Thread: Mzzkc's Comprehensive WILD Guide

Cool! Looking good!
Haha, I'm not much of a WILD'er but I might try it some day

Read this over again and realised what a great guide it really is, feeling more confident!

Just one query, could you go into more detail about setting up 'a sentinel of intent', you said something about a MILD exercise, this strongly appeals to me as MILD is my main technique and being able to WILD in the same way I DILD would be really cool

I've found that listening to (monotonous) speaking that I can barely hear puts me to sleep (my father is a retired minister... probably some connection there . Anyway, the voice also seems to be just at the edge of my consciousness when I'm sleeping. Is this what you mean by an anchor, something that's just on the margin of consciousness? I'm going to try this tonight, I'll just have some book being read on iTunes in the background.

Originally Posted by Ctharlhie

Just one query, could you go into more detail about setting up 'a sentinel of intent', you said something about a MILD exercise, this strongly appeals to me as MILD is my main technique and being able to WILD in the same way I DILD would be really cool

I'll write up a thread on esoteric WILD tech sometime soon and include that in there just for you. =)

Originally Posted by activa

I've found that listening to (monotonous) speaking that I can barely hear puts me to sleep (my father is a retired minister... probably some connection there . Anyway, the voice also seems to be just at the edge of my consciousness when I'm sleeping. Is this what you mean by an anchor, something that's just on the margin of consciousness? I'm going to try this tonight, I'll just have some book being read on iTunes in the background.

The anchor is something that helps you keep that thin line of consciousness, yes. In your case, monotonous speaking might be a great anchor. But an anchor doesn't guarantee success, it's just a nice tool to use on the way there.

do you think tinnitus (the small ringing that some people [me] hear when it is dead silent) would be a good anchor?

Anything could be a good anchor if you can get it to work for you.

I think there was a short discussion on this exact topic on my other WILD thread.

Here-ish: http://www.dreamviews.com/f79/why-yo...ml#post1797761

Hi, sorry if this question have been answered before but I can't really understand one thing.
Are we supposed to fall asleep but staying aware? Is that even possible? To fall asleep and being aware because it seems impossible for me to do it

Thanks

Yes. Yes. It's called a WILD, people do it all the time.

Originally Posted by Mzzkc

Yes. Yes. It's called a WILD, people do it all the time.

But not the people that read jeff777's guide. They struggle

^^ Hard as it might be, that is literally what a Wake Induced Lucid Dream is. You gotta have the "Wake" bit in the formula, or else it isn't a WILD.

And yeah, maintaining waking awareness while your body falls asleep seems counter-intuitive, but it can be done. it can also be a real bitch to do, too, for what it's worth!

... The best stuff is never easy, no matter what they tell you...

[Sorry Mzzkc; I know it's your thread, but it just came outa me]

WILD isn't any harder than DILD.

The knowledge-set required is simply different, as is the training required to see success. The reason so many people perceive an elevated difficulty is that they learn a ton about DILD and almost nothing substantial about WILD. It's one of the many flaws in the current teaching system, and there isn't much a single person can do about it.

Originally Posted by Mzzkc

WILD isn't any harder than DILD.

DILD is a piece of p*ss to do in comparison to WILD!
(It is not a perceived difficulty - You only have to see how many guides are written on the subject and the amount of questions regarding WILD on this forum.)

Originally Posted by Mzzkc

The knowledge-set required is simply different, as is the training required to see success. The reason so many people perceive an elevated difficulty is that they learn a ton about DILD and almost nothing substantial about WILD. It's one of the many flaws in the current teaching system, and there isn't much a single person can do about it.

I never had to learn anything originally about DILD, as I was (unknowingly) doing it naturally, albeit infrequently before I even read about such things.

With DILD, all you have to do is practice some form of WBTB after 5 or more hours sleep, know a couple of RC checks, have good recall and be a bit motivated. The 'so called' hard part is by gaining AWARENESS that you are dreaming, which is in my view the fundamental tenent of most (if not all) LD techniques out there.

In my experience WILD takes a great deal of effort, dedication and time to get to know your own body and mind, even if you have experience of LD, via the other techniques.

Originally Posted by RobStar

DILD is a piece of p*ss to do in comparison to WILD!
(It is not a perceived difficulty - You only have to see how many guides are written on the subject and the amount of questions regarding WILD on this forum.)

This is a fallacy in logic. Quantity does not point to content or quality.

If anything, your assertion supports my point that people don't take the time to learn about transitioning from waking and what it encompasses. Referencing the post made by DiogoCDS, it's clear even the simplest aspect of WILD (it's definition) isn't readily grasped by the uninitiated, even in a thread like this where the OP discusses things at length.

As Diogo is new, I don't have a lot of prior material to work with in order to find the disconnect, however it seems a good portion of his early posts were in Jeff's guides. Take that as you will.

Originally Posted by RobStar

I never had to learn anything originally about DILD, as I was (unknowingly) doing it naturally, albeit infrequently before I even read about such things.

And there are people who WILD without prior knowledge. What is your point?

Originally Posted by RobStar

With DILD, all you have to do is practice some form of WBTB after 5 or more hours sleep, know a couple of RC checks, have good recall and be a bit motivated. The 'so called' hard part is by gaining AWARENESS that you are dreaming, which is in my view the fundamental tenent of most (if not all) LD techniques out there.

This shows me where your knowledge is at regarding realization from dreaming, which is to say, somewhat low and restricted mostly to rhetoric. How often do you dream lucidly? For now, in good faith, I'm assuming a conservative estimate of 20 a month, which is a common average for decently knowledgeable folk.

Originally Posted by RobStar

In my experience WILD takes a great deal of effort, dedication and time to get to know your own body and mind, even if you have experience of LD, via the other techniques.

Yes, or it could go faster, again it just takes a different set of knowledge to master. My guides (which I feel are fairly good at teaching the basics) have netted some people a WILD on their first try. Others had to try a bit longer, but the success rate of knowledge over technique tend to be higher than technique alone. Of course, with bad information, people will struggle with WILD.

And even with good information, they may still struggle. This is equally true of those who practice realization from a dreaming state (DILD). I know several people who've got their theory down-pat, yet can't seem to get lucid even after years of effort. It's all very personal, so to say one (transition or realization) is strictly harder than the other is fundamentally ridiculous.

While there is some crossover in theory, all the important, underlying stuff is quite different. Unfortunately, people don't always understand that. Nor do they understand how foobar-ed teaching WILD is right now.

Tell me, how important do you think sleep paralysis is when WILDing, and do we consciously experience sleep paralysis every time we WILD?

You might be surprised that the correct answers aren't as obvious to some as they should be.

Originally Posted by Mzzkc

WILD isn't any harder than DILD.

I never said it was. Were you speaking to someone else?

The knowledge-set required is simply different, as is the training required to see success. The reason so many people perceive an elevated difficulty is that they learn a ton about DILD and almost nothing substantial about WILD. It's one of the many flaws in the current teaching system, and there isn't much a single person can do about it.

Agreed. But you left out another reason WILD is perceived as harder than DILD. But first let me preach for a second:

I had a nice long post in place telling you how you were wrong, and that WILD is harder, but then, about halfway through it I said, out loud, "God dammit, he's right again!" I hate that.

Why are you right? Not because of the quality of the techniques, different knowledge sets, or the teaching system (not entirely, anyway), but because ultimately all the techniques are the same, and all the techniques are secondary to lucidity. Period.

As Robstar implied above, LD'ing is ultimately not about the techniques at all, but about self-awareness (it didn't help his argument much, but I'll leave that to him). As you well know I'll be the first to say that LD'ing is all about the fundamentals -- self-awareness, memory, and expectation -- and if those are maturely in place then any technique will work just fine; choosing which to use is more a matter of timing an interest than difficulty.

Okay, preachy bit over. The reason I said it, though was to remind you that the level of "fundamentals" strength necessary for consistent high-end LD'ing is fairly high, and rarely reached even by LD'ing veterans. So even we tend to fall back on the techniques, using them to facilitate our awareness, sometimes in a very lazy manner. And those are the experts ... what about the "newbies" who just want to lucid dream?

I think the real difference between DILD and WILD are the people who choose them as shortcuts to LD adventures. The "DILD" folks seem to be people who start out with a real respect for self-awareness, and for the difficulty inherent in carrying it into a dream. So they prepare first: they learn to RC, to look for the odd, maybe practice ADA (not a big fan of that, BTW) and really train their memory because they know that becoming lucid is not easy. Well those people are probably very rare visitors to DV, or show up long after
they've mastered their craft. Not much need to teach them DILD! Then there are the WILD bunch:

The other group of newbies are folks who heard about LD'ing, think it's cool, and want to do it NOW. So they browse the tutorials, and see that DILD is cluttered with waking-life activities, reliance on awareness, and seems require much work. Then they check out WILD, and find that with WILD all you have to do is lie down, hold still, wait, and Bam!, you're in! If you knew nothing about dreaming, Mzzkc, which would you initially choose?

