Palyne

Prior to this article, it’s best to read the previous Aspect RV post.

So as ‘Aspect RV’ settled into my psyche over time (or my psiche, as I call it, since psi is heavily involved here too), I began to realize that not only could I interact with ‘myself’ during viewing, but that the target itself seemed to interact with me.

At first I didn’t know what was going on. I would start a session and get a flash of something bizarre, like: I’m in a tiny dark stone room and there is a big sarcophagus and brilliant gold light is shining out of it but I tune in just at the INSTANT a huge heavy stone lid is slamming down and shutting out the light. WTF?? I knew it wasn’t part of the target, and I suspected it was information about the session or my contact (so… that wouldn’t be a good sign, in this case…) Or I’d be in the middle of a session and I’d see a person, like an ‘Aspect’ — but they would run in a room and slam the door. WTF?? This began happening more often as time went on. I didn’t know what to do. I didn’t know why it was happening. In the Official Doctrine of Methods, the data does not act out and talk to you. It’s considered “inert information” that you “passively wait for”. Yet my data was not remotely inert, and it seemed to want me to be proactively interacting with it.

So one day I was in a session and I ‘found myself’ on a street I sensed, and there was an Aspect, a woman standing in the sky above me, her feet a couple feet above my head. She leaned down to me and held out a pair of eyeglasses. Determined to do something proactive this time, I leaned up and took them, and then I put them on. Suddenly I found myself rushing through space, at enormous speeds as stars flashed past me, going toward some ball. I can’t remember the target now — it was a planet or moon — but the point was, the “experiential” nature of that data was SO intense, and the data itself definitely did seem on target, that I began to think maybe this ‘interact with the data’ was an idea worth trying. Read the rest of this entry »

When I’m in an altered state it’s often difficult to remember what the hell I’m supposed to be doing in a session.

I made a little desktop post-it for my arch process so I could kind of open one eye and look at the list while viewing. I wondered if I’d ever posted this, since I’ve talked about the ‘archetype RV’ and ‘aspect RV’ methods I’ve developed over time. I don’t think I’ve posted the current version anyway, of the arch version, so I’ll go through it here.

(The points are below the explanation.)

————————————–

There are several major categories of the session.

* There are ADMINISTRATIVE points, which is basically just the physical process or points of protocol.

* There are EXPERIENCE points, which is what I call it when I am (for example) working with the target as an archetype, or with Inner Guide.

* There are DATA points, which is what I call it when I am (for example) literally attempting to get information about the target “as focused via feedback and/or the tasker’s intent”.

However, in the case of archetype RV, there are several sections which are both of those (both data and experience).

The data is not pure at those combined points–or maybe it is more pure, I guess it depends on how you look at it. It is experientially-based and target-influenced as a me+target=third thing. Rather like sex, it is the sum of the parts of both my and the target archetype’s experience and how we perceive each other and work together. It is basically us getting to know each other, and the target and I sharing some learning about whatever IT wants–and whatever I want–and some of both.

Although this experience in some respects is likely to touch on data that is part of or related to the actual target data, most of it is either not, or is not easily discernible as being so. These points of the session are about genuinely exploring the target as a collective of consciousness, with respect and interest and fascination. So in summary, the data at points 5-8 is not likely to be the literal “surface data matching feedback or tasker-intent” that is RV’s true goal.

My hope and reason for doing this, is because I want to genuinely ‘get to know’ targets. Not just get surface impressions, as if I am strip-mining the universe for cheap quick mineral facts I can walk away with for my convenience, but instead, a caring, fascinated, “mutual exploration” between the target and I, with respect, so perhaps I will understand the target and its many elements and nature better internally–and perhaps, if I’m lucky, future targets with similarities or points of overlap, I might have better contact with as a result.

Point 9 is where I am asking the target to have mercy and help me focus only on “just give me the facts jack” as Remote Viewing technically wants. This is the single clean RV point in the session.

Point 10 is a summary point. This amounts to a ‘presentation session‘ as I call it. Basically it is a review of point 9 data with the added consideration of the ‘experience’ of points 5-8, some summarizing, some fleshing-out, some cleaning up of the write-up. It does involve psi, so I still consider it session work, but it is more like adjunct session work. The session work in point 9 is true session — whatever comes as data is the data. Point 10 has more evaluation involved, and is what creates the final product I post or hand over.

(I know, legions of viewers are going, ‘What?! You don’t hand over your RAW data?!’ No. You get what I give you, if I’m viewing for you. My sessions have personal insights that are private, abbreviations everywhere, process notes that are not about the data but about me, stuff I want to vent by writing and forgetting, and are nearly illegible. Point 10 creates something that is legible and comprehensible. Now, if I screw it up between 9 and 10, that is my fault and my problem. But learning to end up with a presented product that is workable for onlookers or users of the data, is one of my goals. I realize this contradicts one of the basic doctrine points of RV and ‘raw data’ but you know… so what. I know people who sort so much data in their head, what ends up on paper isn’t remotely ‘raw’ (if it EVER is, don’t get me on that argument…); I simply choose to do some of my processing on paper, but it’s private. Viewer Don Williams has a great debate with this idea. See the link on P-S above and his comment with that.)

I now consider point 12 (feedback) to be a data collection and experience point as much as an administrative point, because with this method, so often I get additional info and have some experiential sense of the target perceiving “my” perception of IT with the feedback. The data isn’t in protocol at that point but it’s not part of the session so it doesn’t matter.

I believe that as an experience point, the feedback “shared with” the target while it and I are “woven together”, is not only very important to “internal learning” and “integration of experience,” but this has resulted in more amazing experience thus far than just about any other thing I’ve done in RV. When you go into this as a genuine “joint venture,” it’s still amazing when it turns out to be exactly that; when the target as consciousness perceives YOU, and wants to know what you are like, and has opinions about how you/your people perceive it. This is the part where I’m forcibly reminded that this process is not merely something on paper and not merely a nice idea in theory, but is a pretty hard core psychic experience in practice.

***

Now so far, the problem is this approach takes awhile. Being the procrastinating whiner I am, I have often ended up getting to like somewhere in point 6 or 7 and then having to jump to feedback. Obviously since the main data and session work is at the 9-10 point, that’s a disaster for the data, which hasn’t really even been pursued in “what matches feedback/tasker-intent” mode yet.

I’ve been unfair to myself and the method a bit, obviously. If I skip the real data steps, I have no right to gripe about it because it seems like the experience was better than the data… of course, doh. So I’m going to be working on a time setup here that will give me the real time I need for doing one of these sessions correctly at least a couple times a week. It takes awhile to write up the experience as well (as I’m only recording data during session) so that I have some record of it. Overall it’s a significant time investment.

————————————–

SESSION FORMAT (ARCHETYPE RV)

[-E-] = Experience
[-D-] = Data
[-A-] = Administration

0 > Open Session [-A-]

1 > Go to Round Plateau w/IG [-E-]

2 > Give him task#/target info [-E-]

3 > Work with archetype [-E-]

4 > Have IG weave us together [-E-]

5 > Target Lead… [-E-][-D-]

6 > My Lead… [-E-][-D-]

(I let target choose the sequence of 5&6)

7 > Joint Venture… [-E-][-D-]

8 > Anything Else… [-E-][-D-]

9 > Basic Data… [-D-]

10 > Presentation subSession… [-D-]

11 > Recording/Posting Data… [-A-]

12 > Get Feedback, review w/Arch [-E-][-D-][-A-]
* sometimes point 16 goes here instead

13 > Have IG unweave us [-E-]

14 > Ask IG to clean/heal/adjust me [-E-]

15 > Close Session [-A-]

16 > Record Overall Experience [-A, sometimes -E intervenes]

————————————–

And that’s it. None of this is complicated but it requires a good deal of “attention” and of course, ability to hold a solid “interactive meditate state” which not everybody can do without practice.

This particular process is the *polar opposite* of the traditional CRV as presented in the “very complex on paper do it as fast as you can without thinking” approach.

This has zero rules about the on-paper–is totally freeform in that respect, though I have my own format that Point 10 would usually present something in.

It is entirely focused on taking time for “genuinely getting to know” the target–NOT just “as data” but as what THE TARGET believes itself to be and wants to share.

It could be considered an “animist” approach to consciousness in this respect (everything is consciousness; every grouping of consciousness has some degree of awareness, some more than others; all able to be interacted-with by human consciousness).

