RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion, Yahoo Groups.
Source Location: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/
Filetype: Archive. Topic: Remote Viewing. Blocked: by topic detail.
Archive Storage: www.firedocs.com/pjrv/ and http://www.dojopsi.info/pjrv/
Archivist: Palyne PJ Gaenir (PJRV, Palyne, Firedocs RV, TKR and the Dojo Psi.? )

begin archive

pjrv : Messages : 1?6?-1?6? of 4038 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/1?6??? ) ?


Date: Wed Nov 13, ?00? 10:07 pm Subject: Channeling dennanm Responding to other posts but this is a more apropo title. Channeling is like the bastard child of psi in our culture. Although a few channelers, such as Alice Bailey and Jane Roberts, can easily on their own redeem an entire field of weirdness and nonsense, that doesn't keep the rest of the field from getting an interesting reputation, even though much is undeserved. Just like RV gets a reputation thanks to 1001 bozos and a few in the media, despite that some people are astonishing with it and many people are sincere and working to obtain legitimate skill, channeling also has a lot of very serious and practical people practicing it for their own development. Aliens, gods and demons are nowhere to be found -- like RV, that is mostly the crap the public hears. A lot of people think channeling is possession, because they believe in a great deal of "separation" between them and the universe -- and there is some if separation is translated to "difference". E.g., if one channels some insightful piece of information, some assume that the often "spontaneous flow" of it, and the "difference" between the tone/personality of it from their normal conscious self, means it is "some other entity" possessing them. Others feel it is their subconscious. Others feel (as I do? ) it is "an aspect of self". I imagine the list of options goes on. I think the possession theory involves a lot of philosophical assumptions. Since the days when Eye of Newt was the medicinal wisdom, the fear-of-other-ness has reigned when any kind of "information from beyond the ordinary scope of the conscious mind" comes around. There is an 'aspect of me' I call "The Narrator." A friend once not- very-jokingly corrected me that it is really "The Dictator," from his own experience with it. Everybody has it. It's a part of the large conglomerate that humans are. When I read Casteneda's "The Art of Dreaming", I was amazed to see him talking about this exact thing. Many people who don't channel will often encounter this aspect in dreams where literally often things are being explained or as I put it, 'narrated'. I believe that at many times in the past, I have so-called channeled 'The Narrator'. I believe this is an "Aspect" of my 'larger self', so to speak. I never really felt "separated" from him but I did feel that this was "a different" part of me. He sounds vaguely like Seth, but without the depth of personality Seth had (Seth was exceptional, to understate it? ). The channeling in my case was never really a formal attempt. I simply would begin focusing on something, and the information "was there" for me. He phrases incredibly well in English, although in reality, it is ME who is phrasing -- it is a joined, merged effort, where my conscious mind is usually part of it. My vocabularly and mental concepts seem to be the "tools" that are being worked with; though the result sounds unlike me, it is a both of us which is a singular identity at that time. There is often a combined sense of "the feel of the shape of the sound" -- as if sound made geometric shapes, and these geometries were the root of "meaning", and English really sucks for matching sound-shape-meaning to word-surface-meaning, so often there is two paragraphs of text to say something that could probably be said in one sentence... but there is a feeling that I/he are "searching for the shapes" to combine to have an energetically-accurate communication. When I feel "in the center" and "in the spirit" this is natural. This is just "me when I am inspired", although I recognize it as "him" simply because it's not my daily personality so the difference is apparent. About the only side effect I notice, is (a? ) I love the process the same way I love the RV process, as if it is touching an intimate inner part of me I don't normally encounter; and (b? ) I often don't remember, after speaking or writing "in the flow", what transpired in detail... the more in the flow I am the less recall I have. In that case it's usually as the information comes through, I'm having all sorts of amazing insights and connections (which I may or may not recall later :-? )? ). There are a lot of misunderstandings about channeling, and a lot of simplistic or polarized perceptions of it which, like remote viewing, when the subject is explored, one comes to realize are not what it's about when pursued by people a lot like "we" are. I used to have them too. I consider channeling to be just as legitimate a form of "divination" as anything else. For those who think Ouija and channeling only tend to inspire jokers like -- as I commented in Bewilderness -- those who will tell people to dig up their kitchen linoleum for buried treasure, try to recall the number of remote viewers who are getting data just about as intelligent and accurate as that in their sessions. :-? ) Dowsing, scrying, and channeling, are almost as interesting to me as remote viewing -- to me, this is really all part of a "spectrum of Being-ness" and of exploring ourselves... our inner, outer, other- selves. Regards, PJ pjrv : Messages : 1?71-1?71 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/1?71?? ) ?


From: greenmn900... Date: Wed Nov 13, ?00? 6:06 pm Subject: Re: Channeling greenmn900... PJ, You keep up this "all is part of us" stuff and I'm going to start calling you PJ Boehm, or maybe Holographic -Theory PJ! LOL! I liked the Seth stuff alot. I know towards the end of her life she came to believe that Seth was an aspect of herself. I met a guy in Florida who was friends with her and had sat in on a lot of the early Seth sessions. The stuff he had to say was pretty interesting. I guess she did some amazing psychic demonstrations, a lot of precog stuff. I tend to feel that a lot channeling IS posession, albeit temporary, simply because the channelers themselves describe it as that. But then again, Jane changed her mind as time went on.. But one big difference between RV, scrying, etc. and channeling and the Ouija board is that I've never heard of anyone being told in an RV session stuff like they should sell their home, move to another location, and do unreasonable and drastic things like that. Oh, I forgot about Dames and Courtney Brown. Okay, forget I said that, lol! Seriously, I don't know of anyone operating under protocols that ever gets that kind of stuff. Best Regards, Don ----------------------------- Moderator's note: You gotta back up and think about the question before you use the answer as evidence, though. People in RV working in protocol are generally describing, as factually as possible, the qualities of something they assume to be, in general, person-place-thing with maybe some concepts. People are not using RV to ask things like, "Should I move? Where should I move to? Is the President a Replacement? Is my next door neighbor an alien?" And you find when people doing alleged-RV *do* ask those kinds of questions as a session, they *do* get the same of BS! So is it the difference between a dowsing pendulum, a sheet a paper with pen, and a ouija board? Or is the difference in the person doing the session? PJ

// end archive

Top of Page