Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 56
Lucky7

Those Who've Seen the Hatman/Shadow People

1,588 posts in this topic

If there is a seperate conciousness interacting with yours and you skin that conciousness with the archetype in your mind, I don't have any problem calling the entire thing an archetype as long as I'm allowed to ascribe conciousness to it. But Jungians would disagree.

The archetypes and Jungians part is not referring to you Mark. Hope you are doing well and have got rid of your prescription. ;)

Jungian "archetypes" can have independent consciousness. He had conversations with what he would call an archetype.

(doctors conspired to keep me on Warfarin etc.(scary side effects)--actually lied about test results--but I'm 1000 miles away from them now and looking for better docs. Spending my summer on medical research instead of hiking in the mountains and just hope to make it through the year alive while reducing side effects.FYI: don't trust doctors of any kind; do your own research.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is a seperate conciousness interacting with yours and you skin that conciousness with the archetype in your mind, I don't have any problem calling the entire thing an archetype as long as I'm allowed to ascribe conciousness to it. But Jungians would disagree.

The archetypes and Jungians part is not referring to you Mark. Hope you are doing well and have got rid of your prescription. ;)

I was referring to the origins of the archetype. It's a shared experience. That sharing might have led to a figure found in varied places and times. If it's a real entity, this fact takes it out of the realm of the symbolic, in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jungian "archetypes" can have independent consciousness. He had conversations with what he would call an archetype.

Then he must have used the word "archetype" figuratively for his particular experience in that particular context (Do you have a citation?). A construct with a conciousness of its own is difficult to imagine especially when Jung theorized it as an abstract prototype in the collective unconcious on which something concrete can be thought to be based on or can share the characterisics of. Jungians could argue that it is possible for something concrete to become so popular that it would enter the collective unconcious as an archetype during evolution. But the problem is once it has entered their version of "collective unconcious" it has become abstract. If you encounter something that is based on that abstract prototype you are not encountering the prototype itself, and even if you encounter the original concrete thing/entity that has entered the collective unconcious as a prototype you are still not encountering the abstract protoype it has entered the collective concious as, so calling it an archetype would then be figurative.

His theories are full of contradictions anyway. Most of them seem to me like direct plagiarization of eastern religious philosophies attempted to be passed off as "science". Shadows, archetypes, collective unconcious, mandalas.. etc etc.

I don't believe in the collective unconcious BTW, it is a slippery slope down to pantheism. Even if it wasn't I wouldn't find it nescessary to believe in a theory that is just that, a theory.

(doctors conspired to keep me on Warfarin etc.(scary side effects)--actually lied about test results--but I'm 1000 miles away from them now and looking for better docs. Spending my summer on medical research instead of hiking in the mountains and just hope to make it through the year alive while reducing side effects.FYI: don't trust doctors of any kind; do your own research.)

What the hell man! Why would they conspire?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was referring to the origins of the archetype. It's a shared experience. That sharing might have led to a figure found in varied places and times. If it's a real entity, this fact takes it out of the realm of the symbolic, in my opinion.

Case 1: Lets say, in a lucid state of dreaming or in AP, you hear a growl. You decide to see this "thing" that is growling near you, but you don't have physical eyes in that realm to actually see the "thing" that is growling. So your mind opens up a list of personal symbols it had, and you subconciously choose from it something specific to give that growling sound a body of its own. If you have a pet dog that frequently growls then maybe you will see it in the form of your own dog. Similarly, another person might see it differently based on the symbols in his own mind. Since the symbols were personal and contextual they will have to vary with the person, and the variation will be great. I agree to this extent and these sorts of unreal experiences happen a lot. The growling sound itself could be the product of your own mind.

Case 2: You hear a growl in a lucid dream and when you focus on it you see a black dog. You come across another person's experience and compare it with yours and find it exactly similar, the same black dog. Then you read about thousands of experiences similar to your own. The question is why the black dog? You can answer this question by simply saying it is a shared archetype, alright good theory (the jungian collective unconcious is just a theory). But what if there is a conciousness that resides in a realm that has access to your dreams and wants you to see it that way, like some sort of hypnotic suggestion but in the non-physical realm? What if the hat is just another such mental suggestion?

Jungians can claim that the "hat" is a modern archetype. But to me it is something more. I would call the "hat" a distraction. I believe that the hat is an attempt to shift the human conciousness in masses. (No offence to new-agers).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then he must have used the word "archetype" figuratively for his particular experience in that particular context (Do you have a citation?). A construct with a conciousness of its own is difficult to imagine especially when Jung theorized it as an abstract prototype in the collective unconcious on which something concrete can be thought to be based on or can share the characterisics of. Jungians could argue that it is possible for something concrete to become so popular that it would enter the collective unconcious as an archetype during evolution. But the problem is once it has entered their version of "collective unconcious" it has become abstract. If you encounter something that is based on that abstract prototype you are not encountering the prototype itself, and even if you encounter the original concrete thing/entity that has entered the collective unconcious as a prototype you are still not encountering the abstract protoype it has entered the collective concious as, so calling it an archetype would then be figurative.

His theories are full of contradictions anyway. Most of them seem to me like direct plagiarization of eastern religious philosophies attempted to be passed off as "science". Shadows, archetypes, collective unconcious, mandalas.. etc etc.

I don't believe in the collective unconcious BTW, it is a slippery slope down to pantheism. Even if it wasn't I wouldn't find it nescessary to believe in a theory that is just that, a theory.

You believe in collective consciousness though right? That's what happens at a concert for example; you can feel it live; something definitely happens collectively, well, the collective unconscious is the opposite of that: it's where dreams come from to become conscious.

jung-philemon-jungcurrents-copy1.jpg

That's Philemon. He was a teacher of Jung. The archetype would be what he represents, like an angel is an archetypal messenger of God, well, Jung had that guy among many others.