It is like slow-food home cooking of gourmet meals with fresh garden ingredients, vs. grabbing your fast food as you drive past the window. It is a deliberate attempt to focus with respect and gratitude and interest on and with the target. I tend to agree with Seth who once said that “Information wants to be known.” I feel that my session experience is as much an opportunity for the target to get something out of it as for me.

Some of the reason for this is because I really AM interested in getting to know “the nature of things” — that’s the magickian hidden in me I suppose — sure my ego wants the data, wants a good session to brag about and feel proud of, but my inner-self wants to genuinely KNOW the target, in the fullest way possible. The archetype RV process is a kind of making love to another aspect of consciousness in the universe.

Which leads to the obvious question: what if the target is something horrible, like an evil person, or a bloody death-disaster? Sometimes it is. These things are as much a part of the universe as anything else. Does the archetype work mean I get way, way, WAY “closer” to “the target” even when it’s something we would consider horrible? Yes. It does.

So far (maybe fortunately), the worst I’ve had while using this method is a woman at probably one of the worst points of her life, literally bawling in grief. In that session, I ended up feeling there was literally a lost soul, and connecting with Archangel Michael and holding the intent to fully free the energy. That was a pretty amazing experience. And it did turn out to be what I said data-wise, though frankly that paled compared to my interest in the non-feedback portions of the experience.

I’ve had several sessions in this format where the target was a ‘thing’ which interacted and shared with me as ‘an identity’ (such as Ganymede, and the Edmonton Tornado, as two examples, though I’ve had others prior).

And, I’ve had several sessions in this format where I felt a definite sense of spiritual squishing, as if another identity was climbing into the tight space of my psychology with me, and it’s had side-effects both during and after the session that seem to reflect much more of a ‘merge’ than is normal even for most psychic work let alone for RV. Dealing with it after takes a little time and is the reason I added in a step in my process where IG basically helps me deal with the fallout of such experience.

My boyfriend gets pissed off when he feels like he is talking to someone else. I have to keep reminding myself not to talk to him after archetype-RV sessions as a result, but since they are often neat experiences I want to talk about, I end up feeling sure it will be fine, but it never is. He’ll be giving me grief about my first real merge like that, the Steve McQueen target (which HE tasked me, ironically!) till my dying day I bet. The real problem is that who I am prior to a full de-weave by IG (and awhile after that, frankly) is just who I am and I’m neither sorry nor concerned, at that moment, about what anybody else thinks about it. It does, of course, make the tasking somewhat more important to be concerned about, for obvious reasons.

——————–

I have a lot of competing theories. One of them is that just maybe, if viewers got MORE from a given session experience than we do, that far fewer sessions (read: years of time) might be required prior to more advanced levels of skill. I think it’s possible that if I truly get to know the target on the inside–its fuller nature, the target from its own point of view, etc.–that perhaps I will be accomplishing one of two things:

1 – better familiarity on my part, or

2 – better acceptance/interaction with me on the target’s part.

Yes… this does suggest that I am saying humans are not the only sentience and that targets have more spiritual depth than gum wrappers even if it were, in fact, a gum wrapper. I’ve considered whether this might qualify as a displacement of responsibility or a projecting-upon (excessive anthropomorphism), but I choose to see it as a matter of respect, and an understanding that psi works *because* either the universe is much more “me” than I realize (in which case I should be interacting with it with love), or the universe is much less “me” than I realize (in which case I should be interacting with it with love), but in either case, that psi works because of the “relationship” that we are able to have with anything, anywhere, anytime.

I’m all about that relationship. I realize that in RV-proper, the data on paper is what matters most, but I am interested in the relationship first, and the data second. It is my hope that this kind of focus will actually improve the data in the end by better connecting me with the target in the beginning. We’ll see.

——————–

Concerning familiarity, and thinking that a ‘deeper interaction with the target’ might increase how much “true understanding” I hold inside to help me with future RV, I’m applying the following logic to it: in my experience, it doesn’t matter what you are doing–software programming, italian cooking, learning to speak japanese–the more you “fully immerse yourself” into what you are doing, the more you see two specific results:

1 – better, deeper, more complete knowledge of the art you are pursuing, and

2 – a deeper level of understanding that can be applied in varying degrees to the rest of the universe.

In other words, every one of the zillion elements–and the sum of their parts divided a thousand ways–that you glean from #1, becomes part of your base repository of understanding, things you grok at the core level and don’t need to consciously think about any more.

Of everything else in the world, many of them are going to have one or more of the components, elements, dynamics, relationships, sequences, etc. etc. that you’ve absorbed. Everything which is already familiar is–already familiar. Is that not the whole goal of RV practice, to make the intuitive experience of elements whether disparate or complex “more familiar”, so that we can more accurately comprehend and communicate?

Well, that’s what we work on with practice. But I have long felt that my experience of RV, even though the sessions were sometimes good data-wise and the experiences sometimes good contact-wise, just seemed like it was missing some depth. I felt like someone who’s had quick sex and shallow experiences and liked it all just fine but eventually started thinking hmmmn, you know, isn’t there something more here?–and felt driven to pursue something deeper, something more meaningful, something which would make what seems the same experience on the surface, into something more richly rewarding and, hopefully, noticeably better in end-result, as well.

We’ll see. I’m still at the bare-bud stage with this. I haven’t had time to do that much with it, but hope to find a lot more time in the coming future, now that I have left all online RV stuff, and aside from “life”, am simply writing and doing personal stuff.

——————–

I guess at some points I’ve just felt like, although RV works, the degree of consistency (how often it works and to what degree) are just not acceptable to me. If what you’re doing isn’t working, do something else, as the saying goes. I mean what I was doing worked–to the degree it worked for anybody, maybe a little moreso–but it just doesn’t seem like enough to me. I feel like we are missing some utterly huge, gigantic, core and central things that we are so oblivious to and will feel like morons if we ever discover it. I don’t know what that is, but I know that the best way around something is usually through the middle, so that’s kind of what this is.

——————–

It may turn out that this is not workable; that it is fun but not ideal for RV. Initially that was my impression but I was unfair with the process, as I noted above, so I am going to give it a proper go this time and record the results well enough for me (and onlookers) to get a decent look.

And if it turns out to be totally non-ideal in some way, that’ll be ok too. I believe it is worth the experiment. I don’t feel this ‘has’ to work; I’m not going to try and force one shape into another in my eagerness to be ‘right’ in this case, because I think no matter WHAT the answer, it is all equal; it’s still an interesting experiment worth doing. And whatever the answer turns out to be for me, might be different for others anyway. So the answer doesn’t matter.

And if it turns out to be dangerous in some way, as some people have insisted that “interacting with the target” IS, then I guess I’ll learn the hard way and onlookers can just learn vicariously. (As the joke goes, it may be that my sole purpose in life is to serve as a warning to others.)

But if it turns out to have value to the viewing end result for me in the end, then it will have been well worth the effort, despite the more intensive amount of time and attention required.

PJ

Long ago when I wrote Bewilderness, I said in the narrative something like,

I psychoanalyzed myself only until I realized I was obviously a lunatic, at which point I concluded I was just giving myself a complex and might as well stop.

I’ve been kind of in denial of viewing the last couple days even though I want to, and I keep thinking about it, and I miss it so much for not having done nearly enough of it lately. I’m carefully avoiding info on TKR’s latest mission so I can squeeze in viewing the target before I expose myself to talk about it…I missed the deadline by a mile thanks to being simultaneously in interest-but-avoidance.

I need therapy.

Meanwhile, I’ve been thinking about the whole archetype vs. session thing. You know, I’m not 100% sure I can honestly say that getting accurate surface data is more important to me than an experience I feel touches my soul and amazes and inspires me. Calabrese called this “process vs. product” and I think that is a decent way of putting it.

I find that the more I view, the more the process starts to mean more to me. The more that a decent data-session with a poor “experiential factor” is a disappointment, while a lousy data-session with a great “experiential factor” feels like a consolation, and usually like it was well worth the effort regardless of the product result.

I feel that this is contrary to RV as a focus. I feel that in fact, I have watched this exact tendency take down quite a number of potential viewers over the years, who got far too involved with the “woo-woo fascinative” aspect of viewing and far too little involved with the “staying in protocol and staying practical” aspect.

