# Lucid Dreaming > General Lucid Discussion > Book Club >  >  Lucid Dreaming Book Club (August)

## Hilary

Our new selection for this month is _Illusions: The Adventures of a Reluctant Messiah_ by Richard Bach. (Suggested by Sageous)

I found these sources online if you need help accessing the book:

PDF: https://denver-psychic.com/wp-conten.../Illusions.pdf

Audiobook: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WX8v...L&index=2&t=0s

When discussing this book, especially as it is a fiction, please use spoiler tags with the chapter you're discussing in the title of the spoiler.


Happy reading!  :smiley:

----------


## nautilus

Thanks for the links MoonageDaydream! Will start reading soon, and looking forward to it. I haven't read it before but did read Jonathan Livingston Seagull as a kid and loved it.

----------


## Hilary

> Thanks for the links MoonageDaydream! Will start reading soon, and looking forward to it. I haven't read it before but did read Jonathan Livingston Seagull as a kid and loved it.



You're more than welcome. 

It seems like a very short book (2 1/2 hour audiobook), so that's nice. I'll be starting within a week or so, I am almost done with _Tibetan Yoga_...

----------


## Occipitalred

Ok, I think I'll give it a try... but first I need to review the reason why I'm not excited about it (express my negative attitude and maybe focus on the positives). 


*Spoiler* for _Jonathan Livingston Seagull_: 




I recently read _Jonathan Livingston Seagull_ for my own book club where I try to summarize the teachings of the book and my reaction to these teachings. In this case, I didn't love the insights. I don't find reading the story of a "Mary Sue" to be a very enlightening or teaching experience... I'm going to share my book club comment on that book. It kind of reminded me of The Alchemist. In both case, I find the stories fun if I approach them as fun fantasy stories. But when I approach these readings with the intention to learn something spiritual, I am disappointed.

_Jonathan first values higher purpose over survival. Meanwhile, every other seagull of his flock disagrees so intensely, they shun him. There is no discussion of compromise or balance. Later, when he is welcomed into a higher world, higher purpose turns out to be perfection. Those who are practical accomplish nothing while those who seek perfection accomplish everything. Heaven is defined as no place and no time, since it is timeless and spaceless. Jonathan seems distracted from this talk by his desire for perfection. He is taught that for perfection, you must know you have already succeeded because you are limitless, that is, spaceless and timeless.

Jonathan is humble but he is uniquely talented. To identify with him is a bit arrogant at best. So, we’re not meant to identify with him, just be inspired by him. He doesn’t fear learning. That’s what’s special about him. So, we’re encouraged to welcome learning. On his journey to understand love, he becomes an instructor and just by saying so, handicapped seagulls can now fly (that's not the lesson we need to learn for meeting people with handicaps and tragedy with love and respect). He says there is no law but the law of freedom, not even the law of the flock (lesson: don't stop yourself from being your best self to stay in the status quo).

Recap: Jonathan is a seagull that didn’t care about fighting for food to survive because he’d rather fly. As a reward, he became a teleporting telepathic seagull often not on Earth. A story challenging the Grasshopper and the Ant fable and obsessed with the transcendence fantasy.

My questions: But what does it say about the escape-transcendence fantasy? It says to have faith (in perfection, in transcendence), it says to practice it (play until success). It preaches confidence and resilience over those who don’t understand and are part of the system. In the end, the protagonist finds a new role authentic to himself (perfection) rather than (survival). He finds a community too, although they are very separate from the initial colony.

What I would have preferred: I think the interesting insights here, spiritually, are the explorations of the timeless/spaceless mindset, and the exploration of being open to learning. I would have liked greater exploration of these things but where the goal is not omnipotence untranslatable to our lives (otherwise, I think it's just a fun story, but with only a shallow insight). In real life, however much spaceless and timeless my mindset is, I won't be able to time travel or to teleport so... that's not the actual purpose of being in a spaceless/timeless mindset. I think some purposes for this mindset might be used to practice connectedness, gratefulness, compassion, and hope/faith. But once you've practiced these states, you still have to solve your problems and live in time and space. So I would have liked to see reconciliation with the colony, compromise, balance. In the end, the spiritual seagulls have just become so disconnected._

----------


## Sageous

^^ Good points all, OccipitalRed, but be assured that _Illusions_ is not _Jonathan Livingston Seagull_. 

