Lucid Dreaming Claims Much Exaggerated
There is probably nothing that people exaggerate more about then the phenomena of Lucid Dreaming.
Here is a URL to a compilation of scholarly essays written regarding lucid dreaming: http://www.sawka.com/spiritwatch/tableof.htm. Pay particular attention to the one by Dr. Anne Faraday (http://www.sawka.com/spiritwatch/selling.htm ) She had been one of the first to popularize the idea of Lucid Dreaming, and promoted the notions and promises about ‘complete control’, blah, blah, blah.
Well, for everyone who says that people are supposed to have complete control, nobody actually does. Or when they manage to impose a great deal of control over their dreams, then it sets up a kind of war with their Dream Mind. The Dreaming Mind actively resists these efforts of the dreamer to assert ‘complete control’.
The Dream Mind’s favorite evasive tactic is to have the dreamer dream that he woke up – a “false awakening”. You see, the dreamer became Lucid when he realized he was dreaming, but that realization becomes cancelled if the dreamer thinks he woke up in the morning and the day has begun. The lucid dreamer then relaxes his attempts to create whatever wild sex dream he had in mind (yes, most Lucid Dreamers want to have virtual sex … with their Sunday school teacher or whatever), and from there the Dream Mind can transition the dreamer back into ordinary dreaming.
You see, ordinary dreaming must have its purposes. If a lucid dreamer were really able to totally co-opt dreaming, then these real uses for dreaming would be defeated, wouldn’t they?
I’ve heard from some Lucid Dreamers, a rare few, who said that they were able to eventually acquire a great deal of control over their dreams and were even able to detect the false awakenings. Then, you know what? The Dream Mind decided to entirely shut them down. Suddenly they could no longer even remember their dreams. For all they knew, they no longer dreamt.
So, Lucid Dreaming is not something you want to screw with – not cavalierly anyway.
But, yes, an occasional Lucid Dream is great. But one must simply take the Lucid Dream for what it was meant to be – that it is a vivid dream in which one realizes one is dreaming. The only control that should be exercised is SELF CONTROL. One should allow the Dream to transact as it ordinarily would. One should make one’s own choices and decisions as to how to respond to the action unfolding during the dream, but one should not go so far as to destroy the dream, to hijack the dream. After all, the Dream Mind took the time to create a meaningful Story Scenario for you to enjoy – perhaps conveying some important Life Lesson. Now why then would you want to cancel all that out for the sake of trying to conjure up one’s own idea of entertainment?
Besides, I suspect that people who do achieve a great deal of control in their dreams are rewarded with some fairly shallow, 2 dimensional, simplistic cartoon like dreams. Whereas the Dream Mind that does ordinary dreaming has a great many assets available to it, well, the personal imagination on the spur of the moment is equipped with practically nothing. Such dreams are typically vapid and flat.
Yes, when one visits Lucid Dream Forums and specialty Pages, one hears a great deal of enthusiasm, but I suspect many people are exaggerating, and are actually jockeying for position as Super Lucid Dreaming Guru. So they lie about their own capabilities. Then, most of everybody else is writing in to complain that they are beset with problems and nothing ever goes as planned. These are the people I expect are telling the Truth about Lucid Dreaming.
Also, there is a problem with the whole model of supposing dreams come from this thing called the “subconscious”. It is a very materialistic concept that supposes that dreams are entirely of one’s own creation – in one’s own head. Well, if that were true, it would be fine; however, there seems to be a great deal of evidence that dreams may come from outside, and that a great deal of dream material is universal or collective. For instance, if one were to have a Shared Dream – two people having exactly the same dream, or rather sharing the same Dreamscape. Well, this entirely explodes the notion of a personal subconscious mind, doesn’t it? And I can attest to the validity of the existence of actual shared dreams.
So, without a subconscious mind, then, to attempt to attain to total dream control, one would have to successfully invade and vanquish some Collective or Universal Mind. Good luck there, but I don’t think so.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
I'm sorry, but you realy have no hard evidence to back this up, and your writings of the "higher dream mind" are too ambigous to have any meaning.
Evidence!? Evidence for subjective experiences. Really. I suppose you need to prove to yourself whether or not you are happy or sad.
As for ambiguity and confusion... well, that all seems to be on your side, and may be the result of some native stupidity. You really have not said enough to show all of us whether or not you have the intelligence to follow any substantial thought, and so your complaining that you do not understand and cannot follow, well, it simply indicates that maybe you should have applied yourself more to some studies, and some intellectual or spritual reflection, before cluttering up other people's pages with confessions of your own inadequacies.