So the problem I think isn't with the teaching system, it's with the nature of the students themselves. They want their LD's now, fundamentals be damned, and WILD seems on paper to be just the right technique. And, of course, succeeding at it turns out to be incredibly hard, if not impossible, because they're not interested in the mental prep. Later, when they finally give up, or their drive and expectation finally deliver them an accidental DILD (more likely a false lucid, but I won't got there today), they "discover" this technique and find it much "easier," because at least with DILD you can bumble into a LD sometimes, and without the wait or much ballyhooed noise that accompanies WILD, no less.

tl;dr: So yeah, you're going to be hard-pressed to find people here who think WILD is no harder than DILD, but it won't be for the right reasons. Bottom line, DILD, WILD, and MILD are ultimately the same thing, and each is just as hard as the other. Master the fundamentals, and they all work exactly as well as each other and are selected from convenience, not need.

I hope some of this made sense.

If not, then oh well.

Originally Posted by Sageous

I never said it was. Were you speaking to someone else?

Just a general statement for clarity's sake, as someone might have caught that implication.

Originally Posted by Sageous

Agreed. But you left out another reason WILD is perceived as harder than DILD. But first let me preach for a second:

I had a nice long post in place telling you how you were wrong, and that WILD is harder, but then, about halfway through it I said, out loud, "God dammit, he's right again!" I hate that.

Lol. Yay?

Originally Posted by Sageous

Why are you right? Not because of the quality of the techniques, different knowledge sets, or the teaching system (not entirely, anyway), but because ultimately all the techniques are the same, and all the techniques are secondary to lucidity. Period.

Mostly agreed. In my experienced opinion, techniques are mostly worthless, if they aren't personally developed. However, approaches to lucidity based on core fundamentals are much more valuable not only as learning tools, but practical ones as well. To get an idea of where I'm coming from, and a proposed solution to the current teaching plight, read over this rather unconventional introductory guide I wrote.

Originally Posted by Sageous

As Robstar implied above, LD'ing is ultimately not about the techniques at all, but about self-awareness (it didn't help his argument much, but I'll leave that to him). As you well know I'll be the first to say that LD'ing is all about the fundamentals -- self-awareness, memory, and expectation -- and if those are maturely in place then any technique will work just fine; choosing which to use is more a matter of timing an interest than difficulty.

Completely agreed. However, as you well know, nailing down the fundamentals is only one piece of the puzzle. All the fundamentals in the world won't help you if you don't understand how transitioning works.

Originally Posted by Sageous

Okay, preachy bit over. The reason I said it, though was to remind you that the level of "fundamentals" strength necessary for consistent high-end LD'ing is fairly high, and rarely reached even by LD'ing veterans. So even we tend to fall back on the techniques, using them to facilitate our awareness, sometimes in a very lazy manner. And those are the experts ... what about the "newbies" who just want to lucid dream?

Throw some B6 pills at them and hope for the best?

Or, let them know straight-up LDing takes work.

Originally Posted by Sageous

I think the real difference between DILD and WILD are the people who choose them as shortcuts to LD adventures. The "DILD" folks seem to be people who start out with a real respect for self-awareness, and for the difficulty inherent in carrying it into a dream. So they prepare first: they learn to RC, to look for the odd, maybe practice ADA (not a big fan of that, BTW) and really train their memory because they know that becoming lucid is not easy. Well those people are probably very rare visitors to DV, or show up long after
they've mastered their craft. Not much need to teach them DILD! Then there are the WILD bunch:

The other group of newbies are folks who heard about LD'ing, think it's cool, and want to do it NOW. So they browse the tutorials, and see that DILD is cluttered with waking-life activities, reliance on awareness, and seems require much work. Then they check out WILD, and find that with WILD all you have to do is lie down, hold still, wait, and Bam!, you're in! If you knew nothing about dreaming, Mzzkc, which would you initially choose?

I chose WILD. Seemed to work out just fine once I figured out how wrong the popular guides were and how WILD actually worked. If I had the right knowledge from the very beginning, I think I might have gotten there even faster.

Originally Posted by Sageous

So the problem I think isn't with the teaching system, it's with the nature of the students themselves. They want their LD's now, fundamentals be damned, and WILD seems on paper to be just the right technique. And, of course, succeeding at it turns out to be incredibly hard, if not impossible, because they're not interested in the mental prep. Later, when they finally give up, or their drive and expectation finally deliver them an accidental DILD (more likely a false lucid, but I won't got there today), they "discover" this technique and find it much "easier," because at least with DILD you can bumble into a LD sometimes, and without the wait or much ballyhooed noise that accompanies WILD, no less.

