Tom,

I am highly curious about what you've discovered about the meaning of your dream/OBE mentioned in the first book--the one that you suddenly remembered during a debriefing with Monroe, after a session.

I'm referring, of course, to your encounter with the three beings that had been sent to you to put an end to your OBEs during your youth. You stated that the one with whom you were interacting looked away to one side as though he were veiwing the future events in your life, and you mentioned his expressions as well.

What have you learned, since then, that explains the meaning of that event?

Rowland,

Rowland, you win the prize. I have been dreading this obvious good question because I knew that it would be impossible to deliver a satisfying answer. Sometimes the truth cannot be appreciated without the proper experience and perspective — but to have to tell someone that as an answer is something to dread if one prides oneself on being straightforward, open, and a good communicator. Such a reply is, in fact straightforward and open, but it never comes off that way. Here goes.

Not knowing what will come to pass in the days between now and the end of this experience packet, I cannot be positive that the events those entities saw — causing them to gasp and grow silent — have already happened, but some events that could well have caused such a reaction have indeed come and gone. The action of those events took place over a year’s duration and were acted out entirely in NPMR almost two decades ago. Though the effect, still unraveling, is reflected within PMR, it was entirely a NPMR happening. Because of its nature it is not something that I can easily communicate in PMR clearly — not that I cannot produce an approximate description with words, but that no one can interpret those words accurately without having very specific NPMR experience and perspective to put them into proper context. In fact, without the appropriate context, the probability of a fundamental misinterpretation is very high — almost a certainty. Furthermore, this information is of no direct value to anyone’s path to higher quality consciousness. Much like there is no value in explaining your financial situation to your three year old. Not a very satisfying answer, even a bit infuriating, but a fact just the same.

Tom C

Well, this is your forum, which is a discussion about your books/theory, so you, of course, set the rules. Frankly, I have no interest in private matters, but since you mentioned it in the book, so I figured it was a fair question. My interest was solely in understanding the operations of the greater reality, and I saw this information as one more sliver of information to add to that knowledge.

I speculate that you could know what was seen, whether you now know or not. From what I've read in RV literature, there are no secrets. (I don't say this because I think that I'm informing you of anything, but only to indicate what was in my mind). If you don't know now, I intuit then that you have no interest in knowing. But rest assured, I wasn't curious from any perspective related to ego.

Roland,

I understand. It was a good question -- one I probably would have asked. I wish I could give you a better answer, but cannot.

Tom

You are skillfully slippery. Would that we were in a classroom, only, I fear that my attempts to wring out every last fiber of information would exhaust patience. But it is my nature (MBTI/Kersey Type Indicator: INTJ), and most of the time I am forced to reign it in.

BTW, I dearly loved your discussion of "ego" in book two. It dawned on me, at some time during the last year (before the book), that virtually every interaction I have with human beings is an interaction that requires skillfull attention to ego--even checking out at the grocer's. It's exhausting.

I've come to view this planet as something of a bottom-rung mad-house of chaotic virtual reality. I even find comfort, now, in Nietzsche and the existentialists; something I never did in my youth.

Tom: Unfortunately, "skillfully slippery" is sometimes a necessary attribute. In this case it is the only way the "P" in my INTP can deal productively and positively with the "J" in your INTJ.

Roland: "I've come to view this planet as something of a bottom-rung mad-house of chaotic virtual reality"
Tom: Brother "J", I got a chuckle out of that description -- though I probably wouldn't have said it quite like that, I do enjoy the way those words roll off my tongue.... a bottom-rung mad-house of chaotic virtual reality. Very true — and well said. Nietzsche and the existentialists would no doubt be giving you high fives as well.

Tom C

I read this portion of book one just last night, and I had two thoughts when I read it: 1) the beings got a glimpse of Tom's work with Monroe, and saw the future prospect of the barbarians at the gate, the hoards of newly-trained OOBers invading the NPMR. This, of course, would account for the distressed look they expressed.

The other thought was that they saw the eventual consequence of the publication of the MBT books, the Ultimate truth being laid out bare for all to read. No doubt some of the beings in the NPMR have vested interests in the perpetuation of religious dogma of various flavors, and Tom's books and insights would be capable of challenging some of them. Again, resulting in distress in the NPMR.

Tom was going to, in his future, play a major role in opening up the frontier of the NPMR to a bunch of low-frequency high-entropy types, and the reactions of the beings were probably spontaneous and justified. No doubt they became immediately preoccupied with battening down the hatches, locking up the valuables and tidying up just a bit, too.

But maybe I'm just too cynical. :D

daka,

Enjoyed your post. Cynical or not, there is always room for a little good natured humor.

Tom C

Tom - the thing is, that was honestly my immediate reaction when I read that section. As for humor, my limited experience with "the other side" is that humor abounds there, and it's often cynical/sarcastic in nature. Am I perhaps projecting too much?

After my first failed attempt at an OBE, where a being was apparently trying to pull me out of my body, and I was pulling back as hard as I could to resist, this being (after relenting) just laughed at me -- the being was immensely amused at the irony of my situation -- to wit, that I had longed for, sought after, tried tried and tried again to experience an OBE, and here when the opportunity was within my grasp, and was even being assisted... I rejected it. Oh, the irony indeed! This being got a real kick out of that, and I understood why, of course.

Daka,

I found your post to be quite humorous as well.

"No doubt some of the beings in the NPMR have vested interests in the perpetuation of religious dogma of various flavors, and Tom's books and insights would be capable of challenging some of them."

This sounds like putting the cart before the horse. Are we the oppressed or the oppressors? Is religious dogma compelling because of marketing or because it is the reaction of fearful beings seeking comfortable beliefs? Can books challenge?

