a response by Sig Lonegren
I thank you for including me in your web of commentators concerning “The Potential of Dowsing.” I found it interesting and thought provoking, and on the whole, I agreed with most of what you have written here, and like the way you’ve said it. It is interesting that Terry Ross was your instigator on this. Terry was one of my Field Faculty for my Masters Degree in Sacred Space, and taught me most of what I know about the techniques of dowsing and geomancy.
Perhaps there is one thing that I am not hearing that I would put forth for your consideration here, and is permission. Just as we have laws here in Britain to keep people from barging in to our house, it is my perception that this is necessary (even more so, karmically) on, the levels that dowsers work on, to obtain permission as well. I am also aware that dowsing works without it, but I must say that my first reaction to the “clearing of 90 years worth of detrimental thoughts and emotions around a sacred site” is, I wonder where that dowser got permission to do that?
On the last page of your letter, you wonder if, “thoughts in the major Psi Field can be cleared out, . . .” Are you thinking in what I would call the Akashic record, or “AR history is recorded in the Psi-Field?” Now, where does one get permission to change that? The Church in Rome is just now opening their files about the Inquisition. Unfortunately they burned many of their files when they were no longer useful. Who gets to decide for everybody what are evil thoughts? How does one get permission to expunge what?
Permission, for me, is also the thread that I move in towards healing on. It is the connecting aka thread (to use a term from the Huna). You might put it that this is how I “link with the person’s Psi-Field.” Also, without permission, for me, it is an invasion of privacy. I am not clear from whom one gets permission to clean up a sacred site. I remember leading a tour of sacred sites in Ireland, and there was a woman from California who had a big quartz crystal that had been cut by Marcel Vogle to be four sided instead of six. (He knew better than Nature?) This woman went from site to Irish site “cleaning them up,” as if the peasants didn’t know enough to do it themselves. The White man’s burden – only this lady happened to be Chinese. Who gave her permission to do that in Ireland?
Having said that about permission, and invasion of privacy, I must also say that one direction where dowsing can take us one day will be that we will be able to know when someone else is lying. The more people who have that skill (and I do not claim it for myself at this time, but I can see it coming down the road in dowsing’s future), the more difficult it will be for a people to tell when their political leaders are lying to them (I think of President Clinton as I write this), when Business leaders are lying, when their neighbour is lying.
This ability to suss if someone is telling the truth is part of a process that I can see for dowsers that I call “gnowing.” It has the same root as “knowing,” but a bit more direct, as it comes from gnoscere in Latin, again, to know. But it also described a bunch of heretics called the Gnostics. They were heretics for several reasons, some of which are of little or no consequence to me here, but the one thing that I really relate to is their philosophy of, “Look, I’ll listen to you, and to you, and to others, but ultimately on things spiritual, because I have experienced the spiritual/Psi-Fields myself, I will I’ll make up my own mind.” (Needless to say, this didn’t play well in Rome.) This equal balance of rational and intuitive is what I call gnowing. It is a direction that I believe dowsers would benefit from moving towards.
Computation and Selectivity
You ask, “[What does computation or selectivity infer about the Psi-Field?]” In magic, this is called intent, and in magic, it is sometimes said, “Intent is all.” A dowser becomes better because s/he can focus their intent more and more sharply. It’s like narrowing the bandwidth so the frequency is exactly right on the button. This is a left-brained process. It is the reason why asking the right question is so important in dowsing.
I agree with you about free will and the difficulty of looking in to the future, but dowsing/divining is divination, and certainly part of divination has to do with the future. The way I look at it is like a stock market trend. Taking all of these factors into consideration, this is where you are going. If a physicist were to be up to her waist in water on a perfectly calm day, and you were sitting in a canoe, and she were to give your craft a shove, if she knew how much the boat and you weighed, and the pounds of pressure she put on the stern, and the surface friction of the bottom of the boat on the water, etc., she could calculate quite closely where the boat will stop. This is future. Of course, anywhere along the way, another boat can come by and tip you over. Mother Nature can come in and blow you off course. And, perhaps most important, if you in your canoe don’t like where you’re going to stop, take some strokes. You can deflect this course – some.
So the function of divination into the future, for me, is to say, “If you like where it looks like your life is headed, go with the flow. If you don’t, take some strokes.” Forewarned is forearmed. I encourage to include the future as part of dowsing as well as the present and the past.
I am pleased to hear your talk about how tuning in to the Psi-Field will bring one back to Nature. I do not walk a specific spiritual path, but one of the ways I might describe myself is a techno-ruralist. I am very involved with the Internet, and I am very involved with Mother Nature. I feel opening up to Nature opens me up to my more intuitive side. It is as if a walk on a Glastonbury lane is a tarot reading. Nature speaks in so many ways. It is in this section where you say, “This improved sensitivity and understanding should bring about a better sense of working together.” The part about gnowing when someone is lying will also contribute to this goal we both desire.
What can I say about the parking spaces? Mea culpa! I remember one time when I was really late, I needed a specific spot on a busy downtown street. A car had pulled up to back in to the parking spot I had “seen” earlier. Another car, also wanting the spot, pulled right up behind the first car. And there they sat. I was next in line, and there was just enough room for me to sneak in frontwards! I just made it to the appointment. Thank you Great Psi-Field!
Science and Dowsing
I do not think the right track is to try to convince the scientists that dowsing is real. It ain’t gonna work. They don’t want it to. It never has’ before. (As far as I know every attempt at scientific verification of dowsing has failed. Dowsing works for need not for proof) As you talk about chaos, I think of Neils Bohr’s troubles when he introduced Quantum Physics to Newtonian Physicists. Brick walls. He ultimately said something like these guys have to get old and die off before my theories are accepted. You and I know Quantum is a better description of reality. Most of us – eighty years later -still live in a Newtonian world.
Given this brick wall reality, I believe our chance of convincing scientists that dowsing is real is nil. That can only happen one-at-a-time through direct experience. Then you gnow it’s real.
The Shark Tank
Oh yes, one last thing, Dudley. In your journey to whatever consensus/feedback you seek on this, I encourage you to create an environment other than what I would call the “Shark Tank Approach.” (“…it is only through putting forward views that can be knocked down and discarded, to be replaced by better ones, that we can make some progress.”) Archaeologists use this technique to answer the question like, “What was it like in King Tut’s day in Egypt?” The pottery expert throws in a leg, and the mummy experts put in a chunk of thigh, the radiologists an ear, the carbon daters a finger, and so on. Each says what they think it was like. Then there is a feeding frenzy. Sharks are everywhere tearing off flesh. When everyone has eaten off all they can, what’s left is what they can agree on about King Tut’s Egypt.
I suspect my major dowsing finding is what I call Sig’s Hypothesis Number One: Unless they were trained by the same teacher (and maybe not even then), it is quite probable that no two intangible target dowsers will agree on what they find at a sacred site.
I would encourage you to create an environment where consensus is the expected goal, and where people can take risks with what they know about this ancient art of ours. I suspect that new growth in the field of dowsing awareness doesn’t happen well in left-brained feeding frenzies.
The job for us dowsers is to live our lives full of dowsing so others can hear about it, see it happening, and then start using it in their own lives. For me, that’s the way forward.
© 1998 Sig Lonegren