Tom: I did not respond to your first post because I did not understand your question well enough to make a coherent or useful reply — I wondered if there really was a question and thought that perhaps you were simply making a statement. I understand your issue somewhat better now, and since you have explained that you weren't musing or being rhetorical — an answer is indeed needed.
Monty: "Why have all the main mystical traditions discouraged psi exploration, claiming it's a distraction from achieving unity, or whatever? Was it really just to hang on to power, and control access to higher states? Tom's news that this zone is policed better now than before has to be related, surely?"
Tom: Mystical groups, if they have any deep understanding of the nature of reality, would not, or at least should not, discourage psi exploration. They should discourage psi fascination that springs from an ego’s need for power, psi obsession, and a pursuit of psi phenomena that are disconnected from a program of personal growth and from a better understanding/appreciation of the nature of the larger reality. In discouraging these nonproductive interests in psi, one may inadvertently appear to be discouraging all interest in psi exploration — a simple misunderstanding. Or some mystical groups may not have a deep understanding of the nature of reality and discourage psi exploration because it falls outside of their dogma and they do not comprehend how it is an integral part of existence as consciousness.
Anyone who would discourage psi exploration “to hang on to power and control access to higher states“ is nothing more than a common hustler serving the needs of his ego, and has nothing to do with actual learning, mysticism, spirituality, or understanding the larger reality. Hustlers abound in religious, mystical, political, and marketing organizations. The manipulation of others for personal gain is not on anyone’s path to higher states. How: “news that this zone is policed better now than before “ could possibly be related to a simple misunderstanding or to hustlers manipulating the gullible is not at all clear to me.
What’s different: A change in NPMRN administration delivered, among other things, a new attitude toward enforcing the existing rules) — result: the system tightened up a bit. From my viewpoint, a welcome change — however, it will take a long time to assess the impact of the changes.
Monty: Thus bringing change (historical development) into a metaphysical arena usually assumed to stand outside of time and history.
Tom: Anyone who believes that NPMR (a if not the metaphysical arena in most folks experience) has no time or history is ignorant of how the larger reality works. NPMR is a virtual reality with a time, history, and purpose of its own just as PMR is a virtual reality with a time, history, and purpose of its own. MBT explains all this in great detail.
Monty: I've been trying to understand a similar attack in the context of a lot of related events, from 30 years ago. It was more like a female succubus, that tried it on with me, but also got its hands round my throat to strangle me.
Tom: This was a learning experience about the downside of casual, ego motivated sex. (Here I am using “ego“ as defined in MBT — intent motivated by attachment to the needs, wants, inclinations, expectations, and desires of I). Whether it was more a random mugging or set up by your guides as an educational experience, or both is hard to say. No danger — just an in-your-face lesson.
Monty: I would zip through a question series, and go through a portal, where there were beings whose language was incomparably more rarified than ours, so I had to strain to catch their drift. Eventually they told me they were performing an operation on my mentation, which went on over several days. But it turned sour - I eventually felt the questioners had been replaced with fakes.
Tom: As you say, you were selected, taken, and modified. The modification was not hostile or unfriendly, its purpose was to open you to a more robust and articulated interaction — i.e., to raise your awareness in a very particular and somewhat narrow sense. It was not necessarily just for your benefit either. You, with your new awareness, were to be used — it was functional to their purpose. The training and subsequent using was neither particularly negative (harmful) nor particularly positive though it would have provided you substantial opportunity to develop yourself in other ways that could have been positive or negative. With such opportunity comes risk. For reasons of their own they found you to be not optimally suitable to their purpose. You were dropped from their interest. The rest (“questioners replaced by fakes“) and an uneasy feeling that urged you to withdraw were part of the “don't call us, we’ll call you “ brush off that was their way of ending the interaction — rather abrupt, without explanation, and with uneasy creepy feelings of something gone very wrong tossed in — their message was “go away and don't come back“, you interpreted the message as the deal “went sour“, because it was not turning out the way you thought or expected (the way they had led you to believe), and you began to feel lucky to get disconnected after they turned out to be a little sinister and weird — not like they had promised at all. No danger, they just had a pretty brusque and insensitive way of culling rejects out their potential recruits. There is no need or purpose to tell more.