_JLS_ is basically just a feel-good book for folks who feel like powerless, unremarkable members of a large equally unremarkable flock.  I don't think _JLS_ was ever meant by Bach to be deep -- all that came later when intellectuals tried to figure out why it sold so well.

I think you will find Illusions more interesting, especially if you read from the viewpoint of a lucid dreamer.

----------


## Occipitalred

Thank you Sageous, I'm definitely in a better mood now to get into _Illusions_ and I'll make sure to read it from the viewpoint of a lucid dreamer!

----------


## Occipitalred

I finished _Illusions_. 


*Spoiler* for _the whole book!_: 




I would describe this story as Bach’s short fantasy; what if he met a modern-day Jesus? What if they had the chance to banter about life? What would he learn? The protagonist is Richard himself, a biplane pilot giving rides in midwest America. Bach grounds the story in his daily life from the start and reaffirms it at the end when the character promises not to write ever (reminder that he is reluctant writer Richard Bach). As Bach told us, he would have much preferred it that way, but turns out, he did write the story after all, because he couldn’t stop himself.   

In the end, I disagree that it is very different from his first work _Jonathan Livingston Seagull._ It feels like the same author and message. I definitely now see Bach has a personal relationship with flight, which gives a better perspective of the story of Jonathan, a seagull that pursued his passion of flying. It’s actually quite personal. In both stories, the protagonist learns to see past illusions. I think a main one, is the illusion that we don’t know. It’s reminiscent of our last book club’s book: _The Tibetan Yogas of Dream and Sleep_. That our experience is ignorance. We will ourselves into ignorance (rather than being innately ignorant) because we don’t know that we know. When we view our life from the perspective of timelessness, we access this cool feeling that everything we will ever learn and do, we already have learned and done; there is no future and past, just what is (the _Is_). I think we can use that feeling to really feel the very important belief “_I can learn. I can improve._” I think there is a lot of scientific evidence showing that this belief is very important to learn and improve. But this is where my admiration ends. I don’t think we already know. I think we need to learn. Knowing that we can do it is a big step but it’s not the only factor. This story tells us to nurture an attitude that doesn’t nurture our limitations: “_Argue for your limitations and sure enough they're yours”_. I agree. But, also, there are real limitations and obstacles that are beyond us. 

So, the book makes for a chill read. I enjoyed the setting. There’s a chance of connecting with a lesson… for some part to resonate with you. I liked the _Messiah's Handbook_; it was its own character, adding its two cents and elevating the atmosphere. I actually own a book that works much the same way.

To be honest, nowadays, I don’t connect with the message “_you can do anything you want_.” I did succeed to achieve my ambitions, but things were not as I expected. The lesson I am trying to learn nowadays is how to be grounded in reality, how to see the sacredness in things as they are, how to feel fulfillment in humility. I am living a shift from my former self who has always been very idealist, and definitely wanted to have it all by believing in it (believing that if you work for it, you will get it). Anyway, right now, the lesson I need to learn is different so that is why I didn’t connect or love this book. There’s a second reason: because the writer doesn’t like to write, he was very brief and there’s little story. The setting (his real life) is an excuse to share lessons or platitudes. The thing is he published this book before I was born so it’s probably unfair for me to call them that. What I mean is the story seems like a weak excuse for the writer to share his wisdom with the reader. When the illusion of the story fades away, and I feel like the writer is talking to me, in those moments, it feels condescending and somewhat superficial.

