Experiencing the Larger Reality - Thomas Campbell

From My Big TOE Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

(This page is being edited and is incomplete)

(Briefly introduce Thomas Campbell's remarks below to the reader here)

Below is a post by Thomas Campbell from the "My Big TOE Forum" with only minor editing for links and so forth. It summarizes the basic nature of experiencing the Larger Reality (NPMR)

Below is some text taken directly from my Austin workshop notes. I thought it would be useful to post it here to help readers better understand the nature of experiencing NPMR.

To make rational sense out of (and to be able to communicate) your personal NPMR experience you turn that experience into metaphors and symbols that have specific meaning to you (relate to your experience database). So, much of what you see, hear, smell, feel and taste while in NPMR (interpretations in terms of PMR physical senses that have no applicability in NPMR) is created by yourself as the closest pattern match you can make, to bridge between what you experience and what is in your personal experiential database. The more you probe, explore, make connections, and gain understanding, the greater and more capable that personal experiential database becomes in its ability to interpret NPMR experience with a minimum of distortion.

It should be clear why skepticism is so critical, why you must learn to live with uncertainty (reality anywhere is more probable than certain) and why just zipping around experiencing whatever, is not very productive compared to a systematic probing and collecting of data in order to assess what is fundamental and outside of you from what is not. It should also be clear why those who do just zip around experiencing whatever without skepticism or deliberate logical probing, come back with lots of exciting fanticiful tales to tell that, for the most part, mean nothing in a literal-detail sense and typically agree only with the observations of others who share similar cultural beliefs. While the details are different, these stories are most similar in terms of the generalities that carry the actual significance of the NPMR experience in terms of shared metaphors and symbols. Also there is agreement when shared beliefs and expectations lead to using similar metaphors and symbols to interpret one's experience (unintentional leading the witness toward a specific generally acceptable conclusion). All these stories only fuel the expectations and beliefs of their listeners and make real understanding that much more difficult. Now we must drag ourselves out of the jaws of a deeply ingrained belief trap before getting a glimpse of the bigger picture that Is not severely warped by the limitations of a host of explorers who mean well and are doing the very best they can to interpret accurately but who do not understand the nature of reality and are content to believe that what you see is what is out there.

This is the most difficult concept for people to get. Almost no one actually gets it at a fundamental level. That is why we talk of NPMR as a "place" with dimension where we have bodies and use our physical senses to describe what we see, hear, etc. Of course that is all oxymoronic - you don't have a body or physical senses in NPMR, but we speak that way and use additional metaphors (like "the mind's eye" or OOBE) to cover the inconsistencies that such assumptions generate in order to communicate to people who cannot conceive of any other way of interacting. ---- A simplistic way of speaking in order to communicate anything at all. Sort of like atoms being basket balls with BBs flying around them in circular orbits. A Complete fiction but far more understandable than the truth.

For these reason, the Hindus see 7 very specific chakras, while the Zen Buddhists and shaman do not. Why? chakras, are only metaphors and not fundamental. The beams of intense white light that light-workers use to heal are just tools/metaphors. Light is only a metaphor. Energy is only a metaphor. The various energy bodies (auras) we see around people are metaphors for the data we receive about those people - data that answers our intent when we connect with people at a level deeper than the physical. People travel through tunnels or go through doors or fly about in NPMR because they believe that you have to move to go somewhere. Early astral travelers were connected to their bodies by silver cords because they believed the physical body was fundamental and the astral body was derivative. People have to sit up or roll or do something physical to get OOB when only a shift of perspective is necessary because they believe you have to do something physical before anything can happen. People talk to (interact with) their dead relatives who appear in familiar looking bodies wearing typical clothes because that is more natural, comfortable and believable than interacting with data. Ever wonder why all those non physical entities are humanoid in form (if they are good guys) and are always wearing PMR clothes - have you noticed that robes are always in style for strangers in NPMR. All is nothing but data moving back and forth and we dress it up in human PMR form and function from our past experience because that is what we are used to, that is what we believe and the way we think - so that is the way we interpret the data.

Explorers report what they see with their own eyes. However, eyes exist only in PMR -- seeing is a physical concept. In NPMR we don't see, we interpret what we experience (the content of the data) in terms of physical sense data because that is our habit -- the only way we know how to express/communicate information. Being skeptical, having no expectations, and not having any biases or beliefs is critical to getting a good pattern match metaphor that captures the essence of the NPMR experience.

In any reality frame, One must strive to become aware of one's abilities and limitations and discover the operational causality of the immediate environment.

Because of the nature of consciousness (units of bounded organized data, sharing bits), everything is subjective, only consistent well planned probing and a statistical analysis of the results of that probing -- i.e. carefully considered experience, can give you a sense of what the objective reality behind the data is like.

Mostly NPMR experience is relationship centered (about interaction with others) as opposed observing the set. PMRs have sets (a stage and props) while NPMR mostly has just actors and ideas (data).

Picking up a rock in PMR has no direct analog in NPMR. People know that either you can pick up a rock or you cannot. If you say you can pick up a 100 lb rock then that is easy to test conclusively. If you say you do remote viewing or OOB, people expect you to describe the painting hanging in the next room - and do so just as if you physically walked into that room. Maybe can, maybe can't - there are many variables.

