*************
The following message is relayed to you by  [email protected]
************
My past scene perceptions are just as real as present time.  Right down to the 
slightest detail.  But I will say this, I don't perceive things spiritually the 
same way I do with my body.  I only see the things I consider important to see. 
If I think it's important to see you , I will see you but I may not see the pen 
on your desk that is next to you.  I may not see what you look like since it's 
not important to know that but I may see ( know ) what your intensions are , 
goals are or what your level of sincerity is . If these are important to me.

I don't  see it like a body sees with it's eye balls. I know it. I know things. 
To see is to know.  To know is to see. 

I can read about a ship sinking back some time in the past and people suffering 
but to get a good reality of the event I must go there ( spiritually )  to the 
same place and time and know the feelings of others . Feel the cold, the 
emotions , the desperations. It's very very real and just as real as the events 
when it was happening.  I can see ( know ) any detail that I desire and not see 
things I don't want to see. ( know ) 

I  do the same with my own past too   . As I do , I vanish charge by ( 
timebreaking ) the importance .  I use the Postulate Failure Cycle Chart to 
locate things ( material ) for time breaking. It's all about knowing, not 
knowing , preventing or being prevented from knowing. Forcing or being forced 
to know. It's not about what form of knowing, just knowing. 

The past is becoming more solid too. Not just real. The material I timebreak is 
becoming more solid as I work my way back to the center of the " onion "



Sent from my iPad

On Sep 18, 2011, at 12:06 PM, Philippe Trounev <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Slim,
> Could you define real, this is the point where I get confused. People say 
> they are as real as they can be, how real can they be? Could you go into a 
> moment and reproduce it second by second with full preceptics and relive it 
> simultaneously with this moment, or is this memory real, which means being 
> able to recognize detail and experience it but not being fully submerged into 
> a full fledged time break.
> Best Wishes.
> P.T.
> 
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Slim . <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mine are as real as real can get or be.
> 
> Its either real or its not. But its as real as the present is real. Not
> as solid but just as real.
> 
> Sent from my Windows Phone From: Philippe Trounev
> Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2011 8:30 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [TROM1] Trom Digest, Vol 86, Issue 6
> *************
> The following message is relayed to you by  [email protected]
> ************
> 
_______________________________________________
Trom mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom

Reply via email to