conformation/validation? absolutely! :)

[slider]

### - just found this posted in ref. to 'The WILD Way' in another group on
fb, by a nice young lady who's only just joined our WILDs & WILDing group,
and with spectacular results! :)

Mia: I've had a wonderful success with this method and can't sing its
praises high enough. 11 wilds now in only 3 weeks or thereabouts from only
ever reading about lucid dreaming before. If someone hadn't recommended
this book to me I would probably be still wondering what the heck is going
on, as I was having some weird experiences on going to bed and didn't
realise what it was.

This book not only cleared that all up, but has also opened up a whole new
world of being to me just like that! Plus I've never felt so good in
myself either? I feel really healthy and there's a spring in my step that
just wasn't there before! I 'love' this experience and can't recommend it
enough. xx

***

so you see chris, they 'can' get it! - and love it!

where they 'go' with it all, however, might just be another matter
altogether haha :)

(oooh look! i've learned to lucid dream with my head up my ass again!)

wouldn't surprise me in the least hehehe :)

[slider]

### - chalk up another winner :)

this young dude is only 16/17 and has been trying for a year to go WILD,
problem was he wasn't trying every night but only occasionally when he
remembered to try it, a busy young student in india apparently doing 12
hours per day of study (sheesh) he kept falling asleep and/or not able to
find any hypnagogia, or losing them when he maybe thought he did... one
thing he did perfect in that time was his ability to relax however heh,
and then his breakthrough came only a little while back (which was posted
here) that involved keeping his eyes still and staring straight ahead
instead of letting them dart about looking for hypnagogia, and when he did
that (kept his eyes completely still i mean) that's when the hypnagogia
really started to come to him...

and now we have his second WILD experience (which he says he'll also post
in the group in more detail later for the benefit of others) and of which
he just messaged me about on fb; in his own words then:

***

Omg...i had a intense hypnagogia last night..it was llike falling
continously for 30 seconds or so...great feeling...& it followed by a very
vivid visual hypnagogia & pulled me to WILDing...
Cooooooooll...im still wondering how amazing & easy it is to WILD at
will...

***

smile, give him a couple of months and he'll likely be WILDing at the drop
of a hat heh :)

------------

ping chris... i gots an answer for ya's from dreaming this morning re
what's it all about (alfie?):

i went WILD and (for myself only) asked out loud: tell me something about
lucid dreaming that i haven't realised yet?

and i gots back what i guess i already knew but hadn't quite put together
in this manner:

"there is NO knowledge in lucid dreaming 'until' you get to the midway
point! after which it ceases to be just a dream anymore and becomes a
living reality..."

meaning: once someone gets to the midway point they're on their own, and
can then do + learn everything/advance all by themselves; they need
nothing else: 'life' itself has become the teacher :)

and because, only once the midway point is achieved does it all becomes
totally volitional to be able to enter into that altered state of
awareness we then 'call' lucid dreaming in a supremely/ultimately sober
manner, and get anything from it besides jerking oneself off merely
amusing ourselves...

why do that? because there's knowledge available to us from that midway
pov that isn't available under any other circumstances AND being there
also contains the ability to then carry it out...

+ screw-you if ya can't be bothered to get there and see/find out for
yourself heh, am done encouraging you...

plus with jeremy on yer' back all the time like that (even to openly
punishing you in public like he thinks he's your fuckin' mother or summat
geez!) am not surprised if life itself is becoming nothing to ya other
than just something more to piss up the nearest wall right along side
him...

but then that's 'your' problem, no one else's...

(in my observation you been sitting under that shits desperately
dominating shadow far too long pal and is dragging you down with him... to
nada... 'coz that's what drowning people do!)

now back-under ya's all go fuckers!

maybe even for the last time :P

[slider]

### - (posted in the WILDS & WILDing fb group just a few moments ago from
india!)

Hiyaaaaaa... :)

Last night i had a intense hypnagogic sensation of falling continously for
about 30 seconds or so...it was very realistic as u were falling in real
life...& also after this sensation ,there came a very very vivid
hypnagogic imagery & when i just look at it,it pulled me into a beauting
super realistic WILD...

So friends,basically i've 2 advices for those who're finding it difficult
to WILD,

the first thing is what i mentioned in my previous post..."CONSISTENCY IN
PRACTING" & the second thing is for those who find it difficult to find
hypnagogia..."HYPNAGOGIA ONLY COMES WHEN U R RELAXED VERY WELL"...dont
rush /skip relaxation part,it is the KEY to hypnagogia & hypnagogia is the
KEY TO WILDing...so stick on to that 2 points...my experience teached me
that things...

I hope this helps u...

If u have any doubt/qstions feel free to ask 😇😊...

And BELIEVE ME, "IT IS REALLY SIMPLE & EASY TO WILD" if u stick on to that
2 POINTS i mentioned above...i can guarantee that... :)

All the best peeps & happy WILDing...

***

nice! and, i would have to say, prolly a fairly standard experience
awaiting just about anyone who attempts WILDing!

kewl :)

[slider]

> thank you boss may i have another?

### - sorry to have been so... 'direct' :)

but this is something one can 'only' give to... oneself?

(kicking his chair): the jackpot IS that 'midway-point' ya ninny!

everything else leads only to that point or it's a waste of time...

devoted a whole chapter to it he did? :)

that *that's* what it's really all about! only i thought/imagined/figured
you talented idiots (intelligent twats? haha:) finding/figuring all that
out for... yourselves?!

(didn't wanna spoil the surprise see?)

only none of ya's can be bothered to even check, you saw it here first was
all...

gave ya's first refusal was best i could do?

(didn't imagine you'd just gob/trample all over it tho hah...)

i.e., there's a distinct difference between healthy scepticism and an
immobilising cynicism??

did my best by you's was all i 'could' do... even by that braying jackass!

end of story folks.

plus who'll provide the 'trump-breaks' now eh?

back under foreveeeer! :P

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

Yeah, you have loads of fun out there in 'Imagination Land'. :)

________________$$$$
______________$$____$$
______________$$____$$
______________$$____$$
______________$$____$$
______________$$____$$
__________$$$$$$____$$$$$$
________$$____$$____$$____$$$$
________$$____$$____$$____$$__$$
$$$$$$__$$____$$____$$____$$____$$
$$____$$$$________________$$____$$
$$______$$______________________$$
__$$____$$______________________$$
___$$$__$$______________________$$
____$$__________________________$$
_____$$$________________________$$
______$$______________________$$$
_______$$$____________________$$
________$$____________________$$
_________$$$________________$$$
__________$$________________$$
__________$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Pointing with the middle, you see it there? The midway point? :)

To make a few serious comments, having experienced that phenomena
several times (decades ago), I didn't and still don't see it
as being especially meaningful or profound. Just my opinion.

Yet ironically, I DID also come to that same conclusion myself,
back in about 1987: that I could "do + learn everything/advance
all by myself; that I needed nothing else; and that life itself
was the teacher". I drew that conclusion more than 30 years ago.

My favorite guru at the time, Carlos Castaneda, even wrote the
very same thing, in his book "The Power Of Silence". To me,
at that time, it was corroboration of something I had just
discovered for myself. These days I would put it all in
slightly different terms, of course.

Actually, I think in a way it is the case for everyone, period,
after reaching adulthood. And dreaming isn't really special.
That 'lesson' applies to all of living - not just dreaming.
After reaching adulthood, your basic teacher is life itself.

Wrt dreaming and LD specifically, I'm still not sure there's
anywhere to "go" after reaching a certain level of proficiency.
For although I continued LD for decades afterward, I never
"got anywhere" that seemed like it was "beyond that". If you
"reach anything" I'd say it is simply a degree of detachment
regarding ALL dreaming scenes. Where is there to "go" which is
"beyond" that in the virtual worlds of dreaming? I think Slider
may be just assuming there is somewhere 'fantastic' to go beyond
that point, and I really don't think so.

At best, dreaming seems to give your own mind a way of "talking"
with its 'whole being' to your conscious mind. And what I've found
is that there are significant aspects of that process which occur
both in full conscious awareness and in more unconscious states
(i.e. ordinary dreams), and even in something I might call
"sleeping thoughts". There is a "spectrum" of sorts in our
mental states and ALL of that spectrum can at times have value,
not just the fully conscious parts (either in waking or in LD).

Recently, I've gotten to a point in my own LD where I can totally
wipe away the dreaming scene at will (iow, not only does it not
matter what the dreaming scene is, there doesn't even have to be
a dreaming scene at all). Not that doing that "leads anywhere"
especially 'profound' either. Not in my experience yet, anyway.
It's just one more thing one can do in dreaming and like everything
else in dreaming it has fuck all to do with the real world, except
that it involves the further exploration of your own mind.

In a way, dreaming is the ultimate mental masturbation. :)
It's all about YOU.

And there are still plenty of other 'teachers' for everyone in the
real world. Try to learn advanced Calculus or Physics or complete
some major task in computer science or engineering without any
teacher(s) and see how far you get all on your own.

.

[slider]

> Brian my boy Vini's book
> might sober you up some.

### - lol stop talkin' shite (heh) and just get yourself to that 'midway
point' business and then you'll 'finally' know for 'yourself' just what
"sober" actually + really 'means & does'

and then ya might then even write a book like vinny's hah! ;)

and 'coz that's where it all... is! (and begins!)

IF... you were lookin' for anything that is hehehe...

(you actually knew all about it when you WILDed in your hot tub that time;
(quote: "son of a bitch it IS actually possible to dream while you're
awake!") - that was the real deal! - plus silly bollocks has 'never'
experienced 'anything' like that and so has no idea wtf he's bs-ing about!
you actually already know 'more' than him in that respect...)

[slider]

### - yeah yeah, get back to me when you no longer NEED to lie?

wont be holding my breath any tho' :)

[slider]

### - curious (or not so curious really...) from a new member with a
history of WILDing:

"one thing in particular. I had stage fright before and used lucid
dreaming to practice in front of an audience. I teleported myself to an
opera-like stage and first I manifested just a few people but over a
couple of dreams I filled the room and spoke(about lucid dreaming) to them
all.

So now when I think back on when I spoke in front of several hundred
people then a room of twenty is no problem"

***

almost verbatim what i wrotes about innit heh :P

[slider]

On Mon, 02 Jul 2018 00:07:24 +0100, fuckowski <allre...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> But it was just my imagination once again runnin' way with me
> Tell you it was just my imagination runnin' away with me


### -better change your shampoo or whatever then 'coz it's apparently
givin' ya hallucinations

[slider]

> i'm not that far off amigo.

### - no skin off my shin bub + wont mention it again.

[slider]

> slider i ran into your favorite mexican restaurant
> today in Hunt Beach. It's called Castaneda's 24 Hour
> Mex Restaurant. Mmmm yummy beaner food. There's just
> not enough Mexican restaurants here in So Cali. This
> place just opened up. La Gorda was working the counter.

### - but you're the one who met him not me? (weird shit you say sometimes
heh)

odd you should say that though 'coz i passed a place today called chris's
retirement home?

wasn't sure what to make o' that one :)

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

Chris, there are well over 100 Castaneda's Mexican Food restaurants
in California. :)

.

[slider]

On Tue, 03 Jul 2018 02:08:48 +0100, fuckowski <allre...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> i did not know that.

### - oh just accept it (let him vent? haha!) after all, he prolly went
round to every single one of 'em and counted 'em all ffs! lol :P



OK so i am hip now eh?

### - oh glasshopper of the 10,000-reprimands path hah; this is only
reprimand-32.5 and you're already complaining under the lash?? (slider
humming: it's a long fuckin' way to Tipperar-yyy!)

plus just wait till all the 'trump' restaurants start opening??

lordy you ain't seen/heard nothing yet! :))))

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

On Monday, July 2, 2018 at 7:45:54 PM UTC-7, slider wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Jul 2018 02:08:48 +0100, fuckowski <allre...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, July 2, 2018 at 5:27:42 PM UTC-7, Jeremy H. Denisovan wrote:
> >> Chris, there are well over 100 Castaneda's Mexican Food restaurants
> >> in California. :)
> >>
> >> .
> >
> > i did not know that.
>
> ### - oh just accept it (let him vent? haha!) after all, he prolly went
> round to every single one of 'em and counted 'em all ffs! lol :P

I knew there were lots of 'em since I'd happened across them
in several places in California. So I did a Google Maps search on
Castaneda Mexican restaurants in California, which instantly shows
how many there are.

Tip:
Your harmful intentions are what continually make you into an idiot. :)

> OK so i am hip now eh?
>
> ### - oh glasshopper of the 10,000-reprimands path hah; this is only
> reprimand-32.5 and you're already complaining under the lash?? (slider
> humming: it's a long fuckin' way to Tipperar-yyy!)
>
> plus just wait till all the 'trump' restaurants start opening??
>
> lordy you ain't seen/heard nothing yet! :))))

There are a bunch of Trump restaurants already.
https://www.trump.com/entertainment/dining/

But po' boys like us seldom eat in such places.

.

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

It's worth noting that Trump's restaurants aren't doing so hot.
Most of his hotels aren't doing so great either.

http://tinyurl.com/ybd2cazh

Quotes:

Trump’s business is private, meaning financial data is hidden. But average room rates have plummeted in every Trump U.S. hotel, according to a November 2017 study, indicating a fall in customer demand. The hardest hit was Trump International Hotel Las Vegas, where the average rate fell by 63 percent from January 2017 to January 2018.

When Koi, a Japanese/sushi restaurant in the Trump SoHo in New York City, closed in June 2017, it also blamed a decline in business following the election. A representative told Money at the time that the drop in business, along with “a whole host of reasons,” was the cause for the closure; an employee who worked at the restaurant drew a stronger line toward the Trump name, telling Grub Street, “Before Trump won, we were doing great. There were a lot of people we had, our regulars, who’d go to the hotel but are not affiliated with Trump. And they were saying if he wins, we are not coming here anymore.” (The Trump Organization eventually parted ways with the Trump SoHo. It’s now rebranded as the Dominick Hotel.)

“It can be generally quite risky to associate one’s brand too closely with political issues,” says Aaron Allen, a global restaurant consultant. “Generally, what we’re hearing [in news reports] is that most of the properties are down, with the exception of Mar-a-Lago.”

***

My favorite:

"...every Trump property — from Honolulu to Miami to New York —
is in a Democratic-leaning city that favored presidential nominee
Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election."

Uh oh.

.

[slider]

### - having spent the better part of 20 years in this gaff, i prolly
couldn't BE more hardened to insults and digs?

what i have difficulty with, however, and accordingly, are complements???
(cringe factor of 7 or 8 lol)

like this one today hahaha...

Tibor Pajer Brian, I like your book very much! Your logical and
observative aproach to the different states of consciousness is simple
excellent! :) I recommend it to everybody!

***

and english isn't even his first language hah! :)

and, is only a shame jeremy couldn't have been 'as-objective' in 'his'
review huh...

