What Repels, What Allows, What Attracts

[dreamosis]

From the article "Reality Creation Redux" on the montalk.net website, http://montalk.net/notes/reality-creation-redux



1) Awareness / anticipation repels.

2) Ignorance / denial allows.

3) Intent / emotional resonance attracts.


I found this article inspiring and clarifying. And it seems like employing these three simple tenets could go a long way in psychic self-defense.

Lucid dreams, and the astral, are fantastic testing grounds for these ideas. I've experimented directly with them and have found that, in dreams anyway, I can stop certain effects by placing awareness on them. If I take my awareness away, the effect may manifest again, through the interplay of 2 and 3 above. Too much of 3 (emotional resonance) can override 1.

The main trouble it seems, in all cases with Negs, is that a person's emotional resonance is being negatively influenced. And it rarely, if ever, seems to be enough for a person to merely to become aware of a psychic attack in order to throw it off.

Successful psychic self-defense appears to follow the above principles. Through increasing your awareness, discovering and minding your blind spots, and maintaining positive attitudes, a person is able to execute the countermeasures needed for a long enough period of time so as to throw the attack off. These three things by themselves won't necessarily end an attack, but it's hard to see how an attack could be stopped without them.

[CFTraveler]

I've experimented directly with them and have found that, in dreams anyway, I can stop certain effects by placing awareness on them. If I take my awareness away, the effect may manifest again, through the interplay of 2 and 3 above. Too much of 3 (emotional resonance) can override 1. I have found this to be true, at least in my experience.

[ButterflyWoman]

1) Awareness / anticipation repels.

2) Ignorance / denial allows.

3) Intent / emotional resonance attracts.

Yes, I can see that for sure. I totally get that. It's very difficult to deliberately enter into a state of ignorance and denial, though. Perhaps "unattached" is a better term for that.

I'm off to read the entire article now. Thanks for posting it! :)

[dreamosis]

Being familiar with most of montalk's material, by "ignorance and denial allows," I think what he's getting at is that ignorance or denial doesn't protect you from anything, but leaves you open.

You could, however, read the second principle in a positive sense: detachment allows (if you understand detachment as a kind of positive, willed ignoring or non-anticipation of a certain effect.)

This jives with a lot of my out-of-body experiences. I'm most successful when I'm in a state of playful abandon, wherein I don't really care whether I succeed in getting out or not, I'm detached, ignoring whether or not I'm having exit sensations in favor of putting my full awareness and emotion into the exit technique. If I move my awareness from the action of the technique to the sensations of leaving my body too soon, "the wave collapses into a particle."

This also jives with my experiences with negative energy. If I'm ignoring my intuition, I get slimed. But, there's a way for me to talk about "ignoring" or detachment in a positive sense too. If I'm detached -- that is, non-reactive -- negative energy will just flow through me. I allow it to flow through me and out the other side or down through my grounding.

[Palehorse Redivivus]

I'm a fan of Montalk's material also, and what I get out of that is pretty much the same. I'm pretty sure it ties into the Victim / Flow archetype; an inconveniently named part of everyone that is the part of ourselves through which things happen TO us, for better or worse, without conscious input. It also seems to tie into much of what I've read on both chaos magic and manifestation; the part where you're supposed to deliberately forget about the working in order to have the result come through.

I'm still kind of in a wrestling match with my detachment / allowing faculty, because when I release the whole process, mine tends to get forcibly hijacked and immediately default to worst case scenarios despite any positive beliefs, expectations and optimism; yet when I myself keep a finger on the whole process, results are better but spontaneity and novelty are stifled. I've seen it work enough to have a good idea of the mechanics of the process, and I think Montalk is pretty right on, but consistency without interference is another story. Meh I say!

[dreamosis]

Yes, consistency without interference is the heart of the game in reality creation/manifestation, isn't it?

It's also the urgent need in cases of psychic attack.

Thoughts on achieving consistency without interference?

[Palehorse Redivivus]

Yes, consistency without interference is the heart of the game in reality creation/manifestation, isn't it?

It's also the urgent need in cases of psychic attack.

Thoughts on achieving consistency without interference?

Kind of an odd predicament, that, because I've got thoughts on *my* situation, though I don't know how common it is, and don't want to go into too much as more aspects of it are being pieced together right this minute.

I do get that the principle of chaos and indeterminate probabilities tie heavily into successful manifestation; if you can make friends with chaos and swing said probabilities in the direction you want, you're golden, I think.

I've also been toying with the idea of something like a protected supply line, so that the intent goes out, and the object of the manifestation comes back, within some sort of well protected framework. That way, you can still "forget" what's happening within the framework and chaos can still do its thing, but the framework is still operating within your parameters, and desires are not being distorted, blocked or the intent behind them reversed on their way back to yourself as they might be when sent out into the relative "wild" of the ether.

As I get more in touch with my nonphysical allies and guidance, some of which are higher nonphysical aspects of people incarnated physically, ideas have been kicked around about having *somebody* directly involved in the manifestations on each others' behalf, which would work something like putting out an intent and having friendly influences handle the mechanics of it deliberatley, kinda like getting a birthday present.

[dreamosis]

Yes, but as we get into the territory of non-physical allies and guides, we're not just talking about manifesting something, we're also talking about asking for help.

[Palehorse Redivivus]

True, but I see this as a sort of continuum. Unless you're poofing things into existence on demand in a Jesusy sorta way*, then what most people call "manifestation" probably has a whole sequence of logistical events and intelligences that participate to get the object from its point of origin to the person who wants it, or to orchestrate all relevant factors into the desired circumstances. I'd guess that when manifesting in a LOA sorta way, most of those participants are usually unconscious; some occasionally conscious of their participation. In other words, most manifestations probably have "help" anyway, and many techniques at the very least involve asking "the universe" for assistance as something perceived as having its own consciousness.

I just figure... I've got this here soul group, we all need things, and if we could end up as a self-organizing network with the ability to pool resources and protect the process, manifestation will probably get a lot easier for all the individuals involved.

*Spontaneous Jesus-like poofing is also something well worth shooting for, but seems a lot less common or reliable, at least to myself at present.