One thing I found interesting with Richard’s character is when he first meets Don. His response to Don levitating a wrench is apathy. He notes he is much further spiritually, so these magic tricks are below him. At that moment I thought, the story would be subversive (the protagonist might not be so ignorant and might actually be advanced enough to expend the discussion and give it more depth). Instead, he becomes terrified by these same magic tricks once they concern the technicalities of flight and thus become more personal. It’s too bad because we didn’t get to explore this other level of spirituality that does not rely on magic tricks. It turned out he was only acting arrogant. What interests me about the illusions of waking life, is not that they are false and what we want them to be. The illusions of waking life are actually representations of a real physical world. Any attempt to avoid or transcend this world is futile. Many have tried in vain. What’s truly interesting is to realize that while the outer world is a thing, the inner world is also a thing and the perceived wall you can’t push is as much created by our brain/mind than our sense of self, our thoughts or a wall in a dream. In that sense, within our illusion, there is no “I” vs “other” dichotomy. This can help get to a nondual perspective. It can also help with dream control.  

So, every time I read a bit of Illusions, and felt… disillusioned, I’d find myself inspired to continue reading _Oneironauticus_ (by Sageous!) instead. I’m 40% into it, reading while listening to synthwave mixes and it feels like I’m on an 80s surrealist trip. I think _Illusions_ always put me into that mood because both books explore illusions. Also, Richard and Don remind me of Alex and Rudy respectively. The thing with _Oneironauticus_ is by virtue of being a novel, it doesn't feel like the writer is telling me wisdom; I'm simply immersed in a story where characters explore dreams and illusions and wisdom arises more naturally. Also, funny story. À la _Messiah's Handbook_, the first time I mixed my reading of _illusions_ and _Oneironauticus_ is when Alex commented that Rudy was the Jonathan Livingston Seagull type. 

To conclude, _Illusions_ is good if you are looking for a short read, a “what if” story that makes you think a little. I preferred exploring some similar themes in _Oneironauticus_ or maybe, what I liked was imagining Richard and Don in the setting of _Oneironauticus_. 

(To Sageous)
Wondering about what sets _Illusions_ apart for you, and although the writer does not overtly discuss this, it made me think a bit between the lines. I wonder if you didn’t resonate with the idea that waking life is kind of like a shared dream, stabilized because there are so many people dreaming it and expecting things to be a certain way at once. Don said everyone chooses how things are for themselves, but everyone is making choices. A lot of choices. Choices and choices. Seemed like he was hinting at a network of choices and expectations, stabilizing the world. If everyone decides water is fluid rather than solid, then that illusion can be expected to be stronger and maintained. Later he asks Richard, who is living in the world? This question is never satisfyingly answered but Don thought Richard knew the answer when he said, “I do.” I think this is a hint to the fact that Richard lives in the world not because he happens to be physically in a physical world but because he chooses to participate in this big shared dream with others. Or maybe he meant he lives in his own personal world, but they belong in a broader world that is the shared world…? That’s not my worldview but I can appreciate the thought of it and the exploration of it enough. And these thoughts do make me think of Oneironauticus though where I am, Alex still doesn’t quite understand all the technicalities, haha, so I’m still conjecturing.

----------


## Sageous

That's an interesting take Occipitalred, though... oh, wait, this must be a Spoiler moment...


*Spoiler* for _Brief response_: 



  Wow, you found a lot more depth in _Illusions_ than I did... well, than I do, I suppose: I thought it was the deepest thing in the world when I first read it as a wide-eyed teenager back in the '70's.  But now, if you were to scrape away all that '70's pop-culture-mysticism/metaphysics in which Bach was embroiled, and from which he fed most successfully, you have what I think is an accidental book about the dreaming experience, with a focus on presence in a lucid dream... sort of like how The Wachowski Brothers completely stumbled into deeper meaning in the first Matrix while making a movie about cool slomo bullets and fists of fury action.  I don't think Bach wanted to be deep, or to teach an important lesson as much as he wanted to _seem_ to be doing so, as much as he wanted to write another short book that would sate his followers (he still has those, BTW) and make him craploads of money.  Cynical, I know, but it might imply that there is more to Bach than he  understands -- like, maybe the actual cosmic consciousness slipped into his work and helped Bach create a vehicle to help dreamers understand the nature of their time in dreams, and not in waking-life like he thought.  

So, basically, I see _Illusions_ now as almost a primer for the dreaming experience; reading it as dream rather than a lecture might open doors that Bach never expected to be there; doors opening on living in a lucid dream, where the messiah, often reluctantly, is always the self-aware dreamer.





