as human history has unfolded, there has been a consistent and unhesitating acknowledgement of this 'aspect' of cognition and its associated mysteries and desires, as expressed continuously in the arts, technologies, and most commonplaces devices - physical, cognitive, behavioral and lingual - of all of earth's human cultures - but especially amongst industrialized nations.

Along with this trend we also discover a strong socio-anthropological trend in human societies toward mediated access to paravisionary realms or experience. Without getting to deeply into this topic, we might easily say that the general trend has been that, in most societies, access to the 'realms of the paranormal' is mediated either by an official of some sort, an organization, or a government. In most cases we find all three. Further, we discover that the people of any society, and their choices within the range of options their experience presents - shape the evolutionary potentials of the concepts, and the mediation(s)/mediator(s) power to control such access.

We can posit that a human child or adult is capable of things far beyond the normal scope of our expectations - at least on special occasions. Given the proper nurturing, and the tools to explore their powers and potentials, we could perhaps expect some rather unusual results from our children, or ourselves, as we grew older and more experienced in our pursuit of the potentials they were born with. However, since we 'land' in an extremely concrete conceptual domain, where the Truth and the Lie are already 'mapped' for us by others in positions of cognitive mentorship - we often fail to even inherit the powers we were born with - or our access to them is so severely limited that few will ever gain a sense of the possible vistas available to them, perceptually and experientially. More tragic, however, is the often crippling effect of such mediation on the experiencer's own feelings, rights, and abilities related to their personal reality.

 

Theft of Domain and Inner Storying

Let's turn the jewel a bit here, and look more closely at the individual. Any individual that dreams has direct experience of an apparently undirected 'storying' aspect of their personal cognitive domain. How we understand, explore and value such an experience depends upon cultural, social, local, unpredictable and personal aspects - in each unique situation. Dreams, as an example, can be valued as nonsense - or utterly holy in every particular - and experienced through either lens by any given perceiver. The lens and any discussion of any experience cannot be separate; for the combination of the lens(es) applied and the object of examination or exposition create in their union the actual cognitive domain we explore - thus the experience itself, in memory - and sometimes in real-time - is really one of the 'cognitive lens(es)' at play, coupled with the phenomenon of the dance between the event and the perceiver. These lens(es) turn out, upon close and objective examination, to be complex cognitive filters - that we use to name, describe, assert, and hierarchically value what we perceive to be 'elements' of any experience of our own or that is conveyed to us.

Seeing this clearly, we discover that, as experiencers and explorers - our ability to perceive, create, modulate and explore the lenses themselves - as tools - is of primal consequence to our very inner formulations about any experience - and thus it is also similarly primal in any communication we may attempt with others regarding it.

When we look at living beings and ask very general questions, we can sometimes uncover something not immediately obvious under more sever scrutiny. This willingness to remain general in some cases allows us greater perceptual flexibility if we are capable of using it appropriately. For example, there have been many attempts at precisely defining 'living matter' - and a common answer has to do with the perspective that might be simply stated as 'life is as life does'. This leaves us with things like the ability to conserve or elaborate evolutionary complexity across generations (reproduction), metabolic aspects, etc. There are many such definitions, each perhaps useful, and I mention them because I wish to point toward a specific one of them for a moment, and declare thusly: Life is metabolizing matter which strives to preserve complexity, and to parse its environment to some degree inherent in its structural capabilities. Thus living things read, create, and interpret signals. This aspect of life appears at every level of organization from the elaborately complex beings such as ourselves to the smallest forms of reproductive matter, including virii. Thus, from at least one perspective - to be alive, is to signal, and to interpret - or parse - the various signals a being encounters in its environment.

For humans, we've been simultaneously liberated and bound by signaling, and our uses and understandings of it.

 

 

Shock is a signal

Loss of touch with Context - stolen contexts, manipulation of context

Whereas in one culture, a person about to become an adult might leap from a high pole with a rope attached to their leg - (a behavior adopted as entertainment by some modern cultures) in another culture the person might find themselves the focus of a family gathering, or a drinking contest amongst friends. The way time may seem to slow dramatically during certain kinds of events - such as accidents. Seeing a horse's face, then turning to see nothing. A midnight abduction in a suburban bedroom with unusual lighting effects and bizarre participants. Examples of such experiences are found in every class, race, 'level' of society and every human culture. Some societies privilege such events with what might be, to the 'supposedly western' mind, an exaggerated mysticism - or perhaps a 'primitive' perspective on a 'neurologically explicable' event. I will pause here to say that I find the language employed in the west to discern, describe, and discuss such incidents nearly totally biased, and perhaps even toxic to the process of a given person having the opportunity and encouragement to explore such aspects of perception with anything resembling an 'open mind'. I consider it part of my goal to demonstrate that the institutions of western science, religion, and even the nature of the English language itself have conspired, if not intentionally, to not only cloud, but to 'purchase' the entire sphere of human experience away from the experiencers and into the realm of 'dissectible criteria' and 'qualified objective inquiry'. Jargon it turns out, is often a primary obstacle in encountering, exploring, and integrating such experiences.

De-animated western languages such as english also serve as the 'sword of judgment' - the implicit threat that any experiencer may feel in working with or discussing their experience is that, somehow, their person and/or dignity will be devalued in the eyes of others, and there is a clear basis for this concern that lies in the common modalities of public perception, and many of these modalities are prescribed by the institutions of science, academia and religion.

Experiencers of paravisonary phenomenon fear 'not being taken seriously' or being cast out from social or filial situations based upon some 'difference' in them. Socially, this tends to manifest and be active as a serious threat to one's well being. They can often expect that, since their actual, living experience may be construed as 'unverifyable, and unverified' that it is either valueless, or at best of a whimsical and possibly even dangerous value. The point is that, even from people one cares about one can generally expect to not be heard, not be trusted, or be somehow devalued, or seen as 'ill' due to the nature of the experience and the way most modern societies tend to respond to this experience in general.

While the nature of the threats have something to do with language, and even how such feelings and experiences are valued - in modern western society, outside of 'metaphysical society' such things are rarely discussed. They are certainly not openly shared, and often, remain hidden in the individual experiencer's consciousness or unconscious mind - awaiting a moment when there may be some external support to become active, or recollected. Such as when the environment gives to the experiencer a direct sign that it may be at least marginally safe to begin some kind of exploration, either alone, or with other beings. Again, however, each experiencer, and event, is fundamentally different.

In one sense, the great lie of science is that an objective reality exists anywhere other than in human conception. It doesn't. If one accepts language, scripture, research - and values them over the only possible verification: experience, one willingly inhabits something far less real and verifyable than a dream - and it is, in a sense, this dream itself that some of our societies are founded upon.

Verifiability is not necessary for exploration - but flexibility of attitude, and the willingness to withhold labeling and stay with direct experience can be important tools in finding one's own answers and even forming one's own personal questions about such phenomenon. Each unique individual, and each event, conspire to create not just 'another in a sequence of related events' - but a totally unique experience. Labeling it - or even what we see as 'aspects' will tend 'settle' the matter, and make further exploration/interaction more difficult. For this reason I recommend the formation and exploration of 'ideas' and 'feelings' rather than beliefs, dogma, or even, apparent reality.

Most of us have been taught to 'only believe' certain kinds of what we refer to as 'evidence'. While useful in certain domains, and even in this one, such approaches must be harmonious with liberal exploration and its modes and means - where they are not, they serve instead as barriers betwixt us and our own natures - and the single, vast nature of living beings that each of our breaths immerses us completely in - a birthright discarded only by the foolish, or the frightened - but one that requires some practice to accept and partake directly of. Each person's path is uniquely their own, no matter what apparent 'similarities' appear in others. At the same time, many threads of experience are shared and celebrated amongst groups, tangible or intangible, of people and perhaps even other beings, with similar goals, feelings, experiences and conceptions.

