"Leaving" your body

I often find that metaphysical terminology is cumbersome, partly because terms chosen assume particular metaphysical paradigms that I don't necessarily share. Words also seem to be used in all sorts of different ways, or we struggle to describe arcane things with a language that is ill-equipped to deal with it. Astral projection is one of those topics where I get the impression it would make a great deal more sense to me if it was framed in slightly different language.

With that said, I have a question for all of you. When astral projection is said to be "leaving" one's body, what do you think that means? Do you take it literally? Is it a metaphor for a state of consciousness? What metaphysical assumptions are contributing to your answer (or put another way, what metaphysical ideas must you consider "given" in order for your view to make sense)?

Excellently articulated Question Quint! I have thought about this at great length myself.

Total agreement on the 'cumbersome terminology' of metaphysical experience. I have actually began studying Sanskrit, being as it has a prodigious spiritual lexicon, though of course it also assumes certain paradigms.

I'm thinking your question boils down to the age-old question if one is really leaving one's body, or if it is all 'just in one's head', so to speak. OBE is literally "Out of Body Experience" - the experience of being out of your body. Most people who have done so seem to accept this at face value, assuming it is just what it seems to be - and having experienced this myself, I can report that yes, that is not only what it feels like, but INTENSELY feels like! The sensation really is INCREDIBLE. It really is something I think everyone should experience some time in their life.

But, of course, that doesn't really answer the question, does it? I can say I have no doubts about it, but what does that really mean?



I think the crucial question here is 'What is consciousness?' Where does consciousness reside? In your head? The center of awareness of most people seems to reside right behind their eyes - but for most people the visual field is what they are most aware of. Numerous experiments have proven that it is not difficult to 'fool' the mind into thinking it is somewhere else by manipulating sensation.

But if consciousness isn't really a 'thing' can it be said to actually be in your body ever? Maybe it's not 'consciousness' that travels out of body, but your 'center of awareness' itself'? Maybe your center of awareness never was actually just sitting behind your eyes, but is non-local, manifesting locally at wherever you happen to be 'aware' at any moment, and OBE is just another means of directing this, as is 'normal' physical consciousness?

You see, that's the thing about answering your question - it involves not just the unknowns of things that seems strange, but also the unknowns of things that seem familiar. We know that the brain appears to be the physical seat of cognition and reason, but we are also learning that organs and even limbs can harbor memories and habit patterns, as some very strange but documented transplant cases have shown. We also really have no idea just how the brain works, or what causes 'consciousness' at all. There's just so many unknowns.

Ummm - I sure hope I've cleared that up!

[Papa Bear]

Hi Quintessence, I see your point, communication is difficult when trying to express, or abridge experience which seems tied to metaphysical vocabulary. But consider that the `Quintessence` itself is another term for the all-pervading ether (the fifth element), as are the Chinese Chi, or prana, vital energy, of the Hindu Vedas. Similarly the Nadi`s of prana represent the same reflection in action as the meridians of Chi or life force. The significance being, that their energy association or activity in explanation, is in essence, the interactive flow of the ether.

Cultural evolution structures vocabulary to adapt best to the needs of the people, whether religious, philosophical, mystical or metaphysical. Most western terms were adapted from eastern terminologies, because they were more difficult for the western mind-set to adapt to. I have had an aspiration towards adapting and abridging such variation, back to their primal source. But to direct an understanding of a source, one needs first to identify reference points which others recognize, to then be able to adapt a representation of a source connection, between the widest variations of translation and interpretation, especially in vocabulary. This then allows for recognition of a primal cause, to most if not all terminologies which represent the same thing.

To address you question specifically, if consciousness produces an alternate awareness, to that of physical nature, then mind and sensitivity must be explored as potential extensions of being, beyond the confinements of the human capacity to experience. If we depend upon the psychological speculations relating to states of psychology, then the psychologist and psychiatrist are the Gods of the metaphysical experience. And any potential recognizable detachment, from the limitations or placement of the human body experience, no matter the term identifying `where` such experience unfolds, ethereal, astral, or even spiritual, would be no more than psychological states of human brain function.

So we are left with the subjective, self-realized experience and the terms we then have to depend upon, to translate, that an experience was detached, from the recognizable human reference to placement and effect of such experience. In these areas, universal terms such as, aether/ether, astral or Spiritual, are terms that all cultural, religious and mystical reference can be directly associated with. And this gives them more credibility, than the fact they have become defined as the terminology of the metaphysical or paranormal experience. Even these terms have become diluted into energy modifications of translation and meaning in modern terminologies. So we have a choice, to use a universally recognized term, or select a personalized vocabulary, which would in most shared reflections require a universal translation anyway.

Without terms of reference, any transformation of consciousness, beyond the confines of the material psychological condition, would remain confined to the human brain, body and mind. Dreams may be an extension of subconscious and unconscious human experience, but only within the sentience of ethereal conscious awareness, can there be recognition of a purer experience of sensitivity.

As only within the astral experience, can understanding be reached, of how mind and sentience may produce interactive recognition, of interactive experiences with, those who have departed this material condition, and manifestations of Spirit who have not taken such form?
So if a reference point is required, to identify a separate placement of consciousness, as a state of awareness, then it would have to be referenced to `who` as much as `where`, your conscious awareness reflected. We can but reflect our own experiences in a vocabulary which others may understand.

If a Hindu, prana or the Akasha would communicate the same thing as, if in China, Chi, if a scientist, the Quintessence of dark matter, in the west, Plato and Aristotle’s, Aether/ether, their fifth element, suffices, it does not matter the source of a term, only what it represents. The primal cause was recognized by the worlds clearest minds, in ancient eastern religion, philosophy, science, (ref Einstein, Newton) and most magi who mastered the mysteries, who have reflected through the mysticisms of the supernatural, or as our super nature. The universal recognition of an all pervading energy, within which, all matter exists, is beyond contention, if and how we experience its vastness as a separate state of consciousness, is left to the vocabulary we choose to reflect that experience. But that is just my reflection.

Peace be with you

Originally Posted by Quintessence

I often find that metaphysical terminology is cumbersome, partly because terms chosen assume particular metaphysical paradigms that I don't necessarily share. Words also seem to be used in all sorts of different ways, or we struggle to describe arcane things with a language that is ill-equipped to deal with it. Astral projection is one of those topics where I get the impression it would make a great deal more sense to me if it was framed in slightly different language.

With that said, I have a question for all of you. When astral projection is said to be "leaving" one's body, what do you think that means? Do you take it literally? Is it a metaphor for a state of consciousness? What metaphysical assumptions are contributing to your answer (or put another way, what metaphysical ideas must you consider "given" in order for your view to make sense)?

For me, my spirit leaves my body. My body is still alive and in a deep sleep state, my brain/mind keeping it functioning. The spirit, like a person in a car, exits the car and goes walking or traveling. We always can come back to the car. We are tethered by a silver cord that links to our umbilicus (belly button). This is like having the keys to the car at all times.

When I astral, it is a time for me to leave the confines of a body, a shell. To be able to go anywhere with a thought, visit places that I may never see with my human eyes. With practice, you can also remember your astral visits. All of us astral in our sleep but not many recall doing it.

Dreams of flying is a key that you've been astralling. :)

Thanks for the replies folks! It's given me some things to think about. =)