Agree to disagree here? Right now, not much is being done to teach the fundamentals; we're still stuck trying to sort out misconceptions in the basic approaches. No matter how you look at it, there's a problem with the current system. Too much focus on the "how" not enough on the "why." People are encouraged to "do" instead of to "think." And while doing is necessary at some point, no one in the right mind would have a pre-med student perform surgery.

Originally Posted by Sageous

tl;dr: So yeah, you're going to be hard-pressed to find people here who think WILD is no harder than DILD, but it won't be for the right reasons. Bottom line, DILD, WILD, and MILD are ultimately the same thing, and each is just as hard as the other. Master the fundamentals, and they all work exactly as well as each other and are selected from convenience, not need.

The end goal and basic fundamentals are the same; the approaches themselves and the knowledge surrounding them vary.

Originally Posted by Mzzkc

This shows me where your knowledge is at regarding realization from dreaming, which is to say, somewhat low and restricted mostly to rhetoric. How often do you dream lucidly? For now, in good faith, I'm assuming a conservative estimate of 20 a month, which is a common average for decently knowledgeable folk.

Firstly, never assume.

Yes maybe I was being simplistic in my paragraph and over generalized regarding DILD. However I can only go on my experience on what I have seen and tried. I genuinely found the DILD method a lot easier when compared to the WILD technique. You, yourself even use the word 'uninitiated' like there sort of is more than meets the eye when learning to WILD.

So basically, I'm sorry you don't agree with my earlier post. I'm here to learn and debate - not argue, as life is too short.
I can only go on my experiences. I respect your guide and the time you have taken to put it together. Maybe it will help me, or perhaps I'm one who needs the B6 pill thrown in?

Originally Posted by Mzzkc

Tell me, how important do you think sleep paralysis is when WILDing, and do we consciously experience sleep paralysis every time we WILD?

You might be surprised that the correct answers aren't as obvious to some as they should be.

You could have given me a multiple choice, although I already know. Thanks

Originally Posted by Mzzkc

Completely agreed. However, as you well know, nailing down the fundamentals is only one piece of the puzzle. All the fundamentals in the world won't help you if you don't understand how transitioning works.

I may not well know this...

I believe, and have occasionally found, that mastery of the fundamentals already includes understanding how transitioning works. If you are self-aware, the transitioning in WILD is no less mysterious or complicated than walking through a door. If you know that you will be dreaming shortly, and you also know that you will be getting there with your self-awareness and waking memory intact, then minding the transition from wake to sleep is almost a meaningless exercise, because the transition is just another step ... you have already built an understanding of transitioning into your understanding of your place in your world, your influence on it, and its on you (aka: self-awareness); there was no option. Though additional understanding of transitioning in terms of perfecting a WILD technique is nice, it is not necessary, I think.

The fundamentals really are that powerful -- and inclusive. And, to turn your statement around, you can understand everything about transitioning, but if you lack the fundamentals, all that knowledge won't help one wit. It's one thing to know the rules for baseball; it's another thing to hit a major-league pitch.

And yes, if you possess all the fundamentals in the world, LD'ing would be a snap, because you would be a god, consciously speaking.

Also, for what it's worth, I was LD'ing for years before I knew these techniques existed, never paid transitioning much conscious thought, and yet still had thousands of LD's. How can that be? And don't tell me I'm a "natural," because a) I don't think consistent naturals exist (we've all had one or two accidental LD's, of course) in healthy people, and b) I worked very hard on this stuff from day one.


Also, I'm not sure about your interest in the DVA stuff, but you might glance at my recent "class" on WILD. I think it more clearly states what I'm trying to say here, and if you read carefully, you'll notice that it may be the only anti-technique tutorial out there. Why? Because techniques don't matter!

Right now, not much is being done to teach the fundamentals; we're still stuck trying to sort out misconceptions in the basic approaches. No matter how you look at it, there's a problem with the current system. Too much focus on the "how" not enough on the "why." People are encouraged to "do" instead of to "think." And while doing is necessary at some point, no one in the right mind would have a pre-med student perform surgery.

I can't argue with any of that! Especially because it echoes the complaint I've been repeating since I ventured into this site.

The end goal and basic fundamentals are the same; the approaches themselves and the knowledge surrounding them vary.

Yup. No question. Uh huh. Sure. Except: The approaches and the knowledge cannot eclipse the fundamentals, or the experience of LD'ing will either be diminished or missed altogether.

... I just remembered in what thread I'm posting this. I hope I'm not overreaching. If I am, let me know and I'll quickly delete this post.

