Hello everyone,

I propose a partnered exploration with everybody interested and experienced in the retrieval technique.

The target would be a member of my family who passed away lately.

Talk to you soon.

Cheers

Ok. Is there anyone else who wants to participate? What is the target date for participation?

You may not even be interested anymore. I think you can see by the content of this forum that many people who are regulars here are distracted by other subjects and completely unable to assist the curious passers by who visit here.

At least, in this particular capacity......However, I still believe it is within the realm of possibility that with perhaps at least one more participant some real information might be gathered.

I think it is always interesting to gather your own information through experience, whether alone or in groups. There is a certain feeling connected to it. Over time, it can be almost a certainty. However, I hesitate to adorn any experience of mine with any particular wisdom which would be essential to anyone else.

The whole point is to have your own experience. What other point is there?

Yeah i must admit this forum is dead, im gonna look for more active forums...

By the way you say one need one more participant to gather real informations, so you think one need to be at least 3 participants right ? If i understood well or not ?

Yes, I think it might be good to have a group larger than two. But not absolutely necessary. I think your results could be more interesting with a larger group. A particular person might have information which comes through more clearly which ties the whole group experience together better. But, that is just my opinion regarding this particular kind of exercise. There is, of course, also work you can do alone or other avenues to explore.

Of course, I would be happy to participate, if you choose to begin. Just pick your day, and I will work around it.

In addition, I do not work privately. You must be willing to have a public conversation here. I have no p.m. function here and have not for a long long long time.

wrote on May 16^th, 2017 at 7:16pm:

In addition, I do not work privately. You must be willing to have a public conversation here. I have no p.m. function here and have not for a long long long time.

And how am i supposed to reveal you the name of the target if it is not thrue PM ?

I do not need a name, in my opinion. If I participate I will simply meditate and open up to whatever information I get. I may get nothing, but that is how I would participate. I really don't understand why being given a name is necessary. People on the other side should be able to figure this out, in my opinion.

Can you give me detail on your technique and his timing please ?

I would personally approach this as an experiment. I make no claims that I have any special gifts. If you wanted to agree on a place to meet 'out there' we could see how the details of any impressions we got during meditation related to each other. Otherwise, it could be totally open. I don't regularly meditate in this particular way, but I would use a guided meditation of my choosing to bring me into a very relaxed state. I would then simply imagine that communication is possible and open my mind to that possibility. I would ask for a message for you. I would try to remember what I could. I would repeat that back to you. I have had visits in dreams of a loved one which were very vivid. It is certainly possible that you are receiving some kind of messages in your daily life or in dreams, but that is not for me to say. Weekends are better for me, so let's just say Saturday or Sunday, if you want. If it's not for you, that's fine too.

I am sorry but I am going to have to leave this site. The repetitious arguments are so tedious. I really cannot listen to it anymore. Please accept my apology.

wrote on May 17^th, 2017 at 2:42pm:

I am sorry but I am going to have to leave this site. The repetitious arguments are so tedious. I really cannot listen to it anymore. Please accept my apology.

What repetitious argument are you refering at please ????

I'm sad that Seagull left  :(

As for this thread's topic, I think the purpose of having the person's name is solely for the purpose of intention.  Bruce always just said the person's name and said that's all that's necessary to set intention and allow the process to begin.  I think it's meant as a way for you to get past the concept of trying and maybe end up being unconsciously stuck, when the whole point is to just cast out your intention and not get caught up in how it works.

Vicky

Vicky wrote on May 18^th, 2017 at 11:48am:

I'm sad that Seagull left  :( As for this thread's topic, I think the purpose of having the person's name is solely for the purpose of intention.  Bruce always just said the person's name and said that's all that's necessary to set intention and allow the process to begin.  I think it's meant as a way for you to get past the concept of trying and maybe end up being unconsciously stuck, when the whole point is to just cast out your intention and not get caught up in how it works. Vicky

Do you understand what are "the repetitious arguments are so tedious" Seagull refered to ? And the reason why Seagull left ?

There are a few long-term members here who don't see eye to eye on various beliefs and continue to discuss and argue their opposing views. 

I'd love to get some partnered exploration experiments going again.  It's sad that most of the old group is gone from this site but I'm hoping newcomers will come and join in.

Vicky

Hi Vicky-

"There are a few long-term members here who don't see eye to eye on various beliefs and continue to discuss and argue their opposing views."

