TRAINING TO SEE AURAS V4 Part 2

4. Auric Theory:

My theory is: that light is necessary for the brow centre to
tune into and focus on auric energy. An aura being a visual
representation of this energy, created by the sight centre of
the brain.

This appears to be the only logical explanation for auric
sight.

5. The Complexity Of Normal Vision:

The process of auric sight may sound very complicated, but is
really _very_ simple, when you compare it with the process of
normal, optical sight - that simple, visual thing we all take
for granted. Look around the room you are in now, look out of
a window - what do you see? Think about all the millions of
objects and colours and tones you are seeing - all at once -
in incredible three dimensional detail. Think about how, no
matter how fast you turn around, your brain keeps up with the
fantastically complex image you are seeing. Your eyes pass on
an _incredible_ amount of information to your brain - but your
brain interprets it all instantly. Normal optical sight is
an incredibly complex and powerful ability. Compare this,
with the few colours and swirls of light you see in a human
aura - no matter how beautiful and complex it might seem - it
is still a very simple picture. There is really no comparison
between these two abilities - normal optical sight is vastly
more complex, and requires much more of the brain's power,
than auric sight does.

To recap the above: Auric sight is linked to and depends
upon normal optical sight, in order to function. What you
see, when you see an aura, is your brain's interpretation of
reflected energy, emanating from your subject. Your eyes are
used to tune and focus your brow centre into this energy. An
electrical representation of this energy is passed to your
brain's sight centre, where it is interpreted as a sight
picture by your brain. In the case of an aura, your brain
shows you coloured bands of light surrounding your subject.


6. Light And The Aura:

Light is necessary in order to see the main aura of anything.
Living auras react in the presence of light - expanding and
brightening. This reaction is most noticeable when a living
aura is exposed to sunlight. You could say that auras are
photo-sensitive.

I have made extensive observations of this light reaction. I
have observed the auras of people inside a house, then
immediately taking them outside, into the sunlight. The
living auras of people expand in sunlight, and are much
brighter. They fairly sparkle with life in strong, direct
sunlight. I have seen auras expand to several times their
normal size in sunlight.

Another interesting observation, that adds weight to this
argument, that auras are not light - but that light is
necessary, in order for auric sight to work: the main aura
cannot be seen in complete darkness. If auras were indeed
light, why is it necessary for there to be light, in order to
see them? This shows that light and normal optical sight are
an important part of auric sight.

Note: In total darkness, it is possible to see some slight
activity around the energy body, close to the skin. This is
almost invisible, but looks like tiny, very faint strands and
sparks of bluish light. This is very faint and most
noticeable around your own fingertips, when they are brought
together in front of you.

It is also possible to see small but intense points of light,
coming from fully active primary energy centres (chakras).
These must be _extremely_ active for this to be seen, and you
must also be very focussed on your subject. This takes a lot
of skill to do, and the subject must be very developed -
energy wise - in order for this to be observed. This is far
easier to see if there is a little available light, even if
you can only make out vague shadows - it gives you something
to focus upon.

To observe any part of the energy body, in darkness, memory
based visualisation is used to focus the brow centre into a
subject. You have to know exactly where the subject is (in
total darkness) and be able to accurately gauge their
distance, shape and position, and see them clearly in your
mind's eye.

I think, for the above, that both astral sight and
clairvoyance play a part, for those that can see energy
activity in total darkness. This appears to be the only
logical explanation for this phenomena.

Note: Light is _not_ necessary for clairvoyant or astral
sight to work, but the eyes and their normal focussing ability
are still used, but with memory based focussing and
visualisation, instead of normal light based focussing. You
can see with astral and clairvoyant sight, just as well in
total darkness, as you can in full light.


7. Viewing Method:

The same basic technique, used to see the aura of colour, is
used to see all other types of aura, including the human aura.
This same technique is also a part of full clairvoyance.
This is why looking at the auras of colours is such good
training for seeing the human aura. The aura of colour is far
denser and easier to see than the human aura. This allows the
auric viewing technique to be learned much easier and faster,
than does practising on the more difficult human aura.


8. The Auras Of Colours:


The auras of colours

+--------+---------------------------+
| Object | Auric Colour |
+--------+---------------------------+
| Red | Green |
| Orange | Pale Green |
| Yellow | Pale Blue |
| Green | Orange |
| Blue | Yellow |
| Indigo | Gold |
| Violet | Pale Gold |
| Pink | Iridescent Green |
+--------+---------------------------+
Table 1: Auric colours given off by
some normal, physical colours.


The exact shade and tone of a colour's aura varies a great
deal, according to the shade and tone of the colour you are
observing. Auras are also affected by the background colour
against which they are highlighted, when observed.


9. Afterimages:

Auric colours are similar in appearance to after images.
Afterimages are generated by staring - for twenty seconds or
so - at a brightly illuminated colour, and then quickly
closing your eyes, or looking away.