:D

[thang ornerythinchus]

On Sun, 08 Jul 2018 21:19:48 +0100, slider <sli...@anashram.org>
wrote:

Well done.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[slider]

On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:00:59 +0100, thang ornerythinchus
<thango...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 08 Jul 2018 21:19:48 +0100, slider <sli...@anashram.org>
> wrote:
>
>> ### - having spent the better part of 20 years in this gaff, i prolly
>> couldn't BE more hardened to insults and digs?
>>
>> what i have difficulty with, however, and accordingly, are
>> complements???
>> (cringe factor of 7 or 8 lol)
>>
>> like this one today hahaha...
>>
>> Tibor Pajer Brian, I like your book very much! Your logical and
>> observative aproach to the different states of consciousness is simple
>> excellent! :) I recommend it to everybody!
>>
>> ***
>>
>> and english isn't even his first language hah! :)
>>
>> and, is only a shame jeremy couldn't have been 'as-objective' in 'his'
>> review huh...
>>
>> :D
>
> Well done.

### - hahaha you're trying to make me cringe innit lol...

so how about this one?

Scott Robinson on Facebook, 7th June 2018:
I am preparing to plug Brian Aherne's (slider's) book big time on my
unworlding group just this morning since this awesome book has just
provided me with a milestone experience, my first ever totally lucid WILD
from a waking state. This is the first really great, original book I've
found in a long time...

(i like it, but it still has a cringe-factor of around 8 lol and perforce
will have to go into hiding if it gets any worse haha...) :)

[thang ornerythinchus]

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 09:10:51 +0100, slider <sli...@anashram.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:00:59 +0100, thang ornerythinchus
><thango...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 08 Jul 2018 21:19:48 +0100, slider <sli...@anashram.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> ### - having spent the better part of 20 years in this gaff, i prolly
>>> couldn't BE more hardened to insults and digs?
>>>
>>> what i have difficulty with, however, and accordingly, are
>>> complements???
>>> (cringe factor of 7 or 8 lol)
>>>
>>> like this one today hahaha...
>>>
>>> Tibor Pajer Brian, I like your book very much! Your logical and
>>> observative aproach to the different states of consciousness is simple
>>> excellent! :) I recommend it to everybody!
>>>
>>> ***
>>>
>>> and english isn't even his first language hah! :)
>>>
>>> and, is only a shame jeremy couldn't have been 'as-objective' in 'his'
>>> review huh...
>>>
>>> :D
>>
>> Well done.
>
>### - hahaha you're trying to make me cringe innit lol...

Not at all. You have done well. You've created a literary work
regardless of objective merit and self-published within limited
financial means. You've attained an audience and critical acclaim. It
is a feather in your cap and I will not withhold congratulations
because we don't see eye to eye on a lot of things.

In my last full career, I employed many professionals (law and
accounting and one electrical engineer) and I always congratulated
those who did well (and generated fees). It's simple Organisational
and Behavioural Theory 101 - some call it Theory Y (look it up), I
call it deserved merit.

>
>so how about this one?
>
>Scott Robinson on Facebook, 7th June 2018:
>I am preparing to plug Brian Aherne's (slider's) book big time on my
>unworlding group just this morning since this awesome book has just
>provided me with a milestone experience, my first ever totally lucid WILD
> from a waking state. This is the first really great, original book I've
>found in a long time...
>
>(i like it, but it still has a cringe-factor of around 8 lol and perforce
>will have to go into hiding if it gets any worse haha...) :)

[thang ornerythinchus]

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 07:59:27 -0700 (PDT), fuckowski
<allre...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Can’t you feel that sun a-shinin’?
>
>Groundhog runnin’ by the country stream
>
>This must be the day that all of my dreams come true
>
>So happy just to be alive
>
>Underneath the sky of blue
>
>On this new morning, new morning
>
>On this new morning with you

It's the depths of winter here and I've got laryngitis. I do not
share your feelings nor do I share your view.

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

Always loved that song (and actually, most of that whole album). :)

.

[slider]

On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 02:35:59 +0100, thang ornerythinchus

### - no need to applaud ffs, can just throw money instead? (really
laffing hahaha...)

> In my last full career, I employed many professionals (law and
> accounting and one electrical engineer) and I always congratulated
> those who did well (and generated fees). It's simple Organisational
> and Behavioural Theory 101 - some call it Theory Y (look it up), I
> call it deserved merit.

### - yeah well, i wasn't trained to write so had to sweat blood to
produce that for general consumption (there was actually a lot of 'zen'
involved in writing all that & compiling it) ;)

[thang ornerythinchus]

On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 23:36:40 +0100, slider <sli...@anashram.com>

I meant it. It takes discipline to create. But you have a lot of
time on your hands, yet nevertheless...

>
>
>
>
>> In my last full career, I employed many professionals (law and
>> accounting and one electrical engineer) and I always congratulated
>> those who did well (and generated fees). It's simple Organisational
>> and Behavioural Theory 101 - some call it Theory Y (look it up), I
>> call it deserved merit.
>
>### - yeah well, i wasn't trained to write so had to sweat blood to
>produce that for general consumption (there was actually a lot of 'zen'
>involved in writing all that & compiling it) ;)

Agreed. I was never trained to write either, no one really is, it's
an aptitude and a love of letters. I love the language.

[slider]

### - ok this is a pretty cool review on fb :D


Don Salmon: in WILDs & WILDing:

Ok, just got Brian's book on Kindle. I'm reporting in real time.

I just skipped to the techniques chapter. I should mention (a) I've had
many spontaneous lucid dreams since early childhood (that's the 1950s);
(b) did a 6 month research project in 1991 involving teaching WILD to 12
research subjects (it was quite successful, by the way) and (c) have used
relaxation and hypnagogic imagery as the basis of WILD for years.

yet within the first few pages, I see something new - the way Brian talks
about the need to not just observe hypnagogic images (from here on,
"images" for short) but look at them in fine detail is, I can't believe
it, something I haven't seen before (I've discovered it myself but tend to
keep forgetting that crucial detail - it's GREAT to see someone else
pointing this out)

a little later, in the relaxation section, he mentions breath holding but
without "corking" or tensing your throat; if you haven't done this, don't
ignore it - it's a great way to relax; I'd also mention "ujayi" breathing
(look it up on youtube); basically, a very slight, gentle closing of the
glottis, the muscles of the throat; it also induces relaxation for many;
but stay calm and loose and playful about it....

I just saw an article in Medium on a technique taught in the military to
guarantee falling asleep in 2 minutes or less. it's basically what Brian
is teaching here - so, again, don't overlook this step.

He later tells you to notice an overall tingling sensation - people who
have practiced out of body experiences for years almost always note this -
i've also found if you can reach it reliably it's the perfect sign that
you're much closer to a WILD.

ok, there's too much to comment on. I'm on page 77 and I now declare this
the best lucid dream book I've ever read (previously I thought it was Alan
Wallace's "Dreaming Yourself Awake." To be fair to Alan, as far as
Buddhist philosophy goes, Alan's is still the best. But that's not Brian's
intention - his is purely practical.

For practical lucid dreams, you just can't beat this

(and FYI, no, i never heard of Brian until I joined this group a week ago
and I promise you, he didn't pay me to write this:>))))

I'm off to Amazon to see if I can order a physical copy of this book.

***

damn nice review eh? and he hasn't even read the second/deeper half yet
heh...

very interested to see what he makes of it all tho' + do enjoy his
excitement in the matter :)

[slider]

> me i'm still tryin' to
> relax enough to take off.

### - smile @ this coming from the 'dude' who went WILD in the hot-tub one
time without even trying??

iow: i think you obviously already know how to relax enough, and to
precisely what degree...

relaxing isn't your problem... letting-go is?

so relax enough-enough already... and then just let go!

and see what, if anything, happens?

technically you already 'know' what to do, and exactly how to do it!

some 'inner-part' of you certainly does! (thrice already!)

you just haven't done so 'deliberately' is all... that's where you're
getting stuck

haven't deliberately abandoned (or let go of) yourself, so it's seemed
like an accident each time/were slightly distracted...

mastery of/over it, being the direct corollary of being able to
'deliberately' turn it all on/off at will, something that only comes
later... iow: you maybe have to have that 'attitude' towards it all as
though you been doin' it all your life kinda thing to somehow let that
part of you out that already knows how to do this do it's work...

maybe don't 'try' so hard then and just let it happen, reaching a little
farther every time

and 'coz whatever it is you're trying it ain't working, or is actually
working against it...

here's a suggestion: 'know' you know how and just 'expect' it to happen! :)

and with minimal relaxation too (no need to make such a big deal outta
relaxing i mean, especially after having had a little sleep as with using
wbtb)

and good luck :)

[slider]

### - ok, here's this same dude responding now to jeremy's amazon review
heh :)


Don Salmon
Ok, one more thought (I just posted a few moments ago having just read the
first quarter of Brian's book and already having had a successful WILD)

Someone on Amazon complained about Brian's claim that WILD's are better
than DILD's.

Here's some scientific research that led me to favor WILDs:

As far back as William James, neuroscientists and psychologists understood
that our world - the waking world we take for granted - isn't just "out
there" as we perceive it. In fact, our brain (our "mind, actually, but I
don't want to get too philosophic here) constructs (not creates!) the
entire array of sights and sounds and tastes and smells.

But there's something particular about the way it does this - in the space
of a few thousandths' of a second, the world "unfolds" - a simple initial
process of unclear sensations, slowly getting more complex until there's
"me" and the "world" (if you're VERY attentive on first waking up, you may
notice a kind of vague conglomeration of sensations and little or no sense
of "I" then at some point, "I" realize "I" have woken up).

Some say the entire universe unfolds this way, but again, I'll leave the
philosophizing for now.

The incredible thing about practicing WILD, if you do it long enough with
enough attention (especially if you've practiced some quiet meditation
like the Zen "Shikan Taza" or Loch Kelly's awareness practices - see his 4
minute animation on YouTube - the easiest meditation in the world but a
GREAT adjunct to WILD practice) you'll start to notice this construction
process, and the waking world will start to feel more fluid and alive and
connected, and your dream world will be much more solid and substantial.

Just a few hints. This book is really good and I can't recommend it enough
if you haven't already got it (and again, no, Brian is not paying me to
say this:>))))

***

nice one! plus is about time someone commented on jeremy's poor/misleading
review :)

you might be gonna get a lot more of that eh jeremy?

i certainly hope so anyway because that way the truth eventually comes out
:)

and imho that's all that ultimately matters...

[slider]

> avoid gaslighting assholes.

### - ...what?? :D

[slider]

### - aaaaand... another one! :)


Neil Brown
15 August at 08:11

I attained my first WILD last night. I'd like to share some of the
differences between this experience and the DILDs I have had over the last
few years.

Most accounts of hypnagogia begin with flashes of light, progressing to
geometric shapes and then to images and scenes with increasing vividness.
Perhaps due to over-tiredness, but within twenty seconds after closing my
eyes I am bombarded with fully fledged scenes that draw me into
unconscious dreaming.

Last night I weathered this barrage and found myself in the usual
meditative state: numbness, heaviness, tingling, and sensory
hallucinations - someone quite large suddenly sitting on the bed beside me
(I often get this one). I remained in the state for quite some time. No
more hypnagogia seemed to form, and I rolled over.

I'm not sure exactly what happened but I found myself half in and half out
of a dream. An orange room opened before me, and I was standing on the
precipice. I decided to enter and I was walking through a corridor with
walls of roughly hewn, orange stone. Thick blues music filled the air. My
hands were ephemeral, and I tried to focus on them; I shook my head. In my
DILDs this lack of solidity was usually a precursor for the dream
collapsing or me waking up. However, despite the transparency of my hands,
the scene itself was unwavering, more so than I have experienced in any
lucid dream before.

Unable to see an exit of any kind, and not wanting to waste time, I
decided to walk through the wall. I put my arm through first. It was hard
and I had to push with all my strength. I reminded myself that there was
no wall, that it was a projection of my own mind, and my right arm
followed with ease and then my head. Doing this previously always resulted
in a new scene. But this wall was thick. I passed through layer after
layer. Suddenly, something propelled me upwards at a speed I have never
experienced. I knew I could stop my ascent but I wanted to know where it
would take me.

I left the atmosphere, my stomach wrenching with the twists and turns but
there was no fear. I laughed as constellations of cartoon animals flashed
by. I have flown in DILDS many times but have always had a problem with
heights. Every time I reached the upper stratosphere, my rational
faculties kicked in, telling me that there was no longer any oxygen, and I
would wake up. But not this time.

The velocity slowly decreased and I hovered in deep space for a few
seconds, surrounded and permeated with an intense peace. Then I began to
fall.

There was no fear, only interest, but then something screamed. It was
bloodcurdling, and I felt terror but it was apart from me and I could
examine it as such. I young girl, her face contorted with an insane
blood-thirst leapt at my neck with her blacken teeth barred. I smiled and
said, "hello". Her face transformed back to a normal girl and she faded
into the kaleidoscopic blur of planets and stars.

I found myself standing by an aeroplane on a floating rock. There was a
shy looking lady doing maintenance. I asked her why she was there, and she
replied that she was there to help me. I asked her what she wanted me to
do, and she told me to put on an old WW1 type helmet. I sat in the
aeroplane with a rudder between my legs looking down at a tiny Earth.

Then I was back in bed.

When I wake from DILDs it is accompanied by the grogginess of sleep, but
not this time. I was completely awake and felt I had been bodily thrown on
the bed rather than waking from sleep.

***

haha nice first WILD + lol at these old 'dild-doers' getting waaay too
fancy for their own good outta sheer habit alone (i.e., as in: "...but
never embellished to the point of flying french poodles" lol)

liked his "orange room" starting point (as it was the same for me the
first few times) + note also his discernment of some kind of obvious
'qualitative difference' compared to what he's otherwise used to, as in:
"However, despite the transparency of my hands, the scene itself was
unwavering, more so than I have experienced in any lucid dream before."

which 'could' just be down to experiencing an increased lucidity
(wakefulness) whilst WILDing as compared to dildo-ing, but which to him as
an old dild-doer was immediately apparent... something which ultimately
allowed him to overcome preciously learned 'fears' (of heights( for
example: "no fear, only interest" - and which is kinda confirmed by his
waking-up experience at the end too, of:

"When I wake from DILDs it is accompanied by the grogginess of sleep, but
not this time. I was completely awake and felt I had been bodily thrown on
the bed rather than waking from sleep."

his first WILD 'already' taking him well-beyond his more usual stance(es)
and no-go areas in the dream state; bubbles he's now completely burst
asunder just by WILDing the once! (very cool), but even so he started
losing it towards the end by talking/listening to dream characters (old
habits truly die hard huh...) his more mystical-type beliefs/training
starting to gain ground again getting him booted hahaha (the noob!), so
methinks will have to have a quick word with him on that ;)

a definite explorer that one tho' innit hehehe...

'detached and at ease' this dude, with just a little more practice, could
prolly fly past anything!

:)

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

To me, it just sounds like he's not very good at it,
either WILD or DILD. There are several indications throughout
his account that he's not really going or staying fully lucid,
not even in WILD. And this dreaming certainly wasn't very 'stable'.
His WILD was as wild as any DILD. :)

.