Is an OOBE are trip 'into' NPMR? Are high-entropy PMR beings capable of experiencing NPMR in a way that is meaningful (can be remembered, can interact with and within)? Or, is the relationship between access to NPMR and low-entropy consciousness directly proportional? It seems to me that in order for the possibility of an invasion of NPMR by PMR beings to exist, the requirements for 'entry' would be mostly quantitative.

There are many interesting ideas lurking within the thoughts you mentioned two posts back. Is there a frontier between PMR and NPMR? Are they just different realms or dimensions? Would high-frequency, low-entropy beings be distressed, preoccupied with concerns,have vested interests, or be deceptive? Most importantly; is MBT Ultimate Truth?

"As for humor, my limited experience with "the other side" is that humor abounds there, and it's often cynical/sarcastic in nature. Am I perhaps projecting too much?"

I have no doubt that humour abounds, but not the cynical or sarcastic sorts - at least amongst the low-entropy types.

MojiDoji,

Aw, do you really think that low entropy beings don't engage in cynicism and sarcasm? I don't mean mean-spirited humor, because of course they wouldn't go there. But you know, irony humor -- or is that different from cynical/sarcastic humor. I kind of see your point, with reluctance. I'm going to have to do quite a bit of work before I'll feel comfortable in that setting, I guess. This PMR sure can sully one's being eh? :D

MojiDoji,

Forgot to address the other thing I wanted, which was the religious dogma thing.

I'm thinking that there are high entropy types in NPMR who are very interested in seeing and assisting in perpetuating the spread of religious dogma amongst the PMR denizens. I'm fairly confident, in fact, that that is where it all originates.

Course, I'm only just through most of Book 1 of MBT, so my perspective might change as I progress further. But I have plenty of evidence that leads me to this belief.

"Aw, do you really think that low entropy beings don't engage in cynicism and sarcasm? I don't mean mean-spirited humor, because of course they wouldn't go there. But you know, irony humor -- or is that different from cynical/sarcastic humor. I kind of see your point, with reluctance. I'm going to have to do quite a bit of work before I'll feel comfortable in that setting, I guess. This PMR sure can sully one's being eh? :D"

It depends on how cynicism and sarcasm are defined. I'm considering the standard definitions:

cynicism: An attitude of scornful or jaded negativity, especially a general distrust of the integrity or professed motives of others

sarcasm: A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule.

As you say, "they wouldn't go there" - or would they? If if the humor is motivated by the right things; why not? I was focused on the attitude which often generates cynicism and sarcasm and you were not, so we're not really referring to the same thing, are we? If the ego-driven aspect of cynicism and sarcasm is removed, I have to concede possibility of their use by low-entropy beings. So, don't assume anything about the nature of humor in NPMR, yet.

"I'm thinking that there are high entropy types in NPMR who are very interested in seeing and assisting in perpetuating the spread of religious dogma amongst the PMR denizens. I'm fairly confident, in fact, that that is where it all originates. "

There could be. My questions were mostly rhetorical. Since I know you aren't very far into MBT, I wanted to give you some food for thought and this looked like a fine opportunity. Since I haven't heard Tom's C2C interview, I do not know to what degree he defined NPMR; however, you will run across more than one NPMR concept in MBT and I was priming the pump for when you reach those concepts.

Religious dogma will find fertile ground in the minds of high-entropy consciousnesses - precisely the same folks who are unlikely to be able to experience NPMR. Likewise, high-entropy beings would be limited in capability in other xMR. The laws of consciousness of the same in every xMR frame (if I can sloppily borrow from Einstein). So, the question is - what is the relationship between PMR and NPMR? And is any xMR a preferred xMR, all other things being equal? What is the basis for measurement when considering operational potential of an individuated unit of consciousness? I have no doubt that high-entropy beings would be interested in spreading their dogma to everyone, but that low-entropy beings are less likely to accept it.

Thanks for your post, daka, you've me quite a bit to think about as well. I've enjoyed reading your posts immensely.

-Moji

[quote="twcjr"]Tom: Unfortunately, "skillfully slippery" is sometimes a necessary attribute. In this case it is the only way the "P" in my INTP can deal productively and positively with the "J" in your INTJ.

Roland: "I've come to view this planet as something of a bottom-rung mad-house of chaotic virtual reality"
Tom: Brother "J", I got a chuckle out of that description -- though I probably wouldn't have said it quite like that, I do enjoy the way those words roll off my tongue.... a bottom-rung mad-house of chaotic virtual reality. Very true — and well said. Nietzsche and the existentialists would no doubt be giving you high fives as well.

Tom C[/quote]

Glad to see your response, I've been on vacation in the Smokey Mts. for a few days--lots of beautiful leaves (and rain).

That's very interesting--I'd anticipated that you were an NT, a likely INT, but wasn't sure of the P or J. Architect--interesting. I was just watching a documentary about Thomas Jefferson, this morning--he had INTP written all over him.

I think it's the systems thinking that makes the INTJ want an answer--else, the picture is incomplete, the system is a tentative one.

Roland,

Absolutely, those Js love closure and tidy packages of completeness. In my experience as an explorer of the unknown, living with open ended questions, incompleteness, uncertainty, and continual skepticism about what you think you know at any given time is a way of life. I can't imagine life and learning being any other way than incomplete, open, and always uncertain -- that is the natural way of discovery. I am a scientist, not an engineer. I once read that Albert Einstein was assessed to be an INTP.

Leading edge research of any sort is usually open, incomplete, and uncertain -- and physics research more than most (since its leading edges are always so weird). If I were not a "P" through and through, I would have likely exploded with anxiety and angst by now and be reading auras in the back of a New Age bookstore in Sedonia AZ instead of doing physics and writing Big TOES. Two phrases come to mind: “It takes all kinds“ and “Different strokes for different folks“.

Tom C


CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE