This soul recently returned to his non-physical self.



And a super-exciting BONUS target!
This is strictly for fun. There are no idents that link to any this image. Very little is known about the subjects and it took place long ago. This is just a practice target. Anything you get is fair game. Strictly for fun. Absolutely no "right" answers.

File under miscellaneous: the more these muscles are strengthened, the easier it gets. What "they" didn't tell you department: "it" (whatever "it" is) works doesn't have an "off" switch. Discernment becomes very important, in my experience.

Illustrative tales always help. What follows is strictly my experience. Making no suggestion this could be your experience.

Background: in my former career incarnation in my present life* I logged more than a million actual air miles as a business traveler. I know absolutely every sound from whirrs to clanks an airliner makes, what is happening when the sound reaches my ears, and if that sound occurs at the right moment in the proper sequence. If there is anything that can possibly occur on a flight that has both a takeoff and a landing, it's happened to me. This is not bragging. It's not even about me.

It's to explain this phenomenon, because I hold absolutely no fear of flying:

If in the course of a flight I am suddenly overcome with a dreadful feeling - you know, the fiery crash or plunge into freezing water at 300 knots -  it's nearly certainly not a premonition. What is likely is I've picked up on another passenger's field. That fellow passenger is the one who harbors the fear, not me, and I simply felt it and mistook it for my own.

This is what discernment is all about. It's about properly tracing the source of incoming infos. It's also about protecting my own field from unwanted intrusion. In the example I cite here, the fear from another passenger is so strong it bleeds into my field.

We're lead to believe our thoughts are our own. Heh. When I say: we are multidimensional beings being multidimensional fields, I'm calling it for what I see.

And back to the original observation at the top of this post: the more we strengthen our atrophied muscles of observation, the greater our sensitivity. Which may bring some unexpected experiences ....

* This is not my first embodiment as a traveler, and likely not my last. All I will say that is verifiably true is: I am known in many ports.

This week's target was named James Finley in his recently vacated life: http://www.newsday.com/long-island/james-finley-award-winning-ap-photojournalist...

The second, "bonus" target is something of a hint. While the idents of the subjects are lost to history, the man who photographed them is not. That photographer was known as WeeGee, AKA Arthur Fellig. His moniker is a reference to the Ouiji board game, for as a photojournalist in the 40s he often showed up at the crime scene before the police. Posted for James as a homage to another great photographer, and also posted as a bonus for our friends at home to practice with.

Soulmael wrote on Aug 13^th, 2017 at 11:46am:


I do none of the things you describe, and I would consider these questions an interruption of that individual's field. How would you feel if you were on your way somewhere and a stranger stopped you and asked these kind of questions?

In my experience simply observing is much more productive, and non-intrusive.

What I do is simply look at the image and nothing more. Even though I knew this week's person (as I'm the one who chose the target), I "got" a clear "hit" on a second look. "I have a good eye" is what I was present to. That's entirely consistent with his work in life. All I do is observe. I believe this is what I ask in these exercises.

Are you (general you, not any specific you) open to perceive the multidimensional resonances of "I have a good eye" ? Because the sentence contains a great deal more information that it appears to on the surface. This is a good example (to me) of a clear "hit" - even though I had no intent of gathering infos when I looked at the photograph!

What is clear to me is how we all are present to the same information differently. A good friend receives code sequences specific to the work at hand. The code sequences are typically number groups. I understand what they mean, and my friend understands what they mean, but were I pressed to explain it I would come up short because they occur outside our language reference points.

To me, getting a name is not very helpful information. To me, that's thinking and acting in 3D. While a name may satisfy a certain analytical desire, it seldom conveys a great deal of useful information as a stand-alone answer. I'm reminded of a painting that shows scientists attempting to use the tools of their trade to understand a genie in a lamp. The painting shows all the dimensions the genie occupies while the scientists are so narrowly focused they can't see anything beyond the physical lamp.

I observe it's necessary to drop our concepts of ourselves as limited in order to interact with that which is not limited by beliefs. I'm also extremely careful not to influence the fields of another field being.

The targets I choose for these exercises are public figures, it is true. That does not mean they also don't hold private lives. All it means is they are used to being in the public eye, unlike some random someone picked from the local newspaper's obituaries. Being respectful of another's field is just common courtesy at the minimum. Messing with another's field is a whole different enchilada. And I observe it is extremely common to inadvertently mess with another's field, or even enter another person's field - particularly when the motivation is "I want to help."