Where you are saying that you do not know what I had said, I can say that I certainly know what you have said, and that is, that you need to go back to school. And then the crankiness that we discern, well, that probably means you need your diaper changed.
You claim that the Dream Mind actively tries to resist someone who becomes lucid and, as you put it, destroy the dream. Well, My personal experiances prove otherwise.
For the past year or so, I have had 100% Lucid Control, and remembered every part of my dream. In fact, it seems as if my 'Higher Mind' as you like to call it, actually HELPS me destroy my dream scape, and allows me to shape it as I see fit. Just last night I destroyed an Entire city, and created it in my own image. According to you, my dream mind should have made me wake up early, or at the very least, give me a false awakening. Neither happened. It stayed clear as ever.
And what makes you automatically attack someone, who simply said that you lack evidence to back up what your saying, and called your dream mind 'ambigous'? You really do lack any kind of evidence of a dream mind. Until you can come out with some concrete evidence to prove your right, no one is ever going to believe you. Thats why you were always attacked on these website such as 'DreamViews'. Not because of your views, but because you put down everyone else's views, but never backed up your own except with long drawn out posts that put people to sleep.
I challenge you to explain my above situation, of my mind ALLOWING, and indeed, helping me destroy my dream scape, and taken absolute control. It completely contridicts your whole 'Higher Mind' theory.
I am capable of all this, because the dreams are simply in my head.
The reason people wake up, or have a 'false awakening', isn't because the higher mind is trying to distract them, its because their dreams become unstable, because it begins to require a conscious effort to maintain the dream,rather than a sub-conscious effort. Your conscious mind is not yet capable of controlling that amount of 'information', not at first. With practice, you become use to it, and can keep it stable.
False awakenings occur when your mind begins to awake, and your body as well. You enter a very shallow wakeful state, and drift right back into a dream. Its so brief you retain no memory of it, but its long enough to thrust you back into a new dream, one of which your body assumes your awake.
Explain if you will, why you people can have back to back to back false awakenings, even when they know nothing about Lucid Dreaming. Whats the higher mind trying to protect them from?
Yeah, he's too scared to respond to that one
Well, I figured if it was long and drawn out he would want to, so I tried making it really long lol. Look me up on DreamViews.com !
I'm already a member my username is tiddlywink101, I think Leo might remember me
Im a member too, however I can't post, they banned me over a year ago lol. They hate me for some reason :(
Anyway, Leo still hasn't replied. Wonder what he's wating for. I think I Stumped him!
Dear Kastro,
Thank you for your thoughts. I am sorry I took so long to get back... during the week I have so little time, and on the weekends I often have my studies.
Well, our first difficulty is in determining what you really mean by total control. You see, so many people who make that assertion are not very glib in fleshing out exactly what that means. For instance, you say you destroyed a complete city and then replaced it... well, with what? Your creation is mentioned in a most vague way. If you cannot not describe it in writing then one can only wonder how conscious was the creation you had made during the dream.
My suspicion is that many people who claim to have complete control are simply taking the credit for what their dreams are creating for them. After it is created they tell themselves that that is what they wanted all along.
But, yes, I have encountered many people who have insisted that they had successfully conducted war against their Higher Selves, sometimes for even a few years. Look at your own language. You are destroying cities.
yes, but this is probably seriously pathological. No, I am not saying that such pathological behavior is impossible. It is entirely possible to behave pathologically. We have plenty of psychopaths and sociopaths running around. I would only hope that such behaviors would be impossible, but obviously they are not.
But the Higher Mind does have a tendency to fight back. In one case somebody wrote in and said that their dreams totally shut down... or rather their recall shut down. For others Lucid Dreaming became impossible.
And regarding False Awakenings. Your explanation does not seem to cover just how and apparently why False Awakenings always seem to arise, and the effects that they have. It SEEMS that False Awakenings occur in order to throw the dreamer back into ordinary dreaming. Your explanation reads like some simple rationalization invented to account for the phenomena... like the scientific community writes off all of dreaming by attributing it to 'random' firings of nerve endings. But more seems to be going on than those simplistic explanations account for.
Anyway, regarding total control, I have yet to hear anybody who claims to have total control present a complete enough narrative so that I can supppose they are actually creating anything.