> (To Sageous)
> Wondering about what sets Illusions apart for you, and although the writer does not overtly discuss this, it made me think a bit between the lines. I wonder if you didn’t resonate with the idea that waking life is kind of like a shared dream, stabilized because there are so many people dreaming it and expecting things to be a certain way at once. Don said everyone chooses how things are for themselves, but everyone is making choices. A lot of choices. Choices and choices. Seemed like he was hinting at a network of choices and expectations, stabilizing the world. If everyone decides water is fluid rather than solid, then that illusion can be expected to be stronger and maintained. Later he asks Richard, who is living in the world? This question is never satisfyingly answered but Don thought Richard knew the answer when he said, “I do.” I think this is a hint to the fact that Richard lives in the world not because he happens to be physically in a physical world but because he chooses to participate in this big shared dream with others. Or maybe he meant he lives in his own personal world, but they belong in a broader world that is the shared world…? That’s not my worldview but I can appreciate the thought of it and the exploration of it enough. And these thoughts do make me think of Oneironauticus though where I am, Alex still doesn’t quite understand all the technicalities, haha, so I’m still conjecturing.



Yes to all that, except for me it isn't about a shared dream but an individual's dream.  If you think of Don not as a separate being but as a unit of Richard's imagination and worldview, _during a dream_, the book takes on new meaning.  I never really thought about the shared-dreaming angle, though, it is intriguing.  I guess I originally read _Illusions_ before I was consciously exploring shared dreaming so it never burned in that way; but it does make sense. 

Since the creation of _Oneironauticus_ spanned way back to the '80's, I imagine that _Illusions_ might have had some influence in my fantasies about what could be.  But, as you noted, I'm much more interested in portraying such stuff as hopefully enjoyable fiction in the magical magical realism mode than in hinting that it is real, or that there might be deeper meaning involved... of course, if you _find_ deeper meaning, let me know!  :wink2:

----------


## Hilary

I apologize for not setting up the next month's poll. I did not see these posts, and thought no one else had read the book! Now I see that I was wrong.  :smiley:  I will set up the next month's poll thread today.

I finished this today. I thought it was a great book. Here is my review from Goodreads:


*Spoiler* for _End_: 



Great book.

One thing is consistent in this life. Every so often, it _amazes_ me with what is possible. The miracles that happen in this book are no different, just spaced closer together. Anything is possible. How to believe this.. however.. now that is the trick.  :wink2: 




My favorite quote from the book:


*Spoiler* for _Quote_: 



“The bond that links your true family is not one of blood, but of respect and joy in each other's life. Rarely do members of one family grow up under the same roof.”




I will read the posts in this thread soon, when I have a bit more time, I can see they are quite long!  :smiley:

----------


## nautilus

Sorry for the late response. I did finish reading this quite a while back but I got wrapped up in a new project I'm working on.



*Spoiler* for _General Thoughts on Illusions and JLS_: 



I went back and re read Johnathan Livingston Seagull after finishing Illusions, and approaching it in that order made it hit me differently, I think. Both books seem to me like the author's projection of aspects of himself onto the characters, similar to what Occipitalred and Sageous were talking about, but much more obviously so in Illusions. I did enjoy seeing the author's growth in perspective from Johnathan's journey, to Richard the character's story arc, to Don's perspective and even Don's growth near the end. Don seemed to me like Richard's internalized "most mature" possible version of himself, so it was interesting to see even that concept shift. In both stories there also seemed to be a general trend from a highly individualistic, unique character perspective (blind spots and flaws included) towards a more general, shared human condition, again more pronounced in Illusions. To me that does indicate some movement towards maturity as Richard - the character and perhaps the author as well - moves from a reactive pushing against the perceived limits of society and an obsession with freedom towards a more compassionate view of others and an increased inclination to teach. Perhaps this level of personal growth isn't as extraordinary as one would expect for a book about the nature of reality. Perhaps the metaphysics, then, becomes like an aesthetic backdrop to a story about a character's growth, for better or worse. I tend to agree with Occipitalred that this interpretation makes more sense than trying to read it as a guide on spiritual awakening.





