Sungazing

[XPreNN]

While staring at the sun, I felt an undescribable feeling in the back of my head, internally. I really don't know what words to use.

I didn't read the entire thread, I just skimmed through it. My eye happened to spot this titbit of info here and I would just like to add that the back of your head, internally, is where the occipital lobes in the brain are, which process visual signals from the eyes. Could be the bright sunlight was overstimulating them in some way.

 

[nate]

what is the water-vapor canopy? What did it do? someone willing to explain? :)

 

[ocean59]

(...)

But, on the subject of sun-gazing, I have often stared at the sun as it was setting and didn't know that I was "sun-gazing" which, from reading this thread, I now realize is the case. Perhaps in very ancient times when the earth was shrouded with a water-vapor canopy, people did it all the time because there was no danger.

what is the water-vapor canopy? What did it do? someone willing to explain? :)

The C's talked about a period of time in history, prior to a major celestial event, when there was a water-vapor canopy layer surrounding the planet. I will re-post some C session fragments that were originally posted by Laura in a somewhat unrelated thread. Perhaps there is a more closely related thread where this specific topic has been discussed more? Googling the topic seems to produce a lot of noise at first glance.

***
30 Sept 94

Q: (L) Was Noah's flood caused by the close passage of another celestial body?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Which body was that?

A: Martek.

Q: (L) Do we know this body in our solar system now?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) What name?

A: Mars.

Q: (L) Was Martek an inhabited planet at that time?

A: No.

Q: (L) Did it have water or other features?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) When it passed close to the earth did it, in fact, overload our planet with water we did not have prior to that time?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Did we, prior to that time, have a water-vapor canopy surrounding our planet?

A: Yes.

***

5 October 84 ( sic, assuming this is actually 94

Q: (L) You said the Exodus occurred in 2676 B.C., is that correct?

A: Close.

Q: (L) Was that the last passage of the cometary Venus?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Was this activity of Venus interactive with the close passing of the cluster of comets you have mentioned?

A: Close. One of three cataclysms close together.

Q: (L) If Venus was one of the cataclysms and the cluster of comets was another, what was the third?

A: Mars.

Q: (L) Was Mars knocked out of it's orbit by Venus?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) And the two appeared to do battle in the sky to the inhabitants of the Earth as Velikovsky described, is that correct?

A: Close.

***

22 October 94

Q: (L) We talked about the planet Martek. Is this an ancient human name for Mars or is it an Alien designation?

A: Combination of both as were many things at various levels of the development of your history.

Q: (L) The remark was made that the planet earth, prior to its interaction with Martek, had a water vapor canopy. How was this water vapor canopy suspended?

A: The water vapor canopy was a natural element of the particular composition of your atmosphere at that particular measure point in space/time.

Q: (L) Was the gravity level the same as what it is now?

A: It was somewhat different. But not perceptible to you. That difference is part of the explanation of why that vapor canopy remained suspended.

Q: (L) Did that condition prior to the flood of Noah, the altered gravitational state as well as the water vapor canopy, was that condition more conducive to extended life spans than the conditions that exist on the planet now?

A: Not only those things but all the other conditions that existed on the planet at that particular point in space/time were more conducive to longer life spans. And, by the way, Noah is a symbolic message rather than an historical event.

Q: (L) Do you mean a historical event in the terms of Noah being in an ark or historical event in terms of the flood?

A: First of all, there was no Noah. Secondly there was no actual real flood as depicted in that story. Thirdly, the whole story was a symbolic message as opposed to an actual event.

Q: (L) What did actually occur and what does the symbolism have to tell us?

A: It is a very broad representation. It simply means that there was a cataclysmic event that did envelop the whole planet at that time and that those that were ready to experience that as part of their soul development without exiting the body, were warned ahead of time. But not by trying to manipulate events, but by simply allowing faith to let them acquire knowledge and being naturally drawn into position to experience what they needed to experience to survive the event.

Q: (L) At that time was Martek drawn close to the earth and did it have water on its surface which the earth then robbed or borrowed?

A: That is very close to being the case. It is far more complicated than that so we will leave that at this time.
***

7 Dec 97

Q: Well, I notice that there is a LOT of heating up of things lately. Gerald Ford admitted to altering the Warren Report, the Mars probe is admitting that there was once a LOT more water on Mars than could be "locked up" in permafrost as Sagan suggested. Good grief! I said that over 10 years ago! Yes, it took about 40 days for all the water on Mars to settle out of our atmosphere after Mars took a close swing and the Earth grabbed it's water.

A: Admissions of such types can be made when it is "convenient." Expect a veritable plethora... And massive numbers of UFO documentaries to be seen on t.v....

