Remote two-person and group energetic practices

[dwai]

Looking around on TBD and there seems to be some apprehension about  doing two-person and group energetic practices. Could some people share thoughts on why it might not be a good idea to do these types of practices?

 

The way I see it is that such practices are usually effective only when at least some people have transcended the seeming duality of existence and therefore can share presence more freely. When done between a seasoned practitioner and a neophyte, this is called shakti pat in some traditions.  This is a great thing so long as there is no dependency formed on any or all sides. It helps release many subconscious mental patterns and habits and can help people open their chakras gracefully and allow Kundalini to rise to the crown and beyond.

 

If someone knows there is no real duality between him/herself and another, they can share presence without any effort. Such a sharing of presence will not deplete any one individual, because the source and access to this energy/consciousness is infinite. A neophyte might initially experience tiredness as his/her mind space expands beyond the normal boundaries. But the system auto-adjusts and the flow of energy (which is infinite, everywhere, and always available) fills in the additional space created by the mental expansion. 

 

What is the risk? What are some of the fears people might have about such practices?

Edited February 8, 2018 by dwai
updated title

[Jonesboy]

That you may pick up “stuff” from others you are working with.

 

That doing energy work could be harmful because the person you are working with may not know what they are doing.

 

Those are two big ones that come to mind.

[dwai]

6 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

That you may pick up “stuff” from others you are working with.

Is that possible? I don't know...never happened to me.

Quote

That doing energy work could be harmful because the person you are working with may not know what they are doing.

Can someone who doesn't know what they're doing, even manage to do anything at all that'll make them harmful to others?

Quote

 

Those are two big ones that come to mind.

 

Edited February 8, 2018 by dwai

[Zhongyongdaoist]

I have given a yes vote with reservations, this is based on my person to person work over decades in short distances, and recent work with people whose judgement I trust on the Dao Bums, in the past few years.  I also believe that they can be harmfuI under some circumstances.  I don't have much time now to elaborate on this right now, but I will try to contribute more to this topic in a few days.

 

ZYD

[liminal_luke]

In a way, group energetic practice is inescapable.  We're together here on this planet and we all influence each other for better and for worse, and often in ways that go unperceived and unacknowledged.  Purposefully engaging in such practices adds a level of intent which intensifies things considerably.  Is this a good thing?  I think it depends.

 

Some people have energy which uplifts; others depress. Some people have very pure and loving intentions; others, not so much.  I`m selective about who I do what with.  Not everybody gets to come into my home, eat at my table, sleep in my bed.  For much the same reasons, not everyone is welcome to muck around with my energy body.   

Edited February 9, 2018 by liminal_luke

[thelerner]

I voted yes, perhaps naively.  The simplest group interaction is simply meditating together.  That's always been a positive experience for me.  As far as distance stuff.. the problem I've had is not being able to connect.  Still caveat emptor.  Know the person or object of your connection before hand.  Be grounded and without expectation. 

[doc benway]

1 hour ago, liminal_luke said:

In a way, group energetic practice is inescapable.  We're together here on this planet and we all influence each other for better and for worse, and often in ways that go unperceived and unacknowledged.  Purposefully engaging in such practices adds a level of intent which intensifies things considerably.  Is this a good thing?  I think it depends.

 

Some people have energy which uplifts; others depress. Some people have very pure and loving intentions; others, not so much.  I`m selective about who I do what with.  Not everybody gets to come into my home, eat at my table, sleep in my bed.  For much the same reasons, not everyone is welcome to muck around with my energy body.   

 

Such an important point.

 

Every interaction is a remote interaction.

We interact with our interpretation and projection of the other, not who they are.
We interact with who we are, not who they are.

 

This happens whether face to face, remotely, in all relationship.

 

So we can do remote energy practice and think about its efficacy, its benefits and risks,... but what a wasted opportunity if we don't bring that intention, that level of interest, that complete awareness to our every word, thought, and action here and everywhere in our lives.

[dwai]

14 minutes ago, steve said:

 

Such an important point.

 

Every interaction is a remote interaction.

We interact with our interpretation and projection of the other, not who they are.
We interact with who we are, not who they are.

How true...

