snowymountains

( removed the above, really interesting though, I am not too familiar with the Egyptian practices and cosmology ) For the quoted part it's two cases/two possibilities. One is static information that we all have at birth and overlaps, such is the postulation of the collective unconscious and perhaps epigenetics will provide an answer. In this case the worlds are not real as in realities parallel to this one, they are real as in genetically inherited information that we all have in us. The other possibility is that the places are real and archetypes are not from our psyche but rather they link us with the said (real) places. This would be a full blown version of the Unus Mundus. So the question becomes, given an experience, which of the two options it's more consistent with.

Happened a few times, I rebuild it 😎

People also draw similar maps for the lower world ( not identical though ) from their journeying, the question is if this archetypical information we all have in us or instead these are real places / what we perceive as spirits are parts of our psyche or something external. Or to reframe, where would someone place the boundary for an experience to indicate something as external, given our own psyches have amazing resources we're not consciously aware of.

This can also be something different BES, in isolation it also doesn't sound as sufficient grounds to remove civil rights and sorry if that was a potential danger for you. Maybe this sounds odd but I can understand you. Someone close to me could use similar words for their experience and what you shared has value, as in this strictly personal relationship they tell me it's important they have someone to speak to about this. It is common that a part of us e.g. reveals knowledge in dreams, without going into what this knowledge can look like when it's from our psyche, it can extend quite a bit further than what intuition says is possible, it is not of supernatural origin though. Under some technicals it is also possible that the message comes as a hearing a voice during daytime, but let's leave the technicals out of the discussion, as nobody can know how relevant they'd be specifically for you. But neither demons nor supernatural beings need to be involved in experiences like the one you describe. Those folks though were explicitly looking for knowledge that is impossible to have, of course I don't know their definition of impossible but e.g. if I were to use their acid tests, I'd need to hear a clear description of something that only I knew and nobody else could had possibly known, it would need to be downright impossible, not just unlikely, for me to change my view. In the one case I am aware of, it was simply the case that the experts were unaware of gossips, and considered such knowledge to be of supernatural origin, when instead of demons it was simple overhearing.

The ones I have mind have very respectable credentials. Also in the only case I'm familiar with, they were just wrong. I think it's interesting that people with credentials take this view but for their view to become fact, they need to share evidence for peer review. Eg nobody has provided evidence of someone knowing information that's impossible to know. Still it's interesting. The reason I say it's interesting the following hypothetical scenario. Hypothetically if the case that made them change view did know information that's not possible to know and the information was dirt on them/skeletons in the closet, then they wouldn't share privately nor submit evidence. So there's a catch 22 hypothetical scenario - no indication of something like this having taken place though.

Their definition ( without knowing each other ) was based on someone knowing information that is impossible to know eg about other people, this was their acid test. In the one case I'm aware of though, it was certainly very much possible to know a piece of information. So in the only sample I'm aware of, the expert was sloppy and held a wrong belief because of it. The closest thing to historical demonic descriptions is multiple personality disorders or even at neurosis level, disowned parts of self sometimes "talking" to someone during the day ( but not yet at psychosis levels ). Both of these would had been thought of as demonic a few centuries ago but today we know they're not. A complex too might had been perceived as demonic a few centuries ago. So, I think their acid test makes sense to distinguish a disorder or a neurosis or anything from something metaphysical. What didn't make sense to me was the handwavy way they applied the test and drew wrong conclusions. But still it's interesting that they believed it, maybe eg they were less sloppy before they believed it and the incident that made the change views was examined more rigourously.

I'll share a nugget which personally I don't really believe, nonetheless it's interesting. I'm aware of two very accomplished professionals, one is a psychiatrist, the other is a Psy.D., both privately believe in demons ( publicly they don't ). They've both had about 50 years career tenures and are well respected. Interestingly both are very experienced in multiple personality disorder and both don't want to share (privately) anything about what strengthened this belief. This is a fringe view btw but it's interesting that two people very accomplished in these fields believe this. But to put their perspectives in context, as great qualifications don't make someone right. Tbh in the only incident I am familiar with, where one of the two experts seemed convinced something was demonic, there was absolutely nothing metaphysical, nevermind demonic. So my view is that probably their beliefs were created by past cases, where similarly they drew wrong conclusions aka they believed what unconsciously they wanted to believe. Still it's interesting as both seem very convinced, they're sharp and well versed in multiple personality disorder.

Thank you. Are you aware in which texts from Daoist Canon is the Yin Devil discussed ? I would say that automatic reactions need a certain degree of self awareness to be recognised and even then it's not always possible, ie it is common for a lot of people to deny their automatic reactions even occurred. Changing them is not something which can be done alone, it's more of a process that can be done with an experienced therapist.

Interesting, sounds similar to what is called today "automatic reactions" or what was referred to in older, Jungian, terminology as a "complex" ( which takes over the ego-consciousness ). And indeed these are difficult to clear as they all "resides" in our amygdalas and first they needs to be brought to consciousness and then replaced with something healthier ( healthier for the present environment that is ). Btw this is something that cannot be worked solo/by the person alone, realistically it's impossible without feedback from the environment and working with a therapist. What was/is the Daoist way to work with "Yin Devils" ? I'm curious as to how it compares with today's therapeutic techniques.

Thanks both, to rephrase, what's a good translation for someone who will read I Ching for the first time ?