What the hell man! Why would they conspire?

Because I was trying an alternative approach and they wanted to scare me back to their method. It worked, and only much later did it turn out to be a lie, and that wasn't the first time one of those doctors lied...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Case 1: Lets say, in a lucid state of dreaming or in AP, you hear a growl. You decide to see this "thing" that is growling near you, but you don't have physical eyes in that realm to actually see the "thing" that is growling. So your mind opens up a list of personal symbols it had, and you subconciously choose from it something specific to give that growling sound a body of its own. If you have a pet dog that frequently growls then maybe you will see it in the form of your own dog. Similarly, another person might see it differently based on the symbols in his own mind. Since the symbols were personal and contextual they will have to vary with the person, and the variation will be great. I agree to this extent and these sorts of unreal experiences happen a lot. The growling sound itself could be the product of your own mind.

Case 2: You hear a growl in a lucid dream and when you focus on it you see a black dog. You come across another person's experience and compare it with yours and find it exactly similar, the same black dog. Then you read about thousands of experiences similar to your own. The question is why the black dog? You can answer this question by simply saying it is a shared archetype, alright good theory (the jungian collective unconcious is just a theory). But what if there is a conciousness that resides in a realm that has access to your dreams and wants you to see it that way, like some sort of hypnotic suggestion but in the non-physical realm? What if the hat is just another such mental suggestion?

Jungians can claim that the "hat" is a modern archetype. But to me it is something more. I would call the "hat" a distraction. I believe that the hat is an attempt to shift the human conciousness in masses. (No offence to new-agers).

Both examples are plausible. There's no doubt that our minds fill in the blanks when we can't use our five senses. For instance, I heard a very strange growl one night. It was different than anything that I heard in the past, from a factual animal or a fictional character. I could not match it to anything. For some reason, the Gill Man popped into my head. I didn't see the source of the sound, but it admittedly startled and threatened me. It seemed quite malevolent. It likely was an animal from the neighborhood that was up to no good that late at night. It's doubtful that it was a creature from a black lagoon. Still, my mind immediately went there. I would be surprised if more than a dozen or so people experienced this exact event during the past hundred years. It likely was particular to me. Now, if there were hundreds of reports of this across the country and around the world, the phenomenon would move from your first case to your second case. There would have to be a reason as to why all of the participants pictured a lizard person in their minds after they heard the sound. What would that reason be? Would it be an example of cellular memory, assuming that our ancestors dealt with such an entity in the forgotten mists of history? Would it be an example of a less popular Jungian archetype based on our shared dread of a reptilian from our collective unconscious, *or* would it be *your* example of an undefined entity projecting disinformation to hide the truth of what it is? Pardon my lame story, which just popped in my head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You believe in collective consciousness though right? That's what happens at a concert for example; you can feel it live; something definitely happens collectively, well, the collective unconscious is the opposite of that: it's where dreams come from to become conscious.

Collective consciousness, yet just another theory. As long as it about a group collectively reaching an altered state of conciousness I don't have problem accepting that but if someone said they share the same altered conciousness in the "astral" space in their collective experience then I would disagree. Still, the reverse - collective unconscious does not derive from this premise alone. The problem with the collective unconscious theory of Carl Jung is that it is based on the notions of the eastern Akashik records beliefs that is itself based on pantheism, it would be contradictory for a proponent of transcendental monotheism to believe in pantheism that can lead to idolatory. So thanks, but I prefer to stay miles away from any such theories.

jung-philemon-jungcurrents-copy1.jpg

That's Philemon. He was a teacher of Jung. The archetype would be what he represents, like an angel is an archetypal messenger of God, well, Jung had that guy among many others.

Philemon was his spirit guide. According to Jungians, Philemon was a figure that represented an archetype and it was not an archetype itself. What he represented was an abstract prototype of "insight"and as I said before archetypes are just abstract prototypes and it's hard to imagine that abstracts can have consciousness of their own. If Jung called philemon an archetype then it must have been a figurative; but if he meant it literally then it goes against his own theory of archetypes, and then it is just one of his contradictions out of many other similiar contradictions.

This is a quote from an article written by a a proponent of Carl Jung's theories and his neo-paganism (Christians beware, please use your discernment):

It is also noteworthy that Jung was not interacting with the Old Man archetype itself, but a specific and very personal image of the archetype,Philemon. The archetypes are ineffable -- and are, in that sense, abstract. But while the archetypes cannot be experienced directly, they can be experienced through “archetypal images”, of which Philemon is one example. The many pagan and Neopagan deities may be seen as other examples of archetypal images, which point beyond themselves to the unknowable archetypes or gods.

source: http://witchesandpagans.com/EasyBlog/polytheistic-experience-and-jung-s-experience-of-the-archetypes.html

The "dogmatic" Christians, as usual would interpret his experience differently ;) :

Philemon, Jung's "spirit guide," was in fact a demon in disguise. Jung was being led into darkness—not truth—during his subconscious explorations. Jung writes that Philemon was an external force that had power over his mind

source: http://amazingdiscoveries.org/S-deception_New-Age-Carl-Jung_visualization_Salome

Anyway, I'm glad you are back buddy. But your usual discussion about deception and hell suits you much better than this defending of someone like Carl Jung of whom you are well aware that he was a great liar. You and I or anyone are just as much capable of setting up our own theories about our spiritual experiences as Carl Jung who was in no way an ideal spiritualist or above any of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both examples are plausible. There's no doubt that our minds fill in the blanks when we can't use our five senses. For instance, I heard a very strange growl one night. It was different than anything that I heard in the past, from a factual animal or a fictional character. I could not match it to anything. For some reason, the Gill Man popped into my head. I didn't see the source of the sound, but it admittedly startled and threatened me. It seemed quite malevolent. It likely was an animal from the neighborhood that was up to no good that late at night. It's doubtful that it was a creature from a black lagoon. Still, my mind immediately went there. I would be surprised if more than a dozen or so people experienced this exact event during the past hundred years. It likely was particular to me. Now, if there were hundreds of reports of this across the country and around the world, the phenomenon would move from your first case to your second case. There would have to be a reason as to why all of the participants pictured a lizard person in their minds after they heard the sound. What would that reason be? Would it be an example of cellular memory, assuming that our ancestors dealt with such an entity in the forgotten mists of history? Would it be an example of a less popular Jungian archetype based on our shared dread of a reptilian from our collective unconscious, *or* would it be *your* example of an undefined entity projecting disinformation to hide the truth of what it is? Pardon my lame story, which just popped in my head.