14 minutes ago, steve said:

 

This happens whether face to face, remotely, in all relationship.

 

14 minutes ago, steve said:

 

So we can do remote energy practice and think about its efficacy, its benefits and risks,... but what a wasted opportunity if we don't bring that intention, that level of interest, that complete awareness to our every word, thought, and action here and everywhere in our lives.

Well said. There are subtle emotions and triggers lurking in our psyches that energetic exercises such as sharing of presence can bring forth. Stuff we may be aware of or perhaps be totally unaware of. They rise to the surface so we can release ourselves from them. 

 

 

[dwai]

1 hour ago, rainbowvein said:

The reason I voted no is foremost because humans are fallible.

Please elaborate

[dawei]

I think it is useful but not everyone is ready for it on two levels:   

 

1. Energy related - Their level of ability to establish and feel the connection may vary.  When I look back on my Medical Qigong period, lots of folks were able to do it.  But I see at the level I now sometimes engage, with Light energy, it is a narrower or sub-set level that fewer can establish.

2. Physical related - Whether one can feel the connection or not, interact occurs (as others are saying).  Stuff gets broken up and released emotionally as well.   There is a kind of refining period, if it is done often enough.  Some folks have a more difficult time with this than with whether they are feeling the connection they feel the effects/outcome of the connection.

 

This means to me that folks should be careful in the sense of the level of interaction they are willing to get exposed to.  Qigong level will be more accessible due to the more basic level of energy;  Light energy is very refined and hits and moves on more so. 

 

Jonesboy mentioned something that is true; one can pickup the issues from another.  If someone else in the group has a particular issue, others who have that same issue can pickup on it from the other person.  As stuff moves off of us, it is really a collective 'us' when the group is connected.   So it can get passed around a bit.  JMO.

[Jonesboy]

Only if you have a shared issue.

 

 I would also say that a true light level dive is more like a direct introduction to  Rigpa where such issues spontaneously liberate. So one doesn’t need to be so concerned about getting caught up in stuff.

[Jetsun]

I can give you a long list of people who do online satsangs, where you share presence. Ultimately in such settings there is no danger other than what is released from your own psyche as there is no manipulation of the energetics, it is more like group meditation but empowered by the group field. Such Satsangs are different than remote healing sessions though where there is a specific intent to work on particular themes and issues. 

 

While sharing presence may have a healing quality it isn't the same thing as a real healing session, and the issue with a real healing session is what is being done or used to move the energy can vary in terms of purity, clarity and benevolence. But can also be more powerful in terms of direct healing if there is something important to target. 

 

I do both types, and would do a group meditation or Satsang sharing presence with anyone or any group without worry, but would only do a healing session with particular people as I wouldn't trust that all people really know what they are doing and trust the beings or energy that they work with. 

[Apech]

Nothing you can do is necessarily 'safe' and whether its useful depends on what use you make of it - if any.  I wouldn't approach any practice assuming that by doing it I am taking no risk whatsoever - just in the same way as I wouldn't follow any teacher or teachings without thoroughly examining them for a long period of time and testing them.  To do anything else is naive.  I would say that powerful practices have inherently more risk - but this is not a reason to not do them but it is a reason to treat them with ultimate respect.

 

Anything involving any level of intimacy with another being carries with it a set of communication dangers - mostly about miscommunication - just as having a lover does the same.  So care for yourself and also care for the other being is important.  Clarity about what you are doing and why is the key.

 

Having said all this - my basic position is that people are free to do what they want (save it not harm others) and I would just ask to not be impacted by whatever they are doing unless i freely choose to get involved.

 

I can't tick the poll cos none of the boxes say this  

[C T]

Its a no vote from me. 

 

Too many things could potentially go wrong when opening up the body-mind to remote manipulations. There are too many unknown factors that could impact and thwart the desired outcomes of such impersonal exchanges. Not to mention the absence of protective shielding, quite an important preparatory ritual, considering the limitless number of wandering entities in the ether-realms. Some may not have the ability/knowledge to exorcise possible contaminations and lodgements of negative energy from potentially brushing up against these entities while engaging with what appears like a safe exchange. 