But it calls me. Do you know that I have been “deeply dreaming” about Mars in various ways for the last decade? Why? I have no idea. I dream of standing on its surface, in cities that feel so old it is a tangible quality, and inside me I feel this terrible longing, as if it’s something I miss. I have semi-ordinary dreams, often involving one of my best friends, where for one reason or another we have to travel there. I had a series of “programmed dreams” that involved it and apparently the future. For that matter, I even think about it a lot. Too often. It bothers me. Like I need to understand something, I want to, it feels important.

I sound like Courtney Brown. That makes me feel vaguely suicidal.

Am I watching the gradual devolution of my own “psychological balance”? I don’t feel unbalanced; I just feel unnaturally drawn to “experiential” RV and sometimes, specifically, to Mars, although I admit that since Ganymede and an old bizarre session related to Titan, all planets hold interest for me. I feel as if internally I am having a real dilemma.

It seems like the more intuitive I get, the more my session experiences are interesting, yet in the process of being interesting, often fail to be particularly productive, which IMO makes the data-collection process into, well, a different process altogether. RV isn’t about spiritual evolution it’s about data collection. That is RV’s glory, that is why it isn’t buried in all the religious and occult and mystic BS that traditionally psi work has been. The whole “psychic functioning” that is the core of RV is by far the most interesting part for sure, but that isn’t RV, it’s just one of the core components. The field of RV is filled with people ranging from miseducated to outright lunatics, and a great deal of where I see this breakdown happening is in the area of RV protocol: when the data collection product becomes less a priority than the psychic experience. So how could I of all people feel like this, when I am so aware of the problem?

I once wondered, after watching Art Bell’s psychology seem to disintegrate before our ears, if remote influence was well-functioning enough in some para-gov’t agenda to literally ‘affect’ people likely to have an influence in the field via the media or whatever. I mean, my much-former long-ago guru wrote a book I consider 99.9% fiction, although the reinvention surely made history and self image more fun. The whole field seems rife with a total disconnect from reality, to the point of it being a downright worrisome pathology. I realize everyone has their own subjective perception, but there is being an individual, and then there is just being nuts. Come on.

Yet if I have a pointless data session but talk to Ganymede, I think that’s ok? What part of that is ok? Wasn’t the data session the point of it all? And what’s with the still getting “experiential data” even after I know what the target is? That’s a psychic thing. (Didn’t I spend a lot of money on methods training so I could say I was a viewer and not a psychic ha-ha-ha.) I guess what I’m concerned about is that my session was lousy and I don’t care. Because the experience means more to me.

I want to care. I need to care. CARING about session data is critical to obtaining it — and caring about the protocol which separates mere ‘experience’ from ‘validation’ is pretty critical too.

It’s like my priorities are shifting underneath me. And I see it, and it terrifies me, and yet I still can’t seem to stop it.

(I edited this a few times ’cause I kept remembering stuff. That’s the thing about the “experiential” bit–it can contain so MUCH info by the time you write it down that you lose it. This is one reason for writing ‘during’ RV — although I think that is overdone sometimes — but the act of writing tends to interfere with experience at times so it’s always a bit iffy on the decision.)

Was doing a tandem with a friend tonight.

The focus goes well, anchoring and feeling ‘in the center’. I’ve been getting all lovey with IG more than usual lately so I attribute it to that.

The archetype arrives and he is a very serious looking, tough, wiry, asian man of middle age. I have a visual flash of a big inset circular shape with something high in the middle. I say my spiel to him about the plans and take his hands. I ask what he has for me. He reaches to a pendant of some symbol I don’t recognize and he yanks on the cord and it comes off in his hand, except somehow he ‘yanked it out of his chest’ too as an overlay to that, and he tied it behind my neck. I look at IG. “Don’t let me forget to take this off when we’re done,” I say, remembering an old experience where the blonde-man-me of The Four realized that “chains equals prisoner” and a commitment of sorts when that symbol-experience happens.

I don’t know what to give him, and ask myself what energy feels right, and it’s some combination of “stalker” and “awareness” of a rather dark kind, ninja-like. I put the energy ball in his solar plexus which seems made for it and I ask IG to weave us. He weaves us, and the merge feels physically weird. Very slightly like the old over-merge with the target of McQueen felt, but not nearly as strong. I’m kind of impressed.

So we begin, and I focus. Before I can ask for anything I keep repeatedly seeing the face of this specific asian man, I don’t believe I’ve ever seen him in real life but he seems pretty clear and repetitive. “Is this someone you know?” I ask the target, and it disappears. I ask the target if he wants me to lead first, him, or both. He decides he wants to see what it’s like. So: Target Lead.

“Tell me something about the target.” I get nothing.

Then a “scary man,” I can’t describe it more than that, appeared and held out his hand to me. I took it, and allowed him to ‘pull me into it’ and now I’m elevated as if I am kneeling on some kind of roof. It’s outside, in a hot dry environment, with an insanely blue sky above. There are stone structures all around me, but not like euro-stone, more like the tan-brown-red arabic or asian stone which is literally part of cliffs and rocks and things, like stuff carved into cliffs and caves. I have a couple of flashes of overlay of curving shapes I associate with artistic architecture such as the Moors.

“Tell me something important about the target.” I have the sense that “the target takes me more seriously now.” As if the archetype somehow respected me more. I have a flash of a caucasian man with tousled shoulder length hair, middle aged, handsome, who grins at me just a little and disappears. I wonder if that is like the target translating approval into terms he feels I would best relate to.

I see a shape like a round circle or wheel, and near one side is an area that draws my focus. The shape is turning or spinning, in motion but my focus stays with that one part of it.

“Tell me something ELSE important about the target.” A very odd sense like a heavy stone pyramid, the very stepped sort (not like egypt but like south America), but it is literally “on the shoulders of” a man, very heavy, as if “the man is carrying the weight/energy of the pyramid” somehow, like a symbol. I don’t know what it means.

Then I see something, like the whole land itself was ball-shaped and turning, and something ’shoots up into the air’ from the ground, in a sequence, at the same time that impacts from something come in from the outside as if someone were shooting at it. Very dynamic motion, turning, but hard to ‘get’.

I re-center myself in THE target, reminding myself it’s about the current target, which I will shortly have feedback on, etc.

“What matters MOST about the target?”

I am standing at the end of a rectangular walkway of stone. Each side has a high side of stone. It’s outdoors, blue sky, with a door at the end. I stand there for a minute, then feel that if I want the info, I must pursue it. I dash down the stone ground and grab the big handle on a wooden door set into the big stone (cliff-like) wall. The door doesn’t open. I throw my shoulder against it hard and imagine forcing it open, and it opens, and I rush in and slam the door behind me.

It’s pitch black. Then a ‘flare’ of light arrives to illuminate only one thing, an old man who appears to be in a room but I can see nothing else. Then he morphs into a different old man. Then into something I can’t make out. Then a few other things. “I get it,” I say. “The old man is not the point apparently.” Just then I had a sense of ‘red and white stripes’ although I didn’t see anything, and then some kind of turning, flying weapon came out from the darkness and hit him, and then something else happened, and he looked bizarre for a moment, and then his body fell.

But as his body fell, a part of him seemed to “rip out of the inside of him” and remained, which looked different I might add, like a different person, and turned to look at me. “Um, target, dude you’re with me right? I’m safe right? IG? I’m safe, right??” I said, suddenly feeling more than a little nervous.

The man motioned with his head to follow him and I did, and then found myself in a boat with a few other people, floating, one fellow in back with a pole, inside a cave it felt like, like deep inside some area, with overlays of like disney’s old pirate of the caribbean theme ride but spookier.

I faced forward and waited. “How long will this take? I have the feeling I’m running out of time,” I said aloud to whichever of the ‘figures’ I thought might be the old man. A man in front, who looked nothing like anyone so far except the archetype itself, looked back at me and said shortly, “It takes the time it takes.”

I shut up, and then considered that this time might be more about my acceptance than anything real, so I imagined that I was fully ok with and one with all this and it was ok to be done, and sure enough, I promptly found we were being helped out of the shallow boat and onto a stone ledge.

