USE OF GRAMMAR AND THE ABILITY TO DIFFERENTIATE
USE OF GRAMMAR AND THE ABILITY TO DIFFERENTIATE
On being able to articulate exactly what is perceived.
Alan rightly said that: “If you can’t define it you can’t have it.”
As a processor, coach and educator I have consistently seen this to be true. Clients and students not having sufficient vocabulary to articulate and thus define what it is they have their hands on, cannot have nor handle what they collide with.
As Christian once noted: “Roger, you do have a way with words!”
Yes, I do plead guilty to that . . . and one of the key issues in getting one’s articulation of what is what correct is being precise with the grammar used.
I am lucky to have studied a little Law in my younger years, and this taught me the importance of getting one’s grammar right.
And it happened that this paid off BIG TIME in my session this morning.
Indeed it afforded me one of my biggest case gain realizations ever.
The trouble with “case” is that too many elements of it that are merely similar get misidentified and collapsed in on one another as being the same and identical.
A common occurrence of this is when earlier similar “stuff” gets collapsed in as being part of, or the same as, later events on our Time Trail.
What I am going to write now is exactly as written in my session notes this morning . . . in solo sessions, I find it VERY beneficial to write out fully in my session notes exactly what I am finding just as I would have expressed it verbally to a processor. By this means I permeate, fully perceive, articulate and get it off my chest onto the paper versus to a processor as in a regular session.
Note: I am doing all my processing as a Spiritual Being/Presence (God-like Being) . . . and currently I am dealing with my alignment and interface with the Physical Universe (PU).
At session start I observed/perceived as written in my notes:
Cog . . . Trying to reach to perceive & permeate “there,” I am colliding with a/the reversal of presence and withdrawal from there . . . i.e., 2 opposed vectors of spiritual action in sequence.
The withdrawal being earlier and left in place such that it precludes/interferes with and blocks the LATER attempt to reach.
(Here I checked for what was the basis that had earlier set up this nonsense) . . . .
Cog! The withdrawal is based on the/an earlier not want to know at there . . .
(Then I cognite and write) note the grammar here! TWO FORMS . . .
Know AT there, and, Know there.
(What I am expressing to you here is what I actually perceived and had to articulate. It took two different though similar grammatical expressions to get the truth of it . . . this because the two concepts that were the construction of the case item and charge I was handling were different, though so similar as to be, at first contact, to be one and the same!)
Cog, Inspecting this I see they occurred at different times! “Know there” is the earlier one and based on permeation and being at-one/in union/unity.
Knowing AT there is later and as a “vision”/ concept, is and requires a REACH TO there from “here” at a separate location.
Cog, Having lost awareness of these two situations as different and distinct yet being similar they identified and collapsed into being as ONE concept of (reaching to) Knowing at there . . . .
That’s enough of the notes for you . . .
The big realization this morning was that because of the omission of that word/concept “AT” in my spiritual actions, everything collapsed into a oneness . . . . example: what should have been “at there” kept collapsing into me HERE.
I hope the above did not stir-up or confused anyone . . . but the truth is, it took me a long time to learn that grammar is not the bitch that many a pre-teen thinks it is.
It really is the key to our ability to practice differentiation.
😊 Alan was famous for his “Alanisms” . . . the above is an example of my Rogerisms.
Rog
Topic: USE OF GRAMMAR AND THE ABILITY TO DIFFERENTIATE (Read 991 times)
previous topic - next topic
