Conference hydra::dejavu

    You may be refering to a "ring-pass-not", which is a protective
    ring of energy which is generally used to protect one from outside
    energies.  Predictably, though, it also keeps our energies in.
    
    Jeff

"White-light protection", maybe?

This may not sound familiar, but, the picture of selective Indian god and 
godesses have "circle of light" around their face. This signifies that the
soul belonged to a super-human being, (i.e, having extra-power than a normal
human being).

    Hmmm...
    
    Anyone ever hear the song by Todd Rundgren called, "Initiation"?
    
    There is a line:
    
      See the shining soul break the ring-pass-not
      Silently listen and it shall be released
      I was born to fly higher
      Basking in the light of the neon fire
      As it burns my useless body to the ground
    
    Meaningless drivel or what?  Where or among what kind of subject
    matter would I find more about a "ring-pass-not"?
    
    
    Re .0
    
    Are you talking about the brotherhood of light?  Other than this,
    only protection rituals come to mind.
    
    
    
    Guy
    
    

re: .4    
    
FYI, replies .1, .2, and probably .0, are all refering to the same 
thing.  Ring-pass-not is a more technical term for it, while "circle of 
light" and "white light protection" are more common terms.  I'm not sure 
where you can find more info on it... Most literature which addresses it 
probably has it buried within the text, as opposed to addressing it as a 
primary topic.  Perhaps someone else can recommend a source for the 
information.

Jeff

    It is a "protection" mechanism, from what I understand. 
    
    Carla
    

        I like the term "bubble of light" better than circle of light
    because a circle sounds two-dimensional to me while a bubble is
    definitely three-dimensional.  I would agree with the concept that
    it is of protective/protection value.  I frequently use the term
    along with its corresponding thought, especially when I travel in
    a vehicle, I say "bubble of light" verbally in my mind (therefore
    not out-loud) and visualize a bubble extending several feet beyond
    the perimeters of my car.  Comes in handy...last Wednesday night
    I drove to Sonoma through San Rafael on US101 when, during the 
    solid rain, I detected a large shadow ahead in the dark.  I
    quickly moved to the left-most part of the road and somehow managed
    to avoid a dozen-car pileup (the shadow was a tractor-trailer stopped
    in the right lane with no lights on.)  Does the bubble of light
    work?  Can't prove by me that it *doesn't*.
    
    Frederick

    I just recently found the DEJAVU file and began looking at different
    topics.  This one caught my eye for some reason.  I wasn't planning
    on responding to anything yet, but what the heck.  Although I have
    had various experiences and happenings occur to and with me, (that
    I won't go into detail on at this time) I am far from being 
    knowledgable on or an expert in any of this.  So for what it's 
    worth, here is my input re: .0.
    
    I was going through a period a few years ago where I was getting
    very negative feelings at night that I couldn't justify getting.
    I guess for lack of a better way of putting it, it could be best
    described as a negative presence that would have me suddenly waking
    up as I was about to fall asleep.  After waking up, the feeling
    of something being wrong around me and anxiety would stay with me
    for awhile.  I talked with my mother (who is into readings, tarrot
    cards and such) and a friend of hers (who is a psychic, I think)
    about these events.  They couldn't tell me what was causing my nightly
    disturbances, but they made a suggestion on possibly stopping them.
    It was, you guessed it, the visualization of the White Light of
    Protection.  They way it was explained to me was that, when the
    occurrance began, I was to picture a white light beaming down on
    me.  As I visualized this light on me, I was to think/say something
    in the line of "I am surrounded by the white light of protection.
    In this light, all evil and negativity is dispelled from me.  I
    am safe within this light".  Whether it actually worked saying it
    or just from my believing it would work, it worked.  The next time
    it happened I did it and the following night, and for some time
    after, it didn't happen.
    
    If this is the same thing that your referring to, there's probably
    more to it.  If it's the same thing, then it's basically a protection
    devise from the bad influences to the psychicly vulnerable.  There's
    nothing to learn on it, it all comes from within you.
    
    
    >>DAVID<<

	Visualizing a cone of white light can be helpfull.
					Lew

    I have read some books on meditation.  Most of them say to 
    visualize a sphere of white light so as to protect you in
    meditation.  
    
