Category: Consciousness
Protocol: CRV (with monitor via Skype)
Coordinates: 3657 3454 1767 1486
Number of viewers: 1
Number of sessions: 1
Date: 2012-10-13
Time: 8.45 p.m. to 9.48 p.m.
Duration: 63 minutes
Pages: 9
What can you find out when you look at people’s experiences of consciousness? The “Monroe Institute: CHEC Units” session already gave a first glimpse . Now, however, the opportunity arose for an even more special target, which comes directly from an experience report of the Thetawaves forum:
Thetawaves-Forum: Fremde Arme (german)
The other day, after re-entering the body, I had a situation that seriously gave me pause. At that point in time, I was already completely locked into the physical body with my non-physical body – almost physically awake. Indeed, I suddenly felt for a few seconds how other non-physical arms pushed their way from behind through my physical arms … so into my physical body, so to speak, from behind through the shoulders and into the fingers …. kind of like pushing your arms into latex gloves in an isolation chamber. The arms felt very cold and strange (lifeless) … that was damn scary and I wonder what the intention is and from whom … Especially this unspeakable coldness of the arms shocked me. That might sound a bit paranoid, but it was really very intense and real …
The target cue:
*Translation: “Describe Wendulins Experience that he reported in the Thetawaves-Forum in the following post…”
As is usual with such targets, the first stages showed a tangle of (often indefinable) colors and surfaces. The AIs of stage 1 expressed themselves as follows: “Prison feeling – contrast (free / walled in) – dead end – like course”
In stage 2 these AIs were shown: “Artificial – simulated – sadly authentic and not authentic” . The viewer felt that part of the target was “real” and another part was “fake”. What that could mean later became clearer.
In stage 3 , the viewer drew a strange scene with a person in the center. Here he felt it was half “real + sad” and half “fake + happy”:
So far it was only pretty abstract data (which is typical with such targets).
Of course, it gets more interesting in stage 4. The aesthetical impacts (AIs) of the viewer to the target were “One side is real (the hollow one), the other side is like a kind of hologram / illusion” . With the emotional impacts (EIs) he then perceived two separate persons / entities. Person 1 (P1) felt something like “shock cold, steadfastness, assertion” and appeared “unimpressed” . Person 2 (P2), on the other hand, appeared “hardened, used, waiting” and “bored” . As ITs of the target there was “bring it down, look at it, project” and“Create ideal / demonstrate”. The viewer’s overall conclusion about the situation was:
“Dilemma”
“Like shortly before the solution”
“Something very small is missing”
In stage 6 we then looked at the aspect “Something is missing” more precisely. We asked what was missing and it was “Idea, sparkling thought, blocked” . Here it became even clearer that only a tiny little thing is missing to something. We then continued with a person perception in order to take a closer look at the two individuals (P1 and P2) occurring in the target.
Investigation and sketching of P1 and its activities (remarkable; the estimated age at 253 years – does that relate to the energy body or soul part?). P1 is on a kind of projection surface that she apparently “operates”.
Here now also P2, after which the “relationship” between P1 and P2 was also examined.
Essentially it came out that P1 tries to break through a kind of wall or blockade, but for which the said “little thing” is still missing. P2, on the other hand, waits on the “other side” and acts like an exam taker or “representative of the supervisory authority”. Obviously, this seems to be a familiar thing for P2, because they just “sit” there, bored and waiting. More precisely, P2 was waiting for a “result from P1”. A guide who should help, but who can only contribute once the OoBe practitioner has achieved the necessary “little thing”?
But how do you explain the aspect of the “strange arms” from the experience report? In fact, no direct contact or touch between P1 and P2 was visible during the session. On the contrary: It all pointed to a spatial / dimensional separation. The viewer developed its own theory afterwards (click for full screen):
So maybe it wasn’t a guide at all, and the experiencer practically “groped himself”? Again one of countless and still emerging puzzles from metaphysical realms …
Summary: An abstract, but interesting session on an experience on the border between wakefulness and sleep. The interpretation of the processes arises from comparison experiences that were made in this state. The symbolism with some kind of projection surface appears more often with such targets. Sessions on dreams also go in the same direction, although further sessions are required in order to be able to accept recurring patterns.
This also opens up the possibility of interesting RV projects in connection with OoBE-experiments: How are the experiences made with the respective techniques or approaches? Are there such things as recognizable constants, or does the data composition remain purely subjective? Can one contribute RV as a verification aid or additional data acquisition? Perhaps a combined OoBE / RV experiment can be carried out in the Thetawaves community in the future …
German version of this article
Leave a Reply