The Little Purple Notebook On How To Escape From This Universe
Copyleft � 1999 by Maximilian J. Sandor
Subscription Information: Maria Loren
[email protected]
Website:
http://transmillennium.net/pnohteftu/
Straightline Remote Sensing #2
If the mirror in the exercise of the first installment is being
moved to another location, a picture may pop up for the viewer, for
example a vase.
What if there is no vase at the location where the mirror was
pointing? What if there was a horse standing at that exact location?
It seems that the result of the viewing must have been wrong! Right?
False! Whatever the viewer sees, the viewer is seeing!
If the viewer sees something different from what other people are
seeing, then there are several possibilities to explain this
circumstance:
* a) The "other" people were grossly incorrect in their
observation, or were intentionally trying to invalidate the
viewer's perception;
* b) A "true" viewpoint of an existing object has been seen which
was hidden from the other observers (cp. "The Blind Men and The
Elephants" parable in PNOHTEFTU);
* c) The viewer saw the object(s) at the exact location, but it
was in the past or in a future;
* d) The viewer saw the object(s) at the exact (concurrent) time
and location, but in a Parallel Universe;
* e) The viewer saw the object(s) at the exact (concurrent) time
and location, but the viewer selected a different domain of
perception (explained in the next installment);
Any combination of above possibilities is thinkable, and does occur
in real life. One should also consider the following points, which
are all accepted by "traditional" mainstream science:
* Each and every spectator changes the events currently
unfolding, willingly or unwillingly, by just simply observing
them.
This was first expressed by Heisenberg's observation, yielding
his famous "Uncertainty Principle." Most recently, CalTech's
scientists supposedly changed the characteristics of a laser
beam over a distance, without any time delay involved. This
feat, if real, is attributed
to the "entanglement phenomenon," a "spooky action at a
distance" (Albert Einstein).
* If 10 people witness a car accident, there will be 10 DIFFERENT
reports of what happened. Adding a remote viewer to the same
will give an eleventh report.
* A tornado starts with a seemingly insignificant micro-event.
The new science of Chaos Theory shows, in an astounding manner,
how creations unfold from the nervous jitter of a single
electron. The effect that may result from even a short and
space-limited observation of a single person can have dramatic
impact on the events to follow. In short, it "does" make a
difference who else (other than the remote viewer) is looking
at an event.
All this may even occur if the observation of the viewer was totally
correct to begin with (which is close to impossible as it will be
shown in the next installment of "Remote Sensing").
This means that the first order of business should be to gain the
confidence of accepting one's perception as what they are: one's own
perception.
Invalidation of one's perception is a severe aggression of one's own
integrity. Since invalidations have happened to a person innumerable
times in the past, it is a good idea to build up a certain level of
confidence before even beginning with remote viewing exercises.
In any case, it is vital to figure out what may have happened when
a new invalidation occurred.
In addition to all this above, the viewer's observation may have
been distorted if:
* f) the viewer saw a picture in his/her own memory from the
past;
* g) the viewer made up a picture instead of observing what's
there (mockup)
* i) the viewer saw a picture that SOMEONE ELSE, at the same or a
different time/space location, was seeing;
* j) the viewer perceived the memory of someone else;
* l) the viewer perceived the mockup of someone else;
* k) all of the above happened in a Parallel Universe;
* m) all of the above happened at a different domain of
perception (see next installment).
After confidence in one's own perception has been restored to an
acceptable level, the factors f thru m must be minimized.
While remote viewing, itself, is of little interest for individual
liberation, per se, all of the above has very much to do with it.
It seems obvious that one should be able to look through and be
untouched by invalidations of any kind. And it also seems essential
that one becomes able to "see things as they are," or, since this is
ultimately not possible, to at least come closer to a clear
perception of unfolding events.
Gotamo (the "Buddha") promoted the ancient techniques of
observations of things "as they are" as the most basic tool for
reaching spiritual liberation. "Looking through" (Pali: vi-passana)
is a practice that is finding, very fortunately, a much wider
audience these days.
Most remote viewing experiments will attempt to investigate a
pseudo-static event, such as the existence and modalities (color,
form, etc) of a vase in a room. These are pseudo-static events that
are error-prone because "reality" does not contain static events--
everything is in a constant flux.
At the time of remote viewing, a person is in a heightened state of
awareness. In such a state, a person is dramatically more inclined
to view things in a way that is closer to "reality," but which is
hidden to the "common" mind. The latter is, more often than not,
filtering existing perceptions to such a degree that abstractions
occur which may have nothing to do with the actual observations of
the person.
In the "Little Purple Notebook" (PNOHTEFTU), all exercises
emphasize viewing dynamic happenings in a continuous, rather than
literally jumping to conclusions.
For example, if the viewer sees a curved line, the perception
should follow the line in a continuous, uninterrupted way. Let's say
the line comes back to where the viewer started.
Instead of abstracting "this is a circle," the viewer is encouraged
to take the sequence of perceptions as they happened, and to begin
with exploring new avenues, based on the fixed point of the curved
line.
The successful learning of a new skill happens through repetitive
comparison of one's action with the emerging results.
Therefore, instead of jumping into the stars, it is necessary to
train one's skills of remote viewing in an environment in which
instant feedback and gratification is possible.
For this reason, the second exercise will still be carried out in
the vicinity of one's current body.
The Exercise
"See what is in front of you by using parts of the body other than
your eyes. Beginning at the head, select body parts in an increasing
distance from your eyes until you can see through each of your toes
(there should be ten of those)."
As a sidenote, it has been scientifically shown that the nervous
system of the body can "reroute" and reinterpret any kind of signal.
For example, there are devices that vibrate on the skin at any
location of the body, and the person can learn to "hear" without
using the ears. Likewise, there has been a crude but working
experiment in which an array of mechanical stimulators on the back
of a human body can produce the "vision" of a signal that controls
the stimulators. (Both phenomena seem to work only for persons who
have learned to see or hear earlier in life.) In short, "rerouting"
nervous signals is an established phenomenon, and originally
independent of "remote viewing" as such.
This exercise has a surprising side effect. It will flush out the
so-called "prana channels" of the body. As a side effect of this
side effect, it can prompt an opening and flushing of the so-called
"chakras," the main energy nodes within a human body.
In short, its application is beneficial in itself, independently of
enhancing remote viewing skills. Its main purpose here is to loosen
the fixation on the eyes as a "via" for visual perceptions.
The next installment will address the different spheres or domains
of perception itself, and will start an adventure of exploration
into a probably unexpected part of this Universe.
Until then, happy remote viewing!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyleft � 1999 by Maximilian J. Sandor