 

Certainly there are many experiences of paravisonary phenomenon that may in some way be symptomatic, and possibly even pathological or physiological in their source, which might be correctly defined on some level as illness. In fact, paravisionary phenomenon and illness have always had some linkage in human experience, since being physically or emotionally ill is often accompanied by various sorts of perceptual shifts. It's not really my goal here to deny that there are forms of illness that can manifest extremely confusing or even dangerous paravisionary phenomenon - it is a fact that there are, however, my personal sense is that these phenomenon arise within an organism with a purpose of revealing to the experiencer, some aspect of necessary shift for healing to occur - they are certainly at least a part of the process of healing for many experiencers. I acknowledge clearly the potential for terrifying and seemingly inescapable, or 'incurable' psychosis - though the exploration of this particular branch of this topic is best dealt with in a separate forum - though we may ply some relationships here as well to see what fruit might be offered for our exploration. Again however, it is here useful to remain flexible in how we determine what we mean by labels like pathological, symptom, and illness, since these terms bring with them connotations that cannot be universally applied. The detractive or derogatory implications of such terms are confusing, and tend to offer an easy way out of a set of phenomenon that are by their nature (and the language we use to explore them) difficult subjects to enter deeply into.

Paravisionary experiences are a normal part of our birthright as human beings, yet most of us, upon first encountering them in our childhood are quickly taught to keep them hidden. Additionally, the blame is often ascribed to the experiencer, as though they themselves are responsible for this 'bad thing' and they must 'stop doing it'. Such things carry, in general, a very negative social connotation, as well as the threat of isolation. Further, they often invite a blaming factor that is at least equal if not superior to the other threats. As any informed observer will generally discover, the experiencer is rarely in control, or in any sort of domain where they might be considered responsible. Secondly, where is the inherent 'culpability' in having a paranormal experience? For what, exactly, is the experiencer responsible that might justify accusations or the casting of aspersions?

In short, it is a nearly hopeless situation for anyone who cannot locate sane, non-judgmental guidance to find their own personal path within the experiences and phenomenon they are subject to. It is part of the purpose of this document to provide a sense of community and empowerment to those who, either willingly or accidentally, have wandered into this strange and sometimes scary garden. You are not alone, and that you can access the garden doesn't mean you're sick, evil, cursed, possessed, or demonically inspired - in fact, part of your right as a cognitive being is to decide for yourself what these experiences mean and are about. That process may be complex, but it belongs to you as a person, not to others who are quick to label, blame, and in general occlude the experiencer from their own inner processes and experience.

Sometimes when we're sick, access to the garden is more common. Sometimes it isn't a garden at all - who knows, maybe aliens actually are coming into your room and doing bad things to you in the night. It probably happens somewhere. We don't need science to prove it, thankfully. We, being a living, sane, thinking and experiencing creatures - have the option to believe and explore our actual experience. Not as fact, but as an unfolding guide to the mystery of what it is to be born something far more than merely human - for words cannot contain the endless worlds we are and represent. To be human, it turns out, is to be vastly larger than fact, or any collection of them.

Such experiences are also commonly targeted by a wide variety of so-called 'spiritualities' as either blessings or curses - the basic goal being to 'corral' such things quickly, categorize, judge, and dismiss them. In some cases, the 'system of understanding' - such as a Christian or even a 'metaphysical' church, might actively seek to 'harness' the initial energy of such an event and leverage it in the experiencer against whatever 'religious doubts' may exist within them. This is an extremely virulent kind of manipulation, and I consider it to be heartless as well as extremely ill-advised.

The idea, so prevalent in our modern societies, that some 'expert' can lead one to any kind of holistic exploration or integration of such experiences is, in most cases, baldly false. The job of these 'experts' can often be described in one of two modalities (though there are exceptions) - to 'de-energize' the intellectual and emotional impact of the event or memory, usually by applying stringent conceptual frames, or to harness it for their own excitement, curiosity, or systematic use. The problem, I believe, is that the framesets that we and others use to discuss such events, are often crippling, because before an individual has had any real chance to explore or understand what is happening, or has happened to them - they will find it, in some ways, neatly pre-defined for them by others who, in actuality, may know much less than nothing about the real or perceivably real nature of the event. The clear message is simply this: events that are by their nature difficult to categorize, or contain within their stories what can be perceived as an 'obvious instability' or 'irresolvable nature' are quickly marked for judgment, and, hopefully, dismissal. Perhaps it goes beyond this, to the marking of the individual by others, and possibly even by themselves, as 'malfunctioning' in some way, whether it be momentary or permanent.

To reiterate; each experience and person is unique. Some experiences may be actual physical interactions between waking beings. While these may fall outside the - basic- scope of this document, which is primarily concerned with experiences that surround hypnogogia, hallucination, dreaming, sleep-paralysis, illness, sudden accident, meditation and other semi or deeply visionary states - waking events are within its scope to the degree we are able to question the division betwixt what we define as waking and sleeping. It is again our definitions, and the incredibly bold (not to mention sometimes foolish) human need to 'distinguish' between often arbitrarily labeled boundaries of experience - in which we find the opponent to our innate desire to explore and reveal to ourselves and others whatever we may find - if we can create the ongoing potential for a more liberated and supported exploration. I agree, in a basic way, for discussion, that there is a difference between the waking and dreaming or paravisionary states - but I don't necessarily agree that the experiences, or divisions between them, are as distinct as our language and habits of thought seem to provide.

One commonly neglected element of these experiences is that many involve a wide variety of experiential 'flavors' - but are often channeled immediately, by language and culture into 'good' or 'bad'. When this is done, it encourages the experiencer to 'fail to open' the experience - which in many cases may contain information or material of critical importance in the life of the person having the experience. To deny the experiencers this possibility, that there is a profound treasure in their experience, is a grave and terrible mistake. It can be a crime, a theft that goes unseen for its nature and subtle causes. It further encourages the habits of selective memory - where a being tends to remember only the easily pared or categorized aspects of an experience. Or those which will not result in immediate confusion, pain or punishment.

Let me give an example of an 'uncommon' paravisionary event in my own life, briefly. One that would not be likely to lead to direct judgment, or so at first it might seem. An example that, really, never needed to be hidden.

When I was 11, I rode my bicycle to a nearby mall. En-route, I stopped at a gas-station to add some air to my tires. As is common, I was kneeling, near the tire, pumping air in through a compressor valve, when the tire exploded. The explosion startled me quite dramatically, so much, in fact - that I forgot where I was, and what was happening, for a moment.

I had instinctively closed my eyes during the blast, and I opened them immediately and found to my incredible dismay, that I was blind. I blinked. Nothing. Not even the slightest glimmer of luminance. Total blackness. I blinked again, a few times. Nothing. 15 seconds passed as I recollected what had happened, still kneeling in the position I had begun in. I kept blinking, and checking my eyes. Nothing was there, at all.

I think about 25 seconds in, I knew I was blind. A moment ago, I had been in one world, and now, suddenly and very unexpectedly, I was in another. One I had no experience of, and one that showed immediate experiential signs of being permanent. I began to wonder if anyone had 'seen' me or 'was seeing' me. I was not yet overwhelmingly frightened. The interesting thing in retrospect is that there was, in reality, a lot going on in those few seconds. To 'categorize' them in order I might make these choices: shock, confusion, awestruck pause, ./reorientation, inner dialogue, fear, regret. But those are merely containers - they do not convey the actual progression of my experience, nor the specific contents of my conscious states during the event. In a sense, they are like the words at the top of the dictionary page - mere indexes.

Perhaps sometime around the 39th second, suddenly, I blinked, and I could see, completely, and with the incredible clarity that I've always considered one of my biological blessings. I stood up, felt thankful, re-oriented myself, and continued 'to the mall'.

The event was brief. It appeared, upon regaining my sight, to have been completely private, in that no other people were involved. It wasn't the first of its kind in my experience, or the last - but it was profound in a few significant ways:

1. A sense I am used to constantly using was completely disabled unexpectedly.

2. The event was 'private' in that no other obvious beings were involved.

3. There were clear demarcations, an 'experiential portal' almost, between the normative and other states I experienced during the event.

4. I had strong reasons to believe the state-change was permanent.

5. Perceptions and perspectives normalized quickly upon resolution.

6. The nature of the event was brief, and epiphanous.
One of the reasons I chose to present this particular event, is that it was a commonplace, waking-reality situation that qualifies, at least within my admittedly evolving definitions, as paravisionary.

The fact that such an event shares sense-states and experience with dreaming events, shock events, illness events, and other 'rapid-shift' experiences is not particularly telling. Moreover, many other normative experiences share such things as well. In fact, by my own categorizations I am implicitly excluding certain common experiences from this discussion, because I wish to focus on the more dramatic examples, in hopes of clarifying something that is, by nature of its variety and myriad manifestations, difficult to frame explicitly while preserving the integrity of the links in the concepts being explored.

