Recognition, Novelty, Psi, and Chakras

I was only about 40% asleep last night when someone, I don’t know who, decided to do some mental walk-through on the concept of mental processing and in particular, in a remote viewing (psychic) context.

I drifted through, as if being led down a garden path of the mind, a variety of memories, from all my favorite sessions. Then I drifted through the memories of sessions done on the same target and how they were different, even with similar data, and sometimes I recognized the target in the session. And then the times I totally did not recognize that I had a target I’d had before.  Then I drifted through the zillion times I had thought I recognized a target “or its nature or something in it” based on data, and was wrong. Then I went back to the previous where I had accurately recognized the target, and it was like a comparison of sorts between the two.

It took me a bit to ‘get it’. And I swear, I guess I’m an idiot, but I think most of the grokking didn’t happen until sometime the next day, as if the back of my brain was working this out while the rest of me went about life. But when I did start to absorb it finally, it seemed so obvious.

Target recognition happens at a completely different place in my body, than ‘recognition’ in ordinary life.

The latter (in regular life) is usually visual, sometimes audible. When that’s the criteria used for ‘recognition’ in psi work, though, it’s analytical overlay instead, and seldom accurate.

The body feeling was down low, right at the bottom of my heart chakra, with a substantial portion of energy around the solar plexus chakra too. I could ‘feel’ (although I think I already believed this, so perhaps I was leading myself) that “understanding of something’s nature” came from the heart chakra, and a sense of physical space, shapes, relationships (physically) — “geometry” — was ‘understood’ by the solar plexus chakra, although this also relates to ‘power and will’.

Very subtly, and I wasn’t paying enough attention to remember this very well, I got that as you went ‘up’ through the heart area, the ‘type’ of understanding changed. That was interesting.

It reminded me of an old era on this blog where I did “the wall of fear” and I described the entire gradient of fear from one side of the spectrum to the other, I understood what every color ‘meant’, the different kinds/sources of fear, and how those colors relate to the colors in our reality (those ones anyway).

Well this was like a spectrum or gradient of understanding, that correlated to the vertical area of the chakra focus in our bodies.

I remembered then, a former Inner Guide telling me about how the true source of RV data was ‘here’ and it was right at the bottom of the heart chakra. Overlapping some with the solar plexus chakra.

Then I felt my attention move upward and I sort of… ‘understood’ that each chakra is a whole sensory-universe of its own. We’re like flatlanders compared to our chakras! They are the energy-onion that goes through a zillion dimensions, and they are ‘portals’ for the limited spectrums of the body (various layers of the body, in an energy sense) to sort of plug-into the larger universe and the fuller-self, which they span.

They are not just an antenna; they are each a part of our much-larger self and they interact.

As a “collection of consciousness assigned a title,” it is definitely that each of them are an ‘identity’. In fact it occurred to me with humor that they are actually a lot more vast than we are. I mean the “we” that bears our names in this reality. Their nature is much more complex and rich and sentient than our conscious human selves.

So it’s kinda funny I’d be wondering about that “bizarre idea” previously that chakras were/had/are identities.  A sort of spiritual chutzpah born of my ignorance, I realized.

They are identities, yes, but not just an identity like my right leg, no matter how amazing/beautiful that is. Because that is all part of me. I’m… bigger than that. I contain that.

But the chakra, parts of me are not part of it, but a heck of a lot of parts of it are not part of me, I mean the conscious-me. It’s not that it is a higher or lower order of being, it’s just… a different order of being. And each of them have as much claim to our ‘larger self’ being ITS ‘larger self’ too, as we do! In fact if we were comparing ‘density and complexity of energy’ that we innately comprise in our attention, they might have more claim to it!

We are part of the same… big-soul, for lack of a better term, but we are symbiotes. We depend on each other. They have a rather… larger/longer lifespan — as they span many layers of energy bodies and not just this physical one — but we are the focus-energy that allows them to ‘plug into’ THIS reality in a  really major and fully-present way.

So they plug us into the energy of everywhere-else and we plug them into the energy of here. Except those words make it wrong, gosh english sucks, because there really is no here or everywhere-else in a literal sense.

It might be more accurate to say here meaning “what we are physically experiencing around us” and everywhere-else to mean “what we consider to be remote from us.”

And, just to further bend my brain, what we consider remote from us is not just what is somewhere else, or unknown, but also what is somewhen else — and to some degree, even someone else.  Chakras don’t have the limitations on time/space we do.