 

Perhaps allowances could be made if two or more individuals have already been actively practicing (in person) together for an extended period, and all the proper precautions are in place. Other than that, I think such practices are irresponsible and unnecessary, but that's my own subjective view which anyone is free to disregard. 

 

I could probably write an essay on this matter, but i think most of what could be said have already been said on various threads relating to the subject, so if anyone is interested just search the TDB archives and also do some serious homework first. Its important to be sceptical in all matters related to the spirit world. One could never be too careful. 

 

There are safer, authentic alternatives available to those who are insistent on surrendering their minds to such manipulations - a common sense approach would be to seek out these alternatives and work with them instead. 

 

I dont mean this as a put-down of anyone or group. There's such a thing as free will, and through it many life lessons are there to be learnt, so its a wonderful thing. Its good to know what the risks are so that preventative measures rather than ignorance can be effected. Vigilance and awareness helps, and should always be at the forefront of one's mind when going down this road. 

 

I apologise should my words get across as lacking subtlety. 

Edited February 9, 2018 by C T
typo

[Jeff]

My view on it may be a little different than most, and is summed up in these two verses from the gospels...

 

For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office: So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another. (Romans 12:4-5 KJV)

 

As others have also stated, there really is no “separation” all such belief is an illusion of mind.

 

If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing. Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known. (1 Corinthians 13:1-12 NIV)

 

Give and share all that is “you”. Let go of fear, break down the boundaries, and truly love all...

[Apech]

Now we know why yes/no style polls at DBs are a waste of time

[dwai]

There are some very interesting responses - thank you all for that. A few key points that stand out for me are --

 

• All interactions are "remote", even those in close physical proximity.  In essence we are observing our own reactions/actions are predicated on own reactions. These reactions are brought about by our own mental patterns (fears, desires, likes, dislikes and preconceptions). 
• There is a risk of negative impact on the energy body from energetic sharing of presence
• There is no risk of negative impact on the recipient if there is sharing of presence (already done via sharing satsangs, etc) but for healing we should be very circumspect as to whom we allow access to our energetic selves.
• Trust in the "other" person or the person sharing presence seems to be a critical factor 

For the dualists, I can understand that there is concept of separation, so there is fear.

 

My question is, there are many here who are Nondualists by practice and philosophy. If our conviction in Nonduality is sound (irrespective of what we subscribe to -- no self or no separate Self or Only One Self), then who is afraid of these negative ramifications? What is the reason to be so wary and afraid?

 From your nondual insight (yes, I'm speaking to all of you, who are my own Self) -- 

 

• Do you not know that see that there is no separation between beings?
• Do you not see that it is the same consciousness that manifests as energy?
• Do you not see that there is no fear of anyone stealing or losing their "energy" because the energy/awareness is infinite and always present?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 9, 2018 by dwai
minor edit

[Apech]

7 minutes ago, dwai said:

There are some very interesting responses - thank you all for that. A few key points that stand out for me are --

 

• All interactions are "remote", even those in close physical proximity.  In essence we are observing our own reactions/actions are predicated on own reactions. These reactions are brought about by our own mental patterns (fears, desires, likes, dislikes and preconceptions). 
• There is a risk of negative impact on the energy body from energetic sharing of presence but for healing we should be very circumspect as to whom we allow access to our energetic selves.
• There is no risk of negative impact on the recipient if there is sharing of presence (already done via sharing satsangs, etc)
• Trust in the "other" person or the person sharing presence seems to be a critical factor 

For the dualists, I can understand that there is concept of separation, so there is fear.

 

My question is, there are many here who are Nondualists by practice and philosophy. If our conviction in Nonduality is sound (irrespective of what we subscribe to -- no self or no separate Self or Only One Self), then who is afraid of these negative ramifications? What is the reason to be so wary and afraid?

 

 

 

 

 

With greatest respect that is (possibly not intentionally) a bit twisty.  It does not follow that someone who does not want to do this energy sharing work is experiencing fear.  Would you say I look both ways before crossing the road means I live in fear of traffic?  Or is it just sense?

 

Non duality doesn't mean that we are all one - or even that we are all included in One or some such.  Non-self does not mean that we don't have selves in the ordinary sense - but just that an independent, permanent essence/soul/atman doesn't exist.

