Topic: Elias's Inventions

[nichi]

"It seemed that the niche of nagual was made for him [Elias].  It allowed him the anonymity and the effectiveness that was denied him in the world.
   "He was a dreamer, and so good at it that he covered the most recondite places of the universe in a bodiless state.  Sometimes he even brought back objects that had attracted his eye because of the lines of their design, objects that were incomprehensible.  He called them `inventions.'  He had a whole collection of them.
   "I want you to focus your recapitulation attention on those inventions," Florinda commanded me.  "I want you to end up sniffing them, feeling them with your hands, although you have never seen them except through what I am telling you now.  To do this focusing means to establish a point of reference, as in an algebraic equation in which something is calculated by playing on a third element.  You'll be able to see the nagual Juan Matus with infinite clarity, using someone else as a point of corroboration."

Commentary on The Eagle's Gift
THE WHEEL OF TIME
Carlos Castaneda

[Michael]

"I want you to focus your recapitulation attention on those inventions," Florinda commanded me.  "I want you to end up sniffing them, feeling them with your hands, although you have never seen them except through what I am telling you now.  To do this focusing means to establish a point of reference, as in an algebraic equation in which something is calculated by playing on a third element.  You'll be able to see the nagual Juan Matus with infinite clarity, using someone else as a point of corroboration."

Commentary on The Eagle's Gift
THE WHEEL OF TIME
Carlos Castaneda

That is a curious idea, that by focusing on a 'third' object, one gets a better picture of an already known object. I will have to ponder that one, but I do like it. Quite often we can't see a person clearly when we focus on them specifically. But when we switch our focus to a specifically related thing, it casts our person in a completely new light.

This is about how the background changes the object in the foreground. One really only sees aspects of a person when they are seen after considering something else which opens up a huge new field of meaning for us.

I recently wanted to talk of night sky-gazing, tho I haven't yet, and how it completely altered my perception of everything around me, including myself.

In the above case, Carlos is being asked to gaze at objects from out of infinity, which would cast Juan in a light Carlos had not realised. These objects give a kind of depth to the world in which Juan was the real operator. Much like Jesus saying I am a king in another world. If one saw that world, then one would see Jesus in true clarity. Otherwise he is only a crazy guy who came to a nasty end.

But these 'objects from another world' can come in many ways. The real trick is in how we focus on them.

[nichi]

That would be the ultimate extension of the practice indeed. To see the corollary in spirit, seemingly unknown in the tonal, as the "third element". One could even expand this awareness, and see yet the fourth and the fifth elements. Etc.

This one struck me at the time I grabbed it, though, because it reminded me of an experience I had, here in the mundane mental -- or in that place which overlaps the mental and the astral, but wishes to manifest in the physical.

On one of the occasions I experienced hypnosis, in the man's bed, he asked me to focus on a picture hanging above the headboard. I was looking at it upside down, which facilitated the eyes-rolling-back (which has a technical term I don't remember now.)  It was a lithograph of two men dressed in butch cassidy sort of clothing.  He told me to see the "third man" in the picture. I did. God knows what happened then -- it went to deeper trance at that point and I never could retrieve all the material in my attempts to do so.

But years later, before it was finally acknowledged on his part that he did all these things, I would look at that lithograph in his den and ask him, "So where is the third man?" Admittedly with a certain fascination for seeing his reaction. ~My own hypnotic suggestion to him, as it were.

Given that the retrieval of the memories never could cross the line of the "third man", though, I would have to say it's an effective technique.

I much prefer Florinda's and your extension of it, though.

[erik]

That is a curious idea, that by focusing on a 'third' object, one gets a better picture of an already known object. I will have to ponder that one, but I do like it. Quite often we can't see a person clearly when we focus on them specifically. But when we switch our focus to a specifically related thing, it casts our person in a completely new light.

Isn't there a physiological/physical counterpart of that method? That is peripheral vision of eyes. When looking specifically at nothing/or at one point in space, one can see other objects clearly with peripheral vision.

[Michael]

Isn't there a physiological/physical counterpart of that method? That is peripheral vision of eyes. When looking specifically at nothing/or at one point in space, one can see other objects clearly with peripheral vision.

yes, my thought also

[erik]

I have been pondering this peripheral vision-thing. I remember Don Juan also instructed Castaneda that in dreaming one should not look directly at various objects as they tend to vanish.

Florinda advised to focus one's mind on another object to have a clearer perception of the object of direct interest.

I've noticed that one cannot really look directly at birds and animals (they tend to run and fly away immediately) and one needs to use peripheral vision if one wants to observe them for a longer time.

At the quantum level, direct observation also tends to interfere with the state of affairs and, this way, it cannot be a source of knowledge.

It all leaves an impression that Unspeakable cannot look directly at Itself in Its various manifestations as Its look at Itself would immediately change It. Endless movement and change could be explained this way.

A ramification of interest is, however, about our eyes - what exactly do they do when focused directly on a living object? Why that effect does not occur in the case of peripheral vision?

[nichi]

I've noticed that one cannot really look directly at birds and animals (they tend to run and fly away immediately) and one needs to use peripheral vision if one wants to observe them for a longer time.

At the quantum level, direct observation also tends to interfere with the state of affairs and, this way, it cannot be a source of knowledge.

It all leaves an impression that Unspeakable cannot look directly at Itself in Its various manifestations as Its look at Itself would immediately change It. Endless movement and change could be explained this way.

A ramification of interest is, however, about our eyes - what exactly do they do when focused directly on a living object? Why that effect does not occur in the case of peripheral vision?

It goes to that frontal view. Predator-animals present with a frontal line of vision, looking directly at prey when they focus on it. Prey animals usually have vision which accomodates the peripheral, to watch out for predators. (The vision of big cats versus the vision of deer.) The animals perceive the direct gaze as predatory. We don't intend to prey on the animal more often than not by just watching them ... or maybe we do. The direct focus locks in on the target.

I have been inside the kitchen, for example, intently watching some of the birds, and they seem to sense it, even when they don't see me.  They then 'disappear', as DJ says.

There's no such thing as a passive observer

(just some thoughts).

[kaycee]

about our eyes - what exactly do they do when focused directly on a living object? Why that effect does not occur in the case of peripheral vision?

I think it also has to do with the way our minds are trained to define and label what we see, and with expectations.  When I look directly at a tree, I 'expect' to see what my mind has defined tree as being.  Same as when I look at Susie or Fred.

Like what happens when I see something unexpected and do that "double take" head movement, trying to bring it into focus to "define" it.

I think with peripheral vision, when I'm not focusing on one defined object, it slows the mind's labeling and expectation process and opens the way for awareness.

At the quantum level, direct observation also tends to interfere with the state of affairs and, this way, it cannot be a source of knowledge.

Now that brings to mind something I've always believed about manifestation/creating reality.  If I focus intently on what I "see" as good - what's just outside that 'narrow' line of vision that might be much better?

Luv, K