[EvonsRorgon]

I've been working on Aura Sight. I can see the etheric body right along the physical body but no colors yet. Will this come in time?

DD

[itaspCatCriny]

I believe it will, it did with me. If you'd like I might be able to show you a sort of 'diagnostic' tool that may help.

-Stu

[EvonsRorgon]

Sure I'd like anything that might help me here.

DD

[crycleascentyv]

I find focussing on trees and plants helps development.

[rushiddink]

I have a serious question. How do you distinguish between peculiarities of normal sight and actual auras? For example, due to retinal fatigue, staring at any object will create a transparent ‘aura’ around it. This is due to fatigue and the minute constant movements of the eyes which make this ‘imprint’ seem to expand around the object. Retinal fatigue will also produce a colours complementary colour around the object in the same method as above (giving rise to a coloured ‘aura’).
How do you know when you are actually seeing an aura, or just retinal fatigue? Frequent staring at objects and producing this phenomenon causes it to happen much more quickly (conditioning the brain to notice such symptoms much quicker than the ‘default’ setting) – so having them arise instantly (as they do in me) isn’t an indication of one over the other.
I’d be interested to hear from someone versed in auras say how they distinguish between these. I am genuinely interested in this.

[desmond001]

I have a serious question. How do you distinguish between peculiarities of normal sight and actual auras? For example, due to retinal fatigue, staring at any object will create a transparent ‘aura’ around it. This is due to fatigue and the minute constant movements of the eyes which make this ‘imprint’ seem to expand around the object. Retinal fatigue will also produce a colours complementary colour around the object in the same method as above (giving rise to a coloured ‘aura’).
How do you know when you are actually seeing an aura, or just retinal fatigue? Frequent staring at objects and producing this phenomenon causes it to happen much more quickly (conditioning the brain to notice such symptoms much quicker than the ‘default’ setting) – so having them arise instantly (as they do in me) isn’t an indication of one over the other.
I’d be interested to hear from someone versed in auras say how they distinguish between these. I am genuinely interested in this.

Interestingly, I have a possible answer: First of all, I don't see auras like some people report, but in special conditions it happens.
Last night at church (Holy Thursday services) I turned around and saw one girl who seemed to glow. She glowed so impressively that I thought I might be having some sort of eye problem. I turned away and looked at the people sitting in front, back and around her. Nobody had what you could consider a discernible aura- I looked at people until I saw 'afterimages', but nothing that was there already. But when I looked at her, wow! She was on fire! And the thing is she was very plain looking but had the nicest smile. (It wasn't somebody I knew, so I didn't go talk to her.) For the longest time she glowed. Then it was over and everyone left, so I wondered who she was. Now, maybe it was a trick of the light but people next to her didn't glow- I'm still baffled by her. I have to go back tonight for Good Friday Services (I work in the church and my son is going to light the candles in the candlelight ceremony) and I'm going to see if I see her. I'll let you know (if she's there) if she still glows.

[rushiddink]

Originally Posted by Chris I have a serious question. How do you distinguish between peculiarities of normal sight and actual auras? For example, due to retinal fatigue, staring at any object will create a transparent ‘aura’ around it. This is due to fatigue and the minute constant movements of the eyes which make this ‘imprint’ seem to expand around the object. Retinal fatigue will also produce a colours complementary colour around the object in the same method as above (giving rise to a coloured ‘aura’).
How do you know when you are actually seeing an aura, or just retinal fatigue? Frequent staring at objects and producing this phenomenon causes it to happen much more quickly (conditioning the brain to notice such symptoms much quicker than the ‘default’ setting) – so having them arise instantly (as they do in me) isn’t an indication of one over the other.
I’d be interested to hear from someone versed in auras say how they distinguish between these. I am genuinely interested in this.

Interestingly, I have a possible answer: First of all, I don't see auras like some people report, but in special conditions it happens.
Last night at church (Holy Thursday services) I turned around and saw one girl who seemed to glow. She glowed so impressively that I thought I might be having some sort of eye problem. I turned away and looked at the people sitting in front, back and around her. Nobody had what you could consider a discernible aura- I looked at people until I saw 'afterimages', but nothing that was there already. But when I looked at her, wow! She was on fire! And the thing is she was very plain looking but had the nicest smile. (It wasn't somebody I knew, so I didn't go talk to her.) For the longest time she glowed. Then it was over and everyone left, so I wondered who she was. Now, maybe it was a trick of the light but people next to her didn't glow- I'm still baffled by her. I have to go back tonight for Good Friday Services (I work in the church and my son is going to light the candles in the candlelight ceremony) and I'm going to see if I see her. I'll let you know (if she's there) if she still glows. Let us know what happens .

