>--- TurquoiseB wrote:
>
> --- lurkernomore wrote:
> >
> > I had a relationship with a lady -her female instincts so
> > finely honed that this cat and mouse game was right there
> > out in the open, (and just beneath the surface somehow ).
> > She nearly caught her prey, and yet I knew it was not the
> > right match. How hard it was to pry myself away. It was
> > extrodinary to see her ply her trade. Good stuff. We
> > still remain distant friends.
>
> From an occult point of view, the ability to
> "push it out" and attract other people's attention
> is far less valuable than the ability to "pull
> it in" and use your energy for something far more
> interesting.
>
> The most interesting person I ever encountered
> in this regard was Bruce Willis. He has the ability
> to be as famous as he is and be in a crowd of people
> and "go invisible," to the point that almost no one
> notices him. Being able to "push it out" is kid
> stuff, occultly; being able to "pull it in" this
> way is far more difficult.
I wonder what the relationship may be
between invisibility and transparency.
I talked to a woman on the phone last
year who left me the impression of being
transparent, not in the sense that I could
see through her ruses and spot her intentions
at their core, but in the sense that she had
no ruses, no agenda, and was merely living
life as it determined to live itself through
her. Does that make sense?
It was in the context of interviewing
people about new jobs they'd taken on.
Except for the one person above, everyone
else had an ego stake in the proceedings.
They reveled in their success or quaked
in the prospect of failure. Their egos
were tangible, opaque objects. This one
person, though, whose name was Angela,
perhaps appropriately ("Angel"), didn't
seem to have an agenda. She lacked an
opaque ego to block the light. She was
doing her work and being supported by
all around her, and marveling at the process.