Originally Posted by UToo

Firstly, never assume.

Right you are.

Originally Posted by UToo

Yes maybe I was being simplistic in my paragraph and over generalized regarding DILD. However I can only go on my experience on what I have seen and tried. I genuinely found the DILD method a lot easier when compared to the WILD technique. You, yourself even use the word 'uninitiated' like there sort of is more than meets the eye when learning to WILD.

For you then, realization was easier than transitioning. But a single experience is not enough to ascertain universal truth; that's all I'm saying.

Originally Posted by UToo

So basically, I'm sorry you don't agree with my earlier post. I'm here to learn and debate - not argue, as life is too short.

Indeed it is...

Sorry for the subtle antagonizing. There must've been something up my bum that day.

Originally Posted by Sageous

I may not well know this...
*clip*

Poor turn of phrase on my part.

To reuse your sports analogy: A player with natural, refined talent who doesn't know the rules of the game is much more likely to make costly errors. Sure they might pull out a win in the end, but is it really worth the risk when they could just hit the books for an hour or two?

Unless you're suggesting that the fundamentals can overwrite biological certainty (sleep cycles and what have you). Some knowledge remains necessary to avoid laying in bed for nearly 90 minutes right as bedtime rolls around.

Otherwise, I agree completely; the fundamentals supersede all techniques.

Mzzkc:

To reuse your sports analogy: A player with natural, refined talent who doesn't know the rules of the game is much more likely to make costly errors. Sure they might pull out a win in the end, but is it really worth the risk when they could just hit the books for an hour or two?

Yes. And hitting those books, for far more than an hour or two, is just as critical. I'm talking about developing and adhering to fundamentals here, and not natural talent; that to me requires an enormous amount of work.

So yes again, refined talent based soundly on fundamentals and much hitting of the books will trump blind adherence to technique every time, no matter how clever that technique might be. If your head's not properly in the game, you'll never pull out a win, period.

(BTW, I personally think natural talent is extremely overrated, based on chronic exaggeration, self-delusion, vague memories of childhood dreams that sure seemed lucid, or misinterpretation. Except in cases of poor mental health, natural talent likely does not exist. It also has nothing, nothing, nothing to do with developing the fundamentals).

Unless you're suggesting that the fundamentals can overwrite biological certainty (sleep cycles and what have you). Some knowledge remains necessary to avoid laying in bed for nearly 90 minutes right as bedtime rolls around.

They can and do overwrite biological certainty. Think about it: doing WILD itself literally and intentionally overwrites biological circuitry, in probably a more profound way than conjuring dreams before that 90 minute window elapses.

Aside from that, and the fact that NREM dreaming, as you likely know, is not only a possibility but a very valid goal for advanced dreamers: Yes, I believe that WILD is definitely best done after WBTB, very late in the sleep cycles; My WILD class says this exactly. Again, good timing and technique have nothing whatsoever to do with the fundamentals... I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, based on what I said.

Mzzkc:

Indeed it is...

Sorry for the subtle antagonizing. There must've been something up my bum that day.

No problem. To be fair, you are quite passionate regarding the subject of WILD which can only be a good thing. I did sort of clumsily jump on the thread where I was a little on the defensive side myself.

Originally Posted by Sageous

-clip-

It might be the concussion, but you know I was agreeing with you, yeah?

^^ Nope, I didn't realize.

Other than your last line, you seemed to me to be taking exception or rhetorically reducing what I said. At best your responses were negative in tone if not, apparently, content. I guess you were just looking to extend the conversation?

Sorry for the misunderstanding... you might reread what you wrote, though, and tell yourself once more that you were not disagreeing.

I believe the falling asleep and the anchor part is what I'm missing. Right now, I'm sort of doing the "Stay still and wait" thing. Tonight, and after the 6th, I'm going to be focusing on finding the right time for myself to WBTB/WILD, and so I'll also experiment with finding an anchor. I'm thinking the environmental anchor will be a better option for me. I've already played around with the mental anchor, but not knowing how to actually use it as an anchor.

Hi, I just wanted to say what a relief it is to find out that I don't have to stay on my back, and still...I've been trying to WILD that way for a month now, and not only has it sharpened my back problems, it's uncomfortable and distracting....ugh. I'll try this tonight, I already have anchors: Count to ten repetitively, a number each time I exhale, and a small black pebble that I'm actually hoping I'll be able to bring into my dreams with me as a sort of dreamsign (that's why I started holding it as I slept in the first place) I really hope this works, now that those few, crucial misconceptions have been righted in my mind.....thanks again!

£ύήά