Asperger's Syndrome and The Third Eye

Post Reply New Topic

It's obvious that if anyone knew exactly what that was, there wouldn't be so much debate on the subject.

It is thought that there is a "spiritual" dimension to reality, a thought you've surely heard uttered. The "Third Eye" is speculated to be the "sense organ" or mental means for perceiving/experiencing that other dimension. The seeker becomes the instrument of detection, perhaps.

Well...I guess its a metaphor. For being open to the metaphysical.

I don't know that I'd touch that one.

There's is however a lot that people have said through the course of this thread that can be researched, qualified or disqualified on its own merit, and followed up on further by anyone interested in doing so. Some people might claim that all of this is unexaminable or that no one has any answers or clarity on it, I personally can't relate to that viewpoint because I have to consider myself somewhat aware and well enough read with respect to how much is out there and that there is a disparity in the quality of information (meaning there is a legitimate deep-end).

Last edited by techstepgenr8tion on 16 Mar 2016, 7:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Huh?

I think it can be defined in clearer terms.

A person generates hypnagogia in sleep border states as well as full environments when they dream. Similarly if a person works with a dissociative drug like DXM they can have experiences similar to what Jacob Boehme claimed to have had when a beam of light came in through a break in the shutters and illuminated part of his kitchen sink - ie. having seen the workings of the universe. In certain states like that you will see rather profound layers of information that your subconscious usually weeds out.

Opening one's third eye is having use of that part of one's faculties in an awake and sober state.

The physical location of it is pretty clearly the visual processing loop, DMT from the pineal is known to excite this in certain ways but as far as I'm aware the same circuit of the brain that processes incomming imagery also handles internal thought imagery. Whatever part of the brain handles dream images and visual imagination would be what you could refer to as the third eye.

Some reptiles and amphibians have a photoreceptor organ in the top of their heads connected to the pineal gland. It sometimes even seems to have degenerated lenses and other atrophied eye structures. So our distant reptile/amphibian ancestors may have had a literal third eye. And it was connected to the pineal gland.

So apparently that literal "third eye" theory is what you all are referring to.

It's partially a confusion of terminology.

The pineal gland does produce DMT which increases certain kinds of internal visual feedback, the pineal gland may have been an eye at some evolutionary point, but its doubtful that the pineal gland is literally functioning as an eye.

'Third eye' the way it usually gets thrown around seems to function as a catch-all term for novel sensory experience, particularly visual and spatial perceptions. I suppose (please correct me if I'm wrong) that people paired the third-eye theory with the stories of DMT, Ayahuasca, the possibility that near death experiences come from DMT release, and hence the term sort of stuck. Vestigial third-eye theory and occurrences of perceptual novelties are mashed together in the same terminology but not necessarily identical.

And there are many that will dispute just about any evidence because it can be defined in more than one way.

One person's angels are another's aliens

One person's visions are another's hallucinations

One person's ecstatic state is another's psychosis

One person's prayer is another's magical thinking

There is a cliché regarding higher consciousness that really catches the subjectivity of the experience: "You will not see until you believe".

------------------------------------------------
From Oxford English Dictionary...

THIRD EYE // noun: third eye; plural noun: third eyes

1. Hinduism the locus of occult power and wisdom in the forehead of a deity, especially the god Shiva.
• the “eye of insight” located in the forehead, which can be activated through the practice of yoga.
2. informal term for pineal eye.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/third-eye
------------------------------------------------

That's part of why it can be quite difficult for people to have meaningful debate on it.

There are areas of consensus I see though. Areas like what kind of disciplines and regimens a person can pick up in order to acquire quote-unquote 'magical' abilities, a great example of this is the path that any good Golden Dawn diaspora organization or independent teacher authors toward a student's attainment of Adeptus Minor. Balancing of the personality is used both by GD and by Franz Bardon by way of the four elements analogy. Similarly the four yogas - Bhakti, Raja, Gnana, and Hatha, are seen as central tools in disciplining the mind/nervous system/etc. to be capable of the task. In fact it seems like most schools in general end up using some form of the yogas (with or without that name) if their students are getting any kind of results.

New age poppycock.

As a man that believes in science myself, I cannot discount new age theory, merely say I need to see evidence. That's not to say there can't be something there, it is all about perception after all, which is as highly personalized and non-scientific as one can get. It's just like string theory, I cannot discount there are multiple dimensions, I can only say I need to see evidence before I will believe it. Lack of evidence is just that, lack of evidence, it doesn't mean that a theory is factually right or wrong, just that there's a lack of evidence. It's the same reason I can't fully agree with the Big Bang, we have theories on it, but no actual evidence-- we can't see the very beginning when matter actually formed (first ~300k years are hazy), we can only theorize about it based on our understanding, which is not actual evidence, merely supposition.

Lack of evidence actually does mean it should be considered wrong. Unless it's only referring to the mind, which is currently difficult to study. But one must take claims about the mind skeptically. We are subject to hallucinations, mental illness, optical illusions, distortions of perception, drugs, mass delusion, self-hypnosis, bias, and suggestion. New age bullchit doesn't even rise to the level of a theory. Yes, the experience of being a self is largely a delusion, a construct, the mind not being something one can study with itself. When we give up using the mind to find the mind, the result is something like seeing for the first time, and this is colloquially called the third eye. But don't read too much into it, it's not supernatural or anything. It's the natural state of man, something that all animals probably enjoy.

I don't think anyone should give much credence to AspE's analysis of anything given his utterances in this thread and others.

I guess I see one impulse here that I want to check and challenge.

Is there anything solidly established or clear-cut in mainstream neurology to the effect that a person will only see fantastic things or have profound experiences in a state of impaired mental functioning?