[slider]

### - he's just an average, plus apparently fairly good, dildo-er of old
by all accounts... and accordingly auto-transfers his more usual
expectations (from dilding) to WILDing thus this initial melange, but
would expect that to improve due to the increased directness & simplicity
of going WILD...

dild-o's apparently having to first correct/get-over their already fairly
ingrained ways of rather clumsily handling dreaming from that perspective
alone, most of which never reaches (or reached) full lucidity anyway
(dildo-rehab required? heh...) - comments like 'never before' tending to
suggest a marked + strikingly noticeable difference in perception on his
part compared to what he's used to; was all i was commenting on... and
because i think i know, from experience, precisely what that is & why...

and imho is just a shame you don't have any of your own 'actual' + more
'recent' experiences to refer to in all this, instead of being reduced to
eternally playing this intellectual guessing-game of what you 'think' it
all 'sounds' like to you etc etc? and all of it questionably negative
hehehe...

iow: you really can't 'do' this stuff from one's armchair, like you're
doing, and then honestly profess to know enough to critique it; dilds
maybe yes but WILDs no? and because the 'proof of the pudding' and all
that heh, 'is' in the actual eating thereof...

and because your current 'tack' on all this tends to belie your previous
statement of:

"Somehow, I feel it is vital that we collectively learn to see
the world from a pov beyond our own selfishness and self-importance"

so eat already, and just tell us what happens! go all 'experiential' on
its ass!

(c'mon don't be scared it's only an apple! bite it! really laffing
hahaha...)

:)

[slider]

### - this follow up comment is, i find, quite interesting too...

the dude posted his experience and this other guy complemented, and then
we get this:

Neil Brown: You're welcome. It was intense yet easy at the same time. Have
you had a DILD?

Antony McKechnie: Yes I have had a few DILDs. I've also had a number of
OBEs, some of which were initiated from within a DILD. But it's been a
while and I haven't been able to have them regularly, hence I'm really
interested in WILDs and the claims that eventually you can initiate them
at any time!

***

that last bit: "hence I'm really interested in WILDs and the claims that
eventually you can initiate them at any time!"

is, imho, key to a sometime-run on WILDs if/when it finally gets around
the ld-community that this is in fact correct!

'fuss/frills-free' lucid dreaming whenever ya want? 'practical' lucid
dreaming?? (cue the rumble of hooves lol)

and 'coz if'n you're interested in lucid dreaming then what's possibly
better than that?!

nada... plus just wait till they discover that the surest way to have a
'dild' is to attempt to learn to WILD and the dilds come effortlessly +
free?? (i.e., it actually works better than all the reality checks,
journals + addon's nonsense put together/combined hah!) :)

haha fiver's be falling from the sky like homer dancing around in
chocolate-land lol...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=II1UOAmPqrc

ohhh look there's another one! hahaha... :D

(well ya never know do ya heh...)

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

Well, I know very well that lucid dreaming can seem as 'stable' and
real-seeming as the daily world. I've experienced that many times.
That dude seemed shocked by it, as if it was unusual for him.

You just do not accept my 'way' of dreaming (which includes not being
fixated on any particular type). But if one is going to do LD then
the key is to stay FULLY LUCID. That last guy really didn't, although
he may have entered via WILD. However, I'm really not obsessed with
lucidity at all. I've expressed many times now my view that ordinary
unconscious dreaming can be just as meaningful and sometimes even more
informative and creative than any lucid experiences.

To quote a post I made in the thread 'Scientific Studies Of Sleep'
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.dreams.castaneda/U0FnPH0J4O4/3b8j8wR4AwAJ

"Some sleep theorists postulate that REM sleep is when we are our
most intelligent, insightful, creative, and free. It’s when we truly
come alive."

Let's just say that I totally understand why they suspect that.
I also think I understand why you might completely ignore it. :)
But the *unconscious* aspects of ourselves give rise to much of it.

I don't seem to be able to adequately convey to you my view that the
conscious aspects of ourselves are not necessarily 'superior' to
the unconscious aspects, and that I simply do not focus to exclusion
on one or the other. I am both.

Nothing that you or anyone else has ever reported, nor anything
in my own decades of dreaming has led me to believe that LD
(DILD or WILD) is more creative, interesting, or meaningful
than our ordinary REM dreaming state can be (at least, for me).

I would even say that going lucid while in the REM state, as
fascinating as it can be, can sometimes be more 'disruptive'
than it is illuminating. In other words, sometimes the ordinary
dream is more interesting than going lucid is, and going lucid
almost spoils it since then you don't get to fully 'play it out'
as if 'emotionally real'. (I have more to say on that topic.)

You seem to conveniently forget that recently you and I both
successfully completed an objective LD experiment (the one with
the mirror). We're the only two people here who completed that.
To complete an LD experiment like that *requires full lucidity*.
It wasn't all that long ago. And I've had 3 or 4 LD experiences
in the last couple of months, in spite of not really focusing
on it anymore.

But really man, I don't care what you think of my dreaming.
You may need to just accept that we simply have different ways.
(And you don't seem to be able to do that.)

.

[slider]

> I know very well that lucid dreaming can seem as 'stable' and
> real-seeming as the daily world. I've experienced that many times.
> That dude seemed shocked by it, as if it was unusual for him.

### - fact is high lucidity is a rarity amongst dild-doers unless you're
ex-castaneda apparently heh, and this mainly because you seem to be the
only one who can (maybe) dild with full lucidity, we only have your word
for this + i haven't actually met any others in all this time claiming
anything similar...

added to which dilds can't be turned on/off like WILDs can, dilds are a
completely random affair...

so in truth you're merely trolling :)

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 8:10:34 PM UTC-7, slider wrote:
> > I know very well that lucid dreaming can seem as 'stable' and
> > real-seeming as the daily world. I've experienced that many times.
> > That dude seemed shocked by it, as if it was unusual for him.
>
> ### - fact is high lucidity is a rarity amongst dild-doers unless you're
> ex-castaneda apparently heh, and this mainly because you seem to be the
> only one who can (maybe) dild with full lucidity, we only have your word
> for this + i haven't actually met any others in all this time claiming
> anything similar...

Aside from sleep lab experiments, we have only a person's word
for ANYTHING they experience in LD, in both DILD and WILD.
This includes you, bub.

> added to which dilds can't be turned on/off like WILDs can, dilds are a
> completely random affair...
>
> so in truth you're merely trolling :)

Apparently, you don't know what the word trolling means.
I made a clear, meaningful statement on dreaming in general.
In no valid sense of the word was it trolling.

So what if DILD can't be 'turned on or off'? Neither can your
heartbeat, or your appetite, or your sex drive, or even your
curiosity. (And besides, to some degree it can be turned on, using
your *intent* to do it.) As I just pointed out, in the last two months
I have had 3 or 4 LDs (without even trying), yet you get all excited
when this guy does ONE half-assed WILD. Can you at least wait until
he's done it say 5 times on demand before claiming he can "turn it on"
at will? For he's demonstrated no such thing; he succeeded only ONCE,
and after trying how many times?? You have to count all the times a
person attempts WILD and fails if you want to claim people can do it
'on demand', or you just have 'the file drawer problem', which
in truth is merely another example of your bias. :)

.

[slider]

On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 17:30:16 +0100, Jeremy H. Denisovan
<david.j...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 8:10:34 PM UTC-7, slider wrote:
>> > I know very well that lucid dreaming can seem as 'stable' and
>> > real-seeming as the daily world. I've experienced that many times.
>> > That dude seemed shocked by it, as if it was unusual for him.
>>
>> ### - fact is high lucidity is a rarity amongst dild-doers unless you're
>> ex-castaneda apparently heh, and this mainly because you seem to be the
>> only one who can (maybe) dild with full lucidity, we only have your word
>> for this + i haven't actually met any others in all this time claiming
>> anything similar...
>
> Aside from sleep lab experiments, we have only a person's word
> for ANYTHING they experience in LD, in both DILD and WILD.
> This includes you, bub.

### - smile, am just saying i just haven't met (nor spoken to) 'anyone'
(other than you) claiming 'full' lucidity in dilds as being common is all,
whereas most people usually remark just how clear & vivid everything is
when experiencing a WILD for the first time 'compared' to a dild, which
then equals only 'you' versus quite a few peeps by now mentioning an
unexpected lucidity when WILDing (is often seen/remarked-on too when peeps
use wbtb to lucid dream and unwittingly WILD but think it's a dild...)

>> added to which dilds can't be turned on/off like WILDs can, dilds are a
>> completely random affair...
>>
>> so in truth you're merely trolling :)
>
> Apparently, you don't know what the word trolling means.
> I made a clear, meaningful statement on dreaming in general.
> In no valid sense of the word was it trolling.

### - heh i meant trolling in the sense of you deliberately making
negative-type comments in an otherwise fairly positive thread in order to
merely mar the tone of the thing and to perhaps pull it off into an
argument (the uglier the better from your pov), something you've always
personally done but also loudly bellyache about like there's no tomorrow
whenever someone does it to you? (+ that's also how i know you know you're
doing it quite deliberately too... you're trolling!) :)

> So what if DILD can't be 'turned on or off'? Neither can your
> heartbeat, or your appetite, or your sex drive, or even your
> curiosity. (And besides, to some degree it can be turned on, using
> your *intent* to do it.)

### - no, there's no conscious switch to dilds thus it's a purely
chuck-it-and-chance-it technique that may or may not even work; hence all
the addon's etc... whereas WILDs are the complete opposite, and only
actually function correctly/fully when quite consciously induced... big
difference! - plus highlights a quite obvious advantage that WILDs then
have over dilds from the off... a much easier and far more straightforward
method of lucid dreaming that had been basically shelved/overlooked for
all the wrong reasons... until now :)

smile, you plead ignorance as that merely allows you to continue to
'pretend' to debate, or do i have to remind you of your own initial
thoughts on this very matter that you then went to all the trouble of
trolling my book with under the guise of being a balanced review??
(grinz...) :D

quote:
"The author does make clear that the major advantage of WILD is the
ability to do lucid dreaming virtually at will, and to remain aware
throughout the entire process, and that is truly an advantage."

so... 'there' you DO at least 'comprehend' what kind an advantage such a
thing 'might' represent, but now today you totally don't?? riiiight...

that's trolling! (or possibly just alzheimers heh, who knows)

:)

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 1:03:14 PM UTC-7, slider wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 17:30:16 +0100, Jeremy H. Denisovan

> wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 8:10:34 PM UTC-7, slider wrote:
> >> > I know very well that lucid dreaming can seem as 'stable' and
> >> > real-seeming as the daily world. I've experienced that many times.
> >> > That dude seemed shocked by it, as if it was unusual for him.
> >>
> >> ### - fact is high lucidity is a rarity amongst dild-doers unless you're
> >> ex-castaneda apparently heh, and this mainly because you seem to be the
> >> only one who can (maybe) dild with full lucidity, we only have your word
> >> for this + i haven't actually met any others in all this time claiming
> >> anything similar...
> >
> > Aside from sleep lab experiments, we have only a person's word
> > for ANYTHING they experience in LD, in both DILD and WILD.
> > This includes you, bub.
>
> ### - smile, am just saying i just haven't met (nor spoken to) 'anyone'
> (other than you) claiming 'full' lucidity in dilds as being common is all

Grin, I told you long ago that I did know several other people
among Castaneda's students - and personally knew two people well -
one male and one female - who were expert at both WILD and DILD.
Neither person regarded either method as being "better" (although it's
great to be good at both methods if you're into LD). Neither person
ever made a big 'issue' out of WILD vs. DILD at all.

Indeed, YOU are the first person I ever encountered who made a
huge issue out of it, and to this day I think that's stupid. :)
Castaneda himself didn't do that either. He was always more like...
well, how a person does dreaming is personal to them.

I even went to a workshop once back in the late 1990's where everyone
present sat down and attempted WILD over and over in a big group.
I wasn't able to get into dreaming during the workshop (in fact,
the methods used were highly distracting to me and I personally
couldn't have entered dreaming that way in a million years) but
several people there did (they said), including one of my friends
who was very good at WILD. (That was a workshop by Hank Wesselman
in 1997.)

You act like you think you're the only one who ever does it.
Wesselman was doing it back in the 90s. Castaneda gave us a few
methods for WILD too back then. They didn't work for me,
personally, but... he did give us a few.

> whereas most people usually remark just how clear & vivid everything is

> when experiencing a WILD for the first t ime 'compared' to a dild, which

> then equals only 'you' versus quite a few peeps by now mentioning an
> unexpected lucidity when WILDing (is often seen/remarked-on too when peeps
> use wbtb to lucid dream and unwittingly WILD but think it's a dild...)

That's almost a non-sequitur. They're probably just unsure whether
they went back to sleep or not. And it probably doesn't even matter,
since if they manage to enter LD soon after going to back sleep then
they're still in the early non-REM stages of sleep (I've done that
many times). I have concluded, after reexamining my own experiences
over the years that there probably is a big difference in the
'stability' of dreaming scenes depending on whether you go lucid in
non-REM or in REM. And THAT is almost certainly why you believe
there's such a big difference between DILD and WILD. It's really the
big difference non-REM and REM. WILD happens right on the edge of
nREM-1, so the dream scenes are more 'stable'.

And I get that, but I learned to maintain lucidity in both states.
Because I worked hard to do it. The REM state is weirder and less
stable (also often much more interesting), but if you're determined
to stay lucid, you totally can in either state. There may even be
subtle differences between NREM1 and NREM2 LD. But I learned using
methods that forced me to hyper-monitor the state of my awareness
and also made me tremendously determined, so I learned that it
doesn't matter how 'stable' dream scenes are or what they morph
into, you can still maintain lucidity if you work hard at it.

The only stage I'm not sure about is deep sleep. I doubt if anyone
but maybe some friggin' monks somewhere can enter LD from the deepest
sleep stage (Delta stage). And I don't think they'd get any big
'prize' even if they could do it (it's just another brain state). :)

> >> added to which dilds can't be turned on/off like WILDs can, dilds are a
> >> completely random affair...
> >>
> >> so in truth you're merely trolling :)
> >
> > Apparently, you don't know what the word trolling means.
> > I made a clear, meaningful statement on dreaming in general.
> > In no valid sense of the word was it trolling.
>
> ### - heh i meant trolling in the sense of you deliberately making
> negative-type comments in an otherwise fairly positive thread in order to
> merely mar the tone of the thing and to perhaps pull it off into an
> argument (the uglier the better from your pov), something you've always
> personally done but also loudly bellyache about like there's no tomorrow
> whenever someone does it to you? (+ that's also how i know you know you're
> doing it quite deliberately too... you're trolling!) :)

I'm just trying to present a more well-rounded view of dreaming.
And maybe get you to be more objective about your obsession.

> > So what if DILD can't be 'turned on or off'? Neither can your
> > heartbeat, or your appetite, or your sex drive, or even your
> > curiosity. (And besides, to some degree it can be turned on, using
> > your *intent* to do it.)
>
> ### - no, there's no conscious switch to dilds thus it's a purely
> chuck-it-and-chance-it technique that may or may not even work;

You keep refusing to even look at something that is simple
and useful. And as it happens, it is a function of will. :)

When you consciously decide to do something, you still don't have
FULL conscious control over how it goes. That's why people may
decide to stop smoking or drinking like 20 times and still fail.
However, if they keep intending it and they also derail some of
the components of the habits that keep them relapsing, they can
eventually succeed, since after many days their unconscious mind
internalizes the goal and they succeed, although they may not
be fully aware of how they finally did it. That's how will works.