The example given above bears little of the common stigma associated with paravisionary experience, though it does bear the threat that a child might experience in reporting to an adult on an activity in which the child, through accident or negligence, came into misadventure - or something an adult might interpret as such. This aspect of the experience, especially amongst children who look to trusted adults for guidance, can be key in determining how one becomes equipped to respond or explore cognitively. If a child fears or is concerned over issues of 'responsibility' and possible blaming or punishment - one can clearly see how this can limit the potential to explore, inwardly resolve or even talk about an unusual event. Of course, the stigma is not limited to children in any way - but it can be a critical foundation of a given individual's ability to bring forth their experiences amongst others - or even to remember them. Let us contrast this to a possible situation in which the experiencer is first perceived with trust, listened to clearly, and supported in exploring or opening the content of their experience.

But back to the event in question. It wasn't really not novel enough, experientially, and in its ostensible 'content' to be threatening to those who might hear such a story, and the states in the experiencer are simple enough that the whole thing can be dismissed as a momentary physical phenomenon based on pressure-shock to the optic nerve. While in fact this dismissal may be accurate in certain senses, it omits the larger picture, which is the actual experience of the individual in the event and post-event recollections.

While some of these events may be considered 'less real' by a given system of experiential valuing, (for example, a dream vs my blindness episode), there are certainly many individual and societal examples (yes, even in the west) of alternate modalities of exploration and integration of such experiences. Given the incredibly broad range of human socio-cultural expression, which I believe lives in individuals more than their societies, this is not terribly surprising. What is more surprising is the alacrity with which such perspectives are often dismissed by dominant academic and cultural systems of knowing and research as being either inexplorable or unvalued.

Modern western research, and 'science', might likely classify the 'dream realm' as unreal, imaginary or at best 'nearly purely subjective'. In english, the very concept of subjectivity is instantly devalued by academia, and even largely by those constituents of the population who understand this term's likely meanings - if not completely, then largely. The fact of the matter, however, is that our language - which is 'conceptifying' that occurs only if and when humans are present - does not and cannot dictate, or accurately describe reality. It points at conceptually discrete elements, and groups them in relational hierarchies. It is not, and can never be, a 'record of experience'. Language is, in effect and in nature, merely a framing device that allows us to categorize, sift, and filter perceived experience and circumstance. A highly useful tool, if we are not trapped by the dangers inherent in its nature, specifically, accepting the equality of labels, and reality.

My point is this: a human experience is, by nature, privileged in ways that neither science, nor religion, nor any linguistically-based system of valuing can possibly hope to even marginally contain or convey. Science, religion, and even those who have spent entire generations of lives exploring this realm bring back only this: words. Opinions. Concepts. Experience is vastly more than this.

Further, I deeply question the idea that one conceptual 'reality' is somehow 'more intrinsically valid' than some other. Because of our social nature, as beings, we tend to accept more easily values and concepts that are widely held. This is an aspect of human 'group-mind' that is obvious in any living society. It is a way of 'not personally parsing every concept' that one comes into contact with, which would be, pragmatically, impossible, especially in 'media-advanced' societies and where people are subjected to advertising. The problem is this: in media-advanced societies, the information flow is so chaotic and basically psychically harmful to any given individual that their hope of stumbling upon reasonable ways of classifying and exploring their experience - whatever it's nature, is or often becomes in time, quite dismal. In fact, prior to an unusual experience, one may well have been conceptually coerced to regard it, in most cases as something extremely negative, dangerous, or worthy of shame - if not all of the above. This 'group-mind' aspect of societies is an evolutionary advantage - if and when it tends to serve the prosperity and growth of the systems that support it, and the beings it supports. Otherwise, its effect is far more like that of a dangerous virus which rapidly annexes important inner terrain and innate abilities in the individuals in question.

The further distinction into 'classes of expertise' in humans is another example of 'distributed evolution' - skill-sets and knowledge are housed and practiced only in socially discrete packages - whether those packages be individuals, corporations, or other organizations. This allows the average individual to benefit from distant expertise without having to be conceptually involved in its manufacture. This is another profound step in our race's evolutionary 'progress' that I consider to be a form of 'branched-evolution' where discrete streams of ability and perceptive paradigm gain focus and diversity over time, preserving and enhancing the quality of whatever practices are at play. Perhaps the true 'treasure' of any society lies primarily in its ability to obtain and utilize resources as well as in the skill-sets and organizational abilities of the people under its influence.

Certainly the 'informational output' of these specialized branches of endeavor is highly prized, and generally, neither the product, nor the organized information is ever directly available to the common person. In this sense, the real treasure and value of these forms of branched progress are forever unavailable to the common people, and when available, usually 'only by prescription' - the prescribers being those who hold the idealized and conceptual power in any society. Thus it is with, for example, the legal system in the United States, which victimizes its own and other peoples, primarily for economic gain, and to exercise absolute control over its willingly controlled laborers and specialists. The 'citizens' willingly submit to this abuse because it has been 'conceptually presented' in ways that lead them to believe it is in their benefit, or there is no other option or somehow both. Access to 'legal assistance' is a completely privileged affair based entirely on social strata and economic wealth, and any discussion to the contrary, at this point in the 21st century, is cartoonish in its absurdity. This is an example, albeit a vehement one, of how a specialized form of knowledge or skill (legal skills), is concentrated in particular societal elements, and available on a prescribed basis.

While I admit, again, that this is a bit of a birdwalk here, the politics of such societies play a distinct role in our parsing, and in our valuing of our own personal experience in ways that are not immediately apparent without careful examination. If the 'context' or 'content' of an event is not 'publicly valued' - there is a greater weight on the experiencer to either keep the event private, or to 'modulate' the content in memory or discussion in the hope of producing a more defensible or safer position from which to explore or seek information or aid. Societies, modern or otherwise, must learn to value the individual's experience, because without that basic fundamental structure of assurance and belonging - the experience itself becomes a threat in cases where it does not match up with a 'publicly supported' paradigm set. This single problem pits the experiencer against themselves at the beginning of the issue - it is a terrible and crippling thing to live with, and around - and further, it injures all of us, as individuals and societies, insomuch as it denies or mediates access to realms of experience that are common, natural, and alike with breathing in cognitive beings. It is no less than a very real cognitive prison, and one from which escape becomes increasingly unlikely with the passage of time for any individual immersed in it.

 

Common Features, and a Generalizing Approach

Many such experiences share certain common features, and it is these, at least in part that I hope to explore in this document. I am sure scholars might gibber over differentiations betwixt such phenomenon as shock and dreaming, for example, but two ideas cause me to oppose them: the first is that each event, for each perceiver, is totally and absolutely unique. Functionally, each event is a 'first time' kind of experience. Rule sets shatter and morph, psyche and daymind battle for the driver's seat of a creature capable not merely of walking between perceived worlds, but of actually creating them internally and projecting them outward into reality (through myriad modes of 'communication') and inward into the reality of their own consciousness - at the very least, in their own experience. And since this experience touches and modifies the experience of nearly every being they contact, however slightly - it can be seen that the effects of these 'inventions' are environmental - and thus find their threads firmly entrenched in actual, environmental reality. This isn't magic, or even metaphysical, however my bet it that it is beyond what we currently define as 'science' as well. It is an aspect of what we call sentience. The ur-science of living forms which is their natural activity in time.

The second idea is that in my personal experience, it is sometimes better to be non-specific - and it allows a broader perspective in this case. Most such experiences, be they dream related, shock-related, stress-related, sleep-related, chemically induced or stumbled accidentally upon - share certain qualities that are, in a sense, nameless. You realize you are having an epiphanous experience - but naming will not serve to sever you from the vital energies and sensations that surround it. The mysteries, the terrors, the stories. These are our stories. They belong to us. Though what we find in these experiences is sometimes more terrifying than anything we might survive in our daymind-life, there is a flip side to these experiences, wherein unimaginable liberations and interactions are not only permissible, but the norm.

While psychedelically-induced phenomenon are normally 'categorized' separately, I would hesitate again, in this instance, to do so. However, in the large part, I will be discussing personal experience that is solely related to sleep/dream\shock experiences that could, for the sake of record, have been said to have occurred in a state of chemical sobriety.