 

I think you should just accept that some people choose or want to do this kind of thing and others don't - and as I said above as long as I have the choice then I am happy to let others do what they want - with the final proviso of course that if I thought harm was occurring or likely to occur I might feel moved to step in as appropriate.

 

 

[Jonesboy]

3 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

 

With greatest respect that is (possibly not intentionally) a bit twisty.  It does not follow that someone who does not want to do this energy sharing work is experiencing fear.  Would you say I look both ways before crossing the road means I live in fear of traffic?  Or is it just sense?

 

Non duality doesn't mean that we are all one - or even that we are all included in One or some such.  Non-self does not mean that we don't have selves in the ordinary sense - but just that an independent, permanent essence/soul/atman doesn't exist.

 

I think you should just accept that some people choose or want to do this kind of thing and others don't - and as I said above as long as I have the choice then I am happy to let others do what they want - with the final proviso of course that if I thought harm was occurring or likely to occur I might feel moved to step in as appropriate.

 

 

 

I would agree with you Apech and at the same time I can recognize that for some it is an issue of fear. For others it is prudence.

 

Nothing wrong with either one.

[Apech]

8 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

 

I would agree with you Apech and at the same time I can recognize that for some it is an issue of fear. For others it is prudence.

 

Nothing wrong with either one.

 

I was once told that the original meaning of 'fear of God' meant shaking in the presence of the divine - just as the ancient Brahmin priests were said to do - and that the word 'fear' was related to the word 'fire'.  I've never been able to verify this but its a interesting thought.   

[dwai]

2 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

I was once told that the original meaning of 'fear of God' meant shaking in the presence of the divine - just as the ancient Brahmin priests were said to do - and that the word 'fear' was related to the word 'fire'.  I've never been able to verify this but its a interesting thought.   

That’s soemthing I’d not heard before. And this dwai unit is Brahmin by birth  

 

[dwai]

19 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

 

With greatest respect that is (possibly not intentionally) a bit twisty.  It does not follow that someone who does not want to do this energy sharing work is experiencing fear.  Would you say I look both ways before crossing the road means I live in fear of traffic?  Or is it just sense?

 

Non duality doesn't mean that we are all one - or even that we are all included in One or some such.  Non-self does not mean that we don't have selves in the ordinary sense - but just that an independent, permanent essence/soul/atman doesn't exist.

 

I think you should just accept that some people choose or want to do this kind of thing and others don't - and as I said above as long as I have the choice then I am happy to let others do what they want - with the final proviso of course that if I thought harm was occurring or likely to occur I might feel moved to step in as appropriate.

 

 

All points conceded as perspectives in duality. 

Yes I agree it is prudent to cross the street after looking left and right. It is good to look before one leaps and so on.

 

personally I don’t have a problem either way (if people want to do it or not). I was curious as to the reasons why one might not want to do this type of work.

 

[liminal_luke]

31 minutes ago, dwai said:

 

 

My question is, there are many here who are Nondualists by practice and philosophy. If our conviction in Nonduality is sound (irrespective of what we subscribe to -- no self or no separate Self or Only One Self), then who is afraid of these negative ramifications? What is the reason to be so wary and afraid?

 From your nondual insight (yes, I'm speaking to all of you, who are my own Self) -- 

 

• Do you not know that see that there is no separation between beings?
• Do you not see that it is the same consciousness that manifests as energy?
• Do you not see that there is no fear of anyone stealing or losing their "energy" because the energy/awareness is infinite and always present?

 

 

Three things.

 

There are levels and gradations of understanding.  A person can subscribe to the intellectual position that there is no separation between beings without having that awareness ring through their being through and through.  Exploring nondualistic possibililities does not obligate one to act "as if" before it`s natural to do so.

 

Some awakened beings still floss their teeth.  Awakening and conventional self-care can comfortablely coexist.  Choosing not to participate in some forms of group energetic exchange might be part of this conventional self-care.

 

And yet...there`s no denying that some people are needlessly afraid.  Sometimes we put up too many walls, too many shields, and the healing thing to do is to learn how and when to take them down.