DM, your story is not lame, its a fine example and you got my theory correctly.

By the way there was no need to emphasize on "my" theory, because it is not my theory alone. I get your sarcasm :). But this belief is not mine alone, it is shared by millions (even if they have not experienced themselves). Even those who did not believe in such deceptive entities started believing in them once they experienced them long enough to pull off their masks. Mark Price here is just one such example out of many. Even though he did not believe in hell, his experiences with the hatman took him spiralling down to hell. Ask him, he is able to explain this better than me as his experiences were much more (for lack of better word) disastrous than mine.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pantheism, idols, Philemon are all the same; the error is to confuse the picture with the being it represents.

It's actually called the subconscious not the unconscious, but unconscious works fine for Jung. That's almost like his trademark now for Jungians. He had a few experiments where people far away were contacted mentally...how is that possible without a mental field reached by more than one person? That's when the personal consciousness taps into the collective unconscious where information often in the form of collective archetypes reside. What is there even to reject about this particular theory when it happens all the time; there are other aspects of Jung which I completely reject...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. Mark Price here is just one such example out of many. Even though he did not believe in hell, his experiences with the hatman took him spiralling down to hell. Ask him, he is able to explain this better than me as his experiences were much more (for lack of better word) disastrous than mine.

That's one way of looking at it. Maybe I missed it somewhere, but what exactly was your experience?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DM, your story is not lame, its a fine example and you got my theory correctly.

By the way there was no need to emphasize on "my" theory, because it is not my theory alone. I get your sarcasm :). But this belief is not mine alone, it is shared by millions (even if they have not experienced themselves). Even those who did not believe in such deceptive entities started believing in them once they experienced them long enough to pull off their masks. Mark Price here is just one such example out of many. Even though he did not believe in hell, his experiences with the hatman took him spiralling down to hell. Ask him, he is able to explain this better than me as his experiences were much more (for lack of better word) disastrous than mine.

Thanks. I mean "your theory" in the sense that it's in your post, not in the sense that you are the father of the theory. Many people think that evil beings are behind all or most paranormal beings and events. I'm not one of them. By the way, my apparent sarcasm was not intended. I apologize if my comment came across that way. We sometimes don't define or describe our points in the best ways. It's epidemic on forums.

I have deep concerns and problems with the traditional concepts of Hell, but I think that it exists in some manner. Strangely enough, I once read a story (allegedly true) about hooded shadow people who took some dabblers, in the occult, to a hellish place. A childhood friend also claimed that he was pulled through a wall by a shadow person and taken to a dungeon full of other kidnapped children. It sounded more like a fairy tale or nightmare than a real event, but I kept that thought to myself since I also saw a shadow person.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pantheism, idols, Philemon are all the same; the error is to confuse the picture with the being it represents.

Tell that to millions of polytheists who literally worship the image and not what it "represents" or do they even have the notion of what it represents in many case. Still where is the question of any "error" when all we are talking is only beliefs here? In that sense, logically, the neo-pagan blind followers of Carl Jung are in gross error. Ask them to prove their beliefs scientifically. The error is to accept the unfounded beliefs of a specific religion as scientific facts just because they have been presented in a "scientific" lingo or the hypothesizer has established his name in the scientific community. But beneath all these hypotheses there is nothing concrete to substantiate them so basically they are all just a set of beliefs. Carl Jung acheived this with quite an astounding deceptive skill.

It's actually called the subconscious not the unconscious, but unconscious works fine for Jung. That's almost like his trademark now for Jungians.

In the topographical map of the human mind, you can subdivide it into as many levels/depths as you wish, it doesn't matter, whether you call it the subconcious or the unconscious. The problem arises when someone starts accepting these subdivisions as scientific facts, much like the division and placing of the human mind into seven specific planes by Buddhists/New-Agers when there is no concrete evidence for that specific number. The truth is that the finite human beings can never know the complete specific mechanism of the human mind.

He had a few experiments where people far away were contacted mentally...how is that possible without a mental field reached by more than one person? That's when the personal consciousness taps into the collective unconscious where information often in the form of collective archetypes reside. What is there even to reject about this particular theory when it happens all the time; there are other aspects of Jung which I completely reject...

The question is not about whether it happens all the time, the question is whether it is happens exactly the way it is believed by Jungians. What is the exact background mechanism? No human can know for sure. Is the collective unconcious the only valid explanation of the background mechanism or can we counter that with equally "valid" alternate explanations. If it is countered with equally "valid" beliefs, will it still be any need to accept this hypothesis as a fact? This mental field is what they call the "astral" plane. You can still recieve information through it without having to merge your conciousness with it at any level. There are many religions that were well aware of telepathy, shared dreaming etc. throughout the human history but they never relied on this kind of merging to explain them, they have their own explanations for these phenomena. It is possible that there are agents like spirits/demons that transfer the information from one person to another, or angels as carriers or God Himself can put thoughts into the mind, or it is possible that you can travel with your own astral body (a vehicle) and get that information yourself. There can be many possible alternate explanations.

That's one way of looking at it. Maybe I missed it somewhere, but what exactly was your experience?

