Archived podcast for paid Subscribers only. Please login to access.

In this, the conclusion to our conversation with author Brian Short, he tells us of his use of hypnosis that is different from how we normally abuse it. Then, for subscribers, host Jeremy Vaeni flies solo, finally revealing what happened when he met a woman at the Esalen Institute who was having kundalini experiences.

Dreamland Video podcast
To watch the FREE video version on YouTube, click here.

Subscribers, to watch the subscriber version of the video, first log in then click on Dreamland Subscriber-Only Video Podcast link.


  1. I was there when he met the
    I was there when he met the woman who was having kundalini experiences. Prepare for a fascinating listening experience!

  2. I really enjoyed this
    I really enjoyed this interview. It’s refreshing to hear a sincere experiencer without ulterior motive and the resulting unbalance on the human level. Sincerity is a great place to begin, and end. I just bought Brian’s book. It looks like an interesting read. Maybe I’ll post a review here, after I’ve read 747 (phone) pages and everyone’s forgotten about this thread…

    Great story Jeremy. I’m glad the New Age’s answer to Hugh Hefner got the cold shoulder while he was in hot water, and the lady got the nutritious happy meal she was hoping for. Seriously, I’m sure you gave her a valuable new perspective and lots to think about, and someone to not only listen, but understand, without trying to co-opt her experience onto an agenda.

    1. “Maybe I’ll post a review
      “Maybe I’ll post a review here, after I’ve read 747 (phone) pages and everyone’s forgotten about this thread…”

      Ha. Please do. We’ll not be waiting.

      1. Careful Jeremy. Your ego is
        Careful Jeremy. Your ego is showing.

        1. Hi Maggie
          I don’t think

          Hi Maggie
          I don’t think Jeremy meant “We’ll not be waiting” as an insult, I think he was referring to everyone forgetting about this thread by then, so no one will be waiting for it. It’s OK; I’ll remind everyone when it’s posted, of course, at the risk of showing my ego…

  3. Jeremy,
    i like when you take

    i like when you take the time to explain how questions can bring into the open what an experiencer is thinking about their experiences. Hearing you do this helps us see more objectively our story and our “understanding / interpretation” of our experience which has often been woven into the facts. It gives insight into oneself.

    This is not something “taught in school” but probably should be… how to listen and respond without judging especially about ourselves!

    It has seemed to me the “i know you believe what you are saying ….” response is quite hard NOT to take as a statement of disbelief. However…i have come to understand it depends on what it refers to of one’s story. if spoken in regards to objective telling of an experience…rather than how one has interpreted it or woven meaning from the objective facts… there is quite a difference.

    Thank you for taking the time to explain these things -more than once for folks like me who are not so quick to “get it”.

    It is also helpful to remember that when someone’s story/ies are met with strong negative responses both judgment and fear are part and parcel of that response. Today there seems to be less of that… but ridicule still runs a strong race. SOOO not being judgmental is the key….

  4. Hi, again, Jeremy. Good
    Hi, again, Jeremy. Good show, as usual. Regarding what you were speaking of near the end of this episode, I don’t see it as hypocrisy, as such. To me, it seems more like a result of one’s subjective experiences vs those of others who may or may not have experienced something similar. Ah!, good ol’ subjectivity. It’s all part of the great & groovy trip of life. Or, as the late Robin William titled one of his albums, “Reality … what a concept.” :p 🙂

  5. Its interesting and I have
    Its interesting and I have had a few strange dreams. One time when I was a little girl I had this bizarre dream where there were these underground grey aliens. They were had a nuclear device and were going to blow up the planet. My aunt came in to rescue me and blamed it on the scary movie that I watched. I really did not fully explain what the dream was about because it was so weird. I wondered if it was because I was a duck and cover kid but we went out in our hall. It was really scary because I remember plugging my ears because I expected a bomb to go off.

      1. Can I just say that, while
        Can I just say that, while not the point of the article, which is worth a read, THIS is exactly the kind of subtle, arrogant crap that irks me about an overly logical/scientific mindset:

        “On the other hand, many people have attested to the power of dreams for spurring creative thought, such as Paul McCartney, who says the melody to “Yesterday” came to him in a dream (on waking, he improvised lyrics so as not to forget the tune), and chemist Dmitri Mendeleev who said the structure of the periodic table of elements came to him in a dream.

        “There is experimental support for the idea, with studies showing that people score better on tests of creativity after naps consisting of REM sleep.”

        So, 2 absolute geniuses tell you that some of their stuff came to them directly from dreams, and your answer is that we need experimental support for this idea?