Before I delve too deeply into my own experience, I would like to talk further about perception, or some aspects of how we, as communicating beings, 'talk to ourselves' and others about experience. The reason is that the conceptual frames we use to explore this realm are extremely important - in fact not separate from the experiences - which, outside of the 'experience' itself, in time - exist only as 'memories' - so we should take a moment to create some foundation from which to leap off into the subjective aspect of a single person's experience, and paravisionary experience in general.

Firstly, it may be impossible to determine whether events such as the semi-commonly reported 'abductions' by unusual beings are occurring in a set of rules that we would agree are 'physical reality'. Many people cannot even exist in a conceptual reality where such things are possible, within themselves. Again, each instance of any sort of event is unique - it is we who desperately desire to link them so that we may begin to think we can glimpse some ordering that will at once verify our labels and protect us from the terror of 'having no idea' about the real content of an experience or set of experiences which appear related. It is this 'having no idea' - this animalian fear which sets itself up at once as the thing most to be avoided - and perhaps the door to understanding, at the same time. Like the guardian at the threshold, our ideas, sensations and feelings stand as some sort of dragon comprised of our own structures. What lies beyond this fell guardian's seemingly deadly and judgmental gaze?

This problem, which is in essence a problem with labeling, or 'naming' certain experiences which share some variables - is central to both the exploration and discussion of such this topic. Let us take an example from common experience, and parse it a bit, to see what might be revealed.

If I see something flying through the air, that appears at first glance to be metallic, I will go through a set of frame-tests, something like this: Possibilities: Aircraft, Electronic Phenomenon, Lifeform, Reflect/fractive Phenomenon, Illusory Phenomenon, or Unknown. If I branch to Aircraft, I'll begin comparing its behaviors, sounds and appearances to other experience and knowledge I have regarding aircraft. This process will continue - only- until I satisfy myself that the phenomenon is label-able, therefore semi-understood, and can then be ignored, or offered at least significantly less attention.

The curve of attention to a given phenomenon seems to drop dramatically once it is observed that the phenomenon is familiar, or potentially familiar. The modalities that the perceiver will use, once a thing is labeled, to explore and question its nature, basically go from hyper-aware - to barely aware - as rapidly as it can be determined that the object bears no direct threat - or potential for reward, to a given experiencer.

We don't merely label to ignore, but this activity serves as a large aspect of the categorization process. Normally, once I determine that an aircraft is recognizable - my interest in it tends to drop dramatically and quickly. This fundamental aspect of our consciousness is constantly busy parsing experience in a way that might be primitively described thusly:
Possible Threat

Attend/Respond/Till Ignorable or Safe

Possible Reward

Attend/Respond/Till Ignorable or Satiated

Unlikely Interactant

Ignore unless novelty requires attention/Till Outcome

One of the meanings of this in terms of real outcomes is that our ability to parse, and deal intelligently with certain types of phenomenal experience is drastically limited by our personal and cultural habits of categorization. The simple grouping of a set of perceptual events into the category of 'dreams' is an example of this effect: each dream is unique - one might arbitrarily say that each event is, in fact, absolutely unique, even though they may seem, to memory, to be related in 'classifiable' ways. By grouping them as dreams, we value their similarity, linguistically (and conceptually), more highly than their uniqueness. This aspect of our linguistic nature, while incredibly useful in certain domains of perception and perspective, is also a terrible handicap when it comes to dealing cognitively with novel experience, for it can easily create or serve as a blinding mechanism, especially if we do not habitually branch out of this behavior when encountering novelty in our experience.

When we determine value by the value of a 'category' we become, in a very real sense, dead to reality's vast cornucopia of nourishing 'newness'. This, in my opinion, is not only a mistake, it is poor observational and classificatory technique. I won't belabor the point further, except to express that, due to the incredible variety of history, physiology, local environmental factors and the basic uniqueness of any event - to linguistically value the category, and see all possible members as of equal or nearly equal value is at best terribly imprudent from any perspective of open perception. However, it does provide some logistical advantages. It again arises from habit, and from the inability to remove from one's perception and perspective elements of hidebound classification which commonly occlude any examination that might actually produce novel conception regarding events, interactants or circumstances.

This behavior, as previously alluded, most likely has a historical and biological precedent. It is perhaps a remnant from the extremely recent human past, where crisis of some kind was pretty much a constant. This rapid-framing of conceptual data was likely one of the keys that has allowed what we call 'our species' to become a dominant player in the world ecosystem. Modern humans have largely forgotten, especially in the west, the fairly recent incidence of nearly constant and unpredictable environmental threat. Many of these threats were not entirely novel. Most likely, not long ago at all, people died from infections far far more regularly than they do now. They experienced day to day challenges and threats from their local environment whose causes were as mysterious as they were deadly. A thorn could kill you in a week, maybe two. Food borne disease, while different, was rampant. Most of these threats are still extant and active, but have been transformed by categorization and language into frame-able, and in some cases, largely avoidable situations. Thus there is also a pragmatism to our ability to rapidly apply conceptual frames to phenomenon.

At the same time, the way we label or 'parse' our experience creates 'vectors' for how we sort phenomenal experience, and thus it determines the stories we tell to ourselves and others, our speculations, even our memories of events. One of the most fascinating aspects of paravisionary phenomenon is that it tends to forcefully remove us from this mode of perceiving into a realm where other aspects of our own inner natures are revealed to be exploreable, and rich with mystery. It is a powerful destroyer of frames, labels, and preconceptions - perhaps one of the most powerful available in the daily lives of most human beings. But all of this destruction is in fact quite terrifying to most conscious beings, and it seems to me that a reasonable quantity of perceptual energy is utilized to quickly 'classify into obsolescence' the vast majority of highly novel perceptual experiences, many of which happen during what one might loosely call a 'shift in perceptual geometry'. In the end, it is as true a statement to say that prayer can affect a drought as it is to say that science's understanding of the physics of the atom is 'theoretically true and verifyable by experts'. It's really a matter of how we value the terms. And this, it turns out, is inextricably linked to our willingness to engage in the deep defining of terms - an art rare outside the legal profession.

So we find our modern consciousness is still highly active in the identification of threats and rewards - and the primary purpose of this 'housekeeper' in our consciousness is to keep the incoming stream of information flowing liberally. To identify or distinguish a given object in the perceptual field requires concentration and specialization of activity in the organism - this further reduces the organism's current ability to react to broader stimuli, creating, in effect, a 'danger' of attention. While you are trying to determine if the thing before you is a stick or a snake - or perhaps a piece of ripe fruit, you may miss the approach of the Lion - your flexibility is momentarily limited by the need to 'get specific' with something in your environment. What I am talking about is something that is going on underneath the conscious awareness of most individuals as constantly as breathing. Most humans are cognitive 'grazers' - they browse over available interactions, quickly selecting to concentrate and engage to various degrees, or to disengage and re-enter the browsing mode. This incredibly ubiquitous human activity is nearly ceaseless; those who stop doing it, are either sleeping, catatonic, or dead - it is a constant activity of the organism to the same degree that breathing is - but we experience it cognitively, or we talk of experiencing it thus, as though cognition were separable from our biology, which of course it never can be - being a direct output of that which we seek to separate it from.

Our consciousness seeks to eliminate the need to attend to potentially threatening or 'subtractive' possibilities around us so that we may return to our attention either to a relaxed broad-scan mode, or a possibly playful, introspective, or pragmatic mode. The main point being that if any threat is detected, we go into a parsing storm internally over it until it is dealt with or can be safely labeled and shelved. The effect for offers of reward appears similar, though not as dramatic, in general. In fact, it seems to be that the initial internal event parsing that makes the 'reward/threat/neutral' choice has a - vast- and overarching relevance to the individual's experience, stories about any experience, and basic perceptions and valuing. This feature of our nature shapes our experience, and our availability to it - it in fact shapes the only thing that we may later examine for whatever purposes we desire - and that thing is a memory. If this mechanism is constantly shaping our experience - 'rounding off the rough edges' so to speak, what exactly is being rounded off? And, perhaps more importantly - what is done with novel experience or perceptions? What are the rules society, culture, and our own experience have set up? What is done with experiences or perceptions for which an experiencer has no name for, or reasonable comparator to?

This is a 'problem' if we cannot interact effectively or intentionally with it. Unfortunately, in this case, the nature of the terrain, and of the early interactions with it and the cultural and linguistic prejudices against it - makes it incredibly difficult for most people to explore or integrate into their experience.