You forgot, we had this discussion quite a few times in PM. Well, I can't blame you, it must have been the hard times you have been going through, the past few months. There were many experiences, but the worst was the dilemma about God's love and to some extent even about his existence that I faced when I embraced them. Evil or not (because it is a subjective term) but I believe that they are anti-God to their core for sure. It is like they are devoid of God's mercy and love and they enter your life with this misfortune and there it is, the beginning of the end. It is like you are being pulled into the abyss as time passes, any effort to resist is like swimming a river upstream in a dark storm with a huge rock tied to you. Frankly, my experiences were not as profound as yours but I have seen the river and the endless network of underground caves, their abodes. I was fortunate enough not to be pulled beyond that.

This reminded me, I had asked you about your experience with the "Jesus" figure. What was it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I mean "your theory" in the sense that it's in your post, not in the sense that you are the father of the theory. Many people think that evil beings are behind all or most paranormal beings and events. I'm not one of them. By the way, my apparent sarcasm was not intended. I apologize if my comment came across that way. We sometimes don't define or describe our points in the best ways. It's epidemic on forums.

I have deep concerns and problems with the traditional concepts of Hell, but I think that it exists in some manner. Strangely enough, I once read a story (allegedly true) about hooded shadow people who took some dabblers, in the occult, to a hellish place. A childhood friend also claimed that he was pulled through a wall by a shadow person and taken to a dungeon full of other kidnapped children. It sounded more like a fairy tale or nightmare than a real event, but I kept that thought to myself since I also saw a shadow person.

HaHa, no problem. Sorry about the misunderstanding. This is the common problem with the internet forums, got to admit that.

The hell I mentioned is not the traditional/popular Christian version. It is something else. I have compared a lot of experiences of people pulled/lead into the hell by shadows, and I have compared the description with that found in the scriptures, not many commonalities. This hell always surrounds us, it is only a matter of time you become aware of it. I believe that the hell mentioned in the scriptures is entirely different from this "astral" hell. It is more along the lines of the Buddhist's/Hindu's Naraka or the Tibetan Buddhist's Bardo, except that when you will experience it free from any predisposed beliefs you will be forced to believe that it is not the mind alone that plays all the role here, contrary to what the Buddhist's claim. Trust me, you will never wish to encounter a shadow again once you witness this with your own eyes.

I'm not one of those that believe that evil is behind all the paranormal phenomeon but the subject of shadows is a bit different. Their MO is deception. They may enter your life as a benevolent protector but it may not be so. Sometimes, it takes many encounters to eventually realize the true face that hides behind that hat or hood, but until the truth is realized it is already too late. Of course it is a belief, but as the direct experiencer and after observing many many experiencers, it has become like a fact to me.

I also believe that every single person on this planet will experience shadows at the time of his death.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No pictures of this "Hatman"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No pictures of this "Hatman"?

Here you go:

198327_zps1eb23543.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see he lost his yellow submarine...... chasing a topless teen I imagine.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell that to millions of polytheists who literally worship the image and not what it "represents" or do they even have the notion of what it represents in many case. Still where is the question of any "error" when all we are talking is only beliefs here? In that sense, logically, the neo-pagan blind followers of Carl Jung are in gross error. Ask them to prove their beliefs scientifically. The error is to accept the unfounded beliefs of a specific religion as scientific facts just because they have been presented in a "scientific" lingo or the hypothesizer has established his name in the scientific community. But beneath all these hypotheses there is nothing concrete to substantiate them so basically they are all just a set of beliefs. Carl Jung acheived this with quite an astounding deceptive skill.

I'm not interested in converting the ignorant masses. The error is they don't know what the hell they are looking at, just like if you saw some statue and did not know what it represents, then somebody tells you what it represents then you start worshiping what you think that means...hahaha that's how dogma spreads. This is not relevant to anything here. They aren't "neo-pagan blind followers of Jung", they are psychoanalysts and patients. My mom happens to be on the board of directors so I have a pretty good idea of what they actually do.

In the topographical map of the human mind, you can subdivide it into as many levels/depths as you wish, it doesn't matter, whether you call it the subconcious or the unconscious. The problem arises when someone starts accepting these subdivisions as scientific facts, much like the division and placing of the human mind into seven specific planes by Buddhists/New-Agers when there is no concrete evidence for that specific number. The truth is that the finite human beings can never know the complete specific mechanism of the human mind.

Yeah, but that's not what subconscious means. It is not a diving submarine; it is just what is not conscious at the time.

The question is not about whether it happens all the time, the question is whether it is happens exactly the way it is believed by Jungians. What is the exact background mechanism? No human can know for sure. Is the collective unconcious the only valid explanation of the background mechanism or can we counter that with equally "valid" alternate explanations. If it is countered with equally "valid" beliefs, will it still be any need to accept this hypothesis as a fact? This mental field is what they call the "astral" plane. You can still recieve information through it without having to merge your conciousness with it at any level. There are many religions that were well aware of telepathy, shared dreaming etc. throughout the human history but they never relied on this kind of merging to explain them, they have their own explanations for these phenomena. It is possible that there are agents like spirits/demons that transfer the information from one person to another, or angels as carriers or God Himself can put thoughts into the mind, or it is possible that you can travel with your own astral body (a vehicle) and get that information yourself. There can be many possible alternate explanations.

Synchronicity is one "mechanism" that happens all the time...All explanations explain the same thing(subconscious), pick one and it will be no more important than another. You're not going to tell the scientific community it was angels. Jung was working with colleagues on that level so his language had to be appropriate.