It is commonly thought: that afterimages are generated by
colour depletion, of the rods and cones in the eyes, caused by
staring at one colour for too long. This generates the
reverse, or negative colour, of that colour. An afterimage
stays in sight until this colour depletion is corrected, and
the eyes return to normal.

I disagree with this theory - and for very good reasons.
Afterimages are generated by staring for a long time at a
coloured object - for twenty of thirty seconds, or more. This
is why I disagree with this theory: When auric sight is more
advanced, the aura of a colour can be seen clearly, almost the
instant a coloured object is glanced at with auric sight. No
prolonged staring is required to produce an aura.

I have just done a test, while sitting here typing this.
Across the room from me, about seven feet away, is a chair.
Hanging over it's back is a bright-blue shirt. I have done
no exercises to stimulate my auric sight, at all. It is early
in the morning now, about 6am, and I have not long woken up.
A clear, dense, yellow aura begins to appear in just under
four seconds (I timed it). This is, surely, far too short a
time to generate an afterimage? I did this several times and
it became faster and easier to do, and the aura brighter, each
time.

Now, you could say that my eyes are becoming depleted of the
colour blue, by continuing to do this, thus more easily
generating the yellow aura. So, I turn around and look at a
red shirt hanging on a hook behind me, on the other side of
the room. This time, a clear, dense, bright-green aura
appears in just under five seconds. This is _far_ too short a
time to generate an afterimage? Now, when I am on what I
call, a clairvoyant high, the auras of colours appear to me,
almost the instant I glance at them - within one second.
There is no appreciable delay at all, they are just there,
ballooning out from colours, as I look at them.

The auras I see, around colours as well as people, do drag
slightly at my eyes, creating a kind of afterimage effect if I
stare for too long at it. This effect is similar to how a
normal afterimage behaves - dragging and following my field of
view.

Now, when I observe the aura of a person, I normally ask them
to remove some of their clothing. This gives me a much
clearer view of their aura, without the interference caused by
the colours of their clothing. I see clear, bright colours in
these auras, building up from bare skin. My point here is
this: bare skin has _no_ colour that can generate any kind
of coloured afterimage.

To be truthful, though, the auric colours I see around
colours, as well as people, are often still visible, hanging
briefly before my eyes, when I look away or close my eyes.
This _is_ a coloured afterimage - but created by staring at an
aura's colour _not_ at a physical colour.

Another interesting point: the colours of any afterimages I
get, when observing living human auras, are exactly the same
colours, as the colours of the aura I am looking at - there is
_no_ reverse colour effect at all, with a bare skin, living
aura.

So, if colour depletion, of the rods and cones in the eyes, is
solely responsible for afterimages, how can this happen?

A better way of explaining the reverse colour afterimage
effect is: (slow auric colours).

By staring hard at a colour, the auric colour of that subject
is slowly impressed upon the sight centre of the brain. It is
_not_ the eyes that are depleted of colour, but that the auric
colour has been impressed upon the brain's sight centre.

The afterimages that appear, when you stare at primary
colours, are the same as the auric colours generated by those
colours. The similarity in these colours - rather than
contradicting the validity of the auric colour of colour -
supports them. Why would they be any different?

You will, in the early stages of training to see auras, cause
quite a strong after image effect. This will drag and follow
your eyes, and still be seen when you close your eyes or look
away. This is the slow auric image effect - caused by staring
so intently, and for so long, while trying to master the basic
technique for seeing auras.

This after image effect lessens in stages. Once the basic
technique is mastered, most of the afterimage effect
disappears. Then, as the brow centre develops further, being
stimulated through use, the afterimage effect decreases
steadily, until they are hardly noticeable.

There will, however, always be a slight afterimage, of sorts,
when you really study an aura. This is unavoidable when you
gaze intently upon an aura, trying to discover it's secrets.
The nature of auric sight, and the involvement of the normal
optical sight process, will always cause a slight afterimage
drag - or slow auric image, as I call it. This happens, even
when auric sight develops into the advanced stages.

Final note on afterimages:

The way the aura builds up is also, totally unlike the way an
after image appears. It builds up, mushrooming bright colours
from bare skin - it does not just fade slowly into sight - it
grows before your eyes. The colours of a living aura do not
begin as a pale shadow, fading into view and then slowly
deepening and growing brighter. They are one consistent
colour, from their first appearance as a thin outline,
highlighting the etheric aura, close to the skin, to their
full size - often more than two or three feet wide. Auras
are also, not just a slight outline of colour around the skin,
but large, vivid bands of colour, with thickness and depth to
them. And, finally, while an aura is building up, if you
shift focus slightly, or blink, it disappears instantly - only
to reappear a few seconds later - an after image does not.