What are demons in Taoism? Is it dark parts of our Psyche, or they're like Christian/Abrahamic demons as in fallen divine beings that have gone rogue and invade/take control of people. In reality, I agree, without proper prior integration of disowned parts, meditation may have negative impact

Lights typically are meditation flagposts, ie nimittas, not unconscious projections, they have a different origin. Here however the OP is seeing imaginary, a projection from his unconscious, and wants to know what it is. Ideally psychoanalysis is the best fit for finding out but the time commitment is *very significant*. Psychotherapy is a good second best fit, depending on the training of the therapist ( eg a CBT therapist may not be the best fit for this particular question ) - which is why the OP may ask them if they've got experience with daydreaming. It would be good to be aware what psychotherapists do before criticising the advice to see one. From your posts it seems to me you believe they do things they don't do ( eg "diseases" , it's clinical psychologists and psychiatrists that treat eg psychosis, not psychotherapists ), or believe they work exclusively with eg disorders, which is not the case. The alternative would be to speculate here, which I won't do, as this won't help the OP answer his question. Hence the advice to find someone close to his place who can.

The ball may even eventually cover everything and then you will be at 1st Jhana. This is not symbolic, it's a sign/flagpost for meditation progression. ( The colour doesn't matter much and is different for each meditator )

I can't comment on whether it blocks the neidan in specific, as I don't practice Taoism, but indeed that's the glaring gap that insight meditation/shikantaza and open awareness practices leave open, unconscious processes. They don't leave it 100% as a gap of course as e.g. even baseline mindfulness ie sensing a bodily reaction next to a person provides some contact with unconscious processing. There has been discussion on other threads that eg latent memories may come to surface etc that is all true. However it's not the full power of the unconscious, which can never be fully brought to consciousness as-is, there simply aren't enough brain layers there at the outer layers which compose the conscious mind to store everything in the inner ones. Open awareness practices are excellent but deep unconscious processes will stay under the radar ( automatic reactions will also stay under the radar ), it's those deep processes that drive fundamental changes in life or how someone approaches life. The unconscious doesn't understand time, only "now" is highly symbolic and "decoding" the symbolism is what translates its message. Now as to if that blocks neidan, it blocks a ton of things in life when the unconscious and the conscious are not aligned, so it wouldn't be a surprise if it blocks a spiritual goal. To give credit though as these practices do quiet the mind, this also increases the amount of times someone acts based on what the unconscious is suggesting. What's needed to unlock the full power of the unconscious though, extends beyond that.

Are Afghan/Kashmirian/Parthian/Chinese origins backed by historical research? This is interesting, if you have the time, could you please give pointers as to who has done this research?

I'm only responsible for what I wrote though, not for how you interpret it. In any case, there lots of reasons someone can see a therapist for, it's not only for disorder treatment or seeking a behavioural adjustment as you suggest. Eg understanding why things happen is one of the common reasons, which was the question in the OP. Anything that occurs systematically either like in this post through daydreaming ( not because of it ), or a recurring dream is worth exploring. It's ok, it's clear you were reacting to something different to what I wrote but it was also worth discussing that psychotherapists are not there only for disorder treatment. They're also infinitely more likely to help the OP find why it's happening, than internet forums.

The way I read your response, you seem to assume its about correcting something behaviourally, but never said anything of the sort. The goal may well be ... to understand why he sees what he sees, which was the question in the OP.

That's up to the OP, he can go or not go, up to him/her

The therapist will help him understand why he sees violence which is something he wants to understand.

Daydreaming activities typically peak at teen years, don't know the OPs age, s/he can know if that's a factor ( no need to write it, imo online discussions offer zero value at helping OP with their question) . Maybe the trigger was the visualisation, maybe something else, maybe a combination. As to what he sees, it could be a number of things, none of which is a metaphysical parasite however. Let's not go back 500 years when bacteria were thought to be spirits. @Chang dao ling In your shoes I'd honestly call a few licensed psychotherapists close to where you live and ask them if they've got professional experience with daydreaming as well as working with people in your age group and take it from there. It's probably best to ignore what's written here, find a therapist and work with them.

bumping this one, between Wilhelm and Huang which one is the most accurate translation? Also, Wilhelm had written a commentary text on the I CHING, which is a separate volume to his translation of the text. Is that a good quality commentary ?

It's called Naitan, I wish to remain anonymous 🙂

Hakuin, it's his fourth energy technique. In terms of execution it's similar to what I've read here about MCO but don't practice MCO myself so can't fully compare.

Nobody said it's bad, it's not an ethics or a religious discussion, the question by the OP was why is this happening.

It's not about teachers, I had teachers in the past and currently do have a monk teacher, from whom I learned a lot and respect a lot. I'm not anti-mediation, nor anti-monks, teachers. For *some things*, like removing conditioning, therapeutic techniques are way more efficient than meditation. Meditation indeed connects to some degree the conscious to the unconscious and "stuff" does become conscious, it's just not the most effective way to bring the unconscious to the conscious and practice while just sitting will miss things as well. Without a long response, at the risk of some sloppiness , any interaction that triggers overly positive or negative emotions is worth gold in terms of looking inside us and some the data that comes out won't be activated from meditation while sitting. The retreats & trauma topic is a long discussion, Gabor Mate included it as one of the main topics in a recent workshop. What you say is correct, it does happen, I've seen it too but it's also a long discussion, as to why, who should go, who shouldn't etc. It's also not always possible to know in advance what will someone experience. Btw I don't conflate the Unus Mundus with the Tao or anything else, I don't practice Taoism anyhow but conflating between different traditions is effectively cognitively bringing spiritual experiences, which can only create an ontological salad, a la Blavatsky. Imo meditation is for things like concentration and spiritual experiences. Eg samadhis or experiencing interconnectedness between living beings and perhaps more experiences that I haven't had yet. Therapy will not provide any of these. It can't and it's anyhow out of scope for therapy ( unless it's Jungian analysis, which is also spiritual ). But for removing conditioning, therapy is king.