***

 

[Nienna]

Nathaniel,

Have you read the Wave Series in its entirety yet? This question is answered there, along with a lot, lot more. :)

 

[Thor]

This is my first post apart from my intro on the newbie part of the forum so if something I write is considered a faux pas, please let me know. The thread has been active for almost four years but not that many people have actual experience based on an extended period of sungazing. I have been sungazing since the spring of 2008 and am currently at about 23 minutes so while I haven’t completed the protocol, I have some experience to draw upon. I am hoping that my comments and thoughts can help shed some light on the matter.

I was introduced to sungazing at my yoga school run by an Indian yogi (which is quite rare in Denmark, where I live) at a lecture given by HRM in the spring of 2008. Like many others I found the man to be sincere but at the same time many of his claims seemed quite fantastic – almost too good to be true. Among the claims were the following: when you’re at 15 minutes all your physical symptoms will disappear and when you’re at 30 minutes all your psychological problems will disappear. As I suffer from chronic lower back pain and have been interested in spiritual development for some time this sounded like a good idea (I realize that there is also in me an urge to try to use shortcuts. However, reading some of Laura’s books and the C material is changing my perspective and there is a sort of relief that knowledge is what is going to set me free). I decided that if it felt uncomfortable I would just stop the practice.

I started using HRM’s protocol of 10 seconds the first day and adding 10 seconds each day. As I live in Denmark, standing barefoot on soil is not an option very often. According to the protocal this is preferred but not necessary. Also, it should make no difference if you take breaks in between days, be they week-long or month-long. Just continue where you stopped. So far it has taken me two years to get half way to the 45 minutes which is where the protocol recommends stopping daily sungazing and substitute it with barefoot walks in the sunshine. Also, he recommends drinking water that has been “charged” in the sun for a couple of hours and then cooled off. So far I have noticed no effects – neither beneficial nor detrimental. My eyes are fine and gazing at the sun for 23 minutes as I currently do is pleasant. My physical problems are exactly the same as when I started sungazing and my psychological make-up seems more or less the same, too. One thing I have noted, though is that “something” in the middle of my head (it might be the pineal gland but I have no way of telling) pulses/ejaculates something from time to time. However, I can’t say for sure that this has a causal relationship to the sungazing or not.

I would like to suggest my own thoughts on what could be going on. I have no proof to back it up but would like to put it out as a very tentative hypothesis in the hope that someone on the forum with more knowledge than me can take this dot and connect it to some other dots. Or not. I think that sungazing is a cleansing process. Reading about Far Infrared Rays as ways to cleanse the body in a sauna and FIR enhanced water to cleanse the body, I wonder if that might be what is going on. Could water being exposed to direct sunlight for a couple of hours be charged with FIR? Furthermore, could someone comment on the possibility of FIR from sunlight cleansing the pineal gland and through that the endocrine system?
I will admit that Shane’s post was news to me. Before starting sungazing I researched the topic and did not come across that information. I am not sure that I would have started if I had. And from the slight disappointment/annoyance that I must admit feeling, when reading it, I can’t say that I’m not emotionally attached, at all. So thanks, Shane for bringing that to light.

 

[Laura]

How is your vision in general, Thor? Before? Now? Age range?

I've also been reading fantastic claims about this and that for ages and quite often, I dive in and try it out to see for myself. Most often, it proves to be either a fraud, or something else is going on and the claimant is attributing it to the wrong stimulus.

 

[Thor]

I’m 38 years old and started wearing glasses/contacts at the age of 15. I was near sighted (-4.25 and -1.75) and had a slight astigmatism on one eye. In the summer of 2008, right after I had been introduced to sungazing I had eye-surgery performed to correct my near sighthedness. I had the type of surgery, similar to a cataract operation where a “permanent lens” is inserted into a hollow space inside the eye. My eye sight is perfect now (there is still a small difference due to the astigmatism. However, I have not felt any discomfort or improvement due to the sungazing.

I agree with you on the many different approaches offered. I tried DNA activation. There was definitely some effect but it was not lasting. Chinese tonic herbs also had an effect for a while. I tried MMS which killed many of the pathogens in my body as a lot of things improved but I didn’t like the idea of having to be on something on a permanent basis. I haven’t had the time yet to read the article about Jim Humble and MMS on SOTT but am looking forward to it. In my experience, this also goes for many alternative medical treatments where I have tried more than I care to count, trying to improve lower back pain.

 

[Chu]

My physical problems are exactly the same as when I started sungazing and my psychological make-up seems more or less the same, too.

I think this is worth really taking into consideration, Thor. This Indian yogi told you that "at 15 minutes all your physical symptoms will disappear and when you’re at 30 minutes all your psychological problems will disappear. " Yet, you've done it, and it hasn't helped you. So, perhaps it only works for very few people, if it works at all!

One thing you can certainly try is reading the Health section in this forum. A lot of back related problems are due to inflammation in your body. So, my suggestion would be that you try to go on a different diet for a while, at least removing dairy and gluten. It has helped a lot of people! I hope it helps you too.