What is "objective here" and what is "objective there" are as different as rocks and data. This misunderstanding accounts for much difficulty for psi researchers and the public in general. They believe that operating in the non physical must be similar to operating in the physical. Either you can do it, or you are as bogus as a 3 dollar bill. There are real physical and mental issues of attaining and maintaining precise altered states - and even more difficult: remaining perfectly detached. No doubt these conditions can be exceedingly difficult to consistently achieve on demand. But that is not what I am talking about here. These individual problems are in addition to issues that are fundamental to the nature of consciousness

The process of perception is the same in all reality frames (objective source with a subjective interpretation) but the mechanics in PMR and NPMR are very different. One might ask: If our Physical world is really subjective why does it appear to be objective - the same to everyone? Answer: Because we all have nearly identical physiology (sensors). And, to a lesser extent, very similar cultures. Lets explore the differences: What if some people could only see Visible, or UV or infrared light? Different perceptions produce different realities. Have you ever experienced not being able to find something that is right in front of you - that is usually a belief issue. The key concept is: NPMR is experienced through your consciousness - your consciousness represents an awareness limited by what you come in with (physiology, personality, and consciousness quality) and the PMR experiences you have after you get here - all of which influences how you interpret those experiences through a complex iterative process of choices generated by feedback. In NPMR, You experience through your consciousness, not through your senses. Do we all have nearly identical personalities, beliefs, and experiences like we do sensory equipment? Do we all interpret the same experience in the same way? 5 people viewing the same accident from the same corner give 5 different stories - why? Then why would one expect that we would all perceive the same reality in NPMR when our sensing mechanism (consciousness receiving data) is so dramatically individual?

The language of consciousness within the less constrained virtual realities (what we call the nonphysical) is about the choices, the intents, the web of interaction, about learning potential -- People and relationship -- not about the details of the set or on the petty ego needs of the players. The details of the set are peculiar to your PMR experience and personal in how they relate to you -- but have no intrinsic value or importance. They are often not saved in the databases in high fidelity detail - you may, in your remote view of the historical database, notice a picture on the wall but the details of the picture are not recorded or displayed unless there is some big picture need to do so (some meaning or significance or some connection to someone's growing up). Insignificant data is not tracked or stored. Ever notice things that you have seen 100 times but never recorded? Neighbor's green shutters ; a comic book store. The finite resources of the larger consciousness system are not wasted on recording and displaying things that are not relevant to the purpose of the system.

"What you experience (data received) does have an objective source within the reality frame you are in. but how you experience it is subjective." Here, in PMR that subjective component is in the margins (5 people all see an accident from the same corner) - in NPMR - data exchanges between very fundamentally different interpretive consciousnesses -- the difference is not in the margins - it is primary.

Data from NPMR: Try to describe the room you are in both conceptually and linearly. The conceptual lacks detail but captures ambience and significance while the linear is a descriptive list of items. For those in PMR it is the linear detail ( the facts) that constitutes "proof" of an NPMR vision because PMR residents extrapolate their sense of an "objective" physical reality to their expectations of NPMR. However, NPMR bandwidth is not wasted on insignificant PMR details.

Let's explore the idea that you interpret the data you receive from NPMR in terms of metaphors and symbols that mean something to you - that are relevant to your experience data base. For example: You experience a NPMR being of great knowledge teaching or helping others on a grand scale. As a result, you interpret: Saint, angel, Jesus / Ancestor, guru, Master / Advanced Being, guide, helper depending on your beliefs and culture. If You have a deep fear - insecurity - that you are small and out of your element when in NPMR, you may get a monster, an evil being as a metaphor or symbol of that fear.

Another example: You are asked to remote view and describe a picture on the wall. The picture is of horses jumping over a hedgerow on a sunny day with onlookers -- a picture of an Old English Fox hunting scene. You get the fundamental nature of the picture - a sense of jumping animals, lots of commotion and excitement, a mix of people and critters - staged drama, something impending, an uncertain ending. Because you are not at all familiar with the experience of fox hunts, but have been to many circuses, you interpret this data as a circus act - horses or other animals jumping - multiple animals, lots of commotion and excitement, a mix of people and critters - staged drama, something impending, an uncertain ending. So you say: "It's a picture of a circus act involving people and animals doing tricks - with the ambiance of a bright, fun, and expectant holiday outing atmosphere ... except, you say, there is this overtone of violence that just doesn't fit. if you are NOT a practiced observer, you might add in some clowns and elephants just to make your circus metaphor more complete. The little red hats the fox hunters are wearing are entirely missing from your received data because they carry no value or significance in NPMR terms. They are meaningless details of the PMR set not worth recording. Though you get a 100% as far as receiving the NPMR data describing the picture accurately, your metaphor is wrong and much detail of the setting (e.g., red hats, woods, etc) is missing - from the PMR view (where the physical setting detail is the most important thing - a literal, linear list of the stuff in the picture) you failed miserably and get a zero. Point: when your intent says: "what is that picture about, what does it look like", you should not expect to receive a photographic image of the picture. You will get only data that captures the significance of the picture from an NPMR perspective and you will have to interpret that data according to your experience base.

Fear, Belief, and Inexperience are the primary constraints that keep you from experiencing what is actually there (the full content of the data). Not from experiencing at all, but from experiencing what is actually intended by the larger consciousness system to answer your specific intended query.

Tom Campbell[MBT Forum 1]


MBT Forum References

(note to be added)

  1. MBT Forum, "Other Discussions", "Physics", Thread = "An Orientation to Nonphysical Experience