A young girl (late teens) appeared to me as if to lead me somewhere. She flashed into a statue of something, like some ancient architectural find of art that has much greater significance than what we assign it, and then back again. A couple of times. As if it was part of who she was somehow. I walked behind her, and it suddenly occurred to me –

– is all of this total fantasy? Yes, I know that often the archetype has NOTHING to do with the target–that’s the norm in fact. I know that often the “archetypal experience” of doing sessions like this is about 9 out of 10 parts of the experience, only 1 being anything resembling session data. I know this is experimental, and I know the point of this is actually more about the archetype work than the session data. And I know that it’s an opportunity for my mind and soul to work with me on stuff which may be several levels removed from whatever I’m doing on the surface.

But, that doesn’t change the fact that I feel pretty moronic. All the sudden I feel as if the target is something simple, mundane, even kinda dumb, and here I am having this major ‘experience’ related to it. I wonder if the experience is just bored fantasy on another level. The girl turns back to me briefly, and I have the feeling that she is thinking at me something that equates to me being slightly shallow and really having no-freaking-idea what’s really going on here which is much bigger than my little practice RV session. That sobers me up a little bit.

I also have the sense that being wrong is sort of not the point in this world; it’s a “wax on, wax off” or “bigger picture” situation where my “learning to trust and allow and understand this interior kind of experience” means a great deal more than some surface-point of data for this particular practice session. I feel an inner dilemma already, about the competition between the archmed and the RV, of course.

But just then my tandem buddy called because my time was up. Wow! 30 minutes just flew by. I never even had the chance to do MY-lead viewing led alone the mutual let alone wrap it up.

Well so it’s time to go get feedback. I’m afraid to look. I’ll go through it seriously with IG and my woven archetype though. I think part of this process requires that, no matter what.

***

The feedback: The big wall of niagara falls. Nothing but cliff-wall and water in this photo.

I have no idea what any of it means. I suppose I should have finished the meditation!

***

So to wrap things up I went back into the meditation where I left off. I was intending to “imagine” myself in the situation where I left, officially thank everyone and imagine IG pulling me out of it and that would be that. I never — never, except the semi-recent session on Ganymede — have any ‘relationship’ with the target after feedback as far as new-data/experience goes. This is because I’m very logical in some respects and one reason I so admire RV is “the total blinding with feedback”: I don’t want to know ANYTHING about the target; and, once I have feedback, as far as I’m concerned it’s over, period, anything after that is just sheer imagination I am sure, so that is that.

But when I imagined myself back there, the young woman seemed quite present as she had before, and walked ahead of me so I followed, through what seemed to be interior caves, and then finally through one area that led into a huge, really huge and deep, sort of cavern. Very irregularly shaped though. She motioned for me to walk down to this one area and sit down so I could look over it all, and I did so.

Looking down, I thought: wait, why can I see it so well? Caverns that feel this “interior” should be dark, yes? There were literally lights, like artificial lights, all around parts of the bottom in the distance, and even a sense of people down there, which I hadn’t consciously noticed because that’s just such a normal thing in my world (people and lights). But then I thought, wait a minute. I have SEEN feedback. I KNOW that the target is only a waterfall. OK granted, that IS on a major cliff of sorts. But… how does this relate? Is this just on the way to some other info?

The young woman appeared next to me and roughly translated, thought at me, “No, this is what I was leading you to. This is what you were to see.” I hesitated. I didn’t want to be unkind, but… “But the target is a waterfall,” I said gently. “I’m a little bit confused about how this relates.” She looks at me for a moment silently, and then cocks her head, giving me an overlay of like a bird and then like a bird-statuette, and says (basically), “You said you truly wanted to know the archetype of this target. You really wanted to know all about it, experience it, no matter what. That is a much larger thing than the focus of your picture.”

I thought about that for awhile. Perhaps, in that case, I have my answer regarding RV and archetypes; perhaps archmeds aren’t appropriate done in this way for the process, unless the point of the process is the “experience and inner knowing” as opposed to “data that makes it to the paper,” which is the point of RV.

I suddenly feel such adoration for the young woman. I feel as if this is partly mine and partly the larger target’s, which I am still woven with. “You are so beautiful,” I tell her. “You are fascinating and I want to know you more. Please, would you mind if I tasked myself on you-as-archetype at some point to get to know you better? You are so graceful and lovely and deep-in-soul.” She nearly blushed, in some conceptual way, and nodded agreement. Then she disappeared.

I had the sudden flashback of a previous session from at least a couple years ago. It had been on a cave. After the session and feedback I fell asleep and had such a powerful dream, in which the cave itself was sort of sentient, in a way difficult to describe. It had gold in it, which “grew” into it (I did not know gold did this, sort of, until I mentioned the session publicly and someone responded about that). In the dream there was this native american man, who appeared to be a very, very powerful sort of shamanic fellow, who was somehow bonded to the cave, as if he and the caves of that area were sort-of-one.

Anyway I am getting off topic, but I suddenly made the connection that this is why I had the sense of the young woman, and of the artifact and so on: that she is some ancient native spirit that is somehow bonded with that, and so is one of the “identities” likely to be encountered when psychically working with what seems to us to be merely a ‘location’ or ‘landscape feature’. I recalled that in the boat I had some “overlays” I didn’t really notice at the time that might tie into all this, I need a little more time for all of it to integrate. Like of secret caves behind waterfalls for example and whole worlds of nature hidden from view. Subtle.

I wondered about the giant cavern. It seemed natural and yet also “being built-out by man” artificially. I wondered if, like I’ve sensed more than once “underneath” the USA, there is… “development” of this, currently or in the future. I decided that if I am going to take this seriously, then I have to call the session a complete miss and accept the data as “psychic and symbolic and not on-focus” because if I use an RV model for this, the entire experiential aspect of my process becomes “irrelevant, distracting and wrong.”

Maybe it is the age-old question I often say RV comes down to: “Which is to be Master?” What is more important to me, RV that accurately describes surface physicals and a few concepts/emotions of a very narrow space/time focus, or “truly knowing a larger and deeper understanding” of something in my universe? Because they do not seem entirely compatible. It seems rather like it comes down to one or the other.

But I will continue the archetype work, because I feel it is good for me, interesting, and because I hope that eventually, a better “inner relationship with” lots of things, might result in better surface-data for RV when I need it.

***

One thing I didn’t write or say on purpose initially. When I was wrapping up this archmed I realized that I had been gently running the fingers of both my hands down my face, front and sides, sometimes hair or body, for a few minutes. I mean from the minute I tuned back into it apparently I was, but I didn’t realize it until I was ready to de-weave.

I realized that was odd and had the sense of a Helen Keller target in the Viewer Studios (TKR at the Dojo Psi) where she is running her fingers over the face of a president, Truman maybe?, to get the feel of what he looked like. I felt that the target, let me capitalize that as an identity, the Target, wanted to know more of me, wanted to know what I looked like.

I remembered suddenly that when this first began I had that sense of a physical merge-effect, not the “rush” of a true archetype merge but the “energetically squished-crowded-inside feeling” of a joining, similar but very, very light in comparison, to the one with the McQueen target. I hadn’t had any other oddities through the session but I realized that this certainly qualified as one. Now that this has happened twice, I actually think I will recognize the feeling in the future. It really is a sense that I can only call “spiritual squishing” as if being pressed upon when something else is joining the same space and there’s not much room.

I had to wonder, if I ‘allowed’ myself to ‘project out and upward’ like trance channels talk about, would I be channeling?? I don’t really want to do that frankly. I have enough identity issues already thanks very much.

I tried to find it a picture of me. I went to Psi-Notes to grab a link I sent someone of a pic of me and my kid from a year ago but I was logged in under a different identity so I didn’t have it available. I finally sighed, and told the target inside me, I’m sorry, right now I don’t have a picture or a mirror, but I will try to visualize myself as clearly as I can for you. I worked on doing this. I felt it was somehow most ‘aware’ of the ’sense’ that I had some native american genetics. “Some,” I agreed.

I had the feeling, much as I had with Ganymede, that somehow if I said things out loud or physically saw them or felt them, that the information would come across more clearly to the target.

This is yet again I’ve felt that the target was viewing ME when all was said and done, that the session process done the archetype way was essentially a shared channel of sorts, a two-way empathy.

***

I feel a great dilemma now over the archetype vs. RV aspect. You know, I have these arguments in my head all the time, and I play both points of view. I am just as fierce about maintaining the simple, objective-data, controlled-protocol, match the feedback aspect of RV as I was a dozen years ago when I began this. I am SO grateful that RV took psychic functioning out of the morass of BS that it’s been drowning in since the dawn of time. I feel it’s incredibly important that a very clean focus be kept on that.