New Scientist recently put it like this. They said there are really
TWO steps to breaking any habit. Step 1 is to "derail" some normal
components of the habit in order to "reprogram your unconscious",
and Step 2 is to adopt other cues to "trigger a more desirable
habit". In the case of LD, the undesired "habit" is remaining
unconscious through all periods of dreaming. New Scientist says:

"Repetition is the key. It can take anywhere between 15 and 254 days
to form a new habit." New Scientist also recommends trying to break
a habit while you're outside your normal environment.

They're talking about: how to consciously change unconscious habits.

[Castaneda heads may find it interesting to note that all of this
advice is practically identical to how Castaneda claimed 'don Juan'
broke some of his own major habits like smoking. So... lookie here,
CC was actually right about a few things, and this is one of them.]

In this case, our desired new habit is to go lucid and maintain lucidity.

Looking back on how I learned to do LD long ago, I did this exactly.
I derailed some of my habits using several of Castaneda's methods,
all while *intending* to trigger a new desired habit of becoming
aware during my dreams and doing specific activities IN dreaming
to maintain that awareness. It did, in fact, take me somewhere
around 14 or 15 days or so to first go lucid and perform the desired
dreaming activities. By repeatedly *intending* to do it, I managed
to reprogram my unconscious mind to assist with the task. It worked.

I would never know when I would 'go aware' in dreaming. But at
some point my unconscious would allow my conscious mind to 'surface'.
Because I *intended* for that to happen over and over.

The unconscious mind is handling your ordinary dreaming anyway,
so if you can get it 'on your side' by continually intending what
you want: "to wake up in dreams" eventually it will help you do
that and you will wake up in your dreams. Then you must work at
maintaining that lucidity while dreaming. Intent works at both a
conscious and an unconscious level. That's how DILD works.

It's not that big a deal to succeed at it. You say "there is
no conscious switch". Yes and no. There is conscious intent that
after being maintained for days gets internalized by the unconscious.

Similarly, when I decided I wasn't all that interested in dreaming
anymore, I *dropped* that intent and largely stopped focusing on it.
LD still happens to me some just naturally since I did it for
so long and got good at it.

It's really not that different from going on a reasonable diet.
You intend to stop eating unhealthy stuff, you derail the habits
of making unhealthy stuff available, and then you start eating more
healthy stuff all the time. But you have to intend to stick to it,
and again... "Repetition is the key. It can take anywhere between
15 and 254 days to form a new habit."

In the case of diet, since we eat every day multiple times a day,
it can take *months* to really change your mind at both the conscious
and unconscious levels to where you eat more healthy all the time.

It's not really that different with lucid dreaming or anything else.

> the addon's etc... whereas WILDs are the complete opposite, and only
> actually function correctly/fully when quite consciously induced... big
> difference! - plus highlights a quite obvious advantage that WILDs then
> have over dilds from the off... a much easier and far more straightforward
> method of lucid dreaming that had been basically shelved/overlooked for
> all the wrong reasons... until now :)
>
> smile, you plead ignorance as that merely allows you to continue to
> 'pretend' to debate, or do i have to remind you of your own initial
> thoughts on this very matter that you then went to all the trouble of
> trolling my book with under the guise of being a balanced review??
> (grinz...) :D
>
> quote:
> "The author does make clear that the major advantage of WILD is the
> ability to do lucid dreaming virtually at will, and to remain aware
> throughout the entire process, and that is truly an advantage."
>
> so... 'there' you DO at least 'comprehend' what kind an advantage such a
> thing 'might' represent, but now today you totally don't?? riiiight...

Yeah, I stand by every single word I wrote in that review you keep
whining about over and over. :) Yes, being able to enter directly
into dreaming is an advantage. But that doesn't matter if you are
no good at it. And most people aren't.

I am pretty good at relaxing. I am good at getting all kinds of
hypnagogia, and even at examining the details of hypnagogia.
The step I've only managed to do a few times is to consciously
succeed at 'getting pulled' all the way into dreaming by it.
It's just not easy for me to make that jump. I've done it a
handful of times, and it's cool when it happens, but... most of
the time for me it doesn't happen. I bet many people have a
similar difficulty. And I can definitely say that I could achieve
full lucidity in either DILD or WILD. WILD was not a noticeably
'special' state of LD, not for me. It was a good clear LD state,
but... for me, nothing special.

> that's trolling! (or possibly just alzheimers heh, who knows)
>
> :)

You don't even listen. You just want to argue with everyone.
Because you're obsessed with something.

.

[slider]

On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 00:10:51 +0100, Jeremy H. Denisovan
<david.j...@gmail.com> wrote:


>> ### - smile, am just saying i just haven't met (nor spoken to) 'anyone'
>> (other than you) claiming 'full' lucidity in dilds as being common is
>> all
>
> Grin, I told you long ago that I did know several other people
> among Castaneda's students - and personally knew two people well -
> one male and one female - who were expert at both WILD and DILD.
> Neither person regarded either method as being "better" (although it's
> great to be good at both methods if you're into LD). Neither person
> ever made a big 'issue' out of WILD vs. DILD at all.

### - such 'lack' of discernment is/was 'their' problem innit, and yours
too apparently heh...

missed the boat much? (grinz...)

> Indeed, YOU are the first person I ever encountered who made a
> huge issue out of it, and to this day I think that's stupid. :)

### - 'anything' you don't understand always seems stupid to you, which
imho precisely defines what 'stupid' actually is lol + all depends on what
you 'want' to understand! - like once you wanted to 'understand' the Cos
and wouldn't hear anything said against them, then castaneda, now all THIS
crap instead?? and that's precisely what you don't understand! mostly coz
you don't wanna and because you're incapable of being more objectively
detached and as such incapable of evaluating anything properly; you're all
'opinion' and no evidence that isn't... secondhand :)

either put-up or shut up?

> Castaneda himself didn't do that either. He was always more like...
> well, how a person does dreaming is personal to them.

### - yeah... and then everything cc said/suggested turned out to be shite
right? lol

so you really shouldn't listen to him about anything right?? and were
actually very angry about how 'wrong' he was and now you're quoting from
him like that qualifies what *you're* saying??

and you don't see any problem with that! LOL! :)))

> You act like you think you're the only one who ever does it.
> Wesselman was doing it back in the 90s. Castaneda gave us a few
> methods for WILD too back then. They didn't work for me,
> personally, but... he did give us a few.

### - laberge basically 'discovered' the whole thing (initially mapped it
anyway) and yet 'still' totally underestimated their actual value?! yes
many mistakes have been made! and not actually realising just what WILDs
actually + really ARE + why they are etc etc, was definitely one of the
biggest blunders/fumbles ever i reckon! - lol talk about dropping the
ball?? - still, 'someone' had to be the champion of dilds innit i suppose
heh, and he (laberge) did a fairly good job too! only now it's roll-over
beethoven time 'coz the 'other' exact side of the coin has arrived and
wont be denied examination any longer hah! (and that's cool because it
clarifies things + adds a whole new part to it; the missing part!)

>> whereas most people usually remark just how clear & vivid everything is
>> when experiencing a WILD for the first t ime 'compared' to a dild, which
>> then equals only 'you' versus quite a few peeps by now mentioning an
>> unexpected lucidity when WILDing (is often seen/remarked-on too when
>> peeps
>> use wbtb to lucid dream and unwittingly WILD but think it's a dild...)
>
> That's almost a non-sequitur. They're probably just unsure whether
> they went back to sleep or not. And it probably doesn't even matter,
> since if they manage to enter LD soon after going to back sleep then
> they're still in the early non-REM stages of sleep (I've done that
> many times).

### - give it up jeremy, you really DON'T know wtf you're talking about
and literally now making it up as you go along lol...

you've done nada mate! not enough anyway, and ALL of it almost completely
unconscious dildo-ing at best thus useless! unless ya wanna be a cc-nut
that is, you'd easily qualify for that lol, opp's sorry, you did already
hahaha :)))

> I have concluded, after reexamining my own experiences
> over the years that there probably is a big difference in the
> 'stability' of dreaming scenes depending on whether you go lucid in
> non-REM or in REM. And THAT is almost certainly why you believe
> there's such a big difference between DILD and WILD. It's really the
> big difference non-REM and REM. WILD happens right on the edge of
> nREM-1, so the dream scenes are more 'stable'.

### - all sounds great 'in theory' jeremy, but that's ALL you gots! just
more armchair theory to justify other armchair theory! it's rem and it's
not rem and all that bollocks?? lol, you're like a scientist pontificating
on Picasso or van gogh lol; it's all numbers and no content, experience
nor style! splashed across a grid that's labeled perspective hah; it's all
crap! and conceptual/contextual crap at that! it's all lies & distortion!

you can't do, you can only theorise :)

>
> And I get that, but I learned to maintain lucidity in both states.
> Because I worked hard to do it. The REM state is weirder and less
> stable (also often much more interesting), but if you're determined
> to stay lucid, you totally can in either state. There may even be
> subtle differences between NREM1 and NREM2 LD. But I learned using
> methods that forced me to hyper-monitor the state of my awareness
> and also made me tremendously determined, so I learned that it
> doesn't matter how 'stable' dream scenes are or what they morph
> into, you can still maintain lucidity if you work hard at it.

### - you don't seem to know anything except an endless bunch of
rationalisations designed solely to make you feel like you're still in
some kinda control 30 years later heh... only you ain't ya know, anything
but actually, you're still the passive victim complaining about everything
because you can't... act!

and so now, from a handful of (maybe) remembered experiences from over 30
years ago heh, suddenly you're an expert on WILDs too?? lol it's just too
funny hahaha... of course you are! how could you not be! heh... listen,
makes no difference whatsoever to moi old chap, you can stay down there
forever if ya like and remain there for all i (or anyone) really cares...

the world is simply leaving you... behind :)

>> >> added to which dilds can't be turned on/off like WILDs can, dilds
>> are a
>> >> completely random affair...
>> >>
>> >> so in truth you're merely trolling :)
>> >
>> > Apparently, you don't know what the word trolling means.
>> > I made a clear, meaningful statement on dreaming in general.
>> > In no valid sense of the word was it trolling.
>>
>> ### - heh i meant trolling in the sense of you deliberately making
>> negative-type comments in an otherwise fairly positive thread in order
>> to
>> merely mar the tone of the thing and to perhaps pull it off into an
>> argument (the uglier the better from your pov), something you've always
>> personally done but also loudly bellyache about like there's no tomorrow
>> whenever someone does it to you? (+ that's also how i know you know
>> you're
>> doing it quite deliberately too... you're trolling!) :)
>
> I'm just trying to present a more well-rounded view of dreaming.
> And maybe get you to be more objective about your obsession.

### - a well round pov based on 'theory alone' just doesn't cut it jeremy
+ you're too funny for words as the 'king' of obsession lecturing 'others'
on the doubtful nature of obsession LOL...

that's hilarious! :)))


(just gonna snip the rest of your insane 'cc was correct' rant lol :)))

did gimmie a good laff tho hehehe :D funny

i mean, actually throwing cc at me of 'all' things lol, and this after you
going around for the last 20 years preaching anti-cc dogma only to end up
quoting him as 'you're' now ultimate authority on dreaming???

it's a riot :)))))

[slider]

### - seems to have hit a home run with this dude who's already heavily
involved with lucid dreaming all his life, plus although imho he's
embellishing on it a bit too much with things like dream journals helping
etc + a couple of other unnecessary bits, he's apparently well impressed
with the method of actually entering a WILD via hypnagogia merely by
examining them in detail...

his quote (below) of: "I may have stumbled on this next part of Brian's
technique once or twice but i have NEVER seen this anywhere else and it's
been a key to more frequent success." - is actually very gratifying that
others are beginning to incorporate this something 'new' into their
teaching methods...

cool :)



Don Salmon 17 August
Hi Folks:

I just posted this at Alan Wallace's FB group. Alan has written a
wonderful book on Dream Yoga, "Dreaming Yourself Awake."

Someone asked about lucid dream practice, and I wrote this - if I forgot,
will someone remind me in a few weeks about my promise to post some music
to help with lucid dreaming?

**********************

Take a look at Brian Aherne's recent book on "WILD" (waking induced lucid
dreams")

METHOD:

1. Deep relaxation (use Ujayi, any form of brief breath holding, or spinal
breathing with Ujayi and possibly mantra if that helps - these breathing
exercises are my own addition - I find using drone music of some kind is
almost essential for success in WILD)

2. Observe spontaneously arising hypnagogic images. DON'T STRAIN!! With as
little effort as possible. if you aren't aware of anything, you can try
listening effortless for sounds and noticing abstract light phenomena, or
"pretend" (as effortlessly as possible) to "visualize" (just take some
place, like your home or neighborhood, that you're very familiar with and
take an imaginary walk, around there, you'll soon realize you are
visualizing then let go and see what arises)

3. This is the crucial part. I've been reading material on lucid dreams
for almost 50 years, have had lucid dreams since a little child and did my
masters research on lucid dreams, teaching 12 people to successfully have
them from 1 to 4 times a week, with 6 learning WILD as well. I may have
stumbled on this next part of Brian's technique once or twice but i have
NEVER seen this anywhere else and it's been a key to more frequent
success. Once you have succeeded in calmly, in a relaxed state, almost
effortlessly (this relaxed effortlessness is crucial) observed
spontaneously arising images, focus in on one of them. If you know
Culadasa's distinction between selective attention and peripheral
awareness, or even better, Les Fehmi's "immersed" vs "Detached" attention,
what you're doing now is highly focused, but immersed rather than detached
(this is very much like Csikszentmihalyi's "flow state" as well).

What Brian describes, and what I've found - to my amazement - is that it
seems like this focusing in on the details of one particular image, if you
can sustain it (you keep focusing on all the details with increasing
interest if you can - that's what makes it "immersed" attention) you start
to feel like you are "pulled" INTO the scene. If you can sustain awareness
(Culadasa's peripheral awareness, balanced with narrow, selective
attention- balancing left mode and right mode, as Iain McGilchrist would
put it) you'll find yourself "In" the dream.

Brian suggests, and I pretty much agree, that you should try this at least
a few weeks to see if it works for you. All the other things about lucid
dreaming can be helpful - keeping a dream journal to make your non lucid
dreams more vivid, doing "reality checks" (which are described VERY well
in Alan's "Dreaming Yourself Awake"), MILD (see LaBerge) etc.

I'd love to hear how this works if anybody wants to try it for a few
weeks. I'm planning to put up some "drone" music that I find helpful, and
you're welcome to use it for free. I'm also very interested in finding how
people use music and if it helps.

If you do use your own music, you might try bringing your attention,
during the relaxation phase, into different parts of the body, and
"feeling" the music vibrating and filling the whole area, until it fills
the whole body and spreads beyond. This "vibrating" sensation will be VERY
helpful for the next phase.

Also, if you're having trouble visualizing, you might look up Helen
Bonny's "Guided Imagery and Music," for help in seeing how music can
dramatically facilitate the awareness of hynagogic imagery.

Good luck and sweet dreams!!

[slider]

not yet WILD enough wrote...

> so does this mean we are changing the name
> of this place to "alt.dreams.Aherne" now?