It’s all energy to them but they are capable of grokking the “linear translation” we do to arrive at both of those perceptual experiences because it turns out they are part of this dynamic happening in the first place. There was more but I didn’t get all of that info as I was kinda spacey and forgot a bunch there.

ooo

But back to the whole psychic context. So I realized that the target recognition came from the lower area of the heart chakra, overlapping usually with some energy from the SP. After that, going up through the throat and head like on tour, I realized that they each ‘understood’ their own sensory universe (as noted above), but that this was a different version of the universe. Hang on let me see if I can articulate this ’cause it’s super important.

OK. You know how in out of body experiences, you can be IN body and have one experiences, roll OUT of body and have things be different? I mean you’re (usually) still in the same place at least sort-of. But there will be variances. Wait, I just remembered OBEs are not normal for everyone so let me paste in a couple of quotes that give some examples of what I mean.

‘From Here to There’ section, ‘The Rainbow of Soul’ chapter, from ‘Bewilderness‘.

When your perception “leaves your body,” you may still be “in the bandwidth of the physical plane.” You may see “reality” around you just like you did when you were IN your body. As your perception moves toward astral (orange) on the scale, the “reality” you perceive will change. First, things may seem mostly the same yet slightly variant. A chair may be in a different place. Your coat may be on the back of the chair, rather than lying on the bed. As you continue toward astral, more significant changes may be clear, and some features of “normal reality” may disappear from your perception. You begin to perceive more of the reality — and the life — there, and less of what is here. You may see your cat who died years before, sleeping on your bed. You may encounter entities, or discover that the tree outside your house seems to be sentient. The farther you go into this bandwidth, the more different things become. At some point, you will lose most if not all perception of what we would call “our physical reality” (the red band) because your perception has moved outside that range (into the orange band).

The more “in the “physical” bandwidth” you are, the more you can physically feel things in your environment that you touch. “Here” as we know it, if you walk up to a wall and don’t stop, you’re going to feel it painfully when you run into it. In the orange band, you may go right through a wall, and feel it as if your body were made of water, or some solid-yet-not-solid substance. Entities that touch you may register quite physically to your perception, as if they were totally solid and yet somehow were able to reach inside your body. As your perception moves more into the astral and then yellow band, you may cease to be aware of any physical feelings; you can pass through the wall as if it is not even there.

As you move further toward the mental (yellow) bandwidth, things continue to change. For example, you may not only not FEEL the wall you pass through, it might not even exist, and you may find that the moment you think of something — for instance, your friend in another city — suddenly either your friend is “there with you” or you are somewhere else with your friend. Awareness of form, such as one’s body, may often vanish altogether. You still may operate as if you have a form. You simply may not be pointedly aware of it. The above is just a simple example. Your physical body did not go anywhere. Your perception, however, did. Your body, especially if your perception moved into astral-orange but was still partly in this physical-red, may show physical symptoms and evidence of your experience. Because it IS partly physical, and/or is close enough to it in many cases that the body is still affected.

I had one experience where I went back and forth between OBE and ‘reality:

Many years ago I was having a lot of conscious OBE experiences. I woke up one morning sleeping on the floor at a friend’s house and could hear her now and then sitting near me, doing paperwork at the table. I slightly turned my head to look at her, and when I did, I felt myself slide out of body, like the inside of me turned and the outside of me, awake but still feeling very heavy, stayed still.

So then I was facing her direction, which was looking at the back of her. She was turned to the side, talking to two people leaning against the counter, one of whom was an Indian in full Chief-Feathers regalia. That was certainly noticeable. They were just having a quiet conversation.

I turned back “into” my body and I thought, “Did I really just see that?!” and then just to check, I turned over, IN my body, to look.

She was sitting facing the table, her back to me, working quietly on paperwork as I’d heard her doing initially. Nobody was there.

I turned back, lying on my back again. That is REALLY ODD, I told myself. Closing my eyes and feeling ‘loose’, I turned over and successfully “rolled out” of my body so I was lying ‘in’ my body but sideways facing her.

And she was sitting turned to the side, quietly conversing with the same two guys, one of which was the Indian Chief. I kept thinking, “Wow. Wow. I must be imagining this. How could it be that when I’m out of body, it’s not just that there are people here who aren’t here when I’m IN body, but even she is different?!” I stared until I finally felt I had my fill, and I had to go back in body and check again to see if they would really not be there, as they were so totally clear, the voices, interaction, everything, all of this only about 15 feet away from me.