 

Toward a Brief Example

For the sake of example, let's postulate that a given individual has, or possibly suddenly 'recalls' the following experience. They retire, perhaps not sleeping well. Something is disturbing them during the night. At a very late hour, the yare awakened suddenly with a feeling of terror, or possibly paralysis or both. There is a vibrating sound, or a throbbing sensation in the atmosphere. A vast light appears outside their window, turning everything white. Beings enter the room, tall, spindly creatures with oversized heads and eyes, and light skin. The perceiver finds they cannot move. There is telepathic communication of sorts from the 'beings'. Instruments are produced, and some kind of medical scenario ensures. The beings depart. The perceiver finds themselves awake, in the bed where the incident took place, feeling pain where an instrument was used.

Two unique perceivers would not only 'remember' this experience radically differently;

their experience would be fundamentally produced by their perspective. The possibilities for cognitive parsing of such an event are dramatically varied. In any given individual they will of course pertain very specifically to their personal socio-cultural, technological and psycho-spiritual environment and history. While this seems obvious at first glance, this concept is largely done away with by the extremely rapid, almost knee-jerk instinct to immediately classify actors, events, and perceptions into rote, pre-valued categories.

I feel that in a general way, this is dangerous as a perceptual strategy. Exploration of such events, by their nature, requires that one attempt to extend one's ability to hold back from this particular instinct. In many cases, at least personally, I have found this single technique incredibly rewarding.

Let's examine a few admittedly completely hypothetical 'possible perceivers' in response to the experiencing or recollecting of the above described event.

Postulate a remote mountain village without access to media in South America. An eight year old girl might perceive such an experience as related to 'god' or 'gods'. The idea or concept of 'technologies' or 'aliens' would be very unlikely to play any role in any local being's interpretations of the young girl's experience. Though she might share such experience with elders or friends, she would probably choose internally whether to value it as 'magical-angelic/hopeful or evil-demonic/dangerous'. Her initial choices in this regard would likely be based both upon whatever spiritual ethos is dominant in her world, modified largely by any respected opinions she might receive from others, as well as her own personal recollections and feelings. Her categorizations and decisions about the nature of the event would tend to radically alter the effect of the experience on her consciousness, future ideation, and psyche, as well as her tendencies toward categorizing other similar or seemingly similar experiences. Most likely, as she grew older, she would parse the experiences of others against this 'frameset' of her own experience, and categorizations of it.

What if she were free to actually actively explore her experience in a deeper way? What if she was given, rather than 2 or 3 possible categories - 8? How might this affect her perceptions and recollections of the event?

Postulate a second experiencer: A 28 year old clerk at a supermarket in California.

A perceiver who uses the label 'Aliens from another planet' is coming at experience from a more limited perspective than one who characterizes the participants as a 'beings of an unrecognizable nature', for example. One perceiver might decide such beings were corporeal. Another might experience them as 'etheric'. Yet another might experience the event or being as a projection of its own mind. Three people might agree that a shared experience was purely physical and explainable - while a fourth companion has the same certainty it was para or metaphysical. Even with groups of related perceivers, each event is unique because the perceiver, and therefore the 'framer' of the event in mindspace - is totally unique - even in sequential events occurring to the same perceiver. Reality can be objectified, but no two perceivers will ever experience the same moment, even together - the very individuality with which two perceivers will come at experience guarantees this.

 

Some Personal Experience

 

The first memorable experience that I would, admittedly somewhat arbitrarily, attach to this thread would be one I remember from probably 1969. Though I do not remember this particular factor, it is likely that the evening in question, or upon a recent evening, I had seen a horror film involving a disembodied hand, in which the famous actor Peter Lorre was working. It may have been The Mummy's Hand, The Crawling Hand, or possibly even A Comedy of Terrors. I remember a humorous scene at the end with a disembodied hand crawling around - but this memory may be linked only through coincidence. I do seem to recall my parents, on being told of the experience, pointing out my recent exposure to the idea in the film - and also my stubborn sense that the coincidence was not as meaningful as the event itself, an idea that my parents, just as stubbornly, rejected.

The event itself was relatively short-lived, but not unworthy of notice. I commonly had some small difficulty in falling asleep, which I have always mostly had. From childhood, even to the present time, I often 'rock' - a lateral side-to-side rolling motion while I lie on my right side. As a child and young adolescent, while rocking, I would often fantasize or experience varieties of hypnogogic phenomenon. This particular night, I remember that I was talking or singing to myself as I rocked, when suddenly a terrifying feeling came over me, and I felt a disembodied hand grab my ankle. How could I have known it was that? It was as if I could see what was happening under the blankets, near my foot, in the bed, and that's what I saw happen. Simultaneously, the Hand spoke, in an extremely stern tone which seemed to resonate with power and vastness. 'You better shut up and go to sleep!' it commanded, shaking my ankle harshly, in a terrifying way. I tried to scream but was strangely paralyzed, and only an unusual squeaking sound could be produced, from somewhere that felt like my sternum, rather than my throat. The event was extremely brief, and the terrifying nature of it encouraged me to accept my parent's insistences that the entire event was imaginary, and thus easily excusable.

I do not really agree, however. While the content is not particularly interesting, except perhaps psychologically or metaphorically - the event, and the reactions of those involved are useful. It was my first remembered experience of paralysis. I also was absolutely positive that it had not been a dream. It angered me that my parents were so insistent on this fact, when I knew them to be wrong; although what I was really experiencing was frustration at not being heard or understood.

What I actually knew, was that, if this had been a dream, it was something very different from what I had experienced and expected from dreaming. There was a sense of realness, of strangeness in the atmosphere, of 'difference' from all my other experiences. I was frightened, but also, inwardly, intrigued. I knew it was unlikely that a disembodied hand had actually grabbed my ankle beneath the covers and shaken it while deriding me, and yet, my experience was exactly that. I didn't feel for a moment that my imagination had been significantly involved, since I had had direct and somatically verifiably (to me) sensations, emotions, and interactions with the phenomenon in modes that were distinctly different from what I had theretofore experienced as dreaming, or dreamlike - including hypnogogia, which, at that time, I was somewhat aware of, though I had no regularized terms for those states. I was, at the time, 5 years old.

Another thing was that, something unnamable happened slightly before the event. I wasn't sure then what it was, and am not now, but I felt a certain kind of shifting - that was so unfamiliar it could only hover like a shadow at the edge of my awareness. I will have more to say on this matter in later discourse, however.

The second event's date is more murky. I believe it was around 1971 or 1972. I remember almost none of the surrounding errata of events or even much of what was going on in our family at that time, but I believe I was perhaps in second grade at the local elementary school. It occurred in the early part of my sleep one night in my bedroom.

I remember having a strange sensation, probably entering into one of a variety of possible hypnogogic or pre-dream sleep states. I felt myself float up off of my bed, and begin to float around the room. My vision-sense was abnormal - I wasn't blind but I didn't understand the way in which I was seeing, and what I was seeing seemed somehow much more minimal than normal. I didn't feel able to control the direction of the floating, or even what I could see. My visual memory is of a black or very dark room, in which there was greenish light, which might have been me. As I floated around the room, and I did recognize that I was in my room and its dimensions. At once point I passed a place where, on the wall near the floor, I knew there to be an electrical socket. I felt I could sense the danger and power of the socket in the wall somehow. I was very frightened of something about it - it was, and this is something I can only see in far hindsight - as though the socket, something about the electricity, existed in both worlds. And even as a child I felt, though I could not say it to myself, that I had been, at least momentarily, in a very different world.

Again, it was dismissed by my parents (the only real authority upon whom I could depend in such an intimate and confusing matter) as merely a dream, or if not a dream, some aspect of an over-active imagination. In short, unworthy of attention or notice.

I cannot help but notice, at least briefly at this point, how science, and the nature of dominant languages, paradigms and experience focus so severely upon the primacy of what we experience with our senses as physical and 'verifyable'. The criteria for 'verifiability' in an environment where so precious few of the variables can be reasonably known (i.e the environment formed by the interactions between individuals, psyche/spirit and matter) and labeled for anything more than academic pleasure borders upon the absurd. Science, and language - have removed the psyche/spirit aspect from our lives almost entirely. Leaving a few stark 'acceptable religions' to bear the incredible burden of the hopes and dreams of an entire world of thriving spirits. A universe of them. Seems a bit short-sighted, at least from my perspective. Not to mention hopelessly unworkable.