I think while that was the case, the forum has much less of that now. Yes, we all don't agree on some things, but I don't see the kind and amount of arguing that used to exist. To me the forum is a much more welcoming place.

R

What kind of PE do you (Vicky & Focus 69) have in mind? Could you maybe explain in short steps how a PE looks like?

I know the OBE style but this is not something i can do at will yet and it requires a lot of time at night.

Then there is Bruce style exploration where i failed.

And last is my own simple method of intent+perceiving impressions like faces, people, landscapes.

Be PE you mean going into NP as a group and then comparing notes or going there to retrieve someone?

Offering this view as one who engaged in partnered retrievals [long ago]:

At that time I felt it was necessary to coordinate a time when all participants would meet. This is a mistaken view. This sort of work takes place out-of-time. That is my experience. All that is necessary is a retrieval target.

Likely one will make itself known. The individual will be in resonance with the needs of the retrieval participants, and I "get" this is being arranged. I have the feeling the target will be an "easy" one so that all feel a measure of success.

Soulmael,

I think any method is worthy.  I like using Bruce's method.  When I've done his workshops it's worked well for me.  And, many of the other workshop participants also had success.  In one group PE we did in our last workshop, each of us got significant verifiable information.  Our target was someone known deceased of someone in the group.


Morrighan,

I totally agree about the time/out-of-time aspect. 

Ok nice. :) So next time i would like to try my perception skills. Our rules after reading the last exploration topics would be like this right?

Before person identification:
- only observe, not intefering with persons field
- no posting of notes on forum or by pm

After person identification:
- comparing perceived data with information about observed persons life from posted url
- notes can be shared on forum topic or exchanged between participants if desired

Far as is known to me no "rules" exist regarding PMs in the time allotted for viewing the target. I believe it's common agreement not to share perceptions on the public forum until the target's name is posted so as not to colour the perceptions of other participants.

Yes it's an "observing only" exercise. No retrievals are required and I personally find it irresponsible to interfere with others and their free choices. It's quite possible to do information gathering without affecting another's personal field in my experience.

I'll post a new target today, seeing as the interest remains.

Soulmael,

A couple of us have been sharing our own results via PMs, but we label the message with "Spoiler Alert" or something like that, so that the other person knows not to read it if they have not done their PE yet.

Personally, I really think it helps to share your findings with someone so as to get their insight after the results are revealed.  Sometimes another person can interpret something in a way you didn't think of, and it helps to have it pointed out.  That's been my experience. 

If there were a "Like" button on this forum you'd get one for this post, Vicky. Our experiences and observations match well.


Vicky wrote on Jul 28^th, 2017 at 1:25pm:

Soulmael, A couple of us have been sharing our own results via PMs, but we label the message with "Spoiler Alert" or something like that, so that the other person knows not to read it if they have not done their PE yet. Personally, I really think it helps to share your findings with someone so as to get their insight after the results are revealed.  Sometimes another person can interpret something in a way you didn't think of, and it helps to have it pointed out.  That's been my experience.

Morrighan wrote on Jul 28^th, 2017 at 1:49pm:

If there were a "Like" button on this forum you'd get one for this post, Vicky. Our experiences and observations match well. Vicky wrote on Jul 28th, 2017 at 1:25pm: Soulmael, A couple of us have been sharing our own results via PMs, but we label the message with "Spoiler Alert" or something like that, so that the other person knows not to read it if they have not done their PE yet. Personally, I really think it helps to share your findings with someone so as to get their insight after the results are revealed.  Sometimes another person can interpret something in a way you didn't think of, and it helps to have it pointed out.  That's been my experience.

Yay!  Thanks.  I often find myself trying to hit the "Like" button and then realizing there just isn't one.  Too much time on Facebook I guess, LOL   ::)

I observe mind is the greatest impediment to accurate information retrieval. This just happened today. The following exchange, while not verbatim, is an excellent illustration of this assertion.

N: what is it that made me forget the bulk of the download for today's [mission] work?

Me: Nina. (The actual name is something that is not Nina. Close enough to understand)
[pause]
Checking my field integrity.

N: We know Nina. We encountered Nina before.

***

So while my infos were spot on, my mind jumped in so that I second-guessed myself. To my mind, "Nina" made no sense as N asked me what, not who. Fortunately there was no hesitation in my original response, and that was the correct response respective of what my mind insisted.

And this is in part why sharing your infos in private correspondence with other participants on these targets is totally useful. A partner is quite valuable in verification. After all, this is the partnered exploration forum.