*Spoiler* for _Semi-Related Philosophical Tangent_: 




It's interesting how we're often tempted to focus on whether or not the laws of physics can be altered when discussing limitations, and Illusions seems to bring that into sharp focus through its events. One thing I've been thinking about lately, roughly along these lines, is that maybe our individual and collective understanding of what is possible _does_ have the potential to change our reality... but we have to be a little looser in our understanding of the exact way in which that happens. As the common example goes, in the past people generally didn't believe it was possible that humans could fly. Then some began to imagine it was possible and work towards flying machines, many of which failed before we began to get successes. And by today, it's accepted that anyone can get on a jet and fly great distances in a short amount of time, beyond even what was imagined in the past. Yet the laws of physics did not change. What changed was our perception of what was possible, and that was indeed reflected in reality as we found ways to create something new within the context of what was already there.

So on the one hand, yes, there are objectively observable "rules", and on the other hand, imagination allows us to create a reality that goes beyond our currently observed one, not necessarily by "breaking the rules" but by realizing that those rules aren't nearly as limiting as we originally believed them to be. By my current thinking, it requires putting the ultimate focus on the goal of what you want to create and not getting too hung up on exactly how that must happen. And by that I don't mean never think about how to accomplish something, because the analytical process does matter and is plenty interesting. I just mean it needs to be kept flexible and dynamic, each "that won't work" balanced out with a "what could work?" So, for instance, what does it matter if Don levitates the wrench by changing the way gravity works in our world or by some other means that makes it appear that way? Does it not "count" (whatever that means) unless it's done through a predefined method, preferably the absolute-most-difficult-for-a-person-to-believe way, like changing how gravity works?

I doubt I'm alone in this, but there really is a stubborn part of me that likes to say "that doesn't count because of blah blah blah so therefore it's impossible." If I try to pin down not only the "what" is possible but also the "how" it's possible or not, then yes, many things become neatly defined as impossible. But if I'm flexible on the how... well, who knows where the limits are then? If I don't care that I have to buy a ticket, stand in a TSA line for an hour, and get inside a complex metal contraption built and operated by other people, then hey, I can fly. How cool is that? Yet that nagging part of my mind scoffs, calls it mundane or sets the bar to be considered success ever higher, and that's the part of me that gets challenged every time I lucid dream.





*Spoiler* for _Favorite Quotes from Illusions_: 



From the handbook:
"Everything in this book may be wrong."

I laughed out loud at that one, especially as I'd been finding myself more and more drawn into a story about seeing through illusions. Gotta love the unknowable and the increasingly sneaky ways the mind tries to pin it down.


Runner up:
" 'Did this have to happen, Don?'
 'No...' he said faintly, barely breathing. 'But I think... I like the drama...' "

Again, after all that pursuit of seeing through illusions, detaching from and transcending them, having Don openly admit something like that and actively continue in interaction with the world (by accepting mortality) just for the enjoyment of it felt like a refreshing reversal.

----------


## Sivason

Hi guys, I am late here but this book was a favorite of mine in the 80s. As far as the book I found it fun and light. I loved the first pages that looked like they where written in ink. That was really funny. I also feel the message has merit but is fanciful as far as levitating wrenches goes.
Occipitalred, I always love reading your thoughts! You take so much time and express yourself in a way I can relate to. Often when I see a wall of text I can not finish it and just scan for the big picture, but your thoughts are well worth careful reading. Thanks.


The next part will sound like it should go in the Beyond Dreaming section. I am going to, in this one case speak with authority that will seem arrogant to some. I always make statements that allow people to maintain their points and usually add stuff like "while I believe these things, feel free to assume I have some sort of delusion". That takes up too much mental energy. Forgive me. I will just bullet some things to perhaps help you guys sort out the magic stuff that seems like wishful thinking BS.