    From what I understand, the pursuit of the spiritual - or
    the Good that is, the darker ones like to bug you to keep
    you from Him.  So this sphere of protection acts to protect
    you.
    
    Also, it is said, that meditation 'opens' you up to other
    things (not of the 3-d world) and the sphere is the 
    protection from harm.
    
    I know this is an old note file . . . but maybe somebody will
    read it.
    
    jp

    Re: .-1 PERRY

Hi JP,
    
>    I know this is an old note file . . . but maybe somebody will
>    read it.

    Don't worry. Most people read conferences by using NEXT UNSEEN.
    So it doesn't matter when the original topic was started - you
    always read the replies which have been added since the last
    time you read.

>    I have read some books on meditation.  Most of them say to 
>    visualize a sphere of white light so as to protect you in
>    meditation.

    For me at the moment I have enough trouble just stilling
    my mind. I 'chat' to myself endlessly, so it seems.

    I'm wondering what 'to visualize a sphere of white light'
    would be like. Am I seeing this from the point of view of
    me inside the sphere? (In which case it wouldn't look
    like a sphere - just a 'white' boundary). Or am I seeing it
    from an outside observer point of view? Is the sphere opaque?
    Does it totally enclose my body? What happens where the
    sphere intersects the chair or the floor?

    You see! Intellectual chat!! :-)
    
John D.

    re: last couple
    
          It's the intention, not the perfection that is important.
    (This visualization "stuff" has been discussed in a couple of 
    other notes.)
          AS for intellectualizing, watch out!  What you are telling
    yourself is intellectualizing may be chatter all right, but sourced
    by the negative ego.  The winner: the negative ego.
    
    Frederick
    

    Re .12, Fred.

>	AS for intellectualizing, watch out!  What you are telling
>    yourself is intellectualizing may be chatter all right, but sourced
>    by the negative ego.  The winner: the negative ego.
    
    I'm not sure I understand. I value my intellect - it's *very* good
    at certain things. However, I also feel that the training I've had
    has over-emphasised its value. So some of my time is spent 'trying'
    to stop intellectualising. Part of this 'stopping' effort is a
    simple breath meditation and as I'm sure anyone who has ever tried
    meditating has experienced, the mind goes on burbling even though
    the mind is having the intention to stop. (Shades of Krishnamurti).

    With a visualisation exercise like the one mentioned in this topic,
    part of the burbling is about what the sphere looks like in the
    visualisation. After all, one is trying to visualise something and
    if there isn't an image...
    
John D.

    re: .13 (Johnfrog)
    
         Okay...intellect *is* valuable.  And clearly you have realized
    it's boundaries.  I suspect you will agree with me in acknowledging
    three other components to our limited physical selves: intuition,
    feelings (emotions) and the body itself.  Which is most important?
    The intellect or the intuition?  Feelings or body?  The answer-->
    there is no answer.  It's whatever it is that works well for each
    person.  But the answer is that ignoring components for the sake
    of only one of the components (e.g., ingoring feelings and using
    only intellect) is risky and probably foolish.  
         I suspect that Krishnamurti was hinting at ways of paying
    attention to that which is other than intellectual, whether it's
    the body or emotions or intuition.  
         My point is that what we often call or label as
    intellectualization, in truth is nothing more than a running dialog
    or a bantering back and forth between self AND...the negative ego.
    Talk between self and negative ego is not thinking.  It is most
    likely the actual carrying out of that which the negative ego seeks,
    which is both the elimination of thought and distraction from original
    focus--in other words, the negative ego has as it's singular purpose
    nothing other than total destruction of the self, and doing *its*
    "duty" is exactly what it wants.  Therefore, engaging in dialog
    with the negative ego is a very risky enterprise.  So, once again,
    I repeat that what we often label as thinking is probably most often
    NOT thinking.  If the "thoughts" sound like a dialog, then it might
    be the dialog I am referring to.  Calling something "chatter" sounds
    to me like aimless negative ego dialog.  Who knows?  The shadow
    do...(to coin a phrase...;-) )
    
    Frederick
    

    Re: .14, Fred
    
>         My point is that what we often call or label as
>    intellectualization, in truth is nothing more than a running dialog
>    or a bantering back and forth between self AND...the negative ego.