[Pwy9egVW]

Hey Chris,
I can tell you one big difference for me....I never saw anything like this until about two years ago. I've been a "starer" all my life. I stare at something without thinking about it, kind of blanking out. I always have people ask me, "What are you thinking about?" It startles me, as I don't realize I'm staring. So, with that much staring, you would think that I would have seen colors before, if your theory held true for me. Hey Patty,

You hit the nail on the head above. General staring is pretty unfocused and, is more alike to ‘blanking out’. In such circumstances you might see some very faint retinal fatigue, this might manifest itself as the visual field becoming slightly lighter and perhaps a bit of ‘sparkle’. But due to the blanking out (not really noticing) it could easily be missed if not intentionally looked for.
Seeing retinal fatigue is more like meditation, you have an object you focus on, and if your focus moves away or becomes more general, you bring it back. If you focus with awareness on an object, rather than looking unfocused in a general scene, you will notice these ‘aura’s start to form. It’s just because you are looking more intently at a single object than at a scene in a general sense. You can test this right now, and I’ll guarantee you’ll start seeing auras or colours .

So, if that's not enough for you, the first time I saw an aura was at a spiritual workshop given by James Van Praagh. I had heard of auras, but never read up on the subject and never even knew anyone who had this ability. I saw a huge pink and yellow aura around James Van Praagh. He had a question and answer period. A man stood up about 2 minutes after I started seeing the aura, and said, "James, you have the most beautiful pink and yellow aura around you.". Ok, I almost fell out of my chair!!

So, I started reading up on auras, and the way I was seeing them behaved exactly as the books were saying. I can sit and stare at something all day, and it doesn't produce an aura. If I put my focus and intent on seeing one, it always pops up. I practice it so much now, that I can see an aura within a couple of seconds. Hardly eye strain.

I've also taught quite a few people how to do it, and everyone reports the same colors. Most people I've taught are seeing them within 5 minutes of me telling them how to do it. Now, if those same people had seen something similar at any time in their life, don't you think they would have said something like, "Oh, yeh, I see that every time I get tired and stare for awhile"? For me, it's a little too coincidental that they see them for the first time in their lives when I teach them how to do it. This sort of relates to the above. Being taught how to look at an object/person (etc) in a specific way to trigger retinal fatigue in a noticeable way would be exactly the same as a person being taught to see an aura in a spiritual way. And from all the books I have read, and all the techniques I have read upon, the results are exactly the same as those produced by retinal fatigue. So I guess the question is, if auras can really be seen in an object sense, and there are normal mechanisms in the brain and eye which produce such results in a natural way – how can you see which is being seen?
Most people might not notice this for the same reason you didn’t, there’s a difference between staring intently at an object than there is staring at it in a general way. Blinking too much seems to move the eye enough to reduce the increasing retinal fatigue. Just staring at an object and trying not to blink much will produce auras almost instantly.
There is actually more interesting things than this, I can teach people to see more than auras very quickly. An example being seeing ‘trails’ from objects, or seeing ‘static’ in the air (which if I was more of a believer in certain occult philosophies I would perhaps interpret as energy being seen directly). But the mechanics of these phenomena is purely brain based.


One strange thing I've noticed...I see them the strongest (largest, brightest, clearest colors) when looking at a speaker. Someone told me that this is because they are emoting and pumped up. Makes sense to me. Also, very emotional people have larger and easier to see auras. If this was eye strain, why would there be a correlation between emoting and size and brightness? Now, I've never read about this correlation in any book, but it is very consistent with me. This is interesting. I think a problem with this whole area is that the mind can exaggerate desirable traits, so while retinal fatigue can produce auras, with the correct desire and suggestion behind it, those auras can be made to develop in intensity and depth over time.

Ps I am not saying all auras are produced this way, I’m just curious that if something natural exists which produces the exact same auras that people with certain spiritual persuasions would class as energy – what is the difference between them?

[hechicxxrr]

Hi Chris,

You seem to have a rather scientific and rational approach to the subject. Your argument that auric sight is similar, if not equivalent to, retinal fatigue is a good theory. However, it seems to me, the arguement as to whether people really see auras or see visual illusions created by fatigue and psychosomatic desires can't really be proven one way or another.