-I experience magic comparable to works of fiction on a daily basis. Much of what happens around me is on the minor miracle level. The people close to me have had all doubt removed from seeing overwhelmingly obvious things repeated over decades.
-This is not a random thing. It is the results of yogic discipline and a relationship with "the divine". (see guys, obnoxiously arrogant. No one is allowed to talk this way. However, in this little book club I doubt anyone but you guys will see it, so this time I think it is ok)
-this BS sounding crap coming from a stranger should be held in deep suspicion, it sounds like a teen begging to get attention. Simply judge that in most of your dealings with me I seem sober, educated and logical, not like a teen.
-to my knowledge things like levitating a wrench is not possible but it makes a good book. The real magic will always have a way to reason it out. It can always be written off by a doubter. A man can have extraordinary luck ten times in a row and you can say "random chance will occasionally have this happen". A woman can seemingly react to things people were thinking or act in a way that is bizarrely fortunate considering what ended up happening and you can always say "given random chance..." A person can have a fish jump into the boat with them after joking it could happen and of course "given random chance..." At that point a doubter is free to wait for something that breaks the laws of physics before calling it magical, but they will be waiting for ever. My son (met him at 14 years old) could not understand. What good is this magic you teach if I can never prove it to someone else? He wanted to be different and better than others, to stand apart as special and able to do something they would be in awe of. He has learned better in the last 15 years. 
-While this is an illusion that is basically a dream it is not actually a shared dream where we each form it with our beliefs. It is more like a video game in that while not real you simply can not jump Sonic over this gap. By most doubters logic, if this is an illusion then walking through walls and such is the proof they need. Same logic applied to a video game: If this game is not real life I can will Sonic to make it over this gap- never going to happen, but the game is not real life- same thing.
-The truth is the dream is mostly coming from something far far above us. That is why I mentioned a deep connection with the divine. You will be limited in how much change you can make with out help from the forces above you. That should make some mad. 
-One understanding of Enlightment is simply seeing the true nature of reality and grasping the way to deal with life based on that. Not only are all of our perception effected by how we feel or believe, but also the fact that the world itself is illusion. 

Here I will stop rambling as far as setting up the basis for my next points. The book was about this guy having extraordinary 'powers' because of an awareness he has. People try to 'believe' fanciful things and nothing happens. Here is why.

-These equations have a variable I will generically call energy.

-The laws of physics are like the software itself. Perhaps Earth's gravity is expressed as 10 to 1,000,000,000,000 power as far as the energy needed to over write it. It is intended to be immutable. Some things are not, such as what the weather will be doing in ten minutes. A rain storm ten minutes from now when you know the satellite says no clouds anywhere is again asking to displace physics, but the rain stopping in this small section of the valley long enough for me to walk to the store is not displacing physics. It is just highly improbable. Perhaps achieving such a highly improbable outcome when I want it takes 10,000 energy. It would be amazing if it only stopped raining with in a mile of me just as I walk to the store, then cut loose while I was in the store and paused again when I walked home, but not in anyway over writing an immutable law. A doubter could definitely say "yes, but given random chance..." Who cares what they say if I get to go to the store with out getting wet.

-You do not get 10,000 energy (making up numbers for helping visualization of concept). Sorry you don't get 10,000 energy. In this system (made up for the explanation) a base level human gets 1 energy. Try as much as you wish, then say it is all BS, because your 1 energy was never going to provide the effect.(You in this case not meant to be hurtful. If you are the exception, sorry to lump "you" in here)

-*You can get more energy.* Think of dream control. If you do not believe something can happen (flying) it will not. This is your 1 energy. Maybe it takes 10 energy to fly. In LDing you can get up to that 10 energy by honestly believing the thing is possible. Back to waking life and this energy. So let's say those who can honestly believe such things can happen now get 10 energy. They are 10 times as influential in things energy can affect than others. Back to LDing. If instead you KNOW flying is possible because you have experienced it 20 times let's say you have 100 energy and now fancy flight is fairly easy. So in life TRUE knowledge of this stuff say brings you up to 100 energy.

-Sorry 100 energy is not enough to cause rain to not fall with in a mile of you while the rest of the valley is getting soaked. "Darn it I saw him do a miracle, I honestly KNOW this is possible, yet I still can not do this!" That does not mean it is not real, you are just 100 fold short of the energy needed for it to happen.

-Mystical training in any one of the energy systems can improve the amount of this energy you can generate. You start Kundalini or Chi training and by the time 30 years have passed you say can now generate 1,000 energy. Still falling short of the rain thing, but perhaps many other fantastic things happen to you, such as high level of intuition, random good fortune, and animals responding in a charmed way to you. Still a whole life and no where near the 10,000 mark!