I turned back ‘into’ my body, and turned over again taking my body with me, and looked at her (normally). She was oblivious to all of this, sitting with her back to me, doing paperwork at the table.

I tried to get out of body again but I was too awake darn it!

So the physical reality around us is like, to analogy it, one setting of the kaleidascope. A whole lot of the pieces are ‘hidden’ in this setting, some are layered creating a third color/shape that is neither of what’s really there, and there are some dynamics about temperature and wind and the shape and size of our little view-scope, and we see a certain pattern based on all that.

When we are in a different frequency-band with our ‘attention’ — dominantly our third eye chakra — the pieces of the kaleidascope mix up, and some of the formerly-invisible stuff is now right up front, and some of the formerly up-front stuff is now invisible, etc., and it falls into a new pattern.

Many “elements of the pattern” remain the same, many don’t. So the world you look upon is very much LIKE the world you see with your physical eyes — but it is NOT actually the same world, except in some ‘overlap’. It is a different “version” of a larger-pattern. It’s different dependent on ‘where’ the perspective is centered.

Like the analogy of the blind men, each touching a different part of the elephant, and believing something different about it as a result: Except in this case, they ALL perceive ALL of the creature, they merely perceive it differently.

At the tail maybe the elephant has a bird-head with a long beak, and from the head maybe it has a bob tail, and from the sides maybe the trunk seems to be feathered, but all the perspectives do perceive the big animal and do agree that (a) it’s there, (b) it’s big, (c) it’s an animal, and (d) it has something big sticking out the front of it.

And maybe the details of the immediate environ vary slightly, and some of the events before, during and after that moment shift sequence a bit or happen less, more, or not at all.  It’s the same world… mostly. It’s just that they all have a variant on how this overall ‘energy pattern manifests’ for them.

(Like an incredibly advanced, complex video game, you could run the same route but if the game were complex enough, with enough independent variables, the experience of that route would be different at any different time and for every different character.)

I got that when we focus on anything intentionally, we tend to ‘default’ to a focus through our third eye chakra, because as a species we are prone to think of ourselves as “living in/from our heads,” even though the vast majority of “us” is actually not the head. We follow our eyes as far as our “sense of placement” goes. (If our eyes were in our stomachs, we would probably feel like that’s where we ‘were’.)  The third eye handles the body-sensory of vision, and most of our culture, if you look at our common sayings, is very visually based.

There is actually just as much legitimate and useable, operational information from the other chakras. But the sensories they translate into — and mind you, science now has like 20 senses officially documented, not just the 5 obvious ones, and probably more to come — are not as easy for us to get a handle on, due to the world we grew up in, as the vision. We use our eyes for ‘navigation’ and ‘recognition’ dominantly and in this particular world, those two things are primary.

I was surprised to note that we use the solar plexus more than we tend to use the heart. Maybe that is why “gut instinct” seems stronger in our culture at large, than genuine “understanding” of much of any kind.

ooo

There was also some sense that the reason most of us are not fully open to, consciously working with, our chakras, is because we model the people around us in our reality and from birth we are struggling desperately to limit the information coming in to this fairly simple, linear, minimal  stream that constitutes our alleged ‘consensus reality’, the one we try to share with our parents first and foremost.

All the parts of us that are the chakras, we reject them, fear them, try to close that avenue down, because this-identity in this focus-reality does not want to accept that info, doesn’t even really have a framework to deal with it.

As we got older, we could open to more of this, except that then intellectually we do not have the framework to handle it unfortunately. Not having grown up in a culture that supports any of it.

So even when people do start opening up they often have great fear, which distorts things horribly, and leads to medication and labels, not meditation and understanding.

I realized with some distress that these identities, these symbiotic parts of us, ARE a huge part of us, and that until I open up and accept them and get to know them, I am not going to have full access to “my larger self.”

I also realized that it is my own ongoing drive toward this end-goal that has sponsored ‘the chakras’ — info about them, them as identities, and so on — starting to repeat in my inner life.

I have to go through, and they are a great part of what I have to go through.

ooo

So a problem is, the ‘target’ (in psychic work) that we perceive at a focus of visual-chakra, because of the nature of the chakras, is not the precisely same world as this one that we perceive with our eyes. We have been doing sessions and seeing some inaccuracies and assuming that ALL of that is just that we screwed up or translated wrong.