This is because science and scientific fact are based upon empirically observed data. Science has to observe something, usually many documented times, before it is considered scientifically valid. The downfall to this approach is something is false until it shown to be true in repeated, documented cases. So, according to science a plane wouldn't fly prior to it's invention, when really planes could always fly we just didn't know how to make them.

I'm a mathematician myself. In mathematics we spend a great deal of time on the idea of 'proof'. In order to prove that something is true, one must eliminate even the slightest possibility that it is false.

Since we have no empirical measure of esoteric qualities, such as auric sight, we cannot prove them to be false. We can conjecture and even formulate plausible theories, but not prove them false. Likewise, we can't prove that auric sight is a real phenomenon because, as you point out, it could simply be a physical phenomenon.

-Z

[Sukadrukanga]

I have been able to see energy from the body for many years now. I have only seen colors once. The rest of the time it appears as a shimmer in air which is transparent. I can not way for sure I am viewing the aura. I did look at someone's aura at the same time as another watcher who does see colors and it seemed to be the same phenomena. I one time I did see color it was some one doing their Qi Gong energy routine on the beach.

I have experienced eye fatigue which also causes colors distortion, shimering and flickering. However, the effect is for all objects, not just ones with energy.

[rushiddink]

Hi Chris,

You seem to have a rather scientific and rational approach to the subject. Your argument that auric sight is similar, if not equivalent to, retinal fatigue is a good theory. However, it seems to me, the arguement as to whether people really see auras or see visual illusions created by fatigue and psychosomatic desires can't really be proven one way or another. Hey zyzyx,

I don’t intentionally hold a scientific or rational approach to this subject, but due to knowledge I have of the eye and brain, I can’t ignore the similarities between what people to perceive as auras and naturally occurring phenomena due to our biological structure.
I think this might possibly be proved, there has been a number of studies regarding perception of auras. Although these studies do not attempt to prove the reality of auras, or discover the mechanics behind them, they test the consistency of seeing auras through a series of tests.
I think it should be possible to get indirect evidence of auras, even if we currently lack the scientific means to see them directly.

This is because science and scientific fact are based upon empirically observed data. Science has to observe something, usually many documented times, before it is considered scientifically valid. The downfall to this approach is something is false until it shown to be true in repeated, documented cases. So, according to science a plane wouldn't fly prior to it's invention, when really planes could always fly we just didn't know how to make them. I agree with the intention of the above, although I would differ in that things are not false until proven true, they are simply not considered at all. Such as a scientist must provide evidence for a hypothesis, else we just don’t concern ourselves with it. This isn’t the same as saying it is false or not possible, we simply do not have the data to say either way.

I'm a mathematician myself. In mathematics we spend a great deal of time on the idea of 'proof'. In order to prove that something is true, one must eliminate even the slightest possibility that it is false.

Since we have no empirical measure of esoteric qualities, such as auric sight, we cannot prove them to be false. We can conjecture and even formulate plausible theories, but not prove them false. Likewise, we can't prove that auric sight is a real phenomenon because, as you point out, it could simply be a physical phenomenon. I agree with this. It is in no way my intention to disprove auric sight as being valid or true. I am just seeking answers, and I just can’t ignore things such as there being biological causes which near exactly match phenomenon which is taken as esoteric or occult.
Even if auras are proved to be a peculiarity of sight, it does not necessarily make the information we can gain from them useless. It might simply be that the forces/ideas behind the colours are manifested in another way than the auras we associate them with.

[wizardasa]

I've also taught quite a few people how to do it, and everyone reports the same colors. Most people I've taught are seeing them within 5 minutes of me telling them how to do it. Ok, I'll bite. How do you do it? Can you post your technique or how you teach others?

I usually only see the first or second layer around the body. And I don't see it very often. I need to be pretty relaxed and looking at, but not really staring. Its definately not retina fatigue for me. I've had that and this is something completely different. When I see it, its usually a bright sky blue and I only ever see them around the head. And it isn't a complementary color (I've seen those as well). I almost always see a sky blue color and it varies in size around the head, depending upon the person. But it looks almost like a cloud or bubble around them. Its not right up against them.

And I've seen this with different people in front of different backgrounds and all wearing different colored clothing (meetings at work, conferences, hubby at home, etc). I've only seen blue though in these people. A few people didn't seem to have any or very faint and very small. One's was large, but all white. So I'm curious what to do or how to do it to see other colors and expand my ability.

[rushiddink]

I've also taught quite a few people how to do it, and everyone reports the same colors. Most people I've taught are seeing them within 5 minutes of me telling them how to do it.