Steven Lebarge, the sainted guru of Lucid Dreaming, admits himself that his own attempts at total control run thin into stick figures and simple panels of animation. The Conscious Mind is simply too thin a thing to fill in much of the detail required to fill in for any decent semblance of Reality, and without a Convincing Reality, then a Lucid Dream is, well, no longer so lucid. One of the primary discriptive terms applied to Lucid Dreams is that they are vibrant, intense, powerful. So what are we to think if those who have Total Control are only drawing in shadowy little stick figures and cartoons?
Anyway, this discussion is certainly not entirely exhausted and we each have much more to say. Please ask me anything you like (and be patient about awaiting my responses), and from you I would like to have a fuller narrative of your dreams so that we may have some idea of what is meant by those who claim total control.
It would take far too long to just type out everything I did. I mentioned just what kind of control I had when I said "In my own image". I created it to my own specifications. As for the level of detail, that was simple enough to accomplish, for I take what I know, and apply it. Over the years, I have come to see many various different structures, objects, people, locations, smells, sounds, everything needed to create a city.
In my dreams, I say I destroyed a city. By that, I don't mean explosions, gun fire, and all that you would associate with destruction, but rather, got rid of everything, and basically started from scratch.
By Total Control, I really do mean total control. You name it, I can do it, quite simply I might add. If in fact I am battling my higher mind, would there not be some struggle for control? Ever since I was introduced into lucid dreaming, and really applied myself to it, I really haven't had much trouble at all, except in the beginning.
You throw off my rationalization as a simple explination for False Awakening, however, unless theres evidence to the contrary, what else am I suppose to believe? I think my reasoning is much more acceptable, and logical, than yours of a higher mind that has yet to be proven.
The only thing I can really agree with you on, is the fact that Dreams cannot be simply random firings of nerve endings. I think the fact that we are capable of becoming Conscious during that time, and can vastly effect the outcomes of our dreams, proves otherwise. But I don't believe theres a higher mind assisting us.
As for questions, I would ask you to present me with some sort of evidence to the higher mind, and not just personal experiances, but something that takes into account MY experiances as well, which seem to contridict the higher mind theory. Is my mind just allowing me to become self destructive? Or is it much simpler in that, there is no higher mind thats allowing me to do anything?
Mr. Kastro,
Thank you so much for coming back.
Yes, I am glad you clarified your desription of destruction and creation -- that the Dream City vanished and that you created a New Scene that was specified to meet your expectations. Okay, I can understand that. I hate quibbling.
Now, regarding my 'Higher Mind', well, does anything ever happen in your dreams that you cannot account for as being sourced from your own mind or experience? This would be Higher Mind. Anything outside oneself can be seen as an opening for the possibility of Higher Mind. For instance, years ago I had a Shared Dream -- me and a lady friend met in the same dream scene and had a conversation, and the next day we met and compared notes. Well, the objective reality of this dream, demonstrated by its objective concensus, discounted that it could be a manifestation of the 'subconscious'mind, a matter of imagination alone.
Sometimes there are instances of inspiration or didactic instruction... yes, these can be explained by saying that one's personal mind went to some work not cognized by the conscious mind, but, still, this does not preclude the influence of a Higher Mind.
Prophetic Dreams would also be an instance of Higher Mind Influence, though I can't say, now, that I can assert proof of prophetic dreams. Yes, I have had prophetic dreams, but nothing that has yet come to pass.
But, still, Mr. Kastro, I would like to ask whether in your totally controlled dreams you ever meet with any unexpected surprise.
Indeed, all the value I see in Dreams is from the Unexpected Surprises. What value can they be if they are simply what you will them to be? No, I am not being smart... I would hate to chase you away by any rudeness. But I sincerely wonder what draws you to 'total control' if your total control will preclude inspiration or spiritual revelation.
Oh, I felt regret last week when I failed to mention my own Lucid Dream of several weeks ago. I was levitating -- flying fast and hard and so I had to apply a great deal of will in order to change the direction of my flight, and so I did in order to climb up high over the New York, Boston, Philadelphia MEGAPOLIS (sp?) and just as I thought I would have some Cosmic Experience of Unity with all that, suddenly it just became a small garden -- from thousands of square miles, to a garden of mixed flowers and vegatables.
It made me think. Now, to me that was not 'total control'. But if I was a Lucid Dreamer who subscribed to the School of Total Control, might I be telling everybody 'that I destroyed all the cities and created one in my own image'?
