|
Can a CRVer's Results Be Influenced By Someone Else?
Question:
I read the book
recently by Jim Schnabel (Remote Viewers), as well as the
abstracts that you suggested. Remote Viewing is not what
I thought it was. It seems to be helpful as a descriptive
tool, but doesn't really help you to identify what a target
is. You even have instructions on the practice targets that
we should "describe, not identify". Do I understand it right?
Can a viewer ever identify what a target is?
Answer:
(NOTE:
This answer has been provided by Palyne (PJ) Gaenir, webmaster
of the Firedocs
web site).
Well... remote
viewing is about acquiring data. Part of the RV process
requires that one train themselves out of assumptions about
"what" something is -- referred to as "analysis" in CRV
but in its most basic form what we're really talking about
is "recognition."
So, much RV data is not going to include "what" the target
is specifically, but instead, a great deal of detail about
it.
BUT. That being said, this does not mean that a Viewer is
not, often, going to recognize what something is in general
or even in specific. Especially if the target is some high-
consciousness target, something lots of people see or think
about. (It is generally easier to RV the great pyramid than
someone's uncle George's woodshed in Kansas, for instance.)
I don't think it would be too surprising for a Viewer to
say, "I think this is the Statue of Liberty." However, it
would be fairly unusual for a Viewer to say something like,
"this is a 1968 Ford Mustang convertible." They'd probably
get that there was an object, it was a vehicle, it was a
car, it was blue... maybe things like, it is kind of old,
or it is shiny, or it is in motion. If they were personally
really "into" cars they might get more. But the degree of
"energy" of the target (some scientists refer to this as
a matter of Shannon Entropy, but that isn't really known
yet) is part of what influences what degree of contact,
and that relates to how much 'identity' as well, that a
Viewer gets.
Note: in the vast majority of RV sessions, the target is
already known to the analyst, so the issue of recognition
is not quite such a big deal. The analyst knows what they
are looking for. It is not always relevant that the Viewer
doesn't know what they are describing. Their job is to describe;
the analyst, who knows either the target or the site or
the suspicions about them, is responsible for putting the
data into context.
:PJ
I would
like to also add that a viewer often recognizes what the
target is during a session. At that time, it is most important
for the monitor to shift the viewer to what is unknown about
the site, as though giving him/her a new target to work
on. For example, there is a practice target of the Empire
State Building, and the viewer, recognizing it, declares
that the site is the Empire State Building. Let us further
say that the viewer, at some earlier point during the session
had described a "high, windowed part". Then the monitor
might say, "OK. Now, move to the "high, windowed part" and
describe." There are two reasons for this:
- First, if
the viewer is allowed to coalesce his/her thinking into
the identification, then all the viewer's preconceived
ideas about the Empire State Building, as well as any
and all related memories, emotions, etc. about it must
be dealt with. Along with this, all >>>related<<< memories,
emotions, etc. creep in. In this example, the viewer
would not only have to deal with all STRAY CATs about
the Empire State Building, but about New York City,
New York weather, traffic, people, etc. Pretty soon,
the burden would be too much, and would shut the viewer
down. As long as you keep the viewer viewing an unidentifiable,
there are fewer problems with STRAY CATs.
- In a real-world
situation, the viewer is not there to view what you
already know. The viewer is there to give information
that you don't already know. Let us take an example
where the police are looking for a hostage and have
narrowed the location down to a certain building - let's
say, the Ajax Warehouse, a recognizable landmark on
the edge of town. If the viewer says, "large", "red",
"brick-like", etc., and suddenly says, "This is the
Ajax Warehouse!" and shuts down, then the viewer has
done you no good. If, however, the monitor/viewer team
is trained, practiced, and conditioned to move from
knowns to unknowns, the monitor can say, "Good. Now,
move to the target person's location within the Ajax
Warehouse and describe." The viewer, having gotten the
overall location, now provides detailed information
of exactly where the hostage is within the location.
Further, if the viewer says, "This is the basement!"
You have what you want, right? Maybe so, but still not
exactly. Let's say that it is a big basement with a
catacomb-like layout, miles of pipes, etc. You still
don't know where within the basement the hostage is.
Now, though, the viewer is working against a double-whammy.
He/she knows that 1) it is a basement 2) of a warehouse.
You must be aware of the fact that all the viewer's
memories and preconceptions of both basements and warehouses
will tend to pollute the impressions gained from there
on, unless the monitor moves the viewer to another unknown.
Otherwise, the viewer will tend to describe it as cold,
dark and damp, when in fact, the hostage's exact location
within the basement may be a warm, well-lit room. The
simple act of having identified "warehouse" and "basement"
may lead the police to the wrong place and thereby give
the criminals time to kill the hostage. At this point,
the viewer may become more of a burden to the police
than an asset. Therefore, it could be best in this situation
for the monitor to either end the session, or just shift
the viewer to a complete unknown. The monitor could
say something like, "OK. Now, move to the target person
and describe. Condition? Position? Activities?" (Remember,
the fact that the "target person" is a hostage is still
not known to the viewer.)
By keeping the
viewer continually working unknowns and never allowing them
to identify anything, you keep the viewer's information
as pollution-free as possible. The job of viewer is often
a very unsatisfying one for this very reason. As a viewer,
your mind is continually trying to stabilize itself by identifying
where it is or by identifying something in its surroundings.
The very minute success is gained, it is pulled out from
under you and you are thrown back to unknowns. It is something
you never really get used to, but once you help save that
first hostage or help rescue that first abducted child,
somehow you don't mind so much, any more. Lyn
|