Ok, I'll bite. How do you do it? Can you post your technique or how you teach others?

I usually only see the first or second layer around the body. And I don't see it very often. I need to be pretty relaxed and looking at, but not really staring. Its definately not retina fatigue for me. I've had that and this is something completely different. When I see it, its usually a bright sky blue and I only ever see them around the head. And it isn't a complementary color (I've seen those as well). I almost always see a sky blue color and it varies in size around the head, depending upon the person. But it looks almost like a cloud or bubble around them. Its not right up against them.

And I've seen this with different people in front of different backgrounds and all wearing different colored clothing (meetings at work, conferences, hubby at home, etc). I've only seen blue though in these people. A few people didn't seem to have any or very faint and very small. One's was large, but all white. So I'm curious what to do or how to do it to see other colors and expand my ability. See this interests me because it doesn't sound like retinal fatigue.

[Gaiaakgyyyg]

I can see plant and tree auras quite well...but where spiritual development comes into this, I don't know. It looks pretty...but that's about it. Check this out:-

The magician James ♥♥♥♥♥, for example, has for many years (as of 2004) offered one million US dollars to any person capable of repeatedly detecting auras, no one has yet succeeded, (though at least one has tried and failed). The test would involve the aura reader standing on one side of a room with an opaque partition separating them from a number of slots which may contain either actual people or mannequins. All that would have to be done is that the aura reader would have to consistently be able to tell which were real people and which were not.

There you go, PHG...fancy a million bucks? It's amazing, isn't it, the amount of money available here...and only one person has tried...and failed?

Anyone?

[bgsavings]

That's hardly fair. I've been through that quake a few times at universal too...could you point me in the direction of the book, phg? The top 5 psychics one? Cheers.

You've manifested millions?


Are you married?

[rushiddink]

Oh, Chris, Chris, Chris....you know I adore you? I love all of your questioning and probing. You know I'm a skeptic, too. But, when things happen to me that are so synchronistic...I can't deny them. I wouldn’t class my self as a sceptic as such, and I bet you wouldn’t either, I guess I just question with the knowledge I have to date – be this scientific or personal experience. And I do learn, and change opinion. I would love to be able to just give up, settle into a nice comfortable belief system and progress within it. But I have a drive to learn past the knowledge I now hold or wish to believe. I’ve tried ignoring this in periods of my life, but it never lets up .

So, let me try this a different way. Almost all of the psychic abilities I have began (actually exploded) when I wasn't hoping for them, expecting them, or even AWARE of their possibility for me. They all started in a big way, and each had a wow factor of being confirmed by someone or something outside of me. One example is the first time I saw an aura, which by the way, was the largest, brightest, most colorful, and profound I have seen since. It was confirmed several minutes later by someone I didn't know. It seems like they all originally happen in this way, and then the ability decreases and I have to study and learn how to improve them.
This makes me think that something, someone, or even my Higher Self starts the kick-off when I'm not expecting, just to get me interested. I know, I know, this is all very intuitive, and there's no way I can prove it. I don’t think there is anything wrong with intuitive knowledge, I actually think we each would progress tremendously if we could access it, and listen to it, more frequently. The one problem here is trying to perceive that knowledge without intention (i.e. not interpreting it within the confines of a belief system we hold, or wish to hold) – but you seem to be open to other possibilities (sceptic ) so I don’t think this would be too much of a problem with you.

Ok, let me try to explain it more clearly. Your test failed for me. If I look directly at an object, no aura appears. When I say I "focus", I'm speaking of focusing attention, not my eyes. I look above or to the side of an object, relax my eye focus (like you would unfocus a camera lens), and relax my body. This is how I see auras. Directly staring at something does not work for me. The problem with what I wrote is that it’s hard to transfer how I see ‘auras’ into writing. It would be much easier to get this across in person, as much is lost in text.

