What are RV methods (no, really, what)?

jrb

New Member
I've been doing some extensive, rapid catch-up on RV and its history.

Reading of Ingo Swann's intent to develop an interface for the subconscious, my best understanding is that all formal RV methods represent an attempt at a contract or agreement of information flow between whatever the heck the subconscious is and our conscious mind.

Ingo's CRV, once formalized and taught, seems to have been taken very literally by some although it was only ever a metaphor or symbolic representation of the relationship between conscious, subconscious, and information.

If there is anything like a hundredth monkey effect, then CRV and other RV methods have all been taught enough now that they may be more "real" in the collective pool of species knowledge. The path is paved and easier to travel.

Comments by Dave Morehouse seem to support this, that his students over the years struggled less and less with concepts and procedures than in prior years.

I had my own experience in this vein. In attempting to learn RV using a bare-bones CRV-like protocol, I met initial, improving success with visual information before several sessions in a row ended with a swirling, tunnel-like visual. This was something like the top view of a cyclone or watching water going down the drain.

I tried to draw it and it had nothing to do with the targets. My mind wanted to call it a vortex, spinning and black and purple and somehow sparkling. I felt like maybe I could move into it but didn't know how. (And still don't.)

I was in the process of reading John Herlosky's book at the time, and not long after, I came to his description of learning Morehouse's ERV and how one goal of their visualization was to bring up a vortex, which for Herlosky was like swirling and purple, if I recall.

This struck me hard. Did I somehow stumble into an advanced RV technique? Is the vortex a universal experience?

I bought Morehouse's online ERV course although I hadn't done CRV. I reached out to their instructor and asked. Basically I was told, "no, the vortex is just a metaphor."

But it is all metaphor, isn't it? Morehouse teaches the Matrix like it is a real, spiritual thing. That isn't how Ingo seemed to view it.

But maybe this stuff is more real the more it is used. Maybe we are all paving the roads with our belief and experience, wishing and practicing and testing and sweating and deluding it into life. Maybe I did get slammed in the face with a vortex because Herlosky and others have repeatedly visualized vortexes.

About 10 years ago, PJ wrote:

"What I mean is, I think that every thing I think about RV is a belief system."

Although I'm still at the starty start and haven't met much success, I've had this impression that RV and its formalized methods are all these pathways being manifested and paved. This interface that Ingo imagined and desired between conscious and subconscious is like a collective spell or work of magic being brought into reality.

Many paths are now open to be trod. There are large disagreements between different RV methods. None are more valid than others, per se. Through belief and commitment and wishing they all provide entry points.

PJ and others, if you don't mind, what do you think now about RV and RV methods?
 
Top