That’s one reason these meditations are on this blog, and not on Red Cairo Firedocs — although a few have made it to firedocs, like the Ganymede session, and I’ve considered pulling it at least a hundred times just because I feel like anything more than “just the facts ma’am” doesn’t belong in any public example of “what-is-RV”.

Archetype meditations are not RV. I’m mixing these for a long list of reasons starting with curiosity, and the driving sense plus experience that outside objective reality is actually determined by internal energetic relationships.

When all was over I said to IG, “I would have liked to have written down the info that it was a waterfall. I’m grateful for the experience. I know that what we are doing is NOT just simple-target-data but what is good for me AND the target, what helps us both evolve, etc. etc. — I know that. But at some point before it was over, I would have liked to have gotten the data I went in there for, because you know, that’s the point of RV to begin with. I know I stopped too soon, but psychically and subconsciously I knew what time I had. For that matter, why couldn’t I just have known, right up front, that it was a waterfall?”

IG didn’t say this clearly, but the ‘feeling’ I got was something like this:

Information flows like a river. Every time you consciously absorb awareness of something, you slightly change the course of that river, and you change the “probability set” of what information is likely to come to you next. (I guess this fits in with data-sequence theories, ‘venting’ aol, etc. in RV.) I had the feeling if I had known it was a waterfall right off, that somehow this would have changed me internally and I wouldn’t have been able or likely to have the experience that I did, instead.

I accepted this, telling IG thanks, but it does not resolve my dilemma with myself about “groovy internal experiences” vs. “writing down the basic info” and which-is-to-be-master in my life.

For now, I don’t have much time to view, and everything I do is experimental. But at some point that is likely to change and I may have to make a decision.

Maybe I could come up with another archetype approach that is less, um, impactive and creative. You know, I’ve had some good sessions using this same technique. Normal data collection, this model works fine. It’s just that sometimes it seems like the experiential aspect overwhelms the data, which either becomes ‘trivial’ (even when it is there and accurate) or becomes ignored. So I can’t say it’s the approach, maybe it’s just me; methods both succeed and fail, every method, for every person, after all.

I guess it would be silly to expect my first real approach to be “the answer” to anything except how to ask a slightly better version of the question. Real science is exploration and there’s often lots of trials before something workable with measurable results (let alone consistency) comes about. Probably the same for this.

Yeah… I know. It has been far too long since I’ve blogged anything anywhere. Especially at this one, which is too weird for even the weirdos I know. If you’re reading this and ever wondered about yourself, now is the time to worry.

It’s one of those things where, had I been blogging, I would have had probably 50 things I could have blogged about, but now somehow I have none. Because it would be like making a big deal of just little things.

So as a way of kind of getting back into occasional blogging again, I thought I would just clean out the recent file drawer so to speak. Which is not all that exciting. But I notice when I go back and read my blogs that what happens on day 10 is often related to what came before, for example. So whatever happened the last week or less is probably going to have some effect on what happens this and next week. So I might as well get it down on virtual paper.

*0*

Alrighty then. First on the front: Archetype meditations for remote viewing.

Now the most interesting thing about this lately is my realization yesterday, when I went back and read this blog’s few entries, that I had completely forgotten just about everything. I mean literally forgotten. Like all the previous experiences on this blog including my 3-stage approach to using archs in viewing, simply never existed.

I noticed about a dozen years ago, for the first time, that my personal version of reality was, at best, unusually creative. This is not something most people admit, even when it’s true. But it really seems to be true for me. It’s not merely that my 11 year old and I, on a daily basis, remember a completely different version of events from as little as a few hours before. (Of course, since she is 11, I blame this entirely on her memory problems. She blames it on mine. By the time she is 13, we will probably both be certain the other is a complete idiot. I secretly suspect she has already decided this about me anyway.)

But it’s more than that. It seems to be that I have an unusually developed ability to forget — and I mean utterly, obliviously forget — radically large portions of my reality if they relate to what you might call “esoteria” or “metaphysics” or anything like that.

If I were as in-denial-forgetful of any other subject the way I am spiritual and psychic stuff, I wouldn’t just lose my car keys regularly, I would forget I had a car. And opposable thumbs. I mean it’s ridiculous.

*0*

13Aug07. Archetype b4 session didn’t have time to be much of anything as I rushed into it. But I found myself intrigued by the session itself, not so much the data as the feel. I got the third experience of “graphic design data” I’ve had. I’ve got to post on this, probably on the firedocs blog when I get time. I had a specific “graphic design” feel, of an “icon”, with a very specific shape. The feeling inside for this kind of data is very subtle yet highly specific. It feels like super clear-cut crystal edges, high resolution, high contrast between two colors, very careful effort. It feels like a “logo” that “represents” the target.

The first two times I experienced this, the shape was incredibly clear in my mind, as it was only 4-5 combined lines. I had the feeling I had seen it before–and yet hadn’t, like some kind of pre-deja-vu. Both times, the shape so dead-on nailed the summarized shape/dynamic of the target (if I could ARV like that even half the time I’d be rich) it was stunning. So I was pretty excited to run into that feeling again.

Except this time, the feeling got a lot more complicated. (Leave it to RV! The minute you know something well, it changes and increases complexity.) This time, the shape was actually something that I thought I might have seen before: a firebird. Or rather, the symbolic iconic representation of a phoenix, except using a ton of separate little shapes to create a sort of graphic mosaic. The shapes were like elongated thinned ovals, pointy at both ends, and the ones at the outside of the wing areas curved upward. After that I got another graphic-like sense; a cylinder that had interlocking elongated triangles of opposite colors, so that the effect was like claws wrapped around something. Then i saw, but didn’t record (I thought I was inventing it, truly), a guy with a bird-head like in the Egyptian stuff. A couple data points later, I saw a key sitting on a big square block/cube of something. I picked it up and a door appeared in the sky. I reached up and unlocked the door, and it opened, and a big bird — like the phoenix — flew out and into my world and then away before I could see anything more.

Not surprisingly, at this point I started to seriously AOL that the target might have something to do with a bird.

Fortunately my data then ceased to have anything to do with that. I had a funky shape, and a sense of “open space/nothingness” between/under it, and yet at the same time, the sense of “a face” being there, as well. I saw a big cliff, like a plateau with a dropoff. Then I saw the plateau with a deep channel carved into it, like out of the rock, narrow at the top but then ballooning into a big area underneath. It seemed to go quite a distance back. Then I got a couple data points pretty specific to “the sun” or some symbol of it. My initial data in the section was all ‘artistic’ and something ‘carved’. Not long in I said, “…a beautiful (manmade?) object, using shapes and contrasts.” Yet somehow I managed to miss entirely the whole carving concept. Ended the session.

The target turned out to be the sphinx. An old pic of it, before today’s modern commercialism, when there is just the sphinx, with its severely mutilated head, and a pyramid in the background. As if to further my ire about not doing nearly as well as I thought I should have on the target, a viewer named teacup promptly did the same target in the galleries on the same day I think it was, and did a better job. That is just SO not fair.

I have no idea what the phoenix symbolism represents. Aside from it, like the Sphinx, being a mythical creature. (Once in a dream I watched these unusually tall people ‘creating’ the sphinx–like giving it life or something. I didn’t see how this could be possible but they indicated that if my bone could have consciousness, why not its stone? They also indicated that they were making it a mate, somewhere far away. I later heard it’s a “legend” that there was another sphinx on the other side of the planet. Who knows.)

I sat there still woven with the target arch, IG with us, looking at the data and the picture trying to grok the connection between these things. I just don’t get it. So maybe that is just off-target. But I’m surprised, given how insanely on target (in the most succinct way) the previous ‘graphic design’ data sessions were. I know that nothing is dependable but I do find that HOW data comes through often seems to have more correlation with its accuracy than any other recognizeable quantity or quality in a session. Oh well. That I missed the repeated references to design carving, and then to the cliff/plateau and carving into the cliff, and didn’t put that together is doh!-material.