The fact that I was encouraged to dismiss such events is what I am trying to underline. My guess is that such things are somewhat common in most or many people's lives, at least as epiphenomenona. However the incredible social, religious, and even parental biases against seeing them in a positive light create a dire situation for the experiencer.

Inherent in the experience, or even feared (even as adults) as critique is the idea that to have, or to take such experiences seriously is to be somehow broken, different, sick, 'special', or otherwise 'not a part of' the experiences and concerns of 'normal people' - who we all are somehow encouraged to emulate and be similar to in concern, experience, expectation, and even curiosity.

Such negative feedback from so wide a variety of sources leaves people who experience such things in an incredibly delicate, and often frightening position, which will tend to exacerbate their discomfort, confusion, and fear - as well as encouraging the internal formation of negative conceptual framesets with which to parse such experiences. Unless one is lucky, or intrepid, or both - the experiencer is often left with little choice but to perceive the whole spectrum of possible experiences as symptomatic, traumatic, or, in the best of situations, avoidable through simply ignoring them or categorizing them as 'junk', and therefore not worthy of any real attention.

There is a long pause in my memory of these events, or a seemingly long one, in any case. One thing that comes to mind as possibly related errata is the phenomenon of significant physical illness, and states related to experiencing severe illness or a state-changing injury. In one sense, these phenomenon bear comparison to chemically induced states - since many of these latter states are 'mini-illnesses' brought on by the introduction of 'psychoactive' or 'somatotoxic' chemistries into the body. While there may be 'magical' or 'spiritual' aspects to such events, and they certainly may transcend the label of illness, they bear striking similarities to a sort of 'highly focused illness effect' - the focus being one of specific somatopsychic sensations or tendencies, and also the experience of the associated disjunction or 'shift' in a relatively short set of time frames; i.e hours, as opposed to days or weeks.

This temporal compression makes it unlikely that we would normally choose to perceive intoxication as self-induced illness - but my personal sense is that this aspect of the use of mind-alterants seems at once clear and common. In this regard, such experiences are, as illness is, conversations with death - at least on some level. They are interactions with dissolution of self, in semi-predictable modalities that seem recoverable - meaning one is more likely to sense a predictable and timely exit from the phenomenon, should it prove too uncomfortable. It is a substitute for encountering directly in every day life the forms and unforms of interaction and exploration of death and dreaming - and of course, birth - that may arise in such states. Birth, life and death are of course upseparate in this case; I merely chose the negative to underline some of the aspects of my thought which might be better served by it.

In the time that I lived 'on the street' - which intervenes betwixt this event (as a prepubescent) and the next remembered event (as an adolescent) - I experienced a few episodes of illness-related statechange, and while different in many respects from what I am here presenting, I'd have to call such phenomenon related, perhaps significantly. The primary difference is that the return to what we perceive as a 'normative' state is not often immediately accessible for reasons related to the passage of time, and its necessity in internal or perceived state-changes in the individual attempting to 'recover' from such an illness. In most of these experiences, there was a constant and dramatic state-change in the nature and sensations of my conscious mind - certainly my physical body was dramatically affected by each instance of illness. However, overall, yet with a few exceptions - the duration of dramatically unusual states were small. Additionally, they did not seem terribly content- critical - there were few plotlines involved, mostly, I might characterize my memories of them as what are commonly referred to as 'fever dreams'. Sets of shifting hallucinatory events of a confused, and disorderly nature. Usually involving seeing blotches of shifting colors laid over the visual field. While I could delve a bit more deeply into these, I feel the treasure most likely lies elsewhere.

##

The next event that I remember clearly took place in my 17th year. I had been studying some threads of occult literature, primarily with a sense of confusion and doubt, but out of a strong curiosity and the desire to find a tradition of exploration that partook of dignity, faith, curiosity, reverence, and liberty in more equal proportions. I found few instances of things even seeming related, but I was drawn by a sense of romance, literary mystery, and also a certain basic youthful affinity to the works of Aliester Crowley. Much of his writing, at the time, was incomprehensible, being couched, as many such literate systems are in oceans of hermetic metaphor, and presented in ways that would be mostly senseless to those who had neither experiential nor personal understanding of the subjects in discourse. Nonetheless, there were aspects of the presentation that were understandable, fascinating in their gothic primitivity, and profoundly unusual. This particular factor, while I make neither this nor that of it, is interesting in its general relationship to my own walk with these experiences - which is the reason I feel it requires herein some moderately close attention, as does the matter of some of the thoughts and paradigms active during that time of my life.

The idea of 'forbidden knowledge' is cogent to this discussion, especially as it pertains to the experiences of youth in a perceptual environment that is carefully circumscribed by social and filial consensus. Forbidden knowledge is often sought and highly prized from early childhood, and in cases such as mine, far into adulthood. I have always been fascinated by what people reject out-of-hand - as well as feeling that I perhaps belong to that set of things myself. Nonetheless, early exposure to speculative literature, as well as my own direct experience of the world led me to believe that the common, and 'merely human' labels, idea-sets, and paradigms did not match up with what I was feeling, thinking, or experiencing, directly, in my daily life.

I longed therefore, as any rational and vital being might, for the conversation of my peers, or those who shared and understood my own sense of experience, my questions, and my seekings in such realms. Or those farther along a path of experience, who might guide my energies and curiosities to their best possible ends. As is common, I found few living iconoclasts that seemed accessible to me, so I turned, as many youthful spirits do, to art, literature, science, the living world, and experiment. My relationship with Aleister Crowley's works partakes of this lineage of seeking, albeit in an early and rather clumsy way which, while affective of a variety of circumstances, never yielded any overt or even covert verification of the principles I had perceived in my own reality, though some of the written material made sense in a metaphorical way and was useful in gaining a foothold, semi-conceptually, on one possible paradigm of approach.

The loss of this conversation, the sense of belonging that comes with the easy understanding of compatriots in unique or related endeavor - has been, and continues to be one of the single most painful aspects of my own path. As adults in this society, finding and building personal bonds has been far more difficult than I could ever have imagined, or feared. The fierce competitiveness, judgment, and devaluing of the adult urban environment is appalling, and agonizing. Perhaps a fertile ground for such 'mere escapism' as the seeking of the sources and powers of being alive and conscious is hidden nearby, and I have merely been missing it because I expect to appear other than it is.

Following Crowley's early exercises, I had had some minor practice in visualizing forms in my mind; simple shapes, single or multiple white lines - and also had somewhat practiced the imaginary creation of a magical dagger, which was made by visualizing it in the mind's eye as a daily practice, building it of imaginary or magical 'energies'. I had some ideas of the methods of drawing pentagrams with the dagger, in an imagined space - beginning and ending at specific points, for different purposes, such as invocation, protection, or evocation. The ideas were interesting, but beyond the basic visualizations of simple forms, they were totally untested in experience, and thus remained curiosities - matters of speculative exploration. In short, I was a practicing skeptic, exploring something unusual, and most of my preparations had been tentative, since my understanding was young and my trepidation about the topics, as well as my curiosity were in fairly equal measure.

The preamble is important primarily to outline, at least in broad strokes the conceptual environment I was exploring, or attempting to gain entrance to. Let's look clearly for a moment, in a simple way at some of the basic ideas, for clarity: There was a man who claimed to have uncovered, embodied, rediscovered ancient mystical laws and rituals. An organization sprang up after his death to perpetuate his ideas, and explore his practices, the basic theme of which was that will could directly affect matter, through transcendent understanding and 'magical' practice. These forces were identified with the shadow, announcing themselves as destroyers, remakers, fiends, etc. The metaphor was largely inscrutable in the texts, which tended toward hermetically poetic mysticism, or instructions encoded in metaphor. The systems and literature were interesting to myself and the few friends who dabbled with it primarily because we felt, that is we were of the belief that will could, in fact, directly affect matter. And that ritual was, in some sense, a method of focusing will - in short, winning the attention of god/spirits/forces that might aid one or teach one in the physical world. A charming and ancient idea, mostly seen as primitive in this day, but still rich with exploreable novelty.