Now I think it would be intellectually dishonest of me to say that I consciously controlled that dream, as what happened, happened and I was a witness to it. But whenever people who talk of 'total conscious control'speak of their dreams, I never get the sense that they are going in with a deliberate conscious schematic for what they wish to assert into their dream scenes. I feel that they may be taking conscious credit for what simply has popped up from the Higher Mind.
Now, please, Mr. Kastro, I don't mean to say that I believe my suspicion is in any sense proven truth, but it is still a suspicion.
We may be caught in a battle of semantic constructions and conceptual licenses. Some people may simply be giving their Conscious Minds alot more credit than I give to mine. For instance, where you say that your Conscious Creation is an constuction of all of your learned and experienced expectations, I might rather attribute the same Apparitional Invention to the intelligence of my Higher Mind.
what is lacking to all those who claim conscious control is a detailed schematic of nearly every important factor. I am willing to let the minor details be filled in. But even with these allowances, I have heard very little of people summoning up specific dream content.
And thankyou again, Mr. Kastro. Please, come again. Perhaps my 'Higher Mind' will take this opportunity to defend itself by coming up with some independent truth that will manage to convince you. Or, indeed, from your own standpoint, that you will set down some detailed construction for a dream -- a meaningful plot line for some epic Lucid Dream -- and you will be able to maintain that it went entirely as written.
You don't have to call me 'mr kastro', just 'Kastro' will suffice.
Anyway, I can understand what you mean when you say unexpected things happen during total control dreams. If it was true total control, nothing would be un-expected. Maybe I don't have as 100% control over every little thing that happens as I would have thought, because random things do happen that I didn't control, but that still doesn't attribute to a higher mind, it could just be my sub-conscious mind trying to create something to make sense of a thought or feeling I was having at the time.
Alot of the time in Lucid Dreams that I have, I will take a break of controlling everything, and let my mind just create things how it wants. Even with dreams that I take "full control" over, I do sometimes allow my mind a little space to wander, because as you said, knowing everything thats going to happen can't be fun.
While I understand your reasoning with things,I am still not ready to subscribe to the idea of a higher mind until more reasons for what one would think is a higher mind can be found false, leaving only the Higher Mind idea.
I think the biggest problem with proving or disproving this, is the fact that no one else is there to witness any of this, and we currently don't have machines that can prove/disprove this. So all thats left to go on is a persons own word, and hoping they are right.
Here we are, 2 people, one claims to experiance the higher mind and his own personal experiances to prove it, and another who with his own experiances, has evidence to disprove it. How we can project these experiances onto others in a way that will be definitive and allow others to view it and say "This wasn't made up, this is 100% real."? Until we can solve that delima, trying to prove or disprove eachothers ideas with simple messages is rather pointless, as we both have our own experiances moving us forward with them.
I think the most we can hope for, is to get an outsider, a 3rd party with no preconcieved ideas about this, and to let them review all we've said, and decide for themselves. I think thats the most we can do at the moment. Although I do enjoy debating the subject, I think at this point it serves not much more purpose than to kill time.
Thank you, Kastro, for your intellectual honesty. you confess that while you use the language 'total control' and '100% control', as do many acolytes of the Lucid Dreaming Community, you in fact are confronted by many accidents and insertions from the Dream Mind itself. Indeed, it has been my supposition for a long time that the Lucid Dreaming Community uses the phrase "total control" not because it is true to anybody's actual experience, but because that is the expected language, and its expression is that of an Artical of Faith in their Religion. But we find that when we can extract some intellectual honesty that there had not been any total control at all.
Now we find that my Lucid Dreams had been just as 'total' as Kastro's. All that was lacking was that I did not call them that.
But, yes, regarding the higher mind, we may be about to argue in a circle. But I did think I scored a point when I insisted that the Reality of Shared Dreaming proved an objectivity in dreams that precludes the model of supposing Dreams entirely isolated to the personal subconscious -- the Materialist Interpretation of Dreaming Dynamics.
But allow me to assert a new argument... no, nothing proved in a lab, but what many learned and educated people have noticed, that it SEEMS as though there are common waves that influence a group or collective psychology. We notice this even in dreams -- there are so many common dream motifs, that it is preposterous to suppose every individual is independently creating the same story. There are running in terror dreams, being naked in public dreams, flying dreams, being late for class dreams. There seems to be a common catalogue of dreaming which presupposes either a collective consciousness, or that every human mind is somehow hard-wired to have these dreams. But schools and even cloths are so recent in terms of the development of the human species that it cannot be a matter of dreams by nervous instinct. It must be a common psychology among us all, and that is how I would define this Higher Mind.
