Theos-Talk Archives (November 2003 Message tt00169)

Hey, John, you wrote: <<Mauri,Thanks for the 
link, have read the articles about the theory 
on DMT and although Professors are free to 
invent cozy theorems I can't say I agree with 
it when theyintimate obliquely that UFO 
Experiencers were somehow on a "high." >>

John, I had similar thoughts. I wonder if 
there might be some kind of broader 
perspective, though, that might throw some 
light on the "visitor" phenomena (ie, a 
"broader perspective" that might, possibly, 
somehow incorporate all or "enough" of the 
various factors---DMA, whatever---that might 
be seen to play a role in whatever "possible 
inducing" of such phenomena/experiencing 
there may be seen to be).

On the Theosophy Study List (I don't know 
if you subscribe to that list, John, but 
anybody can read it at: 
http://list.vnet.net/?enter=theos-l), Gerald 
recently commented to the effect that (per my 
words/interpretion), essentially, the UFO 
phenomena, especially the abductions, 
represent cases of confounding the planes. He 
is saying, apparently, that such experiences 
are on an inner plane, but are often 
interpreted as if they are on the physical 
plane. He's saying that since most people 
aren't familiar with HPB's globes and planes 
model, they are confounding results, and that 
those kinds of experiences take place in a 
part of the "Not-I" that's not shared by 
most, and shared only by a few. But the 
experiences may seem real, like vivid dreams. 
Gerald seems to be saying, unless I'm 
mistaken, that most people make the mistake 
of supposing or believing that the 
experiences happen on our physical plane, and 
so that, in as much as the "physical plane" 
aspects/proofs of such experiences don't seem 
to make sense in whatever sense (ie, it's 
beyond me how people, in general, might 
define "sense," "more specifically," often 
times) and so most people don't feel 
motivated enough (I think he's saying) to pay 
much attention to the phenomena (in as much 
as "most people" tend to be kind of stuck in 
their various interpretations by way of their 
"familiar physical reality"). Anyway, that's 
my speculative interpretation of what I think 
Gerald might've meant, about which I might be 
wrong, of course.

<<McKenna actually journeyed to So. America 
and directly involved himself in actual 
Shamanic Initiation with real Shamans using 
the Ayahuasca extract. As this plant
is found thousands of miles distant in So. 
America and completely obscure and I say 
unknown to the knowledge of most if not all 
Experiencers or Contactee's, much less them 
having any useful knowledge of the analytical 
process to extract the active
molecule I just do not see the connection.>>

Of course I'm shooting in the dark, as usual, 
but what about a "theoretical/hypothetical 
connection" in terms of "accessing certain 
planes" by whichever means that might be seen 
as relevant in terms of acquiring some 
kind of "verifiable/comparative data" from 
whatever outcome by way of whatever means 
("regardless," as it were, to an extent, as 
long as ...).

I wonder if the next HPB-type of messenger 
might go one step further and maybe offer us 
poor schnooks input on what's on, or "might 
be found" on/in, some of those other planes 
or dimensions, as per whatever sense, 
perspective, context, interpretive 
tendencies, karma, etc, or ...

Unless I'm mistaken, Gerald seems to be 
saying that some people can experience 
"visitors" and what have you on some planes. 
But, one might wonder (as in my case, 
apparently ^:-/ ...) whether certain kinds of 
"visitors," say, are all the "same visitors" 
per whatever interpretive/karmic tendency in 
"space-time terms" or in terms of "ordinary 
reality," for all of the experiencers on/in 
whatever "particular plane" that might be 
seen (by some, or all ...) to "have visitors 
on it," say ... or (ie) could it be that 
"other-plane visitors" are, or might tend to 
be (ie, might "appear" to be, maybe ^:-/ 
...), in general, more plastic or 
interpretively tailored (in whatever 
"significant enough sense/extent"...) than us 
humans generally tend to be or "appear" to be 
... ?

<<The reference to Dr. John Mack and his 
research was interesting, relating as it did 
that a significant percentile of events 
happen during the hours of darkness. The 
abductee I was involved with years ago had a 
"Communication" time clock that was set to 
2:10 am in the morning.>>

I have a read one of his books. I'm 
speculating that a problem of sorts there 
might have to do with the author, in that, 
(apparently ^:-/ ...) Mack, as far as I know 
(ie, I'm guessing) ... so a problem of sorts 
might be that Mack might be approaching the 
topic of "visitors" from a rather mainstream 
perspective (ie, apparently not having heard 
or not having given much credence to such as 
variables per "other planes"), so ...

And then there's the "physical 
artifacts/evidence" that might be seen as 
"left behind" by whatever/whoever ... For 
example, in the current issue of Phenomena 
magazine (www.phenomenamag.com) one can read 
about some of that evidence that was 
investigated at some length (not that all the 
articles are on the web site). And what 
about the balls of light that have been seen 
prior to formations of "crop circles"... My 
"speculative view" (whatever that means, in 
whatever sense ^:-/ ...)... so my 
"speculative view" at the moment seems to be 
that the various kinds of "evidence and 
artifacts" might relate to whatever forms of 
extensions of perceptions that have, in 
effect, materialized (evidentiarily) as a 
result of whatever inter-reactions ("karma") 
of ... whatever. (Leon, if you're reading 
this, I'm trying not to be "authoritative." 
How am I doing? And I hope you have noticed 
that, per my attempts to turn over some kind 
of newer leaf, I haven't used as many 
qualifiers as I might have.)

So I'm wondering if there might be 
"materialized evidence," like "materialized 
crop circles," that might be interpreted in 
terms of inter-planic reactivity, if in a 
form (interpretiveness) that may often seem 
novel and confusing in terms of "what it 
means."

I'm tending to speculate that I don't have, 
or don't seem to have, much interest in 
communications/experiences with/in 
"visitors"/phenomena on any of the "lower 
planes," where(one might tend to expect?), 
one might encounter much content, activity.
Seems to me that there might be people and 
"student's of Theosophy" who might be 
inclined to keep "lower plane content" in 
some kind of "more meaningful" perspective as 
by way of whatever might seem/be "more 
spiritual"... That is, not that some 
interpretations don't have whatever 
relevance, but, one might ask (?), what about 
one's higher perspective (that might lead to 
some kind of "Higher perspective," maybe?) 
... And if everything is relative, anyway, I 
suppose one person's "lower plane" could 
easily be another person's "higher plane," so 
... Or was my reasoning too circular again, 
among other things? Not that it wasn't 
circular, obviously enough (sorry), but ... 
^:-/ ...

Speculatively,
Mauri