With that aside, the third experience I recall directly happened in the late evening, while lying in bed with the light on in my bedroom. My bed proper was on stilts, so that it was close to the ceiling - there was a ladder up to it. I was laying down, possibly falling asleep, on my back, with my head turned to look out over the room over my right shoulder slightly. Suddenly I was overcome by an unbelievable sense of fear, it just rushed in, for no apparent reason and with at first no obvious source. Soon I saw something inexplicable before me. Hanging in the air, about 8ft off the ground and about two from my face, was a small kitten, as though an invisible hand had it by the scruff of the neck. It was black and white, and a strangely strangled mewling noise began to emanate from it. It was terrifying, and alien, and loud - but also did seem to be a sound from a catlike or kittenlike thing, perhaps one about to literally explode with 'demonic' rage or meta-anguish. I did not understand what was happening. It did not in any way appear to be hallucinatory or dreamlike. The incredibly profound terror, and the total paralysis and inability to move any part of my body, or even breathe, certainly seemed to indicate that I was about to perish or was actually being killed, somehow. Though there were other family members present and perhaps even awake, I could not in any way even hope to summon them. I felt that my life was about to come to a terrifying and sudden end. At that point, the sound began to modulate and a further horrifying impossibility began; the flesh around the kitten's mewling mouth began first to fold up into a visceral grimace, and then to actually peel slowly back over the animal's skull, toward its ears in small, torn, rolling folds - revealing the viscera, teeth, and general gore underneath. I was, at once, frozen in horror - but I remember that it was as if there was in me another aspect, one which observed, and was still curious in all of the emotional mayhem. A voice I could barely hear in myself, but nonetheless at least distantly capable. It was this thing that, at some point, reminded me that I too was a thing of powers - though not in any clearly understandable way. What I actually experienced, or remember, is a sudden emotional shift - the terror gave way to a furious rage. Suddenly I knew that I hated this thing before me with all that I was, and had to destroy it. This sudden, and at least mildly inexplicable shift caused me to refer to modalities of action that I had at least recently toyed with, and thus I 'summoned' my magical dagger to my imaginary sight, and drew with it a pentagram of banishing in the air - two actions that, interestingly, because they were 'imaginary' required neither breathing nor movement - and this process immediately distracted me from the 'cat-thing' which seemed to rapidly dissipate, along with the sort of 'ocean of terror' aspect of the experience.

The aftermath was confusing, as well, and conflicted. I saw the 'hollywood-esque' aspect of the experience again, and knew that the images, or at least the visual frames had perhaps been actually related to some specific film I might have seen. I knew discussion with my parents would be fruitless, as well. I think I did shout for my father, but it's hard to remember, and I'm certain I've no idea what in hell I might have said to him. I doubt I told him anything at all pertaining to what I'd actually experienced, but that part of my memory on the matter is not entirely clear.

I was still quite shocked, slightly elated (because I felt I had, in some way, conquered, or prevailed in the experience), and confused, as well as troubled by the possibility that I might have actually just experienced a 'magical attack' from someone known to me, or something I had ignorantly attracted the attention of. Stories, as they are want to do, grew grandly in my mind regarding the event. I am not certain that I related it in any way to any previous event. It seemed quite unique, and real. Part of the problem was the extreme reality of the event. I felt the cat-thing was there, and real, and the whole thing had actually happened in 'real life'. I now can see that, while this is true, it is also not entirely true. While I do not believe that what I experienced in that time was a regular dream, I do feel that my body and mind were not in their normal waking state, either. The reality of the experience as emotionally and sensorially perceived is, at best, very misleading to the experiencer - and this is magnified when the event either does or seems to take place in the same 'time-space' and location that the experiencer would expect themselves to actually be in - as was the case for me in this instance.

This conflict is extremely disturbing - the sense that what happened was 'real', but also clearly could not have been - or at least, within the experience, I was not in my normal, 'real' state. What then was actually happening? And what are the most useful lenses to see into the matter with eyes that will aid us both in understanding and in integrating, as well as, perhaps boldly, celebrating such experiences? How can we find ourselves better equipped to explore or find liberty in such bizarre and seemingly terrifying moments? These are questions that are arising for me now, as I write this, and explore with and for you the experiences I have had. I will try to attend to each of these questions, for now, they mark the place of my mind, reminding me to attend them.

 

(Years later, I see this event as a biblically-referring metaphor...the Lion (which is a child lion, or kitten,) has 'failed to lie with the lamb' and has thus become a terrifying 'monster' of itself...which is deadly even to behold, nevermind interact directly with...I feel strongly about this interpretation...but it took 21 years to locate an 'self' which was capable of really intimately mapping the stories, images, feelings, keys and metaphors...the paraphiers and paraphrands of my own human experience...)

I think my mind was busy trying to find a story or set of labels that I could cram the experience into, so that I could feel the habitually sought safety of having named, and thus 'controlled' with framing the emotions and sensations I'd had. I thought of demons and spirits and perhaps even something like a dreampower. I wondered if it had been the result of some ritual, and definitely thought it related in some way to my dabbling in Crowley's literature and practices - after all, I'd used a ritual to banish it, or so it seemed.

I was, mostly, alone with the thoughts and ideas, though I did, I think discuss them some with two brothers who were friends and shared in this particular avenue of interest. I thought it not impossible that one or both of them had actually sent the thing to attack me, as well - but I think I eventually saw this thought as at least slightly paranoic in aspect.

The next event in the series was perhaps more significant, and didn't partake directly of entities, or even potentially unreal events - though it was in many ways far more frightening, and perhaps either heralded or catalyzed a sense of terror in me that would quickly blossom in this time of my life into a 5 year bout with extreme panic-disorder.

I had been in the process of 'awakening' to the understanding of the significance of the existence of atomic weapons. I was suddenly becoming clear to me on a visceral level that everything and everyone I knew could be suddenly annihilated on the whim of some governmental or global-political agent. I had at least a few nightmares where our local world was annihilated by nuclear explosions. The world was, it seemed, poised delicately at the brink of this reality - and it was a matter of growing obsession with me to both integrate and communicate my experience of this incredibly absurd and yet completely real eventuality. Mostly this took the form of abject terror, and I say abject with an emphasis on that being the precise word to describe the kind of terror that began to rise in me more and more constantly as my understanding of the nature of the reality around me began to take on a more adult tone. Without drowning in psychobabble, I can see clearly different realities taking place here; in one, an adolescent coming into the most powerful moment of his life is realizing that, suddenly, there is no protector to which to turn, as the power of the parents dissolves from its godlike intensity to the human, and perhaps even frail or flawed in some paradigmatic way. The other sees the actual reality, and also feels abjectly powerless to affect it - or escape its affects. This self sees the world itself as 'home' - and thus any threat to the world threatens this aspect, or an aspect of this self directly. An important, if seemingly minute point.

Metaphorically, and more - psycho-spiritually, the conceptual capsule of 'atomic war' can play out in all kinds of different interpretations. Mass genocide by a mechanistic organization, by huge machines, has long lurked in the popular unconscious, and perhaps, is a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy, at least as it pertains to global thermonuclear war, or other acts of nuclear terrorism, of which it must be said that the United States is perhaps the most liberal and terrifying perpetrator. The idea of small suns, of burning death raining down from the sky - has been with us for a long time. It's not impossible that, somewhere in the memory of what we have carried forward from our ancestors, are images of meteor-falls that wiped out other species millennia ago. It's not impossible that the memory of those things which perished are within us, as well. Perhaps the cells within us carry memories of the Chixilub event. My sense, for what it's worth, is that both of those ideas are more likely than not. But, as is common, I digress.

The event itself was fairly brief, and rather simple in formation. I arose around 7 or 8 a.m, groggy, and realized that had arisen earlier than I needed to in order to get to work by an hour or two. The curtains on the north side of the house were drawn, and I wandered into the livingroom, where I lay down on a leather couch, facing the couchback and promptly fell asleep in my underwear. No one else was home, as I recall. I awoke a while later, feeling uncomfortable, and walked over and drew the curtain the covered the sliding glass door aside. Looking out toward Sacramento, I noticed that there was a peculiarly solitary small white cloud, floating about equidistant between the northern horizon and the sky's midpoint. I was curled up somewhat, still in my underwear in a chair whose back faced the window. And as I noticed the single small cloud, there was a horrible crimson flash, blinding - everything turned red and I felt heat and heard a high-pitched whistling sound - I knew at any second I would be annihilated, that an atomic weapon had been detonated. Then, I awoke, sweating, terrified, on the couch. In the room I had been dreaming in. When I could gather sufficient composure, I rose, and went to the chair, and drew the curtain. I know that what I saw there actually changed my life forever. The small white cloud I had seen, precisely, in my dream - that solitary cloud, hovered exactly where it had in my dream. Though at the time I did not count this anomaly as anything more than chimeric, I must in retrospect say that it was that single thing - that cloud and its implicationsthat signaled, for me many thingsthe beginning of a severe bout with panic disorder, and the first implication, or what might be perceived as actual evidence, that there were states in which one was not capable of using one's eyes, and yet still perceiving visual reality completely - at least in some aspect.

