Old School
27th May 2007, 07:16 PM
I have two questions:
Are selves and negs the same?
If so (or partially so) then is it not better and a lot less dangerous to present negs as internal and therefore more under our control?
I know you are super busy so I separated he background below as optional reading.
A few years ago I worked though a thought control exercise based on gnostic principles with very positive effects. I basically learned to control / minimise entities called selves that reportedly form the greater part of most physically incarnated people. I didn't have the discipline to maintain the full control approach continuously, but retained the ability to turn the base parts of my being off at will. Then last year I read your book Physic Self Defense. The Negs sounded a lot like selves, except that you promoted them as external and independent of the individual. You mention the alternative interpretation, but nevertheless, the presentation of negs as external in the book appeared to cause a massive influx of the critters into my apartment. My old technique of shutting down selves became a lot less effective (fear is a self and I could not shut down fear of negs when they were around me). I am in much better shape now thanks to the techniques. If fact the techniques have a bunch of merit, but I would like to have gotten there without the influx. I sometimes think that to know one thing you must un-know another. My conclusion was that the perception of negs as external made me more vulnerable. My concern increased when this year a young acquaintance started to read the book (probably because I advised her not to) and she became quite disturbed. I advised her to skip to the techniques at the end and she didn't talk about it again. I would not mind switching the clock back to not knowing about negs as external and my guess is she would as well. I know you want your books to benefit people but I wonder if this one tends to somewhat cause the ill it seeks to mitigate and maybe should be available "on prescription only". If negs are different to selves then better to now about them. But if they are the same or similar then it is definitely better to perceive them as part of yourself where they can be starved out of existence, if you have the will power. The plus side of starving selves is that as you remove the negative part of your being you create space for your positive speck to become a much bigger part. The external view of negs does not allow for that principle.
Are selves and negs the same?
If so (or partially so) then is it not better and a lot less dangerous to present negs as internal and therefore more under our control?
I know you are super busy so I separated he background below as optional reading.
A few years ago I worked though a thought control exercise based on gnostic principles with very positive effects. I basically learned to control / minimise entities called selves that reportedly form the greater part of most physically incarnated people. I didn't have the discipline to maintain the full control approach continuously, but retained the ability to turn the base parts of my being off at will. Then last year I read your book Physic Self Defense. The Negs sounded a lot like selves, except that you promoted them as external and independent of the individual. You mention the alternative interpretation, but nevertheless, the presentation of negs as external in the book appeared to cause a massive influx of the critters into my apartment. My old technique of shutting down selves became a lot less effective (fear is a self and I could not shut down fear of negs when they were around me). I am in much better shape now thanks to the techniques. If fact the techniques have a bunch of merit, but I would like to have gotten there without the influx. I sometimes think that to know one thing you must un-know another. My conclusion was that the perception of negs as external made me more vulnerable. My concern increased when this year a young acquaintance started to read the book (probably because I advised her not to) and she became quite disturbed. I advised her to skip to the techniques at the end and she didn't talk about it again. I would not mind switching the clock back to not knowing about negs as external and my guess is she would as well. I know you want your books to benefit people but I wonder if this one tends to somewhat cause the ill it seeks to mitigate and maybe should be available "on prescription only". If negs are different to selves then better to now about them. But if they are the same or similar then it is definitely better to perceive them as part of yourself where they can be starved out of existence, if you have the will power. The plus side of starving selves is that as you remove the negative part of your being you create space for your positive speck to become a much bigger part. The external view of negs does not allow for that principle.