How to See Fairies. Ramsey Dukes
suggestion is that I am being silly, but truly it is the critic who is being silly. For humans are herd animals with strong social ties, and it makes sense for the survival of such animals to wander forth and explore when there is no danger, but to run back to the herd when there is danger. So it is utterly sensible to explore alternative medicines when faced with minor ailments, and even more sensible to resort to conventional medicine when feeling truly threatened.
I could go on with these examples, but the point is merely to illustrate that the scientific culture has become so familiar that it becomes a line of least resistance for lazy thinkers who rely so much on what is considered to be reasonable that they forget to be sensible. In saying that, I am criticising lazy thinking rather than scientific culture, because in the much rarer circumstance when magical culture has become too familiar, then lazy thinkers begin to rely so much on feeling that they too are just as likely to forget to be sensible.
So my opening exercises will concentrate strongly on the senses. The idea is that we tune up our powers of observation to the point where they are less likely to be influenced by reason. And we do not do that in order to abandon reason, but rather to hold it in check until something has been observed. We no longer refuse to see something simply because “we know it cannot possibly be there”.
SOFTENING THE BOUNDARIES BY TUNING THE SENSES
“Hark how the little birds sing of love,” sang the old lady on the park bench.
“That's aggression, not love! They're staking a territorial claim when they make that noise,” sneered the acne-scarred youth by her side.
Why did he say that? Was the fleeting intellectual triumph really worth the effort? See how quickly the old dear has forgotten his remark and returned to blissful contemplation! But does he look any happier for his knowledge?
They live in two quite different models of reality. Society would call him ”strong-minded', but he bears his reality like an irritating burden, whereas she has disciplined the world into a cornucopia of joy. Should we not then admit that, though not so strong in mind, she is at least the stronger in soul?
The above quote comes from a book I wrote called Thundersqueak (1979). It reflects a conflict between puritanism and sensitivity.
ARE YOU A PURITAN? OR A GOURMET?
When, for example, I read some glossy magazine article extolling the fine difference between one sort of gourmet delicacy and another, or immensely flowery descriptions of the precise impression that a certain wine leaves on the refined palate, then something in me may protest that so much time and money is being spent on expensive delicacies when there are millions of people on this planet who cannot even afford enough food to stay alive.
For some people, the argument stops there. These are the puritans who would deny all luxury or indulgence for any number of reasons—because the flesh is sinful, because others cannot afford them, because the environment would suffer if we all enjoyed them…or whatever.
Although I can accept the truth of many of these objections, there is a second voice in me that points out that the gastronomic spirit is also a very natural and joyful celebration of existence.
On the one hand I can be angry because the Puritan Spirit in me associates gastronomic refinement with excessive wealth and a desire to show off. On the other hand I know that, once the basic needs of staying alive have been met, even the poorest and most destitute can begin to differentiate between foods that evoke delight and those that simply nourish. Just because one is a homeless tramp does not make it impossible to savour wild berries in Autumn, and I myself can recall just how utterly exquisite was the taste of a simple boiled egg after a week without any food…
In fact the real problem with wealthy food snobs is not so much sensual indulgence as the fact that they can be so obsessed with abstract issues such as the price, the prestige, or the rarity of their indulgence that they fail to tune into its true sensual qualities. They become blunted rather than sensitised by their wealth. Don't we love those tales of wine buffs praising a bottle of cheap plonk onto which some joker has pasted an expensive wine label?
IT ISN'T JUST ABOUT FOOD AND TASTE…
Like the angry young man in the quotation above, there are some people who consistently react against the craze for alternative medicine or organic foods by quoting research showing that it is over-priced, or bogus, or no better for us. On the one hand I know how good it feels to get back at some frightfully smug and dogmatic New Ager by challenging their fads, but on the other hand I know that there can also be a great deal of joy in exploring the options for better food or a healthier life. I am all for joyful exploration and believe that exaggerated criticism of that human need reflects a form of dogmatic puritanism that does not like to see people having too much fun.
WHAT HAS ALL THIS GOT TO DO WITH EXPERIMENTAL CLAIRVOYANCE?
It is all too easy to put the full blame for blocked psychism onto an over-developed intellect, without recognising that there is a puritan tendency that can also form a barrier. The spirit that disapproves of the connoisseur, or the food faddist, or the flaky New Ager, or the twittering “sensitive”, is not far removed from the spirit that frowns on any form of magic.
I have some sympathy for people who try not to eat too much microwaved food, but I am irritated when someone refuses to eat any microwaved food even when there is no alternative. I am irritated when someone refuses to take some necessary action because of “bad feng shui” or “negative vibrations”, and yet I sympathise with those who strive positively to create better feng shui or improve the world's vibrations.
IT'S ABOUT HAVING FUN…
It's the difference between being the victim of one's own sensitivity, and opting for a “sensitivity bonus” to increase the joy of living.
So the first message of this course is that we are seeking to develop our psychic abilities not in order to become enslaved or driven by them, but rather to enjoy the value they can add to our lives.
The second message, then, is what to do about an over-busy intellect that keeps insisting “How can you see fairies when you know they do not exist? When irrefutable scientific evidence for the human aura has never been established?” and so on. This is the voice of reason, a very useful voice when you wish to stop things running out of control, but a real bore when it stops anything at all from happening.
Here again there is a puritan side to reason, when it says “I won't allow this to happen because I know it cannot be real”, but there is also a more playful side that can be just as inhibiting. This is the voice that gets so excited when something looks like happening that it rushes in to examine it—rather like the excited child who, having planted a seed, kills it by constantly digging it up to see if it is sprouting. This voice can say : “Wow! I seem to have scored a real hit with that bit of the tarot reading! So I wonder if I'm really psychic, or was it just that I picked up a subtle clue from the punter's body language?” Once you get into that frame of mind you can be so set on finding out “how it works” that you hinder any further results.
THE MAGIC CUP AND THE MAGIC DAGGER
So we need to encourage a different mindset, one that will allow things to develop without slamming on the brakes. To illustrate this mindset I will use an analogy based on a Cup and a Dagger—two so-called “magical weapons”.
The open, receptive attitude that seems to foster clairvoyance is analogous to the Cup, and it is very different from the Dagger of analysis. In the following exercises you will be encouraged to gather sensory data, to explore with all your senses, and I will encourage you to imagine yourself as a Cup, filling up with feeling impressions and simply holding them as a whole, just as a cup holds water.
What you want to discourage at this stage is the tendency in a scientific culture to behave like a Dagger that cuts things open to examine them and analyse into separate parts. For if our Dagger side is over-active, then all impressions get shredded before they can collect.
We are not abandoning the Dagger, simply telling it to wait its turn.