### - can ya send money? then no :D hahaha



> all done with the sorcerer formerly known
> as Carlos Cashinonyourass? cha-chinger.
> if you could just get some money flowing
> your way Brian, your dream would come in.

### - smile, 4 fivers have flutterd down to me literally outta nowhere
just in the last few days (manna descending indeed from heaven lol; homer
in chocolate land lol...) so it's raining alright albeit rather slowly
currently heh (it's just spitting-rain...) but with 'plugs' like that from
recognised dudes in the dream community, it could just turn into a decent
shower too! (alright you don't know him, i didn't either, but apparently
he's quite well known, took his masters in lucid dreaming?? wow...) ;)

plus & oh well, you'll eventually get around to 'dreaming-awake' at some
point huh (grinz at the jolt to your body heh...)

or maybe not, what with jeremy forever terrified it might all turn back
into summat he don't want ahaha! (sorry, but i canny-help having my
mischievous side hehehe...) he's been keepin' you in-line pal! he's not a
freedom-maker but is in fact: a capturer! (one of the old 'den of vipers'
of old, who typically guard the temple and enters not into themselves +
wont let anyone else enter either... old jc hated that bunch! hehehe...)

have been 'trying' to keep it (the dreaming stuff) all to just one or 2
threads, although even that seems too much for some peeps hah... what with
people 'clamoring' about trump and idiots actually giving it to him hehehe
- just LOOK what we have to put up/contend with?? we're being hit with not
a smoke-screen but a trump-screen! :)

i do, however, obviously consider it (our 'ability' to WILD i mean) to be
important + there is, of course, quite a lot more to it all than just any
initially amusing aspects alone (the 'midway point' for example, that's
actually a very important development but which is practically useless to
discuss with anyone who hasn't yet experienced it or it all just sounds
like crazy nonsense: being in more than one place at a time? like what
'good' is that mate?? lol, but it's the midway resulting 'awareness'
that's actually important; it opens genuine doors!)

why important? because peeps 'want' something in their lives that
genuinely expands their awareness, whether it be yoga or meditation, or
even dancing naked at the stroke of midnight in the woods or whatever
haha; they's all lookin' for 'something' innit, preferably something
'real' that might lend some kinda deeper meaning (or even reveal one to
them) that's more than just working like a mule all their lives for shit,
and then all ya gets to show for it being a kick in the pants at the end?

and there IS more! most certainly there is! but they's all been having a
hellish time trying to find it, and this while putting up with crap in the
meantime that's ultimately all only a waste of time (cults and what have
you that are, in reality, only giant milking-machines feeding-off of that
same yearning need!)

and well, an ability to WILD will end all that! no doubt some cults will
again arise trying to claim it for themselves, trying to 'direct' it for
whatever selfish purposes, but once someone reaches that 'midway-point'
awareness ALL that crap is left firmly behind! you're on your own from
that midway point on boss! don't need no instruction, guidance, nada! and
because it's all there for ya to just help yourself to like fruit hangin'
on a damn tree! from that point one can finally help-thyself!

WILDs in that sense are like a unifying theory of everything heh, our
innate 'ability' to WILD ultimately having given rise to all the various
other forms, who've then 'made' it into this or that depending on culture
and all the rest of it... but WILDs are at the roots of it, are the
'basis' for all the rest! (which just in itself is interesting!) and which
when presented in its pure form (as i've attempted to do) will surely
dispel all the rest by explaining them away!

my book being/representing then merely a basis + bald outline of what's
involved, the details/text & blanks of which will be confirmed/debunked
and/or otherwise filled-in by others as they go along, so all i've really
done (and attempted to do) is to point a particular direction + ask a
bunch of related/relevant questions so they don't go wandering off...

we gots to get back to our ROOTS people!

ROOTS MON! - ROOTS! :)))

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ht_LmHjS7Q

(wrote this 30 years ago + which had to be stolen by this band in order to
get released...)

[slider]

> what IF this is all there is?
> just this. nothing more.
>
> oh gonna be a whole lotta religious
> freaks shittin' their pants at the
> end. this is as good as it gets?
> better make it good, don't be farting
> around with horseshit. right ?

### - the ability to quite consciously + deliberately enter into altered
states of awareness and explore/probe them in a more controlled + sober
manner, isn't horseshit... it's an utterly intrinsic + fundamental part of
ourselves (and probably all life) that we've apparently cut ourselves off
from over incredibly long periods of time, and until all we know about it
today being strange tales, quite ordinary random/unconscious dreams + that
of occasionally messin' around with getting out of it via drink & drugs
and/or even via religious fervour; one that merely remains relatively
unexplored/mapped in & by modern standards is all, due mainly to all the
taboos that've been placed on (or near) it over time...

horseshit... is to live a life devoid of being fully aware of ourselves
and all the things we can do while being alive! horseshit is to live a
life of just living to work instead of working to live?

yes this IS as good as it gets in... wallyworld! (that shit hole!)

fortunately, there's more to life & living than just sealing oneself away
inside a clockwork orange for life heh, and thank goodness there is! true,
we lack the missing + relevant cultural reference points, but can find
them again no problem due to the alternate + unwavering 'nature' of
knowledge existing at/beyond that midway point...

this being something you'll have too personally see/experience directly
for yourself (or anyone) to 'really' understand... the closest cc came to
it in 'his' terms being his concept of 'silent knowledge' heh ;)

lay down, be silent, and your awareness will slowly shift to include the
awareness of mild hypnagogia... hang there & keep watching them, don't
fall asleep and they get a whole heap clearer, then examine one of 'em
more closely and allow yourself to be pulled/zoomed into a WILD as you
currently 'are' in the full awareness of what you're doing, and now you're
in another reality (one with which you're already quite familiar with so
no biggie, although perforce everything in it will appear far more vividly
than usual...), then, over few more sessions, get used to the more
volitional aspects of having done this by stepping in and out of lucid
dream states at will and until you discover the midway point, linger there
and play around with your awareness under such circumstances, note how
standing at that particular spot enhances everything else to the point of
complete volition, note too how by doing that for long enough awareness
deepens noticeably yet again until that of lucid dreaming and/or waking up
become utterly equal options compared to each other... play with all that
a while to confirm, and by now another 'type' of awareness altogether
emerges, a completely + utterly detached one/mood! one that snatches
knowledge/understanding right outta the air and hands it to ya on a
plate! have a good long soak in that tub before waking up out of it + note
then how you've carried that same completely detached awareness back with
you into the waking world (usually for several hours afterwards) and then
look/gaze at the waking world (wallyworld heh) 'from' that pov and tell me
it's not important hehehe ;)

then just do that a few more times (again to confirm) + note how your
overall awareness (of the world) has changed/is changing (expanding
actually) to include this new found ability to be more complete/whole...
note there's a distinct feeling of harmony & ease that goes along with it
all, nature apparently restoreth our humanity...

smile, this isn't just about lucid dreaming pal, lucid dreaming is only
one clue/hint of what we can (and should be) doing all along, the
proverbial tip of the iceberg, an inroad only and thus only 'one' aspect
of it all (again totally unexplored so who knows what that might also
actually contain just in the purely ld-ing-side of it all, that's still
anyone's guess apart from weird rumours & myths of ap/obe/parallel worlds
etc, it's another unknown...)

yes chris, the horseshit has to end! the pure horseshit of fake people
living fake lives in fake realities hehehe... people literally raised to
be suckers instead of being raised to be increasingly aware... that shit
really has to end! :)

down with wallyworld!?

(t-shirts/next title? really laffing, nah it'll just fade away all by
itself from lack of attention)

:)

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 6:47:42 PM UTC-7, slider wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 00:10:51 +0100, Jeremy H. Denisovan

> wrote:
>
>
> >> ### - smile, am just saying i just haven't met (nor spoken to) 'anyone'
> >> (other than you) claiming 'full' lucidity in dilds as being common is
> >> all
> >
> > Grin, I told you long ago that I did know several other people
> > among Castaneda's students - and personally knew two people well -
> > one male and one female - who were expert at both WILD and DILD.
> > Neither person regarded either method as being "better" (although it's
> > great to be good at both methods if you're into LD). Neither person
> > ever made a big 'issue' out of WILD vs. DILD at all.
>
> ### - such 'lack' of discernment is/was 'their' problem innit, and yours
> too apparently heh...
>
> missed the boat much? (grinz...)

We all largely agreed on this matter. You're the only one I know
who disagrees. And I think I've even explained to you what has
fooled you into believing otherwise.

> > Indeed, YOU are the first person I ever encountered who made a
> > huge issue out of it, and to this day I think that's stupid. :)
>
> ### - 'anything' you don't understand always seems stupid to you, which
> imho precisely defines what 'stupid' actually is lol + all depends on what
> you 'want' to understand! - like once you wanted to 'understand' the Cos
> and wouldn't hear anything said against them, then castaneda, now all THIS
> crap instead?? and that's precisely what you don't understand! mostly coz
> you don't wanna and because you're incapable of being more objectively
> detached and as such incapable of evaluating anything properly; you're all
> 'opinion' and no evidence that isn't... secondhand :)

You know, these crude gaslighting attempts of yours really say a lot
about the kind of person you are. :) They don't affect me much except
that they're a bit... frustrating. It's weird to talk to someone who
actually refuses to listen to reason and keeps coming back with all
these personal attacks. Here I am taking the time to explain all sorts
of things about this clearly, and all you can think to do is 'fight me'.

My theories are in alignment with current data from the sleep labs
AND are based on quite a lot of my own personal experiences.

Another set of my own experiences strongly implying my theories
are correct is that several times (perhaps as many as 10-15 times)
I did not initiate dreaming via EITHER WILD OR DILD. Rather, on those
occasions, I *initiated* dreaming by having a false awakening.
FAILD? :) Invariably, on *every one* of those occasions, the dreaming
scene was an extremely stable copy of my current real room, one
having such a degree of realism I actually had to do reality testing
to figure out that I was dreaming (and indeed, a couple of times
I didn't figure it out until the scene finally changed). Since also
invariably, false awakenings occur close to real awakening, this means
during all of those experiences I was almost certainly doing LD in
Non-REM states. Moreover, those LD states all seemed highly similar
to your own descriptions of WILD experiences and they were also
similar to my own handful of actual WILD experiences (wrt the
stability and realism of the dream scenes in the handful of WILD
experiences I've had).

On 2 or 3 occasions the false awakening even generated a state that
at first seemed more like an OOBE than LD, but since I was able to
stay lucid long enough for the scene to change, I realized it wasn't
really OOBE. How is that relevant? Well, the ONLY clinical difference
I've seen come out of the sleep labs comparing DILD and WILD is that
WILD has been found to result in more 'seeming OOBEs'. So that is yet
another reason to suspect that I am correct about how DILD initiated
in the early N-REM states (or via false awakening) is highly similar
to (if the not the same as) WILD.

Further similar evidence comes in from my sleep paralysis
experiences. I have on a few occasions also initiated LD from
a state of sleep paralysis (mind awake, body still paralyzed).
SPILD? :) That also tended to result in more 'stable' states of LD
which are more like those attained with WILD.

All that gives me more reason to believe my theory is right.
Are you going to be a sad boy if it gets validated in the labs? :)

> either put-up or shut up?
>
>
>
>
> > Castaneda himself didn't do that either. He was always more like...
> > well, how a person does dreaming is personal to them.
>
> ### - yeah... and then everything cc said/suggested turned out to be shite
> right? lol
>
> so you really shouldn't listen to him about anything right?? and were
> actually very angry about how 'wrong' he was and now you're quoting from
> him like that qualifies what *you're* saying??
>
> and you don't see any problem with that! LOL! :)))

I'm not like you; I actually care about the truth. :) Whoever it
comes from. I don't try to draw black and white lines in the
sand like you. I would listen even if the truth came from you,
although it so seldom does. Castaneda lied about many things,
yeah. I dare say I have painstakingly documented more of his
lies than just about anyone else on earth besides DeMille. Yet CC
was right about a few things too. And when I find them, I say so.
You see, I argue fairly. Not like you.

For example, I just pointed out how CC's writings and comments on
'disrupting habits' happen to be right in line with the current
scientific research. He seems to have gotten that one right.
So I have to give it to him.

But realize, it actually makes a cult leader MORE dangerous to
sometimes get a few things right. Because then there's more reason
to believe in them and they can end up leading more people astray.

> > You act like you think you're the only one who ever does it.
> > Wesselman was doing it back in the 90s. Castaneda gave us a few
> > methods for WILD too back then. They didn't work for me,
> > personally, but... he did give us a few.
>
> ### - laberge basically 'discovered' the whole thing (initially mapped it
> anyway) and yet 'still' totally underestimated their actual value?! yes
> many mistakes have been made! and not actually realising just what WILDs
> actually + really ARE + why they are etc etc, was definitely one of the
> biggest blunders/fumbles ever i reckon! - lol talk about dropping the
> ball?? - still, 'someone' had to be the champion of dilds innit i suppose
> heh, and he (laberge) did a fairly good job too! only now it's roll-over
> beethoven time 'coz the 'other' exact side of the coin has arrived and
> wont be denied examination any longer hah! (and that's cool because it
> clarifies things + adds a whole new part to it; the missing part!)

Actually, Laberge is yet another person who didn't seem to think
WILDs were all that special compared to DILDs. He wouldn't have
either since he was another person like me who could maintain
full lucidity in DILD and he was exposed to many people in the labs
who could do both WILD and DILD. So it wasn't a big deal to him either.
And he was totally right not to make a big deal out of it.

I also notice how you weren't even curious about what methods
Castaneda gave us for doing WILD. :) This, to me, is one of your
defining characteristics: you aren't even very curious - not about
much of anything. You just compulsively 'go to war' over your
own views.

> >> whereas most people usually remark just how clear & vivid everything is
> >> when experiencing a WILD for the first t ime 'compared' to a dild, which
> >> then equals only 'you' versus quite a few peeps by now mentioning an
> >> unexpected lucidity when WILDing (is often seen/remarked-on too when
> >> peeps
> >> use wbtb to lucid dream and unwittingly WILD but think it's a dild...)
> >
> > That's almost a non-sequitur. They're probably just unsure whether
> > they went back to sleep or not. And it probably doesn't even matter,
> > since if they manage to enter LD soon after going to back sleep then
> > they're still in the early non-REM stages of sleep (I've done that
> > many times).
>
> ### - give it up jeremy, you really DON'T know wtf you're talking about
> and literally now making it up as you go along lol...

Actually, I was once again speaking from both logic and experience.
Remember, I've tried to do WILD myself many, many times, beginning
way back in the old days. That's how I found out I'm not good at it.
Yet sometimes while trying I did fall asleep in the attempt yet
soon afterward actually entered LD, and a few times I wasn't totally
sure whether or not I'd fallen asleep first. I don't count those
times as being among my few bona fide WILDs, btw.

You know, I did not mention this before, but the night that I
successfully completed the mirror experiment, I'd woken up in
the middle of the night, and decided to do WBTB and try WILD.
I tried for 20 minutes or so, and then went back to sleep again,
and yet very soon after going back to sleep went lucid in a
dream scene and performed that mirror experiment.

So not only have I done that very thing I was talking about above
many times before, I even did it once fairly recently.