-Once started on this path it is easier to find the path next time and you start with a higher base level of energy. Eventually you will have done this path many times. The level of energy you can reach may be 10,000 by the time you are 30. This is terrible! It means you may not be able to make cool things happen even though you try your whole life! Yeah, where are you going? This multiple lives stuff goes on for thousands of lives, 10s of thousands, infinite? May as well get started, time (lives) will pass.

-Perhaps a miracle such as the sky tearing a gash in the cloud directly above you during a massive storm and a rainbow shining through while you are dry and 1000 feet away a torrent of water hits the ground takes 1,000,000 power. Truth is you are likely never going to reach 1,000,000 power while young enough to still bother manifesting in this world as a human. That is where Higher Power comes in.

-If a Higher Power knows you and likes you it can amplify your power say 1,000 fold. Now with a base of say 1,000 power (attainable in one life) it is enough for a miracle to happen assuming the Higher Power has some reason to care about you.

-These Higher Powers (The Divine) are attracted to 3 things. Those who help themselves, so someone who say reaches 1,000 power. Those that call out to them (think Dream Guide). Those who are honorable and good (don't get involved with one's that don't like that, lol) This is why it has always been people of religion who have had stories told about miracles. They believe (10) they experience it (100) they meditate and learn internal discipline for decades (1,000). They have probably been at this a long time, lives (10,000) They try to be honorable and good and call out to The Divine and have that help that gives a thousand fold (10,000,000).

This thread is not about the magical nature of mystics explained by some guy. It is about the book Illusions and also mentioned JLS. In that book the idea is put forth that this is an illusion and if you truly grasp that, fantastic things can happen. I enjoyed it because to me it was just a neat way of expressing things I honestly experience and believe. My whole long rambling essay is just to give you guys my perspective on how it is possible and why for most everyone it is not attainable on a level you will find conclusive, today. It is simplistic for these books to suggest "believe and anything is possible." It is also fantasy to talk about levitating wrenches in my understanding. I think the better message is "if you honestly believe, then things start to be possible, and with training through a mystic energy art many more things become possible." But that is not a very instant gratification, fun basis for a book if you want it to sell. Notice best selling mystical books always give a fantasy way teens can imagine they could be doing this stuff by next year. Harry is secretly a wizard of amazing strength. He did not study harder than anyone else for 20 years and then was an amazing hero. Books use phrases like "The Chosen One" to give teens the fantasy that they too could suddenly be amazing. Super heroes get bit by a spider or find a magic ring. That is why I like Batman. He goes out and learns to fight, he lifts weights and earns his skill through 20+ years of sweat. I do not expect you guys to believe a word of what I have said or to believe I am not an attention seeker but I do hope at least one person who reads this will see why you not experiencing miraculous things through the simple power of belief does not mean the stuff is not real, and that the mystical stuff never breaks the laws of physics though it may appear to. In conclusion: Books like this must exaggerate the nature of the powers (floating wrenches) and must make it sound like it is possible you can get their soon to appeal to the masses and therefore should be forgiven that embellishment. Everyone wants their book to sell. Still I found the core of what is taught in the book and JLS to be worthy of reflection.

Thanks guys for allowing me to speak openly about something I keep on the down low in general. I doubt very many people will find this, so maybe the amount of "He's crazy" will be very limited.

----------


## Hilary

^ Long read but I found it inspiring. I think you're onto something here. I also think emotion may be a factor at play, as a type of energy. I suspect it can help with manifesting, especially when you're feeling a loving kindness high vibe kind of feeling.

----------


## Occipitalred

Hey, it's been a while but I've been thinking and was brought back to these stories. I feel I need to give a second review. 