    Yes. You're right, I hadn't really considered splitting 'chatting'
    from useful intellectualisation. So, in this case we'd say that
    some part of me (negative ego) is trying to distract me from the
    exercise.

>    I repeat that what we often label as thinking is probably most often
>    NOT thinking.  If the "thoughts" sound like a dialog, then it might
>    be the dialog I am referring to.  Calling something "chatter" sounds
>    to me like aimless negative ego dialog.

    But, but, but. Lets see. Everywhere I put chatter I'm quite happy
    to substitute 'aimless negative ego dialog'. So, certainly what
    goes on in my head when/if I try to visualise a sphere of white light
    is not useful (whatever that means). But it still leaves me with a
    problem of what I am trying to visualise. My mental wheels spin
    when trying to visualise something for which I haven't got an image.
    I'm okay visualising a candle, but a white sphere...

    I talked with Esther about this last night. Clearly I see a problem
    where she doesn't! I had to speak very precisely and pendantically
    to show her my problem. Her point of view (very much like yours Fred)
    was that one 'intends' to do it - and whatever comes is ok.

    I've thought some more since then. I think this is what I would do.
    Probably everyone can remember what bright sunlight looks like seen
    through closed eyes. I would take that sensation but change it from
    red to white light. Then I'll 'be' in a cloud (sphere?) of white light
    of unknown extent and shape. There will (in this visualisation) be no
    problem with my body, the chair etc - because I'll choose for the
    white light to be everywhere.

    I know, I'm sort of side-stepping the sphere problem. Perhaps, if
    there is an accomplished sphere visualiser out there they could
    describe what it looks like.
    
John D.

    Re .-1
    
>    problem of what I am trying to visualise. My mental wheels spin
>    when trying to visualise something for which I haven't got an image.
>    I'm okay visualising a candle, but a white sphere...

    Obviously I can visualise a white sphere - but what is it like from
    the inside?

    re: .16 (greenJohn)
    
          I understand your dilemma.  My experiences with similar
    meditations often have me "flipping" from subjective visualizations
    to objective visualizations.  THat is, I will see myself as though
    on a tv screen, then I'll *be* the person I am seeing. That is 
    definitely the more difficult of the two for me, too.  
          An analogy in my daily life comes from foggy days.  I happen
    to live on a mountain peak which separates the Pacific Ocean (20
    miles away) from Santa Clara Valley (just over the mountain
    and extending about 30 miles from me.)  On various days of the
    year, fog rolls in off the ocean and often reaches my 2900 foot
    elevation and blankets me.  On some of those days I have near
    zero visibility.  For all I "know", the whole world is covered 
    in fog during those times.  It isn't until I leave my property
    and go down the mountain into the valley that I can look back over
    my shoulder and see the huge cloud of white billowy fog sitting
    or pouring over the ridge and covering much of the mountain range.
         THe visualizations we have been discussing could be somewhat
    similar.  From the point of view of the "meditatee" the whole
    outside world could be colored with light, which may be opaque
    or lightly translucent.  From an observer's or witness's point
    of view, however, it may appear to be an egg-shaped sphere.  On
    the other hand, perhaps from inside the sphere the lines can 
    clearly be seen which delineate that which is inside from that
    which is outside.  The point is that it really doesn't matter.
    That you are intending to put energy around yourself is truly
    what matters.  There is a FEELING which comes from that...that
    FEELING supercedes whatever visual or audio or tonsorial or odoriferous
    sensations which you sense with your mental body.  Understand?
    It's not that the mentalized body is deficient somehow, it's that
    the emotional feeling of the mental action is the "goal" that is
    sought.
          So, don't worry that you can't quite "see" it.  How does it
    feel being in a protective capsule of energy?  No one has ever
    said that your mental eyes need to be open in order to sense this,
    have they?  Just knowing that that sphere surrounds you should be
    enough, I think.
    
    
    Enough, I think...
    Frederick