Also, right after going back to sleep after WBTB you do once again
quickly run through the early n-REM stages. So that part's true too.

Sometimes I think your entire arguing method is just proclaiming:
"you don't know what you're talking about". It's lazy as hell.
And really just another form of lying.

> you've done nada mate! not enough anyway, and ALL of it almost completely
> unconscious dildo-ing at best thus useless! unless ya wanna be a cc-nut
> that is, you'd easily qualify for that lol, opp's sorry, you did already
> hahaha :)))

More gaslighting bs. You must be terrified of me or something.
That's the only thing I can figure...

> > I have concluded, after reexamining my own experiences
> > over the years that there probably is a big difference in the
> > 'stability' of dreaming scenes depending on whether you go lucid in
> > non-REM or in REM. And THAT is almost certainly why you believe
> > there's such a big difference between DILD and WILD. It's really the
> > big difference non-REM and REM. WILD happens right on the edge of
> > nREM-1, so the dream scenes are more 'stable'.
>
> ### - all sounds great 'in theory' jeremy, but that's ALL you gots! just
> more armchair theory to justify other armchair theory! it's rem and it's
> not rem and all that bollocks?? lol, you're like a scientist pontificating
> on Picasso or van gogh lol; it's all numbers and no content, experience
> nor style! splashed across a grid that's labeled perspective hah; it's all
> crap! and conceptual/contextual crap at that! it's all lies & distortion!
>
> you can't do, you can only theorise :)

Slider, that's just more bs. I've had several hundred LD experiences.
My last was 4 or 5 days ago and was far more interesting than anything
you've posted in months.

[snip... repetitive contentless crap...]

.

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 11:30:14 AM UTC-7, feewilly wrote:
> what IF this is all there is?
> just this. nothing more.
>
> oh gonna be a whole lotta religious
> freaks shittin' their pants at the
> end. this is as good as it gets?
> better make it good, don't be farting
> around with horseshit. right ?

There's a practically infinite real universe around you that
is 13.5 billion years of incredibly complex evolution unfolding,
and you know very little about it. How much MORE do you want? :)

.

[slider]

On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 23:33:37 +0100, Jeremy H. Denisovan
<david.j...@gmail.com> wrote:


> All that gives me more reason to believe my theory is right.

### - 'believe' all you want heh, it's still 'only' a theory :D

an 'armchair' theory in this instance that isn't even deduced from
personal experience!

you think... you believe... riiiight... :)

>> ### - laberge basically 'discovered' the whole thing (initially mapped
>> it
>> anyway) and yet 'still' totally underestimated their actual value?! yes
>> many mistakes have been made! and not actually realising just what WILDs
>> actually + really ARE + why they are etc etc, was definitely one of the
>> biggest blunders/fumbles ever i reckon! - lol talk about dropping the
>> ball?? - still, 'someone' had to be the champion of dilds innit i
>> suppose
>> heh, and he (laberge) did a fairly good job too! only now it's roll-over
>> beethoven time 'coz the 'other' exact side of the coin has arrived and
>> wont be denied examination any longer hah! (and that's cool because it
>> clarifies things + adds a whole new part to it; the missing part!)
>
> Actually, Laberge is yet another person who didn't seem to think
> WILDs were all that special compared to DILDs.

### - but isn't that just exactly what i said? (laffing...)

> He wouldn't have
> either since he was another person like me who could maintain
> full lucidity in DILD and he was exposed to many people in the labs
> who could do both WILD and DILD.

### - he was like 'you'?? then that would prolly explain why he fumbled it
lol :)))

> So it wasn't a big deal to him either.

### - overlooked it & got hung-up instead on dilds...

BIG mistake! - huge! - WILDs didn't fit... the theory!

so he discarded 'em instead of reexamining the theory...

shit happens :)

> And he was totally right not to make a big deal out of it.

### - ahahaha is that right??

riiiiiight... :D

and well, we're gonna actually find that out now innit!

'coz when 'enough' peeps are doing/using it the demand will arise to find
out!

so all ya gots to do now is live long enough to wait and see :)

point being: the question is still pending, it hasn't actually 'been'
answered yet...

and this no-matter what you just so 'happen' to currently... 'believe' :)

(laberge 'seems' like a decent-enough chap, decent enough to maybe even
admit his error when confronted with it, we'll see... what *you'll* do if
he does, however, is far less certain haha; you'll prolly go and shoot-up
los vegas or summat lol...)

lol what WILL you do if i AM right jeremy? how WILL you handle it??

have you even considered that?

just how 'much' would it fuck you up if am right! :)))

and will you take a bet on it!

am prepared to go 'all-in' on it, are you? (grinz...)

(course you're not coz you're only trolling + wouldn't pay up if ya lost
heh)

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

Well, you don't seem to have any testable theories at all, Slider.
My theories could all be thoroughly tested in sleep labs.

Actually, I do still see some problems with my own theories
and I believe it would take careful experimental designs
to tease it all out more thoroughly.

***

Here are some clinical notes regarding WILD taken from a 1990 paper
by LaBerge:

"Compared with DILDs, WILDs were more frequently immediately
preceded by physiological indications of awakening"
(that's how he formally defines them: LD initiated soon after
the physiological indications of awakening)

Here's the note I find most interesting:
"Momentary intrusions of wakefulness occur very commonly during the
normal course of REM sleep, and Schwartz and Lefebvre (1973)
proposed that lucid dreaming occurs during these microawakenings.
However, LaBerge, Nagel, Taylor, Dement, & Zarcone’s (1981) and
LaBerge et al.’s (1986) data indicate that, while lucid dreams do
not take place during interludes of wakefulness within REM periods,
a minority of lucid dreams (WILDs) are *initiated* from these moments
of transitory arousal and continue in subsequent undisturbed REM sleep."
[*emphasis mine*]

So, another possibility is that these realistic 'false awakening
initiated' LDs that I have MAY be initiated during such physiological
"micro-awakenings". And if that proved to be the case then LaBerge
would have technically labeled them as WILDs. I don't know for sure
that this is what happens with me, but it's a distinct possibility.
It would take sleep lab work to figure it out.

***

This clinical note is taken from a 2015 paper by Nicolas Zink
& Reinhard Pietrowsky, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf:

"Levitan, LaBerge and Dole (1992) found two ways to start a lucid
dream. First and most likely was the “dream-initiated lucid dream”
(DILD), in which the dreamer acquires awareness of being in a dream
while fully involved in it. In the second case, the “wake initiated
lucid dreams” (WILD), the dreamer awakes from a dream and then
returns to the dream state with unbroken awareness. Stumbrys,
Erlacher, Schädlich, and Schredl (2012) revised the methodological
quality of studies using cognitive techniques like mnemonic induced
lucid dreams (MILD), reflection/reality testing, intention,
autosuggestion, Tholey´s combined techniques, post-hypnotic
suggestion, alpha feedback, dream re-entry and other eclectic
approaches to induce LD. They showed that none of these induction
techniques had been shown to induce lucid dreams reliably and
consistently, although some like MILD, reflection/reality testing,
intention, and Tholey´s combined techniques look promising."

Two things I want to emphasize. First, NO technique tested was
"shown to induce LD reliably and consistently". And second,
one of the techniques is called "intention". The "intention" method
is even one of those said to look promising. :)

So I may have to go read a bit more on what has been done with that.

***

Here is a Men's Health article on methods of LD from 2017:
http://tinyurl.com/y8wf6eu2

Notice, from the results:

"The researchers also found that those who only practiced MILD and
were able to fall asleep within five minutes of completing the
technique (after the first five hours of sleep) had a lucid dream
success rate of nearly 46 percent after one week of practicing."

Hmm. Notice that the MILD method specifically uses *intention*. :)
And wow - a success rate of nearly 46% after a week of practice
among those who can go back to sleep fast. That's damned high!

Do you think WILD can ever beat that MILD success rate, Slider? :)
Personally, I doubt it.

"The MILD practice, like WBTB, involves waking up after 5 initial
hours of sleep then focusing on the *intention* to remember you are
dreaming prior to falling back to sleep."
[*emphasis mine*]

***

Here's an article on WILD that was written just a couple of months ago:
http://tinyurl.com/y8fsmz79

This dude uses a completely different method. He also notes
that WILDs "can be quite difficult to achieve since they rely on
extreme physical relaxation to put the body to sleep while the mind
remains awake".

***

Below is a site promoting LaBerge's original method for WILD.
It also lists multiple WILD methods by Charlie Morley (two of
which are intriguing and one mentions setting one's *intent*).

These methods all utilize WBTB.

http://tinyurl.com/y7o6tmqp

Something that interests me about LaBerge's original WILD method
is the statement:

"The dream scene is usually created out of your memory of your
bedroom or wherever you are sleeping. Sometimes you can send your
awareness to another dream scene straight away, but generally without
any other kind of imagery at work, you are going to find yourself
lying in a dream version of your own bed."

All I can say is that I had LOTS of LD experiences that involved
either false awakenings into my own bedroom or finding myself lying
in a dream version of my own bed. That happened to me over and over.

***

One of the WILD methods Castaneda gave us was quite unusual.
I didn't like it much so I may not even describe it perfectly.
(If anyone out there recalls it differently, feel free to correct.)

Carlos had us sit on the floor touching the soles of our feet together
and then lean our head over in the direction of our feet to see how
close our forehead came to the floor. Then he had us each cut little
wooden rods, maybe 1/4 or 1/2 inch in diameter, cut to such a length
that you could place the base of the rod on the floor and lower your
head to touch the other end of the rod, so that the tip of the rod
rested gently on your forehead on what some think is the 'third eye',
placing a little pressure on this spot. You were supposed to intend
to turn off your internal talk and then sit like this with your
forehead on the tip of the rod until you entered dreaming.

I never succeeded at this even once and it was an uncomfortable
position. I doubt if I even tried it as many as 10 times because
I was already good at doing dreaming in my own way. I may still
have that cut wooden rod around here somewhere. LOL. :)

***

Kimberly Mascaro's 2018 book, 'Extraordinary Dreams' mentions
her own success with WILD. She first talks about LaBerge's method.
She specifically says "entering a dream in this manner is rare"
but she also adds: "the technique has worked for me on a number
of occasions".

***

Just to confirm what I said before, LaBerge's FAQ includes the
statement: "Wake-initiated lucid dreams (WILDs) were three times
more likely to be labeled "OBEs" than dream-initiated lucid dreams."

***

This is a description of Paul Tholey's "combined technique" for LD:
http://tinyurl.com/yaffqmqp

Step 2 in his process is all about Intention. A particular part
of it that caught my eye:

"A variation of this approach is for the dreamer to set an intention
to carry out a specific activity in a dream... It is up to the dreamer
to choose which activity he will perform... The activity may be...
a 'reality check' type action, such as looking at your hands."

Wow. There it is. The very method CC says 'dJ' had him use.
And the method I myself used over and over. Very interesting.

.

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 7:42:01 PM UTC-7, slider wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 23:33:37 +0100, Jeremy H. Denisovan

> wrote:

Speaking of LaBerge, Slider says:
> BIG mistake! - huge! - WILDs didn't fit... the theory!
>
> so he discarded 'em instead of reexamining the theory...

No, he didn't. He repeatedly included WILD in his analyses.
I've pointed out already how LaBerge found that WILDs resulted
in 3 or 4 times as many "seeming OBEs" as DILDs, for example.
And that finding is right in line with my own theory.

Here's a quote from a 2014 Masters thesis that even touts WILD:
Lucid dreaming: A Wake-Initiated-Lucid-Dream (WILD) approach

"The discussion has shifted into what techniques are best for
training this ability, but everyone is different, and lucid dreaming
is no exception to this rule, as pointed out by Synder and
Gackenbach (1988). For example, DeGracia, “has 114 recorded lucid
dreams of which 43% were WILDs and 56% were DILDs. In contrast,
only 8% of LaBerge’s and Degracia’s (2000) dissertation sample
of 388 recorded lucid dreams were WILDs, a significantly lower
proportion” (p. 283). These numbers illustrate the profound impact
that different styles and induction techniques can have on one’s
lucid dreaming..."

[In the quote above, I have corrected DeGracia's name.]

So in that dissertation work, Laberge's sample included 8% WILDs.
He did not "discard it". What I wonder about is why I never hear
you mention other people's work, like DeGracia's? Did you do
ANY research when you wrote your own book on WILD? DeGracia was
really big on WILD.

Then again, he takes kind of a... wilder approach to WILD. :)
Here are his collected writings on 'astral projection' and 'OOBE':
http://www.dondeg.com/metaphysics/do_obe.pdf

> > And he was totally right not to make a big deal out of it.
>
> ### - ahahaha is that right??
>
> riiiiiight... :D
>
> and well, we're gonna actually find that out now innit!
>
> 'coz when 'enough' peeps are doing/using it the demand will arise to find
> out!
>
> so all ya gots to do now is live long enough to wait and see :)
>
> point being: the question is still pending, it hasn't actually 'been'
> answered yet...

I'm not sure exactly what you think "the question" even is?
You say weird stuff such as that you think WILD may not even be
dreaming. As near as I can tell you don't have a testable theory. :)

Here's one fact I can tell from looking at existing lab studies.
The physiological state measured in the sleep labs for LD and for
'seeming OBE' is identical. LaBerge found that. Not only that,
but since LaBerge defined WILD as being LD *initiated* in waking
yet *continuing* in REM... how do you feel about the strong
possibility that all you're really doing w/ WILD is intentionally
initiating lucid REM states starting from a full waking state? :)

Based on the data I've seen, that's the strongest possibility.

> and this no-matter what you just so 'happen' to currently... 'believe' :)
>
> (laberge 'seems' like a decent-enough chap, decent enough to maybe even
> admit his error when confronted with it, we'll see... what *you'll* do if
> he does, however, is far less certain haha; you'll prolly go and shoot-up
> los vegas or summat lol...)
>
> lol what WILL you do if i AM right jeremy? how WILL you handle it??

Right about what, exactly? I think I've told you at least 3 times
already that I don't care at all if people do WILD; I think it's fine.
I even stated in a published review that it's an advantage for those
able to do it (albeit a nothing burger for those who find it hard).
So what do you think you're "right" about? You don't even have a
coherent theory that I've ever heard succinctly stated.

To me, WILD is simply another method of initiating lucid dreaming.
So I've never had any problem with it - I just think it's difficult
for most people to do. I also don't think LD is the be all and end all
of life, period. Otoh, you act like you think WILD is something...
WAY MORE than just lucid dreaming, but you never say what.

> just how 'much' would it fuck you up if am right! :)))
>
> and will you take a bet on it!

Right about WHAT? :) My theory can be simply stated as:

"The stability of lucid dreaming is strongly affected by the
sleep stage in which it is initiated, but full lucidity
in dreaming can be attained and maintained regardless of
the initiation method used."

So there's my theory in a nutshell.
Now... what the fuck even IS your theory?
At least tell me that before I say if I want to "bet" on it. :)

And btw, it never 'fucks me up' at all when evidence is made
available for what is conclusively correct. It never does.

.

