The world you see and take for granted as real is imaginary. Your eye cannot provide a whole or consistent picture of the world around you, so your brain fills in the blanks, makes assumptions, which is good enough for most purposes.

In the entire domain of potential sensory experience, human beings only tap into a rather narrow range of it. The only world we know is the world our brain has been trained to make knowable. Does that mean this is the only world that exists?

I can’t imagine it would be. It would be oddly specific. Our world has a sort of atmosphere around it. It has been given many names, the astral plane being one of them, but what this atmosphere is is simply the energy and “space” in which consciousness can occur.

Now if you accept the scientific premise that consciousness is an emergent quality of special kinds of matter, then that quality would also have to be in the energy that makes up that matter also, yes? So viewing the astral as being like our atmosphere, our atmosphere has a lot of moisture in it, and this moisture can take different states, rain, fog, snow, water, ice. Consider that the energy that makes up our own conscious matter is just one such state that this energy can take. Would we necessarily recognize another state of being? Would another state of being have to be less real than ours?

We do encounter these other states of being from time to time, which really are just as real and enduring and in a sense tangible as our own. The contact is just not one that we easily maintain, like the recurring lucid dream. Have you ever had a lucid dream that resisted any attempt you made to imagine it differently?

All my lucid dreams are like that. Perhaps the only reason you know it to have been a dream at all is that you fell back into this state of being. If you could not return to this state, how would you know it was a dream? How do you know this one is not?

When it becomes a memory there appear to be different qualities attached, like ‘this one fits’ … this one doesn’t… in terms of this state. Yes, a sense of context, and magick is learning to adopt new context for your experience. Change in conformity with will. Is there a difference between the two definitions? Between magick as adopting a new context for your experience, and magick as creating change in conformity with will? If you adopt a broader more flexible context, how would that fail to empower you?

It can open up opportunities for you.

Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.

Travis Saunders
Dragon Intuitive
~science,mysticism,spirituality~