I think that It may no be so much that eating food is bad for human beings (after all, we have a digestive system that would be totally useless otherwise ;)), but rather, the quality of the food we eat.

 

[Thor]

Ailèn, I tend to agree with you that sungazing does not seem to have any positive effect on me.

The diet section is definitely on the to-do list and I have a small hope that it will help. I have been on gluten/dairy/sugar free diets several times and also had a period on a raw-food diet that haven’t really done that much but I think that it might be a good idea for my health in general.

I’m totally with you on the quality of the food we eat being key.

 

[Thor]

Shane, as I wrote yesterday, I want to thank you for posting the bit about HRM (reply #70). However, as I had been quite fascinated by him at the lectures I had attended, I thought that perhaps the site you were linking to was cointelpro aimed at defaming sungazing in general as I have seen many other places.

The site is no longer active, but I managed to find it on archive.org and I must say that this is the most in-depth site on sungazing I have seen to date and it has several points that I believe this thread would benefit from. Actually, I would recommend anybody who wants to look further into the issue to read the entire page at http://web.archive.org/web/20080529022708rn_1/www.rawpaleodiet.org/sungazing/. It is not short but I find it worth it as it covers the history of sungazing in different cultures, practices and goes through different “well-known” sungazers. IMO the owner of the site does a good job at being objective and he is not trying to get anybody to practice sungazing.

An interesting quote that I think helps to shed light on whether sungazing is bad for your eyes or not is the following:

An Excellent and Balanced Webpage Presenting a Myth-Free View from Western Science on Sungazing and its Potential for Harm
So, one good bottom-line question is: what do the balanced people in modern Western medicine and Western science think about reasonable sungazing and the potential of possible harm from it? The very best reasonable and balanced overview and debunking article reflecting the views of modern Western medicine and science on this whole matter which I have ever found is one authored by a PhD astronomer who is also a university professor. You see, astronomers and astronomy students, at least those who are interested in the sun or solar phenomena (solar flares, storms, sunspots, etc.) are very interested in staring at the sun, but, largely because of centuries of lore about the possible harm, have normally solar gazed only thru thick darkened welding filter lenses, which remove all of the UV and even a lot of intensity in the visible spectra from the sunlight. In any case, astronomers are always quite curious as to how dangerous it really would be to stare at the sun for brief periods of time without a filter. Well, there is now a great webpage entitled "Galileo, Solar Observing, and Eye Safety", by astronomer Dr. Andrew T. Young, a professor in the Astronomy Department at San Diego State University, at http://mintaka.sdsu.edu/GF/vision/Galileo.html
I strongly recommend this article, it is a very balanced view of the consensus among mainstream modern opthalmologists and scientists on this topic. This article by Young also debunks a number of myths and folktales stories about Newton and other many other early scientists having been blinded by the sun. You will find sections below dealing with some of these particular myths from the history of science and medicine. I exchanged a few cordial e-mails with Dr. Young after I first was alerted to the existence of his webpage in early October 2003; he was already aware that there are folks who sungaze for health and spiritual reasons; he had received an e-mail many months ago from a sungazer in Croatia introducing the practice to him.
The bottom line conclusions reached in Young's webpage article: about the only really serious damage that can happen to the eyes would be from staring at a solar eclipse for even a short time, or from sun staring for too long at high noon or while the sun was high in the sky (more intense) while your pupils were dilated by some kind of drug (prescription or entertainment or street drugs.)

And on scary stories that you hear about the risk of turning blind or damaging you eyes the following is said:

But What About the Stories of the Hippies on LSD Who Went Blind from Staring at the Sun?
There is a sucker born every minute. The multiple stories in the USA about acid-tripping hippies who stared at the sun and went blind were, and are, pure and unadulterated urban folklore (aka urban legend), and worse, one of the seminal news "stories" which led to much of that folklore has been traced to Dr. Norman M. Yoder, commissioner of the Office of the Blind in the Pennsylvania State Welfare Department, and, according to some reports, a part-time professor at a university in Western Pennsylvania, who, in 1968, invented the story to -- in his words when his hoax was later discovered -- help discourage young people from taking street drugs. Incidentally, after being confronted about his deception, Dr. Yoder was suspended from his position as Commissioner, and checked himself into a psychiatric ward for a month, after which he permanently resigned his position. Interestingly, despite unwavering and unquestioning acceptance of the hoax story by the media for many months after its first "release", the challenges which debunked the story and discredited Dr. Yoder were made by mainstream opthalmologists (medical doctors with additional training in care and diseases of the eye), who simply realized that such a severe degree of damage (such as the blindness cited in the news release) was literally impossible from mere sun-staring, even prolonged sun-staring. This urban legend about the acid-tripping hippies has been debunked many times on reputable urban legend and urban folklore websites and even in a few urban legend and folklore journals over the years -- try running a Google search on the topic... One of a number of webpages from urban legend sites which debunks these stories may be found on the Urban Legends Reference Pages website, at http://www.snopes.com/horrors/drugs/lsdsun.htm
Bottom line: there is definitely some potential danger to staring at the sun for any significant length of time anytime after a couple of hours after sunrise or a couple of hours before sunset, and particularly at high noon and during early afternoon, but even then the harm would likely be minor or temporary. There is also some significant danger from staring at an eclipse for even a short length of time, since the pupil may be tricked by the apparent low light intensity into allowing too great an influx of solar radiation at harmful wavelengths into the eye.