I have often asked, years ago, how to explain things that came in clear-as-freakin-daylight but were totally wrong, when otherwise, the session was very accurate. I mean there was little or no translation involved in some cases. It was very clear data got very clearly in the middle of a session that was otherwise very on-target, but that one piece of data was totally wrong, as was obvious from a look at literal feedback.

The world we perceive visually when our eyes are closed is only “very similar to” the world we call ‘reality’. It is not the same world! But very similar when perceived ‘at that level’.

We have been ASSUMING all this time that if we just point at space-time nexus like the corner of Main & Elm in Chicago at 2:45pm on March 3rd 1968 that there is only ONE reality-experience possible, for any person, from any perspective, during or after. That is not correct.

Even totally apart from the fact that our physical eyes and third-eye chakra perception are different, there is more, separate from that. Like: we act as if events, emotions, situations, novelty and nuance and numinosity are something that happen linearly and get carved in stone and never change. And yet we change ourselves and our pasts and “which” of the myriad of kaleidascope-particles-of-past we choose to tuned to, to live in the alleged ‘timeline’ of, constantly. So when we think of ourselves, we may understand that reality is flexible. Yet for some reason we expect it to be set in stone and ‘objective’ for psi targets?

Now, I DID also sense that when we attempt to focus on a target, we are not merely attempting to focus on the space; and the time; but we are also attempting to focus on what you might call “that specific kaleidascope pattern, of the nearly infinite many, that is represented by our tasker’s intent, or the photo that feedback is based upon, or the common ‘story of history’ our world agrees upon.” (I call this, ‘the instance’ of it. Where the ‘totality’ of all instances might be the larger archetype.)

Or on bad days–and this may be the default for some people–the third point is ‘what we find most interesting.’

We are still responsible for finding that; this is what measures RV skill. I’m saying that (a) that the third-eye has a slightly different reality, depending on a lot of factors, and (b) that reality comes in many flavors. But I am NOT saying that either of these factors ‘excuse’ bad data in viewing. What I am saying is that if we want to understand what we are doing, then understanding the various causes of data inaccuracy are important. That’s part of RV skill.

I think it is sort of street knowledge that when it comes to psi work, some people are better at some parts than others, for example I think most people I’ve observed are better at the locational than the temporal; time is more likely to be ‘off’ than space. (I wonder, given the 3rd eye is so visual, what chakra handles ‘time’?) Most people, given an event at a location, they are more likely to get location elements than event elements.

Well this other idea is a third “triangulation point” of our own viewer-intent, it is what makes the target not just a space/time point but the ‘intent’;  this carries, in the case of this example, the manifested individual variant of the target desired.

So, I thought, maybe it just explains a little of why it doesn’t always work out as planned… even good viewers in a good session often have data that is inaccurate, and while most can be tracked to interpretation or communication, or to being shown a ‘memory clip’ that has one/some-thing in common with the target but not all, sometimes it’s just clearly conveyed yet wrong, with no idea why. Sometimes it’s just something sparked by memory or imagination that is wrong.

But, I mused to myself, that’s always a matter of happenstance context. Sometimes, you understand your data no matter how obscure or limited. Once LD had this task I’d given him (into a tBot pool) and as data he got something like “an eagle claw” and from that he worked out just knowing that the target represented the American government ‘getting their claws into someone’ and the shadow of that looming over them or threatening them. (The target feedback showed a vietnam-era draft card.) That is damn little data for a damn lot of understanding, as just one example.

Sometimes one has enough contact that the barest minimum of data is a carrier wave for ‘understanding’. Sometimes you get a ‘memory clip’ with 5 components but you know the one that ‘matters’ so it’s fine.

Other times it’s more confusing than helpful because you don’t know. Other times no matter how much data you get, you can’t put it together. I have given some examples of this in my own viewing of the past, including — to follow my habit of naming all sessions by their most egregious AOL’s — the Martian Blood Vessel session; that’s a problem, when your contact is very solid, your data is accurate, but at some point you lack the contextual framework needed to move farther forward.

Due to the doubleblind’s prevention of any base knowledge as framework, “context” is the biggest issue in RV, aside from mis-acquisition. I have previously suggested experimentation with back-loading, mid-loading, and things like that, but it’s possible that what we are really  missing is simply some approach to psychic work that is as heart-centered as it is third-eye centered, so context is more commonly part of the information.