The problem with the cloud, was merely this: I had not so much as glanced outside since rising that morning. There was absolutely no way that I could have surmised, projected, imagined, or in any other way invented its existence. There are two rather obvious possibilities. The first is that, I never saw the cloud at all. That some sort of unusual brain event created a situation in which what I saw when I opened the window was somehow bonded into the memory of the dream-experience. The second is this: that I, while functionally unconscious, had a complete visual impression of a setting I had no way of seeing or knowing the current state of. The peculiarity of the small cloud's shape, which was abstract, and the fact of its position, and being the only white or cloudlike thing in an otherwise vast blue expanse - all of these added up to a remarkable possibility. If such a state were in fact possible - then it is clearly possible to see without eyes...at least for sighted people. Further, the rather terrifying intersection of nightmare and 'reality' was disorienting at best. Further still, how does one explain such an event or seek guidance regarding it? In general such things are regarded as chimeric, or at best unverifiable. At worst it might be seen as symptomatic of some sort of psychotic break - which leaves us in the common position of any experiencer of 'unusual' phenomenon being, and expecting to be perceived as broken, sick, delusional, or in some other way deranged. The fact is that the experience is neither uncommon, nor atraditional. Such experiences, it is my profound belief are part of nearly every adolescent's life - though they can certainly take place in many life phases. There are perhaps such things which are symptomatic of some sort of dysfunction - physical, chemical, psychic - or integrations of the three, perhaps a sort of bioenergetic hypertaxia. By classifying phenomenon globally in this way, or, disregarding it as peripheral is an extremely dangerous proposition. In my opinion, many of these experiences herald an inner germination of new powers, goals, perceptions, and paradigms for an individual. Often they are invitations to explore unusual aspects of perception, interaction, change, or growth. At first terrifying, they can often be unlocked utilizing knowledge from previous encounters. This is part of the heritage of all living, dreaming begins - it has never been, nor can ever be 'merely symptomatic' - even in cases where the tendency to shift into modified perceptual states is terrifying and uncontrollable, I believe that it is most commonly, though not absolutely, an act of inner desperation on the part of some damaged or starving aspect of oneself that is crying to be attended and empowered. Certainly there are situations which are more symptomatic than not.

My thesis is basically this - that there exist within all humans, and probably all creatures, these abilities which are primarily unknown to us due to their prominent cursing by science, medicine, the church, and even the English language itself, which by its nature seeks to further dis-integrate the physical from itself, and from the psychic, the lingual, the emotional aspects of self. The grand surgeon of our very language is against us in such endeavors, founded and grown as it has been in soil desperate to put to blame those who defer on the traditionalized 'sanctity' of issues spiritual in nature - or even question the traditional ejection of such experiences.

One is left to wonder what sort of realistic options someone is actually left with, having experienced a paravisionary or paranormal event. It seems that in most cases the very best one can hope for is that one's disgrace is momentary. A small reward indeed for having braved such an arduous experience. Further, if the experience - does- prove important to the individual - how will they find guidance to explore it in a context that protects and supports their individual and unique nature, as it expresses itself in their actual human presence - and not merely be perceived as broken or ill, or worthy of some other public or private disregard?

Though these complexities were largely beyond the scope of my ideation or experience at the time, they became extremely cogent later, as the variety of experiences expanded, and as I had more time to attempt to locate sources of aid and confirmation for my own experiences - a task which has proven largely, but not entirely fruitless.

Though my experience with severe panic disorder began around this time, I will not chronicle it here, for though it is related, it does not bear too strongly I think upon the story at hand, and is in its own right a long experience with a particular aspect of paravisionary phenomenon. It requires specific attention which I may later provide elsewhere. The aspect of the experience which I will expand upon slightly is the commonality of response in people surrounding me during the onset of my long experience with this 'disorder'. While, at this time, in the late 1980's, panic disorder was not yet commonly named or diagnosed, the people around me largely treated me as though I had gone mad, in a very specific, but potentially workable way. My panic was focused on the fear of Nuclear War at the time, which was not at all an altogether uncommon focus for ambient adolescent terror amongst the more intelligent of my few peers. In fact, amongst the group of 10 or so friends I had at the time, most of them would have at least a slightly similar, ongoing experience focused around the terror of Nuclear War within a year of the onset of my own chronic experience of panic disorder.

I suppose the two things that I find remarkable about this is the inability of adults, clergy, medical professionals, psychologists, or, really, anyone else to provide any kind of reasonable guidance or aid during this period of time. At best, they seemed confused, as though I might, perhaps, be making it up. Or imagining things. Or any number of other easily ignored excuses for my anomalous behavior or thought or fear.

I didn't make a big deal of the dream. I felt that the synchronous coincidence of the cloud was ripe with almost frightening promise, but I was not at all certain what to do with/ make of it. There were a variety of far more pragmatic concerns on my mind and agenda, at the time. Years would pass before I would have further experiences that I would remember, and class with those I herein chronicle.

 

Some Common Threads

There are many aspects of 'reported' experiences which are common, and any list would be extremely long - but I will present a few of the more common and recognizable:

A: Paralysis, blindness, inability to breathe or speak.

B: Attempts to scream produce a strange chirping, coughing, 'singing', or squeaking sound which feels as though it is emanating from the base of the throat, rather than the voicebox. There is a feeling of intense struggle in making a sound at all.

C: An Entity or Entities may appear, or inanimate objects may take on personified aspect.

Shining humanoids to aliens to bizarre mantis-like beings. You name it, someone has seen it beyond the veil of the daymind. This particular topic deserves a full subtopic, but for now, it must wait. I find it most fascinating when an 'entity' is encountered in a dream as an object, for example, when a pencil seems suddenly to become 'the throbbing focus of all evil in the universe' in a nightmare, or other paravisionary event. The incredible power of experiencing what the daymind perceives as mere 'objects' as sentient or even super-sentient is incredibly profound in such circumstances.

D: Storylines may or may not be present.

E: There may be the certainty of impending death.

F: Unusual environments, powers of action or thought and situations may arise almost spontaneously.

G: The experiencer most commonly feels helpless, but may gain abilities with practice.

H: There is a sense of unusual energies or humming/throbbing thrushing sounds during onset and/or return. Can include spinning, physical or emotional sensations of audible sounds (synesthesia). Singing, or extremely troubling choral-like voices - sometimes with light effects or strobing. Often there are sensations of 'energetic strobing' accompanying the event.

I: A feeling of pressure, or thrumming, or moving energy in the abdominal region.

Personal Experiences:
It is likely that I had a variety of experiences which either went unnoticed, unremembered, or were excused away by parental advisings and certainties, as well as tonal and direct verbal implications that all such experiences were 'merely dreams', and thus to be excused immediately from examination, attention, exploration or, perhaps more importantly, celebration. I imagine a world in which such experiences might be met with calm encouragement, support, and a spirit of joyful unfolding - it is perhaps this negative socialization that we receive toward experiences of this nature which informs their content, and, certainly, our reactions to this content - both during and after the events themselves.

 

The perception of 'entities', which are commonly experienced as extremely powerful, helpful, or malevolent - is often terrifying, especially in the face of socialization around these subjects which leads people to try to categorize them in general as illness, brokenness, otherness, and non-saneness. Yet the fact of paravisionary events is a reality in every human life every single day. Science has attempted to remove from us not only the powers we were born with, but the very memory of them, by calling them illness, or, at best 'symptomatic'. The labels we've been given to use upon the dances of forms we encounter by our 'spiritual traditions' are baldly stark and fall flat in the face of such amazing variety and tone as are present in the myriad personal experiences of paravisonary phenomenon or events.

(in process, last edit 7/31/02)

 

WhiteRabbittibbaRetihW

WhiteRabbittibbaRetihW

WhiteRabbittibbaRetihW

WhiteRabbittibbaRetihW