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

On Saturday, August 18, 2018 at 4:24:33 PM UTC-7, feewilly wrote:
> referee blows the whistle
>
> "too much time in huddle boys"
>
> you spend all your time (or a majority of it)
> here separating the fly shit from the pepper.
> Come on now, this is silly. Let people dream
> the way they like. Your way or his way or the
> devil's way is all immaterial. It won't do anyone
> any good by acting like anal retentives. There is
> no point to prove here, this is NOT a fucking competition.
> Being heavy bogs down dreaming, i guarantee you that.
>
> Lighten up, let dreaming take place on its own. All
> books and tapes in the world won't help if one is hanging
> on who to quien es mas correcto. It all works.
> Let it go, do your way, he does his way, readers / dreamers
> decide their way to dreaming. This shit is very old,
> stop making a fool out of yourselves. You dumb shits are
> gaslighting each other away. Don't be a moron.
>
> stop being farts. you'll soon burn up.

I've been saying all along that LDers should do dreaming
in their own way. That's always been my view.

.

[slider]

On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:02:11 +0100, Jeremy H. Denisovan
<david.j...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, you don't seem to have any testable theories at all, Slider.
> My theories could all be thoroughly tested in sleep labs.

### - you/we can 'talk' all day forever and achieve nothing but just more
talk heh (which is obviously your intention to just get people lost in
words and conflicting ideas) - the real 'test' however is in the doing
thereof, and because in a purely 'nonacademic' manner have laid it all out
so simply that even a child can test it...

best advise is to stop complaining about how 'hard' it all is for you
personally, put all your 'preconceived' ideas away for just 10 minutes and
actually test it 'yourself' based on how exactly how it's been presented,
and then, if ya want, you can try and reconcile it as much as you want to
any existent ideas, theories & models... and because i have no interest in
doing so personally more than so

thus i'll leave the academic comparative-shit to people like you who seem
fascinated by such things, people who'd rather 'talk' than do... i don't,
however, mind discussing it from 'within' the context it's been presented,
but that's all am basically prepared to do...

'do' it and we'll talk about it, else not doing it and talking about it is
just an endless round of if's, buts & intellectual maybes on your part and
nada else that's actually going anywhere (you're pretty good at talking
yourself to a stand-still iow hehehe, but that's about all + cue long list
of jeremy's 'reasons' why it can't even be done at all lol ...)

do it/don't do it makes no difference to me ultimately, but we've nothing
to 'talk' about otherwise, my own interests being more about the rather
fascinating implications + ramifications of being 'able' to do it :)

[slider]

> referee blows the whistle
>
> "too much time in huddle boys"
>
> you spend all your time (or a majority of it)
> here separating the fly shit from the pepper.
> Come on now, this is silly. Let people dream
> the way they like. Your way or his way or the
> devil's way is all immaterial. It won't do anyone
> any good by acting like anal retentives. There is
> no point to prove here, this is NOT a fucking competition.
> Being heavy bogs down dreaming, i guarantee you that.
> Lighten up, let dreaming take place on its own. All
> books and tapes in the world won't help if one is hanging
> on who to quien es mas correcto. It all works.
> Let it go, do your way, he does his way, readers / dreamers
> decide their way to dreaming. This shit is very old,
> stop making a fool out of yourselves. You dumb shits are
> gaslighting each other away. Don't be a moron.
>
> stop being farts. you'll soon burn up.

### - awww but daaad... but am just having some fun fishing with jeremy on
the hook lol :D

the 'real' blast in all this is HIM thinking HE'S trolling me?? LOL :)

dangled my 'bait' and caught the fucker hook, line & stinker! haha!

but oh alright then! just for youuu... ya spoilsport!

(slider leans down & cuts the line...)

tsk... better now? (grinz...)

;)

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

I'd like to think that wasn't just a smokescreen for how you're
incapable of stating ANY coherent, testable theory of WILD.
But I honestly think that's exactly what it was.
I'd like to think even you have more integrity than that.
But after the way you've behaved, I really don't think so.

.

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

And why is the first word of this thread 'conformation'? :)
Is it really so necessary that everyone conform?

.

[slider]

> And why is the first word of this thread 'conformation'? :)
> Is it really so necessary that everyone conform?

### - heh yeah i noticed that typo too, even googled it at one point and
confirmation came up as being some kinda catholic ritual and thought fuck
that, leave it, see who else picks up on it...

and just guess who that was!? (laffing...)

:)

[slider]

On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 01:55:05 +0100, Jeremy H. Denisovan
<david.j...@gmail.com> wrote:

> But after the way you've behaved,

### - I'VE behaved???

riiiiiiiiiiiiiight....

:D :D :D

[Jeremy H. Donovan]

But you ARE a robot (with no free will). :)

.

[slider]

frasier's dad wrote... :)


> you sound like fucking robots.

### - awww don't go on so dad... niles is off the hook now :)

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

But you aren't. Mr. WILD has no coherent theory on WILDs. Go figure...

.

[slider]

> Mr. WILD has no coherent theory on WILDs. Go figure...

### - have no 'academic' theory on it no, never claimed to :)

i.e., the whole thing is written & presented purely from an educated
layman's pov for other laymen, so have just described the experience + how
to reproduce the results while at the same time asking a bunch of
questions to stimulate interest and the spirit of objective enquiry...

others, perhaps more suited to the purpose, can then work out what it all
really is or ultimately isn't, all i could personally provide otherwise
were educated guesses & impressions about what 'it' appears to be from the
pov of doing it and being inside it, all of which is highly subjective and
thus wide open to interpretation, the important parts currently being
mapping the entering into and out of it's various early stages for any
common denominators and finding that midway point, and with anything
deeper than that only expected later from people who've mastered these
initial stages and can then repeat them at will and on demand; it's those
peeps who are gonna be the real experts at mapping/pushing the envelope
beyond that...

basically, all i've really done, is to rescue WILDs from the background
noise and stand them on their own away from the influence of other ideas,
including as seen/viewed from the dilds pov which so far has otherwise
defined everything et-al to do with lucid dreaming, thus urging peeps to
start over with WILDs as being something that stands on its own and to
explore/probe things from there with no preconceptions and/or agendas to
cloud their view, and to evaluate accordingly...

WILDs exist + the method obviously works, and that's actually enough for
moi :)

plus have never claimed it's the only method, only that it's a simple &
straightforward approach that works, one that begs certain questions
'because' it works so readily!

am otherwise very pleased with the 'results' so far as being proof-enough
of concept, and it'll likely go on by itself from there to wherever it's
going and/or ends up...

so bon voyage little one! (kiss kiss!) :)

***

have cast my crusts (of bread) out upon the waters...

and so far the ducks seem quite delighted! :)

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

I didn't say it needed to be an 'academic theory'. You're unqualified
to create one anyway. *Any* coherent theory of how it fits would do.
But Slighter, don't worry about it; I knew you had none all along. :)

.

[slider]

On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 21:57:41 +0100, Jeremy H. Denisovan
<david.j...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I didn't say it needed to be an 'academic theory'. You're unqualified
> to create one anyway. *Any* coherent theory of how it fits would do.

### - smile, it's a 'non-academic' minimum masters-level
dissertation/essay, that ends with:

"Is there a philosophy to lucid dreaming? Is there something, a meaning
behind it all? There undoubtedly is, albeit currently hidden from view,
and discovering, unravelling and understanding that philosophy is
obviously going to take time and experience, not because it’s particularly
difficult but because it’s a whole new field of endeavour containing as
yet unrealised reference points. The implications and ramifications of
this hypothesis, I’m waging, could well be far-reaching, if not immense,
in terms of obtaining a greater understanding of ourselves and the nature
of the world around us." --closing lines from: The WILD Way To Lucid
Dreaming, by slider...

the whole thing's an hypothesis, so you'll just have to take it out of
that heh...

besides which, i don't see you actually doing/offering anything better?

so then either put up or shut up innit hehehe...

have done 'my' bit... what have 'you' accomplished lately that's even
remotely similar? nada.

am perfectly happy with it, it's getting rave reviews + have also sold
another 14 copies just this month alone bringing total sales of it to now
206 currently :)

let's just see ya getting anywhere even 'near' beating that on
word-of-mouth alone??

you can't & you wont because you've basically got 'nada' original to even
say/offer...

heh :D happy days!

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

On Monday, August 20, 2018 at 12:52:16 AM UTC-7, slider wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 21:57:41 +0100, Jeremy H. Denisovan

> wrote:
>
> > I didn't say it needed to be an 'academic theory'. You're unqualified
> > to create one anyway. *Any* coherent theory of how it fits would do.
>
> ### - smile, it's a 'non-academic' minimum masters-level
> dissertation/essay, that ends with:
>
> "Is there a philosophy to lucid dreaming? Is there something, a meaning
> behind it all? There undoubtedly is, albeit currently hidden from view,
> and discovering, unravelling and understanding that philosophy is
> obviously going to take time and experience, not because it’s particularly
> difficult but because it’s a whole new field of endeavour containing as
> yet unrealised reference points. The implications and ramifications of
> this hypothesis, I’m waging, could well be far-reaching, if not immense,
> in terms of obtaining a greater understanding of ourselves and the nature
> of the world around us." --closing lines from: The WILD Way To Lucid
> Dreaming, by slider...
>
> the whole thing's an hypothesis, so you'll just have to take it out of
> that heh...

Even you should know me better by now. When I first came to adc
in 1995, I was already talking about dreaming. In fact, I was talking
about it more than anyone else here and even in those early days,
I was speaking of practices I'd already been actively involved in
for over a decade.

So it shouldn't be hard to see how involved I was in the subject,
nor the least bit surprising given that depth of concern that I
might have demanding standards for how the subject is understood.
You also know of my long-term interest in scientific approaches,
so it couldn't be surprising that I'd prefer a standard of more
'rigorous' thinking.

Given all that, how can you imagine some speculative remark
like the one you make above could be remotely satisfying to...
mwah? :) Of course not, right? LOL. It's not even personal.
I would have been critical with ANYONE doing that. Do you not
realize that??

Now I'll analyze your paragraph above since you offered it.
First, I think you meant to say "wagering" rather than "waging".
Yet that little slip is revealing, for you have long behaved
as one "waging a battle" over what by your own admission is only a
"hypothesis". And that's been reflective of your entire attitude,
which hasn't been one of "let's wait and see"; rather, it has
continually been more like: "THIS certainly stands alone and it
is incomparable with all that has come before! And if you differ
then you must be cut to the ground, for you have done NOTHING
unless you have done THIS in the same way I have."

You've openly stated as much to me here on many occasions.
And that bias is evident in the single paragraph you quoted,
albeit not as aggressively. You say that there "undoubtedly is"
(some meaning behind it all) yet in the same paragraph note
that this presumed "meaning" is "hidden from view".

Yet if "the meaning" (and could anything be more vague?) is truly
"hidden" then how does it "undoubtedly" exist?

This, I suppose, is the 'bet' you'd like to make, and I'm to decide
if I'll take it? Yet obviously, there's no way I could, because
nothing specific has been said, and what was said is contradictory.

Now, do I think you should just make up some 'theory'? Hell no.
I totally prefer honest ignorance over someone pretending to know.
Yet in spite of making no specific claims, you DO pretend to know.

There are lots of "philosophies" of WILD out there. I just pointed
you to Donald J. DeGracia. He believes that when he is WILDing he's
accessing other "planes" of existence, such as the "astral plane"
or the "Buddha plane". He even believes in this "Buddha plane"
in spite of how he even admits he himself has never accessed it.
And he IS an academic researcher. :0

But when I ask for a 'theory', I'm really asking: where does this
FIT with all the verified knowledge we already have on LD?
And in that regard, Slider, you offered... nothing. Even worse,
you've basically utterly dismissed every single thing anyone else
(including me) has ever done that wasn't WILD, which isn't even
your own term, it's LaBerge's. So, in my opinion, your arrogance
on that matter has been nothing short of absolutely stunning.

The bibliography in the back of your book includes a grand total
of four other works on lucid dreaming, two of which are by LaBerge.
That's it. So, dude, I may not have written a book on lucid dreaming
but at least I've READ a lot more books than that about it. :)

Here's one I just pulled off my shelf at random that I'll quote
for you, "Lucid Dreaming" by Celia Green and Charle's McCrury,
from their section on "Philosophical Attitudes", where they speak
of one "long-term possible effect of lucid dreaming that is
sometimes suggested is that the habitual lucid dreamer might lose
interest in the normal concerns of everyday life because of his or
her preoccupation with the absorbing internal events of the dream
life. We do not ourselves know of anyone to whom this has happened..."

Well, I know of someone to whom this has happened. LOL. :)

Before you dismiss her out of hand as you do anyone and everyone
else on earth, consider that she's also saying a lot of other
interesting things, such as commenting on how the subject of LD has
"received a certain amount of recognition in the East". That's true,
and if I'd written a book on LD, I'd have felt obligated to research
the eastern writings on it. You do not have even one such source
in your little "bibliography".

Green speaks of how lucid dreams can "rival the waking world in
perceptual precision and clarity" and even questions "how good
a claim to superior reality our waking life actually has" (all while
making no distinction between WILD and DILD). She devotes an entire
chapter to False Awakenings and Sleep Paralysis.

Green was the Director of Psychophysical Research at Oxford (which
was actually a charity), and she wrote her first book 'Lucid Dreams'
in 1968. In the book I just quoted from, her bibliography is 5 pages
and references over 150 other works, including 10 works by LaBerge.
That's an example of a more serious author's approach.

But okay, I know you're not a 'serious author'. :) And you don't
have to be one either. You can write anything you please. It's fine.
I DO think it's an accomplishment to publish a book of your own.
Good for you and well done! Just don't utterly dismiss everyone else
on earth over it, like some crappy wannabe cult leader. :)

> besides which, i don't see you actually doing/offering anything better?

You've worked hard at being a jerk to me for many years on purpose.
I must seem incredibly threatening to you; that's all I can say. :)
But it says a lot more about you than it does about me.

> so then either put up or shut up innit hehehe...
>
> have done 'my' bit... what have 'you' accomplished lately that's even
> remotely similar? nada.
>
> am perfectly happy with it, it's getting rave reviews + have also sold
> another 14 copies just this month alone bringing total sales of it to now
> 206 currently :)
>
> let's just see ya getting anywhere even 'near' beating that on
> word-of-mouth alone??

Hmm. You act like you think you're in competition with me. I'd just
urge you to shoot a bit 'higher' than to make your endeavors in life
about competing with me (or anyone else). And yet, there are certain
standards one ought to adhere to. No, I haven't written a book, but
if I did write on any factual subject it would require making a
greater effort because my standards would require documenting
everything in the area under consideration (like Green does).

However, I'm glad you're happy with what you've done. I just happen
to be the kind of person who couldn't be satisfied with it. So it'd
be nice if you could see that you're not the only person on earth
and recognize that others have different standards than you do.

And I know you're not completely stupid. It doesn't take a math major
to get that if I have 4 DILDs in the last 2 months and some other
guy has 2 DILDs and 1 WILD, then how is he better at lucid dreaming?
4 > 3. You can't claim he "does it on demand" until he can at least
do LD more often than I do. :) Right? That's a very simple point.

And your 'mysticism' about the 'midway point' doesn't impress me.
I don't believe it results in any kind of "super awareness",
though it might seem like it at the time. I experienced it too.
Mostly during those "false awakening initiated" LD experiences
I mentioned which were probably highly similar to WILDs.