You bring up a good point with the common dream themes. I believe everyone at some point or another has had a dream where they appear in school naked, running in terror and other things. However, with the exception of the Naked Dreams, I believe the rest of the afore mentioned can be explained in a fairly simple way.
As a kid, many people are terrified of things, and are often fearful in dreams and will run from something in terror. What they are running from varies with person to person. As with the flying dreams, many many people wish to enjoy such freedom as flying, but can't. So it happens in the one place its capable of, the dream.
Now, as for being naked in school and public, im at a loss for words on, because I know that for as long as I have been able to remember, showing up to school or leaving my house for that matter naked has never been a fear of mine, nor has it ever happened. I can't say that it would be an influence of sorts (That is to say, someone mentioning going outside naked or dreaming of it and telling someone about it, influencing what they dream about), because these dreams only seem to happen as a kid, and as a kid, I can never recall talking to anyone about what it would be like to show up to school or in a store naked.
So while I don't agree that there is a higher mind dealing with our dreams, I think there may be something more than what we understand currently about dreams.
I kind of have a unique opportunity to experiment with something actually:
You see, I have a nephew, who I see quite often, and when he's old enough to understand things in a greater way, I may request that he keep note in a Dream Journal his dreams, and try to find some thing in there that may explain something. What Im looking for, I don't know, but I think if theres any evidence to a higher mind, it would be in the mind of someone who has very little influence to what he or she dreams about, and can truly have dreams based upon their own thoughts, and I think young kids, such as my nephew, may be just about the only kind of people capable of that.
Hi Kastro,
Again, thank you so much...
I like the idea about your nephew, as a pure subject. But it is really most difficult. Carl Jung had great difficulties in ever trying to prove his assertions about the Collective Mind, and it was because his patients, his clientel were so blastedly cultured and well educated. It could never be said of any one of them that they had never been exposed to something like what they dreamt of.
And it will soon be the same regarding your nephew. People could say he got his Collective Spirituality from the stupid cartoons.
I wish I had saved it, but this was from before computers, an article I read from a psychologist who noticed similarities in psychotic delusions -- these crazy people were latching onto the 'Christ Myth', of death and resurrection. Even jewish crazy people. What he noted was that if these people were arrested out of their psychotic delusions by pharmaceutical intervention -- meds -- then they would be stuck amidst all of their other elements of psychotic baggage. But if they could be allowed to develop completely through the Death and Resurrection set of delusions, then they would ultimately come out upon a somewhat healthy plateau.
Now, of course, everybody has been exposed to the 'Christ Myth'. But what this pyschologist noted was that it turned into an almost universal vehicle for self healing among this diverse population of crazy people... different hospitals... different states. The similarity of the details and the progression of the delusions just had too much in common in order to suppose that it was all simply a convenient coincidence.
I've never been big on that whole christ myth. I don't doubt that he existed, but I do doubt it was anything ilke is said.
I've never been a big person on Religion, and have never believed in any so called god. It gives you so much more freedom when your not stuck worrying about going to hell over doing something, or thinking its against your religion, when you don't have one.
Like I tell my mom, Jesus did those little feats of walking on water, and all that.. but I've seen great magicians do the same thing (Criss Angel just to name one). Who's to say Jesus was anything more than a great illusionist who was able to fool people into things. Back in his time, before people learned the technical aspects behind these feats, they may very well attribute it to true magic, or him being the son of god.
Well, what Christianity is embarrassed to admit is that Christ was not even close to being its greatest Saint. Vincent Ferrer who had toured Europe in the 15th Century dwarfed the miracles of Christ.
Then it should be remembered that Christ and Vincent Ferrer were most famous for emptying hospitals and healing chronically sick and crippled people.
The street magicians do tricks. But they have not been emptying too many hospitals.
And then these modern tricksters don't have the penache of the old saints with their antiquated mechanics... if you insist there is nothing really miraculous going on.
The modern levitators inch along in the air, while Joseph of Copertino of several centuries ago was said to fly swift as an arrow and to spin like a top -- zipping over heads in the Cathedrals, or outside, buzzing above processions, going over trees, walls and buildings. Now, where was he keeping the cables and the magnets?
Well, I've seen Modern day magicians do things that would be compareable (Walking on water, levitating from building to building, walking down the side of a building ect...). And while they may not have emptied hospitals, they have found ways to cut people in half and seal them back up.