You forgot, we had this discussion quite a few times in PM. Well, I can't blame you, it must have been the hard times you have been going through, the past few months. There were many experiences, but the worst was the dilemma about God's love and to some extent even about his existence that I faced when I embraced them. Evil or not (because it is a subjective term) but I believe that they are anti-God to their core for sure. It is like they are devoid of God's mercy and love and they enter your life with this misfortune and there it is, the beginning of the end. It is like you are being pulled into the abyss as time passes, any effort to resist is like swimming a river upstream in a dark storm with a huge rock tied to you. Frankly, my experiences were not as profound as yours but I have seen the river and the endless network of underground caves, their abodes. I was fortunate enough not to be pulled beyond that.

What I mean is more like a coherent story of your experiences that is easy to remember. I remember that much with the river and caves and your perceived difference between Catholic hell and actual hell which overlap...idk, I mean, you don't just start seeing these things so it's better to put them in context, right? (edit: I thought maybe you told that story here somewhere and could link it.)

This reminded me, I had asked you about your experience with the "Jesus" figure. What was it?

Later I realized it was not Jesus after studying demonology a bit. I wont go into the whole story here but is was the classical Jesus in a glowing blueish-purple robe, but he had no feet and brought unbearable pain.

Edited by markprice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were many experiences, but the worst was the dilemma about God's love and to some extent even about his existence that I faced when I embraced them. Evil or not (because it is a subjective term) but I believe that they are anti-God to their core for sure. It is like they are devoid of God's mercy and love and they enter your life with this misfortune and there it is, the beginning of the end. It is like you are being pulled into the abyss as time passes, any effort to resist is like swimming a river upstream in a dark storm with a huge rock tied to you. I have seen the river and the endless network of underground caves, their abodes. I was fortunate enough not to be pulled beyond that.

I'll take another stab at this part. God's love had dissipated and you were left to embrace evil. Most of us have been there because at the time no clear understanding of evil existed, or evil had not yet proved itself. That's not a sin at all. Then you realized they are anti-God to the core leaving you as one who has learned. And their purpose: to bring catastrophe was discovered as well. No mercy, pure evil unmasked. Time spent in the abyss...inertia...trying to move/trying to escape; the strange landscape at the edges of hell (like the river styx etc.) and those who exist on the border. Then it all just ends and you go no further. You are either very lucky or you are supposed to know all you need to know about it from that much direct experience. Either way many drop down from there and most do not survive.

See, I'm mostly just rewording what you wrote so it would be much better if you filled out your story and offered it up without vast blanks IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not one of those that believe that evil is behind all the paranormal phenomeon but the subject of shadows is a bit different. Their MO is deception. They may enter your life as a benevolent protector but it may not be so. Sometimes, it takes many encounters to eventually realize the true face that hides behind that hat or hood, but until the truth is realized it is already too late. Of course it is a belief, but as the direct experiencer and after observing many many experiencers, it has become like a fact to me.

I also believe that every single person on this planet will experience shadows at the time of his death.

Could there be varied types of shadow people? I'm not bothered by the Hat Man. He seems cartoonish and nostalgic to me. However, the "monks" are another thing. They fill me with something akin to fear and dread. Of course, cowls give me the creeps because I associate them with scenes in horror movies. You know the ones. A group of menacing satanists chase a family through a small town in the conclusion of a cheap film from the 1970s. Anyway, I think that there are different kinds of these entities, with different aims and origins. The "old hag" (my encounter) is the most frightening to me. She just oozes malevolence, and she's so black that she makes the dark of night look like the light of day. Your life might change if you see her in a wholly awake, aware state.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not interested in converting the ignorant masses. The error is they don't know what the hell they are looking at, just like if you saw some statue and did not know what it represents, then somebody tells you what it represents then you start worshiping what you think that means...hahaha that's how dogma spreads. This is not relevant to anything here. They aren't "neo-pagan blind followers of Jung", they are psychoanalysts and patients. My mom happens to be on the board of directors so I have a pretty good idea of what they actually do.

You are still defending the undefendable? :w00t: He is not worth this effort, dude... let him drown already.

The psychoanalysts themselves rely on all kinds of theories/beliefs in their practices, don't they? BTW, I wasn't speaking about the psychoanalysts, I was speaking about the neo-pagan jungian fans that often quote Carl Jung for "scientific" evidence of their beliefs as if their beliefs hold more water than that of other religions, when in reality, they are attempting to substantiate their beliefs with nothing but just another set of beliefs.

You mentioned the "error" of confusing the image with the being it represents and when I posted my response it suddenly becomes irrelevant? The images/symbols and what they represent are the explanations put forward by later apologetics. Polytheistic religions did not originate this way. The ancients just began assuming different things as their dieties and started worshipping them.

Yeah, but that's not what subconscious means. It is not a diving submarine; it is just what is not conscious at the time.

Are you referring to the subconcious state or the subconscious mind? I was referring to the the topographical map, not a diving submarine, the iceberg model, one of Sigmund Freud's earliest models of the human mind that he divided into depths/levels but it kept evolving into other models, the last one was also only theoritical. You can subdivide the human mind into as many levels as you wish and name them in whatever way you like but your model will still be a theory among a set of other theories. Nobody knows for sure the exact underlying mechanism of the human mind. I challenge anyone to give the objective evidence of any particular psyche model they have chosen to believe in. I bet no one can. The word subconscious was already popular long before any of these theories were around. Devoid of techincal connotations it can be used in many ways.

Synchronicity is one "mechanism" that happens all the time...All explanations explain the same thing(subconscious), pick one and it will be no more important than another. You're not going to tell the scientific community it was angels. Jung was working with colleagues on that level so his language had to be appropriate.

But you cannot accept these beliefs as scientific facts just because they are presented in the appropriate (or "scientific") language. Synchronicity is just a belief of Carl Jung among numerous others. It is not scientific. He was trying to prove one theory/belief (i.e. of collective unconscious) only with another unestablished theory/belief.

Here is a good rebuttal of the Jungian belief of synchonicity (although, I don't agree with everything in the article):

http://home.swipnet....nchronicity.htm

The collective unconscious is just a belief my friend, it is not a scientifically proven fact. Give me any example of this "synchronicity " and I can give at least five equally strong explanations for that, confirmation bias being one of them.