15Aug07. Again I rushed through the archmed, forgetting all my glorious plans about this. The data combined for the session covered a few areas:
* A repeated sense of looking down on something, of there being an “up high” (VERY high) place, and then a “down low” place, and the people up high were mercenary and the people down low were totally oblivious to them and/or the fact that they were
* Something elevated, in motion, and that “flies a distance away” being a major part of the target
* I “felt”, “thick, numb, hovering” when at the target
* A sense of banks, money, power
When I asked what would seem most important on feedback I got, “That something split open to show the darkness inside.” That seemed kind of odd.
When I asked for anything the target would like to share as last words it said, “The people and things below are so removed from us, and so unimportant. We are the powerful ones.”
Seriously, I was starting to AOL on aliens on the moon or something just as I was ending the session.
The target was Astronaut Bruce McCandless from the Feb ‘84 NASA pic of him in the “rocket chair” flying around, with the earth seen far below.

Okaaaaaaaaaaaay…. I dunno what to make of that one either. I guess all the emotional components of that must have been off-target, unless there is a lot more to the space program, world banks, and potentially aliens, than I have any idea. Moving on!

Did I mention that I haven’t viewed in awhile. I always totally suck when I re-begin so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.

16Aug07. The archetype was odd and had “empty eyes”. But archs usually have zip to do with the actual target and I get horrible AOL if I assume they do, so I ignored that. I hated the session. I felt yucky all through it. I felt that sense of “I hate this environment. Everything about this just disgusts me.” that I sometimes get for really trashy, violent, depressing ghetto environments. All the data was about a structure and maybe vehicles. The target, although those were at the periphery, was focused on a dead Korean war US POW, his corpse lying on the side of the dirt road.

I felt badly for not making better contact. Seems sure to me that this target might want to share something of itself. I will get it again eventually as it’s in my envelope pool twice, everything is, and I still have hundreds left to wade through in that. I spent some time with the target (still woven together) and IG after, working on understanding why I didn’t get the target in my data, as it seemed I had avoided it. I’ve had lots of dead everything before and not avoided it, so I don’t think it is any issue with death as data. Even my after-FB attempt to ‘get rapport’ with the target was interfered with by my emotional reaction of dislike, anger and disgust. Oh well.

16Aug07. Archmed was so fast I don’t remember anything. I gotta quit that. Initial data was “frenzied, frenetic, ultra energetic” and I couldn’t do ideograms because everytime I did one, my whole body abreacted as if I were trying to leap off where I was sitting. Then I got four big parallel thick-lines, “parallel components” I called them, manmade structure. That’s the end of target contact. The rest had nothing to do with the target… it was physical data, I just can’t figure out how it could relate so I assume it doesn’t. The target was a scaffolding from 1960 that had about 125 people at the Indianapolis 500 and it collapsed, falling forward, and killed a bunch. Looked like a giant industrial shelving unit so I guess the parallel thing was ok data. Still. Session on the whole sucked. Wasn’t very long.

18Aug07. I didn’t write down anything on the archmed. Need to start doing that, prior to session. The session had an elevated rounded thing, with letters or something around the front, AOL marquee, which was in the target so that’s fine. I believe I got the general location (water, shore, city, sky, focus is the city) ok. A big circle with a thick border which fairly well describes the shape in the picture so that is ok too (this is diff than the circle in the other direction that was the marquee). Had a nifty “mini-movie” but as is not unusual there was zero way to tell if any of it had anything to do with the target–anyway, it didn’t relate to the focus, which is what matters. Alas, humidity re-sealed a used target envelope, so I had no target. Fine, I said, I’ll just get one for this session; no big deal to me, but it took me four envelopes to find one with a picture for feedback. I consider that a somewhat blown protocol as a result.

20Aug07. Archmed was super brief. Arch distinguished himself though. Every few seconds he’d break out in a little dance, looking at me, like he was teasing me, teasing about being ‘on display’ as my target. It actually made me giggle. I ended up feeling much loving about it before the session. Which, by the way, had not a single thing to do with the target in my opinion (I’d have to call on symbology VERY heavily to come up with anything), which was Jesus. No, I did not task myself this. The new Taskerbot lets TANDEM viewing be done out of someone’s tbot Grab Bag as well as practice, and that one belonged to the other viewer. I am not fond of that target at all. I’ve had esoteric experiences with that identity that were mind blowing but so far in RV that’s twice I’ve missed that target entirely.

Sucking at RV is so demoralizing. Everytime I start getting pretty good at it, I end up dropping it abruptly. That isn’t coincidence, I know.

Knowing doesn’t help though.

My archmeds for remote viewing have expanded in depth but contracted in time and effort. I have begun to skip the majority of the archmed process altogether. I simply imagine myself in ‘my space’ which is just for archetypes of targets, I imagine Inner Guide (IG) introducing me to a human-form archetype which is the summation of energy of the target, I am nice to it for a moment, and then we allow IG to “weave us together.” Then in this merged state I begin the session. It doesn’t make more than about 30 seconds to get there.

When the session is done, I keep the target merged with me to review feedback, write out my notes, etc. Then I tell IG we are ready to be “unwoven” from each other. I take a few breaths as I imagine this and feel the shift in my awareness. Then I do a brief reality med (impossible to describe in so short a space) to heal, strengthen, and sometimes mutate, aspects of myself that might have some trouble with the process I just experienced.

If I don’t set a time limit on this process, I refer to it as protocol ArchNT, for “Remote Viewing, planned session, optional precognitive to target generation, worked soloblind, archetype-RV methodology, no time limit (nt).”

o0o

In my mental model, I AM the target, and it is ‘of me’. Here’s a model you might recognize. If you are colorblind you should see ‘70′ in this pic. If you have normal vision you should see ‘29′. Well in my mental model of ‘myself’ as a huge conglomerate of energy, focused under one umbrella-of-intent, think of the whole circle of dots as “me”. The target is “in” me, because everything is; I AM.

So when its dots light up, they become something perceivable; overall, it’s the archetype of the target. Any one of those dots you might think of as some major aspect of the target like a mountain or machine or whatever. All its dots added together, all its energy, the sum-total of ‘the target’, is the number we perceive.

So it’s a matter of interacting with myself, even though I am using as a model, a framework of interacting with the target. As I’ve written before, I think of Remote Viewing like, “If you could find it within yourself…” — literally.

My sessions have gradually moved to three main ’sections’.

1. There is TL, for “target lead.” I imagine us merged as the inquirers, and merged as the target, and I say, “Tell me what you think matters; tell me what you want me to know.” And I collect a little data like that.
2. Then I note VL, for “viewer lead.” And I ask and inquire and give whatever prompts, movement directives, etc. make my heart happy (this is the “normal” framework of remote viewing).
3. Then I note JV, for “joint venture.” And WE ask and inquire of US, what is most important and worth knowing and experiencing about this target.

Those 3 steps are the session. I can go through them in a few cycles (repeat) if I wish. Whether I bother, and how much data I collect for each section, is just based on how I feel and how well it seems to be working and how much time I have etc.

o0o

So far, I don’t see anything notable concerning the difference between the stages. They have all had good data and problem data, though since my big official COMMITTMENT to Remote Viewing (see the Red Cairo blog), things have gone pretty well.

I do see that when I begin with “target lead” that my initial data often nails the target, but this is the case for ‘initial data’ no matter what the methodology. Excepting, of course, formalized methodological structures which deliberately prevent viewers from getting any initial data beyond a gestalt, and then gradually super simple descriptives. My Archetype method is a ‘relax and do it’ approach with a few obviously added details and procedures, so it doesn’t have those restrictions.

I do deliberately attempt to ’shift perspective’ for each section, because I believe it’s useful and functions as a sort of base-line, fundamental form of “self-prompting.”

o0o

I number my sessions like so:

• There is a lab book they are in, and each book has a number. Right now I have just begun book 8.
• There is a target, and they are numbered sequentially.
• There is a session on a given target, and they are numbered sequentially.
• So in my RV, if you see “8.3.1″ it would mean book 8, target 3, session 1.

o0o

I think I’ll talk about some of my session work in this blog, if it’s done in the Archetype or Aspect methodologies I’ve been working on for years. Albeit barely and occasionally. I’m suddenly viewing a lot more and intend to continue that. I think I should write this stuff down somewhere eventually.

Since I do my ARV work in book 5, I’m hoping book 8 can be dedicated to Archetype and Aspect approaches so I get a more consistent viewing, more consistent style, and better look at the results.

More on this later.
.

This was my first archmed for a session after ‘the eyes of trinity’ where an arch suggested, and IG confirmed, that I could actually focus on the arch work not just to facilitate rapport for remote viewing data collection, but for actual personal evolution as well.