And while now-a-days we know how all this stuff is accomplished, if you go back in the day of Christ and that other guy you mentioned, they would see you as being able to actually do that kind of things.
Now, while there may not be any explinations as of yet as to how they emptied hospitals, if you were to take modern day scientists back to those days, im sure they could solve that mystery quite easily, but sadly, we're stuck with just accepting that 'somehow they emptied hospitals and healed the crippled'.
Anyway, I would love to continue debating religion with you, but I think we should save that for a new topic and stick to the claims of Lucid Dreaming for this topic. If you want to write up an artical on it though for your blog (Or have one on here), I would be more than happy to read it and continue this particular discussion on it.
Actually, scientists are most adapt at simply dismissing things. They call dreams "random fires of nerve ends" simply because they can't quantify any other answer.
Scientists can only assert what they can quantify. So if you take a scientist anywhere where they cannot control every specific variable, and double-blind the situation, then they are really mostly useless.
Or these scientists come up with a priori truths -- matter cannot be created, or no object can occupy two places simultaneously, or no two objects can occupy one place ... you know what I mean. And so they can simply Rule like a Judge that no miracle happens because it would have been impossible. Duh!
Besides... have you seen how Science behaved with the case of Pralad Jnani and the Sterling Hospital Study in India. This old Sadhu in India says that he had not eaten or drank in 60 years, and all of his devotees affirm so. Well, the Doctors at the Sterling Hospital think it would be marvelous if NASA could send astronauts into space without needing food or drink, and so they bring in Prahlad Jnani and they do a study for 10 days, where they verify he has the intake of absolutely nothing, while weighing him and testing him against the ordinary expectations of keeping any man from eating or drinking for 10 days.
Well, the Scientific Community simply rejected the study out of hand, insisting that "no true scientist" could take such a study seriously.
So, while Scientists maintain these attitudes of Orthodoxy and Heresy among themselves, we cannot really expect them to be impartial or fair, now do we?
I remember reading about that man who supposedly went 60 years without eating or drinking anything, and while I have my doubts about it, if there was a real scientific study done that showed him going an x amount of days with no intake, then I would be inclined to believe its possible to a degree of time, but certainly not 60 years.
Thats not to say that I don't believe they did the study, I just want to see the results for myself before I jump to any conclusions.
I follow science, to a certain degree. Modern day scientists dismiss the possibility of ESP, for fear of sounding crazy and losing credibility, but I still believe various forms of ESP are possible (Remote Viewing, Telepathy, Sense of being stared at), for the simple fact that I have experianced each of these, to a limited degree granted, but still, experianced them none-the-less.
So I don't necessarily take these scientists words as absolute fact, but rather as a way to help me way my opinion on something until I can experiance it on my own.
Plus, Science isn't complete, and I don't think it will ever be complete. So what scientists claim is impossible now, or claim as false now, could turn around in 20 years and be proven as fact. Such as the case with the Ancient Egyptians. They KNEW it was gods controlling everything, from the sun rising, to the rain. Yet now, because of advanced science, we know the truth behind these seemingly magical feats.
I know its a big leap from Ancient Egyptian Science, to Modern Day science, especailly considering I gave a '20 year estimate' just before that, but it proves my point none-the-less. So even if scientists may not be able to remain impartial and unbiased, I still wouldn't take their word as fact due to my above reasoning that Science is never complete, and what they say is fact, is only based on what is currently known.
Well, the problem with Science is how it is cited. People are constantly saying that empirically observed events and manifestations are not 'scientifically proven'. Roger Bacon would be rolling in his grave!
Science is great in regards to theoretical research and then applied research... research and development. But to cite observed phenomena and then make a big deal that no University Physics Department had yet allocated funds to thoroughly study it... well it is simply ridiculous.
Oh, and in regards to Pralad Jnani... yes 10 days is not 60 years. But it only takes 3 days for somebody to die of thirst, and I suppose they have data on what a 10 day fast can do to somebody. Pralad Jnani was absolutely the very same person on day 10 as he was on day 1. Now I fast a lot. Even on a 4 day fast I can assert to an absolute certainty that a medical hospital would definitely be able to spot the difference in me. Christ, I'm ready to pass out from standing up too fast. On a brisk walk I am on the edge of passing out (the light head drifting in every time my breathing picks up... it is a conscious struggle to stay conscious... though the lightheadedness is kind of neat... a real swell natural high... as long as you don't pass out, fall down and break your teeth.
Post a Comment