What I mean is more like a coherent story of your experiences that is easy to remember. I remember that much with the river and caves and your perceived difference between Catholic hell and actual hell which overlap...idk, I mean, you don't just start seeing these things so it's better to put them in context, right? (edit: I thought maybe you told that story here somewhere and could link it.)

LOL, and you don't share your stories in bits and pieces all the time? Your experience with "Jesus" for instance.

Okay, we both shared in bits and pieces. Although I remember giving you a brief summary of my experiences, I also remember mentioning the river part, the black thick sewage like water and you said that you had drawn the same river on the cover of your book and that you dove into that river once at the point of no return or something like that. Remember?

The Christian and the Eastern hells, their difference is not just a perceived difference, they are indeed different. This hell (the lower plane) has nothing to do with sin. Still, I believe that both hells i.e. the Abrahamic and the Eastern hells are real. In this astral hell the senses are magnified, the heat, the pain, the torment is just as real as it would be if it happened in the physical, even if it is not your physical body that is being tormented.

I have been to the river quite a few times. The river flows with thick black sewage and smells horrible. It is huge, may be atleast half a mile wide. The atmosphere is always cold and dark there, the air smells putrid. There are some very old (ancient) stone bridges to cross the river that look like they are on the verge of falling. There are some hanging bridges with brittle old wooden planks that easily break/crumble if one even attempts to place their foot on them. It is like it's almost impossible to cross these bridges without falling into the water below. Below the stairs that lead to the bridges there are cages that contain huge black grim dogs "shadow dogs", voracious, growling all the time . You cannot climb up one of these bridges or descend from them without running into these dogs at the banks. And if these dogs break loose, then your journey ends then and there. They attack you, tear you into pieces in seconds. If a beginner encounters one of these, it is best to simply come back to the physical immediately because I believe that "repercussion" is possible although not serious.

The network of caves, the abodes of shadows, snakes and spiders, I cannot possibly describe all of it now. I thought of replying yesterday but I was afraid it would get too long and I was already too tired, but I guess it won't be possible even today. Maybe another time. I have to admit, my experiences in this particular lowr plane are in no way close to yours but you keep getting credit from me for that, don't you? BTW, have you observed we always end up arguing even when both of us are already on the same page? Maybe both of us are equally stubborn about these tiny differences. :lol:

Later I realized it was not Jesus after studying demonology a bit. I wont go into the whole story here but is was the classical Jesus in a glowing blueish-purple robe, but he had no feet and brought unbearable pain.

I asked that because I think your Jesus was a shadow (devil). I'm not sure though.

I'll take another stab at this part. God's love had dissipated and you were left to embrace evil. Most of us have been there because at the time no clear understanding of evil existed, or evil had not yet proved itself. That's not a sin at all. Then you realized they are anti-God to the core leaving you as one who has learned. And their purpose: to bring catastrophe was discovered as well. No mercy, pure evil unmasked. Time spent in the abyss...inertia...trying to move/trying to escape; the strange landscape at the edges of hell (like the river styx etc.) and those who exist on the border. Then it all just ends and you go no further. You are either very lucky or you are supposed to know all you need to know about it from that much direct experience. Either way many drop down from there and most do not survive.

See, I'm mostly just rewording what you wrote so it would be much better if you filled out your story and offered it up without vast blanks IMO.

Alright, I agree, Mark... I left vast blanks. Because I only mentioned my greatest loss during these experiences - the dilemma (and trust me, the dilemma is the worst thing that ever happened to me in my entire life because I'm one of those that prefer to die rather than losing their faith in God), and I only mentioned the lower planes where they come from, not that these were my only experiences. It is impossible to recollect and share all such experiences of my life, I only share what is relevant and I don't consider experiencing these events as something good or something to brag about unlike some other members here, I believe that the more paranormal experiences the more shame. But I have experienced such events my entire life. I communicated with them, learned from them, recieved mandalas (symbols), made pacts then broke them, struggled, fought almost everything. And I'm not proud of it, I can happily exchange all these experiences for a normal life anytime. Although, I'm very fortunate that I didn't experience the core of hell, I know that many don't survive or retain their sanity after falling into that level, still I personally know some others that were dragged or went to the core and came back. I have collected a lot of accounts of this hell from those who have experienced it directly, I mentioned to you some of those in PM. I come from a culture where good/bad spiritual experiences are like an everyday thing.

You have experienced Satan and learned that shadows are from Satan, and I came to know about it through the 'spirit guide" that came to me in the beginning, and from other accounts as well, but in no way is my belief any less stronger than yours about their origin, I'm so certain about them being from Satan/the Devil/Shaitan/Yamaraja (or whatever name he is known by in other religions/cultures) that I can swear about their origin as a fact, it is like a fact to me as much as it is like a fact to you. It is unfortunate that you had to experience the core to learn about it. Still, you should be grateful to God that you survived after experiencing that much evil. Although, I appreciate your courage to share your bad experiences, many people don't have guts to admit that they were victims of something so destructive, most people post in these forums only to brag about their spiritual experiences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could there be varied types of shadow people? I'm not bothered by the Hat Man. He seems cartoonish and nostalgic to me. However, the "monks" are another thing. They fill me with something akin to fear and dread. Of course, cowls give me the creeps because I associate them with scenes in horror movies. You know the ones. A group of menacing satanists chase a family through a small town in the conclusion of a cheap film from the 1970s. Anyway, I think that there are different kinds of these entities, with different aims and origins. The "old hag" (my encounter) is the most frightening to me. She just oozes malevolence, and she's so black that she makes the dark of night look like the light of day. Your life might change if you see her in a wholly awake, aware state.