 

 

 

 

[Spotless]

6 minutes ago, dwai said:

There are some very interesting responses - thank you all for that. A few key points that stand out for me are --

 

• All interactions are "remote", even those in close physical proximity.  In essence we are observing our own reactions/actions are predicated on own reactions. These reactions are brought about by our own mental patterns (fears, desires, likes, dislikes and preconceptions). It goes far beyond just "mental patterns" - overall general resonance and patterning - both natural and habituated
• There is a risk of negative impact on the energy body from energetic sharing of presence but for healing we should be very circumspect as to whom we allow access to our energetic selves.
• There is no risk of negative impact on the recipient if there is sharing of presence (already done via sharing satsangs, etc) It would depend on the definition of "risk of negative impact" and "presence"
• Trust in the "other" person or the person sharing presence seems to be a critical factor "trust" can also be worship or father figure or mother figure or "person that is assumed to know about these things" - any of these types of leanings can open us up to some pretty well meaning fools.

For the dualists, I can understand that there is concept of separation, so there is fear.

 

My question is, there are many here who are Nondualists by practice and philosophy. If our conviction in Nonduality is sound (irrespective of what we subscribe to -- no self or no separate Self or Only One Self), then who is afraid of these negative ramifications? What is the reason to be so wary and afraid? It is a bit amusing to talk of Dualists and Nondual - but in either case - Discerment and fear are not the same.

There are so many reasons to be careful and concerned that it can over power the experiencial value and interaction with the all of us. Most healers have little idea what they are doing but for the most part have good intentions and do not have all that much power to begin with. Even those who can clearly be felt and are clearly doing "powerful" work - but most of them have good intention and ask for guidance in what they do - and so generally recieve it

 

6 minutes ago, dwai said:

 

 

 

IN the initial stages of generally enhanced awareness and opening up to various energies -feeling them for the first time - intimate interaction is simply fun and relatively harmless. As one progresses it is still relatively harmless.

 

As one becomes a "light worker" and a "great healer" and "one working in the energy of Love"  it can become less harmless as the abilities have grown considerably but the belief in ones knowledge has exploded. This is the greater area where care must be taken and at the same time for those "on the outside" it is the better opportunity to have great healing work and work that they can feel and believe in. 

 

A "great healer" may not understand the little things when working around a pregnant woman or what not to do with a person with epilepsy. Very few understand Kundalini - nearly zero. If clear connection/ communication is not established with the spirit then considerable effort in orchestrating life experiences can be "removed" and basically lost. Most concepts around "opening up the chakras" are so far off base that they are generally dangerous in that they can "disorganized the house" of the recipient to the extent that they are open to all sorts of unfortunate side effects.

 

Transmission is generally misunderstood or perhaps a better way to state it is that there are two types:

In generall what is taken as transmission is something for which the word "transmission" is misleading -it is far more a case of a strong effortless Presence that creates an ineffable resonance to which others nearby or even listening in or watching on a monitor can/will begin to resonate with and in doing so unnatural patterning and habituation begin to break up. 

 

The other type of transmission may be a pat to the head or a touch or an intentional sending of energy or holding of energy resonance within the persons space. This second is generally rare from teachers and actually most do less and less of this as experience with doing so guides them to do it less because of the problems often then encountered by the students. Simple pats and things of this sort are fine - devotees drool for such encounters and here and there they offer much. And obviously for some teachers and their persona "touch and hugging" is what they do and direct physical transmission is simply incredible and a thing of great beauty.

 

In general I vote yes with reserve:

Many people do not interact enough - they wall off and die in beliefs. Energetic interaction is a way to "make it real" and however fraught with folly and detour - it is often some simple certainty that "I could feel that" that can spark a life of interest in the all and everything and not just the me and them.

 

 

[dwai]

 

16 hours ago, dawei said:

Jonesboy mentioned something that is true; one can pickup the issues from another.  If someone else in the group has a particular issue, others who have that same issue can pickup on it from the other person.  As stuff moves off of us, it is really a collective 'us' when the group is connected.   So it can get passed around a bit.  JMO.

But what goes around? Is it an actual malaise, or is it more a bringing to the surface of latent mentation issues one already has within?