What I have come to at the moment is that sungazing if done properly is not dangerous. Some people may suffer short time problems but long-term problems are rare. Some people derive some physical/psychological/spiritual benefits from sungazing (I haven’t, myself). Hira Ratan Manek (HRM) is not a credible source on sungazing.

I wanted to post this as an answer to Shane’s post (reply #70) but couldn’t find out how to do that. Can someone point me to a thread that describes how to reply to a specific numbered reply on a post?

Lastly, I want to let every one know how excited I am that this forum exists. There is so much cool knowledge and I know that there is so much to learn. I just hope that I'll be able to contribute so it's less of a one-directional knowledge stream. What a cool place to be.

 

[paralleloscope]

Hi Thor, regarding replying to a specific post: in the top rigth hand corner of posts there is a quote button which will provide your quote with data from where it was taken.

I had the 'pleasure' of sitting in on a HRM talk once and was very put of by his new age platitudes. I tried gazing a couple of times at sunset and experienced a mild energizing warmth in body and saw optical plays in the corona, but then again that's what the sun does on the ordinary level. There may be a deeper merit to sungazing, perhaps it's secrets may be unlocked with refined 'food' (food/breath/impression) consumption and knowledge of the centers connections. 'Cleaning the machine' is not something the sun will do for you, OSIT.

 

[Thor]

Hi Manta,

Thanks for the tips on the quoting - I knew it had to be pretty simple since many people do it. Now I know.

I agree with your assessment that sungazing in itself does not clean the machine. The people who claim to have derived benefit from sungazing seem to practice sungazing while standing barefoot on earth. This I have not done due to living in Denmark. Furthermore, a loving, thankful attitude towards the Sun is often mentioned and I am wondering whether the self-suggestion or belief is necessary. I recall Laura discussing Reiki in the second Wave book, describing that Reiki worked despite the fact that she was totally sceptic of it to begin with and therefore belief was not required. In my experience, sungazing does not fall into the same category.

 

[OrangeScorpion]

Very interesting topic, sometimes too “heated” and that helped me to learn some lessons through others. Thanks for setting it up.

So far I have noticed no effects – neither beneficial nor detrimental. My eyes are fine and gazing at the sun for 23 minutes as I currently do is pleasant. My physical problems are exactly the same as when I started sungazing and my psychological make-up seems more or less the same, too.

I have two years practicing sungazing and nor I have improved physically.

My eyes have not been damaged by practicing sungazing, but have not been cured neither my myopia nor astigmatism.

Psychic or metaphysical benefits I have achieved in these two years, not sure which are due to my practice sungazing

 

[Leo40]

The following is a search result to find the alternate application of "sungazing".
To my knowledge it was Gene Savoy who introduced his method called "cosolargy"
in the early 70's.
They claim:
The transcendent System of Cosolargy, a modern word for an ancient spiritual discipline of becoming, has been practiced by solar mystics and spiritual seekers the world over for nearly 60 years. It teaches the individual how to use the light of the physical sun to enhance not only physical attributes but dormant psycho-spiritual faculties, as well. The Force Centers (chakras) are enlivened; they begin to spin and take on personality. Importantly, they are developed in harmony with each other, which is so often not the case. In time, the practicing solar adept penetrates beyond physical sunlight into Worlds of Light, a place beyond the physical but from where it emerged. By the application of Cosolargy, an ultra-organism is developed – the spiritual Light Body of which so many speak, but of which so little is known. The process takes one on a personal journey where one can retrace their origin to the Godhead and escape the cycle of life and death. It is a magnificent experience, and one which goes far beyond mere sun gazing.
http://cosolargy.net/2010/07/20/beyond-sungazing/#more-689

This sounds fishy to me!

 

[bngenoh]

Well one day I just up and decided to do it (sun gaze) with no conscious researching on my part. I was able to focus in on the sun and it looks much like the moon only featureless, just a white orb, but what was really interesting after subsequent observations was the amount of rings or envelopes I saw around the sun, they were round rainbows, but they grew in number from 1, 2 and then three. I could only do it when the sun was at a 50 degree angle or less in the sky.