But, I was never "taught". And, why didn't anything remotely like this happen to me in the 50 years before the first time? I had heard of auras, but had never read a book about them, or talked with anyone who claimed to see them. It was "spontaneous" in a very suspicious setting (meaning, why in a spiritual setting, where the energy in the room itself was high). The cirucmstances were too extraordinary to me. You may disagree, but then, you are unable to detect and feel what I feel, just as I can't live your experiences. It would probably be easier if I could. Then I might be more able to detect a difference in what we are seeing or experiencing. I know all about subjective and objective experience, so that argument is a little wasted on me. I don't necessarily believe there is anything that is truly "objective". It's just our perception of it on this physical level. I believe we are all in for a big surprise when we transcend the physical. We will be laughing at what we understood to be "objective'. Using the airplane example, it was objective reality that nothing but birds could fly, certainly not humans. Those who believed it possible, were...well, you know what they were considered. It is now objective reality that many kinds of craft can fly. I totally agree. If I was to see from your eyes, I would be ‘you’ and the meaning would still be lost to ‘me’. I also agree that, in the end, we can only ever know our experiences ourselves, at this place and time where we currently are.
I think with the aeroplane example, that plane flight still uses objective ‘laws’ and it was a discovery of the technology to make planes fly, rather than reality changing to allow it to happen.
I think if we ever find ‘the truth’ we will all be in for a surprise (the scientists and the spiritual).
The subject of what is objective and what is subjective is a difficult problem. I see external reality as an internally generated and experienced state. What makes it objective is my perception that it is external to my perceived body, and it seems to contain a consistency internal states do not.
There are so many levels to view this on, I can perceive the edges of something much further past the boundaries of my ‘human understanding’ of the subject. It’s an abstract knowledge which is more felt (in a non-tactile way). I currently don’t have the time to write lots, but I think most people take for granted human perception, and through it, perceive their objective and spiritual realties (however abstract they perceive these to be). Yet, human understanding of any concept is all that a human can understand – it doesn’t necessarily give it any greater truth, or show us how things truly are.
To use the brain as an example (as I’m not sure I’m getting across what I mean). The brain is hardwired to process information is a certain way. The universe as we perceive and understand it is just the product of the brains hardwiring. The universe could be nothing like what we perceive, but we can only perceive it in this way, at this moment in time.

This actually relates to something I said in a post this week. My theory is that our brain is hard wired for all psychic experiences. It can be stimulated either through "mechanical" means (i.e. - probes used during brain surgery, lack of oxygen, etc.) OR can be stimulated directly by our consciousness/spirit. But, like I said, this is a theory that popped into my head one day. I don't know if anyone else has looked into this, but I haven't heard about it. Rarely, though, is something original, so I'm sure someone has come up with the same idea. There has been similar theories, although I couldn’t name who wrote them off the top of my head. I think rick strassman used such an idea in his studies with DMT. That is, the brain is predisposed to certain spiritual events, and DMT acts as a trigger for them.
The idea I had related more to a possible connection between minds. If any true collective unconsciousness existed (astral), there would exist common undercurrents which we perceive to have certain meanings (simple examples are our perceptions of emotion i.e. at one point in time emotion of any kind didn’t exist, but such things were experienced and refined over time to become the emotions we experience now. Sort of like oils mixed with water separating into distinct layers over time). To use this in context of auras: Auras might have their reality in the structure of this biological body, but our belief in the information they convey could be gained from a deeper level. Such as we associate certain colours/structures with certain knowledge, this knowledge is pulled intuitively from the collective unconscious but we associate it with the colours we perceive as an aura. The aura acts as an anchor from which we can pull specific knowledge from a deeper source.

This is all babbling now, and my point perhaps has been missed

Chris

[Weislenalkata]

Sounds similar to a series on Uk television a month or so back. It was called "Pyschic Challenge." There was a whole group of so-called psychics, a psychologist, a magician and some scientist heading a panel. They had all these controlled tests over a few months and each contestant was eventually eliminated down to a single winner at the end. Putting the novelty value of the prog to one side, it was really interesting to see these people who had been charging up to £100 an hour for psychic services, totally humiliate themselves on national tv...and served them right in my eyes. They asked "normal" members of the public to perform the same tests too and, on the majority occasions, the public out-performed the psychics The girl who won it was something else...she blew me away. I think the current agreement is that 75% of psychics are fake: either those who believe themselves to be gifted and in fact aren't, and those who are sheer crooks. But that 25%...wow...I'd love to meet them!

[LoveTTatall]

But that 25%...wow...I'd love to meet them! Bummer I would like to meet some of those guys too.

[aNoBVsUW]

I've been working on Aura Sight. I can see the etheric body right along the physical body but no colors yet. Will this come in time? DD

Yes , there is a predictable continuum of development of clairvoyant sight . Golden to white light is generally the way clairvoyant sight begins . You can develop faster if you try to practice in daily sessions . Deep cleansing prana and then raising energy , will help you to see better . I suggest using a dark background in dim light to see auras , energy bodies and spirit etc better .

[Weislenalkata]

i left a comment in t'other topic. Thanks