*Context:* I've been going through some visualizations of mine. I won't go too deep into it but it was about going to Avalon. This last year, I read Mists of Avalon by Marion Zimmer Bradley. It is an exploration of the Arthurian myth from the perspective of the female characters. In the story, as Christian belief becomes dominant and pagan beliefs are rejected, Avalon, home to pagan witches and druids across the Lake of the Lady fades from the collective reality. But it does stay accessible to those who know the way and there remains a community there. Anyway, in my visualization, I was going to this place to heal from the wounds inflicted by thoughts. I figured most of the pain that burdens me are thoughts that if I let go, will go as easily as that. Untactful comments from people mostly. Another pain I feel is about the rejection of my thoughts and values. When other people don't think my way. It does make me feel isolated. And anyway, meditating about these two types of pain related to thoughts/ideas/values, I felt drawn to heal in Avalon, a fading place. I realized that the metaphor felt really appropriate. Avalon is kind of like a metaphor for the place where my ideas and values are valued. It's a place where my thoughts can feel validated. A place where the negative judgements don't care to follow. Somewhere where I can feel a sense of peace and validation. It also works to say that this place (these ideas and values) can be found by other like-minded people. So even if everyone rejects my values around me, I am not really alone there. In Mist of Avalon, other places fade from the world as they fade from people's memory. So it's not just about a hierarchy of which values are better. It's really about what ideas are in the consciousness of people. And even on Avalon, there are people who have fade even further from the world that you may come across only if you are in the right state of mind and receptive to that place. Anyway, so that spoke to me

And it reminded me of *Jonathan Livingston Seagull.* First of all, in Reluctant Messiah, he is the character in the story. It seems like he wrote about a daydream. And he writes about Jonathan the Seagull like a pilot too. So, I think it's fair to read it as a daydream. And Sageous did tell me to read it like a lucid dream. Reading Jonathan Seagull as a daydream, I can now imagine the other universes he visits to be like Avalon in Mists of Avalon. Like places of shared ideas and values, faded from the collective world. 

I think that spiritual people, we struggle to communicate our ideas with the common person in our lives. Anyway, most people who like to discuss spirituality in my life claim there is very very few people they can talk about these things with, and they seem to exclude other people who are spiritual people because of lack of agreement. Even outside of spirituality, I also know many people who feel there are little people with their values in their social circles and feel alienated in that way. 

So, my new perspective of Jonathan is that he feels alienated from his community (they care about practicality whereas he is more spiritually inclined. He enjoys the intrinsic value of flight). He is shunned/he recedes in himself where he daydreams about his thoughts and values. Like me, he visualizes going to Avalon, where others' judgements don't follow, where his ideas are validated, where he knows others go too. With this new sense of belonging, he daydreams about what such people might teach him. And perhaps it is not only a daydream. Maybe he really finds a community of like-minded people with whom he shares, learns, teaches, feel love, feel belonging and community. 

And in this daydream, he must go back to the original colony because well, some things are unavoidable. The original community is our family or work community or social circles where we go back to but we might not agree on ideas and values. And the original colony attack his fellow seagulls that think like him. To me, it's a metaphor of the social status quo ideas and values hurting the people of our community, especially our spiritual values in this case. Perhaps, being perceived as lunatics/ungrounded for example. Since it's a daydream, this verbal violence is represented by physical violence. In reality, it's likely that Bach and his group don't face physical threat in real life. So, in his daydream, he can lucid daydream and realizing the timelessness/spacelessness of daydreaming, he is free to simply heal the handicapped seagull back to health. Probably by focusing on his knowledge that other people's prejudice will not break his body and that he is in fact safe, physically, from the attacks. In a way, the sense of love from this inner community might be enough to feel healed from the wider societal prejudice, in the context of Bach's life. 

Following with *Reluctant Messiah*, I can also read it as a lucid daydream. Bach is going about his life and he imagines a character that can get him thinking. Get him to lucid daydream. To go back on the levitating wrench, I can imagine Bach was not impressed because it's easy to daydream something flying. But Don started to become more serious to him as he started to show him he could daydream about crazier things. Daydreaming about driving your car backwards through traffic is a bit more challenging because it really goes against strong expectations. I guess he realizes, in his daydream, that he can change things that he takes for granted. 

Anyway, I think those things were already said by others in their own words but I at least wanted to come and say I enjoyed thinking back at those stories from the point of view of daydreams and finding a place where our own ideas and values have a place.

----------