I wonder how much of this is either me putting together what I already believe in a new way, or if I should be less cynical and doubting about myself, and simply say that I have been running into versions of this for nearly 15 years. I’ve talked about ‘loving’ the target and that the target ‘images itself for you’ (as a voice told me coming out of a narrated-dream once ~1997) but this is the first time I’ve had an actually sensible way that might all fit together.

Calling it love is oversimplifying. It is “love under will,” as Crowley put it: heart energy as directed by the energy of intent.

For a bit as I laid there, that seemed profound. And then pointless, like just some complex way of saying it’s unknowable and isn’t expected to be accurate, which is ridiculous and waffling or worse. I can’t think of anything worse for viewer accuracy than convincing the viewer that it’s ok to be wrong because that data was probably some alternate reality, that is actually done in the field sometimes, it’s a disaster.

But then “the why of it” it all snapped together like Legos with what came just before:

It isn’t just about what you focus on. It’s about where you focus from! 

You don’t place a cannon where it can’t reach the target so why do we do this with psi? We often say to ourselves as viewers, “show me…” or “tell me….” in self-cueing. But sending the upper chakras out for info is like negotiating with pirates: they are likely to be quite literal, and provide you with exactly what you asked for–but not quite what you wanted.

Because the navigation rudder of intent is the heart, the point of understanding. That’s where that energy occurs in us.

The third-eye chakra has its own variant on reality without regard to that. It’s likely to be very visually similar most the time, which throws us off, and makes us think it’s the same thing and that the variant details are just our mistake.

The normal lack of heart energy involved in this is why there is often so little “context” for most viewers; why it’s a long series of impressions and eventually concepts, but seldom a larger grasp of things and their context.

Sessions that DO have this, if not given with some form of frontloading, then they do have that energy, because that’s the only way to get that information, is through that part of the self. Some people naturally, unconsciously, are better with that.

I think some of RV’s history, its purpose for primarily surface trivia and not deeper understanding except in some cases, might be part of this; or maybe the government and military and science, which sort of recreated a modern archetype of psychics with the remote viewing program, maybe they are just, as archetypes and entities in general, not real given to heart-energy compared to the others. (Imagine that.)

(Maybe that’s part of why heart attacks are infamously associated with RV: because it leans hard on the heart and this was not really an area military people had developed, the whole chakraic system with that as focus I mean, because the chakra system was not part of the assumptions or training for the work at all.)

But there was more. I lost a lot of this too, darn it. But it was something like:

When the third-eye chakra is really active, it’s very visual, whether or not we perceive all those visuals directly, and it ‘sparks’ the physical brain by focus and proximity. So a lot of the memory and free association and “mental flotsam” one can run into in RV, is in part a result from overstimulation of that ‘area of focus’ (3rd eye). Less focus visually, and more focus throughout the body, might improve not only the clarity and quietness of mind, but the contextual element.

ooo

There was something else going on from the beginning but while the brain seemingly can work on a couple things at a time, in a blog I have to focus on one at a time.

So this was the other area, it dealt (again) with “novelty”. I had previously made some analogies to psi work, suggesting that maybe novelty has some larger role than we realize in the process. But this was some half-dreamy “guided focus” on that, as if in response to my general outstanding query on the subject.

We have approached viewing from the idea of learning theory. From the idea that if we do something repeatedly that we will get repeating experience. From the idea that the more we do something, the more we “standardize the process.” I myself have more text waxing on about this than almost anyone I bet.

I now think this is an error. I understand it, and it’s reasonable, it makes sense that we got there, or began there. This is the kind of paradigm that “logical thinking” brings on, but which metaphysical experience shows is a shell game. Is there some surface demonstration, some physical reality to it, some apparent-logic? Yes. If you don’t think too hard, if you don’t feel too much, then yes it works just fine as a model.

But if you insist on delving further into the dynamics of this, if you work on coming from underneath and feeling your way ‘through’ the process, you realize it doesn’t work that way at all.

Our conscious mind wants to believe it does. It makes it seem logical and makes us feel in control of something we’re not, much, in control of. Yet it also creates extraordinary limits, frameworks, walls and blocks and doorways and left turns, that are artificially imposed by this approach and this belief system.

There is some degree of repetition in experience, sure. Yet I was shown that while some of that is true, the main reason it’s true that constant practice helps isn’t about that. It’s about the belief systems and allowing. That’s what constant practice helps. But the former paradigm (repetition) is getting credit for the latter dynamic (belief systems). And we have other things (learning theory) grafted-on to the paradigm.