I went to my normal area in my inner space for arch-session work. It’s a place near the plateau with my outer guides, but totally set off on its own, and Inner Guide joins me there.

I started to ask for the archetype of the target, and then decided to change the request, to the composite of the archetype of the target plus whatever energies would contribute to my own personal development. And then I stopped and thought, well how selfish is that. If the point here is working jointly with the target, why am I not also asking for what is most beneficial to the target?

I know, most people think only people, perhaps animals, can evolve. But I think all matter is energy, and all energy is consciousness, so technically a gum wrapper has more than we give it credit for; perhaps its collection of consciousness is very small comparatively, less complex; it is not aware, let alone self-aware; but so what?

It reminds me of A Course in Miracles and how people get different side effects from reading it. I passed through several phases. Including the one where I considered everything around me “fake”. It was all illusion after all. And once that finally sunk in, then I passed to the “fatalism” phase. If everything is only illusion, who gives a damn if there is nuclear war, even? Or anything else? It doesn’t matter. Nothing matters. Because everything is fake. Everything is just illusion.

But then finally, thankfully, I passed that too. I realized that everything is energy poured into a creative form-of-intent. Every kind of material that goes into making something is like another addition to the choir of something working as a community. The things we see around us that we devalue, that we ignore, are just as amazing and beautiful and holy as anything else. It took us centuries to develop the technology to build a modern stopsign, never mind a stoplight. There is such deep symbolic dream-symbol meaning in the many aspects of a sidewalk. There is profound significance in a “sliding glass door.”

Your couch and your television are as close to you as family in an energetic sense. Physicists say we trade atoms constantly with everybody and everything around us. So now we know why the sages said you had to love everything and you should remove anything from your environment that you could not love. Because every atom you integrate from something you disrespect, something you invalidate, something you dislike, is now a part of you bearing that energy.

Occasionally I’ve had a rather offbeat ‘connection’ with inanimate objects. Once I managed to fix a broken sewing machine by putting my hand on it and talking to it in prayer for about 15 minutes. But what began as a simple prayer out of need, became a whole mutual love-fest. That sewing machine, I came to realize during the experience, it has its own destiny. It has what you might call its own divine purpose: the one we built it to fulfill. I suddenly realized what a wrong it is for humans to hoard things, to collect things with a function such as books and machines and then hide them away, never to let them be explored and used for their purpose. They have a sort of joy in their purpose just like we do. Except that they are not aware or self-aware, but all consciousness does have a sort of “inherent awareness” in my experience, and they have at least that.

Humans, at least in my experience, seem to have a spiritual facility that it utterly astounding: we can connect with anything, and when we do, we “share” ourselves and our consciousness. I believe that when a human connects with an entity of larger consciousness, they “share” that entity’s larger awareness and become, momentarily, a larger-entity by proxy. Well inanimate objects and machines, when a human consciousness truly validates them and is able to make rapport with them, acquire temporarily some of our own consciousness — enough to make them better able to communicate with us, not necessarily in words, but in a form of “awareness” that is a bit ineffable and I suppose has to be experienced to be understood.

I’m wandering. Back to the meditation.

***

So in the end I told IG, “For my session archmeds from now on, I want you to bring me what YOU think is the best composite combination of these archetypal energies:
1 – The target itself, and my ability to get rapport with it
2 – The evolution of the target in some fashion based on our interaction
3 – The evolution of me in some fashion based on our interaction.”

Of course the archetype, most of the time, has very little to do on the surface with what the target turns out to be, but this doesn’t matter much to me.

***

As I opened my eyes I saw something in the sky falling toward me. I stepped back, and a large stone rectangular block crashed into the ground in front of me. It was shaped a lot like one of those big stone blocks in graveyards that look like they are just a big shape ‘around’ a casket or sarcophagus.

I stared at it. A solid block of stone is pretty novel for an archetype, I thought. How the heck will I figure out how to interact with this??

Solid is an assumption, I realized. So I imagined X-Ray vision and I slowly scanned it from one side to the other from the top. It looked like there was something in it, way down at the center; beam shapes sort of; bones? I’d never done this before in an archmed after all this time of doing them.

I turned to IG and said, Can we be reaaaaaally tiny and etheric so we can just go inside the middle of it and see? I realized I felt a bit nervous so I called Responsibility (one of my fave archs) to come and help me. My ultimate warrior with the golden eyes. Then we all got small and went inside.

First I just saw darkness, and then beams of some sort in the distance around us. And then in what seemed an unbelievably vast span of space, were tons of starships, floating in the darkness. Like a whole fleet of different design and intent. I had a sort of emotional impression of awe, kind of hard to put words to, but something related to like, dreams becoming real.

I said to IG, but what does it mean?

Of course he seldom answers that. Sigh.

We went back to normal size outside and staring at the big chunk on the ground in front of me. I told Responsibility I had missed him, and we hugged each other until we dissolved into each other. So nice, minor rush. Then I turned back to the stone shape and said ok, I’m just going to use water, chemical and energy ‘of Life’ on you on the outside and see if anything happens at all. I’ll go from there.

So imagined all these things combining and raining down on it; it was raining outside, which helped. And the stone started dissolving away. More and more, revealing something that seemed an odd shape inside like black with many limbs or beams, something kind of like a machine perhaps. When everything around and through it had dissolved, I couldn’t see it clearly anymore; I didn’t really understand it.

I (as usual) said, “I respect you. I honor you. Thank you for working with me.”

I imagined opening my heart chakra and genuinely loving it, and suddenly my whole perspective shifted, and in amazed delight I said, “This is YOURS!” and to share with it, I imagined myself back in the ’space’ where I had been at first, while connected to this new arch form at the same time, and it was a sort of mutual awe, as we both realized, “This is your/my potential.” The starships. The furtherance of the dreams of man; technology taken to so much grander heights, that in turns helps man grow as well. I had such an awesome rush “with” the arch as it shared my original perception of it, and I felt so… humbled.

Humbled that I’m so self centered I had not taken seriously enough that everything is equal. As a human I am no more valuable than a gum wrapper except to other humans and to identities that interact with me. Everything is equal. All numbers are infinite. That is IT, you see; when you truly realize that everything is equal, that has to include US. And when you absorb it, it’s like the importance and value of everything else in the universe gets a sudden massive promotion (as our oversized ego dwindles down to its rightful size).

The target’s archetype — the combined energies of it, which so hilariously usually have zip to do with what I consciously, in “objective reality” consider the target to be — it is our equal. It is not just some inanimate ‘thing’ over ‘there’ back or forward ‘then’. There is no time, no space, and there is no such thing as an objective scale of importance. We are not just getting information as if info exists only for our convenience. Information is energy, is consciousness, just like we are. Any given collection of it is a sort of identity, just like we are. It has its *own* reason for being, its *own* destiny and even its *own* needs and wants and evolution, no matter how differently those may be perceived since it is not the same kind of life we are except at the most core level. I can’t say I understand how this can be. I can only say that this is my perception.

I was so happy for it. I was enthralled to be a witness to its potential and to its sense of potential. It seemed… sort of holy.

I receded to my sense of self and looked at it again. I almost didn’t want to ask for any energy from it in trade, the normal archmed routine. I felt almost like I was intruding on something important enough that my wishes were kind of trivial. But IG nudged me and I felt I should, so I said, do you have anything you can put on or in my body to share energy with me?

And I felt my left arm at the shoulder blade do something odd inside I can’t explain, and then I watched as my entire arm in a shift moving downward through it, changed into a complex, super strong, super high technology, black and somewhat hinged machine-like arm, all the way down to the hand. I had a great rush while this was happening as if it were a form of merge. I never had anything like that in an archmed either.

Then I grinned at IG and as the arch disappeared I rolled that world up inside me.

***

I decided I need to write this stuff down. I didn’t much originally because I felt that if I shared it with others, they would not understand.

First because unless a person does archetype meditations they just don’t get it, period.

Second because most people would think meditating on the target, for a remote viewer, should result in an arch that has something in common with it, which 99% of the time it doesn’t. For example if I assumed the target that this archetype relates to is some kind of machine or technology I’ll probably be wildly wrong.