Of course it is possible. Logically, no one can prove that there are no different kinds. Perhaps you are referring to the articles that are spread everywhere on the internet about these different kinds.

But I ask, why the disguise if there is no deception?

Modern "researchers/authors" only mention three "kinds", but they never care about the the numerous age old cliches:

4. "god"

5. "Jesus"

6. Angels

7. The little girl who lost her father

8. The seductress

9. The teacher/guide

10. Extra-terrestrials

11. The black dog

12. The python

That is why I mentioned "distraction" and it is working so well. All these researchers jumping in to cash in on this "new" paranormal phenomenon, they never care to refer to the ancient sources of eschatolology that have already discussed everything in detail, at least to compare with their research. I can assure you one thing DM, you can test this yourself with shadows (no matter what you believe them to be, whether guardians, devils, guides, or just activated archetypes but they) are not interested in individuals as persons. What would the "old hag" achieve by strangling a sleeping victim, a common person? How many same old hags are there in the world? Were they just replicated this way to appear throughout the world? What would the hatman achieve by just standing outside your window staring at you, and doing nothing?

If there are any different kinds, as far as I know, there are only two. The devils and the shadow-self. The rest are non-sentients like spiders, snakes and scorpions, cats and dogs. But even then all of them originate from the same lower plane of the astral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't say for sure, Xing. My guess is that there are varied explanations. The old hag likely is a part of sleep paralysis. It's the form and shape that the human mind creates. It's a bit like how we see objects and people in clouds. Combine that phenomenon with our culture. It probably is that prosaic in most instances. Still, there are "old hags" that aren't a part of sleep paralysis. I don't know how to definitively classify them. We all have our own explanations and theories. My guess is that they're sentient entities of some kind. They might come from another dimension. They might be from the spiritual realm (afterlife souls or demonic entities). Whatever they are, once you encounter one, you'll remember it for the rest of your life.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are still defending the undefendable? :w00t: He is not worth this effort, dude... let him drown already.

The psychoanalysts themselves rely on all kinds of theories/beliefs in their practices, don't they? BTW, I wasn't speaking about the psychoanalysts, I was speaking about the neo-pagan jungian fans that often quote Carl Jung for "scientific" evidence of their beliefs as if their beliefs hold more water than that of other religions, when in reality, they are attempting to substantiate their beliefs with nothing but just another set of beliefs.

You mentioned the "error" of confusing the image with the being it represents and when I posted my response it suddenly becomes irrelevant? The images/symbols and what they represent are the explanations put forward by later apologetics. Polytheistic religions did not originate this way. The ancients just began assuming different things as their dieties and started worshipping them.

Jung is "undefendable", seriously? He doesn't need me to defend him. It's irrelevant because your lack of understanding of deities has nothing to do with what they represent or this thread.

Are you referring to the subconcious state or the subconscious mind? I was referring to the the topographical map, not a diving submarine, the iceberg model, one of Sigmund Freud's earliest models of the human mind that he divided into depths/levels but it kept evolving into other models, the last one was also only theoritical. You can subdivide the human mind into as many levels as you wish and name them in whatever way you like but your model will still be a theory among a set of other theories. Nobody knows for sure the exact underlying mechanism of the human mind. I challenge anyone to give the objective evidence of any particular psyche model they have chosen to believe in. I bet no one can. The word subconscious was already popular long before any of these theories were around. Devoid of techincal connotations it can be used in many ways.

Yeah, none of that is the subconscious. You are talking about theories you have already rejected instead of the subconscious which is everything you don't know.

But you cannot accept these beliefs as scientific facts just because they are presented in the appropriate (or "scientific") language. Synchronicity is just a belief of Carl Jung among numerous others. It is not scientific. He was trying to prove one theory/belief (i.e. of collective unconscious) only with another unestablished theory/belief.

I said it happens all the time; it doesn't get any more real than that. Now you are rejecting a reality already proven to be what it is. Just because somebody names a phenomena doesn't mean he invented it, so by rejecting the person you throw the truth out with the corpse, so to speak.

The collective unconscious is just a belief my friend, it is not a scientifically proven fact. Give me any example of this "synchronicity " and I can give at least five equally strong explanations for that, confirmation bias being one of them.

You can read the book Jung on the Paranormal and save me the trouble of going back through it to prove you wrong.

Okay, we both shared in bits and pieces. Although I remember giving you a brief summary of my experiences, I also remember mentioning the river part, the black thick sewage like water and you said that you had drawn the same river on the cover of your book and that you dove into that river once at the point of no return or something like that. Remember?

Those were different experiences.

The Christian and the Eastern hells, their difference is not just a perceived difference, they are indeed different. This hell (the lower plane) has nothing to do with sin. Still, I believe that both hells i.e. the Abrahamic and the Eastern hells are real. In this astral hell the senses are magnified, the heat, the pain, the torment is just as real as it would be if it happened in the physical, even if it is not your physical body that is being tormented.

Hell is hell no matter who describes it.

I have been to the river quite a few times. The river flows with thick black sewage and smells horrible. It is huge, may be atleast half a mile wide. The atmosphere is always cold and dark there, the air smells putrid. There are some very old (ancient) stone bridges to cross the river that look like they are on the verge of falling. There are some hanging bridges with brittle old wooden planks that easily break/crumble if one even attempts to place their foot on them. It is like it's almost impossible to cross these bridges without falling into the water below. Below the stairs that lead to the bridges there are cages that contain huge black grim dogs "shadow dogs", voracious, growling all the time . You cannot climb up one of these bridges or descend from them without running into these dogs at the banks. And if these dogs break loose, then your journey ends then and there. They attack you, tear you into pieces in seconds. If a beginner encounters one of these, it is best to simply come back to the physical immediately because I believe that "repercussion" is possible although not serious.