(If they were initiated during "micro-awakenings" then they were
technically WILDs. A sleep lab could verify that eventually.)

The last few pieces I've written on dreaming lately have been
entirely whimsical and were created to serve multiple purposes.
Five Minutes Before Noontide:
http://tinyurl.com/ybjtkuka

> you can't & you wont because you've basically got 'nada' original to even
> say/offer...

The way you insult and dismiss anyone who differs from your views
gives away the real you.


> heh :D happy days!

I'd continue to encourage you to step outside the box.
Just because you wrote a book on lucid dreaming doesn't mean
you must be 'married' to those ideas and practices to your grave.

My take, one more time, call it take 37:
There's a gargantuan real world around us. One we all share.
Yet when dreaming, in that real world, I'm just lying there
by myself with my eyes closed in my own private virtual world.
That's it. That's all I can ever DO while dreaming. In the real
world I'm doing essentially nothing and anything that I am doing
virtually is really only about ME.

Dreaming can be amazing, enjoyable, even meaningful, but...
it's still just a personal activity. That is its main limitation.
Life is much bigger.

.

[slider]

> some jockey won 7 races at Del Mar.
> Set some of record, but i didn't bet
> any race on him. (fuck i should have).

### - imagine just a 1-buck accumulator bet on that little lot eh?

(first win goes onto the second which goes onto the third etc etc 7 times
heh)

[slider]

> yeah i was telling this to my wife this morning.
> i will get the payouts of this guy and compute
> what a two dollar bet would turn in to on a parlay ride.
> let me get my calculator out and figure this. be back
> in a while.

### - don't forget to include the 'stake' too by adding 1 to the odds each
time because ya also get back your stake whenever it wins

e.g., a 4 to 1 win thus becomes a 5 to one win when it includes the stake,
which all then also goes onto the next win too... (the easiest way to
accurately factor all that in is to just add a 1 to any win-odds and
calculate it all that way...)

something that wins at 16/1, for instance, actually 'pays' 17/1 because it
includes getting your original stake back too, so ya have to carry it
forward :)

[slider]

> so a two dollar bet would pay
> $1,055,801 at the end of the day
> from betting each race with the
> winnings of a prior race.
> not bad if you just played
> the jockey and NOT the horse eh?
> now there's a worthy dream if i
> ever did see one.

### - ok ya did it the long way round, but yes what a win that would have
been lol :)

2-bucks gets ya a million! LOL :)))

(screwed mine up last saturday heh with only 2 winners outta 7 damn!)

some peeps do bet on jockeys though, we have one here (top rider frankie
dettori) who i remember once pulling a 7-fold like that (fucking amazing!)
all the dettori fans were whooping it up that day all the way to the bank
i can tell ya lol :D

http://www.greatbritishracing.com/latest/frankie-dettoris-magnificent-7/

plus you can bet your bottom dollar the odds in his last race dropped
right down to fuck all regardless of what it started out at heh (actually
ended up at only 2/1 from 12/1; the bookies fixed it based on dettori's
form rather than the horse lol...)

[slider]

let it ride wrote... (i still like that crazy movie lol)

> we'll see how he does on Wednesday.
>
> every dog has his day. (still waiting for mine) tap tap

### - haha woof-woof + everyone was backing dettori and his 1996
'magnificent-7' for months afterwards but all to no avail, think the best
he ever managed again in all this time was 4 winners a few months later,
so something like that really is/was a lifetime-shot thingy... you could
always back your man for a lesser win though... e.g., pick 7 races and
there's 35-combinations of 4-folds (35 bets) that could be covered in a 4
from 7...

you'd write it out something like this:

your 7-picks followed by:

35 x 10c 4-folds = $3.50 (20c = $7.00 etc etc depending on how much you
wanna back per bet...)

a full cover bet would look like this:

21 doubles
35 trebles
35 four-folds accumulators
21 five-fold accumulators
7 six-fold accumulators
1 seven-fold accumulator

a total of 120 bets not including covering the singles heh

details/breakdown here:

http://mybettingsites.co.uk/learn/super-heinz-bet/

but to get anything over 4 is always pretty damn good (even 4 is
impressive!)

so never bet the bank on it :)

a better/more-affordable bet is from 5-selections/picks involving far less
bets

Ten doubles
Ten trebles
Five four-folds accumulators
One five-fold accumulator

= 26-bets (called a canadian lol :)))

a fav. bet of mine this, although i usually ignore the doubles unless
prices are good

10 x 10p trebles = £1.00
5 x 50p 4-folds = £2.50
1 x 50p each-way acc. = £1.00

= £4.50

if 3 win you usually get all your money back + a little extra depending on
prices

4 wins always pays good at those stakes + you pick up/also get 4-trebles
as well (have had a few 4-folds usually paying around 200 to infinity
depending on prices... best ever 4-fold paying 4,500/1, of which i had 10p
on so picked up £450 for only 10p! + the 4-trebles then came to a grand
total of around 750! so howzat for only £4.50 eh? - lol the guy behind the
counter almost saluted me when i went in to collect it hehehe, 'coz they
rarely see that...)

and if all 5 win then it's whoopie-doo! time lol (had some of those too/
always pay well...)

a nice multiple bet like that which wins more often, is to pick 5
favourites and cover them so:

5 x £1.00 4-folds
1 x £4.00 (or £5.00) acc.
= £9 or £10 total...

last time i had one of those all come in (all low priced favourites) it
paid £980, my best-ever payday as it goes :)

smile, was a time heh when i used to have a canadian-bet every day (was
actually around that time of dettori's magnificent-7) so was investing
around £35 per week on average... now only once/twice a week + the free
bet on saturday... am having a similar little go today so wish me luck
heh...

it's a hobby lol (hobby-horse) get it? :)))

[slider]

> my hobby is the lottery.
> hobo 401k for sure.

### - liking the logic of accumulators, applied that same approach one
time to the lottery for a while and had some small wins heh...

when it first started here is was just a simple pick 6 numbers from 49
etc; the resulting odds being 14-million to one lol of ever getting them
all + what most people did (and still do) is to get several tickets with
different numbers on 'em, each a 14-million to one shot with small prizes
for less numbers...

anyway, it was sooo successful that they upped the smaller prizes to
minimum £25 for 3 numbers (for a treble) and a pool for 4+ numbers... so
what i did was to instead of picking 6 numbers i picked 7 and made 7
combinations out of 6 numbers, the idea being that it's easier to pick 3
from 7 selections than it is from only 6... and it worked! it not only
literally halved the odds of hitting the jackpot to 7-million but also
reduced the odds of winning the smaller prizes too!

e.g., anytime i hit 3 numbers i then had 4-tickets with trebles on them =
£100!

and a couple of times got 4-up = 1 4-fold + 4 trebles!, the best of which
paid £331 for a £7 stake :)

even got to the point of considering a 6 from 8 accumulator involving 26
bets only i could just never ever feckin' work out all 26 (or was it 28)
combinations LOL (try it and see just how hard that is lol;
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 - so your first line of 26 lines would be: 1,2,3,4,5,6...
the second line: 1,2,3,4,5,7 - then 1,2,3,4,5,8 etc etc etc till you've
covered every possible combination, only i would only always get about 3/4
the way through and drop the ball and have to start over trying to work
them all out again hahaha + never did manage it either :)

and then, about a year later, they only went and added another 10 numbers
(now 1 to 59 lol) AND doubled the price of the tickets too!? wtf! killed
it!

thus making it utterly impossible from then on to ever get fuck-all outta
'em ever again heh...

[slider]

### - just in case i 'may' have doubted anything; the universe then comes
back at me with this :)

Charlie: (today)
Now I remember why it took me so long to read this book. Something in me
must have known the end would indeed be the sweetest, most refreshing
piece of work I’ve ever read in my life on this planet.

So for over a year I read a little here and a little there, only to be
blown back after gently closing the last page. My name is Charlie, and, I
have read more than six books concerning the intricacies of lucid dreaming
(Journey to Ixtalan, The Art of Dreaming, Lucid Dreaming Plain & Simple,
A Field Guide to Lucid Dreaming, The Tibetan Yogas of Dream and Sleep &
The WILD Way to Lucid Dreaming), and, to this day, have yet to see one
with the switch-blade accuracy it includes.

This book is no less than a revolutionary piece of art. With everything
concerning debate stripped away to leave only the exact process so as to
keep the reader from jumping to conclusions about this or that, The WILD
Way To Lucid Dreaming TRULY is the most practical of all guides created.

***

alright alright fuck me, that's enough! i submit haha! :D

damn, it's almost enough to make me blush?

+ says he's gonna write some of the the above on amazon US as a review
(cool)

cheers universe for reminding me that not 'everyone' i've cast my pearl(s)
before is/was a swine?

ahahaha :)

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

On Tuesday, August 21, 2018 at 1:48:19 PM UTC-7, slider wrote:
> ### - just in case i 'may' have doubted anything; the universe then comes
> back at me with this :)

Yeah, I'm sure the universe is really concerned.

Well good, it's about time a few people who like it reviewed it.
Geez, I mean, tens of thousands of people liked Scientology, right?
(Dianetics by Hubbard, on US Amazon - 4.1 stars w/ 933 reviews.)

There are still only 4 reviews of your book on US Amazon,
and mine seems the most relied on. It says under my review:
"17 people found this helpful". I honestly never thought mine
would be the most prominent (though admittedly, it's accurate). :)

The next closest review in popularity is a 1-star review entitled
"Not Recommended"... where it says "6 people found this helpful."
I think that one's unfair, though. Your book isn't that bad,
although the reviewer's written critique is essentially correct.

He says:
"the author sets you up to fail by giving you a technique that is
unlikely to work, tells you how easy it is and then criticizes a
much easier and more widely practiced method of lucid dreaming...
This technique might have better odds of working if the author
instructed you to attempt WILDs at a time of night when you are
in REM sleep which is after 4-6 hours of sleep. He instead implies
you can do this right at bed and it will work. This is highly
unlikely... I think he found a technique that works for him (maybe)
and so makes the false assumption that it is the best method and
will be easy for everyone else."

A just criticism. While your method itself is good, most people
won't get it to work right when they first lie down to sleep.
Better to use WBTB. But a one-star review is far too harsh.

I also agree with your positive reviewer above on one thing.
The simplicity of your stripped-down method is far better than a
lot of metaphysical whoopla any day. But are we going to have to
hear about it every single time anybody buys or likes it? :)

You know, back when Amy Wallace was around if I'd done that I'd
have had to make tens of thousands of posts here about it. Right?
So could you maybe tell us like every 100 sales or something?

.

[slider]

> So could you maybe tell us like every 100 sales or something?

### - oh alright then if it really bugs ya 'that' much hehehe... ;)

but ONLY if you'll do the same re trump?

deal?

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

I know it may be hard for you to see this, but Trump is
really much more important than who learns lucid dreaming.
And it doesn't bug me much. Just giving you a little shit. :)

.

[slider]

>> > So could you maybe tell us like every 100 sales or something?
>>
>> ### - oh alright then if it really bugs ya 'that' much hehehe... ;)
>>
>> but ONLY if you'll do the same re trump?
>>
>> deal?
>
> I know it may be hard for you to see this, but Trump is
> really much more important than who learns lucid dreaming.

### - 'he' wont be around forever, whereas LDing's gonna be around for the
foreseeable future!

you missed a good offer! :)

> And it doesn't bug me much. Just giving you a little shit. :)

### - yeah that's just what the worlds needs right now innit: 'more' shit??

does seem to be what you're best at though, i'll give ya that hehehe...

loves 'shit' ahaha...

(in my best terry thomas voice...) you absolute 'swine' :)

[Jeremy H. Denisovan]

The keyword was 'little'. You've given me a LOT. :)
And I don't think I've missed anything when it comes to LD.

.

[thang ornerythinchus]

On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 16:24:32 -0700 (PDT), feewilly
<allre...@gmail.com> wrote:

>referee blows the whistle
>
>"too much time in huddle boys"
>
>you spend all your time (or a majority of it)
>here separating the fly shit from the pepper.
>Come on now, this is silly. Let people dream
>the way they like. Your way or his way or the
>devil's way is all immaterial. It won't do anyone
>any good by acting like anal retentives. There is
>no point to prove here, this is NOT a fucking competition.
>Being heavy bogs down dreaming, i guarantee you that.
>Lighten up, let dreaming take place on its own. All
>books and tapes in the world won't help if one is hanging
>on who to quien es mas correcto. It all works.
>Let it go, do your way, he does his way, readers / dreamers
>decide their way to dreaming. This shit is very old,
>stop making a fool out of yourselves. You dumb shits are
>gaslighting each other away. Don't be a moron.
>
>stop being farts. you'll soon burn up.

For some ridiculous reason (if there needs *be* a reason) I dreamt of
Ronald Reagan last night. He was young, handsome and well before his
POTUS time. Regal in bearing and with hair to kill for, but parted
down the middle in a modern way, his chin was up and he strutted and
spoke as mentor to a heap of people who were listening with awe.

Why the fuck would I dream *that*?

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[slider]

### - Great compliment on facebook today re WILDs & WILDing from an
experienced dreamer:

Kristopher Kelley: I just finished reading Brian‘s book and had to laugh.
I’ve been WILDing for many years now. I DILD at night and WILD during the
day for naps and such. I never thought of the ‘process’ I went through
during the day to enter Dreaming. Brian just explained it! LOL! I hope he
gets rich and famous off his book! Good work!

***

rich & famous eh? moi?? thaaat'll beee the daaay! hehehe + i should 'live'
so long!

but'cha just never know innit ;)

[slider]

### - cool comment (and plug) from this established LDing dude running his
own large group on FB heh :)

Kristopher Kelley 5 November at 21:00:

I'm going to post a link to Brian Aherne's book in regards to the WILD
method. I've read the book and it's great for learning this method. He
also has some interesting idea's in regards to Dreaming which are worth
reading as well. I don't 'promote' peoples work lightly, yet this WILD
book and method is so fast and simple, as well as cutting through all the
crap one must attempt to do with others methods, I feel I need to mention
it here. Buy the book. Do the work. Dream. It's really that simple.

***

kewl :)

[salvanilla]

election day 2018, meet the new bosses,
much like the old bosses, yep we got fooled again alright.

keep yourself alive, keep yourself alive,
go see Bohemian Rapsody. Good show for sure.

[slider]

> election day 2018, meet the new bosses,
> much like the old bosses, yep we got fooled again alright.

### - election, what election??

i.e., kennedy's billionaire father was later heard to comment: that he'd
spent/invested sooo much on his son's election that he could have gotten
his 'chauffeur' elected!

so go-figure which billionaire wins-out this time eh? lol :)

under such corrupt circumstances 'elections' are mere... formalities!

(iow: elections are bought, not won...)

[freewilly]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4lrjZ1SeOs

the name of the game is

keep yourself alive !

[slider]

### - we just hit 601 members in the fb WILDs & WILDing group! (yeaaa!)

plus a book sold every 2-days this month as well??

fuck me, it's finally getting busy! :)))

even chris has started seeing hypnagogia & WILDing!

(and he's defo a hard-core dildo hahaha...)

you may say am a dreamer,
but am not the only one...

not any more anyways! ;)