        It’s not an idea! It’s a fact! It was what actually happened to them! And it’s something that happens to millions of people every day, but somehow it’s not deemed real by Western scientific culture until one of the priesthood discovers it for themselves in an experiment. Apparently, it’s not enough that one of their own dreamed up the structure of the periodic table. Didn’t happen in a lab. Does not compute.

        When did we equate being logical with pretending to be soulless robots who don’t know anything until someone with a degree tells us it is so from a lab?

        1. Hi Jeremy,
          I don’t think

          Hi Jeremy,
          I don’t think they’re claiming it isn’t ‘real’ it’s just that they’re only interested in finding the physical mechanism behind it, which they are convinced exists because they think that’s all that exists. You don’t expect them to say “Well, there’s obviously an independent superior coherent intelligence behind this, PUBLISH!”

          1. No, I get that. But my point
            No, I get that. But my point is, they l=might as well be saying, “This genius chemist and this genius musician both say the thing you know them for came to them in dreams. But in case you don’t believe them, there’s also experimental evidence to back it up….”

            Because we’ve been trained not to believe anything happened until it’s been “proven” in a lab.

          2. You have to remember that the
            You have to remember that the *only* faith they have is in physical reality so when they’re confronted with any real phenomena they are compelled to try to define it in physical terms. The reason they talk that way is that it affirms their faith in the physical. The fact that they can’t actually explain the phenomena in physical terms is easy enough to push aside as ‘insufficient research’ which allows them to maintain their faith. Of course they are not correct, but they are understandable. This cultural attitude is a revolt against the rampant superstition that led to burning people as witches and put all esoteric phenomena under the authority of the Roman Inquisition and its barbaric control of society. The fact that it hasn’t led to the utopian outcome once expected is a sign that it’s days are numbered, also the fact that it too easily aligns itself to the greedy and destructive exploitation of the environment is another indication of its unsustainability. If you contrast it with the unbounded gullibility in the modern New Age movement, with the proviso that it aligns itself with a strong morality, I must admit I find it a bit calming. It’s not a mature world view, but at its best, it is at least a sober one.

            ETA The materialist world view is not inherently destructive. It is inherently ignorant and, in isolation, inherently amoral. This is because morality is invisible in pure matter. It’s inherently ignorant because it’s the very result of ignorance seeking knowledge, so it’s not knowledge, but a move towards knowledge from a starting point of ignorance. It can however coexist perfectly fine with a strong morality. 99.94% of climate scientists believe that climate change is destructive and is a result of human activity, but they are as marginalized as anyone who wants to do something about it by the forces that perpetuate it. This marginalization takes the form of science denial among other things, such as economic interest. While its not the be all and end all world view it was once thought to be, which is certainly a good thing, it’s also not, or needn’t be, inherently destructive, as long as those who hold it also hold a strong morality, which as I said it does not inherently oppose, it just does not inherently supply it, which is strictly speaking not its fault.

            While it’s true its amorality allows it to be used effectively by both immoral and moral forces, it is not inherently either, and this is why it’s not in itself a world view to be relied upon exclusively. It makes it capable of both solving and creating problems. It was not born from a world of non-duality; it’s a product of duality, and this it cannot escape – on it’s own.

  6. I’ll echo Steve44’s comments;
    I’ll echo Steve44’s comments; wonderful set of interviews. Brian, thanks so much for sharing.


    1. Thanks, SD. It was fun
      Thanks, SD. It was fun talking with Jeremy.

  7. Jeremy, I’m not sure if you
    Jeremy, I’m not sure if you are familiar with the author Max Freedom Long. He wrote a book entitled The Secret Science Behind Miracles, Unveiling the Huna Tradition of the Ancient Polynesians. The book was first published in 1948 and is about Max’s search for understanding of the Huna Traditions in Hawaii. It contains a wealth of information about the Huna’s understanding of the forces or energies of the soul and how they use it. He also explores similarities in beliefs and practices from around the world including ancient Egypt and Indian. This book came to mind when you talked about your emotional responses to your early experiences and then how you took on the logical or analytical approach to help you understand what was happening, something I can relate to. At times when I hear you talk I hear echoes of myself. I hear myself saying stop it Jeremy, just stop it. Don’t overthink it, just do it, be in the moment and enjoy the ride.

    The concept of bringing forces into balance is universal, whether it’s from the ancient ones or Carl Jung. Develop all aspects of oneself, bring them into harmony, and use them to their full potential. A worthy outcome indeed. I think there is a reason you are where you are in life Jeremy. Being in Hawaii there is great opportunity to learn first hand from the masters. Great things be in store for you my friend.
    Rick Man

Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.