The network of caves, the abodes of shadows, snakes and spiders, I cannot possibly describe all of it now. I thought of replying yesterday but I was afraid it would get too long and I was already too tired, but I guess it won't be possible even today. Maybe another time. I have to admit, my experiences in this particular lowr plane are in no way close to yours but you keep getting credit from me for that, don't you? BTW, have you observed we always end up arguing even when both of us are already on the same page? Maybe both of us are equally stubborn about these tiny differences. :lol:

That's like a chunk of experience; maybe some day you can put the pieces in order like a synopsis or outline. All I know is I wasn't able to rest until I did that for myself.

I asked that because I think your Jesus was a shadow (devil). I'm not sure though.

Of course it was but it fooled me at the time.

Alright, I agree, Mark... I left vast blanks. Because I only mentioned my greatest loss during these experiences - the dilemma (and trust me, the dilemma is the worst thing that ever happened to me in my entire life because I'm one of those that prefer to die rather than losing their faith in God), and I only mentioned the lower planes where they come from, not that these were my only experiences. It is impossible to recollect and share all such experiences of my life, I only share what is relevant and I don't consider experiencing these events as something good or something to brag about unlike some other members here, I believe that the more paranormal experiences the more shame. But I have experienced such events my entire life. I communicated with them, learned from them, recieved mandalas (symbols), made pacts then broke them, struggled, fought almost everything. And I'm not proud of it, I can happily exchange all these experiences for a normal life anytime. Although, I'm very fortunate that I didn't experience the core of hell, I know that many don't survive or retain their sanity after falling into that level, still I personally know some others that were dragged or went to the core and came back. I have collected a lot of accounts of this hell from those who have experienced it directly, I mentioned to you some of those in PM. I come from a culture where good/bad spiritual experiences are like an everyday thing.

You have experienced Satan and learned that shadows are from Satan, and I came to know about it through the 'spirit guide" that came to me in the beginning, and from other accounts as well, but in no way is my belief any less stronger than yours about their origin, I'm so certain about them being from Satan/the Devil/Shaitan/Yamaraja (or whatever name he is known by in other religions/cultures) that I can swear about their origin as a fact, it is like a fact to me as much as it is like a fact to you. It is unfortunate that you had to experience the core to learn about it. Still, you should be grateful to God that you survived after experiencing that much evil. Although, I appreciate your courage to share your bad experiences, many people don't have guts to admit that they were victims of something so destructive, most people post in these forums only to brag about their spiritual experiences.

There's no shame in being a victim of something like this, especially if it begins when you are child. That's not fair play, it's really f-ing evil. Most people don't even know that something is there so they want proof. If they got proof then they would have to deal with it because it's all personal proof and that takes time to be truly convincing. At first one might think it was a fluke but then it happens again and so on. What interests me is the chain of events that provides personal proof. What p***es me off is when someone demands you should be able to prove it to someone else. How can you prove a process unless the person goes through it?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I call this bullcrap for the most part,

Many times I have known to talk in my sleep, wake up believing some one in the room, Ran after something, attacked a lamp, attacked a mirror, argued with the air, one time my wife said i told telling her a man was trying to kill her and i once was dragging her across to my side of the bed.

This normally happens during the christmas season, a high stress time for some one working in retail with terrible long hours, pushy customers and agressive managers trying you to push a sale. The other time is my days during and after birthday where memories of my abusive father would attack my subconcious and i would relive my child hood in my dreams.

During those times I have slept in the living room to not upset my wife.

My wife, Thought i had a ghost haunting me. After finally went to a doctor who ran tests where i sleep a few days in an observation room, he told me i wake up over 300 times during my sleep. He then told me to video record my self and show him these night terrors i have. Two weeks later, There i was watching myself jumping out of bed to yell at the corner of the room, screaming at my father in gibberish where my wife turned on the light and as if by remote control, i went quiet, turned around and climbed into bed the next day I did not remember any thing until my wife told me.

After my doctor watched my video, he told me it is that I need to have regular sleeping patterns and working retail is part of the cause of my sleep paralysis, also eating meals before going to bed is another problem (which i do a lot during the christmas holidays) that i haven't given my body a chance to digess it.

These hatmen, shadowmen, what ever are most likely sleep paralysis. It's where your brain is not fully awake. Even though i wake up to see "villians" or "shadows" or "my father", i know it is sleep paralysis.

Edited by Brian Topp
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I call this bullcrap for the most part,

Many times I have known to talk in my sleep, wake up believing some one in the room, Ran after something, attacked a lamp, attacked a mirror, argued with the air, one time my wife said i told telling her a man was trying to kill her and i once was dragging her across to my side of the bed.

This normally happens during the christmas season, a high stress time for some one working in retail with terrible long hours, pushy customers and agressive managers trying you to push a sale. The other time is my days during and after birthday where memories of my abusive father would attack my subconcious and i would relive my child hood in my dreams.

During those times I have slept in the living room to not upset my wife.

My wife, Thought i had a ghost haunting me. After finally went to a doctor who ran tests where i sleep a few days in an observation room, he told me i wake up over 300 times during my sleep. He then told me to video record my self and show him these night terrors i have. Two weeks later, There i was watching myself jumping out of bed to yell at the corner of the room, screaming at my father in gibberish where my wife turned on the light and as if by remote control, i went quiet, turned around and climbed into bed the next day I did not remember any thing until my wife told me.

After my doctor watched my video, he told me it is that I need to have regular sleeping patterns and working retail is part of the cause of my sleep paralysis, also eating meals before going to bed is another problem (which i do a lot during the christmas holidays) that i haven't given my body a chance to digess it.

These hatmen, shadowmen, what ever are most likely sleep paralysis. It's where your brain is not fully awake. Even though i wake up to see "villians" or "shadows" or "my father", i know it is sleep paralysis.

Um, no, not for everyone, a person does not necessarily have to be in bed or asleep...interesting story though.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 56

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.