And moreover, at the moment I was being shown this, the former seemed like a … like strong-arming the most weak and simplistic element, to try and get the result we want. Basically like there is a primal language, of the subconscious as interpreted by the entire body, and we are mostly refusing to learn it. We get a few words, and it has several words we already know, and then we just want to do this to death, do it harder. Rather than opening up truly and learning the language of the entire body. It’s just… so shallow.

All along I have believed that the secret (if there was one) to psi was sufficient practice leading to a handle on repeating elements. Things regularly change, which complicates that aspect so much (and that is a clue we’ve missed!).

But it was showing me that really experiencing this in the way most profound, the way the body is best designed for doing exactly that, IS actually hugely dependent on ‘novelty’.

If it depends on novelty, then it’s the last thing that we’d do well with using the current approach to psi.

And in fact when we use our current approach to psi, it comes with a subtle, unrealized instruction to the self that it be “as little novel as possible,” it be as standardized in terms we understand as possible, and usually that it be translatable to the audiovisual senses for our recording purposes. We are only willing to go through that one door, using that one approach we ‘expect’, and that is that.

This was showing me that novelty was critical. The ‘energy’ and the ‘rapport’ were greatly related to this, I saw. A whole different experience. And generally much more an experience that led to understanding, context and the bigger picture, than a collection of data points that led to–well, to collecting data points which never go totally together, leave the viewer without psychological closure, and require someone else with intellectual knowledge of the target to evaluate and find context for.

I was suddenly reminded of this saying I read in childhood: Don’t pray for an easy life. Pray to be a strong person. I realized that in a way, this was an analogy to what it was telling me about psi. Rather than wanting sessions to let us use our shallow, intellectually-based approach, and the universe to be wrapped up so small and predictably that some percentage of it is able to fit through that doorway for some accurate data… we should be pursuing novelty, and pursuing the body-understanding, particularly of the SP+heart areas, that would allow us to accurately translate, to understand the novelty, whatever it might be.

We don’t need to get “information points” we recognize through repetition. [Later edit: it seems to me on re-reading that this is an energy-analogy to pursuing accuracy/technical detail in 'compensation' for 'lack of the feel of truth'.] We just need to get a connection, a rapport of understanding, that gives us full access to all of it. Then our detailed need to know of the surface trivia we are usually pursuing via psi, can fairly easily pick those things out, and our mind has a contextual framework to hang it all on, besides.

I’ve worked hard at viewing off and on for 15 years. I haven’t viewed in awhile and usually have 1-3 month periods of it followed by 6-18 month total breaks from it. But generally, once I’ve been doing it again for about a month, I do fairly well with it, at least, I have nothing to complain about.

And intellectually I’ve had the benefit of working with privately, and later just exposure to en masse, the viewing of many many people, as well as a lot of reading and discussing of science and the experience of people far more master and experienced, all of which has been very educational as well.

By the time all of this in my head the other night was finished though, I felt a bit nonplussed. Like… clueless, and recognizing that I am almost totally tuned out of the primary (chakras) sources of information I have. I’m an idiot!

Congratulations on becoming so knowledgeable about remote viewing; now we can show you what a complete and utter moron you have been all this time. Ready to start over?

Remind me that I asked for this. I actually stood in the Tower and demanded of the Four that they help me make psi and remote viewing my path, that I deserved this.

And right after that, the next time I visited, the Senior brought me the Aeons for the first time, and instead of being all happy at something new and a direct response to my query, I clung to the 3rd of 4 like a small child to its mother, directly threatened by my identity challenge with them, as if it hadn’t taken me a dozen years to get half a handle even on the Four. Until my mate/twin’s inner stern guidance made me summon some courage and meet them.

And first in line was the guy I’d just met, but didn’t realize was part of them: Nero. The Four essentially opened the door inside me so I could perceive that part of myself. And I’ve spent 3.5 years resisting that, for the most part, until just recently. And I don’t feel I yet know even one of them even halfway, let alone all of them well.

Some part of me knows that the whole chakra focus is ‘the next step’. I asked, I demanded, and no matter how much I am cycled out of practical RV in my daily life right now, psi is the path I chose and made a commitment to, and everything in some way actually relates to that, although much of it, I think, relates first and foremost to spirit-wide “health” and the “know thyself” theme.

Maybe once those things are in place, psi has different and cleaner conditions, who knows.

ooo

For new year, I was praying at midnight, and then I did an Aeon round specific to the new year, that was fun and lots of merging.