Third, because most people would think that this is scary because “some targets are bad.” But that’s part of the fundamental shift in perspective that this whole philosophy brings, you know; every number is equal. A target that is an assassination or an earthquake or an event is no different in importance than a target that is a single person or an idea or a drawbridge. They are all “creative collections of energy assigned a form;” they all have an identity of sorts, though what that is shifts even as our own assignment of their inclusion/ definition shifts.

Cool, man.

I don’t know if doing these meds on most of my targets prior to session is going to have some effect on me or not. I hope a good one, if anything. Archmeds are incredibly powerful, reality-changing things. But, usually I do them on things with direct relevance to my life. I don’t know what it really means, what the effect is, doing it on every imaginable target. I guess I will just do it and find out.

By the way, in my eagerness to do this med and write this down…

…I missed the deadline on the RV session! Criminy! This was for Radical RV and I totally blew it. Well, I got something out of it, but I doubt they are going to appreciate that detail. ;-)

One of the things about experimenting is, sometimes you don’t really know if you are walking a path with potential… or one destined to failure for something so stupid you’ll be whacking your forehead about how could you have missed it… or just some ordinary, meaningless path that your desire to be experimental is making into a big drama-queen head-trip Adventure with a capital A, when really it just ain’t no thang, as the saying goes.

I did another session along the same lines as the last one. A few have worked so great for me in this “relationship” model I’ve been working in, that I’ve been excited about it all.

I realized when beginning the connect phase that if it’s easier for me to ‘expect’ the target to provide me a symbol of something, like a person, to ‘communicate’ with about the initial phase, that’s fine too. So I did.

When it came to putting some of my energy into some form that I could put ‘on or in’ the archetype—or in this case, give to the target-symbol—I “understood” that it wanted something specific. Instead of just imagining pouring energy into a little ball and handing it over, which was my conscious intent for a moment, I felt obliged to go over my entire body pulling out “threads” of this gold-light-energy. I mean my whole body, head to toes, back and front, as if it was important that there be some representative energy from all over.

I felt intrigued by this; it’s always the spontaneous, surprising stuff that has the most power in archetype work and I didn’t consciously think of this. I then held in both my hands a heaping group of energy strings, looking much like regular strings would in some respects, about 8-9″ long each and several dozen of them. I wasn’t sure what to do with them, but it “felt right” to let them settle into a neat bundle–they looked silky like hair then— and then to twist this into a shape that sort of tied in what looked like a Celtic knot. Then I gave it to the representative, and he indicated that was ok and it was clear that he had a specific . . . “criteria” for this and I had met it acceptably.

This made me feel a bit odd, not bad at all, just wondering… my archetypes as I’ve worked with them for years, may change or heal or whatever on their own schedule, in their own way, and have their own communication, but it has always been me who 100% drove that show. Suddenly it feels as if I’m having to put my experience where my armchair is: all that talk about “mutual” and “equal relationship” and “respect” and I find I’m being forced to acknowledge exactly that, when despite my theories, apparently I still had a comfortable “superior and in control” perspective (if my surprise on not feeling much of either is any clue!).

I wondered, so is the archetype (which is the target, even though in my normal work the archetype is always ME, yet we’re working on the assumption that the universe, target and me are all part of the same continuum here… ouch! my brain hurts!)—is the archetype-target, prior to the session, telling me something about its nature, or the nature of my connection with it?

OK so then in the session, I feel as if it’s going fine. (No FB yet.) Then, this is funny: the element of “string theory” — specifically, Serpienski strings (a type of fractal I believe) — ended up in the session, and I gotta ask myself, ok, WHAT are the odds that something bizarre like that in a session would be following on something in the intro of me pulling out little strings all over me? I don’t know if it means anything more than me picking up on me, or if the session data was in fact wrongly affected by the intro—but still I found it intriguing.

At the end of the session—or rather, some ways in—I had such a massive AOL on the target I’d done just previous that I had to quit viewing altogether. In retrospect I see that it really was AOL, so I’ll be doing another session, ignoring that and picking up the earlier stuff where I left off… and we’ll see if I can successfully, surgically resuscitate the data. ;-)

So then, going into the session after that, I had the feeling that I need to establish a typical, consistent doorway for this contact. By that I mean, archetype work has the inner-space “cave” in the Inner Guide shamanic format, and it has rituals in various occult formats, most things do have some kind of standard visualized environment and process for the “connection.”

I felt that my inner space cave was not the place to do this. Don’t know why, but I feel that it is not appropriate there for some reason. Nor my typical area where my Four and regular guides are. Nor my physical environ either. I felt there was something I’m missing, something that a subconscious part of me was saying, “Do it like this, this is the good, solid, appropriate approach.” I can actually “feel” under the surface of me, a “mental model, thought-form construct” that is what is… good for this. I just haven’t had it come through yet.

In the next session I spent like 15 minutes trying to get an intuitive handle on how to start this off properly and ended up snoring. Sigh. Chronic sleep deprivation sucks. Every time I’ve tried to view for 2 days I fall asleep. Yes I know I need sleep but I don’t have time. Grrrr.

My earlier session, which in retrospect, although a diff experience, made me think: when I went through the data, I saw all these amazing parallels to the previous session I’d done 2 days before. This made me wonder: could it be that I did not “disconnect” sufficiently? You know, like viewers talk about detox from target, well is there some disconnect ritual kind of necessary when you are trying to make such a deep connection as I am with them, an actual permanent exchange of energy with the target as an archetype?

And is my reality going to freak out if I start doing all these sessions that amount to archetype meditations? I’ve only worked on MY archetypes and the results are staggering; this is real magic in the most profound form. Now I’m working on… um… are they still “my” archetypes? Does viewing something connect me with it (”putting it into my reality” you might say) in such a way that this “internal blueprint of communication and energy exchange” makes it no different than me meditating on a life situation or my Sun?

I do rather feel like I’m walking a path that hasn’t got any kind of road at all. The closest I find is a combination of Seth (Jane Roberts), Crowley, Edwin Steinbrecher, and my own years of offbeat experience with ‘active meditations’, identities, etc. I’m not sure if I am blazing a useful trail, or if I’m just meandering through the psychic gutter making a big deal of every can I have to kick out of the way. It feels right, though. It feels like this is something that is really important to me, and that I am supposed to find, but that I am just at the beginning.

It was time to go do the weekly TKR Mission. I used the experimental approach I’ve been trying lately where I see the session as a relationship between me and the target.

I ended up calling my Inner Guide who recommended the same process as used for working with archetypes—that I use my energy to create some object that I place on or in the target. But I was sleepy and I kept kind of tuning out into zombieland initially. Finally, I got into the session, having spaced through actually giving over my “energy construct”, but apparently… some part of me, or the target, wasn’t going to let that slide. I had this archetypally- autonomous- experience where this giant structure, bigger than a vehicle but smaller than a house, came crashing down onto a street where I was standing, sliding right up next to me nearly like a plane crash, and it’s this big bizarre shape, and then I realize–kind of taken aback by the suddenness of all this–that it’s a giant cash register, drawer open! Like, Give it to me! Put it in here! hahaha!

Then I was sort of disconcerted. Wow. Just because I SAID interactive didn’t really mean I was ready for the target to be, er, that interactive. “Show me the money! You promised!” was the gist of it, except energy was the payment.

I had this brief wonder if every RV session is going to be an archetype meditation for me. This would have fairly enormous reality-impact.

Then I wondered if there was going to be pieces of me all over the universe thanks to me doing this archetypal trade with every target?? But that would be silly really, since I trade energy, atoms and attention and even healing with zillions of sources already, so how would it matter.

I had fun in the session. I really ‘felt’ it, I just LOVE the “experiential” kind of sessions. It’s in the galleries. I noticed in my presentation session, seemingly by accident—it just didn’t seem ’so relevent’ to me when doing the gathering for that presentation—I left out some data that I suppose some would consider negative. Then I had this guilt trip about whether I am morally obliged to share at least if I’m doing public session work with others in the public. I still am not sure how I feel about it. Finally I posted it along with the orig here.

Anyway. Not perfect but not bad, though a bit on the wordy and symbolic side, but still enough fun to inspire me to do it more regularly. I think I will stay with this particular approach for at least a few weeks. My last experiment ended up with me unable to hit the broad side of a barn for nearly a month, it was just horrible. But then, that’s what experimenting is about I guess.

I thought the moment in the session where I saw what I thought was a female angelic was interesting, given the name is HAARP. Heh. I’m easily amused I guess.